Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2

 Xbox 360
User Score
6.6

Mixed or average reviews- based on 3152 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1,842 out of 3152
  2. Mixed: 448 out of 3152
  3. Negative: 862 out of 3152
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. Brandon
    Feb 19, 2010
    4
    What to say about Modern Warfare 2. Over hyped? Soulless? Scripted? Any of these comments and more fit in to this awful excuse for a "sequel" (I do use the term loosely) Campaign is fun , but overall short experience, and definitely needs work on the story. Special-Ops can be great when played with a close friend, but can be extremely frustrating, especially on higher difficulties. And What to say about Modern Warfare 2. Over hyped? Soulless? Scripted? Any of these comments and more fit in to this awful excuse for a "sequel" (I do use the term loosely) Campaign is fun , but overall short experience, and definitely needs work on the story. Special-Ops can be great when played with a close friend, but can be extremely frustrating, especially on higher difficulties. And then there's multiplayer. I'm sorry but, what? this is fun, balanced combat? I apologize for my directness, but modern warfare 2 has THE WORST multiplayer I've ever experienced in my entire life. I'm sure you've read the other negative reviews, and you may feel that these are the same reasons, but I'll state them anyway. Extreme latency issues cause many battles to become teleporting spray and pray battles, which is not fun. Perks are ridiculous, usually I spend all my time spawning into the liquifying orgy that is killstreaks. When the other team is winning, chances are they'll have ac130's and such along with harriers and chopper gunners making the match unplayable and unfair for the losing team. Also, balance has been removed completely. I end up on incredibly unbalanced teams and usually can't walk 2 steps after spawning without being insta-killed by an extremely overpowered weapon. I'm not going to talk about akimbo models and commando etc. because I would need an entire blog spot about that. IW was obviously more focused on creating content than fine tuning it. The maps are catered to campers, which pisses me and my friends off. Now, I'm sure many of you are have probably writ this off as a pathetic non-FPS fan's attempt to make the game look bad, but I have always loved FPS's, and have given this game a fair shot. In fact I'm level 55 (no prestige, but nonetheless). The people who write negative review's opinions matter too. Just because you believe the game is UBER AMAZING!!11! doesn't mean it is. In short, waste of $60, get it or don't, it's your decision. Don't say you weren't warned though.… Expand
  2. TD
    Feb 21, 2010
    4
    After playing Call of Duty 4, this game was a huge letdown. The campaign was interesting, with some twists that surprised me. Spec Ops was fun for a while. The multiplayer is what kills MW2. I would have to say the multiplayer system is almost as broken as the system in Two Worlds, my least favorite Xbox 360 game of all time. It is funny that I find myself getting so angry at going 4 and After playing Call of Duty 4, this game was a huge letdown. The campaign was interesting, with some twists that surprised me. Spec Ops was fun for a while. The multiplayer is what kills MW2. I would have to say the multiplayer system is almost as broken as the system in Two Worlds, my least favorite Xbox 360 game of all time. It is funny that I find myself getting so angry at going 4 and 20 on MW2, and then switching to Call of Duty 4 and going 30 and 1. I hope, with all of these unfavorable reviews, Infinity Ward decides to care more about their multiplayer mode. Or, they will find themselves without a devout fanbase like they had after Call of Duty 4.… Expand
  3. AlexD
    Feb 21, 2010
    1
    This game is very dissapointing. The campaign is highly scripted to such extent that it feels like walking on a rope. If you accidentaly kill someone, not complete some objectives, or even wait too long, the game sends you to the prior checkpoint. The enemyes dont have much of a reaction other than poping their heads up for a better view. It only takes a few shots to kill them so your This game is very dissapointing. The campaign is highly scripted to such extent that it feels like walking on a rope. If you accidentaly kill someone, not complete some objectives, or even wait too long, the game sends you to the prior checkpoint. The enemyes dont have much of a reaction other than poping their heads up for a better view. It only takes a few shots to kill them so your teammates may seem smart but they actually spray and pray. Other than that, the campagn is very short and the cinematic moments offer no replayability at all. The multiplayer is good, but its still unbalanced because you have to unlock everything and good players get better and better guns. Players that get a high ammount of kills can call in ac130s and chopper gunners that turn them into killing machines. They should have been less powerful and demand a much higher kill count. The other problem is the high amount of glitches that almost everyone use. IW should have released a beta so they didnt have to release a patch every week now. The graphics look fine, but the shadows are very pixelated and some textures are simply bad. The skyboxes feel like posters and the colours pallet used in some multiplayer maps are almost identical to cod4s.… Expand
  4. Nick
    Feb 6, 2010
    1
    Multiplayer was good, but extremely short. Spec ops is pretty boring. It pretty much amounts to just shooting everything that moves and doesnt require any co op co ordination at all. Multiplayer is horribly unbalanced with campers, glitchers and whatnot.
  5. Dano
    Mar 11, 2010
    3
    I bought this game around the end of December and played it non stop until just last week in March. At first it was great, but as the problems with the multiplayer started to become more apparent, I put it back on the shelf where it will stay if I get a masochistic urge to torture myself. This game, as said before, caters to campers. I prefer fast paced multiplayer with constant movements I bought this game around the end of December and played it non stop until just last week in March. At first it was great, but as the problems with the multiplayer started to become more apparent, I put it back on the shelf where it will stay if I get a masochistic urge to torture myself. This game, as said before, caters to campers. I prefer fast paced multiplayer with constant movements and tactics like the first MW. This game is nothing but a campfest, in which the winner is determined by who can get the chopper gunner first to get 20 kills. I could literally spend 4 minutes in a 10 minute match looking for the other team, only to find most of them in their spawn before one shoots me in the back. The spawning is incredibly frustrating as well. If I had a dollar for everytime I spawned right underneath a predator missile before it hit the ground or on the opposite side of the map from my own team, I would have my money back for this horrid game. The maps are tiny and either have no cover at all to move with, or houses with windows and doors everywhere for some camper to place a claymore to score yet another bs kill. This game is more about killstreaks than it is about shooting.… Expand
  6. JuicyBear
    Mar 17, 2010
    4
    The game is awful and only is fun if you play spec ops. The campaign would have been fun, but i blinked during it so i missed the whole thing. The multiplayer is set up to promote camping in order to obtain a killstreak. "You are just a noob and don't know how to play." Bad players are the ones who think this game is balanced and good because they are successful from camping. I play The game is awful and only is fun if you play spec ops. The campaign would have been fun, but i blinked during it so i missed the whole thing. The multiplayer is set up to promote camping in order to obtain a killstreak. "You are just a noob and don't know how to play." Bad players are the ones who think this game is balanced and good because they are successful from camping. I play on the 360, have a 1.90 k/d(i was over 2.00) but i let my friend boost off me, and i still hate the game. Having a 1.9 k/d and still thinking the game is terrible certainly is an eye opener. Akimbo shotguns and noob tubes with danger close are the only way to consistently be successful at this game because of how laggy and glitchy it is. The good connection always wins because the aiming is so forgiving you get killed if someone looks at you funny. Terrible game. If you suck at video games by all means, BUY IT TODAY, but if you arent a complete idiot then save your money....juicybear86 xbox live....1.8 k/d of CoD4:MW.… Expand
  7. AndrewZ
    Mar 19, 2010
    4
    Campaign is short. I thought playing co-op with friends was the best part but those missions don't take long to complete either. Everyone makes a huge deal about multiplayer but it is complete garbage. Overpowered weapons, cheap perks, camping, and this all adds up to a multiplayer experience that is devoid of teamwork or any type of fun. A few other really frustrating things in Campaign is short. I thought playing co-op with friends was the best part but those missions don't take long to complete either. Everyone makes a huge deal about multiplayer but it is complete garbage. Overpowered weapons, cheap perks, camping, and this all adds up to a multiplayer experience that is devoid of teamwork or any type of fun. A few other really frustrating things in multiplayer are the kill-streak awards that last entirely too long, javelins (one of the cheapest weapons I've ever seen in a multiplayer game), and shotguns that count as secondary weapons and kill you instantly from long distances. When you look beyond the pretty graphics you can see that MW2 is an overhyped, half-finished game.… Expand
  8. MarkG
    Jan 14, 2010
    1
    The campaign is horrible, it's short, has no story, and is ridiculously easy even on Veteran. The multiplayer is a glitch-fest and boost-fest. Given MW as a 10/10 game, this is just a terrible follow-up, and one priced far too high. What a shame.
  9. JustinT
    Jan 21, 2010
    3
    Very, very dissapointing. If it was the first game of the series maybe it'd be better, but with all the expectations there were just so many dissapoints. The to big things are that the multiplayer has not really improved at all and the campaign was absolutely horrible. The individual levels were fun to play, but Russia attacking the U.S.? C'mon man!
  10. JohnS
    Jan 25, 2010
    4
    The campaign, at times, was really fun, when you were shooting and blowing stuff up. The story itself was very weak and I didn't feel like there was enough development. It should have been twice as long to allow for more in-depth detail. It seems like it is a multiplayer game with a campaign and co-op tacked on. The multiplayer itself was a let down. There is so much unbalance in the The campaign, at times, was really fun, when you were shooting and blowing stuff up. The story itself was very weak and I didn't feel like there was enough development. It should have been twice as long to allow for more in-depth detail. It seems like it is a multiplayer game with a campaign and co-op tacked on. The multiplayer itself was a let down. There is so much unbalance in the overly-deadly guns and outrageous perks. Of course, such criticism is considered 'biased.' There is nothing they could patch to fix this atrocious mistake. No significant improvements besides quantity were made. It seems quality was not even considered when developing this game. Map design also makes for a less-than-enjoyable experience. I would suggest renting it first to see if you can handle the frustration. Some may enjoy it, but it's not what a game is supposed to be. I cannot believe that nobody stepped in at one moment during development and said, "Hey, that might cause some problems." The real sad part is Infinity Ward and Activision reaped the benefits because they knew people would eat it up.… Expand
  11. ChemicalReaper
    Jan 31, 2010
    3
    The single player campaign is absolutely phenomenal -- finally, Infinity Ward seems to have created a decent story. It tries to outdo Call of Duty 4's 2 deaths by killing off most of the major characters in the game. Unfortunately, that's where my praise for the game has to end. Why? Because multiplayer is inherently flawed. In fact, it's Infinity Ward's usual problem The single player campaign is absolutely phenomenal -- finally, Infinity Ward seems to have created a decent story. It tries to outdo Call of Duty 4's 2 deaths by killing off most of the major characters in the game. Unfortunately, that's where my praise for the game has to end. Why? Because multiplayer is inherently flawed. In fact, it's Infinity Ward's usual problem -- spawn points. You know there's something wrong when everyone on your team gets killed by a Javelin shoulder-launched missile within thirty seconds of the game starting... Weapons balancing issues, the usual cheap perks, and the fact that the game promotes and rewards stupidity. These things could easily have been fixed during beta testing--- oh wait, I'm sorry; I'd forgotten that Infinity Ward is so absolutely full of itself that they don't DO any testing... The single player on its own would get a 9/10. Unfortunately, Infinity Ward's over-arrogance and their inherently flawed multiplayer hold the game back. Overall, I give the game 3/10 -- and given the multiplayer mode, I think I'm being generous giving the game that many points.… Expand
  12. TimK
    Feb 15, 2010
    4
    What little single player there is can be forgiven because the game clearly put all of its love in the multiplayer component. Spec-Ops is a diversion, nothing more. Now, after CoD4 we all were excited to see the improvements to the formula from the better studio. Honestly, quantity seemed to reign over quality in this department. Guns, challenges, perks pro, equipment, etc. Generally the What little single player there is can be forgiven because the game clearly put all of its love in the multiplayer component. Spec-Ops is a diversion, nothing more. Now, after CoD4 we all were excited to see the improvements to the formula from the better studio. Honestly, quantity seemed to reign over quality in this department. Guns, challenges, perks pro, equipment, etc. Generally the game had potential if not for the inclusion of two huge problems. 1. Side-arm shotguns. Akimbo models, the atuo-shottie, running classes utilizing the shotgun. Allowing everyone to take a shotgun really takes a lot of the fun out of the game. People can spray and destroy you from unreasonable distances (models). 2. Custom Killstreaks! I play CoD4 every now and then and scratch my head wondering why camping is so prevalent in MW2 and not CoD4. What I have reasoned is that custom killstreaks are to blame. Every....single.......player wants their precious predator missle so they can get their harrier and finally a chopper gunner/ac130. To do this they simply sit in a corner and wait. Hop on to CoD4 and you realise that everyone is running around, having fun. I can only speculate it is because they aren't worried about getting that damn pave low to get uber-mega kills. Whatever the issue, for a game that relies on its multiplayer for 95% of its gameplay I think that it fails completely. That's why I give it a 4 out of 10.… Expand
  13. RinduriC.
    Feb 18, 2010
    4
    Ugh, what a horrible experience. It was fun for awhile, until you realize how much shit is wrong with it and how many exploits there are. The perk and killstreak system is completely broken, now everyone simply camps, or does cheap shit like run around with a damned care package. It shouldn't even have a 6.0 user rating, it should have a 4.0 at best. Way to go IGN and the rest, you Ugh, what a horrible experience. It was fun for awhile, until you realize how much shit is wrong with it and how many exploits there are. The perk and killstreak system is completely broken, now everyone simply camps, or does cheap shit like run around with a damned care package. It shouldn't even have a 6.0 user rating, it should have a 4.0 at best. Way to go IGN and the rest, you all are blind.… Expand
  14. JustinM
    Feb 26, 2010
    3
    A 6-hour campaign that makes very little sense, a somewhat-fun co-op mode, and the most unbalanced multiplayer I've ever seen, all for the low price of $60? Fail. I know that this game is MP focused, so I'll skip the flaws of single-player. It takes around 24 hours of play-time online to unlock the best weapons ( akimbo model 1887s). Until then, you suffer from: Lag, enemies A 6-hour campaign that makes very little sense, a somewhat-fun co-op mode, and the most unbalanced multiplayer I've ever seen, all for the low price of $60? Fail. I know that this game is MP focused, so I'll skip the flaws of single-player. It takes around 24 hours of play-time online to unlock the best weapons ( akimbo model 1887s). Until then, you suffer from: Lag, enemies spawning behind you, shotguns killing you from 30 feet away, game-breaking glitches, campers, unavoidable kill-streaks, and the game ending from a booster's nuke. However, once you unlock the best weapons, even if you have no skill, you will succeed!… Expand
  15. jaredh.
    Feb 28, 2010
    2
    This game was way over hyped for what it is. The campaign is alright but nothing you would want to play through more than once. The multiplayer is what most people bought this game for and its a mess. I had my doubts when I found out you could have shotguns and machine pistols as secondaries. With all these secondaries any player can be a one man army. In previous call of duties, when you This game was way over hyped for what it is. The campaign is alright but nothing you would want to play through more than once. The multiplayer is what most people bought this game for and its a mess. I had my doubts when I found out you could have shotguns and machine pistols as secondaries. With all these secondaries any player can be a one man army. In previous call of duties, when you saw a sniper you knew you could out gun him at close range most of the time. Now all they have to do is pull out their secondary and blast away. Camping is my other gripe about the multiplayer. Since there are so many high level killstreaks now, thats what everybody seems to focus on. The killstreaks are what ruined this game. They took the focus off of the gunplay and made the outcome of the match depend on who can get their chopper gunner the quickest. Maybe im just tired of playing the same game for 3 years now. Call of Duty 4 was great when it came out. It seems like they havent changed much in the gameplay since then other than adding more stuff.… Expand
  16. MorganH.
    Mar 12, 2010
    2
    Just like Robert H. said, biggest let down of the decade. (As far as games, at least.) The only reason I even gave it a 2 is because the campaign is the only good thing about it. But the multiplayer? Where to start...the guns are overpowered, WAYYY too many campers(and boosters). And not only are there a lot of annoying kids, there are some people who just run around knifing people. And I Just like Robert H. said, biggest let down of the decade. (As far as games, at least.) The only reason I even gave it a 2 is because the campaign is the only good thing about it. But the multiplayer? Where to start...the guns are overpowered, WAYYY too many campers(and boosters). And not only are there a lot of annoying kids, there are some people who just run around knifing people. And I just finally stopped when I was trying to have a good game of free-for-all, and suddenly a nuke is called in from a freaking booster. Overall, this game is S**T.… Expand
  17. JesseF.
    Mar 28, 2010
    3
    I got this a few days after it came out. I beat the campaign and comepletely enjoyed it. Multi-player was amazing, too. But after three months, the game reveals it's true colors. You start realizing the graphics aren't the best. You start realizing how truly terrible the spawn system is. You start realizing how not fun it is when the other team gets a one kill advantage and I got this a few days after it came out. I beat the campaign and comepletely enjoyed it. Multi-player was amazing, too. But after three months, the game reveals it's true colors. You start realizing the graphics aren't the best. You start realizing how truly terrible the spawn system is. You start realizing how not fun it is when the other team gets a one kill advantage and starts raping you with AC-130's, Harrier's, and Pavelow's all at once. It sad that so many people still play this game. It gets boring, not fun, and very annoying. 50 out of maybe 65 of my friends who bought this game have already returned it. I won't yet because I still want to finish the campaign on Vetern and do all the Spec-Ops missions. The campaign only takes about five to seven hours, so those of you who play the first time through on Vetern, you will finish very quickly. The only very good thing about this game is the Spec-ops. It takes out some missions from Call of Duty 4 and Modern Warfare 2's campaign and allows you to play alone (on some missions) or with a friend (on all missions). There's nothing but campers and hackers online. Even if you have a great connection, you still end up dying. Just now, on my last game of Modern Warfare 2 ever, I shot a guy at least 15 times in the chest and body with a AUG HBAR and he killed me in one shot with a M9. I looked at my connection and it had three green bars. And finally, the spawn system is an absolute fail. At least 100 times, I've gotten killed by an enemy and spawned right in front of him at least twice in a row. Campaign: 8/10 Multiplayer: -5/10 Spec-Ops: 15/10.… Expand
  18. JJC.
    Apr 15, 2010
    4
    I think they evened out the XBOX360 version and a bit more playable. Although they need to get rid of this damn glitch where you hop super fast sideways. Damn glad they got rid of 3rd person cage match. Many cheaters used it to get uber weapons. Akimbos need to go! Getting pissed by my friend who has Model 1987 x2 and gets long range kills. Also many asshats who play the game don't I think they evened out the XBOX360 version and a bit more playable. Although they need to get rid of this damn glitch where you hop super fast sideways. Damn glad they got rid of 3rd person cage match. Many cheaters used it to get uber weapons. Akimbos need to go! Getting pissed by my friend who has Model 1987 x2 and gets long range kills. Also many asshats who play the game don't blame me if this sounds familiar in free-for-all they shoot-crouch-prone-crouch-shoot. Then repeat. Infinity Ward dumbed down the game for people who are n00bs and can't play like adding the perks: Cold-Blooded, Danger-Close, and of course stopping power. Don't forget ridiculous UMP45 kills. The Aim-Assist makes a n00b god and hackers. Don't get me started how hackers made leader boards pointless. That is all.… Expand
  19. SkullScience
    Nov 13, 2009
    4
    The game us uninspired and far too short. It is worth it if you don't own the original modern warfare. Otherwise just rent it for one night and complete it (that ain't difficult). The corruption withine the media must be rife as many far superior games didn't get the proverbial blow job reception the critics have been giving this. As an older gamer (32) I remember when the The game us uninspired and far too short. It is worth it if you don't own the original modern warfare. Otherwise just rent it for one night and complete it (that ain't difficult). The corruption withine the media must be rife as many far superior games didn't get the proverbial blow job reception the critics have been giving this. As an older gamer (32) I remember when the critics constantly said "graphics do not make a game". Especially when, conveniantly, the ps2 (the console with poorest graphics performance out of that, xbox and gamecube). How perceptions have apparently changed, yet money still talks and many an idiot reading magazines and websites base their gaming library and consoles they own on the aforementioned corrupt views. I guess activision and infinity ward had money to influence critics. Can anyone honestly say that this game is original, ground breaking or intuitive in any way. It is an average fps. I may have scored it higher but the ass licking associated with this game is shameful. Many superior games have been released this year with little fanfare in comparison.… Expand
  20. MarkieMark
    Dec 14, 2009
    0
    Unoriginal and boring. I didn't feel any major improvement on the SP play over MW1 and Multiplayer got old faster than expected. They needed to bring smth new to the table, and they failed.
  21. ReeceK
    Dec 14, 2009
    1
    Terrible multiplayer, a single player that is good but cut horribly short, spec ops mode can also be completed very quickly and easily. Why is multiplayer terrible? Horrible maps, every one of them, crazed hitboxes, javelins and model 1887 akimbo's are ridiculous. There are only one or two guns worth using in the game, snipers are horribly weak, the game has an ill fitting sense of Terrible multiplayer, a single player that is good but cut horribly short, spec ops mode can also be completed very quickly and easily. Why is multiplayer terrible? Horrible maps, every one of them, crazed hitboxes, javelins and model 1887 akimbo's are ridiculous. There are only one or two guns worth using in the game, snipers are horribly weak, the game has an ill fitting sense of humour which just doesn't feel like it matches call of duty( this is mostly seen online so im including it here, im talking about money flying out when you get a payback kill, the sad face on the WA2000 etc), spawning is worse than ever( the game places you right behind, beside or even right in front of enemies when you die), the host system is worse than ever too, the host relocation does not work. Its horribly difficult to find a game even though everyone is playing it and I have an open NAT type. I have a 1.80 KD ratio and am lvl 66 no prestige. I gave it a fair shot and I dont hate it because I suck at it, which I don't with a KD like that. My biggest problem overall though is that online, the game just is not fun, its frustrating. COD4 annoyed me in the past but most of the time i had fun playing it, its expected to get annoyed with any online game once in a while but for MW2, its just annoying constantly.… Expand
  22. stevenv
    Dec 15, 2009
    2
    How is this even a debate? I love war games and shooters like Bad Company but the Modern Warfare series is so overrated and generic. Sure its got a good multiplayer but multiplayers been around forever and there are no new, standout modes of multiplayer in these games. The only thing that is pretty damn clever from a marketing standpoint is the perks system. Its there to get people How is this even a debate? I love war games and shooters like Bad Company but the Modern Warfare series is so overrated and generic. Sure its got a good multiplayer but multiplayers been around forever and there are no new, standout modes of multiplayer in these games. The only thing that is pretty damn clever from a marketing standpoint is the perks system. Its there to get people addicted. Do I even have to talk about the single player? the story is clearly the most generic plot to be produced. But there are only so many options when making a realistic war story line so I don't blame the makers. When I say this to my friends, they look at me like I don't know what I'm talking about. Like I haven't played it. I would give this game a 7 if it wasn't for all the annoying people that only talk about how innovative (false statement) the Modern Warfare series is. If they mean innovative by recycling boring plots, then yes, this game has it in spades.… Expand
  23. BenDover
    Dec 16, 2009
    0
    Single player way to short for full price game. Multiplater is even worse. I can't even play.. When you finally get a game its broken and people are cheating and boosting. it sucks! IW ruined COD. Stick with COD4 it is much better multiplayer.
  24. AlexL
    Dec 31, 2009
    0
    There simply isn't any significant improvement over MW1. You are essentially paying $60 for broken multiplayer and a short Michael Bay movie.
  25. JerryG
    Dec 30, 2009
    4
    Mostly hype. I've played a number of good combat games and I've never like the way COD forces you to follow a specific path to get to your goals. Mecenaries and Bad Company gave me so many options - vehicles and free roaming I feel like I'm on tracks in this game. I was completely shocked when I finished the campaigne. I think it took me 4-5 hours. No option to use tactics Mostly hype. I've played a number of good combat games and I've never like the way COD forces you to follow a specific path to get to your goals. Mecenaries and Bad Company gave me so many options - vehicles and free roaming I feel like I'm on tracks in this game. I was completely shocked when I finished the campaigne. I think it took me 4-5 hours. No option to use tactics - just a bullet blizzard and "hurry up and get there" scenes. Graphics are good. Nice mini-movies. Not even close to Battlefield Bad Company. Maybe multi-player will make up for it? Find it on sale and it's worth a play.… Expand
  26. JackCD
    Dec 3, 2009
    0
    Hum... Multiplayer... You can't choose your map, the number of players, the ping. You can't quit during host migration (wich bugs half the time), you can't quit during loading screen (wich also bugs repetitively), you basically can't do shit. Hum, what else? Yeah, akimbo 1887 AND people with Javelin and danger close moving around and killing everyone when they DIE. Hit Hum... Multiplayer... You can't choose your map, the number of players, the ping. You can't quit during host migration (wich bugs half the time), you can't quit during loading screen (wich also bugs repetitively), you basically can't do shit. Hum, what else? Yeah, akimbo 1887 AND people with Javelin and danger close moving around and killing everyone when they DIE. Hit boxes lagg, games lagg a lot. Maps are like COD waw (shit). You get backstabbed all the time ( I wasnt backstabbed in 30 games on 600). Well, I think that's it! Oh no wait, there is also the m16 (wich is abusive) and the lack of inteligence. Oh, and no dedicated server (makes the game lagg all the time). I have it on Xbox360 and regret buying it.… Expand
  27. GarethE
    Nov 11, 2009
    2
    I don't know, where do I start? The lack of dedicated servers for PC is the biggest kick to the balls for most PC gamers, and the lack of modding, tweaking, and pretty much anything that isn't specifically in the console version didn't help. I am still completely dumbfounded by this decision, and while it seems pretty obvious to me that they probably took it out to I don't know, where do I start? The lack of dedicated servers for PC is the biggest kick to the balls for most PC gamers, and the lack of modding, tweaking, and pretty much anything that isn't specifically in the console version didn't help. I am still completely dumbfounded by this decision, and while it seems pretty obvious to me that they probably took it out to encourage more people to buy the console version, I must point out that not only will resorting to such tactics push many more people away than it draws in, there are a lot of us out here that will never start playing FPS games on a console because of the terrible control scheme compared to the mouse+keyboard setup. The forced FOV of 65 degrees adds insult to injury and makes me want to vomit, not just because I have to play with blinders on, but because apparently this was quite purposeful and will not be fixed; whether this is to appease the developers' morbid sense of justice or just because they were too lazy to make a decent port to PC I don't know. So until they give a good reason for all this, I'll just chalk it up to a downright Machiavellian sales strategy. The other problem that I have with the game is the whole "game" part; the single player campaign lasts a grand total of 4-5 hours, the AI somehow seems to have gotten worse, the story feels like it was ripped from Cold-War propaganda, not to mention that the game feels like an army recruitment circle-jerk. I will say that the graphics are quite decent, and while they aren't anything spectacular, they are a bit of an improvement over MW1. Another problem I had with the game is that there's no way to turn off in-game music short of forcing it off by renaming the folder it's stored in. I have no clue why they couldn't have added a "music" slider to the options, but maybe that would have pissed off Hans Zimmer. To be fair, I like the music, but I would rather hear the people shooting at me and therefore I generally turn it off in FPS games. Now, if they had implemented the music in a less obtrusive way, a la HL2 or something where it would be used to hone the import of a certain situation, I would have liked it a bit more, but they just plastered it all over the campaign in what I suppose was an effort to make the game feel even more 'epic.' Of course, there's still much more to be said, like the awful idea of dual wielding and magically bullet-proof riot shields, and of course the bomb-squad hulks, or the fact that apparently the weapons in the old one were too boring and realistic, so they felt the need to replace most of them with tacticool shooting range guns. I still laugh every time I see a Russian soldier carrying an IMI Tavor TAR-21 made by Israelis, but that laughter quickly is subdued by the realization that they haven't added a single Russian gun; no AN-94, no PKM, no AK-74 or AK-107, no VSS Vintorez. Aparently the Russian guns aren't futuristic enough. Anyways, semantics aside, it's probably a good console shooter, if by some chance you are lacking those, but the PC version has been stomped into the ground by the money-hungry team at IW.… Expand
  28. BrekR.
    Dec 11, 2009
    4
    Its rather immature that people seem to feel the need to call out others opinions and deem them wrong because they dont like this game, and saying the reason is because they suck at playing it. Grow up 5 year olds. This game is as medicore and over the top as they come. Because you like it, does not mean end of story, its amazing. Your opinion, whatever. Play some other games, get a life, Its rather immature that people seem to feel the need to call out others opinions and deem them wrong because they dont like this game, and saying the reason is because they suck at playing it. Grow up 5 year olds. This game is as medicore and over the top as they come. Because you like it, does not mean end of story, its amazing. Your opinion, whatever. Play some other games, get a life, and you'll realize that this is nothing what it could have been, purely marketed to look better and offer something thats non-exsistant in the game... so many other titles have done a better job and offered a hell of a lot more. Sure, the single player is alright, completly pointless as it may be and micheal bay inspired (i wonder how many of you complained about transformers 2, yet are praising this? hmmm. hypocritcs.), but it gets old. Its a basic run and gun with absolutly zero thought involved, other than point and shoot until you complete it 4.5hrs later with as many explosions happening at one time. Characer models look good, but environments are flat, boring, almost 2D stills at times. No decision making, no cover mechanics, a total lack of reaslim in; recoil, physics, body damage, and gore. This could have been rated T, but they didnt because it would have turned away older gents. An on rails, linear ride that was ok while it lasted, but you'll never go on it again. Spec ops is rather useless, you may play it once, but never feel any need to go back to it. Again, COD is stuck with a low amount of total players at 2 in spec ops. Thats rather pathetic. A minimum of 4 should have been allowed. Multiplayer gets old, its a useless grind to lvl 70, to see who can have the least life and play the most to unlock guns and perks that make the game completely unbalanced or fair to anyone a lower lvl than you, or somebody who has a life and doesnt play 10hrs a day like most 13 year olds rating this a 10. I've no problem getting a good score in this game, all you have to do is camp. This game has taken everything bad about mw1 and multiplyed it by 12 in mw2. Spawn system is hilarious, glitches run rampant, as do hackers. Still 6v6, with 1 game mode you can do 9v9 on, rather stupid, they can allow more players and they know it. All in all, a rather redundant tool in the gaming world that has offered nothing new, only copied and pasted its predecessor. I feel like I woke up in, when did MW1 come out, 07? Total let down, I doubt I will ever purchase another Activison game. I'm selling this asap. Its rather sad that developers who try new ideas, new ips, or push the envelope with games are going out of business or barely breaking even to continue game creating, while this piece of crap is thriving, or did at least at launch, i see alot of people arent happy. Its the new Madden. Now you all can buy your 2 or 3 maps for $10, and then buy COD7 in a few months. Waste of money... never again.… Expand
  29. Mr.Anderson
    Dec 12, 2009
    4
    Huge amount of hype, and then all the critics love it, so I decide I must have this game. So I get it, and play the campaign and spec ops with my brother (campaign is short but fun and spec ops are a cool addition, I wish it had 4 players...). OK. So now I want to play live. Of course, like every other CoD game, you can only play 1 person per console. But whatever, as long as its fun. But Huge amount of hype, and then all the critics love it, so I decide I must have this game. So I get it, and play the campaign and spec ops with my brother (campaign is short but fun and spec ops are a cool addition, I wish it had 4 players...). OK. So now I want to play live. Of course, like every other CoD game, you can only play 1 person per console. But whatever, as long as its fun. But the problem is that its not fun. At all. In any way. Everything about the live play is just wrong, wrong, wrong. It's not skill-oriented--if you're level 70 you have awesome guns and perks and can just completely pwn everyone else in the match, even if you can't aim well and play stupid and rush into the middle of everywhere. If you're level 1, you have crappy guns and perks and stand no chance whatsoever. It still confounds me that any game would pit a level 70 against a level 1. Even my brother, who rapes at CoD5, can't win in MW2 at his low level. And on top of that, the maps are waaay too big. Maybe if it was a 32 person/match standard, it would be OK, but its not. And once again, people have no say in choosing them...And then I play a match where I am actually doing really good (like 15 kill streak), and its kinda fun, but no, I'm not allowed to do well. Somebody ends the game with a tactical nuke. Worst idea ever. Seriously. Too easy to end the game--happens every 6 or 7 matches, and it drives me nuts. And normally, just because you don't win a lot doesn't make a game bad (take Gears of War 2. Holy crap is that hard to win sometimes but at least its fun and when you lose you're like "OK they're definitely better than me and deserve to beat me.") You don't get that feeling in MW2, usually when you are losing badly you can look at your kill cam and realize it's some fag camping in the corner of a room with his gun pointed at head-height at the entrance to the room. And then you get pissed and end up having to camp yourself so you don't keep dying and it just ends up being a boring, stupid battle of who has the patience to camp for longer. Screw this game, I'm gonna sell it once I beat all the spec-ops and go back to games that are actually good, like maybe the first Modern Warfare, Halo, Gears, and Super Smash Bros (Brawl FTW!!!).… Expand
  30. JudgeMental
    Aug 22, 2010
    1
    My lowest review to date, not because of the quality of the game, which is about a 5/10, but because of how far short of my expectations this sequel fell. The first MW had a far better plot, characters that drew you in, and a solid selection of jaw dropping moments. This sequel went overboard trying to stun people with jaw droppers, and I ended up feeling like I was watching aMy lowest review to date, not because of the quality of the game, which is about a 5/10, but because of how far short of my expectations this sequel fell. The first MW had a far better plot, characters that drew you in, and a solid selection of jaw dropping moments. This sequel went overboard trying to stun people with jaw droppers, and I ended up feeling like I was watching a straight-to-DVD action flick. Characters were boring, the plot and villain were absurd, and not in a good way, and the game added little, too little, for a good sequel.

    Then there is multi-player. A crap-fest of noob-tubes and akimbo shotguns that drown out any attempt at skill or tactic. There are also a host of odd glitches, such as the rare but fun infinite grenade launcher glitch or the hyper speed glitch. Sadly, the game fell short, a point emphasized by the somewhat better Battlefield that came on its heels, and had just as bad a plot, but a much, much better multiplayer, and interesting characters.
    Then there is mu    … Expand
  31. Plumbum
    Aug 21, 2010
    3
    There is one word that ruins this game. Balance. Or rather, the lack thereof. Why bother with a sniper rifle, when your ACR will do a much better job? I know fanboys will decry everything I say, baecuse it's not praising their game, but boo-hoo. I liked the single-player campaign, but I'm sorry, I tried the online play, and what do I get? M203 grenade launchers, M203 grenade launchers andThere is one word that ruins this game. Balance. Or rather, the lack thereof. Why bother with a sniper rifle, when your ACR will do a much better job? I know fanboys will decry everything I say, baecuse it's not praising their game, but boo-hoo. I liked the single-player campaign, but I'm sorry, I tried the online play, and what do I get? M203 grenade launchers, M203 grenade launchers and GP-25 grenade launchers (functionally identical). I can't enjoy the game anymore, I wish there was some semblance of balance, and I can see how this had record first-day sales, since everyone bought it before the realised how **** it was.… Expand
  32. Heroicpotatoe
    Aug 21, 2010
    2
    When I started to play this game it was brilliant, but after I finished the decent typical anti-Russian campaign, I went on multiplayer and I got bored in a few hours and there are few differences from the previous games. The multiplayer is spoilt by people who think they are the best, the game is also spoilt by hackers.
  33. ParagonRenegade
    Sep 12, 2010
    3
    A fun game for the first 2 months, but after the incredibly short kill times, imbalance, generic story (Russians! oh noez!), poor AI, and lack of small details get annoying, the game just becomes a pathetic flogging of a dead horse. Save your money for Black Ops, Gears, Bad company, or Halo, not on this rubbish.
  34. JosephR
    Sep 16, 2010
    1
    game, not worth it, just hype, not 0 ....because multiplayer somewhat fun....untill it was ruined then the game sucked...yeah...campaign..bad story. the opps mode is boring..can't see why anyone would play it
  35. SnakeZ
    Oct 5, 2010
    1
    This game is very overrated. I do not understand the logic behind the hype. Sure it has great graphics, but thats kind of all it has.The story is full of plot holes, short and just feels like a corridor shooter, and the multiplayer side is even worse. The most annoying this about the multiplayer is, however, the campers. Thats entirely the games fault. The short kill times, combined withThis game is very overrated. I do not understand the logic behind the hype. Sure it has great graphics, but thats kind of all it has.The story is full of plot holes, short and just feels like a corridor shooter, and the multiplayer side is even worse. The most annoying this about the multiplayer is, however, the campers. Thats entirely the games fault. The short kill times, combined with the prospect of unlocking new and better guns drive lots of people to camp in a corner, get a high streak, call in a killstreak, win the match. After that they have even better guns to do that. Another thing is the unbalanced perks and weapons. They give player an unfair advantage as higher ranking players who played the game more have better guns and perks and dominate the new players. Its incredibly frustrating. Those are my main reasons for why i give it a 1, and i have not even begun to talk about the plot holes in the campaign, the repetitive spec ops mode and other problems in Multiplayer.… Expand
  36. IllogicTC
    Oct 21, 2010
    3
    Although I am naturally more inclined toward Battlefield, I played this with some friends and gave it an honest chance. I figured maybe I would get hooked in like so many others, and could enjoy the massive fanbase to play multiplayer with.

    What I found was a joke. The hype surrounding it did come through in a couple of places, especially in a particular mission which was much spoken of    Although I am naturally more inclined toward Battlefield, I played this with some friends and gave it an honest chance. I figured maybe I would get hooked in like so many others, and could enjoy the massive fanbase to play multiplayer with.

    What I found was a joke. The hype surrounding it did come through in a couple of places, especially in a particular mission which was much spoken of regarding its content. But when it came to multiplayer, it became ridiculous.

    First off, even with having a ton of people packed in one room playing whatever game mode, modern gaming platforms are capable of much better graphical detail. I watched as someone blew up a Jeep (shame you can't get vehicles, oh well), and instead of having what looked like a good explosion and physics it went like this:

    Frame 1: Jeep is sitting there, beginnings of explosion happening.
    Frame 2: Jeep is turning over, explosion getting bigger.
    Frame 3: Jeep is on its side.

    Are you kidding? It flops like a Hotwheels car would if someone just flicked it. Also, there is just not enough fine detail in the mix to say this looks GREAT. Good, MAYBE, but not great.

    The class-based system allows complete customization, letting you tailor your soldier to your playstyle. Good yes, that customization is allowed, but bad too, since people can build powerhouses that take no getting used to, rather than being put in a place where you deal with the cards you're handed and get good at them. The array of weapons and gadgets is wonderful, but also over-the-top. I don't expect to be seeing our military running around with dual sawed-off shotguns, it's just ludicrous. And of course, I'd like to mention the Nuke. Everyone knows the Nuke, and many people by now have garnered the grin of setting it off. However, it is equally ludicrous. Now, you are allowed to build a no-skills-required soldier, and with enough of a kill streak, a normal ground unit is allowed the power of a nuclear warhead? I could see something cool yes, since it is quite an achievement. Maybe pinpoint strikes on all the enemies, where everyone has to respawn, I would even accept that. But instant win?

    All in all, there was just too much bull in here for me to swallow. 3/10    … Expand
  37. Ddizzo
    Nov 7, 2010
    0
    Possibly the worst first person shooter ever. I was a huge fan of call of duty. I played all the games non stop i loved them. I pre-ordered this game 6 months before it's release and was super excited for it. Then the first day i got it i was playing the campaign and i thought it was ok. Then i got to te multiplayer, it was fun... for a month when all the glitchers and hackers appeared.Possibly the worst first person shooter ever. I was a huge fan of call of duty. I played all the games non stop i loved them. I pre-ordered this game 6 months before it's release and was super excited for it. Then the first day i got it i was playing the campaign and i thought it was ok. Then i got to te multiplayer, it was fun... for a month when all the glitchers and hackers appeared. It's obvious that IW should have had a beta for this game to keep it from sucking so much. Over powered weapons (shotguns can be duelweilded and used as a secondary weapon. what were they thinking?), horrible perks (commando, marathon, dangerclose, cold blooded, just about all of them), things that encourage camping (heartbeat sensors, customizable kill streaks [wtf] and so on) this game just cannot be any worse. Thanks IW i want my $60 back aswell as those 80+ hours i spent. what a waste of life… Expand
  38. Bahamutalee
    Nov 1, 2011
    4
    The singleplayer is the star in this game because the multiplayer is absolute garbage. Which blows because you can see that the single player takes back seat to the abortion that really could have been a fun thing.
  39. zerox505
    Nov 12, 2011
    0
    huh oops i'm sorry, i thought this was mw3, my apologies...same yearly infested piece of **** with no oblivious changes to it all, you do your thing activision :).
  40. pyromcr
    Mar 18, 2012
    0
    COD 4 was terrible, and this squeal is just as bad. Sure it looks nice, but beyond that, it is one of the worst game I have ever player. There is no part of this game that is fun. Total waste of money.
  41. Runfocovah
    Aug 18, 2012
    0
    Man they just keep coming every year with new boring maps. Same freaking game, graphics, gameplay.. **** feels the same every year. They are just milking away the franchise, Modern Warfare was the best COD they have come up with.
  42. KaoticBlade12
    Nov 12, 2011
    0
    Overated piece of crap. Aracdy as hell and not even fun. Buy only if you are a series cod fanboy. Idk what else to say................................................................................
  43. Battle_P0pe
    Dec 24, 2011
    0
    In short, this game is an insult to the first person shooter genre of games A piss poor campaign with 2D characters, nothing really interesting or gripping about them. The campaign is also short. The multiplayer is broken and imbalanced.This is hands down, one of the worst multiplayer games I've ever played. Horribly imbalanced guns, rampant noobtubing, camping, and not to mention theIn short, this game is an insult to the first person shooter genre of games A piss poor campaign with 2D characters, nothing really interesting or gripping about them. The campaign is also short. The multiplayer is broken and imbalanced.This is hands down, one of the worst multiplayer games I've ever played. Horribly imbalanced guns, rampant noobtubing, camping, and not to mention the ridiculous knifing range, quickscoping, and the inane amount of hacking. All in all, avoid this game, unless you like going through one controller a week because of the sh*tty, piss poor gameplay.… Expand
  44. willwynn134
    Jan 5, 2012
    1
    i think this is the worst of the series first of all the campaign is way to short the multiplayer is decent but not great they good make it better by making it longer of a campaign
  45. Rexnos
    Feb 24, 2012
    4
    The campaign and special ops were both passing decent, but the multi-player was a painfully large step back from the brilliance of the original Modern Warfare. The guns were poorly balanced, the spawning system was horribly flawed, and snipers can carry shotguns. Snipers. Can carry. Shotguns.
  46. cryat
    Jun 19, 2013
    0
    This is one of the worst games I`ve ever played. Don`t buy it!
    Singleplayer: The story isn`t good.
    Multiplayer: One Map was blocked so you only can play it on a hacked server. That`s the second problem, in this game are many hacker and hacked lobby`s/server.. The weapons are not balanced just like the match-making-system. You have to play mean to get bonus experience so many players are    This is one of the worst games I`ve ever played. Don`t buy it!
    Singleplayer: The story isn`t good.
    Multiplayer: One Map was blocked so you only can play it on a hacked server. That`s the second problem, in this game are many hacker and hacked lobby`s/server.. The weapons are not balanced just like the match-making-system. You have to play mean to get bonus experience so many players are camping, noob-tubing or rush with overpowered weapons. In this game are some mean kill-streak-rewards like the AC-130. The enemy players dies non-stop so you get no kills too. That means no one is happy (only the player with the AC-130).
    Sometimes it`s very funny but the bad and aggressive making moments are so much more...
    The developers stopped the support so the game will not get updates.

    If I could I would give minus points for this game. Please IW update this game or don`t do mistakes like this again.    … Expand
  47. LackMeier
    Jun 5, 2013
    3
    The Singleplayer is unlogic and boring. Special Ops is only funny if you play with a good friend. And the Multiplayer is full of quickscoper, camper, noobtuber, rusher The extras like predators unbalance the multiplayer.
    The most overrated FPS I've ever seen!
    You can't told me that this "game" is a 10/10 game.
  48. Eternal409
    Jul 29, 2013
    3
    Expectations:
    In only a few words I have no expectations for 'Call Of Duty' games.
    Scores: Graphics: 5/10 Campaign: 1/10 Sound: 2/10 Gameplay: 7/10 Multiplayer: 0/10 Final Score: 3/10 Final Verdict: The graphics put simply are average, the campaign is essentially what battlefield 3 would have been like if it was directed by Michael Bay. The sounds of guns and explosions in    Expectations:
    In only a few words I have no expectations for 'Call Of Duty' games.

    Scores:
    Graphics: 5/10
    Campaign: 1/10
    Sound: 2/10
    Gameplay: 7/10
    Multiplayer: 0/10
    Final Score: 3/10

    Final Verdict:
    The graphics put simply are average, the campaign is essentially what battlefield 3 would have been like if it was directed by Michael Bay. The sounds of guns and explosions in this game are awful, the gameplay is just above average because of the fast paced nature of it. Multiplayer in this game is terrible it requires no skill as all you have to do is choose the right weapon, attachments and perks, after that you're a near un-killable tank.    … Expand
  49. coopert
    Jan 19, 2014
    1
    This was the moment that this generation became obsessed with brown cover based shooting and it was a sad day, this game sold millions but did manage to separate casual gamers from real gamers with one question, do you play COD? Overall this is just a poor run of the mill generic title straight off the 360 conveyor belt of ****
  50. BrettT
    Jun 8, 2014
    2
    With bland multiplayer, and a rather dull gameplay engine, Modern Warfare 2 is not only boring and unfun, but downright stupid. The story to it has got to be one of the worst I have very had the displeasure of viewing, but is so tasteless I cannot bear to type this anymore. This game is overrated and awful. What keeps this at a two is that it at least works. What is funny is that in a gameWith bland multiplayer, and a rather dull gameplay engine, Modern Warfare 2 is not only boring and unfun, but downright stupid. The story to it has got to be one of the worst I have very had the displeasure of viewing, but is so tasteless I cannot bear to type this anymore. This game is overrated and awful. What keeps this at a two is that it at least works. What is funny is that in a game about shooting generic foreign bad guy after generic foreign bad guy is that the guns feel lousy and the shooting is unfun.… Expand
  51. sniper-expert69
    Aug 27, 2021
    0
    the best cod ever in years this and bo2 unbalance and fun mp spec ops is doe snot compete with z
  52. AlexF1
    Mar 4, 2023
    0
    0 score for NATO propaganda,

    why Russians are always bad, why Anglo-Saxons are always good.
    when in real life it's the other way around..so sad
next
Page:

Awards & Rankings

1
#1 Best Xbox 360 Game of 2009
1
#1 Most Discussed Xbox 360 Game of 2009
3
#3 Most Shared Xbox 360 Game of 2009

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
94

Universal acclaim - based on 100 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 100 out of 100
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 100
  3. Negative: 0 out of 100
  1. Telegraph
    100
    Modern Warfare 2 crosses into the must-have category of video games effortlessly. It offers an unmatched shooter experience, a compelling story mode, a slick package of mini missions and a multiplayer which is pretty much unparalleled in depth.
    Read full review
  2. Cynamite
    100
    Modern Warfare 2 offers epic gameplay, a stunning Spec-Ops mode and a huge amount of adrenaline.
    Read full review
  3. GamesRadar+
    100
    Anyone who already has issues with the single-player ‘style’ of IW’s games will still find fault with the scripted, linear experience, but in terms of sheer drama and show-stopping set-pieces accompanied by laser sharp FPS controls, Modern Warfare 2 is your daddy. And that’s without Spec Ops and Multiplayer.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »