Bored of MW2...


Recommended Posts

For me, I have to stick to hardcore, the softcore makes it feel way to arcadish...its all run around and spray and pray type kiddies...

Cant really say anything about mw2 getting boring as im currently 40 hours into multiplayer and its still fuuuuun. But as far as hardcore went - played few matches and then i finally got what ppl were saying about camping. It was so quiet it even wasnt funny anymore. I got my first kill and death afterward some minutes into the round.

So far mostly sticking to domination and ctf.

nothing beats the good old team fortress 2, I love the fact that you have to play as a team in that game, and not run around on your own.

There hasn't been a MP FPS game I've put more hours into than TF2.

Well I've probably played more TFC :p

I do agree, from what I've played of MW2 it seems very lone wolf.

yea. i guess my issue with it is the inconsistency of the multiplayer experience. victory isnt in the hands of a skilled player here. just the luck of the drop.

my favorite and all-time most played game is battlefield1942/BF2. thats what i call a team game.

So you don't think "I'm gonna boot up MW2 and have a night of fun", you think "Should I? Because it's either going to frustrate the hell out of me or give me a great experience" and personally, I don't want to make that choice when starting up a game.

I have the same line of thought when I think about booting up CS:S.. except I think to myself.. do I wanna boot up counter strike and get slaughtered by people who play it every day, and get frustrated that I can't turn a corner without being popped? Goes both ways :p

P.S. I do OK after a few days getting back into it, but I can't be bothered putting in the time anymore.

Aye, it does lose the appeal very quickly. This game has to be the most random, the most luck based piece of casual-crap in a very long time! Yes, it may be harsh words but that's how I feel. There's way too much focus on having the right setup for the right situation at the right time - Back in the day where the player's skills, reaction times and knowledge of the maps that gave you the advantage, meaning lots of training would get you ahead - Now the game is 100% focused on having the right class, perk or attachment at the right time, even the most blind and useless player in the world can suddenly get a great round because he created the right class and got a lucky killstreak.

It was bearable in Call of Duty 4, because it felt like a great first person shooter underneath with some variation sprinkled on top on the shape of perks. Now the game has been smothered in this game, one perk / Attachment more game changing than the other. So yes, it's fun for a week or two but the hype about games like Counter-strike was the sense, the game rewarded you for being good - MW2 rewards you for lucky choices, nothing else! So you don't think "I'm gonna boot up MW2 and have a night of fun", you think "Should I? Because it's either going to frustrate the hell out of me or give me a great experience" and personally, I don't want to make that choice when starting up a game.

Plus with all this host advantage and stuff going around, even being able to aim properly is out the window ... And the consoles have that casual-tard minded aim-assist, so even the retarded kid next door can get a kill.

So when the fun in trying out perks, weapons and attachments have been exhausted, the core of the game has nothing more to offer because it's being killed by the aforementioned.

Could'nt agree more. This is the first CoD game I dont feel like playing more than one time through.

Yea, I am in the same boat with MW2. Was hoping the campaign would of been longer since I love single player games. Not much of a MP player unless is co-op.

I picked up Borderlands the other day. If you like Fallout 3, you will like borderlands. Cool game so far...single player plus co-op option.

Hows the MP on that?

Thinking of picking it up soon :)

Don't expect it to be like CoD. Some people didn't like it because they wanted something like CoD. I like it, played MP A LOT. The levels are awesome specially the DLC ones. There is one with a nuclear explosion every 5 minutes or so. That one is my favorite.

Like I said in the other thread MW2 SP is nice but really short. I finished in a little more than 5-6 hours or something like that. Games I was playing before it Uncharted 2 and Ratchet and Clank I finished the game in 15+ hours. I wasn't expecting a 15 hours SP in MW2 but at least 8-10 hours. I finished it in Regular and Veteran in 16 hours, same time I spent playing Uncharted 2 the first time. :p

I really like the MP. Love the perks options and that you can customize the killstreak rewards but this one doesn't seem to have the golden paint for the weapons. I played a lot the first MW trying to unlock all the golden weapon. Got almost all of them.

The game itself is fun, and the maps are very detailed. but i beleave that MW2 is going to be short lived. The reason im saying this, well the no servers you can pick from, and i hate to say from my own and listening to people in game theres alot of slap tard players out there....but im waiting for Bf2 Bad Company to come out for Pc

Yes the single player was way too short in my opinion, as KoL mentions when you spend 15+ hours beating Uncharted 2 then come to this and blast through it in an afternoon, you are kinda left thinking 'is that it?'

Looks like I will be selling to a guy in work for what I paid for it so not all bad :)

I honestly don't see what the fuss was all about. Everyone at school thinks it's the best game ever, but I'm there with my 700 kills, 1,300 deaths getting killed by the n00bs who can't fire a gun and send me messages to f**k off when I get 30 deaths in a game of sabotage, when everyone else was just sat there camping with their fecking snipers.

It aggravates me, and in a way I wish I hadn't of spent ?32 on it.

i was going to get this game, but after i read it only has 5 to 6 hours of SP play time. i decided its not with the $60. maybe if i played online but i dont.

not to say that i dont think it would be a ton of fun. MW1 was a blast.

oh well. i instead bought assassins creed 2. and OMG did i make the right choice.

The SP campaign was way too short and why the hell are only a few of the maps available in free-for-all? I'm not sorry I bought it though. I seemed to be doing alright against other people for awhile, but now I'm getting creamed constantly since I'm so far behind in rank and practice.

Same here :laugh:

I'm actually thinking of going back to WAW multiplayer for a while, found that really fun, believe it or not.

Seriously.... this game was waaaay to short :(

I personally do not care about the multiplayer mode

I wish that game reviewers now add a game length score also... this was not worth the money and don't count on me to buy one of the CoD games again if the next one.

...at least if there was a co-op mode in SP that would make replayability a little better

SP was fairly average compared to MW1 but I'm loving the online play. People who don't like the online play because they're getting killed by "casual-tards" need to ring for a waaaahmbulance - it's a game, don't get so worked up about it :laugh: And there's no aim-assist in MP console version, is there? Only in SP.

I do agree about the spawn points though - it's annoying when you spawn next to a team mate who is miles away from the action.

SP was fairly average compared to MW1 but I'm loving the online play. People who don't like the online play because they're getting killed by "casual-tards" need to ring for a waaaahmbulance - it's a game, don't get so worked up about it :laugh: And there's no aim-assist in MP console version, is there? Only in SP.

I do agree about the spawn points though - it's annoying when you spawn next to a team mate who is miles away from the action.

Uhh there's pretty damn generous aim assist in MP.

You can see your crosshair physically move quite a bit at times.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • "just $100 per TB"? Just? Are we trying to make this seem like the new normal? Kinda weird to make it sound like that is not a ridiculously expensive asking price.
    • The reviews you refer to mean nothing. Where there is no journalism there is no reason to call the gaming media's opinion pieces "reviews". For GP games there is indeed a metric for success - increasing subscriptions. Which turns in revenue. The only circumstance in which subs do not rise when great is being released is a Game Pass system where the company is close to fully saturated with customers in a subscription. However, in that case as the theory goes you spend aplenty in all kind of games - from shady live service cash cows and customer offending agitprop crap in purple colours to robust and entertaining single player games. And keep a solid level of profitability. Ignoring the simply innocuous but mid games MGS has released primarily of the second kind.
    • Report: Microsoft to use AWS to help GitHub deal with a major surge in demand by Pradeep Viswanathan Thanks to the surge of coding AI agents, GitHub's usage has skyrocketed over the past 12 months. To meet this demand, GitHub started with a plan in October 2025 to increase capacity by 10x. However, by early this year, the company realized that it needed 30x scale. This rapid growth has caused severe strain on the platform's reliability, resulting in several small outages over the past few months. In April, GitHub published a long blog post explaining the steps it is taking to resolve these reliability issues. In the post, the company also confirmed that it is working toward a multi-cloud architecture for better resilience. Today, Business Insider reported that GitHub is turning to Amazon Web Services to help deal with a major surge in AI-driven coding activity. It is important to note that GitHub is still in the process of moving completely to the Azure cloud. The current plan is to move the platform fully to Azure by 2027 so that it can scale better as per developer demand. Therefore, the current decision to utilize AWS might be part of a short-term plan to meet immediate demand. A Microsoft spokesperson confirmed that GitHub is using multiple cloud providers with the following statement: For Microsoft, the decision highlights the operational pressure behind the AI boom. GitHub has to stay reliable for developers at a time when rivals such as Codex, Cursor, Claude Code, and other AI coding tools are gaining attention. And the decision to use AWS for computing capacity seems practical given the circumstances.
    • It's growing on me, however, your right, it make better usability sense if the tabs were bellow the address bar.
    • Qwen 3.6 is better value per dollar, and you can run it locally for free.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      Dys Topia earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Conversation Starter
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Year In
      Console General earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Twozo Technologies earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Twozo Technologies earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      517
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      106
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      88
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      68
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!