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. MacL
    Nov 14, 2009
    4
    IW for the love of god....do not think you can pull off non-leaning in your shooters because BF can. The latter is much bigger in scope and will be forgiven. You on the other hand will not. I will not go into a frenzy about the lack of dedicated servers...i hope you got that message by now. We the Pc community feel betrayed. We made the franchise what it is today....or rather....what it IW for the love of god....do not think you can pull off non-leaning in your shooters because BF can. The latter is much bigger in scope and will be forgiven. You on the other hand will not. I will not go into a frenzy about the lack of dedicated servers...i hope you got that message by now. We the Pc community feel betrayed. We made the franchise what it is today....or rather....what it was since this installment. Fix it..fix it now!… Expand
  2. PeterM
    Nov 14, 2009
    0
    The game is horrible: bad DirectX 9 console graphics (by 2009 standards), the world appears totally unreal. Everything is pre-scripted, no freedom at all. It's a terrible console port that does not deserve any of the publicity it is getting. YOU CANNOT EVEN SELL YOUR COPY of the game after it has been activated (via Steam). It is a ripoff and I wonder when the first people sue The game is horrible: bad DirectX 9 console graphics (by 2009 standards), the world appears totally unreal. Everything is pre-scripted, no freedom at all. It's a terrible console port that does not deserve any of the publicity it is getting. YOU CANNOT EVEN SELL YOUR COPY of the game after it has been activated (via Steam). It is a ripoff and I wonder when the first people sue Activision/Steam for not being able to sell this bad piece of software.… Expand
  3. nuku
    Nov 14, 2009
    10
    People giving this game 0/10 just for the lack of DS are definitely exaggerating or taking gaming too serious. This is a great game by all means. The singleplayer is really intense and damn fun, and I'll play the whole SP once more as soon as i've got the time. multiplayer is as fun as it ever was, and really, more than 9v9 players on these maps would make it really crowded. I People giving this game 0/10 just for the lack of DS are definitely exaggerating or taking gaming too serious. This is a great game by all means. The singleplayer is really intense and damn fun, and I'll play the whole SP once more as soon as i've got the time. multiplayer is as fun as it ever was, and really, more than 9v9 players on these maps would make it really crowded. I don't miss DS either right now, as those you get via the automated system have nothing to complain about. Really, this game is just great.… Expand
  4. SuneL
    Nov 14, 2009
    0
    This game is unplayable on multiplayer. This is what you will get for
  5. KyleA
    Nov 14, 2009
    9
    Well it's official... I'm addicted. So far I've played about 3 hours of singleplayer and I'm loving every bit of it. Not much to say there. The multiplayer is has been very fun so far. Virtually no lag. Joining new matches takes almost no time. The new killstreaks are fun. Many, many achievements and unlocks to keep you playing for hours on end. I took off a point Well it's official... I'm addicted. So far I've played about 3 hours of singleplayer and I'm loving every bit of it. Not much to say there. The multiplayer is has been very fun so far. Virtually no lag. Joining new matches takes almost no time. The new killstreaks are fun. Many, many achievements and unlocks to keep you playing for hours on end. I took off a point because I think there are some balance issues with the multiplayer and some quirks as well. For example, it takes too long to go from sprint to firing your weapon. If you are sprinting (I like to rush rather than camp) and an enemy pops out, you will most likely not be able to get 1 bullet out before you are dead.… Expand
  6. JamesD
    Nov 14, 2009
    0
    Finally, the decline CoD series suffered from CoD3 and onwards culminates in this epic, overhyped disaster that makes Halo 3 look like an excellent game. It's amazing how there are actually no improvements whatsoever - graphics are the same with more filters added, sound is the same, far-fetched-from-the-Moon story is even worse than before, and the gameplay? Say hello to Grenade Finally, the decline CoD series suffered from CoD3 and onwards culminates in this epic, overhyped disaster that makes Halo 3 look like an excellent game. It's amazing how there are actually no improvements whatsoever - graphics are the same with more filters added, sound is the same, far-fetched-from-the-Moon story is even worse than before, and the gameplay? Say hello to Grenade Warfare 2: More Grenades Oh And Respawns. Multiplayer? I think the endless stream of zeroes below my review explains that there is no multiplayer worth talking about. With this much negative karma, one can only wonder how come Mr. Kotick hasn't died in a fire yet. Although I'm sure none of us would be saddened if he did. Modern Warfare 2 is the ultimate insult to PC gaming. Do not buy it. Help knock some sense into Activi$ion.… Expand
  7. ShaunK
    Nov 14, 2009
    8
    I agree that multiplayer does suck at the moment, seeing that i have the most kill view cam and cheaters seem to be ruling at the moment. But single play rocks and can provide hours of fun, the graphics great and like the fact that injured enemies can fight back and don't just die from 1 body shot. For me it's a great game and I will conquer multiplay one day without cheats. So I agree that multiplayer does suck at the moment, seeing that i have the most kill view cam and cheaters seem to be ruling at the moment. But single play rocks and can provide hours of fun, the graphics great and like the fact that injured enemies can fight back and don't just die from 1 body shot. For me it's a great game and I will conquer multiplay one day without cheats. So cheaters beware.… Expand
  8. SwollenBeef
    Nov 14, 2009
    0
    The single player while entertaining, is only good for one play. There is zero replayability here. The story line jumps around way too much and ends in a way that would make the Soprano's ending look good. The AI is horrible. If you just sprint to the objectives never slowing down at all, you will run past the enemies as they spawn in allowing you to move through the game unchecked. The single player while entertaining, is only good for one play. There is zero replayability here. The story line jumps around way too much and ends in a way that would make the Soprano's ending look good. The AI is horrible. If you just sprint to the objectives never slowing down at all, you will run past the enemies as they spawn in allowing you to move through the game unchecked. You really never have to fight anyone you are not required to. Multiplayer feels as if its just an updated MW patch. There is more to do, but when you boil it down, its the exact same game. IW did nothing to innovate the game. It is more of the same told in a different way.… Expand
  9. lordolunch
    Nov 14, 2009
    9
    These people are a bunch of retards fo real. None of them even talk about the actual game. WAH! No dedicated servers. WAH! It uses a matching system. WAH WAH WAH. The actual GAME is a lot of fun. It has tons of action, and looks great if you have a rig to run it. The single player is a blast, and multiplayer actually worked great for me, although I do hope they make dedicated servers for These people are a bunch of retards fo real. None of them even talk about the actual game. WAH! No dedicated servers. WAH! It uses a matching system. WAH WAH WAH. The actual GAME is a lot of fun. It has tons of action, and looks great if you have a rig to run it. The single player is a blast, and multiplayer actually worked great for me, although I do hope they make dedicated servers for it, I can survive with the matching system for now as it works fine. Great game buy it.… Expand
  10. LentS
    Nov 14, 2009
    1
    This was one of the game i expected this year, but when it came out, I was really dispappointed. Why ? the singleplayer campaign is way too short and looks too much like the modern warfare one. But if the singleplayer is way too weak, the multiplayer is way too bad. Only 18 players max, lagging P2P servers instead of the good old dedicated ones, and no voting system. Disappointment's This was one of the game i expected this year, but when it came out, I was really dispappointed. Why ? the singleplayer campaign is way too short and looks too much like the modern warfare one. But if the singleplayer is way too weak, the multiplayer is way too bad. Only 18 players max, lagging P2P servers instead of the good old dedicated ones, and no voting system. Disappointment's name, nothing more to say.… Expand
  11. ConR.
    Nov 14, 2009
    10
    Awesome game, The single player is short but so exhilarating, some excellent actions scenes and the story line is believable enough. Multiplayer is very good too(never had lag). I'm not sure if you're aware or not but there was a atttempted boycott of this game by mostly the clans and modders. If you look at the user ratings for l4d there is still only 1.5k user reviews for it, Awesome game, The single player is short but so exhilarating, some excellent actions scenes and the story line is believable enough. Multiplayer is very good too(never had lag). I'm not sure if you're aware or not but there was a atttempted boycott of this game by mostly the clans and modders. If you look at the user ratings for l4d there is still only 1.5k user reviews for it, within a day this page had 2k. All the people who have rated it 0 are the guys who are trying to stop other people from buying it. I think ign should put up a little note saying "Some of the reviews may be part of an attempted boycott by pc gamers" It's not fair on everyone else that just cause they can't have their clan wars or mod the gravity lvl. People might miss out on a brilliant game because of the selfish actions of these boo-boys! Buy it!… Expand
  12. adamo.
    Nov 14, 2009
    0
    1st off , pls read COD 4 reviews and notice players rating compared to the quality of that game , players rating are the real note , most magazines are not clear , giving COD MW2 100 with all does problems in SP and MP is redicilus , MW2 in a Money machine , the game is totaly incompleted , pyaying the game on my ripped friend PC , ive noticed many glitches easy to find in singel player 1st off , pls read COD 4 reviews and notice players rating compared to the quality of that game , players rating are the real note , most magazines are not clear , giving COD MW2 100 with all does problems in SP and MP is redicilus , MW2 in a Money machine , the game is totaly incompleted , pyaying the game on my ripped friend PC , ive noticed many glitches easy to find in singel player missions , whil COD 4 3 years now playing it and its clean or hard to GL , Weapons are totaly unreal with bad modelisation . the Squad Ai is just a total downgrade from version 8 to 1.2b , enemy vehicles have no AI , enemy are too stupid too . then the online totaly ruined by IW , not only on PC but all platform , and this is the sign of the big IW RIPP , the should be tested before release , and gamers should test teh demo on online , but no the knew the peoblem and they wont to break the calandar , so 5.000.000 people got ripped from IW sadly . I think call of duty series is officialy dead , bcz now its look just liek Rainbow six vegas , and just hope Battlefield bad company 2 looks beter a,d take us to a real tactical warl zone . i give it 0 bcz IW set us a scam , by ADS, no DEMO and lies.… Expand
  13. MoodMax
    Nov 14, 2009
    9
    I do understand the disappointment over the Mulitplayer part and its matchmaking... which seriously isn't that good. But COD has only become a a "real" multiplayer game since Modern Warfare... That's why I do not rate this games bad mulitplayer like all the others since the Singleplayer experience simply is the core part of the game which is great! I still only rate 9 to to take I do understand the disappointment over the Mulitplayer part and its matchmaking... which seriously isn't that good. But COD has only become a a "real" multiplayer game since Modern Warfare... That's why I do not rate this games bad mulitplayer like all the others since the Singleplayer experience simply is the core part of the game which is great! I still only rate 9 to to take in little consideration the Mulitplayer.… Expand
  14. JonahP
    Nov 13, 2009
    10
    Sorry but you guys are a bunch of whiney asses. So the hell what if it doesn't have dedicated servers? Just play the damn game. Xbox and PS3 users don't have dedicated servers (?) and it's not that big of a deal. Just play the damn game or shut the hell up. The single player is the most impressive and polished piece of work I have ever seen in the video game industry, and I Sorry but you guys are a bunch of whiney asses. So the hell what if it doesn't have dedicated servers? Just play the damn game. Xbox and PS3 users don't have dedicated servers (?) and it's not that big of a deal. Just play the damn game or shut the hell up. The single player is the most impressive and polished piece of work I have ever seen in the video game industry, and I have not yet tried multiplayer because Microsoft are greedy dicks and I have to wait a bit to renew my subscription.… Expand
  15. WillY
    Nov 13, 2009
    5
    Before anyone gets pissy at me, I have neither bought nor played this game for anything, which is why its a 5 instead of any extreme. Based on what I have read, the Single player is amazing, and tons of new guns, kill-streaks, etc. adds more to the game than CoD4 ever brought to the table. However, especially the PC multi-player, seems to be rather hit-or-miss, mostly on the "miss" side. Before anyone gets pissy at me, I have neither bought nor played this game for anything, which is why its a 5 instead of any extreme. Based on what I have read, the Single player is amazing, and tons of new guns, kill-streaks, etc. adds more to the game than CoD4 ever brought to the table. However, especially the PC multi-player, seems to be rather hit-or-miss, mostly on the "miss" side. I more often than not see people complaining about the horrendous lag than praising the new system of choosing games. On the note of choosing games, WTF. The users and BUYERS of the game cannot control ANYTHING, not even which "server" they play on?!? I have Borderlands, and while that is a rather obvious port, this takes the cake; at least Borderlands had the ability to choose a host, even if you had to f*** with your router just to do it. All those complaining about VAC: its called VALVE anti cheat for a reason (it really only works on VALVE games). Why IW chose a different dev company's own anti-hacking system instead of using a third party is beyond me. Console version seems to be fine, so if you are really dead-set on playing this game and enjoying it, buy an xbox.… Expand
  16. AkihiroK
    Nov 13, 2009
    4
    The tenth comes around the corner and gleefully I await the release of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. I don't go online to see what people are saying about it. I don't read the petitions about not buying the game. I usually do, so why don't I this time. Well, it's simple, I trusted Infinity Ward. Notice I said trusted, not trust. That would be long in the past. The The tenth comes around the corner and gleefully I await the release of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. I don't go online to see what people are saying about it. I don't read the petitions about not buying the game. I usually do, so why don't I this time. Well, it's simple, I trusted Infinity Ward. Notice I said trusted, not trust. That would be long in the past. The single player campaign was an interesting experience, drawing you into the story in the beginning. It seems to start off where its predecessor left off. Terrorist, check, secret military organization, check, lots of violence, double check. The story starts to make no sense about half way through, falling into chaos by the end. You beat one of two majorly bad men, but that leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. You only get to kill one of the two, seemingly leaving it open for a sequel. How long does this campaign take? For me around three hours at the default difficulty. If one only bought the game for the single player experience, they would be very disappointed with the bang they got for the buck. But that isn't the case for the cod series. I know I bought them for the multiplayer. At least since COD4. All in all id rate the single player experience at a 5 out of ten. I was not overly impressed, but it's not as bad as it could have been. Now for the multiplayer review. I would have to say, I am not impressed. For now let us set aside all of the debates about dedicated servers, and all of the controversy over the decision to cut it. I began my first match of multiplayer fairly fast. The matchmaking removed the ability to search for the best server, instead it "automated" this. Fine, i'd prefer to search for one, but I am willing to give this a shot. I sit an the lobby for about a minute and I am in my first Free-For-All game of COD:MW2. The pace seemed slow, but I attributed that to my lack of playtime. Somehow, I ended up first in score, I win the match. Great, no. Not really. I wasn't excited, but again I blamed this on my lack of play time. Two days later, I write this review. I see all of the negative comments being made, and if you haven't, I recommend going to the Infinity Ward forums and seeing what the people are saying in the pc section. It's amazing how slighted alot of PC Gamers feel. Admittedly IW said there would be dedicated servers. They didn't deliver this, instead you're hosting off of one of the people you're playing with. This causes issues of course, especially lag. Hopefully when your playing, the host doesn't leave. If they do you have in my experience a fifty fifty chance of the game ending. Not so good. I also noticed some issues with host migration, in fact when you see this error. It will direct you towards an Infinity Ward web page, explaining that your router may be the cause. What they aren't saying on there is, that it may have selected a host other than yourself who hasn't left their computer completely open to the wilds of the internet. Now, for all of the anger and hatred being directed at Infinity Ward. I understand some feel mistreated, especially since IW got it's start and popularity from the PC Gaming community. But don't forget, they are a business first and foremost. This means that alot of people got together and made this decision before launch. That being said, removing the ability for the community to create content is, in my humble opinion, a mistake, and one that you will see with future releases. I won't take the time to argue why or why not dedicated servers are important. I will just say that they are a better idea than peer-to-peer, and client hosting. I wait and hope that like left for dead, they patch and allow us to have dedicated servers that we may pick from. I will also say, that since I purchased this game and have played it online, I am very disappointed with the community I have played with. While there are a few people that understand teamwork, they are few and far between. When I play any of the First Person Shooters that I own, which is alot, I have the ability to play one specific servers, and take part in many communities. I have the choice, I am not lumped in with people I don't know, I am allowed my choice of map, settings, ect. This is a blow to the PC Gaming community, in an epic way. I suppose I will finish this thought with laughter at the quote I recently read from an interview with IW staff. While I won't post the quote here, you must be crazy to think that gamers want to play a game exactly how YOU think they should, not how they want to. We don't live in a communist dictatorship. We can choose a different company's game. Overall I would give the multiplayer portion of COD:MW2 a very low 3.5 out of 10. This brings the average and overall score for the game to a 4.25.… Expand
  17. GeoWil
    Nov 13, 2009
    7
    So, MW2. Never has there been a game that has caused so many immatrue "pro" "Hardcore" gamers to get their panties in a wad. The reason everyone is making it so low is because of only ONe feature that was removed, along with the sub-features that go with it. And that was Dedicated Servers, and customization/mods. Everything else that they complain about is irrelevant and was just drummed So, MW2. Never has there been a game that has caused so many immatrue "pro" "Hardcore" gamers to get their panties in a wad. The reason everyone is making it so low is because of only ONe feature that was removed, along with the sub-features that go with it. And that was Dedicated Servers, and customization/mods. Everything else that they complain about is irrelevant and was just drummed up so they could complain about every little thing wrong with it. Time for my unbiased review: Single Player: Despite what most people are saying, the SP is not 4 hours long. It is just about as long as MW1's SP. I went through a strict set of guidelines while playing through both to compare them: 1. No Camping 2. No "running" the maps 3. No deaths 4. Mission Briefings had to be played to the end of the video, then I could start the map. #3 in particular has some sub-rules to it. 3.1 If I did die I reset the timer and started the SP from the beginning. 3.2 Time counted up to a death was not included in the final count. I played both of them on Hardened mode and only died 3 times during MW2 SP and none during MW1. My times were: MW1: 6 Hours and 45 Minutes MW2: 6 Hours and 30 Minutes As you can see, the times are very similar if you play the game the way it is meant to be played tactically with out camping or running. The plot was fairly solid and offers many plot twists and tons of action. This game is more action oriented then MW1. There are tons of new weapons and tools that can be fit on to the weapons. Such as a silencer or HBM (Heart Beat Monitor). Multiplayer: This is the crux of MW2 and does have some issues. While I did say there were some issues, there are no where near as bad as a lot of the people claim. Like the massive lags? Mostly thats from their crappy dsl connection. You will need at least 8 Meg Download speeds to play this with no lag. Even then the Hosts upload speed does factor into it as well. That said in my 13 hours of MP I have not had very much lag at all. I would say 78% of all of my games so far have been lag free, 10% of them have had some lag, 8% of them have had moderate lag, and 4% of my games have had horrible lag. Matchmaking is fairly quick and very efficient. You get into your games in at most 30 seconds and at least 8 seconds. Host Migration is also works pretty well. About the same time frame as Matchmaking. There have been sometimes that the game has dropped out after trying to migrate the host, however this was only twice so far in 13 hours of gameplay. The kill streaks are awesome, once you unlock some of them you can call in predator missile strikes, bombing runs and even take control of an AC130. There is a lot of content to unlock like emblems, call signs, weapon parts, various perks, and game modes. IWNet is doing an alright job so far. Take what teh haters say with a grain of salt and give the game a chance and see for your self. They are all @$$ hurt over no mods and small battle sizes and their crappy connections causing them lag.… Expand
  18. ReneV
    Nov 13, 2009
    1
    Played multiplayer 2 hours straight and completed the campaign in 7 hours on the 'Veteran' difficulty (the hardest). Multiplayer is utter shite. Automatically chooses to connect to random people around the world within decent ping range (100+/-ms). You get no choice, no dedicated servers, nothing. It's always random whom you end up playing with. Seriously, give us back the Played multiplayer 2 hours straight and completed the campaign in 7 hours on the 'Veteran' difficulty (the hardest). Multiplayer is utter shite. Automatically chooses to connect to random people around the world within decent ping range (100+/-ms). You get no choice, no dedicated servers, nothing. It's always random whom you end up playing with. Seriously, give us back the standard SERVER BROWSER for shite sake! It is such a common standard to include a server browser in ANY type of PC game with online multiplayer. If steam gave refunds, I'd take it for this game and buy Modern Warfare 1 instead. I am seriously dissappointed in Infinity Ward and Modern Warfare 2. The campaign was decent though with lots of good moments - but it's WAAAAAY too short! Should have been a cheap expansion for the original Modern Warfare instead of a 'full' 60 dollar game... Not impressed.… Expand
  19. TravisW
    Nov 13, 2009
    0
    Too many features missing compared to past versions of the series, and shooters available on PC in general. This is a mockery of PC gamers and they have the audacity to charge sixty dollars - ten more than the MSRP of any other game on the market. That's twenty percent more expensive, for seventy five percent of a game.
  20. ScottD
    Nov 13, 2009
    0
    If I wanted a console game,I would a bought one!No dedicated servers,no clan based game play,etc..Nothing more than a ps3, 360 game repackaged as a pc game.Game has so much potential if it would just have dedicated server's,doesn't seem to much to ask.People such as myself pay several grand for a high-end gaming rig,and all we get is another console based game that I could use a If I wanted a console game,I would a bought one!No dedicated servers,no clan based game play,etc..Nothing more than a ps3, 360 game repackaged as a pc game.Game has so much potential if it would just have dedicated server's,doesn't seem to much to ask.People such as myself pay several grand for a high-end gaming rig,and all we get is another console based game that I could use a $200 ps3,or xbox to play.… Expand
  21. James
    Nov 13, 2009
    0
    I'm sorry this has to be said, the above reviews that rate this game highly... I don't know what they were thinking. Regardless of the quality of the single player campaign (which is very short indeed), multiplayer is a key aspect of this franchise (and PC first person shooters in general). The multiplayer in the PC version of this game is unplayable by most peoples standards. I'm sorry this has to be said, the above reviews that rate this game highly... I don't know what they were thinking. Regardless of the quality of the single player campaign (which is very short indeed), multiplayer is a key aspect of this franchise (and PC first person shooters in general). The multiplayer in the PC version of this game is unplayable by most peoples standards. The omission of dedicated server support has not only made this game woeful in comparison to its predecessors, but it has also angered much of the PC FPS community. After all, publishers cannot be lead to believe that this will be suitable for future FPS games on PC... it's not!… Expand
  22. RobertP
    Nov 13, 2009
    0
    Singleplayer aspect is roughly 3 hours of a confusing storyline, with a disgusting scene placing you as the terrorist on a shootout through an airport. Yeah, that's appealing. While the gameplay is nice, 3 hours on veteran doesn't make up for it. As for the multiplayer... well, no dedicated servers, player cap at 18, and a simply horrid system with IW that's just terrible Singleplayer aspect is roughly 3 hours of a confusing storyline, with a disgusting scene placing you as the terrorist on a shootout through an airport. Yeah, that's appealing. While the gameplay is nice, 3 hours on veteran doesn't make up for it. As for the multiplayer... well, no dedicated servers, player cap at 18, and a simply horrid system with IW that's just terrible to use. On top of that, hacks and cheats are out and about ANYWAY, despite the fact that dedicated server support was dropped so that they could possibly offer a game with less cheaters. Bravo, IW. I'm not even going to go into the terrible lag, as it may very well be just me, but my friends seem to be experiencing just the same. That said, there is no modding of the game allowed or lean, so you're already looking at less features, horrible multiplayer, and an extremely short single player experience that doesn't make a lick of sense. That's not even my own opinion either, but the general consensus throughout all versions of the game. CoD4 is better in just about every way, even in terms of price! Now, as I said, the gameplay was fun on singleplayer and the optimizations to the engine are certainly noteworthy, but I cannot give this game anything above a 0 because they're charging $60 for so much less. It really makes me wonder at what point in the development cycle did they think this game was worthy of the jacked up pricetag... I honestly wouldn't mind paying $60 if they actually kept the features the previous game had, but no, they didn't feel it was worth it. Just as well, I wouldn't recommend this game to be worth your money either.… Expand
  23. Subsonic7
    Nov 13, 2009
    0
    Too short single player experience that lacks the depth of games like Borderlands and Bioshock. Just not enough value for money for any gamer looking for some quality single player game time. The story is horrible as well. Its essentially ideas thrown in at random just as an excuse to set a level in a particular setting. That
  24. LB
    Nov 13, 2009
    0
    The removal of dedicated servers and pathetically short campaign really screwed this one up. Killing off dedicated servers not only kills the PC community, but is essentially a power play to get gamers to buy Modern Warfare 3 when they turn off IWNet for MW2 due to obsolescence. This is just another example of the publishers and developers trying to screw the customer. I'm done with The removal of dedicated servers and pathetically short campaign really screwed this one up. Killing off dedicated servers not only kills the PC community, but is essentially a power play to get gamers to buy Modern Warfare 3 when they turn off IWNet for MW2 due to obsolescence. This is just another example of the publishers and developers trying to screw the customer. I'm done with Activision and their crummy console ports. I'd like to see more critical reviews that aren't written by reviewers who lay in bed with the game developers. I'm looking at you, IGN.… Expand
  25. JarydF
    Nov 13, 2009
    9
    Great fun game. Looks great, sounds great. Single player has an immersive movie feel. It is shorter than the last one and does feel a bit rail shooter in places but has some good variety in things to do, over the top story and emotion. Special Ops missions also give you more solo game play options if that is what you want. Multiplayer has been good so far. Lag issues have been few and far Great fun game. Looks great, sounds great. Single player has an immersive movie feel. It is shorter than the last one and does feel a bit rail shooter in places but has some good variety in things to do, over the top story and emotion. Special Ops missions also give you more solo game play options if that is what you want. Multiplayer has been good so far. Lag issues have been few and far between. Games have felt balanced and enjoyable. Personally I hate unlock mechanisms etc - I am time poor and want to go in have a laugh, try different things out and get on with life. I do not need to collect badges for self worth and a sense of achievement. As for the no dedi servers, mods etc currently - give it time. I am sure those types of things will work themselves out. It feels to me that IW have made a decision to put the needs of the majority to have a fun, simple, fairly level, engaging multiplayer experience before the needs of clanners, modders, enthausiasts. I would not be surprised if they release some addon for that community once they have finished getting lots of money keeping the rest of us "casual joes" happy.… Expand
  26. NS
    Nov 13, 2009
    8
    I find the user score of 1.5 funny. Everyone that loves the game is playing ti while those of you here !%@#%ing about it are the classic whiners "Our computers and connections aren't good enough to play the game wah wah wah". I'm on a college network and have never had more than 100ping. Singleplayer: 9/10 MP: 8.5/10 Thank god they fixed the terrible terrible run'n'gun I find the user score of 1.5 funny. Everyone that loves the game is playing ti while those of you here !%@#%ing about it are the classic whiners "Our computers and connections aren't good enough to play the game wah wah wah". I'm on a college network and have never had more than 100ping. Singleplayer: 9/10 MP: 8.5/10 Thank god they fixed the terrible terrible run'n'gun strat of ever CoD game after 2. Thank you IW for making the game favor tactics and teamwork.… Expand
  27. BrianH.
    Nov 13, 2009
    0
    Everyone else said this was a bad thing, and just like idiot republican blaming everything on Obama instead of thinking for myself, you know I have to jump off the metaphorical bridge with the rest of the tin-foil hat brigade. "WTF IW! You only gave us a great game that doesn't live up to our imaginary hype!"
  28. JeffreyC
    Nov 13, 2009
    10
    The arrogance of gamers who rate this game 0 and 1 make me absolutely sick. 7 million copies sold in the first 24 hours world wide setting new industry records. Let me be the first to congratulate you haters on your successful boycott. I'm willing to bet most of you haven't even played the game. This is a quality AAA title, and deserves more respect. Single player was The arrogance of gamers who rate this game 0 and 1 make me absolutely sick. 7 million copies sold in the first 24 hours world wide setting new industry records. Let me be the first to congratulate you haters on your successful boycott. I'm willing to bet most of you haven't even played the game. This is a quality AAA title, and deserves more respect. Single player was phenomenal, and blew my expectations away. I've played 8+ hours of muliplayer and was not disappointed. The casual market vastly outweighs the hardcore market because the majority of us have LIVES. The system that is put into place is a fair and balanced between both worlds. The decision to incorporate Steam was outstanding, and to be honest the correct one. ESD providers such as Steam are a blessing in the game industry. I have yet to encounter any devastating lag most reviewers speak of, and host reconnections are brief and rare. Infinity Ward took COD4 and improved it in every way. Maps feel less confined and more organic. The combat system is much more balanced. There are a variety of maps, more unlocks, more guns, and two player co-op! How can you even complain about 9v9? It saved the game in my opinion. Worth the $60 I paid, and hands down the best game I own. Purchase this game.… Expand
  29. BarryJ
    Nov 13, 2009
    0
    Need 2 votes one for single player and 1 for multiplayer. single player scores 10 Fantastic took 6 hours to complete and cant wait to start it again with harder settings, Multiplayer, scores 0 What a dissapointment played for couple of hours definatly needs work. will not play it again unless they change it. i will use the lowest score for my vote as that shows what i am dissapointed in.
  30. tuboffat
    Nov 13, 2009
    1
    Let's put it this way. Once a franchise gets into it's 6th installment you have to make a decision. A. Buy the same game you've played 5 times before. or B. Buy 6 packs of cigarettes. I'm regretting not choosing B. I'm a gamer who has over 100 games on my steam account and has played another 100 on disk. Needless to say, This is garbage. When a game costs $60 I Let's put it this way. Once a franchise gets into it's 6th installment you have to make a decision. A. Buy the same game you've played 5 times before. or B. Buy 6 packs of cigarettes. I'm regretting not choosing B. I'm a gamer who has over 100 games on my steam account and has played another 100 on disk. Needless to say, This is garbage. When a game costs $60 I expect at least 12 hours of single player action.($5 an hour)You know, to justify the cost since a 2 hour movie only costs $5 to rent. I've always felt that multiplayer should be not taken into consideration of a games worth because the majority of normal people have lives and do not waste hours of there day trying to get good at online games. (Underage gamers aside of course) Most people i've encountered are casual gamers who enjoy a good story that they can play through over the course of a week. No competition, just fun. So is $10 an hour worth it? When the recession is upon us and most of us can't afford to pay bills? Wouldn't it be nice if developers could make something that lasts 2 weeks so you would be able to enjoy a game between paycheques?… Expand
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 »