F*ck Modern Warfare 2!!

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jon, Chicago's Mindfreak on November 16, 2009 at 6:28pm

Haven't played it and don't plan to.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Elf™（Original) on November 16, 2009 at 7:38pm

Im with you also.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Porter on November 17, 2009 at 3:38am

I finished it last night in a single 4 hour 55 minute sitting. This is a far too brief game for the Australian $89 price tag. But in that 5 hour sitting I found myself going "Fuck Yeah" at alot of parts eg Space Misson and the Prison Break you know which part guys. But the plot was truly bad and the last 2 missions hinge on a very unnecessary twist that just left me confused for the final 30 minutes of game play.



Uncharted 2 remains to be my game of the year!

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by eDDo on November 17, 2009 at 2:19pm

IMO if you bought call of duty for the single player campaign, then you are stupid to begin with. It was fairly obvious from the get go that modern warfare 2 was gonna be mainly for online play.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Elf™（Original) on November 17, 2009 at 3:56pm

That's utter bollocks, if your spending much on a game then you expect the single to be a couple of days worth of gameplay, this is the problem with games these days, they don't think of the chap that doesn't have or want on-line play.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by corey vire on November 20, 2009 at 10:53am

people spent 60+ just for WoW online. The story included for the same reason it is in all of these . to get new players used to the game or for the few who never ever go online.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by The Leo of Costa Rica on November 17, 2009 at 5:23pm

Then why would you include the campaign in the first place?

Excuse me for thinking I was getting my 60$ worth!

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by MDS on November 17, 2009 at 5:43pm

I think eDDo meant that if you go back over all the "demo footage" and leaked information regarding the game prior to release, you'll see that almost everything that was being said/marketed was geared to the Multi-player aspect, and not the Single-player aspect.

And every game, no matter how good or lame, comes with a "campaign" (Or at least single-player) built in.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by MyWifeDave on November 17, 2009 at 9:19pm

What's wrong with multiplayer? It's what's making the games industry what it is and its causing the creation of larger scale games and, hopefully, in the future we will see the insane money of Gears of War and GTA going into the story modes of games worth playing.

You don't like multiplayer, thats cool. It can be a real fucking pain (though personally I think that's solely due to the fact you have to interact with teenagers who have been given the gift of anonymity) but everyone knew this games story mode would be a side bar but for a fucking side bar it was damn good. Higher quality story telling than Killzone 2.

Multiplayer will never be perfect because you can't control it but in this example it's far more polished and well thought out than any other multiplayer on the damn market. If you bought this game, after buying the Call of Duty 4 and you thought that the story was gonna be so fucking great and a total improvement over the flaws of the first one then you're a moron. If you hoped then you should have waited until Christmas so it was someone else's cash. Its the same, if not a little longer than Call of Duty 4 was and while the story telling used the same bones it did it in a pretty damn entertaining way compared to the mental degenerates in Hollywood.

Also, where do you live? £50+? I have been to three ASDA's, two Tecos and a morrisons where the game was selling at 25-26 pound fucking sterling (with no shortage of the game in any one of those stores. You couldn't wait three days and maybe look around for it if you thought it was too expensive. I'm gonna assume that you're on the Internet: It's on play.com at £45 which has been the normal selling rate for high profile games since the beginning of the summer.

You're just bitching boy and you know it.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by MDS on November 17, 2009 at 11:29pm

I got nothing against multiplayer. In fact, I still play COD4 multiplayer to this day. What I'm upset about with MW2's multiplayer, is that it's geared towards the console and not the PC. Games are small (9v9 instead of 15v15). The maps are smaller than COD 4's. There aren't any dedicated servers that "Clans" can use to play on to work together. It's impossible to hold a tournament now because the "servers" haven't the ability to be "privately dedicated" ones that are paid by 3rd parties. The hackers, cheaters, disrespectful "Rule-breakers" can't get kicked or banned by a server. The "achievements" of MW2 sort of suck compared to COD4.....

Just after all the "advancements" that MW2 was supposed to do for the multiplayer aspect, it actually took HUGE steps backwards.

As far as the "Story line" goes. The one in COD4 at least made SENSE. The story line in MW 2 is nothing but complete dogshit compared to the rest of COD's history. Okay, I'm not looking for the worlds BEST story in single playet, just looking for one that is logical and makes sense.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Undkor on November 17, 2009 at 6:34pm

..... It seems to me that you aren't "sick to death" of Modern Warfare 2, but rather modern gaming.

I'm sorry sir, but nearly every new release will be priced at the same value, will attract douchebags if online features are hosted, and many games are forsaking their solo campaign for multiplayer.

*cough*killzone2*cough*

I suggest investing in a new hobby!

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Elf™（Original) on November 17, 2009 at 8:05pm

OH HELL NO MISTER.

▶ Reply to This

• First
• Previous
• Next
• Last