COD: Modern Warfare 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
i get better results with the red dot, i don't really know why.

I was happy to unlock the acog but i get hammered when it is on. i lose too much peripheral vision or something.

I think the shotgun attachment is a waste. too bad cause it looks badass.

FMJ stack with stopping power making your weapon a one hit machine i think
 
J

Joe Johnson

I was looking through their wiki - it looks like FMJ is purely for going through objects, it offers no extra damage to flesh. Stopping power gives you more damage overall. So, yeah, combining the two will be great for killing through walls/cars/etc. I may end up going back to my silencer, though. I'm really using FMJ now for the challenge unlocks.

The holographic site theoretically gives you slightly more auto-aim, but yeah, I think the dot is larger, so it can actually obscure your vision a little.

I've also been working on my secondary weapon - with Bling Pro, you can have two attachments on that one. I need 10 more kills to unlock the silencer for that - so I can use a red dot and silencer on my secondary. Making it a pretty useful weapon.
 
soooooo what does exactly happen when one enters prestige mode at 70?

ok, i googled my own question and jesus, i fought against 2 dudes who were prestige 10 yesterday. How the fuck did someone reach lvl 70 TEN fucking times.
 
J

Joe Johnson

Yeah, even if you consider some kid who doesn't have a job, and blows off school - or even some 19 year old living in his parent basement, that's a CRAP load of gaming time to get that high.

I guess one possibility is a shared account, where multiple people are playing it just to see what happens.

I prestiged in CoD4 - I probably won't this time. I barely have time to get that high of a level as it is - much less do it multiple times.
 
i have logged around 40 hours in multi and i'm lvl 51. ok, i'm not that good and i don't do runs with premade teams but still...

i won't prestige either. no way i reset my ACR for another 40 hours.
 
J

Joe Johnson

For the most part I play with 'pug's. Most of my friends don't get into this kind of game (their twitch reflexes aren't so great - most of them come from a non-gaming background), and I don't really have the time to invest in a clan/group, unfortunately. It can be really frustrating to play with the unwashed masses, but it's better than not playing at all.
 
L

LordRavage

Bought a Playstation 3 and Modern Warfare 2 yesterday. Hot damn Warfare is a fun game! Only made it to No Russian and now I want to blow off my plans so I spend the day playing..:)
 
OK - after years of not giving in, this friggin game is gonna make me break down & buy a HDTV. I play on a 36" tube, and its just a never ending streak of getting sniped before I ever see an enemy. I have a lot of "most killcams watched" accolades... so I watch them just to see how these guys are finding me.. and most of the time I can't even see myself if it wasn't for the big red "YOU" arrow over my head.

Frustrating cause I just flat out suck anyways, and getting shot as soon as I poke my head out a window makes it even moreso.

And another thing... its called MODERN warfare. What kinda lameass spend their time running around stabbing people?? I mean come on... REALLY!! Seems like every game there's some jackass running around with marathon or commando just slashing people. Kinda makes me wish I had a baseball bat in my arsenal - but that's apparently not "modern" enough for this game.
 
OK - after years of not giving in, this friggin game is gonna make me break down & buy a HDTV. I play on a 36" tube, and its just a never ending streak of getting sniped before I ever see an enemy. I have a lot of "most killcams watched" accolades... so I watch them just to see how these guys are finding me.. and most of the time I can't even see myself if it wasn't for the big red "YOU" arrow over my head.
Yeah that happens to me all the time as well, some guys really have good eyesight and the reflexes to go with it.
If I'm sitting still for a few seconds I can make some 'impossible' kills as well, but seeing the killcams of some people jumping around while sniping people with a handgun from across the map is not something I can pull off.

Also, knifing is awesome if you're not playing seriously. Pretty much like how people used to run around bashing people in the older CoD's.
 
J

Joe Johnson

What kinda lameass spend their time running around stabbing people??
Not sure if you heard, but the 30,000 troops they're sending to Afghanistan are only going to have knives and running shoes.
 
OK - after years of not giving in, this friggin game is gonna make me break down & buy a HDTV. I play on a 36" tube, and its just a never ending streak of getting sniped before I ever see an enemy. I have a lot of "most killcams watched" accolades... so I watch them just to see how these guys are finding me.. and most of the time I can't even see myself if it wasn't for the big red "YOU" arrow over my head.
Yeah that happens to me all the time as well, some guys really have good eyesight and the reflexes to go with it.
If I'm sitting still for a few seconds I can make some 'impossible' kills as well, but seeing the killcams of some people jumping around while sniping people with a handgun from across the map is not something I can pull off.

Also, knifing is awesome if you're not playing seriously. Pretty much like how people used to run around bashing people in the older CoD's.[/QUOTE]

The TV can seriously make a difference in this case, though. Sprites are much more blurred on a non HDTV or on a PC on a CRT monitor.
 
J

Joe Johnson

So, I decided to go the jerk route, and play with a lightweight/marathon/akimbo class. I'm using the backup machine pistols as the weapon. I just wanted to try it, and see how it played. It's actually sort of fun. It' also not super overwhelming. When you get up close to people you can really tear them apart - doing circle strafing like a quake/halo style shooter. But, at any sort of distance I'm pretty much dead right away. So, my ktd using that class isn't that much different than my normal classes. Its best use seemed to be flanking another team. If you can get behind the enemy, you can gobble them up like a scene from a horror movie. However, you end up dying a lot.

I don't see using this that much, though. It sort of changes the way the game was intended to play. If I wanted to play a game like that, I'd just switch back to Halo 3.

I probably won't try the double shotguns - but maybe I'll try and unlock that, in case I need it for a "counter" move.
 
I borrowed my friend's copy of the game the last few days (he was on vacation down south) and I installed the game and played it. Holy fuck is the single player campaign short. I think I pretty much finished it in one sitting of 4 hours. Yes, it was intense and I love those missions where you are with Soap or Price in a coop stealth mission. There were some WOW AWESOME moments. (my fav are going up and down cliff sides and stabbing goodness). Those Brazil stages though... jesus fuck. Trying those stages at anything beyond normal difficulty is bullshit. Love how they always know where the fuck I am. They could have also worked on faster ally/foe recognition. Everyone looks the same with shades of gray to distinguish between them. In the old CoD, you always knew who was who. In those American campaigns, I truly was an American soldier... lots of friendly fire was done. :)

They could have worked on the storyline a bit as well... and it needed to be at least twice at long.. if not 4 times as long. I know people bought this game for the MP but really... 5 hours? For a 60$ game?

Gonna try to MP today, I'm sure it'll be good but still... 4 hours? Comon.
 
I played the first few missions at my cousin's house today. I loved the Roach/Soap mission. There was this awesome point where this guard saw me through all the snow, and I was still bringing my weapon to bear ... and just as I thought he was going to shoot and alert everyone to my presence, he got shot in the throat by Soap from god only knows where.

Awesome, awesome moments in that game.

The first Rio level is redonkulous though.
 

Necronic

Staff member
I picked up this game a couple days ago, and will be writing a full review of it sometime this weekend, but I wanted to read what's been said here about it because for the most part I find this group more mature than the standard gamer type person. So, frankly I am a bit surprised about your attitudes on the No Russian mission, and the implications on the game as a whole.

This is the first time I have ever been disgusted by the path a game took to the point where I may stop playing it permanently. When I played MW1 I was bothered that here I was, making a game out of something that a couple of my friends, who were at the time soldiers in Iraq, went through on a semi regular basis. I was finding enjoyment in something so emotionally traumatising that people often come back from it and aren't able to reintegrate with society.

This issue is something that any war game based on a real war will have to deal with. A friend of mine was playing the Omaha beach scene of a WW2 game and his Grandfather, a veteran who was on one of the beaches was watching him play it. My buddy had a moment of epiphany of what he was doing, enjoying a recreation of his grandfathers worst nightmare, and shut off the game, never played it again.

For WW2 games, and even Vietnam games this issue is less severe, however, as its so far in the past for most of us that we can't really empathize. MW1/2, on the other hand, are set in current times. The reason I finally let myself feel more ok about MW1 was that the combat and action were treated seriously and actually made me empathize with how terrible an experience that would be in real life. It was kind of like watching Black Hawk Down (or for WW2 Band of Brothers).

MW2, on the other hand, feels more like Rambo/Delta Force/Red Dawn/James Bond. There's poorly constructed plot, there's massive holes in the military strategy (eg why would the navy be bombing the gulag that was only a target because of the extraction, that makes no sense as a strategic target), there are fucking SNOW MOBILE CHASES. So Infinity Ward decided to do a lazy execution of this game because all that matters is the action.

The action was intense, no doubt, but it was immature. It was popcorn action, not action with a deep emotional impact, and to make popcorn action that so closely uses real horrors that exist in this world right NOW, deeply disturbs me. Moreover, the general reaction of the gaming media that "our medium can address such weighty issues" (Adam Biessener, game informer), only proves to me the exact opposite, that the level of emotional maturity that exists in our medium is so low that we clearly have no place attempting to address any serious issue.

Of course, many people may respond with "christ dude, its just a game", but you don't get to have it both ways. Its either a piss poor and highly exploitative attempt at a serious message, or its "just a game" that only wants to use these horrors as a form of entertainment for a culture so disconnected from reality that we may be as bad as people in the main stream media often want to say we are.

---------

What kills me most of all, though, is that for as much as I find the game distasteful, I fucking loved playing most of it. The firefights are great, the action sequences are incredible, I have never played something that was so breakneck all the way through. Frankly its a good thing the game was as short as it was, because if it wasn't I probably would have had an adrenaline overload and would have been found dead at my desk with my hands fiercely locked onto my mouse and gamepad.
 
I feel like you might have a point. It's certainly food for thought.

I haven't played through the whole campaign of MW2, so I can't really speak to any of the plot there. That said, what I did play didn't feel that drastically different from MW in theme or execution. As a story I felt like both games were legitimate, and while you raise some excellent points about the appropriation of real-life horrors to serve as fantasy fodder for weekend warriors, I'm not sure if that's such a horrifying thing.

It can certainly be done tastelessly, but I don't feel like MW2 was tasteless. I played through part of the Russian invasion of America in MW2, and it actually affected me. A film would allow me to sit back and bask in the experience. I could have possibly wept freely (an exaggeration) if it was presented to me. But playing through it, I didn't have that luxury. In the back of my head as I was defending Burger Town was how absurd a situation this was, and there was an emotional kernel there. I didn't have the time to think on it or allow that kernel to grow, however until I stopped the game and thought about it.

I don't know what that means, really. We've only in the last decade gotten to a point where it's a legitimate exercise to talk about games as art, or approach the 'literature' of games so to speak. I'll certainly be thinking about what you've had to say over the next while.
 

Necronic

Staff member
After playing multiplayer for a while tonight I am even more conflicted. Its incredibly fun, but of course whatever issues I may have had with the single player campaign are only exacerbated when there are people who go by Adolf Hitler, and [KKK] Obama. Of course there's also the fact that the lack of dedicated servers really kills the PC experience. Couldn't stay in a game for more than 2 rounds without the host leaving or everyone recycling to a new server. Ugh.

I have such mixed feelings. Certain aspects of the execution are so amazingly good, other parts (dedicated servers and dual wielding) not so good, and even other parts are bad on a much more meta scale.
 
I'd just like to point out that most of the people I know who served in Iraq love the Modern Warfare games, and "war-sploitation" entertainment in general.
 

Necronic

Staff member
Yeah, that may be true, but I'm not sure its relevant. How I feel about racism or sexism, for instance, isn't dependant on the way that members of other races or sexes feel about the issue, but about how I feel about it. It is a self sufficient belief. And I think the only reason it really bothered me so much with this game was that it was supposedly so intent on making a message with the No Russian mission. By doing that the game becomes something other than "just a game" and therefore you have to look at it in a different light. When I view it in that different light, that's when I have the problem.
 
(Big snip)
I can certainly see where you're coming from, and if it honestly bothers you, then there's no reason for you to keep playing. But I don't think that the 'exploitation' of war, or other traumas that real people go through, are necessarily bad.

People like having emotional responses. This is a very simple statement that carries a lot of detail with it. People enjoy experiencing simulated emotional responses in a safe environment. It's why war movies are popular. It's why horror movies are popular. It's why tragedies are popular.

Case in point? What's one of the biggest ways to make someone remember your game? Make them cry. If you can present a situation that is so emotionally powerful that the player cries, the player is going to praise that game, because it came across as an artform. Everyone has had friends who have died, but that doesn't mean that
Aeris's (does this really count as a spoiler anymore)
death should be seen as exploitation? I suppose it is, as most entertainment media is an exploitation of something to generate a response in the view/player, but whether this is a 'bad' thing is something I don't think is quite so easy to define.

If someone feels uneasy playing a game about something troubling for them, then that's perfectly understandable. They shouldn't play that game. But I don't think someone should feel that they 'should' feel bad because of this, or feel bad about enjoying it.
 
Z

Zumbo Prime

This debate reminds me of the canceled "12 Days in Fallelujia"(or w/e) game that was being worked on. Too bad clueless controversy wins out over common sense and hard facts.
 

Necronic

Staff member
This debate reminds me of the canceled "12 Days in Fallelujia"(or w/e) game that was being worked on. Too bad clueless controversy wins out over common sense and hard facts.
Could you expand on that? Seems like the standard open ended comment.

Also, after playing multiplayer more I've really come to like the game, and don't get the exploitative feel as much. In the Multiplayer you are really just using soldiers and weapons as flimsy skins, the actual combat is so far from realistic that it doesn't click. But I still think that the No Russian mission was very poorly executed and only illustrated the lack of depth in the gaming industry, as opposed to the opposite. That doesn't mean the game's bad, its really damned fun, its just in no way a statement about anything. Its just a game with some moments of poor taste.
 
C

Chazwozel

I picked up this game a couple days ago, and will be writing a full review of it sometime this weekend, but I wanted to read what's been said here about it because for the most part I find this group more mature than the standard gamer type person. So, frankly I am a bit surprised about your attitudes on the No Russian mission, and the implications on the game as a whole.

This is the first time I have ever been disgusted by the path a game took to the point where I may stop playing it permanently. When I played MW1 I was bothered that here I was, making a game out of something that a couple of my friends, who were at the time soldiers in Iraq, went through on a semi regular basis. I was finding enjoyment in something so emotionally traumatising that people often come back from it and aren't able to reintegrate with society.

This issue is something that any war game based on a real war will have to deal with. A friend of mine was playing the Omaha beach scene of a WW2 game and his Grandfather, a veteran who was on one of the beaches was watching him play it. My buddy had a moment of epiphany of what he was doing, enjoying a recreation of his grandfathers worst nightmare, and shut off the game, never played it again.

For WW2 games, and even Vietnam games this issue is less severe, however, as its so far in the past for most of us that we can't really empathize. MW1/2, on the other hand, are set in current times. The reason I finally let myself feel more ok about MW1 was that the combat and action were treated seriously and actually made me empathize with how terrible an experience that would be in real life. It was kind of like watching Black Hawk Down (or for WW2 Band of Brothers).

MW2, on the other hand, feels more like Rambo/Delta Force/Red Dawn/James Bond. There's poorly constructed plot, there's massive holes in the military strategy (eg why would the navy be bombing the gulag that was only a target because of the extraction, that makes no sense as a strategic target), there are fucking SNOW MOBILE CHASES. So Infinity Ward decided to do a lazy execution of this game because all that matters is the action.

The action was intense, no doubt, but it was immature. It was popcorn action, not action with a deep emotional impact, and to make popcorn action that so closely uses real horrors that exist in this world right NOW, deeply disturbs me. Moreover, the general reaction of the gaming media that "our medium can address such weighty issues" (Adam Biessener, game informer), only proves to me the exact opposite, that the level of emotional maturity that exists in our medium is so low that we clearly have no place attempting to address any serious issue.

Of course, many people may respond with "christ dude, its just a game", but you don't get to have it both ways. Its either a piss poor and highly exploitative attempt at a serious message, or its "just a game" that only wants to use these horrors as a form of entertainment for a culture so disconnected from reality that we may be as bad as people in the main stream media often want to say we are.

---------

What kills me most of all, though, is that for as much as I find the game distasteful, I fucking loved playing most of it. The firefights are great, the action sequences are incredible, I have never played something that was so breakneck all the way through. Frankly its a good thing the game was as short as it was, because if it wasn't I probably would have had an adrenaline overload and would have been found dead at my desk with my hands fiercely locked onto my mouse and gamepad.
I refused to shoot people in the No Russian mission.

And I'll be honest, seeing Washington D.C. in smoldering ruins disturbed me to the point where I had to take a break from the game.
 
This debate reminds me of the canceled "12 Days in Fallelujia"(or w/e) game that was being worked on. Too bad clueless controversy wins out over common sense and hard facts.
Could you expand on that? Seems like the standard open ended comment.

Also, after playing multiplayer more I've really come to like the game, and don't get the exploitative feel as much. In the Multiplayer you are really just using soldiers and weapons as flimsy skins, the actual combat is so far from realistic that it doesn't click. But I still think that the No Russian mission was very poorly executed and only illustrated the lack of depth in the gaming industry, as opposed to the opposite. That doesn't mean the game's bad, its really damned fun, its just in no way a statement about anything. Its just a game with some moments of poor taste.[/QUOTE]

Taste is, of course, subjective, so in your opinion, it's in bad taste. Some may not view it that way. Like I said, most of my friends who served in Iraq had no problems with the game at all, and are, in fact, big fans of it.
 

Necronic

Staff member
This debate reminds me of the canceled "12 Days in Fallelujia"(or w/e) game that was being worked on. Too bad clueless controversy wins out over common sense and hard facts.
Could you expand on that? Seems like the standard open ended comment.

Also, after playing multiplayer more I've really come to like the game, and don't get the exploitative feel as much. In the Multiplayer you are really just using soldiers and weapons as flimsy skins, the actual combat is so far from realistic that it doesn't click. But I still think that the No Russian mission was very poorly executed and only illustrated the lack of depth in the gaming industry, as opposed to the opposite. That doesn't mean the game's bad, its really damned fun, its just in no way a statement about anything. Its just a game with some moments of poor taste.[/QUOTE]

Taste is, of course, subjective, so in your opinion, it's in bad taste. Some may not view it that way. Like I said, most of my friends who served in Iraq had no problems with the game at all, and are, in fact, big fans of it.[/QUOTE]


I was referring to his statement that " Too bad clueless controversy wins out over common sense and hard facts." which is that standard open ended internet argument that says absolutely nothing but wants to appear like a slam dunk.
 
Z

Zumbo Prime

I know, I meant to come back and add more to that post, but I kinda forgot. My apologies. :|

And my bad, it's actually Six Days in Fallujah. My memory is starting to go.

Essentially, the game was supposed to be based on a real, especially bloody battle in a town called, you guessed it, Fallujah by U.S. Marines and insurgents. It was completely based on memories and recollections by veterans who came back from the battle who wanted a game as a documentary. Then the press got involved. They started saying things like "too soon", "video games are not art", "video games are not documentaries", and even nutty things like "we don't want to be massacring innocent Iraqis". Apparently this got heavy and influential enough that Konami pulled the plug and cancelled the game completely.
 

Necronic

Staff member
I know, I meant to come back and add more to that post, but I kinda forgot. My apologies. :|

And my bad, it's actually Six Days in Fallujah. My memory is starting to go.

Essentially, the game was supposed to be based on a real, especially bloody battle in a town called, you guessed it, Fallujah by U.S. Marines and insurgents. It was completely based on memories and recollections by veterans who came back from the battle who wanted a game as a documentary. Then the press got involved. They started saying things like "too soon", "video games are not art", "video games are not documentaries", and even nutty things like "we don't want to be massacring innocent Iraqis". Apparently this got heavy and influential enough that Konami pulled the plug and cancelled the game completely.

Ah, you know I this actually helps me describe my point better. See, this is something I am ok with. The entire focus of the project is as an interactive experience. It truly is using the medium as a form of communication. Its the same for games like Super Columbine Massacre RPG, or Passage. When the focus is that pure, then it as appropriate thing. Now, if this 6 days in falluja had, say, a scene where you doing a snowmowbile chase, or something else that smacked of the popcorn genre then it would compromise the entire movie. And that's what I think MW2 did. It tried to give a serious message with one hand but compromised it with the other.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top