Infinity Ward has made quite a name for itself since 2003. Beginning with Call of Duty, they’ve shown the world – and publisher giant, EA – that they can thrive on their own and take the action shooter genre by storm at the same time. Subsequent titles developed by IW’s “sister” company, Treyarch, haven’t lived up to those crafted by the geniuses at IW. If you read my First Impressions review, you’d think I had a personal bone to pick with IW’s Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. In truth, it’s not a bone-picking session at all. I have a valid fear: IW has grown into such a writhing beast at creating the best games in the shooter genre that their reputation has – pardon the pun – become bulletproof. In the media’s eyes, IW does no wrong, and even controversies such as the now-infamous “F.A.G.S.” reference in a TV commercial (see that here - discretion advised for youngsters) has done nothing but fuel the media machine in IW’s favor.
So if I have a bone to pick at all, it’s with the notion that Infinity Ward is infallible. I think we can all assume that every human being, however great, is fallible. Perhaps I’m a old school fanatic who should just go with what I feel, rather than what I think, but in this day and age where thinking is a lost art, I prefer the latter, not the former. The fact of the matter is that Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 is flawed. Multiplayer is, as expected, fantastic, but should a single mode be enough to merit the media scores for this title and even rumored talk of Game of the Year 2009? What follows is a completely unbiased and honest review of this game, ending with a score that will shock most readers, for good or ill. I’m quite sure I’ll get comments referring to me as a sucky, American gamer. But, to put a stop-gap in, I’ll put up my stats to date and you can make up your own mind.
PRESENTATION:
Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, the first game in this new direction of the series, raised the bar higher than any action shooter game has ever done. Leave the incredible multiplayer mode alone for a moment. The presentation of the game was unparalleled. When I played it, I literally gasped in shock in several spots during the single player campaign. The game was criticized by some gamers for its linear storyline, but in truth, a compelling and breathtaking story is told best when the player is guided along through a linear game world. War isn’t exploratory by any means. There are objectives, there are certain ways to get to those objectives…get in, get the job done, get out. True to real life, Call of Duty 4 took us to new heights of incredible moments, even if the story was a bit disjointed and, at times, far-fetched. We forgave them because the 8-hour journey was enough to keep us coming back for more and then some. Multiplayer carried the game the rest of the way.
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2′s presentation is not as hard-hitting and compelling as CoD4, but the same screen-shattering moments are strewn throughout the VERY short single player campaign. Now, there were those who complained – I among them – at CoD4′s single player campaign length, at 8 hours. I’m here to tell you that this one is shorter…upwards of 65% shorter. I’ve read reports of 3 hour blasts through Normal Difficulty and about 6+ hours on Veteran. I can confirm that short play time. If you’re saying to yourself, “I don’t care,” that’s fine, I’m not saying you should be upset just because I think a 3-hour single player mode is a complete joke that should’ve been released as DLC (downloadable content), but what I am saying is that the presentation being a less-than-CoD4 experience is due to this patchwork single player mode.
To be fair, there are tons of great aspects to the presentation. IW pulled out a lot of the stops in the graphics, sound, and weapons department, which will all be reviewed in separate sections below. The menus are all laid out logically and accessible-friendly. I think MW2 boots up quicker than any game I’ve ever played on any system. After the quick IW animation, if you press Start, then Start again, bam, you’re already at the launch screen for the three play modes. I can get online in under a minute or two, tops, which is a great, great thing. No fluff, no bullcrap, just point me to the mode I want and shoot. IW developed this game completely in-house, so there aren’t fourteen partner logos that pop up at the beginning of this one. That’s a big selling point.
The game’s locations are also a big seller. War landing here on American soil? Yeah, and it’s frightening to behold. I’ll get into the issues I had with the story and AI later, but romping through the game’s snow base, desert caves, airplane graveyard, and Washington, D.C., really struck a nerve, and each area had a uniqueness unparalleled in action shooters. Fantastic work with the environments and presentation of details within. IW should be commended for the level of detail and presentation in this game, but the shortcomings of both single player campaign length and AI issues prevent it from scoring higher.
SCORE: 8.5/10
STORY AND CHARACTERS:
Wow, where do I begin? OK, as I mentioned briefly in my First Impressions review, Uncharted 2: Among Thieves is a game unrivaled in the action adventure genre. Unrivaled. Nothing like it, anywhere, period. It’s nothing new, ultimately, but it does every single thing right. It’s Metacritic score: 9.4. MW2′s Metacritic score: 9.6. I’m baffled. I have no idea what to say. I’ve heard the theory that it’s because there are millions of players playing MW2 online. OK, so what? Are games scored on a single mode that is – bottom line – an improvement over what CoD4 did? There’s nothing really all that new in multiplayer that hasn’t been done over and over before. Perks are cool…lots of rewards are cool…customizable everything is cool…but again, should a game stand on the merit of what amounts to 33% of the total package? By that standard, most every game could earn a top score if only 33% of the game is considered! I know that I’m using too much logic here, but it’s completely upsetting that single player – in both story and characterization – can be so poorly done, yet despite this, the game rises to critical acclaim because of a mode that – while great and worthy of awards, I suppose – has been done before in CoD4, just tweaked a bit more.
All right, there’s the extent of my tirade on the Metacritic thing. Back to the review of this section. MW2, as a sequel, is abysmal in single player mode. I don’t know how else to say it. Read what I’m writing carefully. I’m not saying I didn’t understand the story in MW2. Unlike others, I could follow along well enough. The problem, though, is that the game makes zero effort to explain, join, craft, or otherwise create suspension of disbelief. Samuel Taylor Coleridge, an English poet, named this formula to describe the non-realistic elements in all forms of literature (which I argue extends to digital media). Essentially, what Coleridge suggested was that if a writer could craft a fictional tale composed of “human interest and a semblance of truth,” we as readers would suspend judgment. I’m a fantasy fiction writer, and this duty is a necessity. Humans want to read about and experience other human themes, conflicts, passions, etc., even if they’re portrayed by a non-human character. I didn’t care about the characters in MW2, even less than I did in CoD4. You are thrown into the boots of yet another set of “PFC whomever-I-don’t-care’s” and plopped into situations that are straight out of any number of action movies by Jerry Bruckheimer. I have a question, IW: did you really think no one would notice that you completely ripped off the shower sequence from The Rock??? I think I saw Ed Harris up above Michael Biehn as I played through it.
Beyond the obvious breaches in ethical use of material (I have a nasty attitude towards people who don’t even make an attempt to cover up the fact that they’re ripping off ideas), the storyline is laughable. Three hours to tell a tale, even if IW claims they removed the “fluff,” is silly. Again, I wonder why the game wasn’t shipped without this mode for $49.99, and then offered later as DLC for $9.99. That would’ve made sense and made me happy. Instead, I’m treated to a disjointed, illogical patchwork of story that had me scratching my head, shaking said head in utter disbelief, and feeling let down as much as when I heard about all of Tiger Woods’ recent exploits. Disappointing. I can’t drone on and on with specific examples, but if you ask me to point out moments, I will do so in the Comments section. There are scads.
One last thing: the AI sucks, period. “Sucks” comprises a whole host of images and thoughts to you, I’m sure. At the baseline, I’m sure the AI engine works great for most of its in-game functions. It controls things that seem subtle or are taken for granted by we lowly gamers. But in times of life or death, especially on Veteran difficulty, the AI engine literally crumbles. Enemies run backwards at you, can hit you from 500 yards away perfectly every time, even if they’re moving laterally; enemies ALWAYS seem to know right where the hell you are, even if their weapon does NOT have a heartbeat scanner – this is what I refer to affectionately as a “cheap parlor trick.” That’s not AI, that’s not making the game challenging for the gamer, that’s pure idiocy, and no opponent should display super-human senses just because the difficulty is cranked up. Sure, they are more accurate, but do they really have the ability to hit me when I cross a doorway in a split second? In SpecOps, on Veteran difficulty, it’s the same garbage. Yes, it’s more challenging, but it’s challenging in the sense that the odds are stacked so high against you that it comes off as unrealistic and frustrating. I was white-knuckled and teeth-clenched so many times during this experience in SP and SO modes because of the cheapness of the AI engine. I wrote an article discussing AI engines the other day, and mentioned this game in no real detail. Again, I can give tons of specific examples in the Comments section. CoD4 won awards for their AI engine, but that doesn’t mean it’s flawless or even very good…it just means it’s better than any other engine out there. 
It’s all relative.
SCORE: 3.0/10 (yes, it’s that bad)
GRAPHICS AND SOUND:
Now this is what I’m talking about. IW kicked MW2 into high gear in the graphics and sound department, but mostly in graphics. The engine is noticeably better than CoD4′s. The textures are sharper and more varied; there’s an attention to detail present in the environments that’s hard to describe; the framerate is 100% solid throughout the entire game – yes, even on the PS3; animations are sweet; draw distance is, at times, impressive. The only major issue is draw-in/pop-in. As you walk, especially through detailed wooded locations, the trees shift and bounce around like a kid on a sugar high. But that’s a minor gripe. I was thoroughly impressed with the graphics in this game, and in an age where a ton of money is thrown at prettier graphics, IW has outdone itself.
Regarding sound, it’s most impressive with the slew of weapons and gadgets you’ll be lugging around. From SpecOps to Single Player to Multiplayer, the sound draws you in. Each gun has its own unique and accurate firing sound. The grenades all sound as you would expect, and the shuffling, walking, running, and movement of characters is all believable. You’ll think you’re a solider out there, for sure. And when spectacular moments occur in the game – of which there are, admittedly, a few – the sound will knock your socks off. If you’ve got surround sound, even better. Turn the bass up and watch as your nick-knacks and pictures fall to the floor. It all draws you into the war experience flawlessly.
SCORE: 9.5/10
GAMEPLAY AND CONTROLS:
You all can breathe, relax. The section you wanted is here. I covered single player mode in the STORY AND CHARACTERS section, now it’s time for SpecOps and Multiplayer. Gameplay is, as expected, just like CoD4 with tweaks. You play a solider, you get guns, you shoot things. It’s an action shooter…nothing new or innovative here on the surface. I needn’t explain this concept to my well-weathered FPS audience.
SpecOps is the newest addition to the MW franchise. Basically, SpecOps is a mode that pits a solo player or two players in online or local split screen against 23 missions that aren’t connected in any way via story or characters. It’s essentially an extension of single player, but with goals varying by difficulty. You’ll get some classic maps/missions from past Call of Duty games, like Chernobyl (Call of Duty 4) and Wasteland (Call of Duty).
Now, I must brag a bit here – and this is specifically for those who will squawk about me “sucking” as a gamer. I earned 23 stars – most of them Veteran rank – playing by myself, solo. I’m sure many others have done this, but the fact is that it’s brutally difficult to accomplish these SpecOps missions by yourself. Honestly, I have NO idea what possessed IW into allowing solo play except to cater to those who have no friends and/or who aren’t online. These were designed for two people, period, so why allow solo when it’s next to impossible to beat every single one of them on Veteran difficulty by yourself? I’m sure there are others who’ve done it, but I’d be surprised nonetheless. B.T.’s suggestion: play with a friend. Lug your console to their house if you have to and play split screen. Do what it takes. Two of the missions, it’s worth noting, must be played with two players. It won’t even allow you to try it solo.
Multiplayer. Ah, yes, the quintessential mode that has fanboys bristling with anticipation and smack talk the world over. It’s the mode that defines the MW series, at this point, and it’s the mode that all action shooters will be judged against on any platform from now on. I’ve never fully embraced a passion for online play like many others, but it’s starting to wear off on me. I can’t stop playing it when I have the time to sit and actually play. It’s addictive. The list of reasons is numerous: the tweaked perks, the amount of challenges based on weapon and player skills, the constant XP rewards and stuff you can do in-game to earn them, the customizable weapons and custom classes, and the near-perfect online experience – yes, even on PSN, Xbox Live fanboys…PSN works great and it’s free. Unlocking different items, perks, and gun modes keeps you coming back for more, and playing with a party/clan is easy and accessible like no other shooter out there. I am a huge Killzone 2 fan, but it’s just a fact that IW has the experience that shines through in every area of this mode.
Is it perfect, though? No, and I wouldn’t be doing this review justice if I left this out. Death perks…they’re nice, they’re a great addition to quell the whiners who suck…but do they really offer balance? Ummm, no. Copycat is cool…you suffer enough deaths in a row, and you can copy the class (including all the items, weapons, and perks) of the last dude who sniped your sorry ass. That’s fine, but is that really giving balance to players who aren’t as good or at a low level without any cool stuff? In a word: no. Again, I applaud IW’s efforts to try to do this, I really do, but there’s really no way to create balance for players who aren’t good, period. If you suck, get better or stop playing. That’s really what it boils down to. I’m not being nasty here. I’m not all that fantastic at multiplayer yet, I’m really not, but I don’t suck, and I am getting better. The more you play, the more you stick with it and learn, the better you’ll get. It’s natural progression. Death perks was IW’s way of creating the illusion of balance, but it really doesn’t do much. Painkiller is another Death perk that, when killed X times in a row, you get a health boost for 10 seconds when you respawn. Again, that’s cool, but on large maps or against good opponents, it’s not going to save your…sorry ass.
Controls are fine, nothing much to mention here for good or ill. They work, the controller buttons do their jobs well. Switching weapons and using secondary weapons is smooth and, once you get really good, will allow you to perform all sorts of fun in-game feats, especially in multiplayer.
SCORE: 9.8/10
SUMMARY AND FINAL SCORE:
This review took me a while to write. I’m at about 3,000 words…a lengthy review, to be sure. But I felt it necessary to give you a rundown from a real gamer, not a person paid to do reviews. I believe the media hyped this game for a single mode only, not the entire package. SpecOps is decent, but it’s really nothing all that compelling. It’s a cross between single player and multiplayer…no story, no connection between missions, and two players. Cool, that’s fine, but I think it was only done to add substance where substance was lacking (single player mode). Single player is laughable from a story and characterization standpoint, but the locations and some set pieces are done quite well and fun to tackle. The AI is, at times, horribly balanced, cheap, and frustrating to the point of causing insanity, mostly in Veteran difficulty.
One last thing: I have 82% of the PS3 Trophies so far, including all of the single-player Veteran difficulty and all of the special condition ones. All that remains for me is completing the SpecOps stars to get all 69, which I’ll need a friend to accomplish. I beat Veteran mode in 6.5 hours; it took me longer on Normal only because I nabbed 32 of the 45 Intel items on the first play-through, which took some exploring. I also went back and played some missions separately to get some Trophies, which added to the play time. Overall, I have 17 hours invested in SP, and about the same in MP. I think I have 12 hours or so in SO. So there you go. Oh, and in MP, my Kill to Death ratio is climbing, but I’m not at the 1:1 level yet, which means I’m dying more than killing, but again, it’s improving, which means I’m starting to kill more than die. Death perks…who needs ‘em??
FINAL SCORE: 8.5/10 (not an average)
Foist.
Great review. Thanks for being honest and, truly, I can find little fault with what you’ve described, with your points, and with your analysis of the game but I do have a couple of things I’d like to counterpoint here.
You describe the single-player mode as lacking (which it is) and short (also true) and the AI being superhumanly overpowered at advanced difficulties (for sure) and, obviously, you feel that it detracts from the overall experience of the game. Maybe my view isn’t necessarily opposed to yours, but I see the single-player mode as only necessary to prepare for multiplayer. I don’t view this game as a single-player game. I don’t think it’s the point, I can’t see that it’s the intent of IW to deliver a huge and amazing world and story. This game is an MMORPG in an FPS package. The fanboys and under-21 crowd don’t need or want the intense story. Most kids can’t sit through an entire music video now let alone play their way through a Tom Clancy novel. You pick your gear, you work together, you play a role, you level up. I played it and thought I was playing Warcraft battlegrounds with guns instead of spells. Denouncing the game because the story is lacking is like denying Gisele Bundchen a night in the sack because her makeup is smudged. This game is made for multiplayer mode and the multiplayer mode is sick as hell.
Maybe the campaign should’ve been DLC. Honestly, after reading your statement I completely agree. FPS games are becoming less and less about the story and more and more about dropkicking noobs and talking better smack. Whether this is good or bad is a matter of preference but it certainly is the trend. Don’t be surprised when the next big console FPS is straight up multiplayer only. If IW used the resources reserved for the campaign and made this strictly multiplayer they could make the combat and the achievements much more immersive. I personally dig the trend, I like multiplayer so much more than the campaign anyway. In “2001″ Stanley Kubrick described the role of tool, the machine, supplanting man and his control over his creation. Video games got to a point where they could only make up for their limitations to programming and patterns and lack of spontaneity by performing mechanical tasks like shooting from 500 yards away. Multiplayer removes the AI, delegates the role of this tool, this machine, this game, from opponent to vehicle. I don’t want to compete against a box and wires. I want to compete against people. Multiplayer > Single-Player. It’s the wave of the future, man, so grab a board and start paddlin’ out.
You also talk about the lack of competitive balance. I think it’s excellent. Other multiplayer games are all about the gear. You hae the cool weapons and you win. Skill is dead, parity is king, get the good stuff and faceroll your way to superstardom. I don’t applaud IW for the basically worthless Death Streak perks because I enjoy running around and shooting bad players in the face. I am the bad player who gets shot in the face. A lot. From far away. But that’s okay because I know that *I can improve.* You’re right when you say players who suck must get better or stop playing. And that’s the way it should be. If you’re gonna nerdrage and pout because you get owned then that’s your problem, not mine (I use “you” in a general sense, not directed specifically towards our author). I love that I’m not getting wasted because I have crappy gear, I’m getting wasted because I haven’t attained enough skill in the game. I’ll get there, I’ll get better, I’ll learn. All you have to do to get better equips and guns is be persistent. And, in the meantime, learn. I’m in control of my record, of my level of competitiveness. I am not beholden to some complicated and confusing system of statistical math. If you want to think the death perks offer actual balance then you’ll have to employ the willing suspension of disbelief.
You are so right in pointing out the flaws of the game. It could’ve been stronger in areas. It’s imperfect, it’s fallible. But it’s also fun enough to crack out on for hours on end and, really, isn’t that what it’s all about?
BTW: Sorry, I started typing and got long-winded. It’ll happen. It’ll buff out, you know?
Didonics…that’s the best response I could’ve ever hoped for. Fantastic.
I guess I could’ve pointed out that this game is a multiplayer game with single player tassles dangling from it, and they should just market it as such. But, I figured that’s pretty obvious and didn’t want to beat it into the ground. I do love multiplayer far too much than I should…but I’m a 32-year-old, completely old school gamer. I hate battling the new generation of gamer who has never played Mario, Metroid, Zelda, and immersed themselves in a story unlike nothing that’s done today. Hell, Game Informer ranked 8-bit Zelda as the top game of all time (out of 200 ranked, anyway). Do you think 14 year olds get that at all? They probably scoff and flame GI for it. “But…but…Halo and Call of Duty rules!!!” – I can hear the chants now.
So that’s probably why I’m smitten with single player adventures, especially when it’s marketed to me as such. Not everyone gets into multiplayer like the smalk-talkin’ kids with way too much time on their hands. I’m a grown-up…I have a career…I have a family…when I sit down to play, my time is precious and I want to be fully entertained. I think I was looking for too much, but giving MW2 an 8.5 surely isn’t giving it a bad score or flaming it…I can tell you fully understand where I was coming from.
Thanks again for your forthrightness, Dildonics. My PSN ID is DreamReaver…anyone is invited to friend me so we can tackle the insanity that is SpecOps on Veteran mode. LOL
We’re in the same age bracket. I know all about late nights with Zelda on one TV and watching Short Circuit or Leonard Part VI on another. I could never freeze and jump up all those dudes in Metroid and it took us an entire summer to beat Mother Brain. I still know 007 373 5963. I once got in a fistfight with my childhood best friend because the first time we played Contra the spread gun fell off the screen and I told him to jump down and get it…and he did. I guess the way my brain is wired I just give less thought to the end than to the means. I’m more into the challenges than the reward itself, you know? Maybe it’s a consequence of MTV, maybe it’s ADHD. In the end it’s Coke or Pepsi, Skippy or Jif, six of one or half-dozen of the other. It’s just distraction, it’s just entertainment, it’s just time wasted that could always be better used becoming a better citizen or helping the less fortunate.
I understand that the fading allure of the immersive storylines is troubling to a large cross-section of those of us who blinked, eyeclosing as adolescents and eyeopening as (especially in Videogameland) the OG’s. I’ve never fully been able to find myself lost in a story of a game (save for a couple month period with Suikoden when I cracked out HARD to it) and have always gravitated towards the immediate gratification types so I’m down with the way games are headed, kinda. The chitter-chatter of preteens with potty mouths is usually annoying, unless I’m feeling especially spry and feel like out-flaming all the uninspired and rehashed insults constantly thrown about. Sometimes it’s just too tempting to avoid. (Tangent alert!!) Someone should make a game teaching kids how to heckle with some semblance of wit and flair. Mavis Beacon Teaches Yo Mama Jokes or something.
At least on the Halo/CoD/whatever else games it’s not actual typing-style chat so I don’t have to read “ur” and “thier/theyre/ther (sic/sic/sic)” and “n00b.” I just have to listen to it and pretend they can spell it right. Then again, all that can be avoided by playing single-player games, right?
It sounds sometimes that you’re more turned off by the usually-dismal experience of anonymous multiplayer gaming than by the games themselves. Hell, I am. I don’t know that there’s a more miserable experience outside of hellfire and brimstone than a dozen D-minus middle school students all flaming each other simultaneously. If they could fix that aspect, if someone smarter than I could devise a way that PvP experiences could be jackass-free, then Earth would be so much better off. God rue the day children reared on internet game chat inherit this planet.
And, again, you’re right that MW2 probably shouldn’t have been marketed as being a kick-ass single-player. Is that the result of poor advertising simply being used to promote every game pretty much the same or is it the result of the ever-waning tradition of human storytelling? Unfortunately, dude, it seems to me that, in all forms, the art of performance and story is being usurped by the alchemy of polishing shit until it glimmers. Who sits around the piano and makes music as friends and family anymore? We’ve lost the satisfaction of communal participation because people fear they will be harshly judged if they can’t sing like . I don’t really know where I’m going with this, pretty sure I didn’t when I started. I may have jumped across the fence a few times. Not my problem. Like Walt I, too, am large and contain multitudes.
Just remember that no matter how good your kill/death ratio is there’s always some kid out there with twice the kills, half the deaths, and zero pubes. Even if there isn’t there’s a bundle that will tell you they do (maybe not the zero pubes part). It’s the internet, we are strong because we are nobody.
I meant, “…sing like (insert random American Idol winner here).” but my brain outpaced my fingers.
Now that’s just damn fine reading.
I’m cackling over here. Someone out there who can banter about the word farm as much, if not more than I do??? Fan-freaking-tastic! LOL!!!!!! Excellent stuff man, and oh…so true.
The “zero pubes” comment has me gust-busting at the moment. Uber line, dude. Please friend me on PSN so we can have a 32-year-old slobber fest with said hapless minors. This is too good! LOL!
I have played mw2s story twice now, once on normal and once on veteran. Veteran is very fustrating at times, but the way you describe things in my opinion is completely just not right. The AI isnt cheap, it is supposed to be extremely hard, you made a few references to real life warfare, and if you are about to run from door to door, the enemy will shoot you. My impression, is this is trying to make the campaign as realistic as possible. What you said about the campaign, also sounds as if you just read a bunch of other reviews, and made what they said 10x worse, and justifying by saying, this is from a gamers view. In my opinion, every level in the story was done very well, but the plot needs work to make more sense. Almost every level was fresh and exciting, and i loved this. Your review is also the first time i have heard of Spec Ops not getting considerable praise. Spec ops is a great mode, and it is something special. Some of the moments like being with your friend while he is in an AC130 are priceless. It really seems to me as if you are just trying to make the game sound bad in some areas but alright in others, to make yourself seem unbiased, if that makes any sense. The multiplayer should have gotten a 10. DEATHSTREAKS ARE NOT UNBALANCED. WHen have you at any time been killed by someone with a deathstreak, and then thought wow, thats unfair. They are meant to give people a boost as im sure you know, and if you are doing that poorly, then you should get it. Trust me, ive logged probably 6 times as many hours as you on multiplayer, and there has not been one moment where i have thought damn, that shouldnt have happened. Your thoughts on how the multiplayer isnt that much different, are in my opinion wrong. Call of duty 4 Modern Warfare made one of the best online shooters ever to ocme out, and im sure most people would agree with me. Why is it bad, if MW2 didnt mess with that winning “formula” and just expanded and improved on it drastically. Sorry for the rant, other readers commment on this
So you’re agreeing that MW2 doesn’t do anything different than CoD4 while at the same time accusing me of saying that the mode isn’t that much different? Did I read that correctly? And how did they improve it drastically? Please explain because I don’t see how anything has been improved “drastically”. They tweaked the Perks, many of which return, and added Death Streaks and some more customizable parts. I said all those were great, or did you miss that part of the review? My opinion is that Death Streaks don’t do anything to balance the game, and I don’t care how many more hours of MP you have versus me. I have a friend who has reached Prestige at level 70, started over, is now on level 22 (technically level 92), and shares my opinion. Death Streaks don’t do much at all to help those who suck. That’s my opinion, dude. I’ve never once owned a ton of people after getting Painkiller, it’s a simple fact. Ten seconds of boosted health is cool, but NOT a balance factor. I don’t know why you’re so offended I have that view. LOL
And my review is unbiased because it doesn’t give a mode a perfect score of 10 when it doesn’t deserve a score of 10. No multiplayer game does everything perfect because you’re assuming, with that statement, that all available options for all multiplayer engines have been explored, and I’m sorry, they haven’t. There will be better games that come out in the future. My score is my opinion and my opinion doesn’t require you to agree with me. I don’t mind you disagreeing, but hitting me with “it should get a 10″ is a fanboy statement. OK, I gave it a 9.8…sorry dude. That means that .2 of those two modes aren’t perfect…shoot me.
My question to you is this: why did you find Veteran frustrating, then, if the AI isn’t cheap and does things exactly as they would in real life? If it’s not cheap, then why did it frustrate you? There were many times when it didn’t frustrate me, but more often than not, it did. Why? Because the game does things that are stupid. Agree or not, that’s what the frustration comes from.
Play Chernobyl in SpecOps on Veteran…by yourself…then let’s discuss AI cheapness. I beat it last night, finally, by myself. It’s insane, and those Ghillie Snipers always have the bead on you even though you sneak into house that has completely obsured you from their line of sight. You end up getting killed out of nowhere, play it again, memorize that location, get killed, play again and try to memorize that location, repeat. That’s not cheap AI? Human enemies have that type of sixth sense, then? LOL OK, you’re entitled to your opinion.
B.T Robertson I totally agree with you on MW2. Being a mere 17 years old, I think you’d place me in the Halo fanboy camp lol (as an aside I personally think the Halo series WAS amazing but is now dead in the water, I mean ODST was a rip off of Rainbow Six). With regards to MW2, I detest this game (I’d much rather have an intense shootout on Radec Academy in Killzone 2 anyday
) for the same reasons you didn’t like it. The enemies feel like theyhave X-Ray vision and assault rifles with some sort of lock on device! As for multi-player, it was ok but felt the same to me. I’m a single player game kinda guy but I do love online play to. MW2 however, dissapointed me in every way. The title of the game is just fucked up. I mean how do you go from COD4:MW to COD:MW2. I think they should have taken the 4 out of MW, marketed COD5: World at War as COD4 instead and then having a modern warfare style series would have felt better. I mean I’m sure others (maybe even yourself) will join me in saying that after having COD4:MW, they were like WTF!!! when they saw COD5 was set in WW2 again lol. Anyway dude great review, nice to se someone not being biased. Cya on PSN!
Oh FanaticalAz is my PSN I.D. That was probably obvious, but I just thought I’d clarify
Thanks Fanatical. I think the naming issue came about because of Activision, not Infinity Ward. Activision, the publisher of Call of Duty games, decided to farm out one of the numbered sequels in the CoD series – Call of Duty 3 – to a sister company Activision acquired, called Treyarch. This pissed IW off to no end because they didn’t mind that another team got a crack at the CoD license, but hated that it was a numbered sequel.
I didn’t go into this in any real depth in my first impressions review because you can read it on Wiki or any number of places online, but basically, IW named the first Modern Warfare “Call of Duty 4″ because they wanted the next numbered sequel. However, it’s worth noting that the executable for CoD4 is called “CoD3.exe” (or something like that…I’m not 100% sure of the exact name other than it does have a “3″ in it). This was IW’s way of thumbing their nose at Treyarch and Activision…they felt that their game should’ve been the true Call of Duty “3″.
Treyarch made CoD:WaW…which is NOT a numbered sequel. People call it CoD5, but it’s really not. I know that gamers, myself included, aren’t concerned over the drama, but I love fun facts and stuff like this.
CoD: MW2 is the 2nd installment in the MW series, which began at CoD4, but it’s not CoD6.
LOL!! I know, it’s all nuts, it’s all silly, but in truth it’s not fully IW’s fault. If they were the sole developer on the CoD franchise, I’m quite certain we’d have a much more cohesive character base and numbering format…at least I hope so. But, we’ll never know otherwise, will we?
Well said BT, and very fair review IMO. I’ve grown a bit tired of gushing fan-boy reviews found on popular gaming websites. MW2 has three distinct modes of gameplay, succeeding best in Multiplayer, above average in SpecOps, and faltering in the SP Campaign. No one will argue MW2 graphics, sound, and controls are less than top notch. All of the environ designs are great – no dispute here. A short disjointed storyline presented in the SP Campaign IS a problem and does NOT automatically qualify for a high score because it uses the same graphics, sound, controls and environments as other modes of gameplay. As a matter of fact, another element known as AI, makes it worse!
Here’s my example: No way a sniper can score a hit as you quickly (literally 1 second) cross an opening (between tanks) revealing yourself for the first time in the area. That’s just cheap! The only saving grace, which by the way is artificial, is the fact you aren’t outright killed by that one hit. The overall AI fault comes in the form of how keenly aware and how deadly accurate enemies are – even at distance.
Don’t get me wrong here. I enjoy playing MW2 and have managed to overlook these faults. To credit MW2, the improvements in the Multiplayer experience are outstanding and the two player (overwatch) Spec-Ops missions are fantastic and unforgettable. I can truthfully say the MW1 story and characters were much more compelling than MW2. I’ll be playing split-screen SpecOps missions with my son and online Multiplayer with friends for a long time to come. The SP Campaign would not hold an audience if packaged alone and does not offer much desire to play thru it again.
Multiplayer has balance issues too. There is no filter to sort players into matches with like-skilled/equipped players. Simply put, low-level players are nothing more than fodder for high-level players to build their stats. Earned unlocks, perks, streaks, etc. provide a definite advantage over low-level opponents. Deathstreaks are a joke. On a deathstreak, you can “steal” an opponent’s class after you bite the dust 4 times… until you get whacked again. Trouble is, you may not even get off a shot while under this “borrowed” class… in effect, you get killed 4 times for every one time spent on even ground – effectively multiplying their stats while yours suffer. And the Spwan Boost – what a joke – in 10 seconds how many enemies can you find? More often than not, NONE! Wouldn’t a level or equipment filter make more sense here? It can be frustrating for awhile until you earn enough goodies for yourself. It cannot be argued that Heartbeat Sensors make difference.
I’m old school gamer who loves the standard today’s games have achieved – I own both the PS3 and Xbox 360 – and they sure make me wish I was a kid once again. I’m 41 and my favorite game genre is military FPS. I’ve enjoyed many over the years including the entire Rainbow Six series, the entire Ghost Recon series, many of the Delta Force series, many of the CoD series, original Battlefield games, and well, too many others to mention.
I played alongside BT to achieve stars in SpecOps missions – for his system and mine. We had a good time – co-op is FUN. But the AI is unnecessarily frustrating at some points.
Does MW2 qualify for GotY? Well, in a word, no.
i’m at work at can’t reply at length to the threads above, but i’m thoroughly impressed at the thoughtful analysis applied to, of all things, a video game.
hats off to b.t. and dildonics for such an enlightened dialogue. i was already a mw2 fan(atic), but you guys just made me proud of being one.
if either of you (or anyone) are on ps3, look me up: carlosx911.
Good review. I think a review in the eights is just right for this title. I felt the same way last year when Grand Theft Auto IV was racking up perfect score after perfect score. In fact I feel very similar about both games. Both games follow brilliant titles: COD4 and GTA3 and both titles just kind of bored me whereas their predecessors barely left my consoles. For COD my big complaint is the really boring multiplayer. I don’t know about anyone else but after two years of Halo and COD I find myself craving something new. In fact I find myself playing the Battlefield Beta twice as much as my retail COD. I just find MW2, well boring, and I know I’m in the minority on that one but there are quite a few of us. Good review. This IW jock sniffing is getting old.
Hey listen, great review. I sure couldn’t write that much. As weird as it sounds to me, I guess this game is not for everyone. In order for someone to like this game as much as I do you just need to get into it. I’m the kinda dude who did not stop playing until I got to the last prestige in COD4. I have smashed controllers, punched walls and been very very upset at what some people might just call “A game”. If you just aren’t too good at the game you might really hate it cause you play against this killing machines who have had way too many red-bulls. There is something about shooting games that really put you to defend your pride at whatever cost ^.^ When some kid with a modded controller kills you a bunch of times simply cause his daddy paid 100 bucks to make his kid stop crying, you aren’t going to be happy. I am 19 and have been in front of a console since I was strong enough to hold the controller. I can say that I have never played a game for the number of days as I have played both COD4 and 6. I guess i’m not good enough to tell you the “thing” that MW has that you just can’t do anything besides picking up the controller and playing for hours and hours. Btw people need to start seeing that single player is just not as strong anymore. Unless a game can offer a perfect SP and MP, they are just going to put their work into the MP. Of course there are tittles that offer those good and deep stories filled with puzzles and levels that you wish you could pay someone to pass for you. Of course when this awesome SP game offer some MP, they just never get it right. What I am trying to say is that you need to look at this type of game is a different way. You would just be lying to yourself if you said that it is a bad game. Happy playing
Trust me, Oscar, I’ve been getting very much into it. The more I play it, the more I enjoy it…the multiplayer mode, that is. I’m done with Single Player for good…I’ve got 100% completion in it, so it’s done. SpecOps…I’m 52 stars out of 69 in and almost done. I’m a completist by nature, so I’d love to have Platinum in this title. SpecOps is the mode that will give me that, at this point, but Multiplayer is highly addictive and fun. That mode definitely has that “thing” you are alluding to.
Dude it’s just a game. How many games have you designed?
Just enjoy it and hope for improvements next time around huh?
Games have come a long way since I’ve been playin’ ‘em.
Trust me they’ll keep getting better every year.
So don’t take it so seriously.
It’s the top of the line for now young fella.
Great review kid.
Hate to break it to you, Jack, but I’m not a kid. In the future, it’s not wise to refer to someone as “kid” who is in their 30′s, cool? And it’s not about me designing the games, it’s being critical and honest about a product that someone else designed and holds their hand out for us to pay them for. In that sense, I don’t have to design a game in order to be critical because I’m not charging someone for a product I’m selling. Look at my book reviews – I do write books, I’ve had some tough reviews, it’s life, deal with it. Only an adult would see the truth in this process. Cheers.
I found your review to be probably the best I could find, we are many years apart (16) but we both share the burden of being in modern gaming’s minority, which is of course preferring an immersive and intricate single player to a beefed up mega mutiplayer beast with a feeble SP mode. I, like millions of other humans, loved the shit out of CoD4, I was fascinated and obsessed with the singleplayer mode, I think IW did a great job building the depth of the squads you rolled with (referring to the SAS and Force recon) I found myself enjoying, even after many replays, the banter of Cpt. Price and Gaz, or the comradery and trust the marines expressed for eachother, whilst still maintaining an epic and heart pumping action plot. IW did a good job and keeping it slightly believable yet still grandious. And of course the MP mode was the greatest thing I had experienced since BF2.
So like most americans I reserved MW2, only difference is, within 2 months I sold it and reserved mass effect 2.
The story was sub-par, if that. The characters lacked the depth I had grown fond to in CoD4, and the plot was overall ridiculous. Don’t get me wrong, I LOVED the escape mission in the favela, jumping off the roofs under militia fire onto a helicopter ladder. But as I was being carried into a little bird with cpt. price and then unexpectedly thrown into credits I was blasted with dissapointment. I felt halfway in when it ended, not too mention a little frazzled after trying hard to convince myself that ‘this could really happen’ over and over again.
Multiplayer mode fed my impulsive side quite well, I ranked up quick, but was quite dissapointed. I know i may be the only to feel this way, but I hated the MP mode. No matter how much I played, I died every 3 seconds, from airstrike this, or killstreak that, it was just too much for me, it felt void of any skill required to get kills, like you were a 1 man army blowing up everything in sight with these high powered, super guns.
Oh well, I’m getting tired of this rant. Thank you for showing the flaws of this supposedly infalible gargantuate, i’m glad another has the same sentiments as I.