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. EricC.
    Jan 30, 2010
    6
    -0.5 for bad multi-player spawn setup, especially on maps like Rust -1 for an absolutely awful plot. Right around the "Wolverines" part (shameless Red Dawn reference by Infinity Ward) the plot just turned to pure garbage. -2.5 for failing to get the weapons right, yet again... M16 damage should not equal the FN FAL or SCAR-H. It fires the same round as all the rest of the "assault" rifles -0.5 for bad multi-player spawn setup, especially on maps like Rust -1 for an absolutely awful plot. Right around the "Wolverines" part (shameless Red Dawn reference by Infinity Ward) the plot just turned to pure garbage. -2.5 for failing to get the weapons right, yet again... M16 damage should not equal the FN FAL or SCAR-H. It fires the same round as all the rest of the "assault" rifles except for the AK. It simply has better range than an M4 by a couple hundred yards. The LMG stats are completely backwards in terms of damage. All the ones that fire 5.56 NATO are doing high damage in game and all the ones firing 7.62 NATO are doing low damage in game. That's stupid. The only one with correct damage is the PKM (7.62x54R). And Infinity Ward obviously has no clue how suppressors (mistakenly called "silencers" in this game) work, because if you put one on a shotgun you just ruined an expensive suppressor and probably your face as well. It doesn't work that way. At least they didn't try to put them on the revolvers. The other thing that bothers me is this whole "Akimbo" stuff. You can't control a machine pistol one-handed. It generates far too much thrust as a result of the extremely fast cycle-time, even in moderate calibers like 9mm (mini Uzi / MP5/Glock 18) or the 5.7 (P90). Controlling a SMG or a Machine Pistol 1-handed is like trying to handle a fire-hose 1-handed. You're not going to be able to do it. Trying to handle two at once is beyond retarded. In fact, "Akimbo" fails even with the regular semi-automatic pistols. It sure looks great in Hollywood, but you won't be able to hit the broad side of a barn doing it. I don't even want to get into 1-handed magazine changes for "Akimbo." This is supposed to be Modern Warfare 2, not Hollywhood Firearms Myths 2. The pistols are all wrong too. The .44 Magnum is going to be every bit as accurate as the HK USP but the .44 Mag should have a slower rate of fire. The developers got that wrong too. SMG's are wonky too. The MP5 and the Mini Uzi both fire 9x19 rounds, so their rate of fire should be very high and their damage should be lower. The UMP45 and the Vector both fire .45 ACP so their rate of fire should be somewhat slower thnan the 9x19, but their damage should be significantly greater. About the only SMG IW got right was the P90. Sniper Rifles are dead-wrong too. The WA2000 and the M21 EBR are both chambered in 7.62 NATO, the exact same cartridge the FN FAL, the SCAR-H, the M240 and the MG4 fire... The damage should be the same and so should the range. The accuracy from either of these is no better or worse than that of the SCAR-H or the FAL either. The range on the "Intervention" (Which I assume is a .408 Chey-Tac) should have significantly more damage than the M21 EBR and the WA2000 as well as greater range and barrier penetration potential. Since it is a bolt action it will have significantly better accuracy. And lastly, is the M82A1, which is the semi-auto 50 BMG in this game. The accuracy of this is significantly worse than that of even the M21 and the WA2000. The muzzle blast is so significant that you can see the puff of dust (more like cloud) from a mile away if it's not suppressed. Sure, the damage is astounding, but it's extremely heavy and bulky. It's primarily an anti-vehicular rifle, not a people-killer. Riot shields don't work that way... One rifle round from any of the "assault" rifles, "sniper rifles" or LMG's in this game will punch right through a Riot Shield. They're made to stop rocks, bottles, and the occasional pistol round. You can't carry enough polycarbonate in front of you to stop a round from any of the 7.62 or above cartridges. Lastly, there is no body armor that can currently be worn that is capable of standing up to even 1 round from a rifle chambered in .50 BMG. The same holds true for any shotgun firing slugs. There's no armor available to civilians or military that can handle that kind of impact.… Expand
  2. TyfoidP
    Jan 7, 2010
    6
    Its was a good game I love shooters but its was way to easy and over way to quickly I beat it in a weekend, and the Muliplayer though intense at time killing by shooting though walls to easy. I hope 3 will be out and improved to have more gameplay and better muliplayer.
  3. CanCan
    Feb 13, 2010
    6
    Good game. Single player campaign is too short, even comparing with Call of Duty Modern Warfare. Special Ops give a bit of fun due to raising difficulty. Multiplayer is good, very realistic, with few glitches only. However, steam as a platform for multiplayer sucks big time. Just going through a painful update, that seems to go forever. I wonder if the game will start after that.
  4. AaribM.
    Mar 22, 2010
    6
    For the price of $60 at the time of writing, this game is a spat in the face at PC gamers as far as price goes. It's been roughly 5 months, and still no price reduction in sight. For PC gamers, who shouldn't, and in the past haven't had to, have to pay for a game developed on PCs. Singleplayer is, as always, mostly a gimmick to sell the multiplayer. Multiplayer matchmaking For the price of $60 at the time of writing, this game is a spat in the face at PC gamers as far as price goes. It's been roughly 5 months, and still no price reduction in sight. For PC gamers, who shouldn't, and in the past haven't had to, have to pay for a game developed on PCs. Singleplayer is, as always, mostly a gimmick to sell the multiplayer. Multiplayer matchmaking is painful. Living in a rural area or living with a poor connection makes gamers, even console gamers, regret their connections. No dedicated servers and the "option" for graphics customization is another insult in the face of PC gamers. Overall, it's playable, and fun in short periods, but the same problems are reiterated from the previous generation of gameplay balance. Play it for the experience, then move on or occasionally play it on and off.… Expand
  5. ChrissD
    Apr 19, 2010
    6
    In general it's a well designed game with good graphics and sound, although it would be nice if we could control music & fx volume. Single player isn't that challenging and it's enough to complete it once. The multiplayer part of the game which is the most interesting part, is usually full of cheaters and no one does anything about it. Wish there was a dedicated server In general it's a well designed game with good graphics and sound, although it would be nice if we could control music & fx volume. Single player isn't that challenging and it's enough to complete it once. The multiplayer part of the game which is the most interesting part, is usually full of cheaters and no one does anything about it. Wish there was a dedicated server option. Weapons variety and add-ons is interesting, although some of them kind of monopolize the interest and in-game effectiveness. After prestige 1, the "challenges" become boringly repeated. Another imbalance is that weapon challenges are too similar for all kinds of weapons. When in multiplayer mode, connection problems are happening too often and map circulation sequence is lost, thus you end up playing the same map again & again until a reliable host is found. Would I buy the next COD if it was like this? ABSOLUTELY NO!… Expand
  6. JayceC
    Nov 11, 2009
    6
    Theres alot of hate going around with this game and I can see why, the single player isn't all that long but it's fast pace and the intense story keeps you wanting to know more and more. The multiplayer seems to work fine as theres alot of people disliking the system without dedicated servers which I do agree on, I would like to choose which server to join etc but this system Theres alot of hate going around with this game and I can see why, the single player isn't all that long but it's fast pace and the intense story keeps you wanting to know more and more. The multiplayer seems to work fine as theres alot of people disliking the system without dedicated servers which I do agree on, I would like to choose which server to join etc but this system gets you pretty much straight into a game long as no bugs or host issues occur leaving you with a few annoying messages also you are required to play the game to open up other play options I can see how they are wanting you to play more to give you something to achieve but off putting for me. I can see this game being fixed with a future patch but I do hope it is done soon as there are many people who are upset by this. Worth playing if you enjoyed the story and want to have abit of spray and pray.… Expand
  7. 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
  8. 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
  9. HankR
    Dec 11, 2009
    6
    Not spam review... But this game really hasn't improved much since COD2, and isn't as good as COD4. I was so disappointed with World at War I didn't finish it, so was hoping for something better from Infinity Ward. The story is like every tacky high-budget action flick cliche rolled into a ridiculous, impossible storyline. Battles are repetitive wave defense for the most Not spam review... But this game really hasn't improved much since COD2, and isn't as good as COD4. I was so disappointed with World at War I didn't finish it, so was hoping for something better from Infinity Ward. The story is like every tacky high-budget action flick cliche rolled into a ridiculous, impossible storyline. Battles are repetitive wave defense for the most part, cutscenes are sometimes impressive but the acting and writing is so over-the-top that it's really hard to care about what's going on. But still probably the best all-around shooter this year.… Expand
  10. MortR
    Dec 12, 2009
    6
    Awesome game. Loads of fun playing both the single player and the multiplayer. Also, some great add-ons for the multiplayer like new perks, weapons etc. The server hosting is a dismal failure. I am yet to find a latency free server.What may be acceptable to the "strategy/marketing" dept is not acceptable to me.Many other complaints about the IWNET system but it's not worth moaning Awesome game. Loads of fun playing both the single player and the multiplayer. Also, some great add-ons for the multiplayer like new perks, weapons etc. The server hosting is a dismal failure. I am yet to find a latency free server.What may be acceptable to the "strategy/marketing" dept is not acceptable to me.Many other complaints about the IWNET system but it's not worth moaning about. It is the best game on the market at the moment. Lets hope Battlefield 3 does a better job...… Expand
  11. BrianV
    Dec 31, 2009
    6
    I'm reviewing the single&mutliplayer parts of MW2 on the PC: The single player was very good, very entertaining and not repetitive. i would give the single player a 9,8 (-0,2 for the short game and the weird blood-effect what looks like paint). However the multiplayer... everything about the 'inside' of it is very good: the perks, weapons maps etc. But wow dit infinity ward I'm reviewing the single&mutliplayer parts of MW2 on the PC: The single player was very good, very entertaining and not repetitive. i would give the single player a 9,8 (-0,2 for the short game and the weird blood-effect what looks like paint). However the multiplayer... everything about the 'inside' of it is very good: the perks, weapons maps etc. But wow dit infinity ward screw the multiplayer up with their IW-network! it just doesn't work, as simple as that! i found myself one time waiting 15 minutes for that damn thing to connect me! also playing with friends often gives me trouble too. And the game itself is kind of ruined by the nerds playing. camp,camp,camp it realy annoys me. i give it a 2 for the maps, weapons etc. but the rest is just ruïned! that makes an average of 6 for the whole game… Expand
  12. PiotrH
    Jan 18, 2010
    6
    grat game but to short, and where is the dedicated serwer s , hardcore multi 6 on 6 !!! multi sucks
  13. Spesse
    Jan 18, 2010
    6
    Hmm i liked cod4 and cod5 iw been playing cod for three years now and if i shall compere the games so cod4 will get 8 cod 5=7 and mw2sp 6 mp5, iwnwt sucks and it is to mouth cheeting that will ruing the joy!
  14. SlavaL
    Jan 19, 2010
    6
    I like this game a lot but: VAC is a joke compare to PB and live admins on servers. Airstrikes and Helicopters are NOT balanced at all. I am seriously tired of number of hacks and hackers. Matchmaking, host migrating and low ping games are annoying as hell. Why should I wait 2 minutes for IWnet trying to find some players and as of result get disconnected. And did I say about hackers? I like this game a lot but: VAC is a joke compare to PB and live admins on servers. Airstrikes and Helicopters are NOT balanced at all. I am seriously tired of number of hacks and hackers. Matchmaking, host migrating and low ping games are annoying as hell. Why should I wait 2 minutes for IWnet trying to find some players and as of result get disconnected. And did I say about hackers? Today I encountered cheaters in 3 games out of 10, and what can I do about it? The WHOLE NOTHING! I really don't care about modding and stuff, but I honestly think that Activision really dropped the ball on IWnet implementation. P.S. I do own this game and I'm on level 52 of 1st Prestige so I do know the subject.… Expand
  15. MarwinR
    Jan 22, 2010
    6
    Nice gameplay and graphics but -iwnet sucks -no stear left or right -no mods so if it wouldnt be call of duty i wouldnt buy it
  16. VincentRoth
    Jan 29, 2010
    6
    Great graphics but te campaign is way 2 short. Multiplayersystem sucks without the dedicated servers...I don't like steam and I want 2 be free 2 choose my favorite map. Online performance is not as good as in MW1. The maps are beautiful, but great 4 campers. I will not buy MW3 if this remains the same.
  17. JohnR
    Nov 12, 2009
    6
    The multiplayer portion of the game has already received a thorough and rightly deserved thrashing, frankly, the MP is generic and rather rubbish. But what about single player? Well, it too, is...rather rubbish. The game starts on a high note, with some new interesting locales and some unique 'theme' levels - but at around the third act the game deteriorates into absolute The multiplayer portion of the game has already received a thorough and rightly deserved thrashing, frankly, the MP is generic and rather rubbish. But what about single player? Well, it too, is...rather rubbish. The game starts on a high note, with some new interesting locales and some unique 'theme' levels - but at around the third act the game deteriorates into absolute drivel. The plot becomes to convoluted that by act 2 you wont know whats going on or why, it reads like some kind of bad Dan Brown novel - The original Modern Warfare had a sense of authenticity - this game really has jumped the shark - its nonsensical, michael bay-esque tripe. There are multiple plot holes and inconsistencies. The length however is fine, it doesn't overstay its welcome and will hold you long enough. And really, the game just wasn't that fun. The first act is a blast, and plays somewhat like a FPS version of 'World in Conflict' - but it quickly drops off. Act 3 felt like the game FEAR without the ghouls and leaning - the 2nd and 3rd acts were azy, and heartless, a totally unnecessary sequal to a great game. Avoid MW2 - Its a huge disappointment, in both MP and SP, stick to CoD 4, or migrate to your other MP FPS of choice.… Expand
  18. JakeK
    Dec 2, 2009
    6
    jeeze, the game has a user rating of 2.1 at this point. I hope IW has reviewed it's fanbase and buyer's opinions, because introducing P2P for a PC was a mistake. I had my doubts about it when I found out, but I kept a hopeful spirit. Unfortunately...it was as bad as I thought, the inability to customize the server the way PC gamers are used to is just a shot to the foot for IW jeeze, the game has a user rating of 2.1 at this point. I hope IW has reviewed it's fanbase and buyer's opinions, because introducing P2P for a PC was a mistake. I had my doubts about it when I found out, but I kept a hopeful spirit. Unfortunately...it was as bad as I thought, the inability to customize the server the way PC gamers are used to is just a shot to the foot for IW in my opinion. We were all expecting a game that would fill in the lacking polish that WaW had. But we were let down. Console ports will never become a widespread "professional" game that PC users will enjoy, we've been spoiled for too long. Infinity Ward; Please give us our dedicated servers, console, and ability to kick lame people back to us, lest we leave COD6 for dead. The idea was good in theory, but it just doesn't work. I have a limited network and when I'm randomly selected as the host...all I receive are endless Boos and cries of lag from my fellow gamers. We all need our servers to take advantage of PC gamer's superior hardware and networking abilities compared to Consoles. As far as the Single player aspect is concerned, Constant action, the unique and diverse scenarios and Interesting storyline are what raise the score above a 4. The shear cost of this game is staggering, I understand they have to develop both a SP and an MP version of the game...but honestly...their revenue is enough to sail the world's population through space to saturn. 3 times.… Expand
  19. Russell
    Dec 3, 2009
    6
    This game overall is a good one, but there are many short comings. The SP is decent although short, but you must pay attention and have a good understanding to fill in the blanks. the MP is also decent - it has good game play, all weapons and ranks are mostly balanced (excluding akimo 1887s). Where this game really looses out is the lack of dedicated servers, a console, and SDK. Compared This game overall is a good one, but there are many short comings. The SP is decent although short, but you must pay attention and have a good understanding to fill in the blanks. the MP is also decent - it has good game play, all weapons and ranks are mostly balanced (excluding akimo 1887s). Where this game really looses out is the lack of dedicated servers, a console, and SDK. Compared to other pc games this one is poor. there is sometimes a considerable wait between matches, often the host lags and there is no control over users in the game ( for hacking/foul language). No console and SDK limits the customizations that PC gamesrs love so much. for example one is now limited to a 65deg FOV which on a widescreen monitor is quite uncomfortable. Also there will be no custom maps or mods, these are usualy what keep pc games alive for so long (just lok at CS) overall its a mediocre game - buy it if you want, its not bad.... just not fantastic.… Expand
  20. 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
  21. 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
  22. 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
  23. DanielM
    Nov 28, 2009
    6
    Ok, the game itself is very very very good, but the fact that there's no dedicated servers took a bunch of the game fun because you have to wait a lot of time to create a game, not saying about when the host leaves and you have to wait until the game finds another good host (when there's one). If the game producer was Valve and not Infinity Ward, I think that VAC will probably Ok, the game itself is very very very good, but the fact that there's no dedicated servers took a bunch of the game fun because you have to wait a lot of time to create a game, not saying about when the host leaves and you have to wait until the game finds another good host (when there's one). If the game producer was Valve and not Infinity Ward, I think that VAC will probably ban 100% more than it actually does on MW2, because its not a Valve game, and I think Valve dont care much about the games that they don't develop.… Expand
  24. WeeBee886
    Aug 11, 2010
    6
    Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 offers a very, very small portion of over-polished material. I was not impressed even for a moment with the glib single-player. The story was made for the express purpose of taking us from one location to the next and for creating moments that are supposed to be astonishing. But the truth is that every "astonishing" moment falls completely flat. With noCall of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 offers a very, very small portion of over-polished material. I was not impressed even for a moment with the glib single-player. The story was made for the express purpose of taking us from one location to the next and for creating moments that are supposed to be astonishing. But the truth is that every "astonishing" moment falls completely flat. With no connection to the characters and a nonsense plot, I felt like every "epic" scene was just a bad joke, such as the later D.C. level, the final showdown that made no sense, and the incredibly epic-fail, moronic "No Russian" level. Every time they went for that epic feel, I ended up saying to myself, "You're kidding me, right?"

    I do not mind the removal of prone in the latest military FPS games like MW2 and BF:BC2, because it is basically useless for the environments that the games take place in. But I ashamed that they have removed lean, which is used extensively in suitable combat situations in real life. I also do not like how the guns in the game feel like BB guns. They are too clickity-clickity. They do not feel like they have power and weight to them, nor that they are meant to kill people. BF:BC2 did a better job with the guns.

    The graphics are very consistent throughout, and they do look nice. But it is annoying knowing that they are so shader-crazy -- the textures and such are not nearly as detailed as you would think from looking at the game's bullshots. What I do like though is the game runs on the highest settings on my computer just fine, whereas BF:BC2 is so graphics-intensive that I have to set it to low to run it. So at least on my computer, MW2 looks a lot better, but if your computer can handle BC2 then it will look better on high settings, especially with DX11.

    The multiplayer is a style I do not like -- going solo usually, running and gunning, no squad system (or buddy system, as it should be for snipers), very arcade like. I prefer slightly more realistic (i.e. team-based) multiplayer shooters. This game makes it all a lot less realistic, because they want to maximize the fun, which does a major disservice to gamers by training them to think solo-minded. It trains them to think like noobs.

    Finally, the killstreaks are something that need to just disappear. They are more balanced here than in CoD4, but the problem with killstreaks at all is that they are inherently unbalanced. Giving hot-shot players even more firepower is just stupid, and giving those powers to those who are doing poorly wouldn't make sense either, so they should just be removed entirely.

    I have no comment on the lack of dedicated server support, except that I uninstalled the game and have no plans on reinstalling it unless there is an official patch to make the game friendly to hardcore gamers.    … Expand
  25. jwt7000
    Dec 27, 2011
    6
    The lack of dedicated servers, LAN and mapping and modding support isn't going to make this game more epic, despite the continuation of better gameplay and the story itself. Also the map packs aren't free either as the usage of launching this game from Steam is getting on people's nerves.
  26. skazclaw
    Aug 21, 2010
    6
    Graphics and gameplay are smooth, but it's hard to say anymore good than this. No dedicated servers ruined online, some perks are just ridiculous, and the amount of hackers you come across isn't funny. Campaign is fun but short, not sure if it's worth buying it for it though. Spec Ops is fun with a buddy, but it doesn't come close to CoD;WaW co-op campaign. It's quite short and doesn'tGraphics and gameplay are smooth, but it's hard to say anymore good than this. No dedicated servers ruined online, some perks are just ridiculous, and the amount of hackers you come across isn't funny. Campaign is fun but short, not sure if it's worth buying it for it though. Spec Ops is fun with a buddy, but it doesn't come close to CoD;WaW co-op campaign. It's quite short and doesn't stay fun for long. It's just not worth it.… Expand
  27. Painkiller300
    Aug 23, 2010
    6
    For the PC version well if it was rated just on multiplayer it would deserver something like -5 for the many glitches and hackers you find on the horrible IW net. It my work on the 360 and PS3 but the PC is nether. VAC is the worst security system for detecting cheats next to none at all. if your hoping that you will get a good game with a good connection hope will be all you have and theFor the PC version well if it was rated just on multiplayer it would deserver something like -5 for the many glitches and hackers you find on the horrible IW net. It my work on the 360 and PS3 but the PC is nether. VAC is the worst security system for detecting cheats next to none at all. if your hoping that you will get a good game with a good connection hope will be all you have and the matchmaking doesn't even work quite right.

    The single-player is fun but nothing to special sticks to the same style as MW and WAW. you switch between two main characters that you play as. The storyline is still fun to follow and play along with.
    Co-op. this is probably the best part about MW2 the different modes with maps same as the singleplay putting on a new twist. Play alone or with a friend.    … Expand
  28. seandewar5
    Feb 12, 2011
    6
    Call Of Duty : Modern Warfare 2 is an action packed game full of gunfights, explosives and objectives. The problem I see with the game, is the unbalanced guns in the Multiplayer and the lack of features from the previous CODs (such as Zombies). Other than that, the game runs very well and will be fun for most people.
  29. RMW_Critic
    Sep 24, 2010
    6
    This game is epic. The single-player is one of the best I have ever had the pleasure of playing and watching. Then when I get to the multi-player the game lets me down. It makes me want to sear my face off every time I know that there is a hacker and he will kick my ass every time I look at him. The lack of dedicated servers (WTF is up with that?) and the constantly hacked servers, thatThis game is epic. The single-player is one of the best I have ever had the pleasure of playing and watching. Then when I get to the multi-player the game lets me down. It makes me want to sear my face off every time I know that there is a hacker and he will kick my ass every time I look at him. The lack of dedicated servers (WTF is up with that?) and the constantly hacked servers, that forced me to third prestige, just disappoint. Sorry Infinity Ward, this wasn't as much fun as anticipated. So, yeah, it's good epic and bad epic.… Expand
  30. NJLVFX87
    Jul 5, 2011
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I'll make this short. I like fps games, but this one just doesnt cut it with me. The multiplayer section and team up games i have tried are very varied and good fun but not for very long. Its good to shoot people for a while but then it gets samey after about an hour playtime. The Single campain i played for a while but to be honest i just got bored even after the airport section where you kill dozens of innocent people in a terror attack.

    Visually it is a beautiful game, plot for me was a little incoherant in places. The sound and music was good. The biggest flaw to me is that the difficulty level for any new gamers will be astronomical, i even had some hard times on a couple of areas. Sure this game may be epic and the best game in decades but i just dont see why that is. I feel like i am playing a different looking version of Halo or Medal of Honour.    … 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 »