ForumsGamesDoes modern warfare 2 suck?

48 7197
BonusPoints
offline
BonusPoints
47 posts
Nomad

To me, it sucks hard.Noob tubes and too many killstreaks. R.I.P Call of duty:world at war.

  • 48 Replies
Hydraulic
offline
Hydraulic
223 posts
Nomad

if they made any fps shooter realistic, no one would buy it (except cs:s)


Really? What about Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising? I hear that's selling well.

Snark aside, there probably is no realistic shooter out there. To the noobs who think that MW2 is realistic, well, it's not.

I never really liked these over-realistic games that try to recreate true battlefield environments, it's too chaotic.


Do you really think people in actual wars could try any of the tactics that are used by the people in MW2 and live? There's a couple of reasons:

1) Airstrikes are numbered.
2) Ammunition is finite.
3) Gas for vehicles is finite.
4) There's not that many conveniently-placed chest-high walls that provide the perfect cover in the real world.
5) If all the people in multiplayer actually died, no one would have an army.

And look at the best reason of all: If developers created a realistic shooter, nobody would play it. There'd have to be days of waiting before a shot was fired. Let's face it: Real warfare would have it's exciting moments, but for the majority, it would be boring.
Highfire
offline
Highfire
3,025 posts
Nomad

no, it doesn't
There is nothing to say else


Because you're a 12 year-old fanboi?
Why? Because there's nothing else to say.
Incredible retard, probably a troll

- H
Highfire
offline
Highfire
3,025 posts
Nomad

Sorry for spam, Hydraulic's post wasn't there when I was typing mine up

Really? What about Operation Flashpoint: Dragon Rising? I hear that's selling well.
Snark aside, there probably is no realistic shooter out there. To the noobs who think that MW2 is realistic, well, it's not.

All true actually, because let's face it - if you get shot by an M95 Barrett you cannot fight when you are revived in real life, unlike BFBC2 Or blown up, for that matter.

Do you really think people in actual wars could try any of the tactics that are used by the people in MW2 and live? There's a couple of reasons:

Yeah, I mean none of it is entirely realistic, but MW2 is based on bunny hopping, no cover, drop-shots, running around like a moron, and retardedly small maps which I cannot believe the shotguns can't shoot across (AA12 Can in real life , should have larger maps).

1) Airstrikes are numbered.
2) Ammunition is finite.
3) Gas for vehicles is finite.
4) There's not that many conveniently-placed chest-high walls that provide the perfect cover in the real world.

All true!

5) If all the people in multiplayer actually died, no one would have an army.

You mean the 20,000,000 people dying over and over would add up and no one would realistically have an army? If so, then you're wrong because each map is basically being replayed - it's like skipping back to it for a sec and playing it over, except everyone does it making it different gameplay. Either case, only about 200 deaths would occur maximum in a game. Usually much less...

And look at the best reason of all: If developers created a realistic shooter, nobody would play it. There'd have to be days of waiting before a shot was fired. Let's face it: Real warfare would have it's exciting moments, but for the majority, it would be boring.

I find maps etc in Battlefield realistic, and to be honest if they done it like that, I wouldn't mind playing it (except the amazing amount of pain it could cause, and the death because of people running out of adrenline because they played through it all night (ROFL!))

- H
snipershot325
offline
snipershot325
844 posts
Nomad

ARE YOU SMOKING POT!!Modern warfare is just the greatest game of all time!!!

IAmAce
offline
IAmAce
196 posts
Peasant

obviously u just suck dick at it but personally i hate it

Highfire
offline
Highfire
3,025 posts
Nomad

Okay this threads lost all purpose - anyone care to lock it ?

- H

lulumix
offline
lulumix
10 posts
Nomad

Fuck C.O.D M2

Hydraulic
offline
Hydraulic
223 posts
Nomad

@ Highfire:

Thanks for the support. But the way I look at multiplayer was that the map was a piece of land in very much contestment, and that each battle was a different one fought for it. That way the balance of power kept shifting and affecting some virtual Canada somewhere. I think I'm delusional.

Highfire
offline
Highfire
3,025 posts
Nomad

Thanks for the support. But the way I look at multiplayer was that the map was a piece of land in very much contestment, and that each battle was a different one fought for it. That way the balance of power kept shifting and affecting some virtual Canada somewhere. I think I'm delusional.


Favela = Brazil
Wasteland = Chernybwol
Afghan = Afghanistan?
Rundown = Brazil
Invasion = Middle-East somewhere?
Terminal = Moscow

Hydraulic = Delusional

Hehe, but I'm not too sure I understood you properly. To me it's as if you were one of the soldiers in the fight when it was in the campaign, but it's different because it's a bit far away. There's no real logical explaination for it to be honest. But on-topic - MW2 Sux

- H
Shoestring
offline
Shoestring
152 posts
Nomad

yes..... yes it does.

Highfire
offline
Highfire
3,025 posts
Nomad

yes..... yes it does.


/thread

- H
th100
offline
th100
452 posts
Nomad

Well, I think that Modern Warfare 2 DOESN'T suck, but still wonder if it could get any better.

Xcalibur45
offline
Xcalibur45
1,829 posts
Farmer

I don't think is sucks, I think its very good, all around but I prefer MW.

nemo12
offline
nemo12
723 posts
Nomad

I do not care about what people say, MW2 is great.

jabello11
offline
jabello11
721 posts
Nomad

It is not a good game at all. once you play bad company battle feild 2. then you will see how modern warfare 2 is a terrable game.

Showing 31-45 of 48