Review: Modern Warfare 2

MR T3D

New member
Feb 21, 2009
1,424
0
0
Any modern gun you could want?
especially AK variants other than the 47. saiga 12-gauge?
yeah, I want a Russia to use Russian gun, thank you very much.
and the story is far worse this time around, the beauty of the first one was its semi-realism, not a bunch of cool movie bits strung together.
 

llew

New member
Sep 9, 2009
584
0
0
JordanMillward_1 said:
PayNSprayBandit said:
But in MW2, the message seemed to be all war is bad so therefore all who partake in it are bad as well.
Well.... yea, all war is bad, and all the armies and soldiers and weapons in the world are just necessary evils. I thought that was common sense by now.
touche :)
 

Jordan Deam

New member
Jan 11, 2008
697
0
0
Chadling said:
The single-player campaign in this game whimpered under the legend that its predecessor created.

MW1 didn't just deliver a story, it delivered ideas. One: warfare has changed. It's not about delivering huge amounts of firepower as quickly as possible; it's about stealth, precision, and knowing more than your opponent. Two: the average guy doesn't know anything about what our soldiers face, and we owe them our gratitude for their service. Three: nuclear power, if abused, is a terrifying thing.

And it communicated them all through "holy ****" moments. Everyone can remember the first mission in MW1; they can remember the AC-130 gunship "rail shooter". They can remember the nuke, Pripyat, and the absurdly lopsided firefights towards the end of the game.

So, yeah, while MW2 certainly communicates the devastation caused by warfare... it's just hard to have an emotional response to it. You want to communicate the idea that warfare is bad? Have civilians get caught up in an urban battle. Finding out that your own shots accidentally killed civilians would more of an emotional impact than the shooting gallery that this game is.
I can't comment on the single-player campaign, since I've only played it for about an hour at this point. But I think Modern Warfare 2's multiplayer does "deliver ideas," and it does so in a way that few other multiplayer games do: through game mechanics.

MW2 is definitely a "twitch" multiplayer game - it only takes a couple hits with most guns to go down, so a difference of a few hundredths of a second can make a difference between whether you get the kill or your opponent does. But it's not purely a question of reflexes - by selectively paying attention to the minimap, calling in UAVs and using a heartbeat sensor, you can piece together a picture of the battlefield that will tell you roughly where to go to get the jump on the enemy. In fact, I'd say processing these constant streams of information (in addition to the visual and auditory information that every game relies on) is just as much a part of the gameplay as aiming down sight and pulling the trigger.

Of course, you never get a complete picture of the battlefield - people with silencers or the Cold Blooded perk don't show up on your minimap, and people with the Ninja perk don't register on heartbeat sensors. But the better you can make sense of the information you have to approximate enemy locations, the better you'll perform. Forget the high-tech weaponry - it's this abundance of data that makes the game "modern."
 

Tdc2182

New member
May 21, 2009
3,623
0
0
Nerdfury said:
Tdc2182 said:
Nerdfury said:
I look forward to the next game in the series: Call of Duty XIV: Modern Combat IIX: Adventures in Generic War Shooters VI: Lord of the Shades of Brown.
Now that is an unfair statement. It takes what has been done before and makes it better while adding so much stuff that has never been done. Its far from generic.
It's a perfectly valid statement. This game is yet another generic brown war shooter. And before the end of the year will be another generic brown war shooter.
In no way is it generic. Unless you are calling all FPS's generic. Like many have been saying lately, if it aint broke, dont fix it. It has a very well done combat system and a relatively simple story. Generic shooters are ussually forgotten. This will be around for a while. Its better than the anime and most RPGs games.
 

BonsaiK

Music Industry Corporate Whore
Nov 14, 2007
5,635
0
0
This review, as well as the multiplayer video supplement, told me everything that I wanted to know except the one thing that I REALLY NEEDED to know. How well does the PC multiplayer experience function? After all the controversy, are PC players going to be angry or does it actually funciton okay? Not addressing this issue in the review after all the pre-release articles and fuss made about it, is very, very poor form.
 

dwoo21

New member
Aug 30, 2009
236
0
0
I need to start playing to get that heartbeat sensor and I never knew the riot shield was so effective.
 

ASnogarD

New member
Jul 2, 2009
525
0
0
Kalezian said:
vivaldiscool said:
you do have a ligitimate reason, too bad you spew it as if your way is always better and console people are retarded like all, and yess, ALL of the PC fanboys, have claimed.

I dont see why your still pissed, the games great and if you dont like it, dont fucking play it?

has that thought ever crossed you PC fanboys minds?
Point out where I called any console gamer retarded ? I mean I am a PC gamer who has posted his displeasure at the lack of dedicated servers...so I assume I fall under the category of ALL.

It makes no sense to remove a feature that was present in every iteration of the franchise, a feature that doesnt cost extra to implement or maintain. I would even go as far as to claim that dedicated servers even prolong the shelf life of a franchise long after its sell date, this gives the developer time to make a good sequel (see the UT series... till UT 3).
CoD wouldnt be as successful as it is now, without the PC fanbase ... and the communities that hosted dedicated servers for the franchise.

Give me 1 solid good reason why making a player host the match is better than having a server that can host everyone all the time.
 

[zonking great]

New member
Aug 20, 2008
312
0
0
Russ Pitts, corporate sellout. Anyway, this game is nothing you need to have played before you die. What is added, exactly? A few perks, some different killstreak rewards, a different level or two...that's it. Am I glad multiplayer is not compulsory for getting a 100%.
 

DemonicVixen

New member
Oct 24, 2009
1,660
0
0
almightywabbit said:
Today's price for MW2?
spacerAn Arm, a scrotum and 2 still beating hearts.
Today's price for going for a walk with a loved one?
spacerConsiderably less, and it'll be worth it.
Yeah i would go for the latter. I do like the look of MW2 but i can't afford to pay for it just for some mindless pleasure of sitting killing people. I prefer being out with a loved one (though not my mother) or else jumping off a cliff at the debt i would be in buying it lol.
 

ASnogarD

New member
Jul 2, 2009
525
0
0
Kalezian said:
ASnogarD said:
Give me 1 solid good reason why making a player host the match is better than having a server that can host everyone all the time.
when you want to just play the damn game and you end up with 300 servers with stupid mods that are unbalanced, when you join a game being dominated by a guy 30-0 who is hacking but the admin wont do anything about it because the guy is his friend or him trying to get his k/d better, when you join a game where the entire point is to speed grind your way to tenth prestige and no actual skill is required.

you claim it ruins the "vast communities", I know it actually works.

I have played for over 24 hours already, and your whole arguement of having lag and host migrations?

baseless

In my entire time I have been playing I have had 2 host migrations in match, and only four games that had horrible lag.

why the numbers so low? because you can quit and search for different matches, which is what a majority of players do if no one but them votes to skip a map they hate, or simply go 3-40.

and to be honest, I prefer MW2 more than MW.

Least you get to CHOOSE a server from a list, and when you find a decent one you really had fun on...you can fave that server so you can return and have more fun, and when you have a collection of fave servers you dont need to sift through a pile of servers... just select the fave server you feel like playing on.

TF 2 (PC), I select on of the 6 servers my community has set up ...2 of those servers host the most popular map 24 hours a day, 2 others rotate maps by vote, 1 host arena only maps and the final server host less players on a vote map rotation... I have a nice choice right there. I also know those servers are properly admin'ed because I am part of that community and know how they work.

Matchmaking , click find game and pray. Sure YOU may of gotten a series of good games NOW, but as the excitement dies down and MW 2 is exchanged for the next big game (probably BF:BC 2)... how do you think the matchmaker will fare then ?
Meanwhile my TF 2 servers are still up and waiting for me years after the game was released.
 

Jaqen Hghar

New member
Feb 11, 2009
630
0
0
'nuff said really [http://www.modernwarfail2.com/2009/11/16/warning-to-potential-customers/]
I'm never intended to buy this generic DLC anyway, but the way Activision have continuously pissed in every gamers face (the PC community mostly, but they make fun of all of us) have led me to a proper boycott. No game made by Activision will ever be installed on computer, unless they heavily redeem themselves. I'm never giving them money again, and I'm not even going to give them the satisfaction to know that one more person just had to pirate it so that he could play it. Why? Because it looks stupid and boring! Some people have said it resembles a Michael Bay movie. I agree. And that is the worst insult a game or movie can get. So you guys have fun with your generic $60 DLC.
 

MR T3D

New member
Feb 21, 2009
1,424
0
0
Jaqen Hghar said:
'nuff said really [http://www.modernwarfail2.com/2009/11/16/warning-to-potential-customers/]
I'm never intended to buy this generic DLC anyway, but the way Activision have continuously pissed in every gamers face (the PC community mostly, but they make fun of all of us) have led me to a proper boycott. No game made by Activision will ever be installed on computer, unless they heavily redeem themselves. I'm never giving them money again, and I'm not even going to give them the satisfaction to know that one more person just had to pirate it so that he could play it. Why? Because it looks stupid and boring! Some people have said it resembles a Michael Bay movie. I agree. And that is the worst insult a game or movie can get. So you guys have fun with your generic $60 DLC.
excellent summary, sir, i concur
except...i still have CoD1 and 2 on my machine... i think i'll still play them, just to check upon the happy penguin foy server, that was by far my favourite part of that game.
 

Mcface

New member
Aug 30, 2009
2,266
0
0
everything is great in this game.

everything that is, but the kill streaks.
they are severely, severely broken.
 

ffxfriek

New member
Apr 3, 2008
2,070
0
0
ASnogarD said:
You missed out the fact its a great CONSOLE game, but MP wise it sucks for the PC, the original MW is far better...and mark my words now, will live longer MP wise than MW 2.

Its a glaring ommission for a reviewer to miss out on.

The PC version is a direct and hardly touched port of the consoles, the only nod at the PC was mouse support. Theres even reports that the error messages in the PC game tell you to restart your XBox Live... seems to suggest IW couldnt even be bothered to change the error message text. (the report is unconfirmed, could be a photoshop ..but I read about this error in a few different sites under different contexts).

I suggest you either confirm this is a CONSOLE ONLY review, or at least make PC gamers aware of the lack of MP dedicated server, and that the PC version uses the same console style MP system as the consoles.

MW 2 is by all reports a good game, just dont expect to be joining the MW 2 servers... there are none.
At the bottom of the review it says its the XBox 360 version....


OT: The SP was fun and OH SHIT for a lot of the game. Some parts of the story left me going um...what? But for the most part it was awesome. Though MP sucks majorly....