Bored of MW2...


Recommended Posts

I love MW2 ... it has the best graphics I've seen in a game ... the subtleties in the detailing etc is just phenomenal ... the scene where you're in the capital building and looking over Washington is IMMENSE! Don't tell me other games look better right now. They don't. MW2 is getting a lot of geek hate. It happens to all high rated games. The geeks come out in full force to slag the game off because they feel 'cool' or 'powerful' for going against the grain. MW2 is probably the best FPS game I have played. And I've played em all now. It may not be long enough, but no other game immerses you as much, no other game has the 'feel' that MW has ... the feel of the character movement, the guns etc ... it's perfect. Other games pale.

There. Done.

Lets see.

Game with better graphics than MW2? Crysis, Killzone 2, Uncharted 2.

Game with better warfare gameplay than MW2? Battlefield 2.

Bette overall game than MW2? Half Life 2, Battlefield 2, and many many others.

Lets see.

Game with better graphics than MW2? Crysis, Killzone 2, Uncharted 2.

Game with better warfare gameplay than MW2? Battlefield 2.

Bette overall game than MW2? Half Life 2, Battlefield 2, and many many others.

I disagree.

I've done that on the 1v1 cage matches for a laugh. :p

Batman, Uncharted 2, Killzone 2, Left 4 Dead 2 and Assassins Creed 2 all look a damn sight better.

Really? REALLY?... REALLY?!

Go play Half Life 2.

The 'Really?' comment ... are you trying to be funny? Didn't work.

And I own Half Life 2 ... and no offence, but HL2 is boring compared to MW2.

The one 'good' thing with MW2 graphics is that they are colourful compared to the likes of Killzone 2. Detailing is not as good though. But I would say it's a better single player game just WAY too short.

But better graphics, Uncharted 2 blows it out the water, get on top of a high rooftop and take a look about :)

Yeah, all those stunning low-res 2D cut-outs :p

Hmmmmm think I only really saw one moment of that which was the rooftop section of the museum when you looked out when standing on a air duct.

The rest look pretty good

Uncharted-2-c.jpg

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.

Thank God for that, pardon the expression, and I thought it was me... I agree there was more interaction in the first COD MW and it did feel like a proper FPS although the game is excellent and MP is pretty darn good but you do get a little bored with Single Player, which is the reason why I have bought a couple of games and will come back to it in a couple of weeks or even 2010. I do like the blurred vision when you are looking down the sights which is realist and accurate. Apart from that I would give it 10/10 but you do get bored after a couple of hours playing the game.

But better graphics, Uncharted 2 blows it out the water, get on top of a high rooftop and take a look about :)

Meh sack rooftops, the scene near the end when you first enter Shambala, is effing nuts. That's what you call draw distance.

Here goes my multiplayer gripe... Sorry in advance. :)

It literally frustrates me to no end that this game allows you to use two shotguns, never mind them being ultra affective.

I rarely die by someone shooting me in a gun battle, but I can't tell you how many times I've been shot in the back by some kid flanking me, then to re-spawn and immediately die again. I just feel like the skill is gone from this game. I loved Modern Warfare, and in all honesty I'm not bashing this game because I don't feel like it lives up to the standards of MW1, I just feel like MW1 had a much stronger multiplayer. I think these are legitimate gripes. The maps in the original had flow, most of them forced head on encounters with the opposing team, whereas MW2 is just so random. The recoil on the guns are gone, you can hold the trigger down and shoot lasers.

Let's just take a quick look at what I think is the most ridiculous thing about this game. Marathon Pro, Lightweight Pro, Ninja Pro, Two Model 1887's, and a primary weapon with a heartbeat sensor. I play with some kid that uses this and it is completely over powered. The class balance in this game fails, hard. Just seeing someone with two shotguns running around the map destroying kids, even if they are on my team, is frustrating. You need no reaction time, no aim, and really, no skill. Don't get me started on riot shields.

The positive aspect of this game, however, is that competitively it is fun. Playing MLG (Gamebattles) on Hardcore S&D is great, and I think the maps are set up better for that rather than Team Deathmatch.

It might be just me, but casual play in this game is more frustrating than enjoyable.

Anyway, my rant is over with. I would love to hear other people's opinions whether you agree or disagree with my post.

Whats your problem with riot shields? Just stick some semtex on them or shoot his feet off and job done.

I usually have regular frag grenades equipped, but thank you for the tip. My problem with the shield is that someone can crouch walk up to you, and slam you two times to your death if you don't have semtex. You're literally helpless unless you can time a frag to roll behind them and blow up. It just kinda boils down to the skill factor for me. In my opinion it really doesn't take a lot of skill to use a riot shield, but the reward is great. Just like the duel shotguns.

If you start cheating and glitching for your trophies, you are pathetic - No offence.

Well depending if I find some love for the MP I may end up keeping it. There are about 5-6 guys in work that keep telling me to give it more time. Just didn't find it that enjoyable though.

As for the trophies, yeah I guess you are right there.

Really? Do trophies mean that much to you?

They don't mean jack **** to me but whoever does it lose any sort of integrity, can't possibly boast about his trophies on the forums either if the person did something like that - I'm against any form of cheating and glitching whether it be in games, to boost scores, get rewards or whatever.

They don't mean jack **** to me but whoever does it lose any sort of integrity, can't possibly boast about his trophies on the forums either if the person did something like that - I'm against any form of cheating and glitching whether it be in games, to boost scores, get rewards or whatever.

Then you need to loosen up a bit.

And before you say anything, no, I have not done that glitch. I don't even own the game (only rented it to play online, it sucked, and I returned it).

I have a solid group of friends I play with online and it's a blast. Are you guys that are getting bored with it playing solo or what?

I could never get bored playing solo.

And before anyone gives me **** about posting the glitch, I don't own the game, never played it, never plan to.

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      581
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      73
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!