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. R.MacG
    Dec 8, 2009
    8
    I was quite surprised by Modern Warfare 2. I had done my best to avoid the hype, and it seems to have paid off. Before I start my review, however, I would like to make the point that this review board is for the Xbox 360 version of the game, not the PC. If you have a review for the PC version, and want to have a moan about the lack of dedicated servers, do it on the PC board. Now, back to I was quite surprised by Modern Warfare 2. I had done my best to avoid the hype, and it seems to have paid off. Before I start my review, however, I would like to make the point that this review board is for the Xbox 360 version of the game, not the PC. If you have a review for the PC version, and want to have a moan about the lack of dedicated servers, do it on the PC board. Now, back to the review. I picked this game up for a neat £32, avoiding the £44 price tag of GAME and other major game retailers. I can only wonder why IW thought they would be able to get the RRP to £55, but they must have been having an off day. Had the campaign been significantly longer, I would have agreed with the £55 tag, but for that much money I would expect at least another 4 hours of campaign. As I am talking about the campaign, I'll get on with that first. The story follows on directly from Modern Warfare, with an easy-to-follow plot. After the submarine base mission, I was very impressed with the way the game played. Before this, the game was still great, but those last few missions really grabbed me. Despite the short campaign, it was worthy of being attempted on Veteran. It was sadly far easier than previous CoD games I have played, and even CoD 4 was harder. The music was great, the gameplay was explosive, and the visuals were above average. Next up, Spec Ops. This game mode is a good addition to the game, but sadly it does not make up for the short campaign. This does not mean to say that it is bad. By no means is that true. With 23 Spec Ops missions, and a lot of baddies to shoot, the action never stops. Going for Veteran completion is a nice challenge, especially on the last few missions. I am yet to complete all of them, but I do have 57 stars, so I'm close enough. Juggernaughts are a nice tactical addition to the game, with a demand for you to rethink your assault strategies. I can only wonder what the last three missions are like. Overall, Spec Ops is great. I'm very pleased with it. Finally, we get onto multiplayer. Well, what can I say? Multiplayer has its ups and downs for all players. One day you will be decimating teams with huge K/D ratios, and the next you find yourself being dominated by better-skilled foes. The occasional bursts of lag from poor hosts are hard to notice, even with my terrible connection. I run on a 2 Mb/s connection, and always have a Strict NAT. Most games therefore will not allow me to join other players. This is sadly also the case with Modern Warfare 2. I can rarely connect to a match, and sometimes I am unlucky enough to be in the lobby, only to be "lagged out". That's my fault for having such a shoddy connection though. When in a match, the action never stops. Plenty of explosions, awesome kills, and game-ending kill streak rewards. "AC-130 spotted!" I am only level 24 without prestige, but I am finding it a great game. Some moan about the higher levelled guns being overpowered, but honestly, all guns are the same. Apart from those blasted AK-47s. I can't wait until I hit level 70, if I ever do. So, this game ticks most of the boxes. A great multiplayer, a fantastic, albeit short, campaign, and a fun extra game mode to complete on the side. Great stuff.… Expand
  2. ChrisR
    Dec 8, 2009
    10
    This game is absolutely amazing. If you don't like first person shooters then you shouldn't even be rating this game because it's not your cup of tea. But if you like FPS games then this is incredible! The graphics are the best in the business, the play control is spot-on, the audio is amazing, and the re-play value is there for not only the single player campaign (without This game is absolutely amazing. If you don't like first person shooters then you shouldn't even be rating this game because it's not your cup of tea. But if you like FPS games then this is incredible! The graphics are the best in the business, the play control is spot-on, the audio is amazing, and the re-play value is there for not only the single player campaign (without being almost impossible to find the intel like the first game), but also for the new game mode Special Ops, and the multiplayer. Multiplayer has been expanded with customizable perks, additional equipment and weapon modifications. And the upgrades and goals to achieve in multiplayer come often enough that you always feel like you just succeeded in unlocking something cool, but are still urged on to your next objective without feeling like you're going to be grinding towards it forever. This game was created to make you feel like you're playing through an action movie on the campaign and they mastered it. While some might accuse the developers of a lack of depth in the characters the action takes place around you, the player, and it's your reactions to the graphics, sound, and exciting combat situations you are thrown in where this game shines. If you want a story, go read a book. If you want to be the main character in a playable action movie... This is your must-own game of the year!… Expand
  3. Maxxyw
    Dec 9, 2009
    6
    Meh. While the single player and spec-ops are exceptionally well-crafted, they tried too hard on the multiplayer and just really screwed up. The balance of skill is godawful, and the maps are way too big to create the hectic atmosphere like in CODWOW or even MW1. You don't even have to be good to win. but if the other person doesn't see you, then...boom free kill. And you see Meh. While the single player and spec-ops are exceptionally well-crafted, they tried too hard on the multiplayer and just really screwed up. The balance of skill is godawful, and the maps are way too big to create the hectic atmosphere like in CODWOW or even MW1. You don't even have to be good to win. but if the other person doesn't see you, then...boom free kill. And you see someone about once every 2 minutes on these giant maps...Out of all the live games I have (Halo 3 Gears of War 2 Cod5 Borderlands and this), this is the one I will play the least. Which it shouldn't be, because the live is supposed to be the central part of this game. And the live community on this is more annoying than that of Halo, and I thought that was impossible. At least they fixed that stupid javelin glitch. Not to take away from the single player, which is fun, and the spec-ops, which could be a game in and of itself.… Expand
  4. TomF
    Jan 11, 2010
    10
    First of all I don't understand why the user score is so low, I guess its a love-it or hate-it game but I loved it. If your getting this only for the single player (get xbox live already!) and have nobody to play spec-ops with then wait for the price to go down. For everyone else I completely recommended this 100%, the game looks absolutely amazing in HD, there were a few moments in First of all I don't understand why the user score is so low, I guess its a love-it or hate-it game but I loved it. If your getting this only for the single player (get xbox live already!) and have nobody to play spec-ops with then wait for the price to go down. For everyone else I completely recommended this 100%, the game looks absolutely amazing in HD, there were a few moments in the single player where I felt like a part of the game it was amazing, the final scene is bad-ass too. I liked their take on war torn Washington DC, an eerily real concept that makes you wonder if war will ever be fought on our soil. Also the character models are some of the most realistic I've seen to date and the effects are fantastic. The story may be a little short, I didn't notice this because I spaced it out into a period of a few weeks because of the multiplayer, but it is very well told and interesting. The co-op missions are a very fun and addicting feature that allow you to play with another person. Now for the real gameplay experience, online play. I cannot praise this enough, it retains the core style of the first one and adds massive depth and new weapons. I remember my friend and I discussing things they should add to the new one and they pretty much read my mind. You now get extra points for payback, long shot kills, double kills and many other things; there is nothing like popping someone from 150 yards and having 5 different things pop up on the screen awarding you. The challenges are one of my favorite additions, you can now get up to 1000 kills with a weapon and still earn points and also unlock attachments based on which attachments you get kills with. There are also perc based challenges which encourage the use of different ones. I remember in COD4 I had stopping power for all my classes, but now with things like hardline and cold blooded I'm using different ones all the time. The addition of new weapons also adds another element to the game as there are now many, many ways to overcome your foes. You can be a dual wielding psychopath with two bullet hoses in each hand or a sharpshooter with extremely accurate assault and sniper rifles or anywhere in between. This makes the online element more challenging and harder because you now have threats of all different kinds. like when your sitting behind a sandbag fortification and a javelin missile comes in out of nowhere and ruins your day or when you turn the corner and get blasted by someone with akimbo shotguns. You can also unlock many different titles and emblems to differentiate yourself from other online players. There are many many ways to go about playing this game online and it is one of the best online experiences to date. I highly recommend this game to anyone who was a fan of the last one or fans of first person shooters in general.… Expand
  5. 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.
  6. TheBestAroundAye
    Jan 15, 2010
    10
    First off i'd like to say that if u didn't rate a 10 you need to tell me a better first person shooter that has good campaign and online multiplayer because nothing can beat this game. I'm sure some of you will say Halo but it just doesn't compare to Call of Duty. I will say the campaign is short but the multiplayer is AMAZING. Sure you may get mad at the campers and First off i'd like to say that if u didn't rate a 10 you need to tell me a better first person shooter that has good campaign and online multiplayer because nothing can beat this game. I'm sure some of you will say Halo but it just doesn't compare to Call of Duty. I will say the campaign is short but the multiplayer is AMAZING. Sure you may get mad at the campers and the kill streaks. But thats just the way it is. There will never be a perfect game.… Expand
  7. JacobW
    Jan 19, 2010
    10
    Although the singleplayer is short it has an amazing story and is also fun. It's a good example of where the graphics and gameplay is today. Multiplayer is amazing just like CoD4 but has added in many new weapons, perks and also deathstreaks. I don't understand why people are giving this game a low score because this generation of gaming is about Multiplayer. Why should games Although the singleplayer is short it has an amazing story and is also fun. It's a good example of where the graphics and gameplay is today. Multiplayer is amazing just like CoD4 but has added in many new weapons, perks and also deathstreaks. I don't understand why people are giving this game a low score because this generation of gaming is about Multiplayer. Why should games that have amazing multiplayer and a decent story deserve a low score when good singleplayer and no multiplayer games deserve a high score. Ask yourself this before voting, which lasts longer multiplayer or singleplayer?… Expand
  8. 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!
  9. JustinKo
    Jan 23, 2010
    9
    Some of you guys are total r-tards. sure the campaign is real suckish and you die a lot online, but that doesn't mean you have to give it a 1. They just patched up most of the glitches anyway
  10. RobertM
    Jan 24, 2010
    8
    The Campaign is great, but short. Multiplayer is awesome, extremely addicting, but it has major flaws. Theres always people on cheating to get the nuke, the 1887 shot gun is rediculous, and people running around like idiots with the commando perk knifiing people. A lot of the maps seem to favor people who like to post up and camp out. You will also be cut out or glitched out of a game The Campaign is great, but short. Multiplayer is awesome, extremely addicting, but it has major flaws. Theres always people on cheating to get the nuke, the 1887 shot gun is rediculous, and people running around like idiots with the commando perk knifiing people. A lot of the maps seem to favor people who like to post up and camp out. You will also be cut out or glitched out of a game about every 1 in 5. Other than that, the game is amazing.… Expand
  11. 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
  12. JamesD.
    Jan 26, 2010
    9
    It's difficult for me to score this game. On one hand it's the most media centric game I've ever played at is therefore extremely overated especially when up against GTA IV and he new sensation of Mass Effect and Bioshock. However there isn't any denying that this is gaming crack cocaine and an absolutely genre defining FPS. I came to my score based on the true facts It's difficult for me to score this game. On one hand it's the most media centric game I've ever played at is therefore extremely overated especially when up against GTA IV and he new sensation of Mass Effect and Bioshock. However there isn't any denying that this is gaming crack cocaine and an absolutely genre defining FPS. I came to my score based on the true facts of how addictive it really is, this isn't World At War overated, it earns most of its praise but those who are getting tired of this franchise like me should steer clear. It's intended for the fans so don't expect anything radically new that effects the gameplay, just know its better than the original.… Expand
  13. AnonymousAnonymous
    Jan 28, 2010
    10
    I don't see why there are so many people give games 0 score if its just a little bit bad or mediocre. People say MW2's campaign is less than 5 hours long, if you play on easy and do something like a speedrun. The campaign is really good, and not too short. Spec ops is fun with friends. Multiplayer is just awesome.
  14. 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
  15. 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
  16. DeadlyD
    Feb 18, 2010
    9
    this game is one of the best war games i played. graphics are awesome and the gameplay is really fun, even though i dont really care too much about campain mode, the reason i picked up this game was for the muiltiplayer. and for the muiltiplayer i must say it is fantastic. also, for a challenge they gave us special ops mode which is also very fun to play. special ops is basicly like a this game is one of the best war games i played. graphics are awesome and the gameplay is really fun, even though i dont really care too much about campain mode, the reason i picked up this game was for the muiltiplayer. and for the muiltiplayer i must say it is fantastic. also, for a challenge they gave us special ops mode which is also very fun to play. special ops is basicly like a survival mode ex: getting to a safe zone alive, defusing bombs etc. so if your looking for a fun modern war game, then i would get this one.… Expand
  17. 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
  18. 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
  19. NOOOOOOOOOOOOO
    Feb 27, 2010
    5
    This used to be one of my favorite games. Not anymore. The graphics, sound, and polish put into the gameplay are unparelleled. My friends complained that the story is a let down, but I loved it and I thought the set pieces were amazing, and spec-ops mode rules although I would have perfered more Nazi Zombies. The biggest complaint I have that RAPES this from a perfect ten is the This used to be one of my favorite games. Not anymore. The graphics, sound, and polish put into the gameplay are unparelleled. My friends complained that the story is a let down, but I loved it and I thought the set pieces were amazing, and spec-ops mode rules although I would have perfered more Nazi Zombies. The biggest complaint I have that RAPES this from a perfect ten is the multiplayer. At its best it can be played for hours straight, but all other times you might as well pop in a different game. It's all good ideas but bad execution. The ballance is not just broken, its mauled, limbed, pissed on, and kicked in front of a train. Not only are some guns a million times better than others, you'll barely ever die by bullets. Instead you will be noob-tubed and knifed untill your eyes fall out. Noob-tubing is when someone launches a grenade at you, and it's either an instant kill or close to one. Combined with perks that boost your power and give you an infanate amount you have no defence against them. It's a disaster. Also, the commando perk increases your distance in meele attacks... a lot. You knife people as a meele attack but with commando your range is so long you might as well replace the knife with a spear. Combined with perks that make people run a million miles an hour forever you've got no defence if they come running at you around a corner. Imagine if you're playing free for all in Halo and someone got to start out with an energy sword every single time. Is that fair? Hint: the answer begins with an 'n'. Now concerning killstreak rewards they mess up anyone's chances of catching up. You get airplains and helecopters to spawn camp the enemy team, homing missles, and a lot of other stuff that would be fun for you but a pain for everyone else. The only way to avoid them is to use the cold blooded perk, but what are the chances that you'll have that on every single moment? If you don't you'll have to wait indoors for like three hours until they go away. It also cripples anyone else's on your team's chances to get one, also because you'll be hogging all the kills! Care package rewards never hit their mark and often land on you even if your standing a mile away, and people team kill you to take them on hardcore team death match. Also, with good killstreaks comes bad frustration. To quote a review I've read for a completely different game "maybe I'm not japanese enough but if one mistake costs me everything I've worked for than I'm really not going to feel any sense of accomplishment". Another thing that sucks are akimbo (dual weilded) shotguns. You may argue that they are ballanced out because they either can't hold much or take a while to ready after shooting, but who cares when it only takes ONE HIT FROM EACH TO KILL SOMEONE!! Even the people who use them can testify that one-hit-kills are cheap. Speaking of people who suck, all the people on their headsets are either twelve year olds with extremely high pitched and distracting voices or loser teenagers picking on them because they're younger. The maps are good depending on what game mode you're playing on. For example Karachi is good on domination but it sucks with team death match. Of course, team deathmatch seems to be the ONLY mode on the game; nobody seems to care about capturing objectives over camping over them just to get killed by an RPG spammer. The map playlist is randomized, and that's a problem. I wanted to play on the Highrise map today. I played for three hours streight and not once got to play on it! THREE. HOURS. One nice thing that works is the addition of titles and embelems. In the last game all you got for completing challenges were points. I care about score more than anything, but I dont want to bust my butt to be higher on a leader board where you have to go down thirty spaces to see someone who got a high score without hacking. These callsigns are basically bragging rights, and I dig that. I could say more, but I'm done with this game for a while. When it works, it's a great success, but that's rare. All other times you'll only be in a bad mood and feel like you were robbed of your time. Infinity Ward has been fixing glitches going on in this game, but what's taking so long to fix the FUNDAMENTALS is beyond me. I'm going to play my PS2.… Expand
  20. 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
  21. 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
  22. 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
  23. 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
  24. JonathanS.
    Nov 11, 2009
    10
    I have no idea what game the people voting against this game were playing, except for half of them never having played it and just hating on it because they're immature gamers who have to have THEIR favorite game be the best. Terrible graphics? Poor controls? Someone even said something about a "stupid first person view"? I'm sorry, I thought this was an FPS I was playing. I I have no idea what game the people voting against this game were playing, except for half of them never having played it and just hating on it because they're immature gamers who have to have THEIR favorite game be the best. Terrible graphics? Poor controls? Someone even said something about a "stupid first person view"? I'm sorry, I thought this was an FPS I was playing. I understand some people who don't have Xbox Live not enjoying the game, but I would think you can read the reviews ahead of time and realize that the campaign is short, thus not always worth $65. Playing on veteran stretched it out for me to about 8 hours of playtime, and definitely upped the intensity. I personally thought the cinematic presentation and set pieces were astounding, and the conclusion was possibly the best in recent gaming history, presentation-wise. Graphics were brilliant, the best I've seen on the 360 yet, with only the likes of Uncharted 2 possibly beating it, and controls couldn't have been any more perfect. Multiplayer is still more addictive than any other next-gen game currently in retail, and Spec Ops is a nice addition, and a lot more fun on Veteran with a friend. Overall, I thought the game was just as good as MW, and though not substantially different, the fact that it came out so quickly and is a DIRECT sequel--I wasn't expecting some major revamp, just a perfecting of something I already loved. And that's what I got. As for Halo fanboys and other childish gamers, don't judge a game without playing it yourself and without an unbiased opinion. (Plus, really? It's not like Halo or GTA changed that fundamentally sequel to sequel, so I don't understand those arguments to begin with.)… Expand
  25. MehrajA
    Nov 11, 2009
    9
    I'll be honest, at first I was doubting if infinity ward had done a good job with the SP campaign, the first mission was just more of the same, with the cliff hangar mission being an exception, then having a few sniper missions clearly stolen from cod4, nothing new there, it's when the plot twists came that I started to realise how deep the game gets. As soon as your given a I'll be honest, at first I was doubting if infinity ward had done a good job with the SP campaign, the first mission was just more of the same, with the cliff hangar mission being an exception, then having a few sniper missions clearly stolen from cod4, nothing new there, it's when the plot twists came that I started to realise how deep the game gets. As soon as your given a proper plot, you start to pay attention to detail, from the call outs from the AI to the detailed guns. The graphics are pretty much the same to cod4 iw's hyped streaming isn't all that. When compared to games such as Killzone 2 and Uncharted 2, (BTW i have an xbox360...only never had a ps3) it's not going to hold it's own. However as you get into the swing of things, you quickly realise that any noob can spray but it does actually take a bit of skill to pull of headshots and the such, the multiplayer is definately better than cod4, with new fixes and such but I reckon there are a few bugs in this one, Overall mw2 is more of the same but with a bigger bang. Worth 54 pounds? maybe not, however it is definately worth your time!… Expand
  26. ZardozD
    Nov 11, 2009
    5
    It's CoD: MW 2 (that's TWO) - yes it's almost identical to version 1. Don't buy it if you want an original game. It faithfully reworks the superb graphics and combat system of MW 1, with no significant innovations. If you liked MW1, you'll like this. If you hated MW1, you'll hate this. Multiplayer is a disappointment - lack of a system to balance newbies vs It's CoD: MW 2 (that's TWO) - yes it's almost identical to version 1. Don't buy it if you want an original game. It faithfully reworks the superb graphics and combat system of MW 1, with no significant innovations. If you liked MW1, you'll like this. If you hated MW1, you'll hate this. Multiplayer is a disappointment - lack of a system to balance newbies vs super button mashers makes it frustrating for newbies, who just get to play walking targets, and boring for experienced players (unless you like killing opponents who are no challenge - which is childish). There are some exceptional moments in the single player missions, but generally they lack the old sense of reality in MW1 with too many opponents crammed into smaller maps. The general feeling behind the whole game design is rushed, lazy and self-complacent. They knew they had a solid gold hit before they started work on it, and they knew they had to release it for Christmas 2010, so they simply slammed together what they could in the time they had - and it shows.… Expand
  27. SamF
    Nov 12, 2009
    8
    After finishing the SP Campaign I can honestly say in terms of set pieces, action and Graphics this game gets a 10. With that said the storline really is a major let down with it jumping from one scenerio to another with no cohesive logic and a very confusing story. Infinity ward seems to have not put alot of effort in the story and more on the shock factor which many will agree is way After finishing the SP Campaign I can honestly say in terms of set pieces, action and Graphics this game gets a 10. With that said the storline really is a major let down with it jumping from one scenerio to another with no cohesive logic and a very confusing story. Infinity ward seems to have not put alot of effort in the story and more on the shock factor which many will agree is way overdone. Aside from that the SP Is also very short and can be completed in 6 hours. One saving grace is Spec ops mode that adds a bit of fun with mini missions thrown in much like the last epilogue airplane mission of the last game. Overall I would recommend this as a rental for anyone that only plays Single player...for those who play MP For hours its pretty much the same game with more weapons , different maps and perks where you can rain down havoc if you get kill streaks regularly.… Expand
  28. FPSMaster
    Nov 13, 2009
    8
    Good, fun game, but like every COD title it's over too quickly forcing you to go into multiplayer within 2 days of purchase to extend the longetivity of the game. There is the Spec Ops mode which can be fun, but could have been so much better if it were designed like the extra mission after the credits in COD4 where you have A.I. squadmates with you. But Spec Ops seems more tacked on Good, fun game, but like every COD title it's over too quickly forcing you to go into multiplayer within 2 days of purchase to extend the longetivity of the game. There is the Spec Ops mode which can be fun, but could have been so much better if it were designed like the extra mission after the credits in COD4 where you have A.I. squadmates with you. But Spec Ops seems more tacked on than anything else and that time could have been put to much better use elsewhere in the game. The graphics are good, but this engine is really showing it's age (again) since it's just reusing technology from COD1 from 2003. The multiplayer is exactly like COD4 but with more upgrades and the single player is good, although feels disconnected, disjointed and makes no sense and the missions don't really feel military-ish enough compared to other COD games. They feel too alone and rogue-ish if that makes sense. Good game, but overhyped. It's just your standard yearly COD treatment with more production values to make it feel even more like a movie which also makes it feel even more scripted, linear and on-rails than ever before. Flashpoint could have destroyed and dethroned this series easily if Codemasters had foused more on making a great game than stealing peoples money.… Expand
  29. JoeF
    Nov 13, 2009
    9
    It really pisses me off that people give MW2 low ratings because either "It's not as good as Halo" or "It got too much hype." First of all, if you like Halo so much, play Halo and stop bringing down the CoD fans. They're two completely different games. Second, the game got a ton of hype because it deserved it. It made $130 million in the first 24 hours, which is the biggest It really pisses me off that people give MW2 low ratings because either "It's not as good as Halo" or "It got too much hype." First of all, if you like Halo so much, play Halo and stop bringing down the CoD fans. They're two completely different games. Second, the game got a ton of hype because it deserved it. It made $130 million in the first 24 hours, which is the biggest success in the history of media entertainment, better than Halo 3 and GTA IV and everything else. I like Halo and GTA too, but I don't compare completely different games to one another. The game is freakin awesome, and the only reason I don't give it a 10 is because CoD 4 had a better campaign in terms of raw emotion that really made me connect with the characters, and I was genuinely upset about their fate in the end. But other than that the multiplayer is fantastic and Spec Ops is a great co-op mode. And honestly, does it really matter if the graphics are pretty much the same from CoD 4? They're still good graphics. If you aren't a fan of the CoD franchise and don't have something meaningful to say other than this game isn't halo, then don't rate it.… Expand
  30. SamR
    Nov 13, 2009
    10
    Wow, the negative ratings given by certain people on this website are slightly suspect, with some spent on criticizing aspects of the game that aren't a part of the Xbox 360 version... But on to the game itself. The single player was fantastic! Short of course, but there was enough quality in it that it kept me entertained the whole time, unlike what some other single player Wow, the negative ratings given by certain people on this website are slightly suspect, with some spent on criticizing aspects of the game that aren't a part of the Xbox 360 version... But on to the game itself. The single player was fantastic! Short of course, but there was enough quality in it that it kept me entertained the whole time, unlike what some other single player campaigns provide. The Multiplayer is top notch, with tons of new gadgets, awards, and other things to unlock. It's very balanced and is much more accessible than the last. The new co-op mode provides an interesting array of challenges for you to complete with a friend, although I would have liked to see more than two people for that mode. Remember that these anger spewing children don't properly represent the amount of quality and polish that went into Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2. I highly recommend this game to everyone. Well, as long as you aren't set to hate it before you try it at least.… Expand
  31. Prince
    Nov 13, 2009
    6
    This is a good game, please don't get me wrong, but there are many areas where shortcuts were made and it shows. The campaign is just more of the same, while this isnt necessarily a bad thing (as COD MW campaign was superb) it is too short. Also, the game engine is feeling tired now, and the storytelling is awful. The multiplayer is OK, but to be honest I am disappointed that all the This is a good game, please don't get me wrong, but there are many areas where shortcuts were made and it shows. The campaign is just more of the same, while this isnt necessarily a bad thing (as COD MW campaign was superb) it is too short. Also, the game engine is feeling tired now, and the storytelling is awful. The multiplayer is OK, but to be honest I am disappointed that all the weapons are not available when playing local multiplayer. I for one do not sit for hours at a time trying to rank up - frankly it doesn't interest me. What does interest me though is having a laugh with my mates, and as the local multiplayer is limited because of rank it is not enjoyable. We now play COD4 and Halo again. I agree that online multiplayer should have a ranking system /perks as it gives the people who do want to rank up reason to keep playing and bettering themselves. However for local multiplayer would it have been so hard just to make it all available for use? It used to be the case that games were too casual and didn't cater for the serious players but now I feel it has gone too far the other way. Thus having finished the campaign that was far too short, and getting bored of a multiplayer that is far too limited for casual players - I have to say that I will now trade in MW2 rather disappointed overall that it simply isn't as good as I thought it would be.… Expand
  32. 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
  33. Trevor
    Nov 14, 2009
    10
    You're kidding me right? Are we even playing the same game? Yes, the short campaign mode definately warrants a score check on metacritic, but everything else about this game is above par. Intense story moments, great spec-ops mode, and (the only reason to pay the $60.00) a definitive multiplayer experience. Looking through previous posts, somebody gave it a 0 for poor sound... they You're kidding me right? Are we even playing the same game? Yes, the short campaign mode definately warrants a score check on metacritic, but everything else about this game is above par. Intense story moments, great spec-ops mode, and (the only reason to pay the $60.00) a definitive multiplayer experience. Looking through previous posts, somebody gave it a 0 for poor sound... they recorded all of the actual elements straight from the source, from the AC-130 to the weapons involved. Some people complained that the game didn't "add anything new to the gaming world," which is entirely true, but come on, every time you buy a box of pop tarts, do you want them to be a different flavor? And my personal favorite comment, "horrible, offensive, I never played the first one, heard the hype and gave it a go. For people whom aren't mindless idiots It may be good, the rest of us should avoid." So, let me get this straight... if I'm NOT a mindless idiot, it may be a good game?... works for me! You "mindless idiots" enjoy hating on a simply great game!… Expand
  34. MarkA.
    Nov 14, 2009
    10
    This game is amazing, it took everything that made Call of duty 4 epic, and then it made it more epic. Though the single player is short, it made up for in quality, never have i played a game and felt so more into it. The ice level was so cool with the climbing up the mountain and when looking over the edge while edging along I felt scared that I was ging to fall. A new mode brought into This game is amazing, it took everything that made Call of duty 4 epic, and then it made it more epic. Though the single player is short, it made up for in quality, never have i played a game and felt so more into it. The ice level was so cool with the climbing up the mountain and when looking over the edge while edging along I felt scared that I was ging to fall. A new mode brought into the Call of Duty franchise is called Special Ops, and you can do this with on or two people cooperatively to do side missions based in the single player story, which I Thought was a great idea, and me and my friend had so much fun collecting all of the stars to achieve in the missons. And of course, the Multiplayer is what is there to say. The guys at Infinity Ward realised that they had something special with the previous game, so they kept everything the same, but added in very cool new features, such as customizable killstreaks, death streaks, 3rd person view if you want, and awesome guns. This game will be played for a very long time, iI can tell you that.… Expand
  35. KarlW
    Nov 15, 2009
    10
    I was once addicted to WoW. Bought all the expansions, with excitement. I loved playing Halo multiplayer, I greatly enjoyed the next releases. But never before have I ever been so pumped by a game, for a game, than I am for Modern Warfare 2. I agree with some, the campaign is perhaps short, but the actual story, the plot, was much stronger. The action, more intense. Yes, you've I was once addicted to WoW. Bought all the expansions, with excitement. I loved playing Halo multiplayer, I greatly enjoyed the next releases. But never before have I ever been so pumped by a game, for a game, than I am for Modern Warfare 2. I agree with some, the campaign is perhaps short, but the actual story, the plot, was much stronger. The action, more intense. Yes, you've probably fired a minigun in a game before. For that matter, you've probably also fired a gun in a game before too. This is (keyword) MODERN warfare. Want new toys? Play a sci-fi future game. Want long heroic stories? Play an RPG, or read some Tolkein. This is all about adrenaline-pumping action set in a realistic world of today. And the multiplayer is incredible. Again, innovative it is not, but it stacks on the incredible success of the last game, with the great new killstreaks and wider secondary selection. Some will say as they will about over-powered players and campers, but teamwork still takes precedence, and in my experience the camping team is the losing team. Gripping single-player, addictive multiplayer, and I almost forgot those Spec Ops missions - Incredible fun for two players online or local. Nothing short of the best shooter I've played for the Xbox, maybe even more than that.… Expand
  36. matt
    Nov 22, 2009
    7
    Solid game. (except for your PC). COD 4.2 was a good game, however, If you've played the original call of duty for the PC you'll start finding that the sequels have less and less to offer. The campaign was fun but the story felt overwhelming at times. Sure it doesn't matter when you get to blow stuff up, but sometimes I felt like that the makers were trying too hard to awe Solid game. (except for your PC). COD 4.2 was a good game, however, If you've played the original call of duty for the PC you'll start finding that the sequels have less and less to offer. The campaign was fun but the story felt overwhelming at times. Sure it doesn't matter when you get to blow stuff up, but sometimes I felt like that the makers were trying too hard to awe the players. If you've ever played world in conflict then it feels like COD is trying to imitate the setting but does a much worse job. The multiplayer is fun as expected however I feel that the couple changes they have made isn't worth 60 dollars. If your new to first person shooters or you like games like halo this is worth a shot, but if your a "veteran" of the COD franchise I would still buy this game as long as you don't expect any breakthroughs.… Expand
  37. RowanF
    Nov 28, 2009
    9
    Buy this game. It's all I can say realy. Don't just buy it cos everyone else is, buy it cos it is actualy a good game. Seriously. The story and setting are magnificent and engaging, this is the first game who's story I've truly been inspired by since Halo: Combat Evolved. Finaly a present day shooter that finds something interesting, epic, and awsome to be based Buy this game. It's all I can say realy. Don't just buy it cos everyone else is, buy it cos it is actualy a good game. Seriously. The story and setting are magnificent and engaging, this is the first game who's story I've truly been inspired by since Halo: Combat Evolved. Finaly a present day shooter that finds something interesting, epic, and awsome to be based around. The gameplay is solid and again enjoyable, but it really doesn't add anything to the series, let alone the Gaming Industry as a whole. My only complaints about the campaign are that sometimes it can feel a bit too much like you're watching a film than playing a game, and sometimes the imaginative action packed stunts do border on being a little silly, and of course i'm going to have to raise the issue of the length of the campaign: It's not that short, but neither is it long, and given the development time, the funding they've got, and the hefty price tag, I'd say it definately should have been longer. Oh yeah, and one more thing, WTF happened to Veteran??? Why is it now so insultingly easy? I always look forward to the brutal challenge of Veteran on COD games, that awsome sense of victory when you do a level on Veteran, made even sweeter by 25G. But now it just feels like 'easy' G, i've managed to do numerous levels without dying, there were only two midly challenging ones in the game! Anyway, Multiplayer is more of the same as COD 4, but better, with more satisfying unlocks and great new features. Perhaps the best bit of the game for me, though, is spec ops, the main reason you should buy this game, not rent. Don't get me wrong, I love halo, but Firefight can go shove itself, cos Spec Ops is what I'm going to be playing with my freinds for the next few months : )… Expand
  38. RaphaelR
    Nov 29, 2009
    9
    Ok so first...this game is absolutely good and the whiners who gave it under a 6 need to play the game (exept if theyre pathetic wii owners who are just jealous that the game didn't make it to that console.),aight ? anywayz what can i say of this game...well i gotta say that i'm most satisfied with this game and that it beats the previous game on all fronts. Special Ops is a Ok so first...this game is absolutely good and the whiners who gave it under a 6 need to play the game (exept if theyre pathetic wii owners who are just jealous that the game didn't make it to that console.),aight ? anywayz what can i say of this game...well i gotta say that i'm most satisfied with this game and that it beats the previous game on all fronts. Special Ops is a welcome feature to the franchise wich i really enjoyed and hated on the same time, sometimes its to hard but that whats make the game great.so its just a good feature nothing more further we have the campaingn wich was just 1 of the epicest plots ever forged in the game industry, i enjoyed every second of it (yes even on veteran). and last the Multiplayer online mode:i don't think i need to explain how good it is but just in case for all the whiners here.... its as Epic as ever before and with the future features with playing maps of part 4 and 5 this game will just beat all the games of the franchise, and now my only negative comment on it i think the weapon arsenal were to easy to master and with some of the equiqement released playing trough online makes it a little hard for new gamers coming along with the veteran players in our gaming comunity,this game is worth a solid gold award. but well i'm more for WW2 but that dosent give me any reason to critisize this masterpiece any further.… Expand
  39. AaronM
    Dec 12, 2009
    10
    If there was a 9.5 score, I would have chosen it instead. This game is BY NO MEANS PERFECT. However, it is the most varied, and interesting multiplayer and singleplayer experience on the market this year, featuring real weapons systems that are currently in use or in development. Truly there is a polarizing factor to the multiplayer, people who don't give Call of Duty a chance to If there was a 9.5 score, I would have chosen it instead. This game is BY NO MEANS PERFECT. However, it is the most varied, and interesting multiplayer and singleplayer experience on the market this year, featuring real weapons systems that are currently in use or in development. Truly there is a polarizing factor to the multiplayer, people who don't give Call of Duty a chance to shine, will in fact be highly disappointed, but I think we all remember how excited we were when we got that first AC130. Sour Sallys will always be there to bring down the score of such an epic title, due to a negative online multiplayer experience or gripes over a "short" six hour campaign. What Infinity Ward brings to the table is amazing visuals, realism, and a very competitive multiplayer experience, and they bring it harder than anyone else.… Expand
  40. 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.
  41. 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
  42. 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
  43. NateC
    Dec 16, 2009
    6
    MW2 has some solid presentation going for it. It's a gorgeous game, has great sound design and some good voice acting. There are several cinematic and over the top moments strewn through the campaign that keep the "Wow" factor going strong. But in many ways these cinematic appeals are just a sheet of gloss that hides the atrocious story telling and generic plot. MW2 would have been MW2 has some solid presentation going for it. It's a gorgeous game, has great sound design and some good voice acting. There are several cinematic and over the top moments strewn through the campaign that keep the "Wow" factor going strong. But in many ways these cinematic appeals are just a sheet of gloss that hides the atrocious story telling and generic plot. MW2 would have been far more an impressive game a few years ago, but in today's world it tends to fall flat. The characters are two dimensional and lack any character voice. it's impossible to care for any of them at all, as even the returning protagonists lack any motivation and have not been fleshed out one bit. The controls feel dated in today's world of squad commands and cover mechanics, both of which would ahve been very welcome. And several of these "Wow" moments become exposed as very simple quick time events when put under a microscope. The cherry on top is the 5 hour length of the primary campaign. Not all people like or have the means to play multiplayer, so they are being sold a 5 hour game for $60. A game that cannot stand on its single player campaign doesn't have legs. All in all, not worth the price of admission.… Expand
  44. 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.
  45. ZacT
    Dec 23, 2009
    7
    The Single player and spec ops are brilliant. The Music, sound, gamplay to the above are awesome. Then it comes to the multiplayer experience. Im and Aussie and what I hate so much about it is that I cant see why you cant be placed in a match with good connection. Its bad enough that it takes ages to get into a match, but no, it just puts you in a game located in the other side of the The Single player and spec ops are brilliant. The Music, sound, gamplay to the above are awesome. Then it comes to the multiplayer experience. Im and Aussie and what I hate so much about it is that I cant see why you cant be placed in a match with good connection. Its bad enough that it takes ages to get into a match, but no, it just puts you in a game located in the other side of the world where you get terrible lag and only one bar. However once you get into a game with decent connection (a.k.a in a game with other Aussies), the experience is very rewarding. But I have only gotten into an Aussie match once. Why dont they have that connection filter like World at War did, even COD4 put you in decent connections. I praise Treyarch for considering us Aussies and others like us. Infinitiy Ward, add a connection filter. Then this game will deserve a 10.… Expand
  46. JimB
    Dec 27, 2009
    9
    GREAT GAME, but when you look at someone running in multiplayer it looks they are going 20mph with all their gear.
  47. TechnoS
    Dec 27, 2009
    5
    Despite all the great graphics, over the top action and good framerates, COD: MW2 failed to deliver for me. I can only describe the multiplayer experience as frustrating and, for me, it all comes down to random spawn points (and MW2 is not the only guilty game on that account). I won't say much, except that I find myself yearning for Counterstrike, where teamwork and good tactics led Despite all the great graphics, over the top action and good framerates, COD: MW2 failed to deliver for me. I can only describe the multiplayer experience as frustrating and, for me, it all comes down to random spawn points (and MW2 is not the only guilty game on that account). I won't say much, except that I find myself yearning for Counterstrike, where teamwork and good tactics led to a sense of accomplishment. The fact that there are many different game modes but not a single one with fixed spawn points pretty much ruins it for me. It may seem harsh to put a 5 for only this, but to me it has meant facing only frustration with the game's multiplayer mode and I will be selling my copy soon. Oh, and yelling and nagging kids really ruin the in-game chat (sorry to all the kids who do play seriously and respectfully, but there are just too many annoying ones out there). It never used to be that bad, but I guess with headsets being more and more available, this was inevitable.… Expand
  48. MartinMcFly
    Dec 29, 2009
    7
    MWF 2 holds the title for the most hype, and ultimatley it can't deliver. There are frequent glitches and texture pops as well as decidedly blocky moments. The realism just isn't there and the mutliplayer is well... a bit boring. Sure the game is fun. The enemies die when you shoot them, it's hard but not too hard, there are plenty of great weapons and amazing campaign MWF 2 holds the title for the most hype, and ultimatley it can't deliver. There are frequent glitches and texture pops as well as decidedly blocky moments. The realism just isn't there and the mutliplayer is well... a bit boring. Sure the game is fun. The enemies die when you shoot them, it's hard but not too hard, there are plenty of great weapons and amazing campaign moments, but it has all been done before.… Expand
  49. zhengy
    Dec 30, 2009
    10
    This game improves on it grahpic and visuals.New Gameplay tactic and a rewarding multiplayer.
  50. 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.
  51. TimB.
    Dec 3, 2009
    6
    The problem with the ratings of this game is that people think it deserves something great just because the Campaign was so great. Note to players: Multiplayer was addicting in the first game, If they do the same thing for the next one its not going to make it Less addicting. It's kind of hard to mess up a winning formula.. ...... Except to make it the same, with a little more The problem with the ratings of this game is that people think it deserves something great just because the Campaign was so great. Note to players: Multiplayer was addicting in the first game, If they do the same thing for the next one its not going to make it Less addicting. It's kind of hard to mess up a winning formula.. ...... Except to make it the same, with a little more polish. This game sucks. Is not worth full price at all. Thank god I didn't buy it and only played it at friends house.. it's worth ~30. Thanks alot activision.… Expand
  52. chrisn
    Dec 31, 2009
    7
    great game in my opinion as was modern warfare however the story is way too short and not exactly realistic. secondly the multiplayer although great it is the same as previous games cod needs to come out with a new style of online game mode such as in bad company the gold rush.
  53. 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
  54. 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
  55. BrendanH
    Dec 3, 2009
    10
    For all the people who complain that the campaign is too short, you're missing the point. CODMW2 was not made for people who are planning on playing single player all the time. Yes, I know that this game has it's faults, but don't all games do.
  56. nicholasn
    Dec 4, 2009
    9
    This was a great game with only one small problem, the continuing campaign was great except that the whole get back capn price and get all better didnt make sense...ummmm he kinda died in the the first game and if he didnt why would he be in the jail of a russian government...he did save the US from a nuke! also it was way to short
  57. BenjaminK
    Dec 9, 2009
    5
    Well o know COD games have never been realistic and never really Focused that much on multiplayer in the later sequels but this game was pretty bad. I'm not going to get in the PC's problems. so lets just dive in. The single player makes little sense and there are numerous plot holes. The storyline borders on ridiculous at times. Many of the weapons they show don't exist Well o know COD games have never been realistic and never really Focused that much on multiplayer in the later sequels but this game was pretty bad. I'm not going to get in the PC's problems. so lets just dive in. The single player makes little sense and there are numerous plot holes. The storyline borders on ridiculous at times. Many of the weapons they show don't exist (WTH is Intervention?) and many of the so called good and high tech weapons are some of the weakest in the game. In multiplayer its the same story. Some weapons are Extremely overpowered such as the M16 and the riot sheild that is easily flanked but totally impregnable from the front with any weapon. explosives or otherwise. Finnally they have the AK-47 as the strongest assault rifle in the game (?). But the maps are okay. the addition of launchers were a nice touch and having a literal air battle going on above you was a nice touch. Overall i think the critics rushed into this game or were payed off especially on the PC end. If they stayed playing it for another week they would have saw its problems.… Expand
  58. JaredS
    Dec 9, 2009
    10
    Awesome game. Don't pay attention to the morons who score this below a 5. There is nothing about this game that deserves that harsh of a score. Just a bunch of whiney morons who suck at the game, like this guy below me. They don't understand how rating systems are supposed to work.
  59. 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
  60. EazayC
    Nov 11, 2009
    10
    I rate 10 for overall experience. The campaign alone, though action-packed and filled with many memorable moments, but you could honestly finish it in 4 and a half hours on the recruit or regular difficulty settings, and around 6 hours on hardened and veteran. The story isn't that well told, good but not great, and does not live up to the standard in CoD games. The main attraction I rate 10 for overall experience. The campaign alone, though action-packed and filled with many memorable moments, but you could honestly finish it in 4 and a half hours on the recruit or regular difficulty settings, and around 6 hours on hardened and veteran. The story isn't that well told, good but not great, and does not live up to the standard in CoD games. The main attraction here is the sublime MP, and MW 2 improves on its predecessors in every way possible: Better maps, perks(no more martydom,luckily!), guns, and a more even experience overall. There is also a Spec-Ops mode, which you can do alone or in Co-Op with a friend. This is a set of challenges given to you, and you have to try and get all 69 stars in these challenges. This is a very good idea, brilliantly executed, with many missions having specific tasks for each player. For example there is a mission in it when you have to man an AC-130 machine gun on a helicopter, and control the speed of it, while your co-op partner has to hold off waves of enemies on ground until you arrive. Overall, the game is a brilliant package, and well worth the money, even if it has a slightly higher price tag than other games. I would not reccommend it to someone who focuses on the campaign when buying games, it is just far too short (but very sweet!). A definite contender for GoTY 2009. And do NOT listen to PC players who are dissapointed about the lack of dedicated servers and start whining about the game… Expand
  61. WesB
    Nov 11, 2009
    10
    This game was absolutely amazing. I must admit that the campain was short but it was amazing. I've played a lot of compains, and this one was by far my favourite. It had so many points that made me go "OMG WHAT JUST HAPPENED!?" that I just couldn't get to sleep. The new Spec-Ops is extremely fun and I can't wait to finish it with a friend this weekend. Single player is This game was absolutely amazing. I must admit that the campain was short but it was amazing. I've played a lot of compains, and this one was by far my favourite. It had so many points that made me go "OMG WHAT JUST HAPPENED!?" that I just couldn't get to sleep. The new Spec-Ops is extremely fun and I can't wait to finish it with a friend this weekend. Single player is overall short, but it's extremely fun and for me it is replayable. But the majority of people buying this will be for multiplayer, so that's ok. Multiplayer is extremely fun. There are a ton of new weapons, the maps are nicer looking and more balanced and fun. The new equipment, weapon attachments, perks and killstreaks definitely made this game twice as fun as the original CoD4. I can see myself getting to level 70 and enjoying it the entire way through. People are complaining about the lack of dedicated servers for the PC but I think that's stupid. The current form is better in my opinion. I have yet to lag in any of my games, and I can still play with my friends if I choose. What is there to hate so much about? Anyways i'm not rating 10 just to try and up the overall rating, this game is worth a 10 and i'm happy that I spent every cent on this game. I hate the people downrating to try to bring the overall down, and it seems the people who hate this game the most are the halo players... ha.… Expand
  62. LouisB
    Nov 12, 2009
    7
    Sure there have been many tweakes to the gameplay but overall this just feels like Call of Duty 4 remixed. Firstly the campaign is short but it's not the length that lets it down, it's the mish-mash of missions that don't seem to tie into each other very well that ruins any sense of immersion. The action is non stop but not at any point is there dramatic build up to any of Sure there have been many tweakes to the gameplay but overall this just feels like Call of Duty 4 remixed. Firstly the campaign is short but it's not the length that lets it down, it's the mish-mash of missions that don't seem to tie into each other very well that ruins any sense of immersion. The action is non stop but not at any point is there dramatic build up to any of the multitude of set piece moments. Overall the main campaign feels like it's trying to hard to be a new years celebration movie but just feels like a cheap fireworks display. Secondly the graphics. It has to be said that (despite the many reviews that rave about the visuals) they are a disappointment, particularly if you are a ps3 owner and have player either Killzone 2 or Uncharted 2. This not to say they are bad but there isn't much of an improvement from COD4 apart from the odd lighting effect, so don't expect to be blown away like with COD4. Multiplayer is obviously the main draw card of this title and it shows. All the new features, perks, etc are a welcome improvement. Map design is top notch and the overall sense of mayhem is is awesome. Anyone who was hoping for more from the original won't be disappointed. Overall this is a solid multiplayer title that's not offering a lot else. This isn't a bad thing if that's what you like but when you consider many of the top titles released recently are delivering both a solid campaign and an excellent multiplayer (Uncharted 2) you can't help but question the hefty price tag.… Expand
  63. CoreyS
    Nov 12, 2009
    9
    This game's campaign was by far the best in the Call of Duty franchise. The single player alone makes this worthy of a purchase, but if multiplayer is more of your taste than an thrill ride of singleplayer this game doesn't let you down. The multiplayer has definitely been revamped since Modern Warfare 1 and has twice the fun to boot. Tons of new maps and weapons and attachments This game's campaign was by far the best in the Call of Duty franchise. The single player alone makes this worthy of a purchase, but if multiplayer is more of your taste than an thrill ride of singleplayer this game doesn't let you down. The multiplayer has definitely been revamped since Modern Warfare 1 and has twice the fun to boot. Tons of new maps and weapons and attachments the list can go on forever. With this game selling around 4.5 million copies on launch day you shouldn't have a problem finding someone to play with. The Spec Ops mode is a nice piece too. You and a friend (2-player only) can tackle some of the most difficult missions. This mode is completely separate from the singleplayer campaign and feels more like an Arcade game than anything else. Overall it does have some minor flaws, like the allied A.I. being a bit dull at times and not shooting enemies directly in front of them, while 10 feet away. The difficulty on Veteran I won't complain about, it's made to be tough and it lived up to that. All in all this game is amazing.… Expand
  64. AustinF
    Nov 22, 2009
    10
    Ok look, I highly doubt anyone is going to decide on buying this game based on reviews, espessially of no one important, but Im so sick of these people voting it down, It is an amazing game, very very good, the people voting it down are just stupid and wrong, for example The guy named Jeff D., he gave it a 0 one of his reasons is short campaign, a very valid argument, except he said he Ok look, I highly doubt anyone is going to decide on buying this game based on reviews, espessially of no one important, but Im so sick of these people voting it down, It is an amazing game, very very good, the people voting it down are just stupid and wrong, for example The guy named Jeff D., he gave it a 0 one of his reasons is short campaign, a very valid argument, except he said he likes Halo, I'd like to point out that Halo ODST had an even shorter campaign, this person obviously doesnt know what he is talking about, For Shane F. his main argument for giving it an undeserved 3 is its the same, it really isnt. I played the first and was blown away from the distinct differences from the two, It is a major improvement with major differences that will keep the multiplayer fun to play for a long time. I mostly agree with Alex M. except when he says there was not so many OMG moments, I think there is PLENTY, the campaign blew me away too, where i agree with him most is where he pointed out the part about gamers without online, you should just rent the game if you do not have online, the campaign is great, but yes its short and you will feel alittle bummed if you buy a $60 game for only 5-8 hours of play. I hope this review convinces someone to purchase this outstanding game.… Expand
  65. JakeS
    Nov 27, 2009
    10
    First of all, yes Modern Warfare 2 has its flaws. However, they are all mostly just cosmetic and don't detract from the game itself. One of the biggest complains seems to be that the campaign is too short, but I personally thought it wasn't quite so short and it's one of the most innovative campaigns I have ever experienced in my life. The wide spect of roles and positions First of all, yes Modern Warfare 2 has its flaws. However, they are all mostly just cosmetic and don't detract from the game itself. One of the biggest complains seems to be that the campaign is too short, but I personally thought it wasn't quite so short and it's one of the most innovative campaigns I have ever experienced in my life. The wide spect of roles and positions they put you in in that space of time is astounding and kept me interested, much unlike Call of Duty: World at War was just another bland WWII campaign experience. You could say that the game lost some of its previous luster, but I think the fact that it brought the battle closer to home was very unprecedented in this manner. Also, the multiplayer has added a load of new guns, attachments, and has completely reformulated the perks, changing it almost completely. The first few hours I played this game I was sick, tired, and ready to take it back, but if you give it another chance you will be hooked and realize that infinity ward still put their heart and soul into it, beneath all of the glamour that publisher Activision was lavishing on it. (And, to all of the PC spammers on here giving this game a 0 just because they didn't cater to your every need, keep it in your PC area, this is giving the 360 game a bad name just because you are whiners and want to throw your problems on us. We have dealt with 9v9, player hosting, and lack of mods since creation, and we have an incredible amount of fun nonetheless.)… Expand
  66. RaymondS.
    Nov 29, 2009
    10
    the campaign is both fun and well-written, the spec ops is original and challenging, the online is new and creative by being able to upgrade everything, perks, weapons and killstreaks
  67. MartinS.
    Nov 29, 2009
    10
    This is the best call of duty game of ALL TIME! The campaign is EPIC, multiplayer is addicting, spec-ops is outstanding! This is game of the year right here!
  68. 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
  69. 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
  70. TheIconGuy
    Dec 12, 2009
    9
    The single-player campaign might not engage you enough to want to play through the entire game multiple times, but multiplayer and Spec Ops will both keep you busy until next year when Treyarch releases their next Call Of Duty game.
  71. HunterG
    Dec 15, 2009
    8
    Modern Warfare 2 is a fun game. The extensive single player campaign takes a while to finish, even when played on the normal difficulty. When you play it on the hardened or veteran difficulties, it lasts for even longer. The best thing about the campaign is the plot, however. Every second of playing the campaign I felt an intensity that I have never felt while playing a video game. Add in Modern Warfare 2 is a fun game. The extensive single player campaign takes a while to finish, even when played on the normal difficulty. When you play it on the hardened or veteran difficulties, it lasts for even longer. The best thing about the campaign is the plot, however. Every second of playing the campaign I felt an intensity that I have never felt while playing a video game. Add in a lot of surprising plot twists and a stunning ending, and you have a storyline that cannot be beat. However, most of the campaign is repetitive and boring. When played on normal, it is much too easy, but crank it up any higher and it becomes almost impossible to beat. In my opinion, there is simply nothing fun about dying over and over again, and the boring objectives. (save for the last act) The only reason I played the campaign was because of Infinity Ward's amazing storytelling. As much as everyone hypes over Spec Ops, I never really liked it. All Infinity Ward did was take the repetitiveness of the campaign but take out the amazing plot. I barely ever play special ops. The multiplayer, as with ever other Call of Duty game, is the real prize. Many people have said that horrible level 70's dominate over skilled level 1's simply because of the weapons and perks. However, this IS NOT TRUE. The only problem I have with the multiplayer is the campers. There are many, many more here than in any other Call of Duty games. But, if you play objective-based games, you won't face this problem.… Expand
  72. Robert
    Dec 15, 2009
    9
    I played Call of Duty 4 and Call of Duty 5. I hate it when people think they should be great at this game because they are good at some other game. Then they bitch about not being able to do well. I don't glitch and I hate people that do but that shouldn't have anything to do with the game. They actually just released a patch fixing some glitches and the game has only been out I played Call of Duty 4 and Call of Duty 5. I hate it when people think they should be great at this game because they are good at some other game. Then they bitch about not being able to do well. I don't glitch and I hate people that do but that shouldn't have anything to do with the game. They actually just released a patch fixing some glitches and the game has only been out for about a month. As for the multiplayer not being that great i disagree. What should the multiplayer be like? You want something like gears of war play third person team tactical. If you want better guns earn them the level 70s did and once you prestige you lose them. I like how they added titles and emblems to the game. It allows you to show off your accomplishments and look the way you want. The tactical nuke is an interesting addition but there are people who "nuke boost" and it makes the game not so fun. The graphics are great but they could improve the match making so it does not kick you when your party joins a game or lobby. I lost track of how many games I had to go back to get someone or was left behind.The ability to select your killstreak is a nice addition. I wish the game had a nazi zombie type mode. Well maybe they can add it as an add on or something. Overall I like this game the best out of all my games including GoW2 and Halo 3.… Expand
  73. JBell
    Dec 15, 2009
    9
    Modern Warfare 2 is a hate it or love it game; there is no middle ground. Some gamers complain about the presentation of the game, but the game overall has amazing visuals. Sure, I'll admit that the environments could have used a bit more colour, the foliage look average, and the underwater graphics in "The Only Easy Day... Was Yesterday" are below-average. However, I feel that the Modern Warfare 2 is a hate it or love it game; there is no middle ground. Some gamers complain about the presentation of the game, but the game overall has amazing visuals. Sure, I'll admit that the environments could have used a bit more colour, the foliage look average, and the underwater graphics in "The Only Easy Day... Was Yesterday" are below-average. However, I feel that the developers put in a lot of effort on the character models and the weapon details. Plus, the explosions look amazing. The single player component plays distinctively different on different levels; some levels are set in sun-drenched open landscapes, some during snowstorms in the sub-Artic, some during the middle of the night. Each different level requires a different strategy because of the weather patterns, and it all looks stunningly detailed. The single-player part of the game is definitely short-lived, but is full of memorable moments and is generally a hell of a lot of fun to play. As I stated above, each level is memorable in its own way and requires a different strategy, making the campaign interesting and diverse. There is no doubt that it is dreadfully short, but it's one wild ride which can be fun to replay on a harder difficulty setting. Spec Ops is also a lot of fun to play, especially in cooperative play. It can get pretty dull to play through unless you have a friend to play with, but there is a diverse selection of Spec Ops missions, most of which are just fun to play. The multiplayer component of Modern Warfare 2 is flawed perfection. It is usually fun to play, but it is also plagued with quite a few issues. If you're new to CoD and you play online, you're basically going to get raped for the first fifty matches that you play. The progression system is devastating for when low-ranking players are pitted against high-rankers, as you unlock better weaponry and equipment as you level up. This is obviously a problem, and some of the best guns in the game aren't available until you reach the higher levels. The Model 1887 is just plain ridiculous when dual-weld; you have a 10% chance of living through an encounter with a player who has this weapon equipped. There are plenty of other weapons, such as the AK-47, the M14 EBR, the Desert Eagle and the Javelin, which are only available to high ranking players and are ridiculously over-powered. Another issue in multiplayer is that most of the maps are much to big, considering most of the game modes support up to 6 vs 6 matches. Thus, camping, while requiring minimal skill, is the best way to rack up kills in matches, which defeats the purpose of the game being a first-person shooter. Also, the respawn system is completely out of whack, as you commonly spawn near enemies leaving you not much chance to brace yourself for combat. Although you may feel deterred from the multiplayer part of the game, it is a big chunk of the game overall and is generally fun to play. So long as you don't get into laggy servers. Modern Warfare 2 is pretty good, but the major flaw is that the multiplayer is ridiculously unfair for "noobs" who have had little experience in the CoD franchise. Killstreak rewards, excluding the Tactical Nuke, are awesome and the Accolades system is well thought out. The campaign is short but fun and Spec Ops has a lot of replay value. Overally, Modern Warfare 2 is amazing but not exactly perfect.… Expand
  74. AndrewH
    Dec 18, 2009
    10
    Man, some people have to lay off the drugs... And some people have to realize a great game when they play one. MW2 is a fantastic sequel to COD 4. The single player is alright, and the spec ops is fun with a friend. But people stay for the amazing multiplayer that will have you playing for months and probably years. And on top of that, the graphics are amazing. What more can you ask for? Man, some people have to lay off the drugs... And some people have to realize a great game when they play one. MW2 is a fantastic sequel to COD 4. The single player is alright, and the spec ops is fun with a friend. But people stay for the amazing multiplayer that will have you playing for months and probably years. And on top of that, the graphics are amazing. What more can you ask for? This game is a perfect 10.… Expand
  75. brady
    Dec 27, 2009
    10
    im a big fan of cod but cod 6 is class its beter than cod 2,3,4 and 5.i go on it on the xbox 360 on xbox live if u whant 2 add me just vote it and my xbox live name is frusedborobrad
  76. AlexanderS
    Dec 29, 2009
    9
    Granted, the game is short if you are a single player gamer. Despite how short it is, the story feels rather epic, some say they added a few too many "wow" moments, but I would have to disagree. The learning curve is intense, as the last couple missions are brutal. On the multiplayer aspect though, it shines even brighter. Some people complain about boosters, but those can be ignored for Granted, the game is short if you are a single player gamer. Despite how short it is, the story feels rather epic, some say they added a few too many "wow" moments, but I would have to disagree. The learning curve is intense, as the last couple missions are brutal. On the multiplayer aspect though, it shines even brighter. Some people complain about boosters, but those can be ignored for the most part, as they do not really affect anyone else. The maps are (generally) amazing and varied, and the guns are mostly balanced with the exception to the Knife and the Model 1887s. For a multiplayer gamer, this is a must buy.… Expand
  77. DME
    Jun 9, 2011
    8
    It's shocking to see so many unfair, negative reviews. Most people seem to base their reviews only on the online multiplayer. While important, it isn't everything. Modern Warfare 2 delivered a pretty good campaign. It's a bit linear and the story is full of holes, but the action is non-stop and there is plenty of variety. The Special Ops mode is the sweetest part of the whole package.It's shocking to see so many unfair, negative reviews. Most people seem to base their reviews only on the online multiplayer. While important, it isn't everything. Modern Warfare 2 delivered a pretty good campaign. It's a bit linear and the story is full of holes, but the action is non-stop and there is plenty of variety. The Special Ops mode is the sweetest part of the whole package. While a bit dull by yourself, it's great fun with a friend or sibling. Then there's the online multiplayer. Everything you love about Call fo Duty is there: Prestiging, upgrades, attatchments, killstreaks, etc... But for some reason I hated MW2 multiplayer. The maps are designed decently well and graphics are very nice, but it's the balance and overall gameplay that seriously sunk my opinion towards it. So, the campaign gets 8/10. Special Ops gets a 9/10. Multiplayer gets a 6/10.… Expand
  78. DeVr33z
    Nov 26, 2010
    8
    Modern Warfare 2 is a very well-made game, but it's only as fun as the people you play with. Also, even though Spec Ops is fun for a little while, the campaign has its fair share of weak moments, and the story frequently doesn't make sense. Black Ops is probably better.
  79. 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
  80. 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
  81. 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.
  82. dupplawt
    Apr 20, 2011
    6
    Modern Warfare 2 is a puzzling game. On the one hand, it has refreshing locations and a great multiplayer and co-op option. On the other hand, the campaign was hilariously ridiculous and the DLC support was extortionate. I had fun with MW2 multiplayer, the gun selection is fantastic and the new killstreaks are great, but it's nice to get away from them now and again in the Barebones lobby.Modern Warfare 2 is a puzzling game. On the one hand, it has refreshing locations and a great multiplayer and co-op option. On the other hand, the campaign was hilariously ridiculous and the DLC support was extortionate. I had fun with MW2 multiplayer, the gun selection is fantastic and the new killstreaks are great, but it's nice to get away from them now and again in the Barebones lobby. Spec-Ops is a nice little addition, but it's essentially just short missions to complete with one friend and in my opinion doesn't match the fun I got out of zombies on World at War. It is fun to use weapons being used in modern combat today, and the frenetic nature of the multiplayer is addictive, but sometimes frustrating. The campaign is borderline insane, in plot, but it is fun. It's on the short side and quite easy to beat even on Veteran, but some of the set-pieces are very memorable. My score is positive overall, 3/5, and I would recommend anyone who hasn't had a go yet pick it up cheap and dive in.… Expand
  83. 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.
  84. TamantaX
    Sep 16, 2010
    9
    A whole lot of content to be seen here, from the guns and the perks this game has great gameplay plus great lasting appeal. I also like it cause my dad plays it sometimes and I love watching him get his butt kicked online.
  85. Spartan-279
    Sep 16, 2010
    7
    good, but all to much VERY noob friendly. Very fun, nice guns and perks, good graphics. love it. only problem is that there are a lot of campers and noobtubes, not to forget boosters
  86. 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
  87. Banditron
    Sep 17, 2010
    5
    More like Call of Duty 1.5 . The campaign was such a let down compared to MW1 (wich was friggin awesome), and the multiplayer seems exactly the same. I'm looking for positives or innovations, and just not seeing them.
  88. SchroederRock
    Dec 27, 2013
    9
    MW2 continues the great story telling experience of CoD4, but greatly expands the multiplayer landscape, making Modern Warfare 2 perhaps the best FPS experience of its time. Levels are a bit bigger, more playlists are available, tons of cool killstreaks are available and the level designs are some of the best & most interesting to launch with a game. It's hard to imagine how good thisMW2 continues the great story telling experience of CoD4, but greatly expands the multiplayer landscape, making Modern Warfare 2 perhaps the best FPS experience of its time. Levels are a bit bigger, more playlists are available, tons of cool killstreaks are available and the level designs are some of the best & most interesting to launch with a game. It's hard to imagine how good this game would be if it were "perfect", but the good news is it doesn't have to be. I could warrant a "10" on this game if it carried dedicated servers and could push the graphics envelope a bit more, but in the end these would only push the experience a bit further. Sans dedicated servers, this game plays well online almost all of the time, and I can only think of Halo 2 when considering a game I've put this much online time in, ever. Like CoD4, MW2 is a must-play for fans of the series and fans of the FPS genre as a whole.… Expand
  89. 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
  90. AMHUSSAIN10
    Nov 26, 2010
    10
    It's hard to see the majority of people wanting to play any other multiplayer shooter until the next Cod is released, such is the quality of what's on offer here...Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 takes everything that was great about CoD4 and takes it up to the next level. this game has been hyped many people want to buy and play the game you can play many modes in this game there are manyIt's hard to see the majority of people wanting to play any other multiplayer shooter until the next Cod is released, such is the quality of what's on offer here...Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 takes everything that was great about CoD4 and takes it up to the next level. this game has been hyped many people want to buy and play the game you can play many modes in this game there are many in people in the world who like to play call of duty most people play online with other people from around the world there are so many weapons you can unlock as you complete the levels and do all the missions on the game. Then there are people who donâ… Expand
  91. percy972
    Mar 10, 2011
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I think its a great bad-ass game that, even though it doesn't really innovate the series or the genre, but it is driven by a great and polemic, worst-case scenario plot. It also has a very short campaign and at times you get bored just shooting at Russians and makes you wonder what the level designers were doing or if they were doing anything at all. But I almost didn't notice because the writers did such a good job I just wanted to know what was gonna happen next. The controls are easy-flowing, the action is great, and the characters are awesome which is why I think this game is at the same level of the first game.… Expand
  92. 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
  93. Hot_Carl
    Oct 23, 2010
    8
    Call of duty games should really be reviewed in two parts, online and singleplayer. The online mutiplayer is one of the smoothest and most addictive online experiences out there. On the other hand the single player is a big load of balls, it lacks any of the class from the previous outing and for me had absolutely no replay value at all. If it weren't for the excellent multiplayer thisCall of duty games should really be reviewed in two parts, online and singleplayer. The online mutiplayer is one of the smoothest and most addictive online experiences out there. On the other hand the single player is a big load of balls, it lacks any of the class from the previous outing and for me had absolutely no replay value at all. If it weren't for the excellent multiplayer this game would have been long forgotten about.… Expand
  94. CorsairReviews
    Oct 29, 2010
    8
    The game offers a compelling yet perplexing campaign and a multiplayer bound to draw in the millions with ease. With all this said, we don't think this game's online will have the same awesome power which Modern Warfare brought to the the FPS category nor does it have the war desperation, cruelty and horror which World at War's campaign brought to the category. All in all a very solidThe game offers a compelling yet perplexing campaign and a multiplayer bound to draw in the millions with ease. With all this said, we don't think this game's online will have the same awesome power which Modern Warfare brought to the the FPS category nor does it have the war desperation, cruelty and horror which World at War's campaign brought to the category. All in all a very solid performing game, however we don't feel it was quite up to the high quality Infinity Ward standards we had come to expect after the release of both Call of Duty 2 and Modern warfare.… Expand
  95. 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
  96. claychastain
    Nov 25, 2010
    7
    I played the first game in the series so much that all I did was drool and dream about the features the MW2 would have. In theory, all the new additions to customization and killstreaks would make this the best multiplayer shooter ever. However, after spending so much time with this game, I felt like the experience had been cheapened by diluting the game with a million different featuresI played the first game in the series so much that all I did was drool and dream about the features the MW2 would have. In theory, all the new additions to customization and killstreaks would make this the best multiplayer shooter ever. However, after spending so much time with this game, I felt like the experience had been cheapened by diluting the game with a million different features that took away from the skill and enjoyment of the first. I liked the Spec Ops feature to play with friends, though I rarely used it. The single player had some awesome set pieces, but the game only lasted around 4 hours and the plot made no sense. But the multiplayer is still enjoyable... it just has too much going on for its own good and I don't feel like it's a strong game because of that.… Expand
  97. cfh
    Jun 28, 2012
    9
    I don't know why people are so down on this game. I mean, when the Call of Duty series first got popular when MW2 came out. I think it's a great game. Really good Campaign that was very suspenseful. The Spec Op Mission are great to, they have modified missions from the Campaign and other missions, too. Xbox Live is fun, with a variety of guns, maps, killstreaks, and modes. At the end ofI don't know why people are so down on this game. I mean, when the Call of Duty series first got popular when MW2 came out. I think it's a great game. Really good Campaign that was very suspenseful. The Spec Op Mission are great to, they have modified missions from the Campaign and other missions, too. Xbox Live is fun, with a variety of guns, maps, killstreaks, and modes. At the end of the Campaign they have a level called 'Museum' where there are a bunch of guns in glass cases and key levels from the campaign on display. If you push the button on the desk that says 'do not press' the figures will come alive and kill you. You can play co-op on Spec Ops and split screen where you kill the other person you are playing with. The co-op is not as good as Black Ops or MW3 but it is still fun. If you are thinking of buying MW3 and don't have MW2; buy MW2 first so you kind of know the storyline. I just think MW2 is a great game.… Expand
  98. GameInterpretor
    Oct 31, 2013
    5
    Everything about it sucks pretty badly, but I wish I could submit a review for the story separate from the multiplayer because under the globs of crap that is this game is a grade A action story that Michael Bay would be upset over not getting to adapt to film. Sadly the multiplayer is unbearable and filled with cheap ten year olds that would rather stay at home and develop either someEverything about it sucks pretty badly, but I wish I could submit a review for the story separate from the multiplayer because under the globs of crap that is this game is a grade A action story that Michael Bay would be upset over not getting to adapt to film. Sadly the multiplayer is unbearable and filled with cheap ten year olds that would rather stay at home and develop either some form of dementia from sitting too close to the television or autism; I can't tell which.

    5 out of 10    … Expand
  99. SinisterVortex
    Mar 14, 2011
    9
    MW2 is the most realistic and intense shooter I have ever played, more so even than the first game. The story takes place just a year or so after the first game's ending. The fury that consumed Russia has been restarted by a new insurgent, and as the game unfolds his terrible plan comes to fruition. If you haven't played the game yet then I won't spoil it for you, but I can tell you thatMW2 is the most realistic and intense shooter I have ever played, more so even than the first game. The story takes place just a year or so after the first game's ending. The fury that consumed Russia has been restarted by a new insurgent, and as the game unfolds his terrible plan comes to fruition. If you haven't played the game yet then I won't spoil it for you, but I can tell you that much of the setting is far more domestic then in the first game. Prepare for shock and awe as what you never thought could ever happen happens. The gameplay is virtually unchanged from that of the first game. There are some new abilities like tactical missiles, but that's about it. Multiplayer is much the same in this regard. There are some new variants and playlists, but not much that different to speak of. Overall, I really enjoyed this game, and definitely recommend it to all shooter gamers.… Expand
  100. TheChaser1985
    Jun 4, 2012
    8
    Wow, 131 Battlefield fan boys. The single player was pretty awesome. I great sequel to the first. Not as long as I wanted it, but it was very good and fun to play. They got rid of infinite spawning enemies. Spec Ops was pretty fun too. I had a blast playing with my friends, trying to beat the levels. Multiplayer, despite having many unbalancing things, was excellent. The gameplay and feelWow, 131 Battlefield fan boys. The single player was pretty awesome. I great sequel to the first. Not as long as I wanted it, but it was very good and fun to play. They got rid of infinite spawning enemies. Spec Ops was pretty fun too. I had a blast playing with my friends, trying to beat the levels. Multiplayer, despite having many unbalancing things, was excellent. The gameplay and feel of the controls were the best I've ever seen in a shooter. Pretty good graphics too. There are some pretty dumb perks that unbalance the game, as well as some killstreaks. A big problem is the stacking killstreaks. Thankfully they gave us a Barebones playlist, which strip killstreaks. Overall, this game was great, despite the annoying stuff.… Expand
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 »