GAME - Review - Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2

Conducting software reviews will generate a great deal of debate, game reviews other than framerates on set benchmarks are one of the only statistical views we will be able to provide.

I personally enjoyed the game. Wasn't what I would call addictive though, could take it or leave it. Think that's due to the genre, same old same old. It's like the old saying you can put lipstick on a pig but it's still a pig!

Those that have made comments on how poor the game is and yet have prestiged numerous times must have played it to death to gain the ranks so whilst playing it you mumbled to yourselves " why am I playing this game " all those hours?

Think the debate over dedicated servers has been done to death now.

Good review ollie, look forward to many more and different genres.
 
name='lasher' said:
Those that have made comments on how poor the game is and yet have prestiged numerous times must have played it to death to gain the ranks so whilst playing it you mumbled to yourselves " why am I playing this game " all those hours?

Well I prestiged once and then I kind of.... cheated..(PLEASE DON'T TELL MY MOMMY! :p)

I've put in a decent number of hours, but nothing over the top. It was enough to form an opinion on the game.
 
name='lasher' said:
Think that's due to the genre, same old same old. It's like the old saying you can put lipstick on a pig but it's still a pig!

Well this is just it. I base my opinions on games on what I expect from a game. I could absolutely love a game and still think it was bumgravy, simply as it could well be a rehash of something I have played before. Sadly though I don't like playing games that are so similar to the one before that I feel I have wasted £xx.

I based my review of Fallout 3 on the games merits. Not on my love for it. It hadn't really been done like that before and thus I rated it very highly. It also offered so much that was fresh that I also based my review on that.

MW2 is just an extension to MW which was an extension to other games and thus should be judged accordingly. The single player mode was nothing but a lazy half assed attempt to have it there and nothing more. Infact, the only part of the single player mode that made me go "cor, that's cool" was the ice pick climb. I hadn't seen that before. The rest? Well I base my judgement on comparitive games of which there are bloody loads, and thus come to the conclusion that it is crap. It isn't crap because I didn't play it or didn't enjoy playing it it's crap because it's nothing I haven't seen before time and time again.

Thus, when I compare it to something very similar (Half Life 2, for example) it seems like an utter dog of a game. Quite simply Half Life 2 leaves it in the dust for pretty much everything really. HL2 also offered tons of new stuff, stuff we hadn't seen before.
 
But in certain situations, more of the same is better. E.g, Super Mario Galaxy 2 was essentially more of Super Mario Galaxy yet that game is loved by many people. That is what game sequels essentially are! Think of the fools who buy Fifa and PES on a yearly basis! It can be argued that those types of games are improved upon but they have only ever been improved upon slightly per installment; and same again with Modern Warfare 2.
 
RE : Mario Galaxy 2

Yes it was a clone of the first but right now Nintendo are pretty much the only company left making platform games and the only company making Mario games. And they're always very special indeed.

Rare were the only other company to truly nail the 3D platformer (Banjo, DK and Conker) but sadly since leaving the big N and going off to M$ they have died on their asses :(

Honestly, take a look at how many FPS there are out there today and compare that to the amount of platformers.
 
name='AlienALX' said:
Rare were the only other company to truly nail the 3D platformer (Banjo, DK and Conker) but sadly since leaving the big N and going off to M$ they have died on their asses :(

Actually, I think that Rare were starting to die off even before they left for Microsoft. Look at Star Fox Adventures and Banjo-Kazooie: Grunt's Revenge. Definitely not the standard you'd expect to see them. I might be wrong, but I think that Conker's Bad Fur Day seemed to be their last big band before a few key members of the company left (which is a killer of a game ;D)

Anyway, I can't help but get the feeling that you absolutely love Half Life 2 and regard it as the King of FPS. But I disagree. I think it's the king of game storytelling. The shooting mechanics aren't really all that in the game, where as the atmosphere, the environment and the story itself are all elements where the game really shows itself. And to be fair, I love it as well! Where the hell is Ep.3??? :P

But there's no way I'd really be able to compare it with MW2, simply because MW2 tries to focus on it's gameplay more than anything else. Yes, the story is dog-poop and singleplayer is pretty dull. But personally, I found that the multiplayer made up for this and in the end I didn't really care that the campaign was lame.
 
RE: MG2

Ah! I'm actually trying to plough through the remainder of Mario Galaxy 2 myself. At first I thought that they just took what they had from MG1 and tweaked it a little, thus not being too impressed with it. But it seems to be a bit more than that. After playing it for a hefty few hours I've come to realize that rather than tweaking their MG1 formula, they've mastered it! The gameplay still works, the soundtrack is still above fantastic and hearing Mario yell "Yippie!" after performing a triple jump is still as delightful as when I first heard it from Mario 64!

The levels seem just as varied as ever, if not more and the level selection screen is a lot more convenient than running around that bloody spaceship from the first MG. The extra challenges at the end keep the game going and even the co-op seemed fun when I played as the orange luma trying to help out my little sister when she played :p

To me, the improvements from this game actually exceed the effort that IW put into MW2, but because they're two completely different genres on completely platforms with completely different attitudes, I can't really compare them.

But, yeh. Mario ftw!
 
name='OllieWall' said:
Actually, I think that Rare were starting to die off even before they left for Microsoft. Look at Star Fox Adventures and Banjo-Kazooie: Grunt's Revenge. Definitely not the standard you'd expect to see them. I might be wrong, but I think that Conker's Bad Fur Day seemed to be their last big band before a few key members of the company left (which is a killer of a game ;D)

Yeah Conkers was bloody marvellous. It was the songs.. Especially the giant poo that you had to throw toilet paper at.. "I'm going to pepper you with shiiiiii****t" Dude I was crying during that level. So much that I had to redo it about ten times. And the cow with the trots that you had to ram... "Eeee ! I think I'm going to have the screaming sh*ts !"

Absolutely marvellous :D

TBH the Stampers weren't getting any younger and I suppose you have to stop somewhere. Especially when you have the kind of cash they do.. No point being the richest man in the graveyard !

name='OllieWall' said:
Anyway, I can't help but get the feeling that you absolutely love Half Life 2 and regard it as the King of FPS. But I disagree. I think it's the king of game storytelling. The shooting mechanics aren't really all that in the game, where as the atmosphere, the environment and the story itself are all elements where the game really shows itself. And to be fair, I love it as well! Where the hell is Ep.3??? :P

No idea where Ep3 is tbh. However, I disagree really. HL2 was the first real physics based game (Havok engine IIRC). The gravity gun was brand new, the vehicles had not been done before in a FPS... ETC ETC ETC. Maybe now it doesn't seem quite so awesome but back then it was absolutely ground breaking.

Back to EP3.. Actually yes, I know where it is. Valve are one of the very very few companies who do not use their games as complete cash ins and thus make sure they are good, long, complete and working before they let them go anywhere. Fair bloody play to them tbh.

name='OllieWall' said:
But there's no way I'd really be able to compare it with MW2, simply because MW2 tries to focus on it's gameplay more than anything else. Yes, the story is dog-poop and singleplayer is pretty dull. But personally, I found that the multiplayer made up for this and in the end I didn't really care that the campaign was lame.

You can not rate a game based on the online multiplayer man. That's not something they did, it's something you do . Actions, events, stories.. They are all left up to you. And whilst it may last forever based on that it's nothing they did. I mentioned this in my Fallout review. Something along the lines of Fallout does not rely on mechanics used in multiplayer games because they were all there in the first place

I'm not a huge multiplayer person, but that doesn't have much to do with it really. When a game relies heavily on multiplayer it lacks anything else. And that's lazy. Look how long it took them to make.. Not very bloody long. Look at how long a decent game (like Fallout 3 or Half Life 2) takes to make. Years.

I do not rate or review games based on something that YOU are left to create.
 
name='AlienALX' said:
HL2 was the first real physics based game (Havok engine IIRC). The gravity gun was brand new, the vehicles had not been done before in a FPS... ETC ETC ETC. Maybe now it doesn't seem quite so awesome but back then it was absolutely ground breaking.

I'd forgotten about that actually (the physics engine). I seem to be more focused on content rather than technicalities. Either way, this isn't what makes it a great FPS and in my eyes, the game shines through its environment and story.

Also, I believe that Halo involved a heavy use of vehicles and that was released 3 or 4 years before HL2.

name='AlienALX' said:
You can not rate a game based on the online multiplayer man.

Yes I can.

Perhaps not entirely, nope. But I can't ignore the multiplayer either. The multiplayer is what MADE the game enjoyable.
 
name='OllieWall' said:
Perhaps not entirely, nope. But I can't ignore the multiplayer either. The multiplayer is what MADE the game enjoyable.

Right. It's what made the game enjoyable (for some). Take it away and what do you have? pretty much bugger all. And that's my point entirely.

EA and Activision seem to want to give you less and charge more for it as the days pass. If they get their way and manage to charge people to play online with the 360 it'll be game over for single player games from them.

When I look at a game (and if forced to, rate it) I do so in an order. First step is how does the single player game play and what does it offer. If it doesn't offer much then already I have a large problem as I don't rate games based on the multiplayer aspects. If I did? holy sh*t dude, watch out. The graphics are poo, etc etc.

Fair enough if people enjoy games like this, that's great. Maybe I have just been really spoiled with fantastic titles over the years?
 
name='killablade' said:
SC2 pl0x? :D

Ah Star Craft 2. How I love to hate you. I am but a lad aged 15 so I do not understand the fuss over you! All this attention you receive makes me extremely envious. I attempt to banish thee from the realm of my mind, and my daily dose of gaming news, yet you reappear. Damn you StarCraft 2. Damn you.
 
Well, I've not got a decent PC where I am at the moment. But I have got my Wii and 360. I found a pretty interesting title on X-box live arcade yesterday called Limbo. So as soon as I get some kind of direct video capturing device, I'll be able to grab some screenshots and post it =P
 
name='Bungral' said:
Just play Star Craft 1 then Zak :)

Mega cheap at Game at the min.

I had tried to play Star Craft 1 when I was 10-ish. The story was too daunting. Just gave up. :p

Damn those older uncles who traumatise you at your childhood.

But yeah I might pick it up from Game.
 
Think it's £5 and it comes with the expansion pack.

I'm gonna grab it as I can't remember much fromt he first time I played it.
 
Yeah it is an RTS, and as far as I'm aware, the second one follows on the story from the first game and its expansion.
 
Back
Top