Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2

 PC
User Score
4.7

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 7455 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 2,958 out of 7455
  2. Mixed: 790 out of 7455
  3. Negative: 3,707 out of 7455
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. DarkPacMan77Pacman77
    Nov 19, 2009
    8
    -*- Please Read If you Want the Honest Truth -*- *** This is a long, accurate review, in my opinion*** *** Please read my "Overall" section for a summary*** I've played other COD games and wasn't into them. They were good pick-up fun but didn't keep me hooked like they seemed to do for others. I think that is because I played those games on the console systems as opposed to -*- Please Read If you Want the Honest Truth -*- *** This is a long, accurate review, in my opinion*** *** Please read my "Overall" section for a summary*** I've played other COD games and wasn't into them. They were good pick-up fun but didn't keep me hooked like they seemed to do for others. I think that is because I played those games on the console systems as opposed to the PC. This new COD MW2 keeps me hooked, and it keeps me hooked for most of the reasons that people hate this game. I'll explain. Big Issue Number One: The biggest gripe, and part of the reason for rating an 8 is that the game doesn't have dedicated servers. However, even if it did, I would still find myself playing the official ones hosted individually most of the time because people who moderate ded. servers are usually strung-out over caffeinated children that ban people for no good reason... like if they are killed too much by you. That gets old extremely fast, but I would definitely want the option to have them. Big Issue Number Two: There's no leaning or cover system, and guess what, I like it this way. This game is still a competition of multiplayer prowess and I find it hard to play, yet challenging, which is good. I can't imagine this game with people hiding behind stuff... never moving... and leaning with belt-fed machine guns. Sorry, I've played a lot of a game called War Rock and I've had enough of that jazz. Big Issue Number Three: 9 versus 9 limitation as opposed to 16v16, I believe, for the console versions. Gaming enthusiasts as well as the modern preteen out there are bringing up the fact that there aren't as many people per match and that this game suffers from a gameplay value because of this. I say, wrong. The console offerings have more players, yes, but they are also more chaotic. There are "too many" people in those "small" levels. That's how I look at it. Sure, the levels aren't "small", but compared to other shooter games, they can seem small. I mention this because every 1 in 5 deaths on the console is because you got spawned directly within 15 feet of an enemy and as soon as you began to run... they'd spot you and down you like the little campers that they are. They were able to do that so easily because of the fact that if you have even one DECENT team full of people, that side will DOMINATE the other team to the point where "mercy" doesn't even begin to apply. I think it's a good idea to curb lag on the PC by offering 9v9. I think it's quite fair and helps ensure that you aren't just dying for the sake of dying. You have more chances to walk 10 or more steps and fire a gun a few times than the console counterparts. From here, I'll rate the typical gameplay, sound, graphics, tilt, and overall score. * - Gameplay - * I don't play the single player - most people don't. There's a ton of people, especially through steam, that need to double their medication in this regard because there are people that have only heard that this game is short... and so they say the story is garbage and "over-played" and "no fun". It's short, yes, so are most shooting games. Longest I've seen in a long time is the newest Wolfenstein, oddly enough, but you don't see people raving how amazing the game is simply because it had a great single player mode, do you? Multiplayer is where it's at, and yes, while you sometimes have lag issues, that's expected on the PC platform. There are so many different types of networking equipment that differ from each and every single person playing that it doesn't matter what server, equipment, hardware or software you are using, the latency that you connect to whatever server/ host will ALWAYS be different for each and every player no matter what, even on PS3/ Xbox360 and yes, they lag there too... apparently people have forgotten this?... or at least choose to. * - Sound - * The sound effects could be better, but they aren't bad at all. The gun sounds are still pretty solid even though they could use a little more work. The biggest issue regarding sound is the amount of simultaneous noises going on at once. I have a sound card that can output 128 noises in CMSS3D technology and it's still kind of hard to find the enemy sometimes. You can take this as a pro or a con, however, since utilizing enough sounds on a battlefield to not be able to instantly find your opponents, even while using a superiors sound card, does tend to make you think that Infinity Ward put forward the effort to dilute many of the "dead give away" type moments which can help shield both the noob and the pro while still capturing that "in-the-moment" feeling that keeps you pumped up while playing the game. * - Graphics - * Can they be better? Yes. And that's all that should maybe be said, in short. Going into detail, it's easy to understand why they didn't completely super-power this title. It runs on the same game engine as the other COD games, which helps with frame rates, but if you're using a graphics card from about 2 years prior to this game's release date then you may not have the power, graphically speaking, to run the game at great resolutions with "appropriate eye candy" anyways. I personally have a top of the line (IMO) gaming computer and I find that the game performs very well. I rarely find outright "flaws" in the game mechanics regarding graphics or sloppy textures unless I specifically go looking for them. I was also happily surprised to find that there are many, many more objects that cast shadows or can be blown away by bullets, explosions, or other debris. Throwing a grenade into an office building feels pretty appropriate. About the only thing that doesn't happen is the cubicle walls aren't hurt... but that's more about preserving fairness as well. Graphics are certainly not an issue that you should be concerned with. They are great, albeit revised from CODMW1, and help provide a more seamless gameplay. * - Tilt - * The game offers various different ways to level up your arsenal, which is fantastic for me. The traditional system of the other COD games of leveling up your perks was something that I found particularly interesting... but felt there was something missing. Now, with this game, perks themselves can be leveled up by themselves as well as your weapons and other equipment. This is viewed as tedious and negative by the nay-sayers, but I'll tell you why I think it's a good thing. It's a good thing, in my opinion, because you won't have one person excel at every particular aspect of the game just because their level is higher and they have more guns/ experience. The first game I was dropped into I did a respectable 11-5, not bad for my first time at all. The perks/ weapon setups are only overpowered in "certain ways", in the sense that many perks can stomp out others. Marathon, a perk which makes you able to run an unlimited amount and at a faster rate, is a good one to have against people that don't have the "Stopping Power" perk, whose weapons deal more damage, because it's harder for them to put enough effective shots down range to defeat you, and vice versa. And this is across the board for all of the perks no matter what level they are. Some are annoying, true... but that's war. * - Overall - * There are lots of things that make me a little bit mad about this game, but none really hurt the overall game to me TOO badly. If it does, I shut down the game, like any other ADULT would do, and find something actually worthwhile with my time than playing video games all day. It's not that bad to have a hacker kill you - it's on the PC - it's going to happen... sadly, but true. To think otherwise would be to lie to yourself. Also, the community, particularly the PC community, is whining for so many reasons and they don't realize how badly their ideas contradict one another. I find it funny that people complain about lag or constantly having to find new hosts for games... yet want more players in the game at once at the same time. Guess what? In the older COD games that these guys will say to play instead of this one, if the host leaves, the game entirely ends. At least the game doesn't just flipping END prematurely. In fact, it hasn't even ENTIRELY DROPPED for me on my cable connection one single time yet, so I don't know what all these people are talking about, although I could understand people outside the USA having ping-related mishaps until better servers are setup for people or better match-making is added in a patch. The biggest things people complain about with the PC CODMW2 is that it doesn't have dedicated servers, only has 9v9 players, doesn't have a "command" key (using the ` key to alter game options), and doesn't have additional "filters" for the PC version that make "less debris" or "less objects" on the screen. Well guess what? For all of those losers trying to gain a SLIGHT competitive edge just by deleting the floating stuff in the air or removing miscellaneous bricks on the ground and stuff... or by altering your viewing angle/ position to something someone at default doesn't have... for all of you guys, all I can say is "grow up and learn to play the game as it was intended to be played". It's pretty clear that this is more or less a direct port of a game made on the console, yes. But it's not a "bad game" at all just because of this. It is seriously hilarious how many people say "this game is washed out, over played, has nothing greatly new, uses the same old junkie game engine" etc. and so on... but then say, "Don't play this game, play the old one". I find that so hilarious, personally, because those people sit here and bash this game partly for being similar to the previous modern warfare and then they suggest to play that one instead... you know, the one that they can adjust their viewing angles, use dedicated servers with their buddies without anti-cheat protection to pretend that they are good at the game while kicking every good player off of the server... yeah, that game. The bottom line is that if you pick this up and like first person shooters, especially rushing combat and lots of customization options and leveling abilities, then this game is going to keep you entertained for a long time. At the end of the day, I buy games to have fun, and I'm having a lot of fun. I'd say this is money well-spent even despite not having the option for dedicated servers or larger game rooms, but overall, I'm personally glad that there aren't dedicated servers and larger game rooms by default. This game rocks. If you liked my review or want to discuss anything regarding questions or comments, please feel free to add me on AIM @ DarkPacMan77. Thanks for reading and happy fragging!… Expand
  2. DavidK
    Nov 19, 2009
    2
    Modern Warfare 2 has a very unique and daring, though short, single-player campaign. It manages to refine its multiplayer experience with numerous tweaks and additions, including the much-appreciated reducion of the infamous Martyrdom perk. That said, a lack of dedicated servers makes the game extraordinarily unplayable due to lag, easily hacked, and doesn't even protect them against Modern Warfare 2 has a very unique and daring, though short, single-player campaign. It manages to refine its multiplayer experience with numerous tweaks and additions, including the much-appreciated reducion of the infamous Martyrdom perk. That said, a lack of dedicated servers makes the game extraordinarily unplayable due to lag, easily hacked, and doesn't even protect them against piracy. GG Bye bye.… Expand
  3. LeeH
    Nov 19, 2009
    9
    Alot of the thing that people say about this game isnt as bad as they say considering there is no dedicated servers yeah thats one bad thing but that isnt ruining the game look how many people play xbox and they dont complain about it. The lag issues are either from a terrible host or your internet is terrible. every thing is easier join just pick a game to play and you wait in que Alot of the thing that people say about this game isnt as bad as they say considering there is no dedicated servers yeah thats one bad thing but that isnt ruining the game look how many people play xbox and they dont complain about it. The lag issues are either from a terrible host or your internet is terrible. every thing is easier join just pick a game to play and you wait in que instead of searching forever to find a server you would like to play on. The only issues i really see in the game right now is some times when you match make in a part it some times glitches and kicks you out of a group but this could be fixed in up coming patches the game just came out you cannot expect it to be at its fullest. Other things they should fix that you cannot change your prestige through your files in cod6 folders, last they could get rid of vac or help improve vac people have already found how to hack and the sort every game has been like that for years complaining about it wont help you at all. There are videos on youtube showing people hacking but i am already level 52 and i have been playing along time and i haven't faced agenst one single person that has cheated. people thats have cheated there prestige yes but aim bots or spin bots or speed hacks what every you can think of. this game really is not as bad as people think i suggest buying it and enjoying the game and watch as it improves its really a good game. the single player yes isn't the longest but the story line i see is pretty well made in my opinion. great game buy it as simple as that.… Expand
  4. CB
    Nov 19, 2009
    1
    If you like Michael Bay films you'll probably like MW2. If you're an adult you'll probably think MW2 is a dire excuse for a sequel with poor direction, linear single player and an absoloutely shocking lack of thought put into the multiplayer aspect. This isn't worth the retail price and should have been released as an expansion / DLC for the first game.
  5. AgentDark
    Nov 19, 2009
    0
    Single Player: 3-4 hours worth? What's the point of that? This game costs $90 USD to buy it in Australia. By comparison, Dragon Age Origins, which came out around the same time, costs $50 USD in Aus and that has given me at least 2weeks for a single playthrough. I'll let you decide which is value for money Multiplayer: A joke. Quake, a 13 year old game, has a more technically Single Player: 3-4 hours worth? What's the point of that? This game costs $90 USD to buy it in Australia. By comparison, Dragon Age Origins, which came out around the same time, costs $50 USD in Aus and that has given me at least 2weeks for a single playthrough. I'll let you decide which is value for money Multiplayer: A joke. Quake, a 13 year old game, has a more technically advanced multiplayer component. It's clear what Activision's agenda is here - with no pesky dedicated server or mod support around to keep the game alive (see Halflife for example), it's easy to see that in 1.5-2 years time they will release the next Call of $$$ and everyone will be 'forced' to go buy that. In the meantime, they can charge people for new maps/gameplay modes (Some of which is actually already in the game, just hidden. Go google the developer console hack which lets you enable hidden features). Extremely poor offering from Activision/Infinity Ward. Highly Recommend you save your money and stick to CoD4. It's literally superior in every single way.… Expand
  6. Brumbek
    Nov 19, 2009
    9
    Here's an honest review. The SP gameplay is very polished and enjoyable however the levels aren
  7. JoeB
    Nov 19, 2009
    0
    I love Call of Duty. I really do. I have bought all of them that have come out for PC. I always have. But Infinity Ward needs to feel the burn of gamer dissatisfaction on the issue of Dedicated Servers. This is a downright idiotic move. This is unproductive. This is a step backwards. If I wanted to match-make, I'd make friends and use XFire. To force us into this rediculous system is I love Call of Duty. I really do. I have bought all of them that have come out for PC. I always have. But Infinity Ward needs to feel the burn of gamer dissatisfaction on the issue of Dedicated Servers. This is a downright idiotic move. This is unproductive. This is a step backwards. If I wanted to match-make, I'd make friends and use XFire. To force us into this rediculous system is downright foolish on thier part. For gamers, don't buy this game if you play it for the multiplayer. If Infinity Ward wants to stiffle our creativity for dedicated servers with our own rules and mods, then we'll return the favour and stiffle thier cashflow. Boycott baby.… Expand
  8. ZsomborB
    Nov 19, 2009
    5
    First of all, I'm a huge fan of the CoD series. I loved every game, and opposed to a lot of people, I think the singleplayer of these games is important, and very interesting. This latest game is no different, the storyline is exciting, plays like an action movie, the multiplayer is fun, but there is one sole solid reason why I bring down this game. Activision. Activision, with Mr. First of all, I'm a huge fan of the CoD series. I loved every game, and opposed to a lot of people, I think the singleplayer of these games is important, and very interesting. This latest game is no different, the storyline is exciting, plays like an action movie, the multiplayer is fun, but there is one sole solid reason why I bring down this game. Activision. Activision, with Mr. Kotick and his jew gang is the cancer that is killing the industry, with their cheap franchises, and their cheap moves, ripping of gamers for the same retarded things, and giving less and less for more money is something I can't agree with, and with this, I'm withdrawing all my support (Not like it counts anyway with the millions of retards who actually fell for this shitty viral marketing).… Expand
  9. JonT
    Nov 19, 2009
    2
    SP is too short, MP is fun but full of childish swearing idiots. When you can even get a game that isnt rubber banding all over the place or not seem to connect and other random excuses. Annoying because this game couldve been one of the best MP games ever.
  10. JulianY.
    Nov 19, 2009
    0
    - The single player campaign is 5 hours long. - The multiplayer is both uninteresting and hardly playable. - The game is extremely expensive (60 euros). I'm sorry, but it's not a question of being "butthurt" or not ; most reviews here speak the truth. This game is an horrible quick cash-in for Activision. The reviews in most PC magazines were obviously paid, and one can wonder - The single player campaign is 5 hours long. - The multiplayer is both uninteresting and hardly playable. - The game is extremely expensive (60 euros). I'm sorry, but it's not a question of being "butthurt" or not ; most reviews here speak the truth. This game is an horrible quick cash-in for Activision. The reviews in most PC magazines were obviously paid, and one can wonder about the objectivity of the 10s you see around here. Even without any prior multiplayer FPS gaming experience, this game can't score higher than 7 because of its massive flaws (and its price, if you work for a living).… Expand
  11. AndrewT.
    Nov 19, 2009
    1
    It's a really good game. Single-player is really similar to Call of Duty 4's. That's not a bad thing but I wish they could have made it a little better. The online multiplayer is extremely enjoyable. There's so many unlockables and the maps are fun to play.
  12. KyleC
    Nov 19, 2009
    1
    IW clearly lost its soul with this installment... its not about gameplay or fun anymore... just about making as much money as possible... it seems they looked for the most retarded person and then designed the game for that person. the cut of ded. servers because it was to "difficult" to navigate... the created a storymode that is full of follow that guy and protect this one... youre IW clearly lost its soul with this installment... its not about gameplay or fun anymore... just about making as much money as possible... it seems they looked for the most retarded person and then designed the game for that person. the cut of ded. servers because it was to "difficult" to navigate... the created a storymode that is full of follow that guy and protect this one... youre constantly getting thought what exactly u have to do. if you run to far away from your objectiv you'll get an instant death penalty... i guess the next step for IW is to build a railshooter with autoaim, so also youre pets can buy and play a copy of the next cod… Expand
  13. SergeR
    Nov 18, 2009
    0
    The multiplayer experience is horrific with no dedicated server. After a couple of hours of the game constantly "trying to find new host", I gave up. I will be completely honest and say that I did not play the single player, which was praised by many. The multiplayer though deserves a SOLID 0. IW screwd this one up bad!
  14. Prom3th3an
    Nov 18, 2009
    0
    Firstly, I didnt buy this game because I wanted to see what it would be like first, so I played a mates copy...in short im glad I didnt buy it. The single player campaign (if thats what you want to call it) is excessivly short. This coupled with a poorly engineered multiplayer system has effectivly killed this game and tarnished the Call of Duty name forever and reflects extremely poorly Firstly, I didnt buy this game because I wanted to see what it would be like first, so I played a mates copy...in short im glad I didnt buy it. The single player campaign (if thats what you want to call it) is excessivly short. This coupled with a poorly engineered multiplayer system has effectivly killed this game and tarnished the Call of Duty name forever and reflects extremely poorly on Infinity Ward. The lack of modding support that would normally make a game like this last for a long time is of course a real slap in the face to the PC gamers who made the CoD name what it is today. The lack of dedicated servers is also a killer, putting to much ownes on P2P hosters. Most home conections have less that 64k of uploading bandwidth which is not enough to sustain the numbers that made CoD 4 an excellent multiplay enviroment. The matchmaing system is at best flawed, last night I connected to a game in america, the lag was unbearable. Overall Infinity Ward have basically given the loyal PC gamers the finger and its about time they sit down and think about how they are going to fix this and fast, for I wont be investing in any further CoD games untill they get thier act together.… Expand
  15. EnD
    Nov 18, 2009
    2
    OMG WTF happened to the Multiplayer? 18 players only, WTF are they doing? What happened to 32 v 32 on a 64 player map? 18 players only. FFS. No dedicated servers, WTF? You can NOT choose which server you want to play on, you just get added to the BACK OF THE QUEUE. LMAO. I WAS going to spend my money on this but I am not because I have heard just how shite the multiplayer is. I have OMG WTF happened to the Multiplayer? 18 players only, WTF are they doing? What happened to 32 v 32 on a 64 player map? 18 players only. FFS. No dedicated servers, WTF? You can NOT choose which server you want to play on, you just get added to the BACK OF THE QUEUE. LMAO. I WAS going to spend my money on this but I am not because I have heard just how shite the multiplayer is. I have Battlefield 2 and Special Forces, Call Of Duty several versions, Frontlines - Fuel of War multiplayer FPS, Counter Strike Source multiplayer FPS, going back to the first Operation Flashpoint, DOOM, Special Forces, etc. I love FPS multiplayer games (First Person Shooter = FPS). But I have heard such bad player reviews that I'm keeping my money in my pocket this time around. Seriously OMFG. I an over 30 years old, been playing PC games for over 15 years, and I am so dissappointed because I was really looking forward to this. Metacritic - Stop fcuking about with the ratings, owners of the game are panning it. You need to start including this. Have both ratings beside each other. Ahhhh, feel better now, but massively annoyed that they have FUBAR'd multiplayer. Pricks.… Expand
  16. greinkez
    Nov 18, 2009
    0
    For a game whose main appeal is mp, IW sure put it in the back of the PC community without KY. The multiplayer is a joke. The matchmaking system is a joke. The lack of dedicated servers is a joke. Taking out things like lean because pc users have the 'advantage' of using mouse and keyboard and graphics is ridiculous. It's very obvious that this a very sloppy port of the For a game whose main appeal is mp, IW sure put it in the back of the PC community without KY. The multiplayer is a joke. The matchmaking system is a joke. The lack of dedicated servers is a joke. Taking out things like lean because pc users have the 'advantage' of using mouse and keyboard and graphics is ridiculous. It's very obvious that this a very sloppy port of the xbox version and IW doesn't care about the pc community. Infinity Ward/ Activision really need to set their stuff straight.… Expand
  17. BenT
    Nov 18, 2009
    7
    The single player campaign is brilliant, both the story and gameplay are really internse and interesting. The graphics look as you'd expect and the uniqueness of each level keeps you facing new challenges over and over rather than your typical lone 1 man army push forward. Spec Ops is very challenging but equally rewarding, and doesn't suffer with the lack of dedicated servers The single player campaign is brilliant, both the story and gameplay are really internse and interesting. The graphics look as you'd expect and the uniqueness of each level keeps you facing new challenges over and over rather than your typical lone 1 man army push forward. Spec Ops is very challenging but equally rewarding, and doesn't suffer with the lack of dedicated servers issue that the multiplayer does. That being said the multiplayer is not BAD bad, but its nowhere near the league of COD4. Mainly MW2 loses major points for basically porting the 360 version on to PC rather than make a proper PC game. No dedicated servers, no lean buttons, no spectate, and a poor matchmaking system when trying to get games going with your friends just makes MW2 a total waste for competative multiplayers.… Expand
  18. pauls
    Nov 18, 2009
    0
    Unfinished, buggy as anything i have played in recent memory and designed by committee it appears. Treyarch have managed to become the A team by comparison would say IW wont be making so much cash on next one this is a complete mess feel like i have been conned into buying this rubbish. Want my money back. Don't believe the hype this is very poor avoid like the plague.
  19. JoshA
    Nov 18, 2009
    10
    People are giving this game a lot of grief. FOR NO REASON. The single player campaign is epic, never before have i felt such a rush playing a video game. Yes some moments are scripted but they are awesome. The spec ops mode is diverse and the missions are challenging but fun. the multiplayer is in another league all is own. I like the IWnet service for it makes it easy to get a good People are giving this game a lot of grief. FOR NO REASON. The single player campaign is epic, never before have i felt such a rush playing a video game. Yes some moments are scripted but they are awesome. The spec ops mode is diverse and the missions are challenging but fun. the multiplayer is in another league all is own. I like the IWnet service for it makes it easy to get a good server. some are mad that there is no dedicated server support, but i imagine that IW will fix that soon. The size of the games is also un overlooked bonus. People aruge why can't we have 32v32 games? Maybe because the game looks and runs like crap on those servers? And also a 12 person free for all game is much more entertaining and competitive than a 32 person spawn camp fest. I think IW also made the unlocks, perks, and, challenges much more efficient and streamlined. BOO to you that give this a 1 just because its not COD4+ its a new BETTER game. I rate a game on how fun it is not on what you wanted it to be.… Expand
  20. ANtonioA
    Nov 18, 2009
    0
    The worst lag in Multiplayer that I have experienced in many, many years. The decision to get rid of Dedicated servers is the worst decision that Infinity Ward could have made during the creation process of this game. This game will die very quickly if the multiplayer is not fixed soon, and if there will never be custom mod support. Although, the single-player experience is definitely one The worst lag in Multiplayer that I have experienced in many, many years. The decision to get rid of Dedicated servers is the worst decision that Infinity Ward could have made during the creation process of this game. This game will die very quickly if the multiplayer is not fixed soon, and if there will never be custom mod support. Although, the single-player experience is definitely one of the greatest SP FPS experiences I have ever had (Next to the Half-Life series).… Expand
  21. JeremyS
    Nov 18, 2009
    0
    The one positive side of the Metacritic reviews of COD6MW2 is that we see who's dipping into Big Game Developement's pockets and boost those game's scores... on the other hand MW2 is lackluster and pretty much shy of any real substance... I mean FFS a multiplayer game without the multiplayer portion is fucking rediculous any review above 5/10 or 50% is overrated the game is The one positive side of the Metacritic reviews of COD6MW2 is that we see who's dipping into Big Game Developement's pockets and boost those game's scores... on the other hand MW2 is lackluster and pretty much shy of any real substance... I mean FFS a multiplayer game without the multiplayer portion is fucking rediculous any review above 5/10 or 50% is overrated the game is half finished and crappy the servers.. oops sorry I mean Hosted games lag so much that I cant take 5 steps around a corner and appear in the kill cam back 5 steps being shot before i turned the corner...… Expand
  22. XFM
    Nov 18, 2009
    10
    The online play is so much better than COD4. Pings are consistently low, no one maintains host advantage for more than one round, and the huge numbers of cheaters/hackers in COD4 are no where to be seen. Also there are no stupid rule sets (no grenades wtf) or overloaded maps (32 players in Backlot is just dumb). These low scoring users are just slandering nerds with an entitlement The online play is so much better than COD4. Pings are consistently low, no one maintains host advantage for more than one round, and the huge numbers of cheaters/hackers in COD4 are no where to be seen. Also there are no stupid rule sets (no grenades wtf) or overloaded maps (32 players in Backlot is just dumb). These low scoring users are just slandering nerds with an entitlement complex....little do they know they are missing out on something better.… Expand
  23. ThiagoB
    Nov 18, 2009
    0
    We can't choose maps, the match time is short, they didn't put autobalance.. you spen more time trying to find a game with a descent ping as playing, we don't have an Admin, so we can't kick anoying players. They put 16 maps on game but apears to be half of this.. If they dind't fix those stuffs will be my last Call of Duty. I'm talking for all brazilian people.
  24. JamesG.
    Nov 18, 2009
    0
    This is a horrible excuse for a sequel to Call Of Duty 4 - Modern Warfare. The campaign seems more catered to sub 15 year olds, lots of flashy explosions and mindless shooting. Now don't get me started on the multiplayer. Being part of the glorious PC gaming master race, I can describe it in a single word. Shambles. IW.net is the worst thing to happen to PC Multiplayer shooters in This is a horrible excuse for a sequel to Call Of Duty 4 - Modern Warfare. The campaign seems more catered to sub 15 year olds, lots of flashy explosions and mindless shooting. Now don't get me started on the multiplayer. Being part of the glorious PC gaming master race, I can describe it in a single word. Shambles. IW.net is the worst thing to happen to PC Multiplayer shooters in gaming history. Why? Because it paves the way to paid DLC for PC and eventually Pay to Play subscription FPS gaming. This on top of the fact that we must now rely on IW.nets matchmaking due to the absence of the tried and true dedicated server method of supplying a multiplayer experience. The abysmal listen server technique used in Modern Warfare 2 may work on consoles due to the identical hardware and controllers with aim assist, but this is not so for PC. We actually notice the banana bullets as our control method of Mouse + Keyboard is far superior, supplying a much better span of control not to mention the huge leap in game speed. Matchmaking was not made for PC, I do not want to take steps backwards when I play videogames. To me this is like releasing a brand new AAA game running off Microsoft DirectX 8.0. I will not stand for this. Insanity Ward, I hope with all my being that Call Of Duty 7 never goes into development. I hope you crash and burn.… Expand
  25. randallf.
    Nov 18, 2009
    1
    most PC gamers buy games like this for the multiplayer experience. i was gonna buy it tonight, glad i read the reviews. if IW and activision get their sheet together and put a respectable PC multiplayer system in-place for this game, i will gladly pay $60. i enjoyed CoD:MW on the PS3 which says a lot because i almost always hate playing FPS games on consoles. i've been rocking the most PC gamers buy games like this for the multiplayer experience. i was gonna buy it tonight, glad i read the reviews. if IW and activision get their sheet together and put a respectable PC multiplayer system in-place for this game, i will gladly pay $60. i enjoyed CoD:MW on the PS3 which says a lot because i almost always hate playing FPS games on consoles. i've been rocking the keyboard/mouse combo for my shooters since the days of Quake II and Half-Life (mostly DoD), and having recently mastered the Source games i'm ready to play something new. guess i'll keep looking.… Expand
  26. KelseaL
    Nov 17, 2009
    10
    The fact that this game has a user rating of 1.8 is absolutely tragic. Did most people here even play this game?--I don't think so. Reading through the user reviews a week ago, I almost decided not to buy this game as a result of all the bitter hate PC gamers were spewing; but I should have known better. I'm glad I went with my gut and bought this, because it was absolutely The fact that this game has a user rating of 1.8 is absolutely tragic. Did most people here even play this game?--I don't think so. Reading through the user reviews a week ago, I almost decided not to buy this game as a result of all the bitter hate PC gamers were spewing; but I should have known better. I'm glad I went with my gut and bought this, because it was absolutely epic. I know people are peeved about the changes made to multiplayer--and perhaps rightly so. I'm not sure what IW was thinking (it does come off as traitorous), and I can't say I agree with the changes they've made, but that does not change the fact that this game is amazing. The campaign grips you and doesn't let go, moving through at lightning speed from beginning to end. A lot of people are commenting on and complaining about length--but when's the last time there was a campaign mode this jam-packed for 6 hours, without any filler? Are we looking for quality or quantity? If you're looking for quanity you can have it; I'll take quality and stick with MW2. It's only 6 hours long, but it's 6 hours of intense, meaningful gameplay--not to mention spec ops mode. Yes, there's lots of stuff blowing up, and perhaps some of the smarts have been sacrificed for spectacle--but that's not always a bad thing. The Hans Zimmer score is electrifying and there are more mind blowing twists and turns in this than you'd ever expect--most of them completely unpredictable. The sound is also improved upon, and the graphics were even better than I was expecting. This game is beautiful--don't let anyone tell you any different. As for multiplayer, I've only played a few games, but it's enough to have formulated an opinion. The action does seem a little bit slower, but much more balanced, and thus in a way more fun. My connection is super crappy, but even I have been able to get 3 bars in games where all the other players seemed to have 4. Maybe if you're from another part of the world (I'm from Canada, 2 hours NE of Toronto) you might have problems, but I havn't experienced any so far. The other aspects from MW1 multiplayer that we know and love have been amped up, built up, improved upon, and even replayability appears to have been extended. It's like MW1 multiplayer x 3, if you're able to get past the negativity surrounding the dedicated server issue. If you would rather focus on the negative (no dedicated servers, lean, mod support) instead of the positive (absolutely everything else) then don't buy this game. Otherwise, this is the shooter you've been waiting for. If you're on the edge like I was, think hard about it, consider the bitter "DOA" reviews by many of the upset fans here, and make an informed decision. I'm not saying the game is perfect (I would have given it a 9.5 given the option) but the reviews here are simply not legitimate. Might IW have screwed up partially on the multiplayer? Perhaps, but t's still great and they've crafted a near masterpiece of a game. I have to end by saying that if you are a shooter fan, this really should unquestionably be a part of your collection--you won't regret it. I'm not saying the game is perfect (I would have given it a 9.5 given the option) but the reviews here are simply not legitimate. Might IW have screwed up partially on the multiplayer? Perhaps, but t's still great and they've crafted a near masterpiece of a game.… Expand
  27. BJones
    Nov 17, 2009
    1
    I give it a one simply for the fact its a game. They took away our Dedicated Servers. They took away our ability to LEAN when the enemy and your comrades can lean. The lack of Video/Graphic Options was a minus. The Audio Options...what options?....Speaker Option and a Volume Bar....are you serious? I dont know what happened at the office but some folks need to be smacked around a bit. I I give it a one simply for the fact its a game. They took away our Dedicated Servers. They took away our ability to LEAN when the enemy and your comrades can lean. The lack of Video/Graphic Options was a minus. The Audio Options...what options?....Speaker Option and a Volume Bar....are you serious? I dont know what happened at the office but some folks need to be smacked around a bit. I am stuck with a copy of this game and can only hope they patch the crap out of this. If they dont then it sits on the game shelf and collects dust while I play Modern Warfare 1 or whatever else comes to mind.… Expand
  28. LeoF.
    Nov 17, 2009
    1
    I have played the singleplayer and multiplayer, but I haven't bought the game. Although my experience on PC multiplayer wasn't terrible, it is still, lag-wise, downgrade from CoD 4, there is no doubt of that. I can sense the lag, it can be fairly obvious sometimes. It's a real shame, as I would really like to buy and play the game. All we need is a simple patch that makes I have played the singleplayer and multiplayer, but I haven't bought the game. Although my experience on PC multiplayer wasn't terrible, it is still, lag-wise, downgrade from CoD 4, there is no doubt of that. I can sense the lag, it can be fairly obvious sometimes. It's a real shame, as I would really like to buy and play the game. All we need is a simple patch that makes it like Left 4 Dead, we can even keep the matchmaking, but have decent servers host the game. It's like they hardly played the PC version when developing it, because it's really quite obvious that we NEED faster servers because we use a MOUSE which is much more responsive than a console controller.… Expand
  29. NateS
    Nov 17, 2009
    6
    Short and sweet singleplayer, unforgivably horrid implementation of multiplayer. CoD as a franchise is not known for being awesome in the latter respect, fair enough, but c'mon! It's a bald faced port with a +$10 price tag. CoD is what it is, a console centric franchise. With that in mind, I wish I had not paid the premium for the privilege of playing this game; I would have Short and sweet singleplayer, unforgivably horrid implementation of multiplayer. CoD as a franchise is not known for being awesome in the latter respect, fair enough, but c'mon! It's a bald faced port with a +$10 price tag. CoD is what it is, a console centric franchise. With that in mind, I wish I had not paid the premium for the privilege of playing this game; I would have waited to pick it up from the $20 bargain bin. 10 for doing what CoD does best(besides royally screwing PC gamers), 4 off for the lim n->0+ n^-1 level of fail at delivering the promised multiplayer game play.… Expand
  30. OlegK
    Nov 17, 2009
    0
    Fine single player mode with crap story, keeps player busy for 8 hours or so. When you go to multyplayer you get horrible ping, no NORMAL hardcore modes choice (12 man team deathmatch with 10 sec cooldown to spawn makes me sick). I want my f-n 30 man hardcore FFA with no cooldowns, no killcams, normal ping, no lag, no host migrating every 5 minutes and other crap you made this game with. Fine single player mode with crap story, keeps player busy for 8 hours or so. When you go to multyplayer you get horrible ping, no NORMAL hardcore modes choice (12 man team deathmatch with 10 sec cooldown to spawn makes me sick). I want my f-n 30 man hardcore FFA with no cooldowns, no killcams, normal ping, no lag, no host migrating every 5 minutes and other crap you made this game with. IW you got a middle finger at your face from all PC community. And btw, a lot of us actually GOT xbox360, we just want a normal multiplayer gaming with mouse and keyboard.… Expand
  31. ciccio92
    Nov 17, 2009
    9
    I dissent with what most people sey and keep saying... It think that Modern Warfare 2 Is a great product and worth the price in my opinion. Okay singleplayer is not as long as you'd expect but i think that though the missions are few they are very intense and playing the whole campaign was a statisfying experience to me. As for the multiplayer i think that the introduction of I dissent with what most people sey and keep saying... It think that Modern Warfare 2 Is a great product and worth the price in my opinion. Okay singleplayer is not as long as you'd expect but i think that though the missions are few they are very intense and playing the whole campaign was a statisfying experience to me. As for the multiplayer i think that the introduction of console-like matchmaking was a great move and i praise infinity ward guys for doing so because to me at least games a realy fluid and LAGLESS contrary to what people say and i perfer team deathmatches with nothing more than 18 player rather than 64 player slaughters where you could not even spawn without getting killed right after or where people kept spawnkilling to rack up points faster or people who use continuosly copters and bombing on the map making surviving more than 60 second a challenge. In conclusion I hope you stop seeing modern warfare 2 a flawed product just for a short multiplayer or for some choices aimed to help player rather than harm them and therfore i suggest everone to buy this game though you have to keep in mind all the choices Infinity Ward has taken and think if this game is good you or not.… Expand
  32. SteveM
    Nov 17, 2009
    1
    Having been a long time COD fan, and a COD4 clanner, I was truely looking forward to this game. The single player was short but good, 6hours of fun. No story, but what can you expect? The problem here is the multiplayer. It is woeful, and impossible to find a non-laggy host here in Melbourne Australia. I seem to be constantly connecting to US hosts, and they drop out mid-match. The menu Having been a long time COD fan, and a COD4 clanner, I was truely looking forward to this game. The single player was short but good, 6hours of fun. No story, but what can you expect? The problem here is the multiplayer. It is woeful, and impossible to find a non-laggy host here in Melbourne Australia. I seem to be constantly connecting to US hosts, and they drop out mid-match. The menu and controll settings look like a console screen i.e. no settings. I am selling this game on ebay and buying L4D2. This game is a giant f-you to the PC gaming community. I have probably spent 200+ hours playing COD4 multiplayer, and 8hours finishing the singleplayer. I can have barely played 3 hours multiplayer in MW2 and I am sick on this. Wait till the price drops to something reasonable and buy it for singleplayer, not the multiplayer. The game is $120.00 in Australia, and $99 on steam. L4D2 is $49 on steam. Go figure.… Expand
  33. KeyBoarder
    Nov 17, 2009
    0
    Oh my, it makes me sick to think about my undying love for this franchise throughout the years. I feel so ripped of, literally, I just don't have enough words to express how strongly I feel about the incredible let-down this game has proven to be. But I'll give it a try. 1. B-class movie story simply to sustain a series of cool scenes. Now, I don't actually mind, but then Oh my, it makes me sick to think about my undying love for this franchise throughout the years. I feel so ripped of, literally, I just don't have enough words to express how strongly I feel about the incredible let-down this game has proven to be. But I'll give it a try. 1. B-class movie story simply to sustain a series of cool scenes. Now, I don't actually mind, but then everyone please stop pretending as if it's a great story. Because it's not. 2. Shortest single player ever for the money. It took me 4 - 4.5 hours and then it was over. To me, for 55 euros (about 80 dollars!), that's simply a slap in the face. 3. Sure, it's COD, so multiplayer has vast promise, but it is broken in every single important aspect, so I just can't accept it. And, believe me, I HAVE TRIED FOR HOURS AND HOURS. > not being able to connect to the Steam network. > not being able to connect to IWnet. > not being able to find a host. > not being able to find the right host. > ... and it goes on...and on...and on. Really, for anyone who knows anything about coding and/or gaming, it truly is a no-brainer that this flimsy port necessitates important patches. It gets even worse. No dedicated servers. I repeat. No dedicated servers. I repeat. No dedicated servers. I repeat. No dedicated servers. I repeat. No dedicated servers. I repeat. No dedicated servers. I repeat. No dedicated servers. ... You know what? This would be a fine game if I had bought it for my Xbox 360. But I especially own a PC to play these kind of games. Why? Because an fps game in it's dumbed-down console version just doesn't work for me. If Infinity Ward wanted to ignore their PC audience, then they just shouldn't even have bothered to publish it for PC. It would be hard to swallow, but then at least I wouldn't be sitting here next to my +2000 euros PC with the biggest disappointment of the last decade in my hands. I refuse to remain at the side while my gaming experience is being dumbed down to serve the more easy-and-fast-fix-minded type of players. Therefore I can't but give this game the absolute minimum.… Expand
  34. Nate
    Nov 17, 2009
    1
    A beautiful console port that could have made it far if it was not for lack of dedicated servers. Matchmaking is lame and laggy as all get out. Being multi player is the biggest part of COD games, They really goofed this one up. I mean come on! How hard is it to at least add dedicated server support and add a filter for it on the crappy IW.net match making? I got other complaints, but i A beautiful console port that could have made it far if it was not for lack of dedicated servers. Matchmaking is lame and laggy as all get out. Being multi player is the biggest part of COD games, They really goofed this one up. I mean come on! How hard is it to at least add dedicated server support and add a filter for it on the crappy IW.net match making? I got other complaints, but i don't need to go on.… Expand
  35. V.Z
    Nov 17, 2009
    6
    I am only reviewing the single player portion, as someone who enjoyed Mdern Warfare's 1 campaign quite a lot. The MW1 campaign was the pinnacle of single player gaming comng from Infinity Ward. I would be surprised if they ever manage to reach such quality again. MW2's campaign is much weaker. The action is mostly well orchestrated, but some areas are simply not well designed. I am only reviewing the single player portion, as someone who enjoyed Mdern Warfare's 1 campaign quite a lot. The MW1 campaign was the pinnacle of single player gaming comng from Infinity Ward. I would be surprised if they ever manage to reach such quality again. MW2's campaign is much weaker. The action is mostly well orchestrated, but some areas are simply not well designed. The spawning reaches insane levels, and the game starts to feel like a stupid arcade shooter. This seriously hurts the immersion, as after all you are supposed to feel like part of the war machine. The last few levels get even more ridiculous, as you will find yourself killing hundreds of enemies almost alone. The plot is simpl horrible. It does not make any sense. There is a terrorist plot which triggers a war between Russia and the US, but there is no way the plot could work unless the entire world is dumb. Well, perhaps the Russians are overly aggressive and are just waiting for an excuse to trash D.C., but the story does not show this too well. There are some great levels, both in the battle and in the spec ops department. You do find yourself in awe a couple of times, even though the setting and the ideas are not very fresh anymore. You also get to steer a predator drone a few times, which is fun. So overall, a solid experience, but a far cry from the brilliance which was the first MW game.… Expand
  36. Torwyn82
    Nov 17, 2009
    1
    The single player experience was... ok. More of a visual treat and decent shooter, over before you could blink. However, the staggering lack of thought towards the PC community in multiplayer has destroyed this game. I am in the UK and can't play multiplayer without intense lag - I can no longer choose a local server, I am forced on to servers based on the other side of the globe, The single player experience was... ok. More of a visual treat and decent shooter, over before you could blink. However, the staggering lack of thought towards the PC community in multiplayer has destroyed this game. I am in the UK and can't play multiplayer without intense lag - I can no longer choose a local server, I am forced on to servers based on the other side of the globe, and my camera is constantly shaking left and right with lag. I will never buy another IW game again unless these issues are rectified quickly.… Expand
  37. Scott
    Nov 16, 2009
    9
    For those who are looking for an action packed single player FPS with amazing story and variety - look no further than MW2. This game puts you in many fun situations such as snowmobiling, climing an icey mountain, gunning your way through a shanty town, firing rockets from a UAV, blasting terrorists aboard an oil rig, blasting civilians while playing as a terrorist in a shocking twist to For those who are looking for an action packed single player FPS with amazing story and variety - look no further than MW2. This game puts you in many fun situations such as snowmobiling, climing an icey mountain, gunning your way through a shanty town, firing rockets from a UAV, blasting terrorists aboard an oil rig, blasting civilians while playing as a terrorist in a shocking twist to the storyline.. all with improved graphics from COD4. In addition, this game offers a co-op challenge mode where you and a friend can complete different challege levels, about 25 in all, packed with variety and fun. The online multiplayer shooter contains modes such as capture the flag, bomb planting, death match, free for all, ground war, with TONS of new weapons and extras to unlock. Yes, the abscense of dedicated servers may be a pain for many, but at the same time the new automatic grouping system does make games much easier to find and join for me, and you can always invite your Steam friends to the game via the Join Game option on steam friends list. All in all this is my favorite game of the year, even with it's flaws, I had a blast playing it and I recommend it to anyone.… Expand
  38. WilsonGarrett
    Nov 16, 2009
    9
    I love this game, and I can't stop playing it. The single is phenomenal, and the multiplayer is everything call of duty 4 should have been. All the people that are giving it 1's and 0's probably haven't even bought the game, no dedicated servers does suck but its the gameplay that matters .
  39. JonathanJ
    Nov 16, 2009
    5
    I give it a 5 because the epic story enveloped around the campaign is just insane (read: amazing, 10 / 10) but the fact that there is no lan support and the online portion of the game feels like a console-to-pc port with it's matchmaking-only multiplayer is rather uncool (read: 0.5 / 10). The fact that it works at all (read: lagg grenade) is the only reason I give is a half a point. I give it a 5 because the epic story enveloped around the campaign is just insane (read: amazing, 10 / 10) but the fact that there is no lan support and the online portion of the game feels like a console-to-pc port with it's matchmaking-only multiplayer is rather uncool (read: 0.5 / 10). The fact that it works at all (read: lagg grenade) is the only reason I give is a half a point. IW earned the buzzkillington of buzzkills with this one in my book, and that makes me sad.… Expand
  40. CaptTrek
    Nov 16, 2009
    2
    No dedicated server. Without a dedicated server you cannot control what is happening on the server. There are already cheats out there and of course bunny hoppers.I tried playing this new way and it sucks. Plus single player is way toooooooooooooo short. Should never have wasted my money.
  41. NickJ
    Nov 16, 2009
    0
    The biggest FPS, and an outright insult to PC gamers. The deplorable practice of demanding more money for less substance, the arrogant and condescending attitude towards PC gamers, and the utterly miserable online multiplayer experience all sends a very clear message to gamers and other companies that it is perfectly okay to scam and rip-off consumers if they can get away with it. Save The biggest FPS, and an outright insult to PC gamers. The deplorable practice of demanding more money for less substance, the arrogant and condescending attitude towards PC gamers, and the utterly miserable online multiplayer experience all sends a very clear message to gamers and other companies that it is perfectly okay to scam and rip-off consumers if they can get away with it. Save your money and wait for Battlefield: Bad Company 2.… Expand
  42. CJ
    Nov 16, 2009
    1
    Pathetic. Played SP, ~5hours max. Played MP for one week and gone back to COD4 with dedicated server support and zero lag. IWnet is laggy at best when it works, this game is a direct console port hence the need to create a matchmaking system. Slot in new code, job done. Lazy developers, be warned if thinking of buying.
  43. ZillaM
    Nov 16, 2009
    0
    This game is broken on the PC, the single player is good but the way too short. The multiplayer is a console port made from console to the PC. IWnet is a joke, you can't play your favourite maps, always laggy (even the ping time in ms is taken out and replaced with a cellphone coverage bar system hiding how bad the lag is), full of cheaters and no server admins to control it, spend This game is broken on the PC, the single player is good but the way too short. The multiplayer is a console port made from console to the PC. IWnet is a joke, you can't play your favourite maps, always laggy (even the ping time in ms is taken out and replaced with a cellphone coverage bar system hiding how bad the lag is), full of cheaters and no server admins to control it, spend more time waiting for matchmaking to complete than playing, no chance to meet regulars to play with which is something youve always had on PC. I havent even mentioned the install from DISC took 6 hours to complete...the whole game has to be considered a fail in my book on the PC.… Expand
  44. Maciej
    Nov 16, 2009
    0
    Several good ideas, I like the concept of some 20 or so cooperative missions. But unfortunately, first problem was the fact there was no LEAN functionality. This is a solid thing that I expected the game to have, especially that I saw a video where one of the dev's said everything in the sence of control of the character was exactly the same as in COD4. Additionally no dedicated Several good ideas, I like the concept of some 20 or so cooperative missions. But unfortunately, first problem was the fact there was no LEAN functionality. This is a solid thing that I expected the game to have, especially that I saw a video where one of the dev's said everything in the sence of control of the character was exactly the same as in COD4. Additionally no dedicated servers feature / multiplayer is very dissapoining with random lag spikes, and unreliable conectivity. Additionaly there is no feature to disable the HUD during signle player... and I would like to play SP "hardcore like" .... I just hate the target crosshair ... is it so hard to remove this? Sorry but I'm dissapointed I spent my $.… Expand
  45. ANonymous
    Nov 16, 2009
    1
    No dedicated servers is ridiculous. Thanks for taking a step back in gaming, IW. Why is this game priced at $60 instead of $50? The reason console games are more is for the console license that PC gamers don't pay for. The single player is graphically beautiful, but the game is horribly stupid. 5 hours is pitiful. The plot is pitiful. Good job, you appeased a bunch of knuckle No dedicated servers is ridiculous. Thanks for taking a step back in gaming, IW. Why is this game priced at $60 instead of $50? The reason console games are more is for the console license that PC gamers don't pay for. The single player is graphically beautiful, but the game is horribly stupid. 5 hours is pitiful. The plot is pitiful. Good job, you appeased a bunch of knuckle dragging idiot console jockeys and spit in the faces of PC gamers.… Expand
  46. E.O
    Nov 16, 2009
    6
    It took me two months to explain to my boss how Myspace works... I think that decisions with Steam really frustrate the few casual players that the PC has left. I think that Steam is a piece of hypocritical bullshit with no intend to get up for the consumer rights. Right now, all versions in Russia are patched so you can't play certain 'offensive' missions. It's a It took me two months to explain to my boss how Myspace works... I think that decisions with Steam really frustrate the few casual players that the PC has left. I think that Steam is a piece of hypocritical bullshit with no intend to get up for the consumer rights. Right now, all versions in Russia are patched so you can't play certain 'offensive' missions. It's a outrage that a fair buyer, has no control over his own game. Steam does this shit too in Germany, where you instantly get the censored version, even if you imported it... I will never buy a game for steam. Singleplayer is still cool. And if it were an expansion, I would buy it. It's sometimes a little too scripted, but generally, it's all you will ask for. Multiplayer on the other hand has ruined a lot by making those support powers so overpowered. Once you get a killstreak, you will get an other killstreak, and especially when one team has the advantage, you can't break this cycle while your enemy is blowing you to bits. This game is best on Concole. Although it's perfectly 'oke' for PC players, Call of Duty is not about being 'oke'.... it has to be awesome!… Expand
  47. DanC
    Nov 16, 2009
    0
    Slow, choppy game play due to the terrible 'host it yourself' setup. IW gave a big 'F U' to the gaming community but now allowing dedicated server support. No way to kick hackers or griefers. No way to get 10v10 of your favorite friends together without jumping through tiny, tiny hoops. Overall my expectations were huge, but I want my money back. Additionally, I really Slow, choppy game play due to the terrible 'host it yourself' setup. IW gave a big 'F U' to the gaming community but now allowing dedicated server support. No way to kick hackers or griefers. No way to get 10v10 of your favorite friends together without jumping through tiny, tiny hoops. Overall my expectations were huge, but I want my money back. Additionally, I really think Metacritic reviews should be required to play the game for a week after launch before reviewing it. It sounds like some reviewers are either a) Console-only gamers, or b) getting paid to do these reviews. Unacceptable. Ps. The hackers are ridiculous, there's no way to do anything about them. IW just proved that they are money grubbing game developers, just like EA.… Expand
  48. DarrenC
    Nov 16, 2009
    4
    The Single Player, despite what many people are saying, is really damn good, and it's not bewildering or barely understandable. However, Call of Duty games will NEVER be judged solely on the single player. The Matchmaking system does work, Albeit not very well. You can easily spend up to 10 minutes trying to successfully get into a game, opposed to the 10 seconds it takes to join a The Single Player, despite what many people are saying, is really damn good, and it's not bewildering or barely understandable. However, Call of Duty games will NEVER be judged solely on the single player. The Matchmaking system does work, Albeit not very well. You can easily spend up to 10 minutes trying to successfully get into a game, opposed to the 10 seconds it takes to join a dedicated server. The Lag isn't as frequent as other users put it, but when it DOES lag, it lags badly, VERY badly. A Patch released for the game apparently "Improved" the IWnet Matchmaking, whereas infact it did the complete opposite, making it take even longer to join games and consistently choosing hosts that cant really take the strain of other players. Its not a BAD game, unfortunately for the PC, its a Huge step in the wrong direction, whoever thought up removing dedicated servers and the use of VAC needs to find a tall building and go to the roof, and think to themselves "Will you forgive me god?"… Expand
  49. JohnJ
    Nov 16, 2009
    1
    Great single player campaign and co-op mode is surprisingly fun to play with your best friend with teamwork. Cmapaign mode was really short but it was very nice. and now to the VERY bad part; remember that this is PC version not console and yet Activision made a choice to NOT have dedicated server which is one of greatest advantage that player has over console players. such function not Great single player campaign and co-op mode is surprisingly fun to play with your best friend with teamwork. Cmapaign mode was really short but it was very nice. and now to the VERY bad part; remember that this is PC version not console and yet Activision made a choice to NOT have dedicated server which is one of greatest advantage that player has over console players. such function not existing at all is a huge, huge minus to this game. Do NOT buy this game with PC version; Activision really should have lowered it's PC version price already by now. They have simply converted the console version to PC without adding anything else. If you have Xbox360 go buy this game and play there; there is no Xbox360 exclusive game that can beat this multiplatform game. If you have PS3 then I wouldn't really recommend it unless you are a huge fan of FPS game; otherwise enjoy other exlucisve games like Uncharted 2 I am very diasspointed in MW2 PC ver. It's sad to see such great game got ruined because Infinity Ward somehow missed the most basic, and simplest advantage that PC player should have gotten; Dedicated servers… Expand
  50. EricP
    Nov 16, 2009
    1
    Looks like Activision have tried to ruin the COD franchise for PC gamers: -No dedicated servers. -Using VAC for banning cheats is useless cheats are already out, VAC does not work. -Lack of Punkbuster and dedicated server has made it impossible to keep tab on hack and ban them. -Same tired game engine as the previous COD's.It's full of cheats already available...So how did they Looks like Activision have tried to ruin the COD franchise for PC gamers: -No dedicated servers. -Using VAC for banning cheats is useless cheats are already out, VAC does not work. -Lack of Punkbuster and dedicated server has made it impossible to keep tab on hack and ban them. -Same tired game engine as the previous COD's.It's full of cheats already available...So how did they expect to be " cheat free " ? -Single player campaign is too short.… Expand
  51. VladB
    Nov 16, 2009
    10
    Oh my god. You guys are really pathetic. How can you give it a 0 just because there are no dedicated servers. Or just because it's too short. Yeah you're right but the small single player part is the most entertaining campaign that i have ever played. You can play more with the special ops and multiplayer. Both will be better with time. The game is just awsome so, shut up.
  52. Macca
    Nov 16, 2009
    1
    Reading the "professional" reviews at the top of the page giving 90-100 and stating that this game is a no-brainer if you want multiplayer, it is clear to me and many other PC gamers which magazines are clearly taking some sort of back-hander from certain developers. What a let down and a waste of money this game is to any gamer who likes to invest the time it takes to be decent online.
  53. rtruuerrg
    Nov 16, 2009
    9
    Having no dedicated server should not give the game a 0. It was announced months before the game released that there's no dedicated server. Why did you buy it then? The game is perfect, singleplayer has a great plot, keeping me entertained for hours and multiplayer is just amazing. Once, I agree more what the critics said than the people. Half of you don't even own the game nor Having no dedicated server should not give the game a 0. It was announced months before the game released that there's no dedicated server. Why did you buy it then? The game is perfect, singleplayer has a great plot, keeping me entertained for hours and multiplayer is just amazing. Once, I agree more what the critics said than the people. Half of you don't even own the game nor do you know how to rate a game.… Expand
  54. SR
    Nov 16, 2009
    0
    Completely overhyped garbage. There's very few truly visible changes to the graphics, the single player mode can be finished in like 4 hours, and is so linear it's like you're on a rail. There is no Lean in the controls. Are you serious? The realism is totally shot on the control side of things if you can't lean around corners. That's lame as all hell. There are Completely overhyped garbage. There's very few truly visible changes to the graphics, the single player mode can be finished in like 4 hours, and is so linear it's like you're on a rail. There is no Lean in the controls. Are you serious? The realism is totally shot on the control side of things if you can't lean around corners. That's lame as all hell. There are no dedicated servers to play online, so you might as well not even consider it being worthwhile to play multiplayer... the entire system is flawed now, and completely gives the finger to the gaming community on whole. Infinity Ward should be ashamed of themselves (although they probably don't give a damn RE: over 30 million in sales on the first day) and should accept returns on the game. Another note... the controversial Terrorist level is completely ridiculous and shocking. I'm generally the last person that says "that's too much for a game", but come on. Are we as gamers viewed as that stupid that we need to have Infinity Ward (or whoever it was that wrote the storyline) put us in the shoes of terrorists to learn a lesson, or pull us deeper into the game? What are we, children? There's enough B.S. political overtones in the game already to choke a camel, give us a break. It's a GAME. Or was supposed to be, until IW screwed it up and consequently screwed the community at large. My hope is that somehow IW will get a spanking for this. Boring, unimaginative, quasi-cinematic crap.… Expand
  55. Maxizz
    Nov 16, 2009
    0
    Multiplayer sucks! well its great for a couple of days.. but maps are all the same - smg galore daitona circle racing.. no sniper maps at all.. stupid console system.. no punkbuster. no dedicated servers. Jumping rangers shooting dual MP5s and Stingers are fun and unrealistic as hell. IWard bad job!
  56. EvenK
    Nov 16, 2009
    8
    The singleplayer campaign was too short, and confusing. It lasted me 5 hours. What the hell happened to the guy you hunted down in Brazil? What the hell happened to Makarov? ... The singleplayer portion is not organized at all, moving you from Brazil, to the US, to Russia, to Brazil again.. wtf.. Special ops is very fun if you play with a friend. I wish they would have more vehicle-based The singleplayer campaign was too short, and confusing. It lasted me 5 hours. What the hell happened to the guy you hunted down in Brazil? What the hell happened to Makarov? ... The singleplayer portion is not organized at all, moving you from Brazil, to the US, to Russia, to Brazil again.. wtf.. Special ops is very fun if you play with a friend. I wish they would have more vehicle-based Spec ops sessions. It'll last you longer than the campaign, that's for sure. As for online, pretty good. A lot of new challanges and perks, prestige mode, new guns etc. They didn't implement dedicated servers which is a pretty stupid thing to do. There's 15 MP maps and I don't wanna play through the all. The only good map in my opinion is Afghan, so why do they force me to play the other, boring maps? Advantages such as dedicated servers and peeking left or right is not implemented in the game. As a matter of fact, the console versions now have an advantage. I'm thinking of leaderboards and split-screen function.… Expand
  57. jamest
    Nov 16, 2009
    9
    #Singleplayer Pros&Cons: +Good Story +Good Graphics +Good Audio +Good Gameplay -only around 7 hours of gameplay even on veteran(probably alot more for inexperienced players) #Multiplayer Co-op&Spec Ops Pros&Cons: +fun +quite Challenging -only 2 player max #Multiplayer deathmatch etc. Pros&Cons: +fun +very challenging +good variety +lots of unlockables leaves you with huge replayability #Singleplayer Pros&Cons: +Good Story +Good Graphics +Good Audio +Good Gameplay -only around 7 hours of gameplay even on veteran(probably alot more for inexperienced players) #Multiplayer Co-op&Spec Ops Pros&Cons: +fun +quite Challenging -only 2 player max #Multiplayer deathmatch etc. Pros&Cons: +fun +very challenging +good variety +lots of unlockables leaves you with huge replayability +good for casuals... -..bad for competitive gamers -no dedicated servers What's left to say is that i had 10 minutes of lag out of 6 hours of playing online. Also ignore those 0-1 ratings, with all the trash on the market, this is the best game i've played this year. Also it's the first time since 2000 ,when i started with counter-strike, that i've been hooked up with a FPS and played it for more than 30 minutes. I would pay 60$(around 48… Expand
  58. LoLmobile
    Nov 16, 2009
    0
    Its funny how IW have the guts to make there game seem the best on the market and have the arrogance to sell virtual copies for $90 US since the great response people gave CoD4. When IW grow up and release dedicated servers on a patch I'll give up on my priated version and think about giving those greedy people some more money to add to their large pile of shamfully earned money.
  59. OSD
    Nov 16, 2009
    9
    After putting 30+ hours into multiplayer (PC) and playing through campaign / spec-ops on console, I must say that I'm simply baffled by the sheer amount of ridiculously low user scores. To all those who are still on the fence about this game and trying to make up their mind, rest assured that these user comments you are reading here are just the "vocal minority" that follows every After putting 30+ hours into multiplayer (PC) and playing through campaign / spec-ops on console, I must say that I'm simply baffled by the sheer amount of ridiculously low user scores. To all those who are still on the fence about this game and trying to make up their mind, rest assured that these user comments you are reading here are just the "vocal minority" that follows every major game release (the satisfied millions of users are probably too busy playing the game to come and comment here). I think the vast majority of them simply cannot see beyond the "They changed it so now it sucks" whining and therefore don't hesitate to rate this fine game with 0s and 1s. As for the game itself, the single player is a blast (although a rather short one, yes) if you like Hollywood-esque action. The campaign is packed with it and has some truly breath taking moments of pure adrenaline. The co-op Spec Ops mode is a very good addition and provides hours and hours of additional fun before you hit the online multiplayer. Now, the multiplayer. I seriously think that those who experience game-breaking lag should blame their Internet service providers before MW2. Out of dozens of matches I have so far played I have encountered noticable lag only a couple of times, and although I must admit that I have a 100mbps fiber-optic Internet connection at my home my friends playing on a regular DSL fared no worse. The matchmaking system can use a little tweaking for level-balancing and such (which is pretty easy to do and will surely come with future patches) but otherwise is very quick and efficient in finding matches. In CoD 4 (where I played to Prestige 3) I have never ever deviated from servers running anything but the original, official game ruleset so as far as all the fuss about the lack of dedicated server and player-modding support is concerned, I really fail to see the meaning of it. Someone mentioned something about better anti-cheat protection because dedicated hosts can ban people from their servers, but I will take the new system where cheaters will get banned from ALL servers simultaneously over the old one any time, thank you very much. So overall, a great game even if you are just going to blast through the campaign and then burn several days with a buddy playing Spec Ops. But if you are also into online multiplayer, getting MW2 is a no-brainer. Have fun!… Expand
  60. LCaz
    Nov 16, 2009
    0
    Well the single player was okay as usual - mostly repetitive gameplay with a few interesting sequences. But not many people would spend £35 for the single player anyway as that's not where the fun really lies! Obviously I didn't realise until after I'd purchased the (unfortunately non-refundable) game that the multiplayer aspect had been neutered and, honestly, it Well the single player was okay as usual - mostly repetitive gameplay with a few interesting sequences. But not many people would spend £35 for the single player anyway as that's not where the fun really lies! Obviously I didn't realise until after I'd purchased the (unfortunately non-refundable) game that the multiplayer aspect had been neutered and, honestly, it really breaks my heart. With pings above 100ms as standard it is like multiplayer gaming has gone back 10 years! Perhaps IW feel that new guns and more complicated perk systems can disguise the fact that the game now has a simply bad online experience. Ultimately it's all very trivial, unless they reintroduce the multiplayer functionality - a necessity to PC gamers not a privilege - then I won't be buying another of their games and will simply move onto the next company to produce a decent fps. I imagine alot of other people will too. The problem is that with gaming becoming more mainstream (and focused more on the consoles than the pc) IW can afford to shortchange PC customers as they know that console gamers are their main market now and will pick up the slack. Even with the furore I don't expect IW to reintroduce the dedicated servers. As someone already mentioned they are likely doing this as to slowly integrate console functionality to the pc - a two tiered system. First you pay to buy permission to play the game, then you pay monthly to play it. It's a sad indication of the way gaming is heading - it's now no longer a niche market supplied by eager, honest companies but big business akin to hollywood or the music industry. Easy money.… Expand
  61. KaneR
    Nov 16, 2009
    1
    Lack of dedicated servers has destroyed an otherwise flawless IP. People don't buy these games for the singleplayer aspect, and if you do, why would you waste an extra 10 bucks on a 5 hour game? Terrible value for money and a lackluster, thoughtless multiplayer experience, doesn't merit this game above what I've given it.
  62. Simonp
    Nov 15, 2009
    5
    MW2 is a technically well executed shooter. It's horrendously linear though, most of the times you only have one path to follow making you feel rather railroaded. The plot is just terrible, it feels like something out of the movie "Red Dawn" if anyone remembers that and that movie was way more realistic for it's time. It really broke the immersion for me that they didn't MW2 is a technically well executed shooter. It's horrendously linear though, most of the times you only have one path to follow making you feel rather railroaded. The plot is just terrible, it feels like something out of the movie "Red Dawn" if anyone remembers that and that movie was way more realistic for it's time. It really broke the immersion for me that they didn't even try to make the plot work. How anyone can think this story is "interesting" is beyond me, they must be the same people who pay to watch "Transformers" or "Rambo 4". The game includes atrocities against civilians, it feels more like a manufactured controversy to me though. Overall it's got lots of bling effect and it is sort of fun to play through once, but the basic gameplay is stale and 10+ years old. You can't even lean around corners anymore and there's no real cover system either. I'm not into MP for COD but Peer to peer hosting for a FPS is just beyond belief, noone has ever tried playing quake vs the guy hosting? (hint he will have 0 ping and a huge advantage) It's not going to work people. I'll still give it a 5-6 for the pure gun-porn experience and the polished execution of a limited concept.… Expand
  63. SteveE
    Nov 15, 2009
    9
    Are you guys nuts?! this game is great! campaign may be a little short but really how many people bought this game for the single player? Even if you did buy for the single player you have multiple challenge's to do that are pretty damn hard. I can't even explain how fun the multiplayer is, my K/D ratio is always low and I still love every bit of this game. I do not know how Are you guys nuts?! this game is great! campaign may be a little short but really how many people bought this game for the single player? Even if you did buy for the single player you have multiple challenge's to do that are pretty damn hard. I can't even explain how fun the multiplayer is, my K/D ratio is always low and I still love every bit of this game. I do not know how people can say otherwise...… Expand
  64. HarveyD
    Nov 15, 2009
    10
    In all honesty I would have given this game a 2, but I'm trying to balance off all the jerks giving the game a 0. It's been said time and time again, no dedicated server support? Oh silly, silly Activision. No console either? And the number of players is limited to 9v9? Not being creative enough to implement new features is one thing, but to actually think that taking away In all honesty I would have given this game a 2, but I'm trying to balance off all the jerks giving the game a 0. It's been said time and time again, no dedicated server support? Oh silly, silly Activision. No console either? And the number of players is limited to 9v9? Not being creative enough to implement new features is one thing, but to actually think that taking away features would somehow make your game better is, for lack of a better word, just stupid.… Expand
  65. angrycustomer
    Nov 15, 2009
    1
    The WORST multiplayer experience i have ever had! The P2P matching system is awfull, it is very laggy. In most cases i can stand behind someone, head shot them and the shot takes a hell of a long time to register. I and meny people i know are having great difficulties with this system, bring back dedis! The number of supported players is quite dissapointing. The maps are also very campy The WORST multiplayer experience i have ever had! The P2P matching system is awfull, it is very laggy. In most cases i can stand behind someone, head shot them and the shot takes a hell of a long time to register. I and meny people i know are having great difficulties with this system, bring back dedis! The number of supported players is quite dissapointing. The maps are also very campy there is a window over looking every doorway, you can not walk around one corner without a camper having the crosshairs locked on you from a vantage point a mile away, the over detailed/cluttered, dark dingy maps make this problem even worse, makeing it impossible to identify a camping enemy If you are used to the MW multiplayer and expect the same level of quality you will not find this with MW2. I dont recomed this game for a serious multiplay gamer. However the new weapons, attatchments, special effects and perks are brilliant.… Expand
  66. GregoryU
    Nov 15, 2009
    2
    Single player was polished but abridged version of the first game. How can you not include a C-130 mission in single player? How can you not have a follow up sniper ghillie suit mission? The addition of vehicles mission didn't make up for the missing items. This game is a step backwards. We want more technical gadgets, not less. We want to control bigger modern warfare armorment. I Single player was polished but abridged version of the first game. How can you not include a C-130 mission in single player? How can you not have a follow up sniper ghillie suit mission? The addition of vehicles mission didn't make up for the missing items. This game is a step backwards. We want more technical gadgets, not less. We want to control bigger modern warfare armorment. I am really let down. Enough has been said about the multiplayer.… Expand
  67. gammab
    Nov 15, 2009
    0
    Ok no dedi servers wtf? your match setup is a joke i lag with ever host. this dual wielding crap is so stupid. this isn't halo IW only 1 ump should be held at a time. i also feel like you just brushed off the pc players as if they were a spec of dust on your suit. Ive been playing this game since cod2 and loved every one but this. game play sucks, lag is crazy, and your Nazi zombie Ok no dedi servers wtf? your match setup is a joke i lag with ever host. this dual wielding crap is so stupid. this isn't halo IW only 1 ump should be held at a time. i also feel like you just brushed off the pc players as if they were a spec of dust on your suit. Ive been playing this game since cod2 and loved every one but this. game play sucks, lag is crazy, and your Nazi zombie replacement sucked. ill never be able to get back the 60 bucks i spent on this shit but since i already did i hope your guys pull this game out of the toilet and clean it up.… Expand
  68. onotixanonymous
    Nov 15, 2009
    6
    It's ok. they completely fucked up the game play though. Dual wielding? wtf is this halo? i mean maybe pistols are ok but when some dude comes running down a hall 2 p90s in his hand blasting 120 rounds my way it though that was kinda messed up and unbalanced. The shields messed things up too. places were gripping multilayer battles in close quarters should have been were suddenly It's ok. they completely fucked up the game play though. Dual wielding? wtf is this halo? i mean maybe pistols are ok but when some dude comes running down a hall 2 p90s in his hand blasting 120 rounds my way it though that was kinda messed up and unbalanced. The shields messed things up too. places were gripping multilayer battles in close quarters should have been were suddenly replaced by a stand off with you and an almost invisible noob. and that fnj or what ever its called attachment. i dont fancy getting shot through a car.… Expand
  69. JustinS.
    Nov 15, 2009
    10
    These people are just being bitches. I'm not a fan of any of the other Call of Duties. This one? This one's a masterpiece on three fronts. Playing spec ops with my friends, trying to get each level to perfection... Trying to climb the ranks in multiplayer, and experiencing a very emotion driving campaign (although short) seal the deal with this one. Some of these guys are nerd These people are just being bitches. I'm not a fan of any of the other Call of Duties. This one? This one's a masterpiece on three fronts. Playing spec ops with my friends, trying to get each level to perfection... Trying to climb the ranks in multiplayer, and experiencing a very emotion driving campaign (although short) seal the deal with this one. Some of these guys are nerd raging and probably haven't even played the game because they don't get their dedicated servers. I must say, I LOVE dedicated servers but considering I play this on PS3... It's a non-issue. Yes, I HAVE played the PC version. So sorry you don't like simplicity in just jumping into a quick match guys. I understand you want 50+ multiplayer and whatever... But Honestly all of your picky needs are childish. So sorry there's no server where you play on the same damn map every time, etc. I play COD4 alot on PC. And this one is just different. You want the same damned thing over and over? keep playing Call of Duty 4. Only the minority (the haters of this game) are even voting on this site, they're the only ones that wanna make a big deal.… Expand
  70. Erik
    Nov 15, 2009
    0
    No dedicated servers, Steam crashing and locking up, D/Cing all the time. It took me 2 evenings to get the game installed because of the crappy installation procedures. The singleplayer missions are great, but this game seriously needs to get its multiplayer part fixed, or people will loose interest and leave.
  71. JaapH
    Nov 15, 2009
    7
    Lol people this game is not so bad that you must award it a zero, as the singleplayer is good. Ok ok.... it's rather short, took me 6 hours on hardened. However the multiplayer is rather fucked up and as I tend to spend atleast 200hours on multiplayer on a given game. I must agree that this game is relatively expensive for what it has to offer. Still it's worth a tiny 7.
  72. Wm.K
    Nov 15, 2009
    3
    If your looking for the a Modern FPS this one maybe not for you. It appears to have been made for a very immature audience. It
  73. JaeQ
    Nov 15, 2009
    0
    The Modern Warfare series itself was nothing innovative or special just Counter Strike: 2007. The unlock system was part of BF2 which came out long before MW1. The weapons themselves are just as generic as you get.. you know m16, ak47. Now I would give the first MF a 6 or so, but I've seen much more new content in small mods for games let alone sequels.. Top that off with The Modern Warfare series itself was nothing innovative or special just Counter Strike: 2007. The unlock system was part of BF2 which came out long before MW1. The weapons themselves are just as generic as you get.. you know m16, ak47. Now I would give the first MF a 6 or so, but I've seen much more new content in small mods for games let alone sequels.. Top that off with disgustingly short, linear, faux-cinematic sp and the lack of dedicated servers in Mp as well as the worst choice of anticheat tool and you have a game just as bad as the latest Wolfenstein. It's not worth buying at all, so it deserves nothing more than a 0. PS. Love the fanbois giving this shit 10's. You're either 12 or just have subpar IQ and sheep along with what's mainstream.… Expand
  74. MikeL
    Nov 15, 2009
    0
    Completely awful. the online experience is the worst, lag cheating, small maps, no leaning in game. No dedicated servers. 9v9 games is u can get into one, waiying around for games is a joke. this is a waste of $60.00. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMupHG21NVw&feature=player_embedded these guys deserve your money, they make a quality product. also over 250,000 pc gamers have boycotted and Completely awful. the online experience is the worst, lag cheating, small maps, no leaning in game. No dedicated servers. 9v9 games is u can get into one, waiying around for games is a joke. this is a waste of $60.00. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMupHG21NVw&feature=player_embedded these guys deserve your money, they make a quality product. also over 250,000 pc gamers have boycotted and banned this game, get on the band wagon. read the infinity wardforums for Mw2 PC game… Expand
  75. BradN
    Nov 15, 2009
    2
    I was very disappointed with Modern Warfare 2. There wasn't very much change in the game play besides weapons, perk setup, and killstreak/ and the new deathstreak. The server system they use ( similar to xbox live) is *NOT* meant for PC gamers, PC gamers like to have the choice of being able to browse through a server list of dedicated servers in order to choose a good server to play I was very disappointed with Modern Warfare 2. There wasn't very much change in the game play besides weapons, perk setup, and killstreak/ and the new deathstreak. The server system they use ( similar to xbox live) is *NOT* meant for PC gamers, PC gamers like to have the choice of being able to browse through a server list of dedicated servers in order to choose a good server to play on. Instead, we get these player hosted servers which in return gives host advantage and lag spikes at times depending on the hosts internet. There is also the fact of the player limit being cut in half, with such big maps 18 players is not enough for these maps, Rust and Scrapyard maybe the only maps that are probably understandable for a lower number of players but with maps like: Afgan, Terminal, and Sub Base, the most players will be doing is running around trying to find each other! Overall in my opinion I think the PC version of the game will be underpopulated and eventually because of Infinity Wards mistakes will lead to it's demise while Modern Warfare #1 still stays at the top. This is a PC game, not a 360 game.… Expand
  76. Gab
    Nov 15, 2009
    0
    Total Crap. Single player is not bad, but honestly who buys a game like this for the single player experience, its not like this game is like a fallout 3 or anything. People buy FPS for the multiplayer experience cause single player can get boring really fast once you have beaten it a couple of times. MW2 fails in multiplayer. I would not recommend this game to anyone unless u enjoy being Total Crap. Single player is not bad, but honestly who buys a game like this for the single player experience, its not like this game is like a fallout 3 or anything. People buy FPS for the multiplayer experience cause single player can get boring really fast once you have beaten it a couple of times. MW2 fails in multiplayer. I would not recommend this game to anyone unless u enjoy being fustrated with lag, 9v9 games in huge maps, and loads of hackers.… Expand
  77. BradynM
    Nov 15, 2009
    0
    No dedicated servers = no purchase. Before Infinity Ward screwed beyond everything up, this was a shoe in purchase for me. I just can't buy it in good conscience now. Infinity Ward is gone and Infinity Ward/Activision is in where the bottom line is appealing to the 14 year old casual players who are ignoring the ESRB rating anyway. Have fun, Infinity Ward. I hope you lost millions!
  78. JohanB
    Nov 15, 2009
    7
    So, the game that almost every PC gamer has been bashing on since "no dedicated servers" was announced has arrived. Singleplayer is an enjoyable experience, it's very short though but delivers a few "wow-moments" and is very well done. Multiplayer offers the same gameplay as its predecessor but with added perks, weapons, challenges and killstreaks. IWNet, the feature that is used to So, the game that almost every PC gamer has been bashing on since "no dedicated servers" was announced has arrived. Singleplayer is an enjoyable experience, it's very short though but delivers a few "wow-moments" and is very well done. Multiplayer offers the same gameplay as its predecessor but with added perks, weapons, challenges and killstreaks. IWNet, the feature that is used to set up games is good in theory, but not so much in practice. When you set up a game, it sometimes starts to pop up errors all the time and you jump between lobbys like crazy. When the game finally starts, it's enjoyable action to the max, unless latency issues (which are are sometimes unnoticable for hours but then decide to screw everything over) cause problems. My personal feeling is that the game should work flawlessly, but it doesn't always deliver on that point. IWNet needs alot of tweaking so that people can accept it. Also, some players feel that dedicated server support is needed. I can agree that it would be awesome, but if IWNet can be fixed, I for one would be able to like it.… Expand
  79. PeterR
    Nov 15, 2009
    1
    I'm only reviewing the single-player part: The previews looked nice. Then I realized it was basically the exact same game as most of the other COD games. I don't mind games being a little linear. They don't all have to be like Oblivion etc. But even the original Wolfenstein, original Doom and newer shooters like Far Cry etc. offer much more freedom. The surroundings are I'm only reviewing the single-player part: The previews looked nice. Then I realized it was basically the exact same game as most of the other COD games. I don't mind games being a little linear. They don't all have to be like Oblivion etc. But even the original Wolfenstein, original Doom and newer shooters like Far Cry etc. offer much more freedom. The surroundings are really cool (despite graphics being a bit mediocre at times), and the thought of fighting through the level with all that is happening around you, simply seems amazing. But once you get started, you quickly realize there is no freedom at all to explore the level. You are basically being GUIDED through every little 30-second segment of the level. I think it would best be compared to those old CDROM-games where a prerendered movie were running, and all you had to do was to control the crosshair. I understand that when they do it like this, it is very easy for them to create a sort of "movie experience". But at least they should have given us a little more then in all these heavily scripted sequences. Why can i still not shoot the enemies in several different ways? It would help a lot if they could be hurt and killed in ways that felt much more realistic/varied. Also I was disappointed to see all the background not having any function except using it for cover. Everything feels even more scripted when I can't even destroy a simple fence, or blow the interiors of a room to tiny bits. After so many years with FPS's I can't understand why people like this "walk-through" of a single player campagin so much. If it's just for the cinematic feel, I prefer a real movie.… Expand
  80. johns
    Nov 15, 2009
    0
    Now before all the fan boys go zomg this was the best stuff ever, i bet half of the people that bought this never played cod1 now that was a great game and this has set a new low to their franchise. The single player is less than 5 hours if you good maybe less than 4 so thats about 15$ an hour to play and the multiplayer is same with new guns and a few new modes. O did i mention the Now before all the fan boys go zomg this was the best stuff ever, i bet half of the people that bought this never played cod1 now that was a great game and this has set a new low to their franchise. The single player is less than 5 hours if you good maybe less than 4 so thats about 15$ an hour to play and the multiplayer is same with new guns and a few new modes. O did i mention the graphics are the same as cod4 and it only makes me thing some of these reviewers were payed off i mean a 95 you've got to be kidding me.… Expand
  81. MahmoodAzad
    Nov 15, 2009
    1
    This game has a very interesting singleplayer, the start of the game wasn't much to draw you in but as the story progressed the context became more intriguing and keeps you going. However this is a very short singleplayer campaign which only lasts 4hrs-5hrs giving your level of experience in FPS. As with all Call of Duty games the main attraction is the Multiplayer. The Perks in MW2 This game has a very interesting singleplayer, the start of the game wasn't much to draw you in but as the story progressed the context became more intriguing and keeps you going. However this is a very short singleplayer campaign which only lasts 4hrs-5hrs giving your level of experience in FPS. As with all Call of Duty games the main attraction is the Multiplayer. The Perks in MW2 are tweaked to help out newbies (noobs) and even up the playing field. The introduction of IWNet is an important factor not to be left out, This concept is all well and good for consoles but not very reasonable for PC. The maximum number of players in a multiplayer match are 16 (9v9). On the console it took 5minutes for IWNet matchmaking system to find a suitable game and join. Upon joining the lag was very horrific, I would die shortly after going into cover only to have the kill camera show me getting killed 2 seconds before I went into cover. This is one of the most terrible things that could happen in a multiplayer game. The removal of the Dedicated Sever support in MW2 is a big NO. Overall MW2's main attraction is the singleplayer. With extreme lag and drastically reduced player slots results in MW2 losing the majority of points.… Expand
  82. JanD
    Nov 15, 2009
    1
    Well about 4hrs of single player for $60?? Gives you the feeling they just removed stuff to add later with over-priced shitty DLC. For PC no mods/customization or dedicated servers? They removed YEARS of free content. Now they charge $60 it's a really bad deal. Don't buy it until price drop or mod/dedicated server support. Hopefully both so that it can compare to the average PC game.
  83. SirSmokealot
    Nov 15, 2009
    0
    >4-5 hr singleplayer >lean taken out >It's still CoD: Grenade Warfare in multi >no dedicated servers >matchmaking only, enjoy your high ping and being matched with some gimp in Timbuckfuckintoo >everything's through IWNet to lock down game >no mods, DLC only, most likely DLC will eventually become required to play on server >no SDK ever >$60.00 even on PC where the dev >4-5 hr singleplayer >lean taken out >It's still CoD: Grenade Warfare in multi >no dedicated servers >matchmaking only, enjoy your high ping and being matched with some gimp in Timbuckfuckintoo >everything's through IWNet to lock down game >no mods, DLC only, most likely DLC will eventually become required to play on server >no SDK ever >$60.00 even on PC where the dev doesn't have to worry about licensing fees >Pay extra for DLC that's already on the disc you paid $60 for, devs are lying about not making content until after game is in stores >No dedicated servers, matchmaking and IWnet lockdown means you'll be forced to buy DLC maps when the brainless masses do It's a dark day for the consumer.… Expand
  84. Etacol
    Nov 15, 2009
    7
    The single player campaign is absolutely great and immersing. Of course, it's pretty linear (except for some tiny parts of the carefully detailed cutscenes) and scripted - but anyone who bought COD4:Modern Warfare shouldn't act all too surprised. This game would be at least be a 9 if it weren't for the lack of a dedicated server for multiplayer (which is less important to me).
  85. ChrisB
    Nov 15, 2009
    6
    Single player is compelling, Spec Ops is a welcome game mode addition. Multiplayer is lacklustre and Infinity Ward have taken major strides in the wrong direction by removing tried and tested methods of connecting to other players. Adding to this the lack of standard features in FPS games, such as the ability to peek around corners in a tactical fashion, points more to the "run and gun" Single player is compelling, Spec Ops is a welcome game mode addition. Multiplayer is lacklustre and Infinity Ward have taken major strides in the wrong direction by removing tried and tested methods of connecting to other players. Adding to this the lack of standard features in FPS games, such as the ability to peek around corners in a tactical fashion, points more to the "run and gun" console generation than it does to the established PC gamer market who tend to require more refined gameplay. IWnet is a welcome addition for those gamers who may have had issues with finding suitable games, and to an extent it works well, when it works. I can't help but wonder why Infinity Ward didn't include both the infant version of IWnet (as no doubt it'll be worked on over time to improve it) as well as including the tried and tested dedicated server support. The PC community will also not be able to take a solid game, and further the lifespan by adding mods and maps of their own creation, leaving Infinity Ward to focus development time on the console market and the next installment of the Call of Duty series, which seems slightly short sighted. I'm sure there is reasoning behind the move, but it isn't one that is apparent at this time, rumours aside.… Expand
  86. ChrisD
    Nov 15, 2009
    7
    I bought this game full well knowing of the dumbed-down MP experience. I was very skeptical, but even still I waited in line (11th) for the midnight launch at my local store. Installing the game was very annoying for me (disk 2 didn't like my SATA DVD-R/Ws...), as was having to DL 3.X GB off Steam after - but those have been my biggest gripes by far. The SP experience while short, is I bought this game full well knowing of the dumbed-down MP experience. I was very skeptical, but even still I waited in line (11th) for the midnight launch at my local store. Installing the game was very annoying for me (disk 2 didn't like my SATA DVD-R/Ws...), as was having to DL 3.X GB off Steam after - but those have been my biggest gripes by far. The SP experience while short, is nothing short of Hollywood-blockbuster amazing! Incredibly memorable. MP was painful at first - half my games were laggy like nothing else while half were not. The recently released Steam update for IWnet however seems to have increased the stability, and overall I enjoy the multiplayer - it's refreshing to enjoy the new maps and weapons. One thing to note however is that it seems more difficult, or less skill-based than MW1. People die faster so noobs have a bigger crutch that way... Also, spraying seems to be pretty effective with Steady Aim and almost any gun. Overall (Not average): 7 Graphics: 8.5 Sound: 8 SP Experience: 9.5 MP Experience: 6.5 Spec Ops: N/A… Expand
  87. EH
    Nov 15, 2009
    3
    The multiplayer of this game is clearly a farce but that is not the reason I bought this game. Infinity Ward have always created powerful Single Player stories that they have told to great effect in their games but this one falls short. Sure, the voice acting is great and the plot is ballsy and well though out but the on-rails, Virtua Cop style pop-up bad guys are just laughable while the The multiplayer of this game is clearly a farce but that is not the reason I bought this game. Infinity Ward have always created powerful Single Player stories that they have told to great effect in their games but this one falls short. Sure, the voice acting is great and the plot is ballsy and well though out but the on-rails, Virtua Cop style pop-up bad guys are just laughable while the boring, ugly, repetitive and staggeringly unrealistic surroundings are pathetic. This game is well below the acceptable par for PC in every respect from length of gameplay to graphics to longevity and the fact that it is the single most highly priced game on the platform and comes with non-functioning multiplayer is just a kick in the teeth. Avoid at all costs.… Expand
  88. SusieT
    Nov 14, 2009
    0
    Honestly, this deserves a 3 for effort, and a 0 for the final product. As many others have said, no dedicated servers (Aka, no community, in a sense, and lag), no console (Pretty much no messing around, can honestly be forgiven) and well, 9v9 (Alot less then most of our games.) Single player is short, too short to make up for the multiplayer, and is very easy. I'd suggest that you Honestly, this deserves a 3 for effort, and a 0 for the final product. As many others have said, no dedicated servers (Aka, no community, in a sense, and lag), no console (Pretty much no messing around, can honestly be forgiven) and well, 9v9 (Alot less then most of our games.) Single player is short, too short to make up for the multiplayer, and is very easy. I'd suggest that you stay away until it is patched, or just stick with COD4.… Expand
  89. pudgypawH
    Nov 14, 2009
    2
    The Good: Graphics, Efficiency of Code, Single Play, Co-OP, Steam The Bad: No Dedicated Server System, Can't Mod, Can't be used in E-Sports Analysis: Infinity Ward had a good reputation. Scenarios in single play had IMPACT. From the WWI Russian assault (COD1) to D-Day (COD2). MW2 SP on Veteran level is a challenge even for a CS1.6/CS:S veteran like me. For MultiPlay there is The Good: Graphics, Efficiency of Code, Single Play, Co-OP, Steam The Bad: No Dedicated Server System, Can't Mod, Can't be used in E-Sports Analysis: Infinity Ward had a good reputation. Scenarios in single play had IMPACT. From the WWI Russian assault (COD1) to D-Day (COD2). MW2 SP on Veteran level is a challenge even for a CS1.6/CS:S veteran like me. For MultiPlay there is replayability and a great system, building a community, the single most important element to preserving a game/system online. Look at the Facebook community. Look at CounterStrike servers. Look at COD4.1 Servers. We return to those sites/games because of the people. I think Steam is going to save MW2 from utter annihilation with the buddy system. But multiplay feels as fragmented as Left4Dead. You can't see the community. It must be built via the buddy system. Those who enjoy simple competition (clear skies, no gimmicks, your reflex time vs mine/1.6style) will no doubt return to COD4.1 and CS:S/1.6. I simply think MW2 indicates a shift in direction of the company, away from competitive e-sports toward the casual. Perhaps IW will go back, perhaps not. I DO regret, however, the role Microsoft played in this. Microsoft even timed the xBox ban with MW2 release. Microsoft is clearly using IW, milking/destroying the precious reputation IW spent over a decade to build. All within one game project. I just hope IW will wake up and return to it's senses. Microsoft seeks to dominate OS, consoles, now individual PC/Internet titles. They will monopolize everything. Even if we don't have nuclear war, Microsoft conglomerate/domination is my next biggest concern and fear. IW please return to us, your trust in this community will NOT be misplaced!… Expand
  90. TatLoo
    Nov 14, 2009
    2
    A great single player game but very short (less than 6 hours on med settings if you are an experienced FPS player). The problem comes from the way that IW and Activision have gimped the multiplayer aspects of the game, taking out options and features which PC gamers have used for years. In exchange we get a waterd-down lag-rich console gaming P2P experience. This has shortened the A great single player game but very short (less than 6 hours on med settings if you are an experienced FPS player). The problem comes from the way that IW and Activision have gimped the multiplayer aspects of the game, taking out options and features which PC gamers have used for years. In exchange we get a waterd-down lag-rich console gaming P2P experience. This has shortened the lifespan of this game, all for a higher price than almost any other new release PC game on the market. An obvious attempt by the publishers to try and control every bit of content associated with this game and set PC gamers up for paying for DLC's. Modern WarFAIL 2.… Expand
  91. TomS
    Nov 14, 2009
    5
    The gameplay, graphics and core gameplay mechanics are generally great, aside from the removal of lean. Unfortunately, the storyline is terrible and completely forgettable - if you can even understand it in the first place. If COD4 was The Bourne Identity, MW2 is Transformers 2 - overblown in every way imaginable, without letting plot get in the way. But, I suppose that a Michael Bay-ish The gameplay, graphics and core gameplay mechanics are generally great, aside from the removal of lean. Unfortunately, the storyline is terrible and completely forgettable - if you can even understand it in the first place. If COD4 was The Bourne Identity, MW2 is Transformers 2 - overblown in every way imaginable, without letting plot get in the way. But, I suppose that a Michael Bay-ish approach is to be expected given the dev team's obvious influence by The Rock. Multiplayer - for PC - is truly a let down. As I said before, the core gameplay is great and largely unchanged from COD4. In short, casual bursts, it's fun - which was the purported aim of IWnet. But the vastly limited options wax apparent the more you play. Despite the addition of a plethora of level ups, achievements, challenges, weapons and equipment, this game will not have the same life span COD4 did on PC. Many who are used to playing games on PC will grow tired of the shackles it places on gameplay before they finish unlocking everything. No choosing maps, number of players, hardcore for any game type, ping, etc. - only much simplified and generic playlists. After you pick the playlist, IWnet controls everything except for the part where you shoot things. Don't like "Afghan"? Tough luck - you can only start a vote that likely won't pass. Quit the server to find a new one and IWnet will very likely throw you back into the same one. It did this to me 3 consecutive times for one server (read: host player). Finally I relented and just put up with it, which is sort of allegorical of the IWnet experience as a whole. It reminds me of the old Ford Model T slogan: you can get any color you want, as long as it's black." Well, here "you can play MW2 any way you like, as long as it's the way Vince Zampella intended it." Latency is often not terrible - until you notice its at-first subtle disadvantages. Get ready to watch plenty of killcam videos where you don't appear to have fired any of those final shots that you were sure hit the other guy between the eyes before he killed you. For me, this happens a lot and on even the "fastest" servers. P2P latency also introduces new controls. For example, the sprint key must be held down for at least a full second. Otherwise, you will start-stop sprint. These issues arrive because what you do on your PC takes a lot longer to get back to the host. What happens on their PC is the "reality" of the game, while you get a delayed version of that. So what kind of game type is P2P matchmaking just fine for? Two-player coop. Is matchmaking available in Special Ops mode? No. Invite only. If you don't have anyone on your friends list to invite (which isn't too unlikely given boycotts, jilted players, and the fact that the PC is much less populated to begin with), you can't play any of it two player, and the coolest missions require it. The reason I gave it a 5 is because the core game is great, and that's half the battle. But the implementation, the storytelling, the lack of a well-oiled multiplayer, etc. etc., is the other half. What good is a great game if playing it to your liking is such a headache? This is not an elitist thing. These features are a necessity on consoles, not a luxury. And things like P2P servers simply do not work as well on PCs. Without open source games, an open source platform is worthless. At some point in the last several months, IW decided to put MW2 in the back of the fridge and hand PC players MW2 Lite. I really hope my take on this is a "to be continued ..." and that IW at least throws PC a bone. They got a taste of console profits and now they want to either replicate that for PC (not possible) or edge the platform out altogether. We're the ones complaining now, but more and more, others will see. Talk of subscription fee models and additional for-pay content are starting to rise to the surface. Activision and IW are riding their power trip for every penny they can. Console players may have a higher tolerance for this, but it will eventually get to be too much - probably sooner than later.… Expand
  92. TimM
    Nov 14, 2009
    1
    I bought this game, mainly, for the multiplayer. I gave it a one because the single player is solid even though its short. But once you log onto multiplayer, you wonder if this is actually an Infinity Ward game. Between the terrible lag and the enormous amount of gimmicky and sometimes downright annoying perks they added I just do not find it fun. Multiplayer might be better if they patch I bought this game, mainly, for the multiplayer. I gave it a one because the single player is solid even though its short. But once you log onto multiplayer, you wonder if this is actually an Infinity Ward game. Between the terrible lag and the enormous amount of gimmicky and sometimes downright annoying perks they added I just do not find it fun. Multiplayer might be better if they patch in a way of turning off certain perks/killstreak awards. Playing a game of S&D when an AC130 is up is just worthless, it's going to kill the entire team. This failure is partially my fault because I had so much hope that this game would deliver in all aspects. I put Infinity Ward on this pedestal and declared that any game they make is amazing. It is clear IWnet needs A LOT of work. The lack of AC, voting or ANY kind of customization in weapon and perk settings is extremely frustrating. This game could have been much better. Is this game really a one? No. But after all the hype this gimmicky game does not deserve any higher than a one. I want my 60 bucks back.… Expand
  93. ChrisR
    Nov 14, 2009
    10
    This game was amazing. All the people who complain about dedicated servers are idiots. I hope there isn't another Call of Duty game released on PC. What you idiots say won't affect it's sales by more than a mere fraction. You are all missing out on the best game of the year and if you aren't playing it well then I feel sorry for you.
  94. CravczecM
    Nov 14, 2009
    8
    Visuals are spectacular. The game play is fairly frantic and the missions are short and so far not very complicated. It's a great addition to the series and I hope they make a more involving story line next time around. Multiplayer is just frenetic spawn and die with not much cerebrum required. No strategy, no cover and a friggin AC130 blowing up everything is sight. Kind of stupid Visuals are spectacular. The game play is fairly frantic and the missions are short and so far not very complicated. It's a great addition to the series and I hope they make a more involving story line next time around. Multiplayer is just frenetic spawn and die with not much cerebrum required. No strategy, no cover and a friggin AC130 blowing up everything is sight. Kind of stupid waste of time unless you're a teenager wacked out on Mountain Dew.… Expand
  95. CurtisS
    Nov 14, 2009
    1
    This is probably the worst release of the season. The single player is a pathetic 5 hours long. There is absolutely no excuse why the Campaign is so short. Having no Dedicated servers was a terrible, terrible idea for Multiplayer, as well. It literally renders Multilayer unplayable over 50% of the time, and the pause between finding new hosts really, really takes you out of the game. This is probably the worst release of the season. The single player is a pathetic 5 hours long. There is absolutely no excuse why the Campaign is so short. Having no Dedicated servers was a terrible, terrible idea for Multiplayer, as well. It literally renders Multilayer unplayable over 50% of the time, and the pause between finding new hosts really, really takes you out of the game. Infinity Ward is planning to charge customers for 'Extra Features' to the game, which I assume will be Dedicated Servers. This announcement, of course, came DAYS after the release. I regret my purchase, and will never be buying another Infinity Ward game again.… Expand
  96. MarkM
    Nov 14, 2009
    0
    This game has such promise, but infinity ward took a shit on this game by using iwnet. Iwnet is the biggest fail i have ever seen. It is laggy as hell, when the host leaves you have to wait like 5 minutes for it to find a new host, reconnect, and restart the game. You cant restrict gay shit, or guns and the the iw net servers have the worst reg i have ever seen in a first person shooter. This game has such promise, but infinity ward took a shit on this game by using iwnet. Iwnet is the biggest fail i have ever seen. It is laggy as hell, when the host leaves you have to wait like 5 minutes for it to find a new host, reconnect, and restart the game. You cant restrict gay shit, or guns and the the iw net servers have the worst reg i have ever seen in a first person shooter. Dont buy this game until they make a significant patch.… Expand
  97. Larson
    Nov 14, 2009
    9
    I was skeptical after reading all the hard criticism around the dedicated servers. I'm was furious about what this would do to the game, and as such waited a couple days to buy it. I did however end up buying it because my friends told me the lag was not so bad. I've played about 50 rounds now. In that time 3 host migrations, 1 dropped game, and 1 game with 2 bars. The rest have I was skeptical after reading all the hard criticism around the dedicated servers. I'm was furious about what this would do to the game, and as such waited a couple days to buy it. I did however end up buying it because my friends told me the lag was not so bad. I've played about 50 rounds now. In that time 3 host migrations, 1 dropped game, and 1 game with 2 bars. The rest have all been 4 bars (~50-60ms I'd guess) and very very playable. In fact, I've been having a damned good time. Yes, it would be better with dedicated servers. And yes, I'd buy it again, even without them. I sincerely hope they add them in at some point, but honestly the game works very well right now too. The limits to 9v9 work as well because the maps are very tightly designed and there is no lack of action. My biggest complaint is that you drop back to the lobby after each 10 minute round and have a minute of "intermission", during which there is only voice chat.… Expand
  98. GlenA
    Nov 14, 2009
    1
    Easily the biggest let down I ever experienced from a game. The single player was fun but saddly lacking compared to the first game but thats ok cause its a sequel and i never honestly expected much out of it. The worst part is the multiplayer the compy version feels nothing like the original modern warfare which was a nice change and why I liked it at first but saddly the lack of Easily the biggest let down I ever experienced from a game. The single player was fun but saddly lacking compared to the first game but thats ok cause its a sequel and i never honestly expected much out of it. The worst part is the multiplayer the compy version feels nothing like the original modern warfare which was a nice change and why I liked it at first but saddly the lack of community servers and the conplete lack of the larger game sizes that made the original stand out from the consuls has been lost and replaced with a multiplayer set up the feels like a a total bitch slap from IW. The compy version is now exacly like the consul version which just gets obnixious since the whole reason I got it for the computer was for the larger game sizes (i.e. 32 people hardcore team deathmatch, now that was fun.) and useing WADS. They also dropped the lean controls which isnt that big of a deal but it just gets annoying everytime you want to take cover that you cant lean out of it. The one thing I do give it credit for is a solid perk and custom class system which is extreamely differnet than the original but in my oppinion better. The only issue is the complete uneveness of weapons now the game is geared twords assualt rifles unlike before where there was a more even spread of weapons to choose from (basicly the total like of a internal box sniper rifle just gets me agitated).… Expand
  99. kyles
    Nov 14, 2009
    0
    This game for PC, is the worst game ever produced. It is blatantly obvious infinty ward and everyone else who produced this takes no pride in the quality of product they produce.All they want is to make money even at the expense of the very people who line their pockets.Personally I wish I had just used my 60 dollars as toilet paper, would have been a better use.
  100. EthanB
    Nov 14, 2009
    5
    I could drone on about the fact that the PC version of this game is a pathetic port attempt as others have mentioned, but I
Page:

Awards & Rankings

14
#14 Best PC Game of 2009
1
#1 Most Discussed PC Game of 2009
32
#32 Most Shared PC Game of 2009

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
86

Generally favorable reviews - based on 40 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 36 out of 40
  2. Mixed: 4 out of 40
  3. Negative: 0 out of 40
  1. 1UP
    91
    The PC version of Modern Warfare 2 is identical to the console versions in almost every way, and that's actually the problem. PC gamers have a certain expectation for online shooters. Removing dedicated server and user mod support from a game that's already $10 more than its predecessor seriously hinders the long term appeal for me.
    Read full review
  2. Thunderbolt
    90
    Modern Warfare 2 will leave you breathless.
    Read full review
  3. GamingExcellence
    92
    It looks better, it plays better, the story is more intense and the multiplayer is more inviting. And with the inclusion of SpecOps, the longevity of this game is sure to have increased as well.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »