Call of Duty 2

 PC
User Score
8.5

Generally favorable reviews- based on 1187 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 993 out of 1187
  2. Mixed: 157 out of 1187
  3. Negative: 37 out of 1187
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. mr-NachoMen
    Apr 3, 2020
    7
    Call of Duty 2 made a huge improvement over the original game... in the technical aspect, The modify version of the ID tech 3 engine use in this game improve character models, textures, shaders and add real time shadows, maps were more bigger than in the previous game... However, Call of Duty 2 still suffers from a really boring and generic narrative and mission structure, players saw theCall of Duty 2 made a huge improvement over the original game... in the technical aspect, The modify version of the ID tech 3 engine use in this game improve character models, textures, shaders and add real time shadows, maps were more bigger than in the previous game... However, Call of Duty 2 still suffers from a really boring and generic narrative and mission structure, players saw the return of Captain Price but aside from him there's no real characters.
    The game still missing the sprint feature that was added on the first game's expansion pack (also known as DLC), enemies are bullet sponges... sometimes they can drop "dead" to the floor, but after a couple of second they stand up again, after you shot them the whole magazine, most of the time you'll never be sure if they are totally dead. A new mechanic was added... the regenerating health that today's is kind off hated by some of the COD community but it is better that looking for health packs and this feature helps in some "tight" situations.
    Sadly compared to United Offensive, COD 2 offers no real challenge what so ever so it can be easily grabbed for casual players.
    In short terms... COD2 was tech improvement that perfectly fit with the launch of the XBOX 360, but is it way better than the original? no...    … Expand
  2. jwt7000
    Dec 30, 2011
    7
    Weaker than the original COD, I never actually liked the idea of health regeneration without the usage of getting health packs and armor and all recent COD games do. Also the graphics and parts of the gameplay made me dizzy.
  3. JohnD.
    Mar 26, 2007
    6
    While the flashy graphics and new features make the game look a while lot better on the box, playing it shows how it really did little to improve the experience. It makes you feel like your in a war movie, but in that lies the problem. Movies are never as realistic as they aim to be. The seriousness of the situation gets blown away by the lack of realistic weapon characteristics and While the flashy graphics and new features make the game look a while lot better on the box, playing it shows how it really did little to improve the experience. It makes you feel like your in a war movie, but in that lies the problem. Movies are never as realistic as they aim to be. The seriousness of the situation gets blown away by the lack of realistic weapon characteristics and unrealistic game play. You will be constantly saying "Theres no way anyone could do that in real life" However, it does appeal to those younger who either don't care about realism or are there to just play. But then it puts into question, why make a WWII game if you chose to ignore so many of the characteristics of WWII?… Expand
  4. MikeR.
    Dec 31, 2008
    5
    If you've played Medal of Honor or the first COD, you'll find nothing new here. The single player campaign feels identical to the first COD with better graphics. It's simply a rehash of the first game, except rifles are now so weak they're irritating to use (2 to 3 shots to kill with even bolt action rifles makes them next to useless). The missions in Africa were a If you've played Medal of Honor or the first COD, you'll find nothing new here. The single player campaign feels identical to the first COD with better graphics. It's simply a rehash of the first game, except rifles are now so weak they're irritating to use (2 to 3 shots to kill with even bolt action rifles makes them next to useless). The missions in Africa were a nice change, but seriously, enough of Stalingrad already. The multiplayer took a huge step back as well, as it is essentially the same bland multiplayer from COD without the anything from the expansion that made it actually worth playing. This game is certainly not a classic.… Expand
  5. elessar101
    Mar 6, 2012
    6
    Whilst the game itself it ok and the graphics were updated. No punkbuster support for 6months i dont see how this game got above 80. Feels like the first cod to be more interested in the console users than the pc users...sad really.
  6. Sinmaker
    May 27, 2020
    7
    a ser feita em breve jakjalkahslkdhalkshdlkahslkdahslkdakhldhsaldhaklshdlkahsdklah
  7. Nekellor_Met
    Jul 5, 2020
    6
    В сравнении с первой частью, очень хороша. Графика, меню, стрельба все стало в десятки раз приятнее.
  8. TimW.
    Nov 16, 2005
    6
    I was really wondering at first why there was such a big disparity between the 'professional' reviews and the user reviews, but now I have played COD2 I tend to agree with the lower, user ratings. This is more like WW2 quake, which is not what attracted people to COD originally and kept them there. The video game reviewers obviously like the Quake FPS style of the new game, COD I was really wondering at first why there was such a big disparity between the 'professional' reviews and the user reviews, but now I have played COD2 I tend to agree with the lower, user ratings. This is more like WW2 quake, which is not what attracted people to COD originally and kept them there. The video game reviewers obviously like the Quake FPS style of the new game, COD veterans or anyone who prefers a little 'virtual realism' won't. Personally I like: the improved graphics, and the way the AI will fall back when flanked, or actually hide behind cover to ambush you, or charge you when you least expect it. I like the feeling of being in a bigger, more verbal war, with shouted warnings from the AI telling you what is going on. I don't like: that my PIV 3 with 1G of memory and 128MB ATI 9800 has to run at 800x600 for the game to be playable, or that multiplayer has no BASE maps, or the new invincible health mode made necessary by the thousands of respawning enemies. If you are into multiplayer though, look for a 'tactical realism' server where this health effect is disabled and a couple of well aimed shots will kill you.… Expand
  9. CoD-er
    Oct 30, 2005
    7
    It has some cool new elements but it lacks the original mission objectives from COD (UO.) Also, I hoped for a better ending for the game, it just didn't feel rewarding. Also, Paul is right about MP. Great gfx and stuff though, but in the end it was just a run-n-gun game. Makes me look forward to Commandos: Strike Force even more. :)
  10. IanC.
    Dec 2, 2006
    7
    Due to lack of patching by the games developer, the game Call of Duty 2 has taken a severe blow. Although the allowing of steam to host their game was a very good business tactic, they needed to keep game content fresh and new, and fix the major bugs that were in COD2 v1. But strategy, but it is a great premise for a game. Missing the ragdoll in this. Seriously, most games should have it Due to lack of patching by the games developer, the game Call of Duty 2 has taken a severe blow. Although the allowing of steam to host their game was a very good business tactic, they needed to keep game content fresh and new, and fix the major bugs that were in COD2 v1. But strategy, but it is a great premise for a game. Missing the ragdoll in this. Seriously, most games should have it now in their system. Ragdolls are the new breaking glass. Just have to have it in game.… Expand
  11. Godebrandt
    Sep 4, 2006
    7
    I think 7.5 is a more than fair score for CoD2. What CoD
  12. SuwannapoomN.
    Sep 8, 2007
    7
    I got COD2 from steam. The game crashed during cinematics randomly because I used Windows Vista. And because I had played COD and it's expansion before, this game didn't much new excitement. Anyway, I have to say it's the best single-player WWII FPS to date. The graphic is really nice and the story is well made.
  13. RichardL.
    Nov 18, 2005
    5
    Call of Duty 1.5 Graphics are basically the same as Call of Duty 1, and there's no new physics system. Is this still the Quake 3 engine? Graphics are pretty standard apart from the addition of 'Bloom' effects. Overall singleplayer is repetitive, yet entertaining whilst it lasts - expect to only get about 9 hours of single player gaming with this one. Multiplayer is complete Call of Duty 1.5 Graphics are basically the same as Call of Duty 1, and there's no new physics system. Is this still the Quake 3 engine? Graphics are pretty standard apart from the addition of 'Bloom' effects. Overall singleplayer is repetitive, yet entertaining whilst it lasts - expect to only get about 9 hours of single player gaming with this one. Multiplayer is complete crap, and many of the online maps are EXACTLY the same as those seen in Call of Duty 1. Still no controllable vehicles - havn't the developers played Battlefield 2? Definitely not worth the $50 pricetag for content recycled from Call of Duty 1.… Expand
  14. MattN.
    Feb 21, 2006
    6
    A disappointment overall, the game play is very simplistic much like Quake 4 but nowhere near as entertaining (or good to look at) for some reason - I think it's the lack of gore and the respawning enemies this is my pet hate with this game - nothing robs you of a sense of accomplishment like fighting a never ending stream of enemies. And for such a frantic shooter the weapons are A disappointment overall, the game play is very simplistic much like Quake 4 but nowhere near as entertaining (or good to look at) for some reason - I think it's the lack of gore and the respawning enemies this is my pet hate with this game - nothing robs you of a sense of accomplishment like fighting a never ending stream of enemies. And for such a frantic shooter the weapons are pretty weak - the rifles are all a bit similar though the Bren gun is nice. It's also surprisingly demanding on your PC (my machine P4 3.4Ghz, 2 Gigs RAM, Geforce 6800), I have to run many of the settings at low quality and it's not as if it looks like Half-life 2 or Far Cry. I probably to need to hurry up and get myself an SLI rig (not for this game though!!).… Expand
  15. AnonymousMC
    Jan 11, 2007
    6
    100% liner gameplay, ennemys can come running out of a room for ever, even though the room is closed of with only one exit! It is not realistik at all, in any way or form. It looks okay, and it sounds okay but its not that fun, because the gameplay never changes! It's the ame alle the way through.
  16. MaxI.
    Nov 1, 2005
    7
    Single player: lots of fun. As Paul said, same as COD but prettier. Multiplayer: awkward. The auto-regenerating health is a genuinely unattractive feature. Even though it's far more detailed and aesthetically refined than COD, the gameplay feels a bit....clunky. Even playing on a loaded server with 30 other people, the game action just isn't as HOT as COD and COD UO. Lack of new Single player: lots of fun. As Paul said, same as COD but prettier. Multiplayer: awkward. The auto-regenerating health is a genuinely unattractive feature. Even though it's far more detailed and aesthetically refined than COD, the gameplay feels a bit....clunky. Even playing on a loaded server with 30 other people, the game action just isn't as HOT as COD and COD UO. Lack of new modes in MP game is too bad; a real missed opportunity (perhaps will be patched into in COD2: United Assault or whatever..fork out another $50). The new HQ mode is horrid; mashes the worst element of SD into what was a perfectly exciting game mode in COD. And what's with the total lack of vehicles? I fully expected to be able to FLY this time around, maybe a spitfire and possibly a bomber....at least in the SP mode....… Expand
  17. Silo
    Nov 18, 2005
    7
    Loved the single player. Multiplayer is a joke, if you play a killcam server you will see that there is a huge time differential between what you and your oponent see as real time, skill takes a backseat to ping as you can unload a clip into a person and they'll one shot you before you blink. Been playing CoD for a year and was really hoping that would improve in 2, almost seems worse.
  18. Superman
    Nov 2, 2005
    6
    let me make something abundently clear: i wish the devolpers would STOP making world war 2 games! i get it all ready ive played through it only a bazillion times i mean come on do something original make your own war wh not!!? over all an okay game that would be beter if the subject matter were more original.
  19. MikaP.
    Nov 4, 2005
    5
    Singleplayer campaigns are great, but multiplayer doesn't give the kicks United Offensive gave. Seems like developers focused on xbox too much and forgot all the good features of UO
  20. StephenJ.
    Nov 6, 2005
    6
    No Base Assault in MP, shame shame shame! Many may not like it, but many do, and TDM get's boring quickly.
  21. Jeremiah
    Nov 28, 2005
    6
    This is the same game we've played for the last 6 years. The same WWII setting. The same ripoffs of melodramatic WWII movie scenes. The same super-linear levels. It seems like there are so many more compelling aspects of war that can be explored - the strategy, relationships between battles, ect... I never once felt attached to my comrades in this game. They just felt like the same This is the same game we've played for the last 6 years. The same WWII setting. The same ripoffs of melodramatic WWII movie scenes. The same super-linear levels. It seems like there are so many more compelling aspects of war that can be explored - the strategy, relationships between battles, ect... I never once felt attached to my comrades in this game. They just felt like the same cannon fodder clones I am shooting at. I never felt a sense of risk or danger because of the game's Halo-esque health regeneration. Both allies and enemies are so devoid of fear or personality-distinct human reactions that they might as well be robots. The action is repetitive - kill enemy behind crate, kill tank, kill sniper in window, rinse, and repeat. Luckily, I got my copy for free with my graphics card, but it still bugs me that pretty games with shallow gameplay seem to be the trend and most "professional" game reviewers give such undeserved praise to them.… Expand
  22. Speed4Runs
    Dec 1, 2012
    5
    Probably the best Call of Duty game.
    Mediocre graphics and gameplay, boring story and very slow game rythm.
    Anyway, it is a very good game, compared to the other CoDs.
  23. Balcetus
    Dec 28, 2020
    6
    GRENADES GALORE:
    What a huge disappointment this was... The game lets you play once again the same three allied countries (Russia, Britain, and the USA) before we delve into the bad, let's start with the good:
    - Gameplay: Has seen significant improvement over the first one, guns feel more powerful and responsive. At least no more solo missions, and friendlies are able to kill now! -    GRENADES GALORE:
    What a huge disappointment this was... The game lets you play once again the same three allied countries (Russia, Britain, and the USA) before we delve into the bad, let's start with the good:
    - Gameplay: Has seen significant improvement over the first one, guns feel more powerful and
    responsive. At least no more solo missions, and friendlies are able to kill now!
    - Visuals: From a game that was released in 2005, the graphics somehow don't feel outdated and in
    fact at times I had to sit there and take in the scenery as planes bombed the area around me.
    - Audio: much improved, sounds make sense now, the game is still as loud as ever and I love that,
    makes you feel like you're in an actual warfare, unlike games nowadays where all guns sound
    suppressed and bombs sound like the balloon pops.
    - Voice Acting: Sure you don't have cutscenes and stuff, but the interactions and awareness of AI is
    pretty spectacular (when it comes to voice lines at least) for example, friendly soldiers will point out
    enemy positions and flanks, which really helped me numerous times throughout the game.
    They'll even shout each other names like "Wither take cover!"
    Now, the bad:
    - Story: once again the game has 0 cutscenes, 0 character development, I mean for god's sake it
    took me 30 mins to find out each main character name that you play as... The only memorable
    characters were Captain Price (just because of the later games) and Sergeant Randall. The rest
    were unmemorable as ****
    - Enemies: ok so here is my experience playing the game: Take cover, Get thrown at with 30
    grenades at the same time, attempt to run away, get shot at, die, repeat. Such a tedious cycle that
    sadly ruined the game for me.
    - The three countries: So I will give each allied country its own rating.
    Russia: 4/10, Britain 9/10, USA: 6/10
    [The Russian campaign was so immemorable. The British campaign was the best hands down,
    filled with different set pieces and great scenery. The USA campaign was super repetitive but D-
    Day and Sergeant Randall carried it]
    Overall, This game took me 10 hours to complete (cause Veteran difficulty which I don't recommend anyone to play it on) I expected way more from what I heard about this game... but Nah... This is back when COD campaigns weren't about the story and characters, it's just shooting and shooting, some people will like that sure, but not me, I want to get to know who's behind the gun. So if you want to play a game with seemingly never-ending nazis that carry around never-ending grenades that are thrown so precisely at you, then be my guest. I'm glad it's over.    … Expand
  24. Soullex
    Nov 30, 2022
    7
    En iyi COD muhtemelen bu daha iyisi gelmez diye düşünüyorum................
  25. Vanco
    Jun 4, 2019
    5
    Ok campaign, unfortunately restricted to the allied perspective. Rifles are extremely overpowered.
  26. PixelGamer115
    Oct 24, 2020
    6
    - Campaign: 7/10
    - Multiplayer: 3/10

    .....................................
  27. r03vg
    Oct 19, 2021
    5
    Да, они убрали аптечки и это сильно изменило геймплей. Жаль, что последующие части не сильно менялись в геймплее. Разве что, бег появится.
  28. PanMrkvicka
    Sep 6, 2020
    7
    good immersive game but pretty repetitive and drags a lot. also some of the setting look really cool
  29. Richard_dias
    Aug 14, 2023
    6
    That was responsible for that recovering health trend and such. Good game! Don't really like the british campaign but COD 2 is an absolute classic.
  30. Antontavrin
    Jan 11, 2023
    6
    uzkfvghlzflucdöivchkö.fvciö.hhhhöik.voik o kg okg boöf gf tse r w op poz xrgt
  31. KevLooney
    Apr 29, 2022
    5
    5/10. The weapons feel inaccurate. Tons of muzzle flash and visual recoil. The weapons feel inaccurate. Lots of flinch. There is an insane amount of visual recoil. The weapons feel terrible to use. Getting flinch locked is a common occurrence. There is a lot of screenshake. The game makes me angry and slam my desk.
  32. kndr
    Feb 1, 2022
    7
    Good campaign, good graphics that still holds up to this day and atmosphere is immersive.

    But I don't like ww2 shooters.
  33. KAHRAMANOV
    Jul 7, 2022
    7
    Эту игру я не считаю прорывом по сравнению с прошлой частью.
    Из плюсов игра имеет хорошее управление и неплохую графику НЕПЛОХУЮ
    1 часть была прорывом но разрабы решили сделать сиквел просто такой же и плюс с дымовой гранатой. Из минусов это сюжет сделали бы норм уровни некоторые просто выбешивали. 7 больше не могу дать    Эту игру я не считаю прорывом по сравнению с прошлой частью.
    Из плюсов игра имеет хорошее управление и неплохую графику НЕПЛОХУЮ
    1 часть была прорывом но разрабы решили сделать сиквел просто такой же и плюс с дымовой гранатой.
    Из минусов это сюжет сделали бы норм уровни некоторые просто выбешивали.
    7 больше не могу дать
  34. KOJ71
    Jul 22, 2022
    6
    Call of duty 2 was a significant jump from the first. The story is exceptional and the gameplay is also much better than before. While call of duty 1 is no longer satisfying for the gaming industry, this game still has a secure place in it. The graphics were decent for the time but may put off gamers under the age of 14.
  35. Menaga
    Aug 8, 2022
    5
    Recommended
    10.2 hrs at review time
    Veteran difficulty
    Gameplay 5/10
    Music and sound 5/10
    Screenplay 5/10
    Technical 6/10
  36. qbangamer98
    Nov 18, 2022
    7
    a good game not as good as the frist one but still good the multiplayer in cod 2 is better than the one in the first game thought
  37. threeoftendie
    May 8, 2023
    7
    Та самая Call of Duty, которая для многих стала точкой входа в серию. Лично я прошел ее в более-менее сознательном возрасте, так что могу в целом составить о ней свое мнение. Один из лучших шутеров на момент выхода. Эффектные миссии в интересном антураже, кампании на разных фронтах, графика - все, что привело игру к успеху. И все это я оценил. Но то, с чем ты сталкиваешься, ставя сложностьТа самая Call of Duty, которая для многих стала точкой входа в серию. Лично я прошел ее в более-менее сознательном возрасте, так что могу в целом составить о ней свое мнение. Один из лучших шутеров на момент выхода. Эффектные миссии в интересном антураже, кампании на разных фронтах, графика - все, что привело игру к успеху. И все это я оценил. Но то, с чем ты сталкиваешься, ставя сложность "выше легкого", делает из этой игры какое-то издевательство. Противников - огромное множество, союзники тупят, до чекпойнта далеко, "беги и стреляй!". Оружие проработано далеко не так, как хотелось бы, ножа нет, гранаты откидывать тоже нельзя. Да и практические эффекты от действий указывают на возраст игры. Спасибо, хоть капитан Прайс в конце кого-то вытащил на себе, показав далеко не в последний раз мощь британского спецназа!… Expand
  38. arllda
    Feb 4, 2023
    7
    I don't understand how they make such a good game in 2005 best world war game ever

Awards & Rankings

12
#12 Best PC Game of 2005
8
#8 Most Discussed PC Game of 2005
28
#28 Most Shared PC Game of 2005

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
86

Generally favorable reviews - based on 64 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 62 out of 64
  2. Mixed: 2 out of 64
  3. Negative: 0 out of 64
  1. Yahoo!
    80
    When something is this well done, just because you've seen it all before doesn't mean it's not worth seeing again.
    Read full review
  2. 1UP
    80
    Pulling its trigger condenses everything that's right about Call of Duty 2 into a single moment. Online or off it is the epitome of visceral thrill seeking.
    Read full review
  3. IGN
    85
    I find implementing regenerating health to be a little troublesome. It allows you to experience a kind of combat only a mythical super-soldier could withstand, and in so doing, propels the game from gritty authenticity to John Woo fantasy.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »