Gaming Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 PC Review

Modern Warfare 2 is here and it's bigger and more controversial than we thought possible. It's so huge in fact that Joe and Harry have teamed up to tackle it. Is the singleplayer is more than endlessly respawning troops and is IWNet is as bad as it sounds?



http://www.bit-tech.net/gaming/pc/2009/11/11/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-2-pc-review/1

 

I wasn't going to get this, but Sainsburys had it for £26 for the 360 (and PS3).

 

Good review as always guys, looks like it's worthy of one's money after all, and for less than £30, a total bargin too.

Sam

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MdSwgKtSYg

So much for IWnet protecting against cheaters, and you can't even kick them!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHsWZp5pWCo

The typical lag effects I've seen so far (when you get a bad host which has been 15/20% of the time)

 

So the MP analysis is basically saying "They cut my willy off but that's okay because I don't get laid anyway?"

Riiiiiiiight.

Also, 6v6 is unacceptable for a pub. In CS:S and TF2 that's a scrim, for f***'s sake! When I'm pubbing (especially TDM) I want a map FULL of player, not some 9v9 ********.

 

I think its a great game, many hours of fun to come

 

Ticking the "no empty servers/no full servers" boxes and setting "ping < 100" in the server-browser of most other PC shooters does the same job without taking the elements of choice and control out of the players hands.

It may work, but to PC gamers IWNet is to Server Browsers and Dedicated Servers what the Xbox 360 is to a PC.
Just because it does the job doesn't mean it's an adequate subsitute!

I'm not accusing the article of being in favour of IWNet or anything like that, but the quoted statement just feels like an attempt to justify accepting IWNet when we really shouldn't have to.

 

Also, after reading this frank statement from Joe:

I can't help but think the MP analysis was at least worded a bit too leniently.

 

Agreed. Being a PC community, and the differences between the BRILLIANT Modern Warfare 1 versus the changes made to Modern Warfare 2 - BT should of been harder on them, and really question why we are being "consolefied"!

 

Harry and I sat down and talked our thoughts over this morning, so it's a consensus. I have some very big issues with some very small parts of IWNet, but at the end of the day I'm more of a singleplayer anyway. What really winds me up is the lack of text chat in lobbies - it's stupid and makes no sense.

 

Fair enough. You enjoy SP more.

But CoD4's USP for many (perhaps most) of its players was MP. I played the campaign twice, but I play MP almost everyday. For someone like me, who enjoys MP and the mods and picking servers and all that, this game is not worth the $50 $60.

If it was a blog, I could understand saying something like "SP is great, MP is anal but I don't care about that anyway because I never play MP."

But this isn't a blog, it's a review and one expects a degree of (dare I say brutal?) honesty if something is flawed. From the comments on other sites and the video posted on this thread, I'd have to say that the BT review seemed to simply brush off the problems with MP gameplay instead of offering some serious opinion on them.

 

That's awesome. I hope they hack it to sh*t.

 

I am surprised at how many copies we have sold (on multiple platforms) over the past 2 days at work. Personally I will probably never play it, unless it's given to me and even then it will be SP only. The CoD series went downhill after CoD 2 in my eyes,

 

From where I am sitting in South Africa Multiplayer is totally ruined for me unless IWNet is willing to put a server here in South Africa.

I am looking at pings of between 300 and 450 to play or one bar on the new indicator.

The community here in South Africa is devastated, MW1 was huge here!

 

There are no servers. It's peer 2 peer.

 

We gave an opinion, but the fact is that the problems with IWnet are outweighed by the superb game underneath. We've specifically targetted the lack of ability to choose your favourite map, the gimped custom games, as big flaws, ditto the lack of text chat, but the fact of the matter remains that the game beneath IWnet is still superb and has been improved on immeasurably.

I understand some will think 6 vs 6 is a bit limited, but with the maps designed and balanced for teams of this size it never feels like you're lost or looking for someone to shoot. Saying that, I thought MW servers with 32+ servers were bloody ridiculous, but it seems a lot of PC players are set in their ways and won't accept less than 16 vs 16 - if this was enabled in MW2 it would ruin the game - the maps would be insanely full.

I think a lot of people had made up thier minds about this game simply from the overwhelmingly negative (and rightly so) press it's been getting on the PC. It's a real shame to see stuff like dedicated servers and mod support left out - I was angry too, but the fact of the matter is that there's still a superb game here. If you choose not to play out of some misplaced loyalty to a feature set (that other dev's like DICE are more than happy to take advantage of) you'll be missing out.

Would the game have been better with dedicated servers and mod support? Of course. Does IWnet spoil the MP irrevocably? Absolutely not.

 

The problem is in SA the internet connections for users are shockingly bad (and they pay through the nose for it). WIth such poo individual connections, hosted servers are vital. You have my sympathies

 

I thought the Respawning enemies had been removed from MW2? I haven't seen it yet in the first few levels unless i'm moving forward to quickly. Which i doubt.

 

You misunderstood my previous statement. I wasn't referring to the review, I was referring to an informal forum comment made late yesterday based on the short amount of time I've played MW2 MP for. I was offering my own view of IWNet.

All the multiplayer comments in the review were written by Harry, who is predominantly a MP gamer (though I do play COD4 MP every lunch time, religiously) and offer a fair and open review of the system. He lays down clearly what IWNet can and can't do (no level ups in custom matches, no text chat in lobbies, etc) so you can make an informed decision for yourself and then lays his own opinion down too - one which probably will resonate with the vast majority of MP players, who just want to jump in and play for an hour before dinner and don't care about clan support.

Whether this site is a blog or a publication is irrelevant - a good review is one which explains a product in a way that lets readers able to understand the issues and make an informed decision, while complementing that with the opinions of the writer. Harry's discussion does that fine without having to stray into flaming or baiting thanks to a proper, impartial approach which isn't based on preconceptions about what the audience thinks the game should be.

 

After much debating i have decided to take a chance on MW2 will be picking a copy up on the way home from work. At least i've got hours to get it installed before the kids go to bed.