Comments on: MW2: To Get Or Not? http://jasdemi.com/games/fps/mw2-to-get-or-not/ Tue, 07 Sep 2010 10:29:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Droniac http://jasdemi.com/games/fps/mw2-to-get-or-not/comment-page-1/#comment-885 Droniac Sun, 22 Nov 2009 20:00:24 +0000 http://jasdemi.com/?p=1156#comment-885 Okay, so I just finished playing through the singleplayer campaign (on Veteran ofcourse). It definitely doesn't make a whole lot of sense and it's way out there. Heck, even the (flimsy) scenario in H.A.W.X. is practically hyper-realistic in comparison. But the missions are loads better than those in MW1. A lot of different and spectacular scenarios and not nearly as many terrible infinite spawns. The levels seem a bit more open and the graphical quality is markedly better than in MW1. This is due to textures that aren't total suck, but only marginal suck. Essentially, anyone complaining about textures in Dragon Age will still do the same here, but it's not atrocious like it was in MW1. Definitely not worth it for $60, but if you're in it for an actionpacked thrillride then you might want to get it when it's on sale for $30 or something. Still only took me 6 hours to get through it (on Veteran) with a fair amount of reloads... so not exactly great bang for your buck. Definitely not worth it over a genuine GOTY contestant like Dragon Age, or even a good co-op game like Borderlands or Left 4 Dead 2. Okay, so I just finished playing through the singleplayer campaign (on Veteran ofcourse). It definitely doesn’t make a whole lot of sense and it’s way out there. Heck, even the (flimsy) scenario in H.A.W.X. is practically hyper-realistic in comparison.

But the missions are loads better than those in MW1. A lot of different and spectacular scenarios and not nearly as many terrible infinite spawns. The levels seem a bit more open and the graphical quality is markedly better than in MW1. This is due to textures that aren’t total suck, but only marginal suck. Essentially, anyone complaining about textures in Dragon Age will still do the same here, but it’s not atrocious like it was in MW1.

Definitely not worth it for $60, but if you’re in it for an actionpacked thrillride then you might want to get it when it’s on sale for $30 or something. Still only took me 6 hours to get through it (on Veteran) with a fair amount of reloads… so not exactly great bang for your buck. Definitely not worth it over a genuine GOTY contestant like Dragon Age, or even a good co-op game like Borderlands or Left 4 Dead 2.

]]> By: Phl4m3z http://jasdemi.com/games/fps/mw2-to-get-or-not/comment-page-1/#comment-764 Phl4m3z Thu, 12 Nov 2009 02:41:25 +0000 http://jasdemi.com/?p=1156#comment-764 Pretty much agreed with what everyone has said. Definitely not worth $60. Kind of lame actually that they slapped on an extra $10 to the game, just because it's *Call of Duty*. Sure, COD4 was a fantastic game. But come on, $60? Really? For a little bit of single player, with not much replay value besides playing it on a different rank. In my opinion, they could have possibly had some DLC for COD4 at a small price instead. Pretty much agreed with what everyone has said. Definitely not worth $60. Kind of lame actually that they slapped on an extra $10 to the game, just because it’s *Call of Duty*. Sure, COD4 was a fantastic game. But come on, $60? Really? For a little bit of single player, with not much replay value besides playing it on a different rank. In my opinion, they could have possibly had some DLC for COD4 at a small price instead.

]]> By: Samodean http://jasdemi.com/games/fps/mw2-to-get-or-not/comment-page-1/#comment-763 Samodean Thu, 12 Nov 2009 01:34:49 +0000 http://jasdemi.com/?p=1156#comment-763 Get. Get. Get. A thousand times, get. All the hype is true. It REALLY is that good. Granted, I have it for 360 and the PC "issues" do suck pretty hard. Still, GET. Get.

Get.

Get.

A thousand times, get.

All the hype is true. It REALLY is that good. Granted, I have it for 360 and the PC “issues” do suck pretty hard.

Still, GET.

]]> By: Droniac http://jasdemi.com/games/fps/mw2-to-get-or-not/comment-page-1/#comment-758 Droniac Wed, 11 Nov 2009 19:31:26 +0000 http://jasdemi.com/?p=1156#comment-758 I have it on pre-order (got a good deal) and it should arrive early next week, but I'm not expecting much. Most reviews right now are of the overhyped and bought kind. Ratings at impossible heights (94-100 average) with reviews that either read like a 60-70 worthy title, or completely ignore the multiplayer shortcomings (on PC) and rampant singleplayer criticism amongst fans and players. I've followed a few player comments on the game and the gist of multiplayer on PC seems to be this: excessively laggy due to a lack of dedicated servers. No server browser to properly choose your game, nor a console, nor the ability to kick cheaters or lamers from servers. Add to that a player cap of 18 and no competitive community (no dedicated servers, no console, no mods) and it's easily the worst multiplayer shooter to grace the PC platform... ever. Heck, Unreal Tournament 3 looks feature-complete in comparison. Singleplayer looks to be about as lengthy as Modern Warfare. Which means you pay $60 (the official price for the PC game) for 5 hours of mediocre-at-best storytelling. Worse, the campaign is told to be even more disjointed than the original and even entirely illogical in execution and preposterous in setting. I hope that's wrong, I can't cancel my order now. Either way, it seems likely that I'll be spending more time with Serious Sam HD and Left 4 Dead 2 than Modern Warfare 2 this month. If I ever drag myself away from Dragon Age... I have it on pre-order (got a good deal) and it should arrive early next week, but I’m not expecting much.

Most reviews right now are of the overhyped and bought kind. Ratings at impossible heights (94-100 average) with reviews that either read like a 60-70 worthy title, or completely ignore the multiplayer shortcomings (on PC) and rampant singleplayer criticism amongst fans and players.

I’ve followed a few player comments on the game and the gist of multiplayer on PC seems to be this: excessively laggy due to a lack of dedicated servers. No server browser to properly choose your game, nor a console, nor the ability to kick cheaters or lamers from servers. Add to that a player cap of 18 and no competitive community (no dedicated servers, no console, no mods) and it’s easily the worst multiplayer shooter to grace the PC platform… ever. Heck, Unreal Tournament 3 looks feature-complete in comparison.

Singleplayer looks to be about as lengthy as Modern Warfare. Which means you pay $60 (the official price for the PC game) for 5 hours of mediocre-at-best storytelling. Worse, the campaign is told to be even more disjointed than the original and even entirely illogical in execution and preposterous in setting. I hope that’s wrong, I can’t cancel my order now.

Either way, it seems likely that I’ll be spending more time with Serious Sam HD and Left 4 Dead 2 than Modern Warfare 2 this month. If I ever drag myself away from Dragon Age…

]]> By: Viiral http://jasdemi.com/games/fps/mw2-to-get-or-not/comment-page-1/#comment-757 Viiral Wed, 11 Nov 2009 18:57:08 +0000 http://jasdemi.com/?p=1156#comment-757 I only care about the story, and that what i'm getting it for, to play the story mode, never cared much for the multilayer. To many hyper active kids playing with godly aim, all hooked up on sugar.. sitting there 24\7 ranking up. I only care about the story, and that what i’m getting it for, to play the story mode, never cared much for the multilayer.

To many hyper active kids playing with godly aim, all hooked up on sugar.. sitting there 24\7 ranking up.

]]>