Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 Review

More Game Info (Print This Article)

Graphics:

8.4

Gameplay:

8.8

Sound:

9.7

Control:

9.0

Replay Value:

9.0

Online Gameplay:

9.0

Overall Rating: 8.9

Publisher:

Activision

Developer:

Infinity Ward

Number Of Players:

1-2 (18 Online)

Genre:

FPS

Screenshots

Read this before you post comments: So you see yet another dreaded 8.9, and convince yourself that it's a bad score. You will likely jump down my throat, call me a whole bunch of names, and vow to never read my work again. And that's all good, if you're a 13-year old who doesn't wish to read and understand the opinion of one game critic, who strongly believes that even though Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 is a great game, it doesn't offer nearly enough groundbreaking material to warrant a 9.0. And in fact, at times, the game feels like it's taken a few steps backward in some instances. And before the alarmists and conspiracy-theorists come to claim I'm doing this to get attention, don't even waste your time. If I was, indeed trying to whore in the attention, I'd have given Modern Warfare 2 a score much lower than an 8.9. Moreover, I'd probably choose a massive 1st party game, say, like Uncharted 2, instead of a multi-platform title. Again, it's important to keep your cool and read through the whole review to see where I'm coming from.

Modern Warfare 2 picks up from where the last game left off. The gameplay is very much like the first game, except in this sequel, gameplay allows you to carry two primary/large weapons, as opposed to a handgun and primary/large weapon. Likewise, you can also carry two handguns simultaneously, or dual-wield a pair of secondary guns akimbo-style. Certain weapons have secondary actions, such as shotgun blasts from a standard rifle, or grenade launching out of an automatic. Shooting is superbly precise, and enemies go down like they should, so you won't spend time unloading hordes of bullets into an enemy until he dies.

And that's one of the many aspects I really love about the Modern Warfare games, is that their shooting is absolutely satisfying, the mechanics are practically perfect, and the amount of recoil dialed in is just right. Bullets that hit anywhere in the upper part of the torso are almost always an instant death - as they should be - no matter how far away they came from. Shooting in the legs will render an enemy badly injured, but not completely out of action, as they will continue to shoot from the ground. I've even encountered the enemy A.I. playing dead after shooting him in the stomach, only to see him lift his arm and shoot at me again. Furthermore, the A.I. acts like this no matter what difficulty setting you have chosen, so be prepared.

Differences in difficulty seemed to largely change the accuracy of the A.I., and not so much their brains. The enemy A.I. retains their patterns of running, gunning, and covering, and these patterns are quite intricate, actually. You may see an enemy in one location, but if you don't act quick, he'll make his way closer to you, using the objects in between as cover, all the while taking a few shots at you. That said, prepare to die a lot, no matter what difficulty you choose, as the game environments are laden with baddies everywhere you look...and that brings me to my first problem with the game...

Unlike the first Modern Warfare, the sequel has lost its focus and is now way too run-and-gun happy. The first game had a problem with infinitely respawning enemies, and the sequel has a similar problem of way too many enemies appearing simultaneous. This becomes an issue because if you're in a more linear level like the ones in Rio, you think to yourself "oh, I cleared the group of enemies, so no one should come from behind me", but you'd be wrong. In fact, despite clearing enemies out and advancing, you are never safe, and your A.I. teammates often don't do a good enough job at helping kill an attacker coming from behind you. The game simply throws way too many enemies at you, and there isn't nearly enough support with you to do an adequate job of containing them properly, so you'll often find yourself encountering a cheap death.

The absurd amount of enemies may feel epic at first, reminiscent of games like Medal of Honor: Allied Assault, but it wears thin quickly down the campaign, as it simply starts to feel repetitive and redundant. And in that respect, the first Modern Warfare felt like it had more varied mission structure, mixing the speed with the stealth and the epicness with the tension. Furthermore, the campaign is still extremely short, once again measuring in at about 6 hours of total play, with a not-so-great ending. On top of that, the story is extremely boring, and you almost forget that there even is one - it's just very poorly executed. And while I full well realize that it's the online aspect of Modern Warfare 2 that many of you buy the game for, it doesn't mean that the game should get a free pass into a higher score range just because it has a bustling online world, but we'll get to that later.

Another issue I have is the annoying blood splats that fill up your screen when you're shot. Quite honestly, it's a pointless visual effect that is extremely distracting when you're playing, because it makes it nearly impossible to see the enemy that's shooting you when your screen is stained with red blood and becomes blurred. Now, the easy to solution to this would be to just run away and wait until the stains clear, right? Unfortunately, you'll run into problems doing so...literally. With your screen covered in blood and blurred, it's fairly hard to see where it is you're going, as objects outside of your view will prevent you from running any further, leaving you vulnerable to more hits, once again leading to a cheap death.

And would you believe that I also have a problem with the online gameplay? I mean, yes, online is fantastic fun, largely thanks to the superb game mechanics still present, such as the experience points. And it's a great way to collect tons of items/perks and upgrade your character, giving it an almost RPG-like element, which makes the online gameplay so endearing. But 18 players? Really? I mean, I've been refraining from making any sort of comparisons to other FPS games, but we have games offering 32, 40, 60, and soon, 256 player online matches...and Modern Warfare 2 still offers 18? It's just odd to me that a game with such a massive budget, so much hype, with such a talented team doesn't, at least, offer an extra eight players or so two years later. To me, this industry is all about progress, and in many ways, I feel like Modern Warfare 2 doesn't make very much of it over the original.

The assortment of multiplayer modes is great fun, though, and if you're fine with the 18-player limit, then you'll still find a lot to love. Free-For-All, Search & Destroy, Demolition, Domination, Team Deathmatch, and Capture The Flag should be all self-explanatory, but with these new modes also come a host of new features. First, and foremost, no longer will matches get dropped if the host leaves - instead the game pauses and a new host is selected, which allows the game to resume from the moment it stopped at. Next up, are the kill streak rewards which there are 15 of. Kill streaks are achieved when you accomplish an uninterrupted streak of kills, as a reward for achieving a streak kill, you will be given a reward to use during the match. One such reward is summoning an assault gunship to rain hell on your enemies from the sky. Another is gaining the ability to use a remote missile strike and controlling the missile yourself. Of course, some of these rewards are harder to achieve than others, and they are not random, as a 25 streak earns one thing, and a four streak earns a whole other.

Visually, from the moment I booted up Modern Warfare 2, I was met with disappointment. First, the game still runs at a sub-720p resolution, so if it's not looking as sharp as you'd like on your HD screen, you know why. Second, the textures leave a whole lot to be desired, as you're going to see one low-quality texture after another almost everywhere you look. And while it's normal for a game to have even a few low-res textures (Uncharted 2 had a few), Modern Warfare 2 might have a bit too many. Once again, all of this is met with disappointment, because I had assumed that two years later, we'd be looking at a powerhouse of a game. And while the lighting in the game is superb, the animation practically flawless, and the environments/locales nice to look, your eyes may still focus on those textures, and your lungs will let out a sigh. Also, the smoke effects have an awkward and flat look to them, reminiscent of stuff I've seen in PC games many years ago, at the start of the decade. But, despite that, Modern Warfare 2 does run super smoothly, as the game is V-locked, so that means no screen tearing, and the framerate hovers between the 40-60 mark, which makes for a smooth experience.

Audio is still as good as it was years ago, but with even more ambient screams, chants, cries, explosions, and just general chaos. You'd be doing this game, and yourself, a disservice if you didn't have your PS3 paired to a sound system. And I know that I'm always going on about audio setups, but you simply have to understand just how important it is in a game like this, where audio is an extremely immersive gameplay tool. There is a solid amount of voice acting here, both during missions and in between them when you are being briefed. Voice work is very well done, as you'd expect, and you likely won't find any complaints here.

Once again, it needs to be stressed that this 8.9 is not a bad score, and if you'd like to discuss or argue it in the comments, I can only welcome calm and professional responses. My basis for the score is one that boils down to a number of issues, one of which is Killzone 2, which I felt offered more as an overall package. Now, it was only a matter time before I made a Killzone 2 mention, and I figured it'd best be done during the conclusion. As is normal in any industry, there are benchmarks, and it is only fair that those benchmarks are constantly tested and compared to. I believe that Sony had set a certain bar by offering a game that looked astonishingly good, boasted 32 player online matches, a great story, a lengthy and very enjoyable campaign, and sounded absolutely insane. I expected Infinity Ward to do all of that and then some, but ultimately their game falls when it comes down to the campaign, online limitations, story and visuals. It does have an online core that does provide more depth as far as rewards and extras go, and the co-op gameplay is great too (even if it isn't campaign based), but it's not quite enough to overcome the rest of Modern Warfare 2's shortcomings.

Had it not been for the existence of Killzone 2, this game would've easily scored in the nines, but the balance of things change when there is that one benchmark that is so well rounded in practically every aspect, that, to me, it'd almost feel like I'm lying to myself by saying Modern Warfare 2 is as good as the benchmark. As it stands, Modern Warfare 2 is a great game, there is no doubt about it, but its shortcomings make it feel as if the game has stagnated and doesn't feel evolved, at all. And in some ways, I actually think the first Modern Warfare was better. Shame, but that's just my opinion, as heartbreaking as it may be for some of you to read it.

11/12/2009 Arnold Katayev

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Comments (258 posts)

Toggle Scrolling | Reload Comments

InBlackestNight
Thursday, November 12, 2009 @ 11:37:11 PM
Reply

I think that's the first truly honest review I've seen for this game. Thank you!

43 up, 2 down

armedkiller
Thursday, November 12, 2009 @ 11:39:49 PM

I agree, this site has a knack for down-to-earth, honest-to-God, quality reviews. Keep up the good work!

21 up, 1 down

Qubex
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:35:25 AM

Thanks Arnold, a perfect review... Killzone 2 - no doubt - still king... all hail exclusives... I ma tired of buying sub-par games... only the best on my shelf, even if that amounts to 10 games!

Q!

"i am home"

10 up, 4 down

Kempy21
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 3:44:59 AM

finally a honest review i didn't think I'd ever see one. really good review this is why i come to this website.

8 up, 1 down

mastiffchild
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:00:42 AM

I'd have knocked a nmark off straight away for there being nop dedicated servers on any layform myself. PS3 owners are quite used tio the merits of them these days allowing many more people online than the paltry rip off offered by the apparently going backwards with multiplayer IW.

The story is also completely silly and a step vack from the excellent pacing of the first game. I haven't bought the game as I don't think IW/Acti deserve any of our money this time round and shafting the eU and PC gamer was pretty crappy, imo. However I've watched 90% of the campaign and loads of the spec ops and MP to knopw what the games about andd , to me, the "airport terrorit" level is done just for the press in generated and could have been handled better in a differnt way-say in a flashback during narative with a scarred, mentally demoralised former operative, no?

The nig one, though, is for the lack of dedicated servers which smacks to me of IW starting not to cre about the overall quality of their product. It was the most onvious move forwards for a ganme oft touted as the online game of the year and it isn't like they're strapped is it?

BTW, most of my mates would totally agree with your scoring Arnold. They average between 8.5-9/10. 9v9 doesn't cut it for me anymore-when a game as small, in comparison, as Warhawk can manage 16v16 lagdree on dedicated servers the fact this doesn't is a greedy, money grabbing disgrace and they should be ashamed at the mess they made.

7 up, 1 down

Jut420
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:05:02 AM

That's why this is literally the only site whose opinion I consider when I'm on the fence about a purchase. They tell it like it is and always point out everything that's important. I realized it when I read a review for a game that I had already played and after reading all I could say was, "Wow, I couldn't have written this any better." You guys are great here at PSX!!

5 up, 0 down

Danny007
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 7:03:06 PM

Totally correct. This game is so not perfect like other reviews say it is. Uncharted 2 is the only game that comes close to perfection. Uncharted 2 for game of the year!

2 up, 0 down

Gone
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:12:17 PM

It's nice to know that there still exist a true gaming site that does not follow the hype and gives real reviews. Keep up the good work.

Your nickname should be AK47 (Arnold Katayev 47) for shooting down the hype.

5 up, 3 down

THEVERDIN
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 10:55:43 AM

I agree with everything said and would also add that sometimes it's hard to get to your objectives, seems like I get lost or blocked out of areas.

0 up, 0 down

armedkiller
Thursday, November 12, 2009 @ 11:38:03 PM
Reply

Spot On! I like the game, it just seems to me that after two years the game should have made leaps and bounds, especially in the graphics department. I found the story to be lack-luster, but still worth playing.

Ultimately, the game falls short of the hype.

Last edited by armedkiller on 11/12/2009 11:40:47 PM

9 up, 1 down

xxnova
Thursday, November 12, 2009 @ 11:39:32 PM
Reply

Very good, fellas.

3 up, 0 down

WolfCrimson
Thursday, November 12, 2009 @ 11:47:45 PM
Reply

Nice review, Arnold. As in : you didn't get influenced by peer pressure and hype. This is what I like about this site. The reviews just tell it as it is.

On a sidenote: Uncharted 2 has some low rez textures? Really? I didn't find any, but if you could, could you like point out where they are? I wanna see this for myself; this is like finding a sasquatch in an urban city!

8 up, 1 down

ArnoldK PSXE [Administrator]
Thursday, November 12, 2009 @ 11:52:16 PM

Heh, there were a few to see, I won't lie. I don't recall exactly where, but they were in the game for sure. ;)

7 up, 4 down

raztad
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 7:56:52 AM

You can find them mostly on the floor (stones look pretty bad), exactly where nobody is looking at while playing :D. Pretty smart.

Nice review BTW, with all those flaws a 8.5 would be more accurate :)

5 up, 1 down

Jawknee
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:46:10 AM

I remember seeing a few too but they didn't stick out nearly as bad as the ones In MW2. Naughty Dog did an excellent job hiding them. I came across a majority of them while I was examining the environtments and scenery. They go completely unnoticed in normal game play.

2 up, 0 down

TheCrazyMerc
Thursday, November 12, 2009 @ 11:48:20 PM
Reply

the best reviews ive seen. They tell whether or not I would buy a game.

2 up, 0 down

jerocarson
Thursday, November 12, 2009 @ 11:48:34 PM
Reply

Nice. . .
But but How come games with perfect scores don't sell as much . .

4 up, 0 down

LimitedVertigo
Thursday, November 12, 2009 @ 11:49:00 PM

They aren't multiplatform FPS.

14 up, 0 down

LimitedVertigo
Thursday, November 12, 2009 @ 11:48:37 PM
Reply

Glad to see you found a few of the same faults I noticed with the game.

9 up, 2 down

MyWorstNightmar
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:37:12 AM

You played the game? I would not have thought you would have played it, bought it or even rented it with previous posts you have made filled with disdain towards this game and any FPS for that matter. Thought you would have been too busy with Demon’s Souls, or Dragon Age.

Last edited by MyWorstNightmar on 11/13/2009 12:37:50 AM

3 up, 0 down

LimitedVertigo
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:04:47 AM

I didn't buy it, or rent it. I did however play it, took me a little over 5hrs to finish the game. I'm not one of those twerps that bashes a game without fulling experiencing it, that would just be ignorant.

My disdain for FPS? I love FPS, true FPS. I'm not a fan of console FPS or games like MW2 which go backwards instead of forward in terms of gameplay. In fact I've already preordered LFD2 and I'm buying BC2 on day one.

I'm currently enjoying my 2nd playthrough Demon's Souls and recently started TorchLight on my PC.

4 up, 4 down

Qubex
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:37:44 AM

I am expecting a very high score for Bad Company 2... a day one buy for me too... that Frostbyte engine sings out allowed to me.

Q!

"i am home"

2 up, 0 down

Geobaldi
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 3:47:45 AM

Torchlight is an addicting little game. Great warmup for Diablo 3 as well.

1 up, 0 down

MyWorstNightmar
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 10:38:15 AM

Limited, so you made it all the way through Demon's Souls? I would like to play that game, I have heard it is very difficult. Might be too frustrating a purchase for me, but I also don't want to miss out on a fantastic game.

Last edited by MyWorstNightmar on 11/13/2009 10:38:51 AM

0 up, 0 down

LimitedVertigo
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:14:37 PM

Demon's Souls can be VERY intimidating in the early going. But if you keep at it after a few hours of playing you will start to get the hang of things and it wont be as tough as you might think. VERY rewarding game and it totally sucks you into the environment. A MUST game for anyone remotely interested in RPGs or action.

0 up, 0 down

Daedusian
Thursday, November 12, 2009 @ 11:50:33 PM
Reply

Yes, very good honest review! Something in the 9's is TOO good for this game, which EVERYONE seems to be giving. Personally, I'd give it an 8. The story is lame and short and the MP is much the same as the first. However, I was never a BIG fan of the CoD franchise in the first place, but I do enjoy their games. If MoH kept their old-school formula, I'd be following them, but they have really sucked for the past X years..

4 up, 1 down

Bagmup
Thursday, November 12, 2009 @ 11:54:27 PM

Multiplayer is totally different imo.In fact, it felt quite foreign to me at first and i played CoD4 everyday until MW2's release.

4 up, 0 down

Qubex
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:39:25 AM

Why did K sell his Craptivision shares? ...because he knew the truth!

Q!

"i am home"

2 up, 1 down

johnld
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:08:52 AM

in my opinion, the matchmaking sucks. I was a level 1 and was set up against people who were 30+. before i even got a feel of the map i get bombarded with all these killstreak rewards. after that it was fine. But this game is unforgiving to lower level players.

1 up, 0 down

Bagmup
Thursday, November 12, 2009 @ 11:51:55 PM
Reply

SP is a little dissapointing, but i mainly bought it for the online and it's a 10/10 for me.

4 up, 5 down

chucknasty
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:00:13 AM
Reply

Is the game really only four hours long or is that coming from the same people who beat RE5 professional mode just using a knife and only died in Demon's Souls by choice to darken tendency?
I get that the online is the appeal for most but as I suck at FPS vs modes that is not a selling point for me.

0 up, 0 down

Oxvial
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:08:52 AM

my friend its pretty good on FPS but not godly to do those feats you are mentioning XD.

I see him beating the game he owned the sp in 5 hours I'd say if you suck perhaps you gonna need 7 or 8.

still sp story wasn't epic if you are not going to use the mp don't buy it.

Last edited by Oxvial on 11/13/2009 12:09:41 AM

1 up, 3 down

chucknasty
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:17:36 AM

Thanks! Good feedback.

0 up, 0 down

godsman
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:12:57 AM

Same here, I'm not interested in FPS. You just don't get the connection with the main character if you don't see him in action.

1 up, 3 down

ebterp
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:09:04 AM
Reply

The reviews are so refreshing on this site. I appreciate the time you guys take to really discuss a game. My copy is coming tomorrow and I am very interested in the "feel" of the gameplay as the 1st Modern Warfare was just superb in that department. I would say I will play it this weekend but I am fully engaged in Uncharted 2.

1 up, 0 down

chicko1983
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:18:24 AM
Reply

meh, I dont buy a game unless it gets a 9 at least.

2 up, 12 down

Snaaaake
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 7:07:39 AM

So that means you're not getting Ratchet and Clank A Crack In Time?

5 up, 0 down

Random_Steve
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:28:46 PM

outrage! lol, but really get it, tis worth it

0 up, 0 down

chicko1983
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 2:38:15 AM

sorry, was being sarcastic - doesn't get picked up on the interwebs well.

My point is, if you worry about a review score because it determines whether or not you will buy it is complete nonsense.

People are saying well done to Arnold for sticking to his principles and not bowing to hype when reviewing games (and I also commend him for it), but the fact that he has to preface the review with a disclaimer is sad reflection of the sate gaming reviewing is in at the moment.

I sure most FPS fans will like this game but it doesn't interest me, and neither does Ratchet, but each his own and that is what you have to remember when reading reviews as well.

1 up, 1 down

Scarecrow
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:34:50 AM
Reply

I agree fully with this review

Saw this game way before it came out on a modded 360 and didn't look that impressive (gameplay wise and graphics wise)

1 up, 1 down

MyWorstNightmar
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:40:20 AM

Modded 360? Does that mean that Microsoft shut that 360 down this week because it was modified? Interesting to see how many people buy a new 360 because of the ban, or will they jump ship and by a PS3. Depends if they have a lot invested in games I suppose. (ones that they legally purchased)

Last edited by MyWorstNightmar on 11/13/2009 12:41:26 AM

2 up, 0 down

Qubex
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:41:42 AM

If you are going to buy a 360 to mod it; don't play online; simple as that. Then you will have no issues... I don't have one and don't intent to get one... stick with my black beauty!

Q!

"i am home"

0 up, 0 down

Scarecrow
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:49:00 PM

I never said the modded 360 was mine

I "SAW IT" on a modded 360 (someone else's obviously)

I'd never buy junk with such a failure rate

4 up, 0 down

Qubex
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 8:45:13 PM

No probs Scare, was talking generally... as is, "if one were to buy a modded 360... bla bla"... just to clarify!

Q!

"i am home"

0 up, 0 down

BTNwarrior
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:36:09 AM
Reply

yeah the single player game seemed more like a gimmick. I was really dissapointed in the stealth/sniper mission, because after the epic stealth mission from the first game this one seemed like it was just tacked on.

multiplayer is still epic though, and this time around the best weapons get unlocked first and the worst ones last so you don't get raped by high level players. (I do miss my bolt action snipers though)

0 up, 0 down

MadKatBebop
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:46:50 AM
Reply

I really like this game, but this review speaks the truth 100%. Strange that this game was like this though, you never expect a COD game not to deliver its best!.

2 up, 1 down

Arvis
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:31:54 AM

Really? The first Modern Warfare was lightning in a bottle, but other than that, EVERY Call of Duty game was quite flawed.

But I thought the first MW was really freaking boring, anyways.

-Arvis

0 up, 2 down

AshT
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:49:14 AM
Reply

Loved the review Arnold, this is probably the first honest review i've read for MW2, good job.

4 up, 1 down

OriginalSin
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:51:40 AM
Reply

I don't see why people will complain if it scored in the (High) 8's... Unless they are completely blinded and follow the masses like sheep. I mean I rate any game above 8.5 as a great game. I fully understand that that different people have different preferences and like different things within games especially.

And I come to PSX because of the honest and in depth reviews you guys give. And any game that you rated above 8.5 has been awesome in my eyes. You guys made me do a lot of good buys and no impulse buys at all. Therefor giving me a game collection I can be proud of and saving me a heap of cash.

Anyway I think this was a great review and I will at some point definitely give MW2 a go. And i actually applaud you for giving your honest opinion and review and for not following the "Sheep". Keep it up that why I come to PSX.

On a side note...After playing Killzone 2 even thou it wasn't 100% perfect it game damn close in my books. And after my first play through I already knew that they have set the bar really high and from that point on FPS really had to step things up just to compare to Killzone 2 never mind surpass it.

And I'm not a biased fanboy... If Killzone 2 was an Xbox exclusive and it was the same quality than what it is now I would still say the same thing.

Multiplayer and online is not such a big thing for me. For me the story mode/campaign is still the most important element for me and if that is the focus or at the very least 100% on par with the multiplayer I tend to pay less attention to it no matter how big the hype.

In the end it doesn't matter if MW got a 8.9/ 9.9 or a 6.9 it is still one of the biggest and fastest selling games ever so it doesn't matter who scores it what... It already won.

Just nice to get an honest review and not one according to hype.

4 up, 2 down

godsman
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:55:33 AM
Reply

How do critics give the final score? That is one thing I always want to know. Everyone claims that the final score is not an average of graphics, gameplay etc. Is it something you feel the overall is worth, without having direct relation with the weights of each category scores?

BTW, I respect Ben for giving an honest score. Many critics are hyping games too often, and scores usually are a lot higher than they are worth. If a game is close to 10.0, that means theres no room for improvements.

Last edited by godsman on 11/13/2009 12:58:38 AM

0 up, 0 down

Fane1024
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 9:24:31 PM

No, it just means it's as good or better than anything previously released (i.e., it's state-of-the-art).

0 up, 0 down

Banky A
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:55:54 AM
Reply

Arnold, you know I want to jump down your throat and never read your work again. This is ludicrous!

ROFLOMG 8.9 sucks so bad, I'm disappointed & expected a 9.0
;)

6 up, 3 down

MadKatBebop
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:06:39 AM

Are you being sarcastic or for real?

1 up, 1 down

Qubex
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:43:46 AM

Come on Banky!

Q!

"i am home"

0 up, 1 down

Banky A
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:20:57 AM

^_^ you decide haha
C'mon Qubex, you know my style.

Last edited by Banky A on 11/13/2009 4:26:58 AM

4 up, 0 down

www
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:46:19 AM

I agree with Banky, I just hate that 8.9, 7.9 stuff, I just want it rounded off, so in this case I see it as a 9.0 all the same.

2 up, 1 down

Swim_Irr
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:06:23 AM
Reply

Hey Arnold, what did you think of the sound of the guns?

I personally thought they sounded kinda squeaky, high pitched. Is that just me or my sound system?

0 up, 0 down

Jawknee
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:25:25 AM

There was no level of boom or snap to them. I own an AR15(civilian model of the M4) and it doesn't sound like a damn toy. That sucker has some crack to it.

1 up, 0 down

Qubex
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:44:31 AM

Read the review; Arnold talks quite a bit about the sound quality!

Q!

"i am home"

0 up, 0 down

NiteKrawler
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:06:42 AM
Reply

Whatever Arnold! The game deserved an 8.91!!! Ha, just kidding of course. I'm actually quite surprised that you guys still give numerical scores after all the grief you are given by the sheeple. I never look at the score though. I'm more interested in what you have to say about the game's different elements.

1 up, 0 down

hobgoblin
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:07:39 AM
Reply

Thanks for the honest review. It's always refreshing to read a review on a site that doesn't base it on hype and the history of the title alone.

Graphics-wise i have to agree. When i first booted up, i thought it looked slightly better than the first, but then when I played the "Airport" level, to me, the shift in quality made it seem like this was tacked on as an afterthought. I even think that the graphics for MW were better than this one.

Here in the UK, I got my copy of PSM3 which reviewed the game and gave it 96% to which i rolled my eyes at. Am now waiting for the obligatory 10/10 that the Official Mag is going to give it.

I suppose that when you've seen what PS3 CAN do graphically (imo KZ2 and Uncharted 2), you kinda feel cheated when something like this comes along. Don't get me wrong, i love the multiplayer and will probably be playing it for ages, but if this gets Game of the Year, i'll be very disappointed.

Last edited by hobgoblin on 11/13/2009 1:11:09 AM

4 up, 1 down

Douchebaguette
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:07:43 AM
Reply

I laughed.

Which brings me to why I am disappointed...

...with IGN's review. I mean watch it! He clearly mentions the campaign being a huge flaw [clearly showing dissapointment with this flaw as well], and yet they still gave it a 9.5! WTF? Having a crap campaign is equivalent to losing a limb. No, your internal organs. Actually no, it's infact your brain.

Not only that, but the guy's words just felt inconfident, as if he struggled to actually make fits of joy out of the game's great points.

He mentions the co-op just being an "awesome, AWESOME mode", only mentioning it's basic stats without mentioning any strong detail to what makes it so double-awesome.

His main points about the decency of the multiplayer were balancing and "kill-streaks". Lame. And yet he didn't even mention the third person perspective mode; I so reckon this would be quite an unmissable feature to mention [is it?]. Other than mentioning the few advanced features for multiplayer [which sounds like a really nice improvement from COD4], he mentions that the venues are "extremely impressive" and that the "new-game modes rock", without even explaining why...and then he goes on to say that "Modern Warfare 2 has AGAIN set the bar for online shooters". Wow.

Their review felt pressured, and maybe my head is just up my a** but I could just feel it. Shame, because [other than PSXE] I like IGN's reviews. Better than Gametrailers' anyway.

__________________________
---------------------

This review however, which though was unexpected, gave the score around the margin I was hoping for. As soon as I heard that IW wanted to take out authenticity for a "live-action" feel, I knew this game would of buzzkilled.

Even so, despite me saying this, it doesn't stop me assuming that MW2's online is very, very fun. More fun than my days with COD4? I don't know, but it's really what each individual recreates with this game - not the game itself. I'm just glad the mechanics of COD4 kicked so much a** allowing gameplay to be very addictive which opened for those fun days. If MW2 is practically a polish of COD4, then at least I'll know what to expect. Though I fear that expectation can lead to disappointment...

2 up, 2 down

Jawknee
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:08:40 AM
Reply

Great review. I pretty much agree with everything except the audio part. I thought it was terrible and the guns mostly sounded the same. IW should have kept the same gun sound effects from the original. I liked that the AK47 had a different firing sound then the M4 Carbine etc. Now they all pretty much sound the same with a few exceptions. But they sounded cheap. They don't have the same level of pop or crack as they did in MW1 or even KZ2.

The graphics I have to agree were very subpar. Everything looks like construction paper and the colors looked like they had been through the washing machine a hundred and a dozen times. I didn't hate the game, but I was far more impressed with MW1. I think for me this is one of the most over appreciated games this gen. I'm glad I didn't get my hopes up. It was pretty much what I expected.

Last edited by Jawknee on 11/13/2009 1:18:38 AM

5 up, 1 down

Swim_Irr
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:19:41 AM

I had the same complaint about the sound. The gun sounds aren't satisfying in the very least.

2 up, 0 down

Jawknee
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:13:03 AM

One more thing. The 1911 isn't present in the entire game until end in the museum. Disappointment.

Last edited by Jawknee on 11/13/2009 2:16:09 AM

1 up, 0 down

Karosso
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 10:52:53 AM

Black had the best sounding guns of any shooter to date.

2 up, 0 down

orangpelupa
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:10:06 AM
Reply

@jawknee
the colors look bad on PS3 version but it can be fixed. by tweaking the monitor/tv brighness setting.

yes its a bit annoying, but MW2 will look A LOT better.

this "color" / "brighness" issue seems to occur both to PS3 and xbox version --> eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-modern-warfare-2-face-off/

@arnold
Arnold, thanks for this good review.

and yes im disappointed on the 18players online too.
and even more disappointed when i just got my PC version and found that it also ONLY 18 PLAYERS. ARGH!

i already OK playing with a few players on the console with my friends to kill some time when i busy or when im just too lazy to turn on my pc...

but when on weekend, me love the 50players on PC.. i miss 50player online play...

Last edited by orangpelupa on 11/13/2009 1:12:51 AM

1 up, 0 down

Jawknee
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:39:31 AM

Yea I tried adjusting the TV settings. I managed to make it loo better but when I quit my game the PS3 home screen looked like crap. Too much trouble.

0 up, 0 down

dillonthebunny
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:21:04 AM
Reply

for me the game is in the 9.5 area, but facts are facts.... tho single player is amazing, it does remind me of a killzone2 cod4 rainbow6 resistance hybrid bastad child, lol. good, but nothing but a series of incredibly controlled very playable intense comfort zones.

multiplayer is where il be spending my day with a lil spec ops. personality i think this game is worth every penyy, but i have to agree with your thought AK.

seems the community is behind you on this, thats a good sign.

3 up, 4 down

dillonthebunny
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:47:22 AM

damn i hate the combination of typing on a ps3, sitting too far away and being late for work, sorry for my typos in my previous post..

2 up, 2 down

www
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:48:22 AM

Yea me too, at least a 9.0 - 9.5 area.

4 up, 3 down

bigrailer19
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 10:45:25 AM

im with you guys! i think it brought alot more new features to be ignored. and the campaign this time around i actually enjoyed. MW campaign i did not like, but this one made me feel like i needed vengeance or something!

and dont get me started on the MP, and spec ops. i honestly thought the spec ops was gonna be a rip off, but im wowed by it! simply makes the game 10 times more valuable!

thats all im gonna say though, im tired of all the FPS hate around here so im done defending games i really enjoy to play. id rather play em' than argue with immature people, who cant respect ones opinion! if you dont like it thats cool, but i think its a 9.0 game which is in the 8.9 range which makes it a must play in my eyes! good review btw Arnold!

Last edited by bigrailer19 on 11/13/2009 10:51:49 AM

3 up, 2 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:42:07 PM

That's a good move Bigrailer, if the game tickles your gonads then it's best to play it over knocking your head against a wall trying to defend it.

The way I see it, games are very subjective, and even with an unbiased professional review it is still just an aid to gamers, in the end even I like some games that get ACTUAL low scores and dislike some that get high scores.

1 up, 0 down

bigrailer19
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 5:08:25 PM

yeah i mean i understand people have tastes. i just find it really hard to voice why i like the game, before getting shut down! lol you know what i mean!

anyways i do like it and im enjoying it so let me get back to what i was doin! ;)

1 up, 0 down

___________
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:26:19 AM
Reply

meh, if you ask me a 8.9 is very generous.
but how did i know this was going to happen?
its confirmed i can read the future!

3 up, 2 down

Qubex
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:47:51 AM

"anonymous"; I felt similar... from what I have seen from the gameplay videos and various video reviews; I would probably have scored it a little lower... again, my bar is Killzone 2!

Q!

"i am home"

Last edited by Qubex on 11/13/2009 2:48:07 AM

3 up, 2 down

___________
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 7:08:25 AM

for me BLACK set the bar.
thats the best FPS ive ever played.

2 up, 1 down

tridon
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:17:05 AM

My bar is still the original two Red Faction games on the PS2. Those are my favorite FPS games ever. Safe to say I was more than upset when the new RF became a third-person shooter.

0 up, 0 down

HAMCHUNKS
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:32:21 AM
Reply

i have to say Arnold, why is more better in a multiplayer
i believe it was limited to 18 for technical reasons (xbox or live capacity) and for balance issues, i h8 anything more than 16 in KZ2 because it becomes a frag fest and chaotic plus i can only enjoy MAG because of its massive maps, again limited due to MS reason IMO
and why is it a bad thing that the Co-Op part not be related to the campaign when the story was really horrible LOL i heard their are some great experiences on Co-Op from my friends and im still excited

0 up, 5 down

mastiffchild
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:06:53 AM

But not everyonme likes smaller games, do they? With dedicated servers there would have been the possibility to hve many m,ore or even fewer players if you wished, no?

While they were at it why not allow mod support like we got for UT3? Dedicated servers are just BETTER and if IW cared either about gamers or their online experience they'd have given them to us. Christ it's nearly 1020 and they're still using P21P on a game this big and famed for MP!??

Dedicateds kill the lag fairies as much as possible and you don't get a game wrecked by host advantage or crappy connections of other payers so much-I'm still peeved that U2 didn't go the usual first party route and give us dedicateds too!

Fact is we'd have had a better online game had they given them to us, more choice and less lag-what's not to like?

3 up, 0 down

JackieBoy
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:36:54 AM
Reply

Great review. I wouldn't honestly even give 8.9 to this title. You pointed many con's about this game - if this was not COD:MW2, it would get about 8.0
6 hrs to complete? Thats just a pathetic joke devs... 2 years has past and this title is practicly still the same as no. 1. Shame.
Kinda NFS dejavu...

4 up, 3 down

Bo0mKiiD
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:40:06 AM
Reply

Snowmobile part is the best by far.

1 up, 1 down

nickert0n
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 3:05:19 PM

Nah the Water Dingy is better!

0 up, 0 down

Gordo
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:48:37 AM
Reply

Good review.

I'm playing MW2 now and it's definately an excellent game but graphically not so strong as Uncharted2 or even Killzone2.

With KZ2 you seemed to have more time to evaluate the situation and think about a plan of attack. There were definatly more flanking and thought out opportunities.

With MW and MW2 it's quicker, more frenetic and you need to just run and push forward to progress in most cases. In Killzone2 running and gunning usually got you killed...

I traded GTAIV, Valkyria Chronicles and COD MW and picked up MW2 for free so time will tell if I did the right thing.

I'm time poor (job/wife/kids) and need to grab the odd hour here and there so my gaming opportunities are shrinking by the year.

Modern Warfare 2 is my bite sized, arcade run and gunner... Sometimes you just want to watch 24, eat a hamburger or read Dan Brown!

1 up, 0 down

Qubex
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:49:43 AM

I will be staying unmarried for sure? Having a family is too expensive today!

Q!

"i am home"

0 up, 0 down

Random_Steve
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:11:14 AM
Reply

This is the first review that i've truly been able to relate to. granted, ive only played it a couple of times at mates houses, but its just not the best game in the world ever as everyone says it is. im getting uncharted 2 instead, despite the amount of ppl saying im a fanboy for getting it and not MW2...

3 up, 1 down

Jawknee
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:15:07 AM

IGN gave it a 10 in graphics and sound. What a joke.

7 up, 1 down

Qubex
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:51:08 AM

After Killzone 2; absolute JOKE! All they need to do is have two PS3's running and compare the two games as they run... Score of 9.5 upwards are an embarrassment to game journalism... I would like Ben's opinion on all this, really!

Q!

"i am home"

Last edited by Qubex on 11/13/2009 2:51:24 AM

4 up, 1 down

Random_Steve
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:54:32 AM

yea i totally agree, but what annoys me and that because i'm not getting it as im getting Uncharted, im instantly a fanboy because im getting 'another s****y PS3 exclusive as opposed to the best game of the decade' as my friend put it

4 up, 1 down

Jawknee
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 10:41:35 AM

He's a bad friend.

4 up, 1 down

Random_Steve
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 10:49:08 AM

he's undereducated on these matters ;)

5 up, 1 down

Arvis
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:01:32 PM

Are people really that insane?

I wish I understood the appeal of this game. I really do... I mean... I guess I can understand the appeal of online play (virtual "Tag! You're it!") but you can get the same sense of satisfaction from MANY other superior games.

Not just PS3 games, either. Halo 3 makes MW2 look like GARBAGE, and that game isn't even all that great!

I feel bad for indirectly insulting Deadman, but this whole MW2 craze has me in fits.

-Arvis

2 up, 1 down

Deadman
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 3:45:11 PM

The multiplayer is what grabs me the Campaign is good just not all there, but the multiplayer is really addictive well imo. To each his own I guess.

No hard feelings about before Arvis, dont really understand why you are so angry that people like games like this but oh, well. I do find it disappointing at the least that this game sold 10+mil copies while far more superior games havent.

0 up, 0 down

Fatcat3788
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:13:44 AM
Reply

Thank you guys! I was so confused why this game was getting 100s. I didn't think it was just me either. Happy to know that I'm not the only one that thought this game didn't deserve a perfect 100.

Last edited by Fatcat3788 on 11/13/2009 2:14:12 AM

0 up, 0 down

Thinker
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:22:46 AM
Reply

I'm almost halfway through the game (SP), and from what I've seen, the review score is more or less correct. I would have given it an 8.5 myself (more to do with round figures than accuracy :) ).

And yes, that blood-spatter is annoying as hell.

MP's good as always though - I'm not complaining about number of players.

1 up, 1 down

Naztycuts
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:32:36 AM
Reply

Bravo Arnold another honest review from psx extreme, Its a good game but the lack of support (fixing the online PROPERLY) is a bad mark against IW maybe they should have had a beta after all ya know? I know treyarch had their issues with w@w but they are second to none this gen in consumer support IMO, all the maps including new zombie levels n stuff. IW hates them but they need to take a page out of treyarch's book and actually support their game that just sold millions. Who am I kidding IW are xbots anyway they love microsoft money.

1 up, 0 down

Naztycuts
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:33:36 AM
Reply

Also is it just me or does the game feel a bit hurried? like they didnt put their full effort into it?

2 up, 0 down

Qubex
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:52:26 AM

Look at the release cycles for the last 3 CoD's... they are hurried... simple as day light... so expect something similar from Tryarch i think :(

Q!

"i am home"

0 up, 1 down

Jiggy
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:46:54 AM

Qubex, I wouldn't necessarily say that. COD3 was a joke, A JOKE...and TA produced a solid game in W@W, maybe cause it had zombies but it was still miles ahead of COD3

1 up, 0 down

Qubex
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 11:11:17 AM

True Jiggy, very true... I'll go with you on that one mate!

Q!

"i am home"

1 up, 0 down

Gordo
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:36:04 AM
Reply

I think if you only had enough money to buy Modern Warfare 2 or Uncharted 2 then that's a no brainer and Uncharted 2 would be the first choice for anyone with a Playstation 3 (IMHO).

I already had U2 so my choice was Modern Warfare 2 or Assassins Creed 2. I chose MW2 since I was bored of GTAIV (tail some guy in car for 5 minutes, walk through a door, get shot, fail mission repeat from the start - ever heard of a checkpoint?)

I traded in the first Assassins Creed pretty quickly when I realised that all the missions were the same. Shallow I know but I want to be entertained.

Will be interested to see a review of Assassins Creed 2 and see if its a big improvement.

Uncharted 2 however was a joy from beginning to end!

0 up, 0 down

Beamboom
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:51:27 AM
Reply

Dear Arnold&Ben: Just move the decimal one step to the right!

Even the simplest of creatures can relate to the minor difference between 89 and 90. To translate that into 8.9 VS 9.0 is however left to the more advanced beings to ponder abut.

So, this game got a rating of 89, everyone! Yay, what a game!

0 up, 0 down

Qubex
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:54:10 AM

Beemboom, sry but your post is nonsensical... it probably deserves a lower score overall... again though, depends what you are into!

Q!

"i am home"

Last edited by Qubex on 11/13/2009 2:56:28 AM

0 up, 0 down

Beamboom
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:57:15 PM

Well, that might be, but I'm referring to the general irrational bickering about the difference between a 8.9 and a 9.0 rating on various reviews on this site, as Arnold mention in the introduction.

As for this game, my first impression of mw2 (after just a few chapters into the campaign) is very good, better than what I expected. And that's even before I've started on the main course: The multiplayer. That's what COD is all about imo. So a rating around ninety somewhere sounds fair to me. ;)

0 up, 0 down

Axe99
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:53:38 AM
Reply

While you make a lot of good points in your review Arnold (and particularly about the graphics which, while not bad, haven't come far from CoD4, while the top-tier PS3 exclusives have stepped it up a notch or two since), but I think the 8.9 is possibly a little harsh (although only by 0.6 at most). Reasons being:

- The coop mode is really good fun and well put together, with more than 20 misions - and only rated half a sentence in your review. A game that was purely the coop mode would probably review fairly well off the bat (although it'd need a bit of context for it to make any sense, of course).

- I actually didn't have an issue with enemies coming from behind - I'm about half-way through, and the situations where that's happened have been in places where you would expect the enemies to come from all angles and be pretty hard to 'wipe out' in the traditional way. And didn't find it overly frustrating (although reasonably challenging ;)), and I went through the Rio levels on Hardened in my first hit-up. All up, I'd say I'm enjoying the gameplay of the single-player more than CoD4, which is no bad thing.

- As for the story, I actually didn't think it was boring at all. However, and you could have probably laid into the game a bit better here, it was appallingly told! If there was one area that was a step back from CoD4, it was here.

- And while the online hasn't changed much, it has changed in subtle but very important ways - it's a little easier on new starters (death streaks, and no cheap perks like martyrdom for vets), and is a step up, albeit a small one, from the excellent CoD4, with 14 new maps and a heap of unlocks.

Of course, 8.9 and 9.5 are stuff-all different, and not suggesting you should change anything - your review is good and makes all valid points. Only thing I'd say is that it was lacking much discussion of Spec-Ops, which I would say is around a third of the overall game, and possibly the best part.

As for why it's 18 players max, that's fairly obvious - it's the peer-to-peer architecture. Sony is happy to support dedicated server-based games for it's top-tier online offerings (and SOCOM ;)), but MW2 is peer-to-peer, which severely limits the number off players we can have going at once. Of course, that's no excuse, and it _should_ be rated down for that, relative to the other games available on the platform.

2 up, 1 down

Ricochet
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 5:33:33 AM
Reply

EXCELLENT review, Arnold. To be honest upon reading your content it shoud've warranted and 8.5 or less. No doubt that MW2 is a great game but it offers no drastical improvment over it's predessor yet they hype and *cough (biased) reviews would point out otherwise.

Never bought into the hype of MW series but I will be picking this up once it meets the bargain bin. But I'm glad that the review pointed out it's strength and weaknesses and former is OBVIOUSLY the multiplayer (even though you pointed out some issues there).

1 up, 1 down

Wage SLAVES
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 5:38:13 AM
Reply

"from the moment I booted up Modern Warfare 2, I was met with disappointment" I felt the EXACT same way. I felt even W@W looked sharper.

However, I must say that our opinions differ on the story. I thought it was great. The twist on the terrorist level was crazy.

I did feel like they were trying to engineer the Epicness rather than the natural feel Cod4 had. Some extra credit has to be put on Co-op too. My brother and I are killer Cod players and we had some tough times in Spec ops. It is FUN some parts remind me of Metal Gear.

Overall I think we differ in a minute decimal points worth but the biggest irk was looking at this game pandering for Uncharted 2 graphics. I imagined it the whole way through the game.

0 up, 1 down

xtreme
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 6:28:42 AM
Reply

Good review, However will you both stop compareing every single game to uncharnted 2?

I mean by rights uncharnted 2 didn't even need to be menstioned here, if you REALLY wanted to compare MW2 to a game you should have picked killzone as they are the same genre.

It just makes you look like a pair of fan boys which I know your not. Apart from that thankyou for the honest review.

5 up, 3 down

Juanalf
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 7:46:00 AM

"if you REALLY wanted to compare MW2 to a game you should have picked killzone"

He did.Try reading the whole thing o.O

4 up, 1 down

bigrailer19
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 10:48:17 AM

i agree with xtreme but both of you make factitious statements.

uncharted 2 is amazing too look at compared to any other game yes, thats why its being compared. on the other hand though i think we all knew it wouldnt be up there in terms of graphics, maybe comparig it to MW would have been more precise since it didnt change much!

1 up, 1 down

ArnoldK PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:00:51 PM

Dude, I compared it to Killzone 2. The one and only mention I made of Uncharted 2 was when I said that even the best looking games have sloppy textures here and there. That's it. It wasn't a comparison.

4 up, 1 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:39:03 PM

What's Uncharnted 2?

1 up, 0 down

bigrailer19
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 5:16:11 PM

lol leave it to you to find fault!

0 up, 0 down

Qubex
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 8:47:22 PM

Lol xtreme!

Q!

"i am home"

Last edited by Qubex on 11/13/2009 8:48:35 PM

0 up, 0 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:09:11 PM

lol, well it's one thing to spell it wrong once but twice in the same post?

1 up, 0 down

frostface
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 6:29:26 AM
Reply

Great review. Maybe I'd hyped it up too much in my head but I expected it to look better. I even think the first MW did look better than this one.
This game was way to short and I couldn't believe it was over so fast. There was so much more that could of went into making at least another two chapters to round the game off better than it did.
I do enjoy the online but I'm finding myself in alot of free-for-all games with only 3 to 5 of the 8 players available in a round. Where are all the millions of players that have bought this game?
Despite that I did enjoy the game but enjoyed Killzone 2 more.

1 up, 0 down

Jawknee
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:53:01 AM

A lot people are saying the same thing.

2 up, 0 down

Diggity Dan
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:32:23 PM

I dunno, in just about every way I feel that MW2 was an improvement over COD4. Only exception being the quality of the story for single player.

I think the graphics looks *really* improved over COD4. Not throughout the game necessarily, but in particular parts of the game. The weapon detailing, map textures (especially on the map "Afghan" and lighting effects look noticeably improved.

As far as the single player, yea it's short, but no shorter than COD4. Didn't we all expect that? IW pretty much confirmed that before launch.

The Spec Ops mode adds tons of replay value though, especially for folks who don't want to play competitive multiplayer.

Yes, Killzone 2 has sharper textures, but it also has a much slower framerate. I also disagree that it offered a bigger overall package than MW2. Killzone didn't have co-op, and I think the online for KZ2 doesn't have that same good pace and feel of MW. I think it's a much better single player game, IMO.

1 up, 0 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:35:27 PM

It had to fit on a DVD.

0 up, 0 down

tanner1
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 6:52:48 AM
Reply

What a great honest review, u cant pull the wool over Arnolds eyes, glad 2 see that u didnt join the hype train. I agree after Killzone 2 the bar is extremely high set for f.p.s and this just doesnt measure up. If im honest i think the campaign is just a mere added bonus, the multiplayer will go on forever. For me personally, the 1 thing i will keep goin back for is the 2 player coop with me buds. This undeserved title will get G.O.T.Y, i have no doubt.

Last edited by tanner1 on 11/13/2009 6:54:02 AM

1 up, 0 down

spiderboi
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 7:33:40 AM
Reply

when i first played MW1 just a month ago (so bash me), it didn't strike me as being legendary in the online aspect (I was playing Battlefield 1943 before). The sheer number of players in BF filled the atmosphere with tension. MW1 just felt arcadey. Now knowing its still the same, a big thanks to Arnold. I think I'll just borrow this from a friend and buy Uncharted 2 instead (still looking for an Uncharted 1 though). Great review!

0 up, 0 down

LimitedVertigo
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 8:16:44 AM

You can get Uncharted for under 25 dollars on Amazon.com

1 up, 0 down

NeoHumpty
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 7:48:34 AM
Reply

Thanks! I don't get into the online FPS's very much, so I would be focusing on the single player. Thanks to your review, I have decided to rent this later and buy Dragon's Age today. I ALMOST fell for the hype. You guys are great! Shame that you have to defend your scores against fanboys.

4 up, 1 down

Perry Katy
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 8:53:48 AM
Reply

Unbiased review as usual. Great job, Arnold K...

1 up, 0 down

DGo8
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:00:21 AM
Reply

Im waiting for BF:BC 2...all my friends got MW2...anyone gonna be joining me on BF???

1 up, 0 down

Dustinwp
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:19:31 PM

BF:BC2 is going to be my FPS of choice.Loved the first and looking forward to playing what looks to be a well rounded and polished experience.The audio in the first BF:BC was truly superb,not too mention destructible environments are always sweet.Also 12vs12 multiplayer isn't great, but is better than 9vs9 for sure.

Last edited by Dustinwp on 11/13/2009 2:26:14 PM

1 up, 0 down

bigrailer19
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 5:14:36 PM

Me too. Im actually really looking forward to battlefield: BC 2. I never played the first but obviously you suggest it! Ill probably rent it though BF: BC that is. Unless i can pick it up for like 20 bucks!

1 up, 0 down

Dustinwp
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 5:44:13 PM

@bigrailer19 Sorry we got off on the wrong foot yesterday.I was in a sh*t mood for sure.My bad!

Last edited by Dustinwp on 11/13/2009 5:44:54 PM

0 up, 0 down

bigrailer19
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 11:26:31 PM

No hard feelings were only human! I also was frustrated so we'll leave it at that! No big man! Sorry!

Last edited by bigrailer19 on 11/13/2009 11:27:45 PM

0 up, 0 down

tridon
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:09:08 AM
Reply

Thanks for the good, honest review. I picked this up day one but I haven't had a chance to play it yet. I was a huge fan of the original game so this was an easy buy for me. Honestly, while I found Killzone 2's online to be great, I found the campaign mode to be rather boring and generic for a shooter. To each their own, though, right? I hope this one lives up to my expectations.

1 up, 0 down

LittleBigMidget
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:10:31 AM
Reply

Anyone seen the Online plans article on IGN? They said in their interview, Activision hinted at monthly fees for playing COD.

0 up, 0 down

www
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:14:45 AM

Like that'll be the SADDEST thing to ever happen in the games industry, especially on the COD franchise part!

1 up, 2 down

Jawknee
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:48:21 AM

That would mean I would never play a CoD game again.

2 up, 2 down

bigrailer19
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 10:49:27 AM

i dont see it happening, but since the whole dedicated server thing is out the window maybe fees for PC. if they were gonna charge they would have already i think!

1 up, 2 down

Random_Steve
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 10:52:37 AM

the thing is is that they jsut dont need to. they've made so much money on 3 occasions (COD4, waw, MW2) but they know people will still pay extra for it.

1 up, 0 down

NiteKrawler
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 11:45:49 AM

If anyone were to do it, it would be Activision...

2 up, 1 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:34:49 PM

360 owners already pay it, or their parents do.

1 up, 0 down

vgWacky
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:16:16 AM
Reply

If I wanted to be cheeky I'd say your review was a disservice to gamers.

But I won't. =)

3 up, 5 down

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 10:51:52 AM

Maybe you would've had a case for that if we had given it a 6. ;)

5 up, 3 down

bearbobby
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 3:49:04 PM

Humorous avatar, lame post.

4 up, 3 down

KidCallaway123
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:32:26 AM
Reply

Arnold you are my most trusted source for game reviews bar none... I am not a big FPS guy although I did buy and play the first Modern Warfare based on your review. I will pass on this one and wait just a few more days for ACII!

Thanks for your top notch effort as always!

1 up, 1 down

rogers71
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 10:17:16 AM
Reply

Perfect review. Actually, I would have given the game a lower score but spot on Arnold. I am so glad to see that I wasn't the only one annoyed with the useless blood splatter on the screen. I am extremely disappointed with the game. I think for the first time in the COD Franchise, Treyarch has outdone IW. COD:WAW was a much better game with an extremely welldone story and single player campaign.
Way to keep it real.

2 up, 0 down

Deleted User
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:52:50 PM

I agree with you. World At War was a very underrated and amazingly fun game. It's the only CoD game that I ever really enjoyed.

1 up, 0 down

Deleted User
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 10:28:57 AM
Reply

...if you're a 13-year old who doesn't wish to read and understand...

You're a man who sees it like I do. Too many 13-year olds on the 'Net; most of whom shouldn't be playing this game.

It's just more of the same. The same is an awesome game but the sequel isn't the leap that Uncharted 2 is to the original.

1 up, 0 down

WigSplasher
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 10:46:03 AM
Reply

awesome review... spot-on!

0 up, 0 down

Geobaldi
Sunday, November 15, 2009 @ 8:34:04 AM

Love the avatar. Full Throttle rocked!!

0 up, 0 down

JackC8
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 10:47:53 AM
Reply

Sometimes you can tell a lot more about a game from the overall tone of the review rather than the score. Great games produce enthusiasm in the reviewer, but there's absolutely none of that here. I get the impression that this game was a rather large disappointment in almost every conceivable way.

0 up, 0 down

gungrave
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 10:48:57 AM
Reply

Great review...you hit the nail right on the head but I still think an 8.9 is too high.

This game actually feels more like an expansion than a full blown sequal. New maps and new story but it was done better the first time around.

The online is still pretty fun but now it's a lot more NOOB friendly....

This game will sell a lot thanx to the reputation of first game but this game doesn't live up to the hype of even the first one....can't believe treyarch topped these guys....oh well, i'm always down for some zombies next year

ps-Killzone 2 topped these guys overall

3 up, 0 down

Alienange
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 10:55:25 AM
Reply

This review is biased.

5 up, 5 down

Qubex
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 11:15:19 AM

I don't think so at all! Thank God for PsX!

Q!

"i am home"

1 up, 1 down

NULL
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 11:33:33 AM

To whom?

0 up, 0 down

Banky A
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:42:10 PM

It was a joke. lol

0 up, 1 down

JPBooch
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 11:18:53 AM
Reply

Since you are being so honest with your review, I will do the same for you. Now, take it for what it is, a comment to your review. I've been reading and commenting to this site for over a year.

First off, an 8.9 is a little too gimicky for me. You guys pride yourself on having objective reviews, yet this score doesn't reflect that. It reflects you thinking it doesn't deserve a 9. (100% subjective)

Second, your beef with the enemy spawns and blood on your screen leads me to believe you just aren't that good at gaming. Are you really seriously complaining that you can't see when you get shot and should be dead?

Which leaves me to my third point. Your main beef with the multiplayer is the amount of people in a battle. I didn't know the quality of a multiplayer game is dependant on the amount of people participating. They took all the minor gripes with the first and improved them in the second.

The Co-Op and Multiplayer make this game Epic. 3.5 million people on the first day is more than just sheep. People buy this game for the multiplayer. The Co-Op is just a fantastic edition and you barely mentioned it. This leads me to believe you didn't even play it, which is a crime in and of itself for a review.

In my opinion, the graphics are less realized because of the nature of the action. If you want realism, you play Killzone. If you want arcade style, you play Call of Duty. Killzone feels heavy, everything you do you feel. COD games ARE running and gunning. (I love both franchises) Just my opinion as I know very little as to what resources are used for enemy AI, pixels, textures, and what not. Just a gamers observation.

Accept this game for what it is. A cultural phenomenon. If you want to rate it a 8.9, that's your "opinion". I'll continue to read your reviews, shake my head, and roll my eyes.

And a final note to the community, you can flame me all you want for this post. I'm not a sheep to the site.

My psn ID is docbooch if anyone cares to check to see if I can at least back up what I say.

7 up, 8 down

NULL
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 11:33:01 AM

Saying a reviewer is bashing a game because of their skill level is pretty dense thing to do as every aspect of the game should be reviewed including the visibility when dying. And the amount of people participating does matter in multiplayer, if their are alot of people then you can do what you said "running and gunning", you said that it dosent matter, so if their were less than five people and they were all sniping it would be terrible.

4 up, 1 down

convergecrew
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:13:35 PM

I agree with your review more than I do with Arnolds.

Id like to see the review WITHOUT all the comparisons to other PS3 exclusives. Reading this I think the reviewer seems to be looking for reasons not to like the game, even though the review is generally positive.

3 up, 2 down

NiteKrawler
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:24:18 PM

"Reading this I think the reviewer seems to be looking for reasons not to like the game, even though the review is generally positive."

...Or maybe you are just looking for reasons to dislike the review...

3 up, 2 down

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:25:37 PM

Just my two cents: we are going to compare games that are supposed to be "AAA" to other elite titles. It just so happens that several others are exclusive to the PS3, and it makes perfect sense to compare this to the other elite FPS of the year (Killzone 2), and the other title that excels in the technical department (Uncharted 2).

Secondly, Arnold is hardly the only one to complain about the damage and blood; I've seen complaints in my inbox, and if you read the user reviews scattered around the Internet, you'll see many of the same complaints. I don't think it has anything to do with skill; it has a lot more to do with the fact that it's ANNOYING. Yes, maybe "annoying" is subjective, but I fail to see how that's a problem.

As for the online, it's NOT much of an opinion to say that more people on the same map is somehow a negative thing. Provided the gameplay remains firm and the map size can accommodate it, it's usually "the more, the better." And after the intensity of 60-player online with Resistance 2 - which is surprisingly similar to MW2 in terms of gameplay style - and the norm being more of a 32-player setting for online multiplayer these days...well, to have only 18 in what is supposed to be the ultimate online shooter experience seems OFF.

So take from that what you will.

Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 11/13/2009 12:26:32 PM

5 up, 3 down

Jawknee
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:46:12 PM

I love it when people site the number sold of any given product as an arguement of how good it is. Millions sit down to watch American Idol, doesn't make it a good show and millions bought Britney Spears records but that doesn't mean her music is good. The only thing it proves is that gimmics and mediocrity sells. And no matter how bad the title could have been it would have sold just as well because it's Modern Warfare.

8.9 was generous. This game does not deserve the praise it's receiving.

Last edited by Jawknee on 11/13/2009 12:47:06 PM

6 up, 5 down

Alienange
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:05:52 PM

@ JPBooch - Why would I flame you when you make perfect sense? Arnold seems so busy comparing MW2 to PS3 exclusives that he's completely missed what MW2 truly is.

"Had it not been for the existence of Killzone 2, this game would've easily scored in the nines"

Excuse me? Did you actually write that? Why didn't you write "Had it not been for the existence of Haze, this game would've easily scored a seven?"

Gimme a break. By your own admittance in your first paragraph, this article is nothing but your opinion.

3 up, 4 down

ArnoldK PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:12:23 PM

From my review, all you got out of it was that I'm a crappy gamer and blood stains? Did you miss the part where I said the story is lame? Or that the single-player is still way too short? Or that your squad's A.I. isn't particularly good or helpful? Or that missions feel redundant and boring sometimes, lacking variety?

Come on, buddy. A step forward this isn't. Not to me, at least. Oh, and as far as my gaming skills...well, just ask Ben how am I in Resistance. Best sniper, carbine, and tagger by a mile - have all the medals to prove it. I've been playing FPS games on my PC ever since I was a kid - I was deadly in Unreal Tournament and Rogue Spear.

7 up, 2 down

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:12:35 PM

I'm sorry, but anyone who doesn't compare MW2 to Killzone 2 is not doing their job as a critic.

Believe what you want. Killzone 2 beats the sh** out of MW2, from what I'm hearing and I don't CARE how "different" they are; they're in the exact same genre and are in direct competition.

6 up, 3 down

ArnoldK PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:18:37 PM

Alienage: With all due respect, I'm not quite sure you understand the concept of benchmarks. That's simply how it works. When something so big comes out and trounces almost everything else, the quality of a competing game degrades as it begins to show its age - it doesn't matter if that game is newer or older. MW2 simply fails to deliver in many aspects. Realistically, it did not dethrone the benchmark, because the competitor offers more.

6 up, 1 down

Hezzron
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 3:00:26 PM

I tend to agree with the sentiments that the reviewer seemed to be on a bit of a "witch hunt" with MW2. A little too much nitpicking done on this game, that other games seemingly have gotten a free pass on. I can only speculate as to why, but I have my suspicions.

KZ2 was a love it or hate it game, due to some drastic changes in FPS speed. UC2 had arguably the best SP experience ever, but when that's been played a few times, it's over and done with. The MP doesn't cut it. However, both games deserve high scores for the different things the do well.

MW2's appeal is the great fun factor, unrivaled MP experience, and overall longevity. I know I'll be playing MW2 online much longer (which contributes to the overall value) than the previous 2 games mentioned combined, online or off.

8.9 is far from a fail, but seems low enough just to cause a stir.

2 up, 3 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:27:45 PM

Newsflash, if a product falls short of its competitors in multiple areas then it doesn't deserve a high score, do we really need to get into opinions vs evaluations again? And if you can't compare it to superior exclusives what should it be compared to? It isn't written anywhere that a multiplat has to be reviewed only against other multiplats. These aren't arbitrary numbers, they are an objective segmented view, Arnold didn't say "What can I give all of these parts so it adds up to 8.9" Get over yourselves.

6 up, 2 down

convergecrew
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 6:31:19 PM

The best thing about this site is that the reviewers actually read our comments and address them (which is why people keep coming back to comment). Agree or disagree with whats said, this doesnt happen on too many other sites, as far as Im aware.

3 up, 0 down

Wage SLAVES
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 8:54:18 PM

I honestly think MW is all about MP and gameplay. They seem to have a formula that works. It is fast intense and caters to many styles. These things are not touched by even Killzone 2.

My biggest gripe is the graphics, though. I feel that it would have been a better game with polish. Also, it is TOTALLY ok to compare U2 against MW2 because they were released the same month two years ago. It is a great ruler to show who made the most advancement.

I don't have to much of a gripe with the score. Story is a subjective thing though. Obviously because then I'd think it was bland too, but I don't.

0 up, 0 down

shaytoon
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 11:49:22 AM
Reply

well the review is pretty accurate and being anal is one thing with certain things but whatever, still doesnt stop us from playing the game though its great. one thing i can complain about, though its not so huge but still, youd think IW would have worked on it better; is every time you die a quote pops up and youd think you would be able to read 6 words fast enough but they dont give you that time to see what it says, by the time u get to your 3rd word, the game is back up. so its like uhhhhh gee thanks what was that quote again?? oh i dont know it keeps passing me by (like she did) by the time i read the 2nd word im back in the game...oh another thing i HAAAAAAAATE and this isnt just from MW2 but from MW1 and WaW: i play on veteran so you would honestly think youre "team" in campaign would be just as smart to take down SOME enemies but they fucking stand there with their di*** in their mouths shooting no one and those of you who play in veteran know what i mean when you have a billion bullets flying everywhere considering 3 hits and ur dead but nooooooooo YOU have to do ALLLLLLLLLL the work. why isnt your team any smarter than the fu**ing dirt they walk on? i mean literally, therell be spots where you respawn and you have zero time to react and the fu**ing allies just stand there. FU** stupid computer teammates

4 up, 2 down

NiteKrawler
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:26:43 PM

^^^Punctuation fail.^^^

1 up, 0 down

maxpontiac
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 12:11:10 PM
Reply

A good review, that highlights the obvious short comings.

It's a 9.0 in my book, for the exact reasons mentioned in the review.

0 up, 0 down

Larsperson
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 1:30:19 PM
Reply

Good Honest review there. As I tend to focus more on singleplayer, was left feeling underwhelmed with the campaign for sure and the jam effects on the screen after being shot is just annoying for me. Was under 6 hours I think for me to finish which seems to short, but will ramp it up to Veteran for the next playthrough. Im enjoying Call Of Duty Classic more at the moment to be honest.

0 up, 0 down

schillah
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:01:38 PM
Reply

good review

only thing I would disagree with is the 18 player limit. I think that's perfect for COD. If more players were allowed I feel kill streaks would be extinct. We all know how chaotic killzone is and how hard it is to get a streak going (without bots). The other games that offer more players don't really reward you for streaks

2 up, 2 down

leatherface
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:09:16 PM
Reply

great review Arnold.
also, did anyone notice that one of the quotes in, MW2 when you die is from Nathan Hale. i only seen it twice since release day. i think it says "The only regret I have, is giving my country one life." I think it's cool that IW knows Resistance is an awesome game. I think they love KZ2. look at Soap, he clearly has Sev's haircut.

1 up, 1 down

fatelementality
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:50:45 PM

You need to study your history a bit better bud. The quote is not from that Nathan Hale

4 up, 0 down

Trarman
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:14:03 PM
Reply

I'm surprised it was given as much as 8.9. Seems to be a lot of things about this game that fall below expectations. The stuff they got right must be pretty amazing!
But thanks for the review! I think I'll pass on this and go back for more BF1943

0 up, 1 down

JPBooch
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:25:27 PM
Reply

I guess the people who are complaining about the jam effects didn't 100% WaW. The amount of damage you can take in this game on veteran is at least double that without the grenade spamming. I'm just happy to still be going when the screen fills up with blood.

As far as the amount of users in the multiplayer, I don't see it taking away from the game one iota. Some of the best matches are in search and destroy, which would not work with more than what is designated. Those S&D matches are reminiscent of the SOCOM days and are just as much fun and addicting.

All in all, the points mentioned other than the not so inspiring plot(subjective) and short campaign(objective) just sounds like nit picking to me.

The Co-Op in this game is great, I've already had some very memorable moments in it and I can see it will be the substitute to WaW's Zombies. I wouldn't be suprised to see DLC for it with the map packs.

4 up, 4 down

Diggity Dan
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:34:53 PM

Yea, the 18 player limit is just fine for COD4. The maps and player limits are well balanced.

3 up, 2 down

Hezzron
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 3:10:03 PM

The 18 player online limit is a strong point if you ask me. The best part about online gaming is the revenge factor, getting a rivalry going with the players you meet and play against. Don't you want to be able to hunt down and nail the guy who just fragged you?

Too many players online at once and you'll never see the same person twice, they may as well all be bots. The chatting would be a mess too.

5 up, 3 down

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 8:35:55 PM

How the hell is it nitpicking to address aspects of a game we ALWAYS consider in ALL reviews? The campaign's too short and the story sucks. Sounds to ME like you just want us to ignore it because it's Modern Warfare 2.

Sorry guys, but it looks like the witch hunt is on the other side, here.

4 up, 4 down

bigrailer19
Monday, November 16, 2009 @ 2:03:41 AM

i actually fond the story intriguing. it made me want my revenge. and the way they added that slow remorseful music when you fight on U.S. soil made it epic. thats just my opinion though. the game was short though!

0 up, 0 down

fatelementality
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:37:34 PM
Reply

Well I got here a little f*****g late didn't I? (Backs away slowly)

5 up, 0 down

helgso
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 2:48:44 PM
Reply

I think I'm gonna pass on this one. I am 100% satisfied with Modern Warfare 1, I'm always enjoying myself in it. Besides, I was only going to buy this game if it would have got higher than the original, just because I'm so satisfied with cod4 (I don't feel like changing =))

2 up, 0 down

nickert0n
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 3:08:11 PM
Reply

I know its trendy to hate on Acttivision, and I am going to get downvoted for personall opinon but,

I played it on Veteran, the campagain was great and looong to me, the multiplayer is awesome too. All and all I say this game is better than the original and I love it, I followed the story no problem and got very emotionally invested in it which is more than I can say for about any FPS ive played, and I loved Killzone 2.

And yes Uncharted 2 is still my favorite game, followed by Demon Soul's, and then this.

3 up, 1 down

Godslim
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 3:26:56 PM
Reply

great review!
only thing i though should be higher is gameplay i think mw2 is near fps perfection gameplay wise....unrealistic i know but fun

3 up, 1 down

Wage SLAVES
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:00:48 PM

Lol, I laughed when I saw they added dual wielding Uzis. I think the gameplay is perfection too. I guess some people just can't get accustomed to the awesomeness.

3 up, 0 down

Deadman
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 3:33:07 PM
Reply

Arnold you could have gave this game a 5.0 and everyone here would have loved you.

1 up, 3 down

Arvis
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 3:51:26 PM

You know how I feel about this game, Deadman, but if Arnold had given it a 5, I'd never read any of his reviews again.

-Arvis

5 up, 1 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:30:18 PM

From my experience Arnie isn't in the biz to be loved.

2 up, 0 down

Deadman
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 5:30:40 PM

Sorry bad joke I guess, I need to remember to put that LOL thingy at the end of jokes. It definetly deserves the score it got, I'm finding alot of the same issues.

1 up, 1 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:13:15 PM

I like to put a little wink ;)

0 up, 0 down

Banky A
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 10:50:20 PM

I know that was a joke World

=D

0 up, 0 down

JPBooch
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 3:42:54 PM
Reply

It's all good Arnold, you can certainly fall back on it not being "Ground Breaking". However, that is usually the cop out a critic takes when he rates a game lower than his peers.

The funny thing is, Infinity Ward was given the oppurtunity to make it ground breaking, but decided not to re-invent the wheel. They went with what worked and got them GOTY, albiet 2 years ago. You can't please everybody, I guess.

I didn't take a snipe at your gaming skills, I just told you what it sounded like. It's not the first review where you have griped about something that just makes the game more difficult. (Borderlands and Demon's Souls comes to mind) It was something the developers put in on purpose as a difficulty curve. In my opinion, a complaint about a games difficulty due to poor controls or glitches would be a different story.

3 up, 3 down

ArnoldK PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 6:05:12 PM

Dude, I didn't even review Demon Soul's, that was Ben. And nowhere did I say Borderlands was hard...it just has glitchy collision detection issues. So I have no clue what the heck you're talking about.

To top it all off, nowhere did I say that I found Modern Warfare 2 hard. I just said it had way too many enemies that your team couldn't help you with, and the blood splats made it difficult to see where's you're being shot from. I had no problems running through the game, for the most part - it's actually quite easy.

3 up, 1 down

NiteKrawler
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:26:20 PM

Arnold, you really need to just come out and admit to all of these people that the only reason you gave it an 8.9 was to piss them off and make their lives unlivable. It obviously wasn't because you were trying to give them an accurate, unbiased review. [/sarcasm]

0 up, 1 down

Bugzbunny109
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:07:05 PM
Reply

I agree with the score 100%. Although the game has a excellent gameplay; it still lacks substance. There is nothing for the player to connect to. In MGS4, the players were able to connect and feel the characters and the overall plot. This made the game such a great game. I think game developers should be looking more at games like MGS because most games nowadays, have very little substance.

0 up, 0 down

Lairfan
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:19:30 PM
Reply

Good review, Arnold. IMO it deserves an 8.5, but oh well.

2 up, 3 down

Naga
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:20:38 PM
Reply

Since this yet another mindless shooter its a automatic 6.
I'm getting sick of this atrocious genre

6 up, 4 down

Arvis
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 11:05:33 PM

*applauds*

-Arvis

2 up, 2 down

Alienange
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 12:06:25 AM

You two can go back to Wii Fit now.

2 up, 3 down

NiteKrawler
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 2:55:00 AM

Because people who don't prefer FPS games are automatically grandmas or toddlers? Seriously Alienage, you need to get that sand out of your vagina. You been stressed out lately or what?

2 up, 3 down

Naga
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 2:18:20 PM

Wow amazing I might as well get back to Mirrors Edge this how a first-person genre should look

1 up, 3 down

hu24ebr
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:24:24 PM
Reply

I totally agree with you arnold, I felt that there is no progress in the game, it almost feels like COD4, with extra features here and there.
some reviewers feel like there is an online pressure to give this game a 9 plus score just because it is so much hyped, and they don't want those 5 million buyers to feel bad about their purchase.

one thing that I really like in the online is host migration, its a very neat feature.

the thing that I really hate and wish that it gets updated is the blood stains, I mean if you're about to die, the game has to give you the opportunity not to, not blind you.

0 up, 0 down

Jawknee
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:34:06 PM

Each new Call of Duty In general tend to be the same damn game every release with a new coat of paint. With MW2 it's the same game as MW1 with new paint and no primer.

1 up, 1 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:29:40 PM
Reply

The truth hurts doesn't it? It's so annoying when people have to justify their purchase, if you are happy with it then it's all good, have a seat and play instead of worrying about a review.

6 up, 3 down

JPBooch
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 5:07:33 PM

The truth? I'm not quite sure what you are implicating. I don't need to justify any purchase I make. If the owners of the site didn't want people to comment on their reviews they whould lock them from it.

It's actually pretty ballsey of them to allow it and it's one of the reasons I come back to this site.

We all have our opinions and they are just that. The proof is in the pudding. Sales = Success. 9 scores usually equal more sales and is the pinnacle of gaming reviews. Ben and Arnold know that more than anybody.

However, what makes this game a phenomenon is that it doesn't matter what it's reviewed at. The game has already broke records.

And it's all about the multiplayer. It's probably the first game that was engineered with that in mind and the campaign as the afterthought.

5 up, 2 down

Deadman
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 5:21:37 PM

Yeah but this game sold off of the other
games(s) success. This review was honest and with other better games out there deserved the score it got. I'm not a graphics whore so where it lacks there I'm not to upset about. The MP is excellent but again my opinion.

This site give some really indepth reviews and let you know that everything is reviewed off of opinion. Arnold was able to in his opinion justify every aspect of his score. A 1 point increase means what exactly?

3 up, 1 down

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 8:37:17 PM

If you want to believe that such a tremendous focus on multiplayer at the expense of the single-player campaign is a good thing, JPBooch, that's your deal.

But it's just an opinion. And one a LOT of people around here disagree with.

5 up, 3 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:11:18 PM

I wouldn't stifle your opinion Booch, that's why we are here posting, but you seem personally wounded by the review.

1 up, 1 down

NiteKrawler
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:39:06 PM

Ben's right, and he has proof. Look at what came in first in one of the recent polls about our favorite aspects of games. Did multiplayer come in first? Not even close. Story took it.

2 up, 2 down

Alienange
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 12:15:20 AM

That's a strange comment Ben. Since when is "a tremendous focus on multiplayer at the expense of the single-player campaign" a bad thing here at PSXE? Arnold gave Unreal Tournament 3 a 9.5 and I wonder what he'll give FFXIV? A focus on multiplayer is just fine and you know it. Why would you come out with a comment like this?

Last edited by Alienange on 11/14/2009 12:20:41 AM

3 up, 1 down

BattleFox21
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 4:38:15 PM
Reply

WOW, I normally don't comment on reviews, but I think you really nailed it. The only thing I don't agree with too much is, I feel as though the blood in your face makes it so it's not so run & gun. Other than that, I do feel that is it over bearing & in the spec ops on alpha where your sniping on top the building in the snow it was very over bearing. Overall great review!!

P.S. you need to start adding the mechanics of the game to the review seeing as this is the most important part. I think every review should grade on mechanics.

2 up, 0 down

tlpn99
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 5:13:35 PM
Reply

Good review Arnold. I agree with you on the fact that you think the first one was better so do I.

I thought the first one was great. This one just left me feeling empty and flat at the end. Ok they added the spec ops thing. I have tried these and they just didnt get me so I am happy to move onto other bigger and better things.

I dislike the red jam stuff on the screen too but it's in the game and it's annoying as hell.

I have played online and while it was fun it didnt make me over excited.

Plus I was a tad diappointed in the ending. Don't worry folks I wont spoil it for those that have not completed it. I prefer the 1st one its that simple.

This felt like Call Of Duty : Modern Warfare 1.5 :)

Last edited by tlpn99 on 11/13/2009 5:14:15 PM

2 up, 0 down

FlyingKickPunch
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 5:47:16 PM
Reply

great review a-a-a-ahhhnold!

one oddity, in the game when i jump off a staircase or fall out of a first story window, blood sprays all over my face. lol...

and whats up with the textures? i went into that burgertown and was looking at a menu that wouldn't have looked out of place in duke nukem 3D. same with the stop signs, and pretty much every wall. even the ladders looked like they belonged in the original half-life.
the bar has been raised people. if you settle for cookie cutter games, you will get cookie cutter games. lets hope there's a KZ3 in 2010!
everybody delayed their games to run away from this? i know it sold bajillions, but jeez what a disappointing holiday season...'cept for uncharted 2!
can't wait for GT5, MAG, and GOW3.
did anyone else notice GT5 prologue outsold Forza 3? and prologue was practically a demo! lol

what a disjointed post...sorry everyone

1 up, 0 down

FlyingKickPunch
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 5:48:16 PM
Reply

also MW2's callsign/title was a COMPLETE ripoff from street fighter 4...

1 up, 0 down

NoMoreWar
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 5:55:20 PM
Reply

i have been playing the hell out of this game since its release and, for the most part, enjoying the hell out of it too. this review is pretty much exactly how i feel about it. in fact, the only difference i see is that i would probably rate it a little lower than 8.9. lol. its a lot of fun and i see myself playing it for a long time, but its not at all a new experience. everyone who is saying that this is MW1 with new paint is 100% accurate. its practically just a mod for the original. its just a really good mod... exactly what i was looking for. why start anew for the sequel to one of the best-selling games of the gen? just sayin

1 up, 0 down

King James
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 6:51:42 PM
Reply

WHAT!!! AN 8.9!!! You're a stupid, stupid, reviewer Arnold. IDK why I come to this site. You never validate my purchases. You, Arnold, with your honestly and valid, logical points. I didn't come here to read that.

I want to hear "a 10 or a 0". "Buy it or don't buy it."

----End Fanboy Rant-----

Good review Arnold, as always.

Last edited by King James on 11/13/2009 6:52:47 PM

6 up, 2 down

Banky A
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 10:52:59 PM

Yeah he sucksssss.

2 up, 1 down

Jed
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 7:45:15 PM
Reply

I have not played the game, or even seen somebody else play it. But all the cool kids commeted on this thread so I thought I would.

I smoke for the same reason.

2 up, 0 down

Wage SLAVES
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:02:46 PM

Lol. We can get leather jackets and paint T-birds in the back. You got the cigs I'll bring the GREASE...

2 up, 0 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:27:23 PM

You know you smoke because of Solid Snake.

1 up, 0 down

Arvis
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 11:09:32 PM

Just play it cool, boys..... real cool.

-Arvis

0 up, 0 down

mykjessnjr
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 8:38:02 PM
Reply

Great review as always, fellas. Glad I spent my $$ on R&C and not this.
Reminds me...I was working at a house the other day and some 19 y.o. douchebag was playing this on his 360 in his parents' basement. He had his headset on and every word that came out of his mouth was an obscenity. I couldn't help but laugh at him.. and cry.

Sorry for the stereotype- didn't mean to offend...or did I???

0 up, 0 down

Qubex
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 9:03:33 PM

Lol, there should be a hollywood movie called, "Douchebags"! ...about speckled teens laying into their xbot equipment when it fails!

Q!

"i am home"

Last edited by Qubex on 11/13/2009 9:04:26 PM

2 up, 0 down

sha4dowknight05
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 8:50:23 PM
Reply

TO Alienage:

Well , Modern Warfare 2 isn't the best game out there it may be the #1 sold game this year if so, and #1 on your list but remember everyone has thier own peferences and thoughts. 8.9 isn't bad but it's only decimal away from 9, and Killzone 2 is an awesome game i have it so i would know. You might be caught up with all the fanboyism. Arnold knows what he is saying about this blockbuster okay it has a short storyline and a not very good one, but the multiplayer is pretty much the same but with a few twists so no ned to start bitchin about an 8.9.

4 up, 2 down

Banky A
Friday, November 13, 2009 @ 10:51:48 PM

Nice comment for once sha4dowknight05
;)

2 up, 3 down

Alienange
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 12:19:47 AM

Why is your comment addressed to me? What comment of mine are you referring to? Where did I say 8.9 was a bad score? Gimme a break buddy. You want to reply to something I've said then you can hit the reply button of the comment that bothers you and write your piece.

2 up, 4 down

WorldEndsWithMe
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 12:45:37 AM

lol, maybe he's new.

2 up, 1 down

Qubex
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 1:56:02 AM

Looool World! Lord you are funny; I can just see the expression on your face if you were looking directly at Alienange with that one :)

Q!

"i am home:

Last edited by Qubex on 11/14/2009 1:57:09 AM

1 up, 1 down

somethingrandom
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 12:32:07 AM
Reply

Nice review. I think it is amazing even though the online does not work for me. The addition of the co-operative spec-ops mode was brilliant.

0 up, 0 down

Phoelix
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 4:02:50 AM
Reply

This may have already been addressed, but Uncharted 2's multiplayer only supports up to 10 players. Why is MW2's limit of 18 considered a weak point when it's higher than at least one other excellent title?

I guess you'll probably argue that Uncharted 2 is a step in the correct direction with regards to technological prowess, and so it can be forgiven for having so few players in one game.

0 up, 0 down

Corak
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 5:49:37 AM
Reply

Now I dont have to feel bad for not playing it. I am into FPS (ex PC gamer) but not into the whole realistic warfare games (I like KZ2, but its kinda SciFi).
So I wasn't planing on buying anyway.
But thank you for the Review. GT had me confused before ;)

0 up, 0 down

___________
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 7:16:53 AM
Reply

has to be said.
how the %$#@# did this get the same score as R&C ACIT?
i mean seriously is this just as good as ACIT?
is it?
to me, its no where near as good as R^&C ACIT.
thats why i dont bother with reviews as 100% of the time i disagree with reviews and sadly people base there decisions on them.
sadly people are not like me, they cant afford to buy every game released so they rely on reviews they see this and see its the same as R&C so they buy this.
thats not fair, R&C is a 1000 times better game than this!

0 up, 3 down

NiteKrawler
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 8:04:19 AM

So you really disagree with the things Arnold said in the review? I'm assuming you only take fault with his numerical score. Read the freaking review.

0 up, 0 down

sha4dowknight05
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 9:30:31 AM
Reply

BANKY A I've always had quality posts lol, and Alienage you sure do act like it's a big deal that 8.9 is a bad score I mean give Arnold and Ben a break because if you don't like reading other peoples opinion that dosen't suit to your perferences than go post comments somehwere else because this review is accurate, MODern Warfare 2 is a fantastic game but fails to deliver and looks repetative like th eifrst but has new stuff added thats it. Don't exept a high scroe forevery game that you like....bud.

0 up, 1 down

Alienange
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 12:23:23 PM

Don't expect a high score? 8.9 IS a high score! And where did I say I didn't agree with Arnold's score?

1 up, 0 down

sha4dowknight05
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 9:32:19 AM
Reply

Remember, Assassin's creed 2 might even top out Modern Warfare 2's score as well.

1 up, 2 down

jr75
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 9:32:39 AM
Reply

Nice review. It is really nice to see an honest review.

0 up, 0 down

JPBooch
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 12:01:12 PM
Reply

For the record, I didn't take the review personally. I took argument with the reviewer scoring the game .1 below a 9 for no other reason than him feeling like it. This after an editorial telling us how reviews are based on facts and all good reviewers use the same criteria.

If he wants to give it a 8.9, it's entirely cool by me. To be honest, I wouldn't rate it much higher.

1 up, 0 down

NiteKrawler
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 12:49:54 PM
Reply

In school, teachers will sometime round your grade up from an 89% to a 90% to give you the A if they think you really put your fullest effort into it. The same goes for this situation. Obviously, Arnold did not think that IW put their all into this game, which apparently shows, and so they do not deserve the A.

4 up, 0 down

Geobaldi
Sunday, November 15, 2009 @ 8:47:28 AM

90 is an "A" in school now? School just keeps going downhill.

1 up, 1 down

NiteKrawler
Sunday, November 15, 2009 @ 1:02:21 PM

Well, it's a low A. On my college transcripts, there is no such thing as pluses or minuses. No A- or B+ etc.

0 up, 1 down

trinichinese
Saturday, November 14, 2009 @ 3:34:09 PM
Reply

Hello great review .I agree just wish they had put certain things in the game like a good cg clip like Metal Gear to draw you in the story more like the part when the us was being invaded. for those of you who played Ace combat 6 or is a fan of the series would understand what i am talking about ,the feeling of (shit this is actualy happening they here )( RED DAWN)any one

1 up, 0 down

Hestar
Sunday, November 15, 2009 @ 10:22:51 AM
Reply

ohhh wow,did we even play the same game?.Boring single player?,I loved it.Then you go on to say killzone 2 offered more as a game...Did we play the same games?..

It's your opinion,I respect your review and that every one has different tastes and what not.But to say killzone 2 did a better job makes me scratch my head and think if MW2 was ps3 only the score would prolly be higher..

Last edited by Hestar on 11/15/2009 10:23:48 AM

1 up, 1 down

NothingBoy
Sunday, November 15, 2009 @ 11:17:43 AM
Reply

Nice! Definitely an honest review.

0 up, 1 down

WakkoWarner
Sunday, November 15, 2009 @ 2:03:52 PM
Reply

I would not have given this game any higher than an 8. Is anyone else bothered by the fact that some programming genius added a gun pod under the nose/pilot of the Harrier that has never existed (the location of which would interfere with the nose landing gear on the aircraft)?? I get so tired of getting shot by aircraft at angles that the aircraft is incapable of shooting at. Helicopter nose guns cannot shoot straight down under the belly of the chopper. Harriers do not have gun pods under the pilot. Perhaps Infinity Ward programmers would do well to actually RESEARCH the things that they are putting in their games, to be sure that they are actually capable of doing the things they let them do in the game. Lazy programmers are very irritating.

Last edited by WakkoWarner on 11/15/2009 2:09:08 PM

1 up, 0 down

mousekiks
Sunday, November 15, 2009 @ 10:46:58 PM
Reply

I must say, this is why I love this website. It gives honest reviews, even if I don't totally agree with all of them. I don't have to worry about any bullshit.

0 up, 0 down

PaiNT_kinG
Monday, November 16, 2009 @ 3:42:09 AM
Reply

i agree with the blood splatter thingy,it may looks cool,but put you at a major disadvantage as you are virtually blinded from all threat with 5 ft ahead of you,The 18 online player limit is kind of a dissapointment also,i though the max would've been 32+
The story could use some work,i didn't get a damn thing,a longer campaign would've been nice also

0 up, 0 down

SerendipityDeus
Monday, November 16, 2009 @ 5:51:33 AM
Reply

haha, just felt like commenting, but yeah the game itself id decent enough, although in all truth said, dont think it warrants the $60 price tag, just seems like alot of recycled stuff, maybe at 50 or maybe even 45.

1 up, 0 down

JoshBall
Monday, November 16, 2009 @ 6:20:24 AM
Reply

I go on this site a lot but i really feel people are slating this game just because a) it's popularity, or b) because it's a multi-plat. I mean, the campaign is epic, the spec op missions are amazing fun (and even more so on split screen) and it's just generally awesome to play. As for saying things like 'it looks disappointing' in terms of graphics and things, then get a better tv, cause it looks stunning on my new LED and if you saw it you couldn't disagree. Yeah, i loved Killzone 2, but i'd hardly say it gives a better package than this, with all the spec ops and online activity, it is gonna last a long time.

0 up, 0 down

BG_921
Monday, November 16, 2009 @ 8:43:14 AM
Reply

I totally agree with this review, I love the fact it doesn't get the mandatory 9.0-10 most sites have given this game. Now I am a big Call of Duty fan, but I can't sit back and say this game is perfect. I like how it stays true to Call of Duty 4, but still feels different enough to warrant the purchase. Overall good game, just not the end all of gaming other sites have made it out to be.

1 up, 0 down

Mr Bitey
Monday, November 16, 2009 @ 10:05:55 AM
Reply

Good review. It seemed to hit on a lot of the flaws other reviewers did. The only difference is this review actually weighed the flaws fairly, instead of overlooking them and giving the game the obligatory 10 score.

0 up, 0 down

Explosive
Monday, November 16, 2009 @ 1:44:52 PM
Reply

Thanks for the honest review. This game doesn't deserve anything over a 9.
It just doesn't do enough than the first one did to warrant anything over 8.5 imo.
Thanks Arnold.

0 up, 0 down

Reynono
Tuesday, November 17, 2009 @ 9:02:23 AM
Reply

It seems like because of the hype, you only said bad things about the game.lol I agreed with a few of the things said but was also in disagreement. And you didn't mention alot of the better things in "life"(I'm a COD fag). I would have scored it higher but as they say, "its all in the eyes of the reviewer!"

0 up, 0 down

Goondu
Tuesday, November 17, 2009 @ 9:40:41 AM
Reply

good to hear an honest review in a sea of reviews for this game. I tend to agree, I gave this game an 8.5 on the gamespot user review. it is a great game, there's no doubt, if you're a fan of FPS, you should get this game, along with Killzone 2 and Resistance 2. my small annoyance with this game is more the single player, in a nutshell - its too short for the hype and the price tag! I think Killzone 2 has more depth and a better story - Scolar Visari or Makarov. I tend to lean on games with better story ideas. well thats me! get the game anyway, the multiplayer will keep you occupied for months thas for sure

0 up, 0 down

marcus808
Wednesday, November 18, 2009 @ 2:52:19 AM
Reply

Good review.

I'm not a "hardcore gamer" particularly, but I was totally sucked in by the first Modern Warfare. I'm not really interested in the Campaign. I play through it as a fun warm up for the multiplayer, but I'm probably not going to play it again. However, although its not really my thing, the campaign was generally impressive; visually detailed, crisp and sharp, with some incredible lighting. I was excited about getting into the online action! How disappointing...

Modern Warfare 2 is a great game online, just as it was the first time round, but that's the problem. I was expecting the next level. I preferred COD4 to Killzone 2, favouring the speed, fluidity and gameplay over the visually superior Killzone. I was expecting it all with Modern Warfare 2 and it hasn't delivered.

Is it just me or is the multiplayer in Modern Warefare 2, almost exactly the same as the original, with a few tweaks stolen from Killzone? I know this is a slight exaggeration, BUT NOT MUCH! (8.5/10, which includes an extra half point off for the disappointment factor... so really an 8.9 which is spot on)

0 up, 0 down

big mac
Sunday, February 07, 2010 @ 2:02:24 AM
Reply

is this game cool like the first modern warfare

0 up, 0 down

0_o
Friday, September 10, 2010 @ 12:25:08 PM
Reply

What's that!!! The picture UP! :S

0 up, 0 down

vincenzo397
Saturday, January 15, 2011 @ 11:29:04 AM
Reply

it's the best game ever

1 up, 0 down

rapotski
Wednesday, June 22, 2011 @ 3:46:17 AM
Reply

Hi guys, have you heard about Karma Online: POD? I tried playing this game and I find it awesome and addictive. This is a cool online FPS game with a believable portrayal of World War II battlefields. Customized characters with skills, weapons and armor setting within your weight limit. Air strike is available once you do consecutive kills. You can also fight hordes of zombies in the Non-PVP zombie mode.

Check out the website: http://www.joymax.com/karma/

0 up, 0 down

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Grand Theft Auto: Liberty City Stories cheats	PSP
Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas cheats	PS2
Max Payne cheats	PS2
Saints Row: The Third cheats	PS3
FIFA Soccer 12 cheats	PS3
Virtua Fighter 5 cheats	PS3
Countdown Vampires cheats	PS1
The Incredible Hulk cheats	PS3
Wild Arms 4 cheats	PS2
WCW Mayhem cheats	PS1

Playstation 3

Playstation 4

PSP

Playstation Vita

Playstation 2

Playstation

Other

PSX Extreme

Site Stats

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 Review

Comments (258 posts)

Leave a Comment

Latest Updates

Popular Cheats

Recent Reviews

Recent Previews

Popular Sections

Extras

Grid 2 review	PS3
The Last Of Us review	PS3
Remember Me review	PS3
Call of Juarez: Gunslinger review	PS3
Fuse review	PS3
Resident Evil: Revelations review	PS3
Metro: Last Light review	PS3
Zombie Tycoon II: Brainhov's Revenge review	PS3
Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon review	PS3
Star Trek: The Video Game review	PS3

South Park: The Stick of Truth preview	PS3
Murdered: Soul Suspect preview	PS3
The Bureau: XCOM Declassified preview	PS3
Time and Eternity preview	PS3
Ride to Hell: Retribution preview	PS3
Call of Juarez: Gunslinger preview	PS3
Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon preview	PS3
Spartacus Legends preview	PS3
Payday 2 preview	PS3
DUST 514 preview	PS3