# Call of Furry, Modern Wurfare 2



## DarckArchon (Oct 30, 2009)

(sorry for cheesy title )

Wanted to know if any are waiting very much for Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 and if you think it might be better. And if Marty should be pulled out .

Ohh and if anyone is still playing CoD 4, maybe a Multiplayer match before the second comes out, for practice.


----------



## Jelly (Oct 30, 2009)

the mind boggles why you didnt make it Murrdern Wolfur 2


----------



## TheNewfie (Oct 30, 2009)

Getting it Xmas ^.^ (I hope)
Right now it looks like its better then COD4 or COD WAW
I still play COD4 every now and again


----------



## Adrianfolf (Oct 30, 2009)

I'm sorry but from the kick in the balls IW did to PC owners I do not think it will be better than CoD4 unless they bring back Dedicated Servers then it will most likely be a buy just for my CoD collection but never played


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Oct 30, 2009)

Did you know?  They've changed the title to "Activision's Money Maker: Suck On It And Make Kotick Rich"


----------



## Adrianfolf (Oct 30, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> Did you know?  They've changed the title to "Activision's Money Maker: Suck On It And Make Kotick Rich"



This


----------



## DragonRift (Oct 30, 2009)

I completely understand and agree with what Activision has done with the PC version.  It's absolute bullshit.

But that's not going to stop me from buying the 360 version, though.    It doesn't matter how many people boycott the game... they're still going to make a shitload of money.  So your choice is either to sit it out and play something else, or simply get over it and just get it for your PS3 or 360 instead.


----------



## Runefox (Oct 30, 2009)

ActiBlizzard's big fuck you to PC gamers is going to prevent me from buying it on the PC.

Console controls will prevent me from buying it on the 360/PS3. Joysticks suck.

I will not be purchasing MW2, just as I didn't purchase WaW (but for wholly different reasons).


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Oct 30, 2009)

Yeah, I'm gonna hopefully get it for console.  

I prefer CoD4 over CoD:WaW only because the multi-player is a bit better.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Oct 30, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> Did you know?  They've changed the title to "Activision's Money Maker: Suck On It And Make Kotick Rich"



This too. Not getting it because I'm a PC gamer and they decided to fuck the game up for us. Doesn't mean I won't pirate it just for the singleplayer, since that campaign looks awesome.


----------



## Internet Police Chief (Oct 30, 2009)

Not buying it. Fuck that and what they did to PC gamers.

I will be pirating it for the single player, however.


----------



## TheNewfie (Oct 30, 2009)

Baron Von Yiffington said:


> Not buying it. Fuck that and what they did to PC gamers.
> 
> I will be pirating it for the single player, however.



Fuck PC gamers I say about fucking time they started ripping you people off.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Oct 30, 2009)

TheNewfie said:


> Fuck PC gamers I say about fucking time they started ripping you people off.



wat


----------



## Adrianfolf (Oct 30, 2009)

TheNewfie said:


> Fuck PC gamers I say about fucking time they started ripping you people off.



You do realize that without us the consoles would have never exsisted right?


----------



## TheNewfie (Oct 30, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> You do realize that without us the consoles would have never exsisted right?



No shit, but they exsiste now so fuck the PC   
>=]


----------



## Internet Police Chief (Oct 30, 2009)

TheNewfie said:


> Fuck PC gamers I say about fucking time they started ripping you people off.




Someone got told they are terrible with a mouse and keyboard.

lol umad?

Edit: Also, I like how you say "you people" like we're different or something. You realize you're playing the same thing as us, right? Just on a far lesser platform?


----------



## TheNewfie (Oct 30, 2009)

Baron Von Yiffington said:


> Someone got told they are terrible with a mouse and keyboard.
> 
> lol umad?



No, but being blind in one eye does not help. lol


----------



## Internet Police Chief (Oct 30, 2009)

TheNewfie said:


> No, but being blind in one eye does not help. lol



And playing on a console (especially the pstripple) helps with you being blind how?


----------



## TheNewfie (Oct 30, 2009)

Baron Von Yiffington said:


> And playing on a console (especially the pstripple) helps with you being blind how?



Alot easy-er to see text/menus/etc


----------



## Internet Police Chief (Oct 30, 2009)

TheNewfie said:


> Alot easy-er to see text/menus/etc



Get a bigger monitor.

*PROBLEM SOLVED*


----------



## TheNewfie (Oct 30, 2009)

I would but (stupid) mother got a laptop for me instead of a decktop.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Oct 30, 2009)

I'm not using a *decktop* either, but I can game just fine.   :V


----------



## Internet Police Chief (Oct 30, 2009)

TheNewfie said:


> I would but (stupid) mother got a laptop for me instead of a decktop.



Yeah, she's obviously so stupid for thinking about you and buying you a fucking laptop. 

PS: You can still use a monitor on (most) laptops.


----------



## TheNewfie (Oct 30, 2009)

Baron Von Yiffington said:


> Yeah, she's obviously so stupid for thinking about you and buying you a fucking laptop.
> 
> PS: You can still use a monitor on (most) laptops.



No she's stupid for not thinking about my eye site before buying the laptop. And any ways I use my PS3 to do everything on the internet. like posting on here.


----------



## DarckArchon (Oct 30, 2009)

TheNewfie said:


> Fuck PC gamers I say about fucking time they started ripping you people off.




Gues what i am a PC gamer, and you can give me an Xbox, PS3 and a Wii and ill still say PC is better


----------



## Daervhir (Oct 30, 2009)

So what is the actual point of this thread...I'm going to assume someone looking for furs that ware going to be playing CoD: MW2? 

If that is the case, I'm skipping three days of school to play it. I'm getting the prestige edition and play Cod4 everyday. So feel free to add me on Xbox Live if you want to play a few games. I'll play everything but Domination. 

If you do add me make sure to send a text message along with it so I know its you.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Oct 30, 2009)

Daervhir said:


> If that is the case, I'm skipping three days of school to play it. I'm getting the prestige edition and play Cod4 everyday.



*facepalm* skipping school to play a fucking video game? You're a retard. Why not just wait until you get home?

Also CoD's multiplayer on consoles sucks balls.


----------



## Daervhir (Oct 30, 2009)

I'm skipping school because if I want to make the MLG Draft this year I need too. 

Also, I have all my work done and turned in for the days I'll be gone. 

Either way, I just need to become very used to that game, the maps, and all the weapons as fast as possible. I've already been slotted for a tournament on Jan 3.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Oct 30, 2009)

Daervhir said:


> I'm skipping school because if I want to make the MLG Draft this year I need too.



That doesn't even make sense. "Skipping school" is when you deliberately skip classes without permission. Then there's if you have permission to not go, for example dentist, doctors visit, etc etc.

Anyway, good for you, CoD doesn't take much skill anyway compared to most other shooters.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Oct 30, 2009)

Daervhir said:


> I'm skipping school because if I want to make the MLG Draft this year I need too.
> 
> Also, I have all my work done and turned in for the days I'll be gone.
> 
> Either way, I just need to become very used to that game, the maps, and all the weapons as fast as possible. I've already been slotted for a tournament on Jan 3.




What are you, 12?


----------



## Aleister The Wolf (Oct 30, 2009)

Im getting it, and i'll be on from about 5 to 11 weekdays, add me if you want...


Daervhir said:


> I'm skipping school because if I want to make the MLG Draft this year I need too.
> 
> Also, I have all my work done and turned in for the days I'll be gone.
> 
> Either way, I just need to become very used to that game, the maps, and all the weapons as fast as possible. I've already been slotted for a tournament on Jan 3.


Im sorry, But REALLY?!
your so determined to be in an MLG "draft" (because gamin' is SERIUS BIZNUS) that you are skipping school for three days to play...


----------



## Daervhir (Oct 30, 2009)

I was on the draft last year. I'm trying to make it again this year. You make serious money off of it. (I made roughly $370,000 last year and was sponsored) 

@ LotsOfNothing: I'm not 12.


----------



## Tobias-the-pink (Oct 30, 2009)

I spend a lot of time on IW's forums (Tobiwanz) so i'm looking forward to it lots! Wonder whether it'll live up to the hype tho :/


----------



## Vintage (Oct 30, 2009)

Daervhir said:


> I was on the draft last year. I'm trying to make it again this year. You make serious money off of it. (I made roughly $370,000 last year and was sponsored)
> 
> @ LotsOfNothing: I'm not 12.



 semper games, bro


----------



## Runefox (Oct 30, 2009)

Daervhir said:


> I was on the draft last year. I'm trying to make it again this year. You make serious money off of it. *(I made roughly $370,000 last year and was sponsored)*



Hi! Welcome to the Internet. It looks like you're trying to spout random bullshit about your e-peen size. Would you like help?
*Get help spouting random bullshit and extending your e-peen*
*Continue spouting randomly without help*
Don't show me this tip again


----------



## Holsety (Oct 30, 2009)

Excuse my ignorance, but did Activision ever explain WHY they were removing Dedicated Server support for the PC version?


----------



## Internet Police Chief (Oct 30, 2009)

Daervhir said:


> I was on the draft last year. I'm trying to make it again this year. You make serious money off of it. (I made roughly $370,000 last year and was sponsored)
> 
> @ LotsOfNothing: I'm not 12.




Oh, really? You did? Where's your MLG profile? Who were your sponsors? If you did that well, certainly you would be recognized by them.

You're a terrible liar, kid. If you're "skipping school", I know you haven't made almost half a million.

You're 15. You haven't made $370,000 playing video games, and you never will. Professional gaming is retarded.

P.S:



> I'm skipping school because if I want to make the MLG Draft this year I need too.



This is some of the funniest bullshit I have EVER HEARD.


----------



## Runefox (Oct 30, 2009)

Holsety said:


> Excuse my ignorance, but did Activision ever explain WHY they were removing Dedicated Server support for PCs?



They did... Sort of, anyway. The story goes that it allows for a more integrated experience - matchmaking, friends lists, etc etc etc. The problem is, though, Steam already exists for that, and does it incredibly well - Why, then, should IW need to create IWNet, especially considering they're already fully geared for the "Steam experience", with Achievements and everything? The answer is pretty simple - First and foremost, locking to their IWNet means less piracy (a good thing in concept) - Sacrificing the freedom of their consumers in order to prevent it in a similar manner to which the consoles do (some in the extreme contend that it also encourages people to purchase the nearly-un-piratable console versions in a coup against the PC gaming community); Second, locking to their IWNet means that anything "special" would be done through them, up to and including the ability to host dedicated servers further down the line.

This article from IGN tells the story a little better; the benefits are few, and most of them are integrated with Steam and/or easily integrated into the game without IWNet anyway. Just months prior, they hadn't had any plans nor indicated any to change the way they did multiplayer - Actually, they said that it wouldn't change. This was a recent, last-minute decision.


----------



## Holsety (Oct 30, 2009)

Runefox said:


> They did... Sort of, anyway. The story goes that it allows for a more integrated experience - matchmaking, friends lists, etc etc etc. The problem is, though, Steam already exists for that, and does it incredibly well - Why, then, should IW need to create IWNet, especially considering they're already fully geared for the "Steam experience", with Achievements and everything? The answer is pretty simple - First and foremost, locking to their IWNet means less piracy (a good thing in concept) - Sacrificing the freedom of their consumers in order to prevent it in a similar manner to which the consoles do (some in the extreme contend that it also encourages people to purchase the nearly-un-piratable console versions in a coup against the PC gaming community); Second, locking to their IWNet means that anything "special" would be done through them, up to and including the ability to host dedicated servers further down the line.
> 
> This article from IGN tells the story a little better; the benefits are few, and most of them are integrated with Steam and/or easily integrated into the game without IWNet anyway. Just months prior, they hadn't had any plans nor indicated any to change the way they did multiplayer - Actually, they said that it wouldn't change. This was a recent, last-minute decision.


Ah, thank you for that.


...Yeah this all seems extremely redundant and more like another attempt to "control the masses"


----------



## Aeturnus (Oct 30, 2009)

Yeah I'll be getting it. It'll be nice to have another war game that isn't based on World War II.


----------



## Seas (Oct 31, 2009)

More like Grenade of Grenade: Modern Grenade 2 , huh?

Anyway, I might buy it despite the dumbed down multiplayer system of no dedicated servers. Except if Battlefield Bad Company 2 will seem better by comparison, in that case i am buying that one instead.


----------



## Daervhir (Oct 31, 2009)

Sponsors: Arby's, MLG Profile is erased after the season or when you are dropped off of MLG. Face the facts that there are people out there that do this. I don't care about e-peen >.>. I'm not here to impress. I'm here to be here.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Oct 31, 2009)

Go to bed, kid.  It's like 1 in the morning.


----------



## Daervhir (Oct 31, 2009)

Age is irrelevant. I'm not here to impress. Believe what you want, deny what you will. I don't need your friendship. Although I'd rather not have you as enemies. 

In the long run, What is said right now doesn't matter to me. So, do what you want. I just know that in two weeks time, I'll have the next title in the Call of Duty series.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Oct 31, 2009)

Well have fun sucking Activision's dick then.

Just remember, that the taste of burnt yogurt in the back of your throat is the flavour of genericy.


----------



## Daervhir (Oct 31, 2009)

No matter how generic those games are. I enjoy them. That is what matters to me. So, bleh.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Oct 31, 2009)

But that's fine that it doesn't matter to you.  I'm just informing you.  Activision really doesn't like you and the new Call of Duty game is really just a ploy to get fantards (I.E., you) to pony up 60 bucks for the same game they released a while back.


----------



## Daervhir (Oct 31, 2009)

Oh trust me, I've been told by many people to not buy it. To be honest, I'm there for maybe 40% story and 60% multiplayer. This game is more of a replacement for Cod4 for me. After I buy it, I plan on officially switching over to MW2...Unless for some reason I'm not even half as good at it.

Although I do appreciate the information. Its a nice gesture.


----------



## Internet Police Chief (Oct 31, 2009)

Daervhir said:


> Sponsors: Arby's



lol no, sorry. Google brings up clearly that there have been no sponsors for MLG by Arby's. Nice try.



> , MLG Profile is erased after the season or when you are dropped off of MLG.



Cool cover, bro.



> Face the facts that there are people out there that do this.



Yeah, there are. However, they aren't 15 year old kids making $370,000. Face the facts that you aren't going to make nearly half a million dollars from any sponsor (let alone Arby's) by playing in the MLG for one year at 15 years old.


----------



## Daervhir (Oct 31, 2009)

If you really need me too, I shall find the copied version of the checks from Arby's and will pm them to you. If you really require that I do that. 

I didn't get all the money from Arby's. There is something called a tournament which has prizes. 

I know I'm young, but there are other people out there who are maybe 2 years older then me making a hell of a lot more.

Also, if someone wants to question me further about this then you can PM me. I see no need to continue posting arguments over this.


----------



## Internet Police Chief (Oct 31, 2009)

Daervhir said:


> If you really need me too, I shall find the copied version of the checks from Arby's and will pm them to you. If you really require that I do that.



Do it.



> I didn't get all the money from Arby's. There is something called a tournament which has prizes.



Yeeep, now you're changing your story. Of course.



> I know I'm young, but there are other people out there who are maybe 2 years older then me making a hell of a lot more.



No, there aren't. There are not 17 year olds making over $370,000 a year. It isn't happening, sorry - and if it is, it isn't by playing video games, I assure you.


----------



## Bokracroc (Oct 31, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> I'm sorry but from the kick in the balls IW did to PC owners I do not think it will be better than CoD4 unless they bring back Dedicated Servers


Sucks to be PC.
Getting this on console (360) so everything is fine and dandy unless Micheal Atkinson chucks a pigheaded old-man wobbly and gets the game banned in Australia over the Airport level.


----------



## Daervhir (Oct 31, 2009)

Sponsorships don't just hand you money for doing jack shit. They generally pay you to go out and win tournaments while wearing or using their product. For example, sponsored by Red Bull, you would drink a Red Bull. Its not that hard.

How exactly did I change my story? I never specified any amount of money from Arby's. I never specified any amount of money from a tournament prize. 

$370,000 a year? Your damn right no 17 year old is making that. Not as a yearly thing. I had one hell of a year and won a few big tournaments. Along with the money from Arby's and tournaments prizes, it adds up to roughly $370,000. 

The people making a hell of a lot more are the people that go to places like Anaheim. They do the extreme, extreme tournaments. People like Walshy, if you know him. T Squared as well. Yeah they are older but when did age have anything to do with ability?


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Oct 31, 2009)

Daervhir said:


> $370,000 a year? Your damn right no 17 year old is making that. Not as a yearly thing. I had one hell of a year and won a few big tournaments. Along with the money from Arby's and tournaments prizes, it adds up to roughly $370,000.



You don't make $370k off of video game tournament prizes and sponsorships. You can MAYBE make a couple thousand, but not $370k. I doubt you could even make more than 20k. 

Not even if you're in the pro league can you make that much money.

So stop making shit up and waving your e-peen around. We get it, you're good at CoD. Who isn't? CoD is the easiest FPS ever. Even easier on consoles. It's not hard to be "good" at CoD.


----------



## Internet Police Chief (Oct 31, 2009)

Daervhir said:


> How exactly did I change my story? I never specified any amount of money from Arby's. I never specified any amount of money from a tournament prize.



Now you're back peddling. "Oh, see, I didn't say that, I said..." Good job.



> $370,000 a year? Your damn right no 17 year old is making that. Not as a yearly thing. I had one hell of a year and won a few big tournaments. Along with the money from Arby's and tournaments prizes, it adds up to roughly $370,000.



Uh huh, except you said:



> I know I'm young, but there are other people out there who are maybe 2 years older then me making a hell of a lot more.



You're 15, two years older would be 17. If they are making more than you, that means they are making more than $370,000. So which is it? Are people two years older than you making more than you or not?

P.S. he isn't able to send me the checks by PM. Can't find them.


----------



## Daervhir (Oct 31, 2009)

I can't wait for the release of this game. It looks like a good one.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Oct 31, 2009)

Oh, and not to mention, I highly doubt a sponsor would pay out hundreds of thousands of dollars to some 15 year old kid nobody knows who's going to play in an MLG tournament. Oh and hey, even if they give you a HUGE sponsor for something like this, say, $100k, 
You'd still have to win over $270k in prizes. And unless you're like, competing in SEVERAL pro matches in several different games, and winning first place in each, then there's a /slight/ chance of you getting that amount. But oh yeah! That's right! A 15 year old kid didn't single handedly beat America's best video game teams single handedly!



Daervhir said:


> I can't wait for the release of this game. It looks like a good one.



Now you're just changing the subject because you KNOW you cannot back up your false claims. Admit it, just say that you lied and get it over with.


----------



## Internet Police Chief (Oct 31, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> Now you're just changing the subject because you KNOW you cannot back up your false claims. Admit it, just say that you lied and get it over with.



Oh come on, we already know he's lying.

But anyway yeah, poop on the creators. I'm not buying that shit with the restrictions that are put in place.


----------



## Daervhir (Oct 31, 2009)

I'm changing the subject because I'm not going to spam up a thread over a pointless argument that should take place over a pm. I'm sticking to the thread. 

Either way, I think this game looks fairly decent.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Oct 31, 2009)

Baron Von Yiffington said:


> Oh come on, we already know he's lying.
> 
> But anyway yeah, poop on the creators. I'm not buying that shit with the restrictions that are put in place.



Yeah. Hey, wanna pirate it together and play that new Co-op thingy over Hamachi? : D


----------



## Internet Police Chief (Oct 31, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> Yeah. Hey, wanna pirate it together and play that new Co-op thingy over Hamachi? : D



You bet your ass I do. That would be fucking awesome.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Oct 31, 2009)

Daervhir said:


> I'm changing the subject because I'm not going to spam up a thread over a pointless argument that should take place over a pm. I'm sticking to the thread.



Actually, this is not to be resolved through pm's. We all know you're lying kid, you just don't want to humiliate yourself by saying that you lied so that everyone can see. Quite natural, people do it all the time. 



Baron Von Yiffington said:


> You bet your ass I do. That would be fucking awesome.



Fuck yeah. Now lets just wait until November 10'th c:


----------



## Daervhir (Oct 31, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> Actually, this is not to be resolved through pm's. We all know you're lying kid, you just don't want to humiliate yourself by saying that you lied so that everyone can see. Quite natural, people do it all the time.
> 
> 
> 
> Fuck yeah. Now lets just wait until November 10'th c:



Say what you want, I'll keep going on my own path and doing what I have the ability to do. 

I don't give a damn if you say I'm lying. It doesn't make a difference to me.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Oct 31, 2009)

Daervhir said:


> Say what you want, I'll keep going on my own path and doing what I have the ability to do.
> 
> I don't give a damn if you say I'm lying. It doesn't make a difference to me.



Alright, suite yourself. 



Hmm, since MW2 multiplayer is out, I guess I'm gonna take a look at Bad Company 2.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Oct 31, 2009)

Guys, don't be so mean.  *Cyber athletes* needs love too.
























:V


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Oct 31, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> Guys, don't be so mean.  *Cyber athletes* needs love too.
> 
> 
> :V



*:V*


I was unaware that _cyber athletes_ have souls.


----------



## Internet Police Chief (Oct 31, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> Guys, don't be so mean.  *Cyber athletes* needs love too.



No they don't. They replace feelings with money, which must be really easy because Arby's will give $370,000 checks to 15 year olds for playing video games and skipping school.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Oct 31, 2009)

Baron Von Yiffington said:


> No they don't. They replace feelings with money, which must be really easy because Arby's will give $7.50/hour checks to 15 year olds for flipping burgers roast beef stuff.



Fixed


----------



## Runefox (Oct 31, 2009)

Seastalker said:


> More like Grenade of Grenade: Modern Grenade 2 , huh?



Yup.


----------



## ZiggyTheWolf (Nov 2, 2009)

Over rated crap anyway


----------



## Torinir (Nov 3, 2009)

Baron Von Yiffington said:


> No they don't. They replace feelings with money, which must be really easy because Welfare will give $500 monthly checks to 15 year olds for playing video games and skipping school.





LotsOfNothing said:


> Fixed



Fixed


----------



## Torinir (Nov 3, 2009)

@NewfDraggie

Dude, learn to think before you talk. Even Fatal1ty never made more than around $50k-100k in a year actually gaming and that was back when he was in top form. The endorsements and products his name got tagged on were worth more than his actual tournament performances. And that kind of goodness won't be seen again for a long time, if ever.

In today's economy, you'll be lucky to see one or two big money tourneys in gaming in a year. The CPL's dead. Even with that Middle East guy buying them up out of their ashes, don't count on them coming back as big as they were in the past. The days of million dollar purses for video games are done and gone.

@Daervhir

Cool story bro, and I'm gonna let you finish, but you're full of shit. You need to prove yourself in the competitive community to even think about getting a sponsorship. How the hell do you think the top players got their sponsors? They proved they can beat down the competition without a thought *before* they even looked at a sponsor.

You're just another noob looking for a handout. GTFO. :arrow:

As for MW2, no dedicated servers = no competition and no community = dead game. Infinity Ward screwed up large, and they think their IWNet is God's gift to gamers. I want the drugs they're smoking. It's GOTTA be good stuff.


----------



## Ojikori (Nov 3, 2009)

I'll be getting it...I played TDM on XBOX 360 on WaW (currently ranked in the top 100 for TDM kills) and CoD 4 (came back after 3 months of WaW and was still in the top 3000).  

I plan to keep going with it too...gotta keep a furry in the top 100 right?


----------



## Lazydabear (Nov 4, 2009)

I already got my copy reserved for Xbox 360.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 4, 2009)

So it turns out that the PC version, in addition to being locked to IWNet, is also being limited to 9v9 multiplayer rather than 16v16 as has been customary. In other words, there is now almost zero difference between buying it on the PC and a console except for the controls, and I'm getting a strange feeling they'll find a way to mess with that, too. It seems like they're trying hard to rid PC gamers of any reason to buy it on the PC (where it will be pirated) and instead go grab it for the 360 or PS3 (where you might as well say it can't be pirated). I'm guessing that the next installment of CoD/MW may not have a PC version at all - I bet they'll cite 'poor PC sales' and 'high piracy' as the reason.


----------



## Torinir (Nov 4, 2009)

Runefox said:


> So it turns out that the PC version, in addition to being locked to IWNet, is also being limited to 9v9 multiplayer rather than 16v16 as has been customary. In other words, there is now almost zero difference between buying it on the PC and a console except for the controls, and I'm getting a strange feeling they'll find a way to mess with that, too. It seems like they're trying hard to rid PC gamers of any reason to buy it on the PC (where it will be pirated) and instead go grab it for the 360 or PS3 (where you might as well say it can't be pirated). I'm guessing that the next installment of CoD/MW may not have a PC version at all - I bet they'll cite 'poor PC sales' and 'high piracy' as the reason.



Actually, there were a number of 360 users who got leaked/pirated copies of MW2. Which is why M$ was slamming the ban hammer on a number of Live accounts on Halloween.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 4, 2009)

I guess game devs don't realize that by removing their games off the PC market it will mean more demand for console pirating software, making it more available to the masses like PC pirating already is. 

However so far I haven't tried the no dedicated server thing, who knows maybe this will cut down on hackers and stupid servers with stupid mods/settings as well as always being able to find a game with people in it that suits what you're looking for.

This 9v9 I agree with as well, COD4 with 16v16 is a explosive clusterfuck. You die a lot at spawn...a lot. Even with 9v9 it'll sill be a bit heavy on explosives. Although I would have preferred a nice even 10v10; two teams of five make for awesome squad tactics.


----------



## Azure (Nov 4, 2009)

Dude, bro, I made over 9,000 dollars playing Tetris sponsored by Randalls Baseball Mudding Solutions. I r a 1337 gamezorz.


----------



## Azbulldog (Nov 5, 2009)

Launch Trailer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=429l13dS6kQ


----------



## Kesteh (Nov 5, 2009)

My brother sold some of my PS2 games...to preorder this shit?
I want my fucking cut of the money.


----------



## Torinir (Nov 5, 2009)

Gotta love IW's advertising for MW2...

http://bashandslash.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=770&Itemid=111


----------



## Neybulot (Nov 5, 2009)

More PC version info:

http://www.tek-9.org/news/mw2_developer_chat_reveals_more_bad_news-2115.html

I think this sums up the differences nicely though:


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 5, 2009)

From: http://www.tek-9.org/news/mw2_developer_chat_reveals_more_bad_news-2115.htm



> Ignoring IW.net, is the PC version a direct port of the console version?
> 
> Mackey-IW: No, PC has custom stuff like mouse control, text chat in game, and graphics settings.



Oh, That's _totally_ what a direct port is! Direct ports have no mouse+keyboard control and instead require you to use a gamepad, and have no graphics settings at all! /sarcasm


----------



## Runefox (Nov 5, 2009)

Torinir said:


> Actually, there were a number of 360 users who got leaked/pirated copies of MW2. Which is why M$ was slamming the ban hammer on a number of Live accounts on Halloween.



Yeah, which is another thing - Pirates are dealt with on Live. They are not dealt with on the PC. Another major reason why IW ActiBlizzard wants to tighten the noose on the PC version and shift as many as possible to the consoles.



> This 9v9 I agree with as well, COD4 with 16v16 is a explosive clusterfuck. You die a lot at spawn...a lot. Even with 9v9 it'll sill be a bit heavy on explosives. Although I would have preferred a nice even 10v10; two teams of five make for awesome squad tactics.



Frankly, I would have preferred to be able to, I don't know, CHOOSE. But hey, CoD multiplayer's historically sucked ass anyway - Grenade spam, spawn camping, etc etc. Of course, the 360 controls didn't help. If I end up getting possession of this game somehow, I can pretty much guarantee that it'll be for the single player campaign.


----------



## furryfan917 (Nov 5, 2009)

with no dedicated servers, no mods, matchmaking only, a $60 price tag, and an 18 player limit?

no.


----------



## Torinir (Nov 5, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Yeah, which is another thing - Pirates are dealt with on Live. They are not dealt with on the PC. Another major reason why IW ActiBlizzard wants to tighten the noose on the PC version and shift as many as possible to the consoles.



Strange that piracy has been tackled in many other ways by other game makers. Epic used their master server to banhammer warez CDKey hashes in UT2k4, Anticheat programs can be coded to only allow valid keys, deployment platforms like Steam can refuse to accept invalid keys.

XBL/GFWL is notoriously horrible when it comes to piracy. I know why, but I won't discuss this in an open forum. If you want to know why, PM me. IWNet won't solve piracy. And IW is smoking some serious crack to think it will.

It still does not justify IW's actions. Someone on ArsTechnica said it best. Blaming piracy as the cause of all of the PC gaming woes is like RIAA blaming piracy for all of the music industry problems. Guess where it got RIAA?


----------



## Holsety (Nov 5, 2009)

> If I end up getting possession of this game somehow, I can pretty much guarantee that it'll be for the single player campaign.


I would say I'd wait for the price to drop, but we all know that CoD name + Bobby Kotick means it'll be $60 US for years.


----------



## Lazydabear (Nov 5, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Yeah, which is another thing - Pirates are dealt with on Live. They are not dealt with on the PC. Another major reason why IW ActiBlizzard wants to tighten the noose on the PC version and shift as many as possible to the consoles.
> 
> 
> 
> Frankly, I would have preferred to be able to, I don't know, CHOOSE. But hey, CoD multiplayer's historically sucked ass anyway - Grenade spam, spawn camping, etc etc. Of course, the 360 controls didn't help. If I end up getting possession of this game somehow, I can pretty much guarantee that it'll be for the single player campaign.


 

So your saying they are Focus on the Console market because Activison Blizzard believes PC market isn't helping them to make much profit?


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 5, 2009)

Neybulot said:


> More PC version info:
> 
> http://www.tek-9.org/news/mw2_developer_chat_reveals_more_bad_news-2115.html
> 
> I think this sums up the differences nicely though:



Uh, that chart is incorrect. Whoever did that is clearly buthurt. For instance, avrage ping can't even be determined seeing as the game isn't even out yet, as well COD4's average ping for US was about 80. There is possible console commands, we don't know. CoD4 had no lean. It was up to 32, not 64. Host could have "zero ping advantage" in any game. Price is the same for both.

In short: Chart is wrong and clearly biased.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 5, 2009)

> So your saying they are Focus on the Console market because Activison Blizzard believes PC market isn't helping them to make much profit?


It's pretty obvious, isn't it? I mean, there aren't any MW2-themed video cards or anything like that, but there's a whole *special edition MW2 360 Elite unit*. That takes a good bit of commitment to a platform. The only other games to do that have been Halo 3 (Microsoft's own), Resident Evil 5 and a special one for The Simpsons movie.



> Uh, that chart is incorrect. Whoever did that is clearly buthurt. For instance, avrage ping can't even be determined seeing as the game isn't even out yet, as well COD4's average ping for US was about 80.


Peer-to-peer would increase the average ping versus server-based play. Take for example virtually everyone's ping to my computer on KF - 100ms+. Without centrally-hosted servers on optimized connections, the latency will necessarily be higher (as it is for pretty much every 360 game).

That said, it was probably around 100+ to begin with. People who actually get 25-40ms pings don't exist.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 5, 2009)

Well we still don't know how the system works, but yeah. I'm not expecting 50 ping, but I'd expect to see about 120-150ish. 360 didn't have any, or barely any issues on cod4 with lag.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 5, 2009)

*Bad news for PC Modern Warefare 2 gamers*

Okay my friend just linked me to this site, and my god. I thought Infinity Ward was retarded. But they have just reached "Big headed cockbite" retarded. 

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/...tm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=rss

Now as you know, Infinity Ward told us there would be no dedicated servers. But it gets SO much worse what they have planned for the PC version.

Here. Let me quote a few passages. Basically Infinity Ward personel got into interviews with gamers, and they got to ask them questions. Here are a few responses.



> *Josh111:* PC Question... What will the max amount of players per map be for PC multiplayer on IW.net
> 
> _Vince-IW:_ 9v9



Thats a big problem for map makers, as 18 people on one map isn't too big. Yet there is still no word on Mod Tools being released, so it's unlikely players will even be able to do that anyway.


> *Q:* Is there a console in the PC version of the game, so we can change our field of view from the xbox's default 65 FOV to 80 also can we tweaks the weapon damage for each gun, removes perks, graphical debris, breathing sway, also thru console like we where able to before or is this all gone?
> 
> _Vince-IW:_ We would like you to play the game the way we designed and balanced it.​



... no comment


> *DudezTY:* Since we cannot kick people in ranked matches, how will we stop hackers who get past VAC?
> 
> _Mackey-IW:_ Our goal is to ban hackers from the game.



Okay is Infinity Ward run by the guys in the mail room?


> *Moriarte:* Ignoring IW.net, is the PC version a direct port of the console version?
> 
> _Mackey-IW:_ No, PC has custom stuff like mouse control, text chat in game, and graphics settings.



... I guess so. Either that or the development team hasn't actually ever picked up a controller.

Here's something to sum it up for people who don't want to read the article. It is at the conclusion.



> We thought the lack of dedicated servers was bad, but now we can add the lack of console commands, the inability to have a say in who hosts the game, a lengthy pause while the game migrates to a new host if the currently selected host quits, no leaning, no option to record matches, and no way to kick or block trouble players, hackers, or cheaters.
> You have to wonder if there are any actual PC gamers working at Infinity Ward, as it will be a challenge to find any member of the PC gaming community that will stand up for any of these omissions, not to mention all of them bundled together. At launch, this will be one of the most locked-down, inflexible, and gamer-unfriendly game ever created.



Now I am glad I was never actually going to buy it.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 5, 2009)

*Re: Bad news for PC Modern Warefare 2 gamers*

I believe the thread you're looking for is over here - Most of that information has already been posted.


----------



## ElizabethAlexandraMary (Nov 5, 2009)

*Re: Bad news for PC Modern Warefare 2 gamers*



CryoScales said:


> Now I am glad I was never actually going to buy it.


Reminds me of some retarded Bioshock employee responses. ("Hey, your brother bought the game, you didn't. Go get yourself your own copy :V")

So pretty much that. A shame, though, since I was actually planning to pick up CoD there, after neglecting the series since CoD2. But I guess it's really made to stay on consoles.

Edit: Oh nvm, that^


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 5, 2009)

*Re: Bad news for PC Modern Warefare 2 gamers*



Runefox said:


> I believe the thread you're looking for is over here - Most of that information has already been posted.



That was a thread about finding COD4 games that digressed into ranting about it. Here people can talk about it more freely.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 5, 2009)

You know, I missed this one earlier on, mostly because TheNewfie seems pretty much adamant that PC's are evil, etc etc, but...



TheNewfie said:


> Alot easy-er to see text/menus/etc



Someone missed out on Dead Rising.


----------



## ADF (Nov 5, 2009)

*Re: Bad news for PC Modern Warefare 2 gamers*

Allot of people seem pissed by it, someone made this.






There seems to be developers cashing in on this, Bad Company 2 is going out of its way to appeal to those MW2 have pissed off. Even Shattered Horizon made sure to mention they have dedicated servers.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Nov 5, 2009)

*Re: Bad news for PC Modern Warefare 2 gamers*

Why do both list 'Yes' for LAN play and yet it's still in red for MW2?  That should be a tie.

Also, how are the average practical pings for the PC port known?  The game is unreleased and I don't see any torrents of an early leaked copy.


----------



## ADF (Nov 5, 2009)

*Re: Bad news for PC Modern Warefare 2 gamers*



AshleyAshes said:


> Why do both list 'Yes' for LAN play and yet it's still in red for MW2?  That should be a tie.


*shrug* not my image.



AshleyAshes said:


> Also, how are the average practical pings for the PC port known?  The game is unreleased and I don't see any torrents of an early leaked copy.


There was an interview somewhere that stated it had 100 ping in their own office and they thought that was "great".


----------



## AshleyAshes (Nov 5, 2009)

*Re: Bad news for PC Modern Warefare 2 gamers*



ADF said:


> There was an interview somewhere that stated it had 100 ping in their own office and they thought that was "great".


 
Has anyone actually gotten 10-40ms ping in online play under normal practical circumstances?  Cause I can see that on LAN, but 10-40ms over internet?  I have SERIOUS doubts that most people's connections can accomplish that.  Using SpeedTest.net I'm getting a 47-49ms ping and that's just for a very SIMPLE ping.  That's not even close to trying to send game data, get it processed and get a response.


----------



## ADF (Nov 5, 2009)

*Re: Bad news for PC Modern Warefare 2 gamers*



AshleyAshes said:


> Has anyone actually gotten 10-40ms ping in online play under normal practical circumstances?  Cause I can see that on LAN, but 10-40ms over internet?  I have SERIOUS doubts that most people's connections can accomplish that.  Using SpeedTest.net I'm getting a 47-49ms ping and that's just for a very SIMPLE ping.  That's not even close to trying to send game data, get it processed and get a response.



The people who saw the article seemed to take issue, they seemed to think they get much better ping on dedicated servers. I wouldn't know but since they took issue with it they must get better.

I'll have to load Steam tomorrow and see what I get.


----------



## Sinjo (Nov 5, 2009)

*Re: Bad news for PC Modern Warefare 2 gamers*

I was hopeful for this game.  I don't want it anymore.


----------



## Armaetus (Nov 5, 2009)

*Re: Bad news for PC Modern Warefare 2 gamers*

Not gonna bother with this game. Thanks Finity Ward!


----------



## Torinir (Nov 5, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Uh, that chart is incorrect. Whoever did that is clearly buthurt. For instance, avrage ping can't even be determined seeing as the game isn't even out yet, as well COD4's average ping for US was about 80. There is possible console commands, we don't know. CoD4 had no lean. It was up to 32, not 64. Host could have "zero ping advantage" in any game. Price is the same for both.
> 
> In short: Chart is wrong and clearly biased.



Umm... wrong answer, Newf. VERY wrong answer. Did you even think for two seconds when you wrote that?

Infinity Ward had ADMITTED during the Best Buy live chat that they had *100ms pings in a LAN MATCH* in MW2... I have never seen any game played LAN with more than 30ms ping. And even that was a stretch. This alone tells me that the netcode is likely the biggest chunk of turds ever developed, and I've borne witness to some horrible netcode before.

IW also stated there would be no console commands available during the Best Buy live chat.

Leaning was present in CoD4 for PC. I don't know if you didn't see the bindings in the setup or not, but they were there.

And in CoD4, people played on DEDICATED SERVERS. It could handle 32 players without batting an eye, and there was no host, because it was client/server.

Price for MW1 was $50, Price for MW2 is officially $60. $50 != $60.

Please, let the intelligent people do the talking for a change.


----------



## Holsety (Nov 6, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:
			
		

> It was up to 32, not 64


What?


Also, after watching the Launch Trailer does anyone else think that we've gone way past the Michael Bay line?


----------



## Neybulot (Nov 6, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Uh, that chart is incorrect. Whoever did that is clearly buthurt. For instance, avrage ping can't even be determined seeing as the game isn't even out yet, as well COD4's average ping for US was about 80. There is possible console commands, we don't know. CoD4 had no lean. It was up to 32, not 64. Host could have "zero ping advantage" in any game. Price is the same for both.
> 
> In short: Chart is wrong and clearly biased.



You apparently didn't click the link. One of the IW devs said to the following question and I quote:

*What kinds of pings did you get during your IWNet testing and what do you say is an acceptable ping?*
Mackey-IW: I've been playing mainly with around 100ms ping and it was great.

The zero ping advantage line is incorrect though, yeah.


----------



## Neybulot (Nov 6, 2009)

*Re: Bad news for PC Modern Warefare 2 gamers*



AshleyAshes said:


> Cause I can see that on LAN, but 10-40ms over internet?  I have SERIOUS doubts that most people's connections can accomplish that.



AshleyAshes: Meet FiOS.


----------



## Corto (Nov 6, 2009)

*Re: Bad news for PC Modern Warefare 2 gamers*



CryoScales said:


> That was a thread about finding COD4 games that digressed into ranting about it. Here people can talk about it more freely.


Regardless, we don't need two threads for what is essentially the same topic.

Merged.


----------



## Torinir (Nov 6, 2009)

Neybulot said:


> You apparently didn't click the link. One of the IW devs said to the following question and I quote:
> 
> *What kinds of pings did you get during your IWNet testing and what do you say is an acceptable ping?*
> Mackey-IW: I've been playing mainly with around 100ms ping and it was great.
> ...



The host in a peer to peer match will always have a 0 ping, since his client is the main connection point, and the one processing all of the game traffic, so data from his "connection" will have virtually 0 turn around time as it's processed locally, not over the network.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 6, 2009)

Torinir said:


> Umm... wrong answer, Newf. VERY wrong answer. Did you even think for two seconds when you wrote that?


lol


> Infinity Ward had ADMITTED during the Best Buy live chat that they had *100ms pings in a LAN MATCH* in MW2... I have never seen any game played LAN with more than 30ms ping. And even that was a stretch. This alone tells me that the netcode is likely the biggest chunk of turds ever developed, and I've borne witness to some horrible netcode before.


Proooof~ I've never seen any game played lan with more than 10ms in latency, so you're so full of shit.


> IW also stated there would be no console commands available during the Best Buy live chat.


Proof, I've been following this like a hawk. No such claims have been made.


> Leaning was present in CoD4 for PC. I don't know if you didn't see the bindings in the setup or not, but they were there.


I have two copies of COD4 PC right here (two computers). There is no lean. I'm checking twice, no there is no lean.


> And in CoD4, people played on DEDICATED SERVERS. It could handle 32 players without batting an eye, and there was no host, because it was client/server.


Dedicated servers aren't as good as people like to believe. You get a lot of people kicking/banning, abusing the power, modding, changing variables around and etc. The only upside to a dedicated server is better ping, but if the netcode is good enough that shouldn't matter anyway. Which is what I assume MW:2 has, good netcode. So I'd expect >150 ping which is well within the best performance line. If you complain for having 150 ping then I laugh at you, seeing as I'm always at 100-150 ping on dedicated servers on every game I play and I rip shit up.



> Price for MW1 was $50, Price for MW2 is officially $60. $50 != $60.


I bought my COD4 off steam for $60. It was $60 several months after launch. All PC games are $60. You're so full of shit, yet again.


> Please, let the intelligent people do the talking for a change.


Then stop posting.

That list is the exact same ADF posted, and clearly it was simply some moron that decided to make some BS pile of text and get other morons to paste it around. Quite the success, two morons posted it here. Thankfully I know several things are wrong in there, and several otehr things can't even be determined until the game is actually released. So It's quite easy to say the entire chart is full of shit, wrote up by some butthurt moron.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 6, 2009)

Holsety said:


> What?
> 
> 
> Also, after watching the Launch Trailer does anyone else think that we've gone way past the Michael Bay line?



You can mod it to be 64, by default it is not. And 32 player games were spawn camping nade fests. 64 player games were laggy, unplayable messes. It's literally the worst thing to play, a 64 player cod4 game. You can't get anywhere without blowing up from a x3 nade spammer, martydom, or nade launchers. The game wasn't designed for 64 players in the slightest.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Nov 6, 2009)

Um Newf most PC games in the States are only $50 brand new even on Steam. I bought Fallout 3 on PC through steam a week after release for $50 so your agruement is invalid. They may cost that much where you live but not everyone else. MW2 is the first (Non special edition) game I have ever seen on PC be released at the CONSOLE game price. Hell even Dragon Age Origins is $49.99 and so is Borderlands both games that have been released this year on PC as well as the consoles


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 6, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> I have two copies of COD4 PC right here (two computers). There is no lean. I'm checking twice, no there is no lean.



Uhhh.....There is lean in CoD4 PC. Default keys "Q" and "E". Without quotations of course. I just jumped into multiplayer and checked, there is lean.



NewfDraggie said:


> You can mod it to be 64, by default it is not. And 32 player games were spawn camping nade fests. 64 player games were laggy, unplayable messes. It's literally the worst thing to play, a 64 player cod4 game. You can't get anywhere without blowing up from a x3 nade spammer, martydom, or nade launchers. The game wasn't designed for 64 players in the slightest.



It's not really the game, it's more the maps. I've played a few custom maps made with 40+ players in mind and it works rather well, although one would like actual ballistics rather than hitscan, which is what CoD4 uses iirc.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 6, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> Um Newf most PC games in the States are only $50 brand new even on Steam. I bought Fallout 3 on PC through steam a week after release for $50 so your agruement is invalid. They may cost that much where you live but not everyone else. MW2 is the first (Non special edition) game I have ever seen on PC be released at the CONSOLE game price. Hell even Dragon Age Origins is $49.99 and so is Borderlands both games that have been released this year on PC as well as the consoles


Ah USD. See with the value of the USD dropping significantly every month they're charging you the same price as they charge Canada, seeing as the dollar is basically the same at this point. So you're not mad at them, you should be mad at the federal reserve.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 6, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> So you're not mad at them, you should be mad at the federal reserve.



While I agree with you...



			
				Bobby Kotick said:
			
		

> if it was left to me, I would raise [software] prices even further





			
				Bobby Kotick said:
			
		

> The goal that I had in bringing a lot of the packaged goods folks into Activision about 10 years ago was to take all the fun out of making video games.





			
				Bobby Kotick said:
			
		

> I think we've definitely been able to instill in the culture the skepticism and pessimism and fear that you should have in an economy like we're in today.



Man, I wish I had a pullstring Bobby Kotick doll so I could listen to these great quotes all day long!


----------



## Alvine33 (Nov 7, 2009)

Don't worry guys, we've got custom stuff like _mouse control, text chat in game, and graphics settings_!



NewfDraggie said:


> Proooof~ I've never seen any game played lan with more than 10ms in latency, so you're so full of shit.


Are IW's own words not proof enough for you?



> 02:56 LaGgY_42o
> What kinds of pings did you get during your IWNet testing and what do you say is an acceptable ping?
> 02:56 Mackey-IW
> I've been playing mainly with around 100ms ping and it was great.





> I have two copies of COD4 PC right here (two computers). There is no lean. I'm checking twice, no there is no lean.


Really?  How could you not notice lean? Q and E are the default keys for it, like Ishnuvalok said.



> Dedicated servers aren't as good as people like to believe. You get a lot of people kicking/banning, abusing the power, modding, changing variables around and etc. The only upside to a dedicated server is better ping, but if the netcode is good enough that shouldn't matter anyway. Which is what I assume MW:2 has, good netcode. So I'd expect >150 ping which is well within the best performance line. If you complain for having 150 ping then I laugh at you, seeing as I'm always at 100-150 ping on dedicated servers on every game I play and I rip shit up.


Kicking, banning, changing variables, and modding _are_ upsides to most of the PC crowd who want dedicated servers.



> I bought my COD4 off steam for $60. It was $60 several months after launch. All PC games are $60. You're so full of shit, yet again.


http://www.gamestop.com/browse/search.aspx?N=0&Ntk=TitleKeyword&Ntx=mode+matchallpartial&Ntt=bad%20company%202

$50 for PC, $60 for consoles. Who's full of shit now?


----------



## Holsety (Nov 7, 2009)

Thats for Bad Company, not CoD4


Edit: Nevermind, I see what you were saying now


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 7, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> I bought my COD4 off steam for $60. It was $60 several months after launch. All PC games are $60. You're so full of shit, yet again.



I bought the CoD4 Collectors Edition for 450 SEK, about $60 US. The normal game was about 350 SEK at my local GameStop, that's about $50 US. Maybe prices are just jacked up in Canada :\

Although, prices have jacked up a LOT since then, Borderlands: 499 SEK, that's $71 US. Same for MW2, $71 US.

Holy shit I'm getting ripped off.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 7, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> I bought the CoD4 Collectors Edition for 450 SEK, about $60 US. The normal game was about 350 SEK at my local GameStop, that's about $50 US. Maybe prices are just jacked up in Canada :\



They so fucking are. .__.; The dollar's not even appreciably worth less any more, and stuff's still as expensive as hell - Typically more than 10% more expensive.


----------



## Alvine33 (Nov 7, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> I bought the CoD4 Collectors Edition for 450 SEK, about $60 US. The normal game was about 350 SEK at my local GameStop, that's about $50 US. Maybe prices are just jacked up in Canada :\
> 
> Although, prices have jacked up a LOT since then, Borderlands: 499 SEK, that's $71 US. Same for MW2, $71 US.
> 
> Holy shit I'm getting ripped off.



http://store.steampowered.com/app/10180/?cc=AU

D:


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 7, 2009)

Alvine33 said:


> http://store.steampowered.com/app/10180/?cc=AU
> 
> D:



$90 US!? 

Holy hell, we beat you by $10. 700 SEK for MW2, that's $100 US. 

._.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Nov 7, 2009)

The fuck?  90 bucks?  Shit's not worth that much.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 7, 2009)

Shark_the_raptor said:


> The fuck?  90 bucks?  Shit's not worth that much.



The CEO of Activision wishes it was more.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 7, 2009)

Alvine33 said:


> Are IW's own words not proof enough for you?


I haven't seen any proof showing they said anything of the sort, so no. Your own words aren't good enough.


> Really?  How could you not notice lean? Q and E are the default keys for it, like Ishnuvalok said.


Guess you guys have different versions of the game than I have, or you're just yankin' my chain.


> Kicking, banning, changing variables, and modding _are_ upsides to most of the PC crowd who want dedicated servers.


Leave, leave, unfair, lame/dead mod database for cod4 anyway.



> http://www.gamestop.com/browse/search.aspx?N=0&Ntk=TitleKeyword&Ntx=mode+matchallpartial&Ntt=bad%20company%202
> 
> $50 for PC, $60 for consoles. Who's full of shit now?


That link shows bad company 2 for me, if you meant cod4 then you're a little late. Seeing as it's almost 2010 and cod4 came out in 2007.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 7, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> I haven't seen any proof showing they said anything of the sort, so no. Your own words aren't good enough.
> 
> Guess you guys have different versions of the game than I have, or you're just yankin' my chain.
> 
> That link shows bad company 2 for me, if you meant cod4 then you're a little late. Seeing as it's almost 2010 and cod4 came out in 2007.


1: Check here: http://jalba.se/headz/files/text/bestbuymw2log.php

If you want the exact quote: 


> LaGgY_42o: What kinds of pings did you get during your IWNet testing and what do you say is an acceptable ping?
> 
> Mackey-IW: I've been playing mainly with around 100ms ping and it was great.



2: Lean is in the game. Start up the game, set all controls to DEFAULT. Then while in game, press "Q" or "E" you will lean to the left or right, respectively. Don't play dumb. 

3: You stated that ALL PC Games are $60. He wasn't using CoD4 as an example because it's obviously gone down in price and isn't a good example, so he choose a game that's going to be released soon, namely BC2. As you can see in the link BC2 is NOT $60, but $50 (for PC version).


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 7, 2009)

A hundred ping is the same as dedicated servers, if it is 100ms ping then you're complaining about absolutely nothing. I'm saying your estimation of 20-40 is total bs.

Also i don't think you can read very well, from his link it doesn't say $50. It says $59.99, that's $60 just so you know.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 7, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> A hundred ping is the same as dedicated servers, if it is 100ms ping then you're complaining about absolutely nothing. I'm saying your estimation of 20-40 is total bs.
> 
> Also i don't think you can read very well, from his link it doesn't say $50. It says $59.99, that's $60 just so you know.



$59.99 for the CONSOLE version. 

$49.99 for the PC version. 

I don't think you can read well~

Whenever I play on my favorite servers on CoD4, my average ping is between 30-60. 100 is minor lag, enough to make me put off a server.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 7, 2009)

Sure your average ping is 30-60, sure it is. 100ms is laggy, xD your eyes can't actually see that lag, the point where you'll notice lag is about 120-150 and even then if -that- puts you off on server that's your fault. I play on -every- server with 150 ping and I easily top scoreboards, it's not hard and the lag isn't even noticeable. If you think 100 is bad then you're crutch.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 7, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Sure your average ping is 30-60, sure it is. 100ms is laggy, xD your eyes can't actually see that lag. It's physically impossible.



On all my favorite servers I get an average ping around 30-60ms. 

It varies from game to game, but it's not what the eye sees, it's what registers as hits, that's where it starts to have trouble. Stuff like sniping gets harder the higher your ping gets, around 100 for me I've noticed that shots that should have hit and killed, didn't even register as hits.


----------



## Alvine33 (Nov 7, 2009)

Am I being trolled? :|



NewfDraggie said:


> Guess you guys have different versions of the game than I have, or you're just yankin' my chain.











> That link shows bad company 2 for me, if you meant cod4 then you're a little late. Seeing as it's almost 2010 and cod4 came out in 2007.





> I bought my COD4 off steam for $60. It was $60 several months after launch. *All PC games are $60.* You're so full of shit, yet again.



http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...0008994&Description=borderlands&name=2K GAMES
http://www.gamestop.com/browse/sear...rd&Ntx=mode+matchallpartial&Ntt=bad company 2


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Nov 7, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> The CEO of Activision wishes it was more.



Someone shat in his coffee one too many times.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 7, 2009)

Alvine33 said:


> Am I being trolled? :|



No, Newf just really, really, _really_ doesn't like admitting that he is wrong.


----------



## Rel (Nov 7, 2009)

Its actually pretty surprising on how you guys are reacting over this game, but I can definitely see why some people would be upset with the PC version of the game. Some of your debating issues are a little.... absurd, like your charts (The first one was obviously biased, as MW2 was marked worse than CoD4 when they had some of the same options, as the second one was, with the exaggerated claims and repetition to the first chart.)

Most of you guys are worried about a 100ms lag difference in a LAN match? Well, one second is 1000ms, and really, if you can shoot a bullet in 1/1000ths of a second, actually, that isnt even possible from the animation of the bullet, the timing coding, and the distance from the target. The only time it really would matter (even if you could pull it off), is if you were literally next to a person and you impossibly shot a bullet 1/1000ths of a second faster than the other person.

We could even go on to discuss the LAN connections, 100Base-T, 1000Base-T, or 10,000Base-T connections, and the switch type and speed, but really, why does it matter? I really don't think  1/100ths of a second would even matter, let alone you wouldn't be able to even see it.

IWNET, for all PC users, fucked them over hard, with banning listen servers, etc. This turned many people off of the PC version, which i can see why, but if you wanted to play with your clan, or just among friends, you can just make a private match. Sure, you can't get into anything like TFP or C2, on TF2, but, Its the best feasible alternative to it.

The price cost for other countries is mostly just huge BS on Activision's part, $100 for a game that only costs $60 in the US? That's really just bullshit. But people worrying about an extra $10 in the US is just sad. Is it really that bad to pay a console price for a PC game? When its only $10?, That's nothing to worry over. Is it the end of the world if you spend $10 more dollars? And really, if it does matter that you can't pay an extra $10, then you should be more worried about your budget, than a game that will drop in price after a while.

Other than those 3  "problems", I don't see anything else wrong with it, unless it was extremely over hyped, and it ends up just failing, which, from the videos I've seen, hasn't happened yet. For the 360 and PS3, there really isn't anything wrong with online, because all of the same features from COD4 are still there. And besides, look toward the better features of CoDMW2, like SP, MP additions, etc, instead of just scrutinizing every little detail possible.

/My2cents


----------



## Runefox (Nov 7, 2009)

> unless it was extremely over hyped





> hasn't happened yet


What rock have you been living under? People are hyping the game left and right. And frankly, the whole IWNet thing (and the controversial ads and scenes in the game) has only brought more publicity to the game.


----------



## Rel (Nov 7, 2009)

Runefox said:


> What rock have you been living under? People are hyping the game left and right. And frankly, the whole IWNet thing (and the controversial ads and scenes in the game) has only brought more publicity to the game.


Someone didn't read the whole line.



> unless it was extremely over hyped, *and it ends up just failing*, which, from the videos I've seen, hasn't happened yet


I can also quote that "it" was referred to earlier as the game itself


----------



## Maikeru (Nov 7, 2009)

The whole mess that is the PC version is admittedly a shame--turning it into a clone of the console version?  Really?  ...But it ultimately doesn't effect me much, so I guess it's not a factor in my enthusiasm.  I'm a console gamer when it comes to pretty much any multi-platform release, with the exception of Valve's games...  So it isn't really playing a factor in my purchase.

Having said that, I'm glad that this is getting more and more people to look at Bad Company 2 as well...  I'm pretty excited for that game as well.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 7, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> $59.99 for the CONSOLE version.
> 
> $49.99 for the PC version.
> 
> ...




http://store.steampowered.com/app/10180/

That looks like it says 59.99.



Rel said:


> But people worrying about an extra $10 in the US is just sad. Is it really that bad to pay a console price for a PC game? When its only $10?, That's nothing to worry over. Is it the end of the world if you spend $10 more dollars? And really, if it does matter that you can't pay an extra $10, then you should be more worried about your budget, than a game that will drop in price after a while.



You don't seem to see the fact that Activision expects PC gamers to pay production royalties, as they do with consoles.  Something that PC gamers have never had to do, because the software isn't licensed to a specific console.


----------



## Alvine33 (Nov 7, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> http://store.steampowered.com/app/10180/
> 
> That looks like it says 59.99.



Newf said that *all* PC games were $60, not just MW2. Ishnuvalok was talking about the other games.

Again, Newf:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...0008994&Description=borderlands&name=2K GAMES
http://www.gamestop.com/browse/sear...rd&Ntx=mode+matchallpartial&Ntt=bad company 2

$50 for the PC versions, $60 for consoles. Just admit you're wrong.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 7, 2009)

Alvine33 said:


> Newf said that *all* PC games were $60, not just MW2.



Oh, so you're bullshitting semantics here.


o btw he's also canadian.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 7, 2009)

Damn Americans and your $49.99/59.99 games. Here, it's $59.99/69.99. Grumble grumble.


----------



## Alvine33 (Nov 7, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> Oh, so you're bullshitting semantics here.



How is that semantics? He said it pretty clear that all PC games were $60.

Fine on the Canada point. But you'd think he would've said something after I gave him 3 links to American websites. :V


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 7, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> No, Newf just really, really, _really_ doesn't like admitting that he is wrong.


Even so, I didn't see it there at all and I guess I didn't look for it for a few reasons. One I first played cod4 on the 360 and only later got in on the PC when it was actually dieing in popularity. Console version doesn't have any lean, I know that for sure, so I assumed it didn't have it either. I agree with taking the lean out, it's lame, it's being removed from most FPS' for a few reasons, consoles don't get it so why should PC get it, and it's honestly unrealistic in the way they lean in most FPS' anyway. There's maybe a handful of games I know of where the "lean" was proper, MGS4 and Splinter Cell Double Agent to name two.

You people believe that the games should be completely different? Hell you're saying that with 100ping you can't play, which is honestly hilarious. It means you -have- to have everything in your favor or else you can't kill anything; if you have a tiny amount more ping you ragequit. It's not the lag, it's simply you can't play at all. Try every server at >100 ping at all times and still getting good scores before complaining about your lag at >100 ping. It's pretty pathetic, like by a large amount too; you play with a ping advantage crutch or else you don't play at all.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 7, 2009)

Alvine33 said:


> Fine on the Canada point. But you'd think he would've said something after I gave him 3 links to American websites. :V



It's Newf.


'nuff said.


----------



## Neybulot (Nov 8, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> You people believe that the games should be completely different? Hell you're saying that with 100ping you can't play, which is honestly hilarious. It means you -have- to have everything in your favor or else you can't kill anything; if you have a tiny amount more ping you ragequit. It's not the lag, it's simply you can't play at all. Try every server at >100 ping at all times and still getting good scores before complaining about your lag at >100 ping. It's pretty pathetic, like by a large amount too; you play with a ping advantage crutch or else you don't play at all.



Personally, I believe 100ms should be fine for servers that are about 200+ miles from you. I'd also say that would depend based on an internet connection though. Also, I really really doubt you're getting good scores ALL the time at 100ms. You could be used to playing at that ping for all we know.

The base for this argument is that if it's 100ms locally...Which IW hasn't exactly clearly stated...(They just called it an average. But do they mean an average for country-side to country-side or within 100 or so miles?)

I personally wouldn't play a game where it's 100ms within 100 miles.

To sum it up, that's the real argument here. If we're talking 100ms pings close, we're talking even worse connecting farther out. Heck, I can play with people in the UK and get a 150ms ping on TF2. It's sounding like that would be 250 or so on MW2.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 8, 2009)

I in newfoundland, for a ping to be lower than 100 is rare. Very rare.
I'm usually between 100 and 150, anymore in an FPS it becomes too hard to hit things. But 150 or below I do what I always do. If you complain about 100 I would probably laugh at you relentlessly.

You can not get 100ms locally. It's impossible. Coming to that conclusion doesn't even make sense? Who said that local play had 100ms ping? lol p2p technology in a game must increase the distance between you and your local friend(s) somehow.

It's impossible that you'll be getting higher pings from the same distances just because of this technology. For one you won't even know where they are, and it will slot you in with low-ping players automatically. There won't be a search for all "servers", it'll just be a queue. So you'll never actually know if it's 100ms at 100miles, it'll just be xx(x)ms ping and you'll never notice it. It's far, far better than a dedicated server in many ways, I'm assuming they'll carry over the friends list and allow you to queue up for matches with all your friends.


----------



## Slade (Nov 8, 2009)

Meh. I'm more looking forward to Bioshock 2 and Assassin's Creed 2.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 8, 2009)

Slade said:


> Meh. I'm more looking forward to Bioshock 2 and Assassin's Creed 2.


I'm with the latter, can't wait for Assassins Creed 2.


----------



## Holsety (Nov 8, 2009)

I would look forward to Assassin's Creed if it didn't have the most annoying ads ever.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 8, 2009)

Slade said:


> Meh. I'm more looking forward to Bioshock 2 and Assassin's Creed 2.




Assassins Creed 2? Oh fuck yes. I liked AC, although the repetitiveness was extremely annoying, and downright boring at times. But otherwise it was real fun.


----------



## bennyboy1995 (Nov 8, 2009)

assassins creed was boring might get it for psp


----------



## CynicalCirno (Nov 8, 2009)

Cock of doody mocken whorefair.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 8, 2009)

ArrLeashen said:


> Cock of doody mocken whorefair.



I lol'd, got the reference......if there was one.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 8, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> I lol'd, got the reference......if there was one.



There was a reference? I thought he was just trying to start a flamewar.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 8, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> There was a reference? I thought he was just trying to start a flamewar.



There's an episode of Arby n the Chief where they discuss CoD4. The Chief takes Arby's copy of CoD4 and destroys it, then Arby asks him where it is? The Chief shows him a self-made CD case that says "Cock of Doody 4: Modern wurrfur" or something like that.


----------



## Bobmuffins (Nov 9, 2009)

Eh, personally, I'm not a fan of this series-

The single player in CoD4 was alright. I've played better- but I've played a lot worse too.

Online though, was just... no. No other game I've found can get away with a 'you die in 2 hits' formula, why is this different? All the good shooters I've found you need to be hit at least 3 or 4 times unless it's by like, a headshot by a sniper or something. CoD seems to be the only series which can get away with this, which confuses me. I dunno what it is, but I don't see the appeal in dying that fast. Most of the time you can't even turn around before you die. 

To anyone attempting to reply to this-

I'm not trying to start a flamewar or anything here. Also, don't try to give me the 'lol get better' excuse everyone gives me when I say this- getting better at the game does not give you more HP. You still die in the same amount of hits no matter how good you are.

But, whatever. If you find something fun with dying in two hits, be my guest, but I'm sticking to TF2 for now.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 9, 2009)

Yeah because in real life you get a chance if somebody shoots you in the back. In cod4/mw2 there's a slim chance. ;3


----------



## Xx WoLF (Nov 9, 2009)

Yup, I'm getting it for sure. Going to be amazing.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 9, 2009)

> But, whatever. If you find something fun with dying in two hits, be my guest, but I'm sticking to TF2 for now.


You realize that you die in about two hits depending on your class in TF2, too, right? One if you're picked off by a Sniper or Spy. The Soldier and demoman make quick work of the weaker classes, too, and god help you if someone gets a critical.

No, the difference is primarily in the pacing. They're two very different games indeed, but TF2's designed for frantic, fast-paced, oft-hilarious action, while Call of Duty and similar series of games tend to prefer the slower, more tactical (though still very arcade-alike) approach. Personally, Call of Duty doesn't really even hold a candle to the old Rainbow Six games (Rogue Spear = <3) in terms of realism as far as damage goes, and especially as far as tactics go. Actually, nothing modern does - Not even Rainbow Six, which has turned into a big clusterfuck of action movie cliches and the "duck and cover, bullet sponge!" health system that everyone seems to like so much.


----------



## Bobmuffins (Nov 9, 2009)

Runefox said:


> You realize that you die in about two hits depending on your class in TF2, too, right? One if you're picked off by a Sniper or Spy. The Soldier and demoman make quick work of the weaker classes, too, and god help you if someone gets a critical.



Ah, but there's the thing.

Both the Soldier and Demoman's attacks can be dodged if you move fast enough (read: are a scout), and Sniper/Spy seem fair to me, I mean, come on- you either let them headshot you or get right behind you. Though I agree, criticals are a bit annoying.

Back on topic though.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 9, 2009)

Bobmuffins said:


> Ah, but there's the thing.
> 
> Both the Soldier and Demoman's attacks can be dodged if you move fast enough (read: are a scout), and Sniper/Spy seem fair to me, I mean, come on- you either let them headshot you or get right behind you. Though I agree, criticals are a bit annoying.
> 
> Back on topic though.



lol, noob. Nobody dodges my rockets.


----------



## Bokracroc (Nov 9, 2009)

Here's me in my night vision goggles burning down a village:






Oh.. the game is cool too I suppose


----------



## Olaunn (Nov 9, 2009)

I'm getting the game tomorrow. Sadly, I won't be playing with anyone on my friends list. Apparently I'm the only one with decent job.

 Looks like I'll be spending my days having ego battles with rich kids rather than having good fun with buddies. Damn you jobless furries.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 9, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> lol, noob. Nobody dodges my rockets.



I can.  Then again, you've already got a bullet in your face.


----------



## Kommodore (Nov 10, 2009)

I am getting this game in the next few hours and plan to play it all night long. Yo.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 10, 2009)

CommodoreKitty said:


> I am getting this game in the next few hours and plan to play it all night long. Yo.



Ugh, you're one of _*those*_, huh? Can't wait for morning, gotta get it at midnight. I don't even understand why games (much less retailers) do this. Though in recent memory the only other game I can think of that did a midnight launch was WoW's Wrath of the Lich King. Which... Well, it's not even a _game_, and its parent's status as a game is debatable.


----------



## Kommodore (Nov 10, 2009)

Well, my friends and I are going to play. And it will be fun. I am probably going to be mauled online because my friends are pretty fucking good at shooters to say the least and I am just "meh," but it will be fun nonetheless. 

You, sir, are an enemy of fun. Don't b h8in' on midnight releases yo.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 10, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Ugh, you're one of _*those*_, huh? Can't wait for morning, gotta get it at midnight. I don't even understand why games (much less retailers) do this. Though in recent memory the only other game I can think of that did a midnight launch was WoW's Wrath of the Lich King. Which... Well, it's not even a _game_, and its parent's status as a game is debatable.





CommodoreKitty said:


> Well, my friends and I are going to play. And it will be fun. I am probably going to be mauled online because my friends are pretty fucking good at shooters to say the least and I am just "meh," but it will be fun nonetheless.
> 
> You, sir, are an enemy of fun. Don't b h8in' on midnight releases yo.



I actually have to agree with him. You know you have a life when you devote your Friday night to standing in line with hot sweaty mouthbreathing foul mouthed nerds. Who all just talk about how many "noobs they'll pwn" once they put the game into their console.

Probably the only game I'll get on the release date is Mass Effect 2. Only because Bioware deserves it.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 10, 2009)

CommodoreKitty said:


> You, sir, are an enemy of fun. Don't b h8in' on midnight releases yo.



I'm just saying, you're getting it like, literally, 10 hours before everyone else, and on top of that, you presumably need to sleep before morning (otherwise you'll sleep during the day, or otherwise you're an addict). What's the difference? Why put yourself through that, exactly? Why put the employees through that? What, exactly, is the point, and what, exactly, is the difference between getting it at midnight and getting it in the morning?

The difference to most is so that they can get in that extra few hours of experience over everyone else, which is a pretty shitty reason to do something. It basically highlights very plainly the obsession that certain people have over video games (WoW's example being another very big highlight of same issue).

Frankly? Lining up at 12 midnight to get an edge over the competition at a video game is the bane of fun, anyway. Playing THAT competetively isn't healthy.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Nov 10, 2009)

:V

Edit:  Definitely getting the game later today.  Playing Campaign FIRST THING.  So I can see handsome Soap Mactavish~


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 10, 2009)

Shark_the_raptor said:


> So I can see handsome Soap Mactavish~



Mactavish isn't the protagonist anymore. So I wouldn't be surprised if they just did what Killzone 2 did and have him be some mentor character to the "awesomely young and handsome everyman protagonist that is a level headed one man army". The mentor character is then killed off and none of the new players really give a shit.

Man modern FPS game concepts piss me off now. I mean I turned the other cheek when Killzone pretty much just created some totalitarian empire that was almost entirely based off Nazi Germany. Although at one point you have to get original with your ideas. It was good when BJ Blazkowicz was a lone wolf and one man army infiltrating the 7 circle of hell, AKA Castle Wolfenstein. But I mean come on now, working off cliches? What ever happened to just being a rookie secret agent who slowly becomes tangled in a web of lies and deceit (Deus Ex).


----------



## bennyboy1995 (Nov 10, 2009)

got it yesterday


----------



## Adrianfolf (Nov 10, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> Mactavish isn't the protagonist anymore. So I wouldn't be surprised if they just did what Killzone 2 did and have him be some mentor character to the "awesomely young and handsome everyman protagonist that is a level headed one man army". The mentor character is then killed off and none of the new players really give a shit.
> 
> Man modern FPS game concepts piss me off now. I mean I turned the other cheek when Killzone pretty much just created some totalitarian empire that was almost entirely based off Nazi Germany. Although at one point you have to get original with your ideas. It was good when BJ Blazkowicz was a lone wolf and one man army infiltrating the 7 circle of hell, AKA Castle Wolfenstein. But I mean come on now, working off cliches? What ever happened to just being a rookie secret agent who slowly becomes tangled in a web of lies and deceit (Deus Ex).



This


----------



## Endless Humiliation (Nov 10, 2009)

Watching it on Game Anyone? and think it's kind of awful (read:awful) that there's a level where you shoot up a Russian airport but at least it distracts from the dumb as hell story.


----------



## Dahguns (Nov 10, 2009)

bleh..i ordered yesterday will be getting it next week :/


----------



## Alvine33 (Nov 10, 2009)

Shark_the_raptor said:


> :V
> 
> Edit:  Definitely getting the game later today.  Playing Campaign FIRST THING.  So I can see handsome Soap Mactavish~



He doesn't look anything like what I imagined, lol.
http://imgur.com/FejY3.jpg



CryoScales said:


> Mactavish isn't the protagonist anymore.



That's why you can see him. You never see or hear your character in CoD games.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 10, 2009)

Alvine33 said:


> He doesn't look anything like what I imagined, lol.
> http://imgur.com/FejY3.jpg



Oh man. He's... He's... Terribly ugly. Looks like a five year old's idea for a cool soldier-guy. x_X; What is WITH his hair? I though of Soap as a lot less... He-Man-esque.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Nov 10, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Oh man. He's... He's... Terribly ugly. Looks like a five year old's idea for a cool soldier-guy. x_X; What is WITH his hair? I though of Soap as a lot less... He-Man-esque.



That's military style haircut I think.

So yeah, beat campaign.  Very interesting imo.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 10, 2009)

Shark_the_raptor said:


> That's military style haircut I think.
> 
> So yeah, beat campaign.  Very interesting imo.



A Mohawk is a military style haircut? Yeah, if your Mr. T or the most recent Turok maybe. Or was a crazy soldier in the Vietnam war. But soldier haircuts are more buzz-cut-Niko Bellic style.

Wow Mactavish looks a LOT like Mr. T. Isn't Mactavish an Irish last name? Why does he look like his entire family for generations was born and raised in Brooklyn.


----------



## Kommodore (Nov 11, 2009)

Runefox said:
			
		

> Frankly? Lining up at 12 midnight to get an edge over the competition at a video game is the bane of fun, anyway. Playing THAT competetively isn't healthy.



It has nothing to do with competition, it is just fun. I waited (only for about ten minutes by the way) with my friends and we just talked while we waited to get the game. The plan was to play a game we all found fun right away, not to get the competitive edge but because we can. 

As it turned out I was sleepy so I went to bed instead of playing, like a boss, but the point is getting the game "early" is fun and wanting to be better quicker has nothing to do with it. 





Also I find it comical how you are made to slaughter all the civilians in an airport, but they censor the "f" word. 

wut


----------



## bennyboy1995 (Nov 11, 2009)

cant till i get home from school


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 11, 2009)

Game is awesome, anymore than 18 players an I would eat glass though. You get killed very easily, and a lot of times you spawn pretty close to an enemy (or right next to one) instantly, and that would happen a lot more with more people.

No lag for me. No problems at all actually.
Awesome game.


----------



## Azure (Nov 11, 2009)

This game is boring ass vanilla shooter action. What a load of nothing new at all.  I dunno why people even like this series. Capt MacTavish is pretty cool though, reminds me of my platoon sergeant.


----------



## Maikeru (Nov 11, 2009)

Thus far, I've played it for a couple of hours in multiplayer last night, and all but the first game I played felt relatively smooth.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 11, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Game is awesome, anymore than 18 players an I would eat glass though. You get killed very easily, and a lot of times you spawn pretty close to an enemy (or right next to one) instantly, and that would happen a lot more with more people.
> 
> No lag for me. No problems at all actually.
> Awesome game.




How much did Activision threaten to sue you for that one?


----------



## Holsety (Nov 11, 2009)

Runefox said:


> Oh man. He's... He's... Terribly ugly. Looks like a five year old's idea for a cool soldier-guy. x_X; What is WITH his hair? I though of Soap as a lot less... He-Man-esque.


<obligatory son i am disappoint>

Now all the times Price yelled at soap for being green seems silly, he looks like he could break Price in half ._.


----------



## bennyboy1995 (Nov 11, 2009)

cod6 severs down


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 11, 2009)

Holsety said:


> Now all the times Price yelled at soap for being green seems silly, he looks like he could break Price in half ._.








And then he would say "BITCH I PITY DA FOOL"


----------



## Kyzen (Nov 11, 2009)

Game is horrible on PC :/


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 11, 2009)

Kyzen said:


> Game is horrible



Thar


----------



## Mikael Grizzly (Nov 11, 2009)

I have trouble making sense of the plot. Especially the Airport level, which doesn't make sense storywise when you consider who your character is.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Nov 11, 2009)

Console's Multiplayer seems to play pretty smooth so far.  Gotta say, fun.  Riot shields rock.

And the levels.  Huge levels.


----------



## Torinir (Nov 11, 2009)

http://gamevideos.1up.com/video/id/27045

2 days and already there's cheats for it.


----------



## Armaetus (Nov 11, 2009)

Hahaha.

Serves IW right for gutting the PC version!


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 11, 2009)

Torinir said:


> http://gamevideos.1up.com/video/id/27045
> 
> 2 days and already there's cheats for it.



Good thing IWnet's really cracking down on cheaters.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 12, 2009)

Mikael Grizzly said:


> I have trouble making sense of the plot. Especially the Airport level, which doesn't make sense storywise when you consider who your character is.



You're not one character, you're several. And how does it not make sense?


----------



## Mikael Grizzly (Nov 12, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> You're not one character, you're several. And how does it not make sense?



Uh, in the fact that you're an American undercover agent participating in a _massacre of civilians_ at a Russian airport?


----------



## Torinir (Nov 12, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> Good thing IWnet's really cracking down on cheaters.



Remember: IWNet and VAC are replacing dedicated servers because they'll *guarantee* that you can play without all those nasty hackers and cheaters!

Oh wait...

But I guess now that the cheaters are here, we can get an admin to ban them... oh wait, no we can't...

Then I guess we can kickvote them out... oh wait, no we can't...


----------



## Holsety (Nov 12, 2009)

Mikael Grizzly said:


> undercover agent


answered yourself broski


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 12, 2009)

Mikael Grizzly said:


> Uh, in the fact that you're an American undercover agent participating in a _massacre of civilians_ at a Russian airport?


Uh yeah, you're trying to get close to that guy for intel. And they thought that after doing -that- you would be closer than anybody, but he was one step ahead of them.


Holsety said:


> answered yourself broski


Yeah.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 12, 2009)

Torinir said:


> Remember: IWNet and VAC are replacing dedicated servers because they'll *guarantee* that you can play without all those nasty hackers and cheaters!
> 
> Oh wait...
> 
> ...



I guess you could always leave the match, have you come into contact with one yet?


----------



## Torinir (Nov 12, 2009)

Don't have it. But bailing mid-match forfeits any XP gains from the match, so some would consider that a lose-lose situation for the players. And it still won't stop the cheater from running rampant on future games, where you may or may not be matched up with him again. And if a cheater really wanted to be a douchebag, they could quit the match just before it ends, wiping out the XP, so they could get rematched with lower rank players.


----------



## Mikael Grizzly (Nov 12, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Uh yeah, you're trying to get close to that guy for intel. And they thought that after doing -that- you would be closer than anybody, but he was one step ahead of them.
> 
> Yeah.



So killing dozens of civilians is good if an American undercover agent does it?

Uh, that's insane.


----------



## Barak (Nov 12, 2009)

Hey,you can skip the mission if you are a pussy


----------



## Lasair (Nov 12, 2009)

Barak said:


> Hey,you can skip the mission



^^ that, its amazing how people get so angry about playing it when the first thing you're asked when you start is if you actually WANT to play it.

(wall of txt coming up here)

Honestly the amount of people on the Radio yesterday complaining about how violent and full of killing it is was mad.

Obivously, its an FPS and with a name like Modern Warfare 2, what do these people think it is a teddy-bears-picnic simulator? *facepaw*

There was a load of mothers complaining about how they bought the game for their little 10 year old kids and saying it was too violent and bad for them....If the game is 18's rated why did you buy it for your 10 year old in the first place *rolls eyes*

Anyway, contreversy aside, the game is utterly brilliant.
IW have made a superb fps, and a fine sequel to COD4. It has a great story, excellent graphics, good hit detection and shooting mechanic, i love it.

Multiplayer is great fun too, lots of good maps in it, save for 'Wasteland'.
Plenty of attachments to unlock, love not being restricted to a pistol for side arm (UMP + AA12 = CQB ownage :3)
Host migration works quite well too.

Only downside is the invite system on PSN, having to send a message through the XMB seems a bit f'd up to me.

Also there were a good few 'launch-issues'
Party-system failed (will be fixed in v1.03 patch)
Trophies were not applied (now patched)
Friends-list status freezes (fix in v1.03)
Matchmaking was slow
And then the servers went down for 24hrs due to the amount of traffic, just couldnt handle it.

So, after careful consideration, i would give Modern Warfare 2 a solid 9.5/10, the game only loses half a mark imo due to the screwed up invite system, and an occasionally stuttery frame-rate. Other then that, its a shoe-in for GOTY '10.

TLDR: Great game, excellent story and MP, fucked up invite system. Defo worth a buy.


----------



## Mikael Grizzly (Nov 12, 2009)

Modern Warfare games have good stories? Sure, it has some great action and gameplay sequences (All Ghillied Up and Death From Above come to mind), but the overarching story is little better than any of Michael Bay's movies. 

My gripe is with the story - it's stupid. I couldn't care less about digital civilians getting killed (although I'd prefer to kill Americans, that'd be a lot more funny), but when the game amazes me with how stupid its plot is...

The presentation is still top notch, as is the atmosphere, but the story's just plain stupid.


----------



## D Void (Nov 12, 2009)

ITS A RUBBISH GAME


----------



## Lasair (Nov 12, 2009)

D Void said:


> ITS A RUBBISH GAME



Wow, you know, thats such an amazing and compelling argument, that i now agree with you....


Seriously, not to sound like an ass but, if you're going to say that,  you shouldat least tell us what you don't like about it imo.

@Mikael, i thought the story was excellent.....just because it was hilariously stupid XD

after each level i was thinking 'god bring on the next one cuz i can't wait to see the crap they can come up with.'
Its so bad its funny, and that imo is what made it great.

but then after all, most ppl will play the story maybe once or twice, and then head onto the MP.

In the long run its the multiplayer that will keep the game going after all.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Nov 12, 2009)

I'll just keep thinking that furries have low standards. :X


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 12, 2009)

Mikael Grizzly said:


> So killing dozens of civilians is good if an American undercover agent does it?
> 
> Uh, that's insane.



It was off the record, it was up to him, and he knew that he would never be able to come back to the USA if it went through. He sacrificed himself, killing hundreds, in hopes to save millions. Buddy had a nuke, and he was suppose to get close to him and find out as much as possible before taking him down.

The story isn't the best, but it isn't the worse either. I rather liked it, actually. Tied with the first game nicely.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 12, 2009)

My biggest problem with the whole "YOU'RE A TARRIST" thing is that it's unnecessary. It didn't have to be there, as I understand it, it serves no purpose to the story (a big lipped alligator moment), and it's just shock value. Especially considering the fact that you can skip the scene. This is the kind of thing that lesser game devs would do to try to boost sales based on shock factor.


----------



## Bokracroc (Nov 12, 2009)

Lasair said:


> ^^ that, its amazing how people get so angry about playing it when the first thing you're asked when you start is if you actually WANT to play it.
> 
> (wall of txt coming up here)
> 
> ...



Best part yet, majority of angry people aren't bitching about slaughtering hundreds of Russians and Brazilians. Cause the Russian army in the Ranger levels are totally the new Nazi's. Like, they deserve to die after a Russian terrorist basically caused the whole thing.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 12, 2009)

Runefox said:


> My biggest problem with the whole "YOU'RE A TARRIST" thing is that it's unnecessary. It didn't have to be there, as I understand it, it serves no purpose to the story (a big lipped alligator moment), and it's just shock value. Especially considering the fact that you can skip the scene. This is the kind of thing that lesser game devs would do to try to boost sales based on shock factor.



I thought it was good, it fit the scene perfectly and it made sense to me. The entire game is basically based on that moment, it's refered back to several times and the russians invade the USA -because- you (the american that was part of the slaughtered) was the only dead terrorist, so they assumed americans. Play it and find out. ;3


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Nov 12, 2009)

Trying to assess something deep on a war story is trying to look at Death Note and thinking it's deep. =/


----------



## Mikael Grizzly (Nov 12, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> I thought it was good, it fit the scene perfectly and it made sense to me. The entire game is basically based on that moment, it's refered back to several times and the russians invade the USA -because- you (the american that was part of the slaughtered) was the only dead terrorist, so they assumed americans. Play it and find out. ;3



Which is exactly why it's a bad plot.

His death is precisely the reason why he should've avoided going with the guys to the Airport, since even without Makarov's bullet (now, answer me why would an Ultranationalist leader himself participate in a massacre? I don't recall Zakhaev or Al Asad being a low level thug and doing operations themselves), if he died, he'd have caused this whole debacle.

Then there's the whole Red Dawn thing, which is utterly insane from the ground up. Cold War ended a long time ago and a Russian invasion can only happen in the most twisted of minds. 

Christ, this entire plot looks like a redneck pulp fiction story.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 12, 2009)

Mikael Grizzly said:


> Then there's the whole Red Dawn thing, which is utterly insane from the ground up. Cold War ended a long time ago and a Russian invasion can only happen in the most twisted of minds.
> 
> Christ, this entire plot looks like a redneck pulp fiction story.



Pro-American patriots are still a little pissed that America didn't attack Russia and cause a nuclear war, and vice versa. They want to imagine what would happen if it would happen and they would "whoop" their ass.

Honestly its quite sickening how much America wants to feel so superior compared to Russia. As a person of slavic decent myself, I know that Communism and Socialism aren't perfect. But demonising your former enemies with propaganda is any better? The Cold War indeed ended a long time ago with no blood shed. Get over it and stop wishing some conflict would have happened. Jewish people are finally just starting to get over the Holocaust. Enough with reminding them about Germany and let people move on.


----------



## Kommodore (Nov 13, 2009)

I was kinda getting agitated by throughout the game with my character always getting killed at the end of the levels. At the end I was like "are you fucking serious?" for that whole fight sequence. But it all worked out. 

I approve. 

Also: fuck thew russians they got what was coming to them.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 13, 2009)

CommodoreKitty said:


> Also: fuck thew russians they got what was coming to them.



Having their entire government collapse and spending the next 20 years hated second only to Germans? You do know Russia was as on edge as America when it came to dropping a nuke on their enemy. While Russia had Communism, its still not that bad an idea. It is just extremely poorly implemented. Socialism is better co-existing with Capitalism and functions well in countries such as Canada.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 13, 2009)

Mikael Grizzly said:


> Which is exactly why it's a bad plot.
> 
> His death is precisely the reason why he should've avoided going with the guys to the Airport, since even without Makarov's bullet (now, answer me why would an Ultranationalist leader himself participate in a massacre? I don't recall Zakhaev or Al Asad being a low level thug and doing operations themselves), if he died, he'd have caused this whole debacle



He's crazy and just wants to kill everything. That's no "low-level" to him, he enjoys it.


----------



## Mikael Grizzly (Nov 13, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> He's crazy and just wants to kill everything. That's no "low-level" to him, he enjoys it.



He could've at least wore a hood or something. I think a videotaped Russian is a bit more counterproductive to his plan than spoken Russian.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 13, 2009)

Mikael Grizzly said:


> He could've at least wore a hood or something. I think a videotaped Russian is a bit more counterproductive to his plan than spoken Russian.



Well russians look a lot like americans...from videotape it's kinda hard to determine.


----------



## Barak (Nov 13, 2009)

Just finished the game on veteran.....

They should put : May include excessive swearing from the player


----------



## ADF (Nov 13, 2009)

So Call of Duty players, Activision tells us you want to pay for online?

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/104/1044965p1.html



> November 12, 2009 - The online business models for many of Activision's key franchises could start to change in the near future.
> 
> During today's BMO Capital Markets Conference, CFO of Activision Blizzard Thomas Tippl was asked if the successful World of Warcraft online business model will ever translate into the publisher's other major franchises, such as Guitar Hero and Call of Duty. While Tippl said WoW's model is difficult to replicate, players should expect new montization models for its other titles soon enough.
> 
> ...


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 13, 2009)

ADF said:


> So Call of Duty players, Activision tells us you want to pay for online?
> 
> http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/104/1044965p1.html



Uh...the game is out, and it's free. Plus it's not Call of Duty anymore.


----------



## ADF (Nov 13, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Uh...the game is out, and it's free. Plus it's not Call of Duty anymore.



It is considered part of the Call of Duty franchise is it not?

I know the game is out, perhaps I badly worded it, according to them the fans want them to charge for additional online services.

I wouldn't be surprised if they start charging for dedicated servers after they took away PC gamers ability to host them.


----------



## Lasair (Nov 13, 2009)

ADF said:


> It is considered part of the Call of Duty franchise is it not?



Not according to IW head Vince Zampella it's not.

In a short interview to PSM3 Magazine, in a special pull-out, he said:

We made the decision to pull the Call of Duty name from the game because this is taking a complete breakaway from the franchise entirely. This isn't another entry in the COD series, instead we focused on making this a direct sequel to Modern Warfare. We didn't want people to be thinking this is Call of Duty 6, not in the slightest.

So no, Modern Warfare 2 is pretty much a seperate entity from the Call of Duty franchise.

With the micropayment thing, i'd say they will test that out when Treyarch inevitably get around to COD-6 in 2010.


----------



## ADF (Nov 13, 2009)

Lasair said:


> So no, Modern Warfare 2 is pretty much a seperate entity from the Call of Duty franchise.



Then why does it still say Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 on the box?


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 13, 2009)

ADF said:


> Then why does it still say Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 on the box?



So people will buy it.

*cough*Fallout 3*cough*


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 13, 2009)

ADF said:


> Then why does it still say Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 on the box?



Because Modern Warfare 2 was only going to be a transitional game. The next one is going to be Modern Warfare 3 and not have a Call of Duty subtitle.

I am finding Activision very pathetic right now. Thinking of charging you for an FPS game's online and all. The pro capitalism is just everywhere in game companys now. I am even finding EA an appealing company now


----------



## Torinir (Nov 13, 2009)

And now you know the real reason for IWNet...


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 13, 2009)

Torinir said:


> And now you know the real reason for IWNet...



It's always been about content control, don't even try and pull that out of your ass, stupid.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Nov 13, 2009)

Dunno 'bout you guys, but Special Ops is pretty cool.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 13, 2009)

Torinir said:


> And now you know the real reason for IWNet...



Same reason as why BNet 2.0 exists. Ever since Vivendi/Blizzard merged with Activision, Activision's name has been taken for all of their dealings, and it's been smeared all over the place. I'm fairly sure I know which of the companies involved is the true menace here, even if Kotick was the CEO of Activision long before he became CEO of ActiBlizzard (Activision Blizzard is the actual name of the company behind both Activision and Blizzard as a whole now). Especially since, y'know, after the merger they shut down Sierra, dropped a ton of games that they considered couldn't be "exploited every year on every platform" or "didn't have the potential to become $100 million dollar franchises".

I hate Vivendi/Blizzard. Activision's descent into the realm of douchebaggery is on their hands (and Kotick's).


----------



## FurrFox (Nov 13, 2009)

lol that Tittle was just so funny ^^

yeah I do believe it might be better anyway I Really trust Activition development and I love everything what they do.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 13, 2009)

So is anybody playing this on the pc?


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 13, 2009)

FurrFox said:


> lol that Tittle was just so funny ^^
> 
> yeah I do believe it might be better anyway I Really trust Activition development and I love everything what they do.



How exactly can you trust a company now that has a new slogan. "We make games that only have the potential to become 100 Million dollar franchises. Everything else we kill off and deny ever existed"


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 13, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> How exactly can you trust a company now that has a new slogan. "We make games that only have the potential to become 100 Million dollar franchises. Everything else we kill off and deny ever existed"



But...that's a positive outlook...
Like...what you're saying is: "we keep the good, and throw out the bad"


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 13, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> But...that's a positive outlook...
> Like...what you're saying is: "we keep the good, and throw out the bad"



If you look at it from the corporation's ultra capitalist look yes. But remember, how are they going to judge what is going to be a 100$ million dollar franchise? Easy, spend massive amounts of money purely on graphics and celebrities voicing characters.

Their slogan is quantity over quality. They would sell you shit in a gamebox if it sold money.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 13, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> But...that's a positive outlook...
> Like...what you're saying is: "we keep the good, and throw out the bad"



Actually, it's kinda like the video game equivalent to the Saw series. A new one every year whether it's good or shit! Hurrah!



> So is anybody playing this on the pc?


*crickets chirp*


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 13, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> But...that's a positive outlook...
> Like...what you're saying is: "we keep the good, and throw out the bad"



Psychonaughts sold very poorly, doesn't mean it's a bad game. 

Bad sales /=/ bad game.

Good games can have bad sales, just as bad games can have good sales. 

Halo, Gears of War and The Sims are examples of bad games that sell extremely well. 

Compare these up against games like Psychonaughts, No One Lives Forever and Evil Genius. Which are amazing yet they sold poorly.

Your logic is flawed.


----------



## Holsety (Nov 13, 2009)

So... Am I the only one here whose biggest problem with the game is the whole "Russians invade the US" part?


----------



## Seas (Nov 13, 2009)

It's hilarious that how much of an unlucky bastard are all the characters you play in MW1 and 2. He almost falls of a helicopter while jumping on it, pulled up by a comrade. He almost falls of a cliff, pulled up by a comrade. He actually fails to jump between two rooftops, followed by a chase to the rescue. He is knocked half-conscious by falling debris of an old building , while no-one else does. He fails to knife an unarmed guy who just crawled out of a crashed helicopter. Had to be carried by another man by the shoulder several times, etc.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 13, 2009)

Holsety said:


> So... Am I the only one here whose biggest problem with the game is the whole "Russians invade the US" part?



It's very far fetched, Modern Warfare 2's story is very far fetched, and has a lot of plot holes. It's alright, but it's not as good as CoD4's. 

IWNet is a complete failure though. Lag from time to time (about 1/3 of the matches I play in I get noticeable lag), not being able to choose what map I want to play on, not even being able to choose what _gametype_ I can play without leveling up. Not being able to leave a match without forfeiting your accumulated score and counting that match as a loss. I don't understand why.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Nov 13, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> It's very far fetched, Modern Warfare 2's story is very far fetched, and has a lot of plot holes. It's alright, but it's not as good as CoD4's.
> 
> IWNet is a complete failure though. Lag from time to time (about 1/3 of the matches I play in I get noticeable lag), not being able to choose what map I want to play on, not even being able to choose what _gametype_ I can play without leveling up. Not being able to leave a match without forfeiting your accumulated score and counting that match as a loss. I don't understand why.



Thats match making for ya


----------



## Barak (Nov 13, 2009)

Seastalker said:


> It's hilarious that how much of an unlucky bastard are all the characters you play in MW1 and 2. He almost falls of a helicopter while jumping on it, pulled up by a comrade. He almost falls of a cliff, pulled up by a comrade. He actually fails to jump between two rooftops, followed by a chase to the rescue. He is knocked half-conscious by falling debris of an old building , while no-one else does. He fails to knife an unarmed guy who just crawled out of a crashed helicopter. Had to be carried by another man by the shoulder several times, etc.



Soap/Roach/Allen/Joseph are all pussy !


----------



## Holsety (Nov 13, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> It's very far fetched, Modern Warfare 2's story is very far fetched, and has a lot of plot holes. It's alright, but it's not as good as CoD4's.
> 
> IWNet is a complete failure though. Lag from time to time (about 1/3 of the matches I play in I get noticeable lag), not being able to choose what map I want to play on, not even being able to choose what _gametype_ I can play without leveling up. Not being able to leave a match without forfeiting your accumulated score and counting that match as a loss. I don't understand why.



It's not even far fetched, it's stupid and feels like it should be the background for a horrible Red Dawn remake directed by Michael Bay.

And yes, welcome to matchmaking.



> He fails to knife an unarmed guy who just crawled out of a crashed helicopter.


To be fair, he also just crashed down a waterfall out of a dingy, and to a more experienced commander.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 13, 2009)

Holsety said:


> So... Am I the only one here whose biggest problem with the game is the whole "Russians invade the US" part?



Read the 7th page



CryoScales said:


> Pro-American patriots are still a little pissed that America didn't attack Russia and cause a nuclear war, and vice versa. They want to imagine what would happen if it would happen and they would "whoop" their ass.
> 
> Honestly its quite sickening how much America wants to feel so superior compared to Russia. As a person of slavic decent myself, I know that Communism and Socialism aren't perfect. But demonising your former enemies with propaganda is any better? The Cold War indeed ended a long time ago with no blood shed. Get over it and stop wishing some conflict would have happened. Jewish people are finally just starting to get over the Holocaust. Enough with reminding them about Germany and let people move on.


----------



## Holsety (Nov 13, 2009)

Well see

That's because you're taking a game plot personally and getting butthurt over it. (If I'm reading that correctly and you're implying videogames are propaganda, lul)

I'm just annoyed because somehow I expected better from Infinity Ward.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 13, 2009)

Holsety said:


> That's because you're taking a game plot personally and getting butthurt over it.



Hi there, you obviously didn't read this post:



Holsety said:


> So... Am I the only one here whose biggest problem with the game is the whole "Russians invade the US" part?


----------



## Holsety (Nov 13, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> Holsety said:
> 
> 
> > That's because you're taking a game plot personally and getting butthurt over it.
> ...


um

right

There's a pretty big difference between thinking IW could have done a better job with the plot than

WHY CAN'T WE FORGET THE COLD WAR GUYS

but whatever you're right im a jackass


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 14, 2009)

Holsety said:


> um
> 
> right
> 
> ...



It's a biiiiig change from "NEVAR FORGOT WW2 AND HOW WE KICKED DEM NAHTSEE ASS FUCK YEAH AMURIKKA"

But no rly, you went right around from "BAW BAW RUSSAINS" to "lol u mad bout gaem?"


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 14, 2009)

Holsety said:


> (If I'm reading that correctly and you're implying videogames are propaganda, lul)



I would say something, but Lostie already summed it up nicely for me.

Also ANYTHING can be propaganda. A homeless person chanting a song on the bus can be propaganda. As long as it riles the masses up for the wrong reasons it can potentially be propaganda.

Movies can be propaganda, Television can be propaganda. Games being propaganda isn't a very large stretch.


----------



## Holsety (Nov 14, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> I would say something, but Lostie already summed it up nicely for me.
> 
> Also ANYTHING can be propaganda. A homeless person chanting a song on the bus can be propaganda. As long as it riles the masses up for the wrong reasons it can potentially be propaganda.
> 
> Movies can be propaganda, Television can be propaganda. Games being propaganda isn't a very large stretch.





> *propaganda*
> â€“noun
> 1. information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.
> 2. the deliberate spreading of such information, rumors, etc.
> 3. the particular doctrines or principles propagated by an organization or movement.


You must be pretty out there to assume movies and videogames are being _intentionally_ used to stir up AMERICAN PRIDE to go bag us sum commies, rather than being reused because it's easier to base a plot off of.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 14, 2009)

Holsety said:


> You must be pretty out there to assume movies and videogames are being _intentionally_ used to stir up AMERICAN PRIDE to go bag us sum commies



You obviously haven't met Bobby Kotick.


> During a speech at the 2009 Deutsche Bank Securities Technology Conference, Kotick received significant criticism for stating, "We have a real culture of thrift. The goal that I had in bringing a lot of the packaged goods folks into Activision about 10 years ago was to take all the fun out of making video games." Kotick later stated he tries to promote an atmosphere of "skepticism, pessimism, and fear" in his company and, "We are very good at keeping people focused on the deep depression."


----------



## Holsety (Nov 14, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> You obviously haven't met Bobby Kotick.


I think if Bobby Kotick is putting any propaganda into his games, it's that it's okay to pay ridiculous prices, and not about the Cold War


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 14, 2009)

Holsety said:


> I think if Bobby Kotick is putting any propaganda into his games, it's that it's okay to pay ridiculous prices, and not about the Cold War



Because that'd make a great storyline.


----------



## Holsety (Nov 14, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> Because that'd make a great storyline.


it'd probably sell a fuckton just on the concept


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 14, 2009)

Every time I hear the name Bobby I think of Bobby from King of the Hill. With Hank yelling "DAMNIT BOBBY"


----------



## Azbulldog (Nov 14, 2009)




----------



## Jashwa (Nov 14, 2009)

Azbulldog said:


> pic


That should be in the "you laugh you lose" thread.


----------



## Neybulot (Nov 14, 2009)

Azbulldog said:


> http://img5.imageshack.us/img5/6062/1258035395841.jpg



:/ I'm in that group. I think I'm one of the two people that actually boycotts what they say they're going to boycott.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 14, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> Psychonaughts sold very poorly, doesn't mean it's a bad game.
> 
> Bad sales /=/ bad game.
> 
> ...



I like Halo, the sims, and I didn't hate GoW.
I didn't play psychonaughts, no one lives forever was good but not great, and evil genius I never heard of.

If a game makes 100+ million dollars it's good~
I didn't say they should do that, but if that's -their- strategy then that's fine. They're making the same games they would normally make anyway and just because they told you their goals shouldn't mean you get upset with them. If they said nothing but kept the same strategy, then what?

Other companies can make the games you love, too. They don't have to do it.

Ubisoft is still <3


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 14, 2009)

Barak said:


> Soap/Roach/Allen/Joseph are all pussy !



Soap pulled a knife out of his own body! lol


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 14, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Soap pulled a knife out of his own body! lol



There is an edit button...


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 14, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> There is an edit button...


lol


----------



## Kommodore (Nov 14, 2009)

Yeah that was pretty cool. Honestly did not see that one coming.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 14, 2009)

Holsety said:


> You must be pretty out there to assume movies and videogames are being _intentionally_ used to stir up AMERICAN PRIDE to go bag us sum commies, rather than being reused because it's easier to base a plot off of.



There's that, and there's the whole "if they're too fat and lazy to revolt, then the right to bear arms and oust corrupt governments is practically a writeoff!" bit. McDonald's has done its part. Time for Kotick to reel 'em in. =D


----------



## Neybulot (Nov 14, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> If a game makes 100+ million dollars it's good~



So Enter The Matrix must be awesome, right? :3

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/atari-full-year-revenues-fall-despite-enter-the-matrix-success

Enter The Matrix was certainly the highlight of the company's       operations during the year, with the title *selling some 5       million units* despite critical derision; tellingly, however,       Atari has announced no plans to exercise its right to make a       further two games based on the franchise.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 14, 2009)

Neybulot said:


> So Enter The Matrix must be awesome, right? :3
> 
> http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/atari-full-year-revenues-fall-despite-enter-the-matrix-success
> 
> Enter The Matrix was certainly the highlight of the company's       operations during the year, with the title *selling some 5       million units* despite critical derision; tellingly, however,       Atari has announced no plans to exercise its right to make a       further two games based on the franchise.



I fucking loved that game.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Nov 14, 2009)

Liking something =/= Good

Twilight must be a good book because many tweens like it!


----------



## Torinir (Nov 14, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> It's always been about content control, don't even try and pull that out of your ass, stupid.



http://www.wiispace.com/?p=vB26361

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=227204

IWNet has always been about money and how fast IW and ATVI can relieve you of yours.


----------



## FurrFox (Nov 14, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> How exactly can you trust a company now that has a new slogan. "We make games that only have the potential to become 100 Million dollar franchises. Everything else we kill off and deny ever existed"



I didnt know about their slogan  but so what they want to say with it?


----------



## Holsety (Nov 14, 2009)

The fact that we're all trying to argue something that is pretty much 90% subjective is hilarious.



WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Liking something =/= Good
> 
> Twilight must be a good book because many tweens like it!


see; subjective. From a financial standpoint Twilight is a golden dog that shits pure platinum.


----------



## CinnamonApples (Nov 14, 2009)

Daervhir said:


> If that is the case, I'm skipping three days of school to play it.



People who skip school to play a videogame really need to get their priorities in check.



Mikael Grizzly said:


> I have trouble making sense of the plot. Especially the Airport level, which doesn't make sense storywise when you consider who your character is.



That scene was put there for the sole-purpose of shock-value and I, personally, find that disgusting.
It would be passable if it brought about some point or message but it didn't. Although it's not like the
people who play these games really give two shits about plot anyway...


----------



## Runefox (Nov 14, 2009)

> That scene was put there for the sole-purpose of shock-value and I, personally, find that disgusting.


See, that's my problem with it.It had no point, it was just put there to add to the saleability of the game due to the shock value, something they absolutely didn't need to do. I mean, I don't find it offensive, I just find it tasteless - Why did they even do it?


----------



## Holsety (Nov 14, 2009)

> Although it's not like the people who play these games really give two shits about plot anyway...


lol, stupid generalizations that were disproven _in this very thread_


----------



## Runefox (Nov 14, 2009)

Holsety said:


> lol, stupid generalizations that were disproven _in this very thread_



Come now, are furries representative of the million or so other people who play this game?


----------



## Lazydabear (Nov 14, 2009)

Runefox said:


> See, that's my problem with it.It had no point, it was just put there to add to the saleability of the game due to the shock value, something they absolutely didn't need to do. I mean, I don't find it offensive, I just find it tasteless - Why did they even do it?


 

Its a way to make money even if that means hurting the consumers and Video Game Developers.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 14, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> I like Halo, the sims, and I didn't hate GoW.
> I didn't play psychonaughts, no one lives forever was good but not great, and evil genius I never heard of.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 14, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> I fucking loved that game.



*Facepalm*

Enter the Matrix took me four hours to beat, all the while through that game I was bored out of my mind. I mean sure killing people using cool martial arts moves was fun... for the first hour. At that point I just wanted to complete the game.

Plus who ever thought of a flight-sim rip off for a climax? Honestly I wish they could have just done one epic fight against Smith instead of hundreds of smiths coming at you.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 15, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> *Facepalm*
> 
> Enter the Matrix took me four hours to beat, all the while through that game I was bored out of my mind. I mean sure killing people using cool martial arts moves was fun... for the first hour. At that point I just wanted to complete the game.
> 
> Plus who ever thought of a flight-sim rip off for a climax? Honestly I wish they could have just done one epic fight against Smith instead of hundreds of smiths coming at you.



Did you beat it on the hardest difficulty, and did you hack?
Also there was a ton of re-playability after you unlock a bunch of bonus stuff, survival levels, and the sword.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 15, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Did you beat it on the hardest difficulty, and did you hack?
> Also there was a ton of re-playability after you unlock a bunch of bonus stuff, survival levels, and the sword.



Lol I was already too bored with the game that I continued to replay Dark Cloud


----------



## Mikael Grizzly (Nov 15, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Well russians look a lot like americans...from videotape it's kinda hard to determine.



Sorry for the late answer, but I was away for the weekend.

Anywhooo, no, it's not hard to determine that. Especially not if the guy in question is a psychopatic terrorist hunted worldwide.

Upon replaying, I can't believe just how stupid the plot is. The execution is awesome, some great gameplay and sequences in there, but the overarching plot is illogical and so far fetched it makes the Iraq war look completely justified and warranted. 

It doesn't even try to connect to the previous game, where the Ultranationalist party was broken, what with the death of Zakhaev, his son and much of its military power. It's even mentioned that the party was thrown into turmoil.

So, why exactly would the government see fit to erect a statue for Zakhaev as the hero of New Russia? Unless it's an Ultranationalist government, at which point I'd like to know why nothing of the sort was ever mentioned in the intro. That'd explain a lot. 

Except IW doesn't like for its game to make sense. I wonder if Michael Bay was secretly funding the project...

Anywhoo, I could rip the plot to shreds for the next few hours, but since it's obvious IW didn't care about the plot, focusing on the execution and presentation, it's pointless. 

I wish it wasn't packed with "Fuck Yeah America". Shepherd's annoying, especially in the first real mission, where he stands out in the open, easily visible to any sniper with half a brain. 

What the fuck is with that?


----------



## Kommodore (Nov 15, 2009)

American Generals are too badass to be shot. 

I should think the logic behind this would be self-evident.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Nov 15, 2009)

I thought it's because they're stupid that they needed to be spared.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Nov 15, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> So is anybody playing this on the pc?



Nope.  Got it for the two consoles.

-cannot hear anything over the sound of his L86-


----------



## sabe (Nov 15, 2009)

I play modern warfare 2 and love it!!!! add me ChronicRise!!!!! tell ur from furaffinity so i know!!! WEEEE!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Runefox (Nov 15, 2009)

If I could make a choice between god-awful console controls or god-awful PC multiplayer, maybe I'd actually be playing it. From what I've heard, the single-player is short as all hell, so it really comes down to the multi in the end. And again, in the end, both my feelings going into the launch and reports of people playing the console version, it's just not good enough.

That and the whole "WE NEED TO MAKE IT MORE SHOCKING SO PEOPLE WILL BUY IT" part. I guess in the end it comes down to, if I had it for the PC, I'd play it (consoles are no), but since I don't have it, I'm not going to buy it and support that kind of bullshit.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 15, 2009)

Shark_the_raptor said:


> Nope.  Got it for the two consoles.
> 
> -cannot hear anything over the sound of his L86-



I have it on 360, will have it on PC next week-ish.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 15, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> I have it on 360, will have it on PC next week-ish.



Why? The PC version is crap, it was reported all over this thread.


----------



## sabe (Nov 15, 2009)

I have the 360 version so you should add me!


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 15, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> Why? The PC version is crap, it was reported all over this thread.



Actually everybody that's posted on this thread hasn't played, or seen it played on the PC. They're all, and yes I mean all, going by what somebody else has said; I say this game is awesome, and by comparison COD4 is shit.


----------



## Renegade Kangaroo (Nov 15, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Actually everybody that's posted on this thread hasn't played, or seen it played on the PC. They're all, and yes I mean all, going by what somebody else has said; I say this game is awesome, and by comparison COD4 is shit.



I respectfully agree with you to the fullest


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 16, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Actually everybody that's posted on this thread hasn't played, or seen it played on the PC. They're all, and yes I mean all, going by what somebody else has said; I say this game is awesome, and by comparison COD4 is shit.



So your saying the person who made this: http://i36.tinypic.com/2uf7sro.jpg

Is a troll and all of that is absolute bullshit?


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Nov 16, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> I have it on 360, will have it on PC next week-ish.



Sweet.

Imo it is better than CoD4.  Though, I miss some of the perks.  But I'm only a 7 on the 360 version so I don't know what all the perks do.  But damn.  .44 Magnum <3  And it's gonna be a pain to get to lvl 70.  XD


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 16, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> So your saying the person who made this: http://i36.tinypic.com/2uf7sro.jpg
> 
> Is a troll and all of that is absolute bullshit?



Yes, for one you're unable to connect to a player that has more than 150ms ping and it focuses toward <100ms ping. There's little lag and when there is lag it's quickly dealt with and a new host is chosen.

-Nobody gets 40ms-60ms ping average. Nobody.
-Why do you need console?
-Lean is a clutch, unrealistic in the way its performed in cod4, and encourages camping corners.
-There's no modding community for COD4, why would there be one for MW:2; no maps needed.
-Anymore than 18 players and I wouldn't buy the game. 18 is pushing it, the maps aren't -that- big.
-A second section about mods, wasn't this already listed? Seems like he's stretching it out to make it look worse than it is; a futile attempt at making people think there's more missing than there actually is.
-Ability to record was poor in COD4, it's more simplistic to use a program such as FRAPs to do such things and nobody used COD4's built in one anyway. It was useless and a waste a time to develop something inferior to a free product that specializes in such things.
-Banning/kick hackers is, again, another attempt at stretching it out. We already know it's p2p, you don't need to use it again.
-There's no servers to select, again stretching it out for the purpose of a larger list.
-Mute them.
-Zero ping advantage is present in every game, also stretching it out because this again relates to not having servers.
-Demo is unimportant when the final release is out.
-Price rises as US dollar decreased in value, basically now the US pays the -exact- same price Canada pays for all its games: $59.99; you have to pay what we pay and it's an outrage, but when we have to pay $70 when your dollar drops in value we don't complain at all.

Also this list was released before the game was released.
This was released on some forum, made by some community member who, again, hadn't played the game and was going by what he was told solely.

Whoever made such a list should really re-make it, and not stretch it all out in hopes to make it one-sided and trick people who don't know/notice the difference.

He also left out the massive amount of maps, weapons, mods, and etc that was added to the game. As if content matters or something though, right? Pfft.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Nov 16, 2009)

Um lol, go visit the IW forum regarding the TRUE components of the ping. They discovered that you can barely reach less than 100, since IW intentionally changed the ping meters.


----------



## Kanic (Nov 16, 2009)

It's good shit


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 16, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Actually everybody that's posted on this thread hasn't played, or seen it played on the PC. They're all, and yes I mean all, going by what somebody else has said; I say this game is awesome, and by comparison COD4 is shit.



I've got it on the PC. The multiplayer is somewhat of an improvement, but only in the gameplay, perks, weapons, stuff like that. 

IWnet is crap. Can't choose what map I want to play, there are only public playlists, can't make your own, host migration disrupts gameplay, but I think it's better than having the game just stop. Honestly, dedicated servers would have worked much, much better for this game. IWnet really restricts the choices you as the player can make. There are also some issues with lag, seems to happen at randomly. Multiplayer freezes up, seen it happen to a lot of people, and had it happen to me. 

Cheaters are to be found, and sadly you just have to put up with them until VAC bans them, if it ever bans them.

By comparison to CoD4. Eh, it has it's pros and cons, MW2 has the upper hand with weapons, perks, challenges and ranking, CoD4 has the upper hand with dedicated servers, choice. If they had stuck to dedicated servers it would have been a much better multiplayer experience, but alas. 

The singleplayer story is very far fetched, full of plot holes, but it works. The pacing is excellent, and the level design is alright I guess. CoD4's story was much more solid that MW2's. But they're both executed very well. 

Singleplayer: CoD4 and MW2 are on even. Although I'll give the edge to CoD4 due to the story is better than MW2's. 

Multiplayer: CoD4 has a better system with dedicated servers, and adds much more freedom of choice to the player, while MW2 restricts the player immensely. But if you're a "casual" player, you won't really care. If you're a more hardcore player who's in a clan, I'd say skip MW2. It doesn't provide enough support to you guys.


----------



## TehSean (Nov 16, 2009)

Holsety said:


> Well see
> (If I'm reading that correctly and you're implying videogames are propaganda, lul)



America's Army

..

besides, a lot of video games have an underlying message, even if not on purpose. The general theme for CoD4 was "All armies, no matter how partiotic, get their hands dirty."

So. The government and even some soldiers see things like that as discrediting to their cause. The basic idea is that it hurts recruitment... yet others might like it, etc etc. Blah blah blah speculation.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 16, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Um lol, go visit the IW forum regarding the TRUE components of the ping. They discovered that you can barely reach less than 100, since IW intentionally changed the ping meters.



YEAH THEY'RE TOTALLY LYING TO YOU. It doesn't -say- 100ms or less when you bring it up or anything. Go actually play the game and find out, I have and when it's searching for a game it tells you the ping threshold it's using. It'll start at 100 and go to 150 if there's no games at 100ms, but it doesn't go higher than that.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 16, 2009)

@Newf, I think you just offered more evidence to support that claim. 

Long story short, ActiBlizzard threw IWNet together at the last minute as a scheme to prevent piracy. In doing so, they fucked over their actual customers and potential customers (like me).


----------



## bennyboy1995 (Nov 16, 2009)

i have it on ps3


----------



## ADF (Nov 16, 2009)

Looks like someone managed to get mods and dedicated servers in.


----------



## Mikael Grizzly (Nov 16, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> -Why do you need console?



Field of view, graphics settings otherwise inaccessible in the config menus (the console is a basic tweaking tool, to optimize performance), key binding, admin commands, single player mode cheats (I, for one, like to hit notarget or AI freeze and take a closer look at character models. Sadly, I can't do that in MW2, since for some reason it's disabled).



> -Lean is a clutch, unrealistic in the way its performed in cod4, and encourages camping corners.



Call of Duty is realistic? It might appear to be, but at its core its an arcade shooter with hordes of enemies, regenerating health and pretty much infinite ammo. 

And leaning is a simple, yet effective way of simulating peeking around corners. In MW it's useful to not expose yourself totally when shooting. In MW2 you have to step out in the open entirely to shoot. HArdly more realistic than lean.



> -There's no modding community for COD4, why would there be one for MW:2; no maps needed.



http://callofduty.filefront.com/files/Call_of_Duty_4/Maps/Multiple_Gametypes;11793

Just because _you_ don't need maps doesn't mean everyone doesn't.



> -Anymore than 18 players and I wouldn't buy the game. 18 is pushing it, the maps aren't -that- big.



It's all about you, isn't it? 

Also, it's funny, with Dedicated Servers boh you and people liking mass engagements could have fun.



> -A second section about mods, wasn't this already listed? Seems like he's stretching it out to make it look worse than it is; a futile attempt at making people think there's more missing than there actually is.



A mod =! A map



> -Ability to record was poor in COD4, it's more simplistic to use a program such as FRAPs to do such things and nobody used COD4's built in one anyway. It was useless and a waste a time to develop something inferior to a free product that specializes in such things.



Except there's a bit of a difference between a demo and a recording of a game.

Quite a bit of difference.



> -Banning/kick hackers is, again, another attempt at stretching it out. We already know it's p2p, you don't need to use it again.



It's actually pretty damn importat for competitive gaming, so it deserves to be listed.



> -There's no servers to select, again stretching it out for the purpose of a larger list.



No servers to select on IWNet. Quite a bit with dedicated servers.



> -Mute them.



_Do everything manually! The new wave of gaming! Forget about automation, set everything up yourself, just like in the 1980s!_



> -Zero ping advantage is present in every game, also stretching it out because this again relates to not having servers.



A detailed list is better at explaining the point rather than two mysterious bullet points. 

When reading a comparison of two cars, for example, do you insist that the author should've just written that one's a Lamborghini and the other a Ferrari?



> -Demo is unimportant when the final release is out.



No it's not. A demo gives the buyer the ability to evaluate the product before purchase, so that he doesn't have to waste his money.



> Also this list was released before the game was released.
> This was released on some forum, made by some community member who, again, hadn't played the game and was going by what he was told solely.



Welcome to the wonderful world of ad hominem.



> Whoever made such a list should really re-make it, and not stretch it all out in hopes to make it one-sided and trick people who don't know/notice the difference.



While your list would be so totally unbiased.



> He also left out the massive amount of maps, weapons, mods, and etc that was added to the game. As if content matters or something though, right? Pfft.



When the mechanics that bind them together are inferior to the earlier installment? Yes, new content is pretty much pointless then.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Nov 16, 2009)

Is this really all you guys do is bitch and moan at every little thing? I've seen people cast the MP for MW2 on PC and it looks like it works just as good as anything else. Really guys who gives a fuck about Ded servers? Yes they are nice and pretty much every game released on PC has them but is it really worth crying over just because you lost it. To be honest dedicated servers don't mean shit to me as long as you can enjoy the game then why does it matter if they removed a few thing. Also if you love looking at models so much then kill them then look at them. For god sakes I hate seeing people bitch over a few really unneeded features (Yes I do play PC games)


----------



## Mikael Grizzly (Nov 16, 2009)

Is it really this hard for you to accept that the world doesn't revolve around you and your preferences?


----------



## Adrianfolf (Nov 16, 2009)

Mikael Grizzly said:


> Is it really this hard for you to accept that the world doesn't revolve around you and your preferences?



Where did I state anything about preferances? I'll tell you where. No fucking where! All I've seen out of pretty much everyone in this thread is bitching about "No dedicated servers" or some other form of something they have removed. You all need to grow the fuck up and learn to just take what they fucking give you. Hell you should just be happy that they even made another COD game to begin with. Whats stopping them from dropping it all together? Nothing thats what. If you *WANT* dedicated servers then go play something that has them instead of bitching about a game that doesn't have it.


----------



## Mikael Grizzly (Nov 16, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> Where did I state anything about preferances? I'll tell you where. No fucking where! All I've seen out of pretty much everyone in this thread is bitching about "No dedicated servers" or some other form of something they have removed. You all need to grow the fuck up and learn to just take what they fucking give you. Hell you should just be happy that they even made another COD game to begin with. Whats stopping them from dropping it all together? Nothing thats what. If you *WANT* dedicated servers then go play something that has them instead of bitching about a game that doesn't have it.



Gee, aren't you bright. The difference between the eponymous us and you is that we are consumers with a brain, who demand quality in their entertainment, especially if the quality was present before.

Ergo, the person who needs to mature is you. Stop being a mindless consumer drone and start caring about what you're playing instead of just caring about playing.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 16, 2009)

Mikael Grizzly said:


> Ergo, the person who needs to mature is you. Stop being a mindless consumer drone and start caring about what you're playing instead of just caring about playing.



Well said


----------



## Adrianfolf (Nov 16, 2009)

Mikael Grizzly said:


> Gee, aren't you bright. The difference between the eponymous us and you is that we are consumers with a brain, who demand quality in their entertainment, especially if the quality was present before.
> 
> Ergo, the person who needs to mature is you. Stop being a mindless consumer drone and start caring about what you're playing instead of just caring about playing.



I'm not a mindless drone. I know quality games when I see then also quality of a game is dependent on opinions of other people. I could say it is a game of high quality and you could say otherwise. That is our opinion. So now just because I'm not into one little change I'm a mindless consumer? I have yet to even buy the damn game. I know quality entertainment and from what I have seen of the game it stands up with all the other CODs before it. Also I test my games before I buy them to make sure its what I will enjoy. I read reviews and watch gameplay videos before I make a purchase. Most of the games I have I enjoy greatly and feel they meet my standards of quality. I know what I want in a game and as long as it is fun and enjoyable I don't sweat the petty shit like I don't know DEDICATED FUCKING SERVERS. That is a petty thing to sweat over! I know for a fact that any platform I buy the game on I will enjoy it. If it meets that standard then its got good quality to me


----------



## Mikael Grizzly (Nov 16, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> I'm not a mindless drone. I know quality games when I see then also quality of a game is dependent on opinions of other people. I could say it is a game of high quality and you could say otherwise. That is our opinion. So now just because I'm not into one little change I'm a mindless consumer? I have yet to even buy the damn game. I know quality entertainment and from what I have seen of the game it stands up with all the other CODs before it. Also I test my games before I buy them to make sure its what I will enjoy. I read reviews and watch gameplay videos before I make a purchase. Most of the games I have I enjoy greatly and feel they meet my standards of quality. I know what I want in a game and as long as it is fun and enjoyable I don't sweat the petty shit like I don't know DEDICATED FUCKING SERVERS. That is a petty thing to sweat over! I know for a fact that any platform I buy the game on I will enjoy it. If it meets that standard then its got good quality to me



Again, Mr. World-Revolves-Around-Me, just because _you_ don't use dedicated servers doesn't mean it's a _petty_ thing. It's actually pretty big, since dedicated servers are the cornerstone of online gaming.

And yes, you are a mindless drone. The very fact that you're complaining about the eponymous us is proof that you're nothing more than an LCD - Lowest Common Denominator.

After all, why should the developers make an effort, if they have loyal consumers like you that base their purchases off of PR-approved reviews and gameplay videos?


----------



## TehSean (Nov 16, 2009)

A lot of dedicated servers are based around very expansive, large communities which consist of well.. random internet cliques, or local communities. I enjoy playing on any Los Angeles-based server because you tend to bump into those people all the time at Balboa Arcade near Reseda and First St Simi Arcade as well.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 16, 2009)

Mikael Grizzly said:


> When the mechanics that bind them together are inferior to the earlier installment? Yes, new content is pretty much pointless then.


Ah so you haven't actually played MW:2. lol.
There's a reason it's the most sold thing in all of entertainment, and it's mostly because it's everything cod4 was times ten. If you liked cod4 then you'll like MW:2 more.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Nov 16, 2009)

Also, lol if you're a host, OF COURSE your ping would be faster. >_>



NewfDraggie said:


> Ah so you haven't actually played MW:2. lol.
> There's a reason it's the most sold thing in all of entertainment, and it's mostly because it's everything cod4 was times ten. If you liked cod4 then you'll like MW:2 more.



Twilight is also the most selling book in this generation for this year. I guess it's the best book ever yes?


----------



## Runefox (Nov 16, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> Is this really all you guys do is bitch and moan at every little thing? I've seen people cast the MP for MW2 on PC and it looks like it works just as good as anything else. Really guys who gives a fuck about Ded servers? Yes they are nice and pretty much every game released on PC has them but is it really worth crying over just because you lost it. To be honest dedicated servers don't mean shit to me as long as you can enjoy the game then why does it matter if they removed a few thing. Also if you love looking at models so much then kill them then look at them. For god sakes I hate seeing people bitch over a few really unneeded features (Yes I do play PC games)



Ah, so you'd rather it continue rolling down the hill with paid-for matchmaking services like X-Box Live (except every major game studio seems to want in on it (IWNet and BNet2.0 are good examples), and they're chomping at the bit to charge for it) and draconian DRM the likes of which we saw with titles like Spore, where the activation process was far from perfect and quickly made pirating the game a lot easier than actually purchasing it.

It's dangerous to allow stuff like this to happen, and it's unfortunate that it's happened with quite possibly the highest-demand video game on the market right now, because it sets dangerous precedents, both within ActiBlizzard and with other companies. One of the major attractions of PC gaming has always been customization of virtually every aspect of a title, from controls and graphics to modifying the game itself, and as those things erode from the mainstream, so, too does one of the major raisons d'etre of PC gaming.

Again, I firmly believe that ActiBlizzard stepped up with IWNet at the last minute as a measure to curb piracy and to focus more sales onto the console market, where (at least there's a perception that) piracy is much less rampant and in the PS3's case, nigh on impossible at the moment, and while you can't fault someone for trying to make a dollar, it all comes down to corporate greed - The people who bought this game, by and large, are the ones who would have bought it to begin with.

This circles around, too - If more developers began doing this kind of thing and focusing solely on the console market, the necessity for innovation and development of PC graphics chips would diminish; If the necessity for high-end graphics chips and the competition in that market decreases, so, too, do the capabilities of the next consoles diminish. As it stands right now, both the major consoles where MW2 has seen release have had their specifications built around the technology of the day. With a stagnation of innovation in the GPU chipmaking market (of which there are mostly two markets - Games and workstation usage, the latter not being oriented towards high-performance gaming), they become more expensive and less capable as time draws on versus a thriving market.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 17, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Also, lol if you're a host, OF COURSE your ping would be faster. >_>
> 
> 
> 
> Twilight is also the most selling book in this generation for this year. I guess it's the best book ever yes?



It's not the most sold book of all time now is it?
One year in books != all time in all entertainment.


----------



## Kommodore (Nov 17, 2009)

Hey I just wanted to interject for a second and say:

this is a good game you guys should be playing it.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Nov 17, 2009)

CommodoreKitty said:


> Hey I just wanted to interject for a second and say:
> 
> this is a good game you guys should be playing it.



I totally am.  BD  Listen to my L86 roar.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 17, 2009)

CommodoreKitty said:


> Hey I just wanted to interject for a second and say:
> 
> this is a good game you guys should be playing it.



Any particular reason why? As it was the same thing I heard when people told me about ODST. Yet I ended up disliking that anyway.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Nov 17, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> It's not the most sold book of all time now is it?
> One year in books != all time in all entertainment.



Are you saying MW is an "all time"? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH!!!

Seriously, stop destroying games by being the corporation's dick sucker.


----------



## Mikael Grizzly (Nov 17, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Ah so you haven't actually played MW:2. lol.
> There's a reason it's the most sold thing in all of entertainment, and it's mostly because it's everything cod4 was times ten. If you liked cod4 then you'll like MW:2 more.



As usual, sales =! quality. 

Because by that logic, McDonald's is the world's finest cuisine.


----------



## Kommodore (Nov 17, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> Any particular reason why? As it was the same thing I heard when people told me about ODST. Yet I ended up disliking that anyway.



The console version of MW2 is more refined and better executed in every way then the console version of MW1. If you liked the first on the console you should like this one as well. I have not played it on the PC so I can't comment on it but it you certainly cannot rip on it without trying it.


----------



## Torinir (Nov 17, 2009)

Get ready. The UT series #1 cheat coder, [ELF]HelioS has his crap for MW2 PC.

http://www.viddler.com/explore/Artificial_COD5/videos/2/

I've kept my eye on him for years, since being an admin at TWL, and was expecting this.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 17, 2009)

Mikael Grizzly said:


> As usual, sales =! quality.
> 
> Because by that logic, McDonald's is the world's finest cuisine.



Not the same thing, it is quality due to this large amount of sales. Food and entertainment aren't the same thing. For a single game to beat all of entertainment is beyond phenomenal. It is GOTY, it is the best game out for this year, and it is ten times better than cod4. If you can't accept that because you want options nobody else would want, then that's your problem.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 17, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Are you saying MW is an "all time"? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAH!!!
> 
> Seriously, stop destroying games by being the corporation's dick sucker.



This doesn't even make sense, what are you attempting to get across here?


----------



## Tobias-the-pink (Nov 17, 2009)

I'm nearly prestiged in multiplayer =] I need a life ^_^


----------



## Mikael Grizzly (Nov 17, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Not the same thing, it is quality due to this large amount of sales. Food and entertainment aren't the same thing. For a single game to beat all of entertainment is beyond phenomenal. It is GOTY, it is the best game out for this year, and it is ten times better than cod4. If you can't accept that because you want options nobody else would want, then that's your problem.



I'm the only one who wants Dedicated Servers and console? Do crawl out from under your rock. 

And no, sales never equal quality. Sales are proof of an effective marketing campaign, nothing more.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 17, 2009)

Mikael Grizzly said:


> I'm the only one who wants Dedicated Servers and console? Do crawl out from under your rock.
> 
> And no, sales never equal quality. Sales are proof of an effective marketing campaign, nothing more.



Actually yeah, sales do equal quality. When a game sells more than -anything else ever in entertainment- and gets flawless scores across the charts, and is labeled GOTY before the end of the year by many it is good. You may not like it, but -everybody else- does. Nobody cares what you, and the -very- small amount of morons who want the game their way or they won't try it, think.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 17, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> it is the best game out for this year.



Dragon Age: Origins is a far better game than Modern Warfare 2.


----------



## Armaetus (Nov 17, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> Is this really all you guys do is bitch and moan at every little thing? I've seen people cast the MP for MW2 on PC and it looks like it works just as good as anything else. Really guys who gives a fuck about Ded servers? Yes they are nice and pretty much every game released on PC has them but is it really worth crying over just because you lost it. To be honest dedicated servers don't mean shit to me as long as you can enjoy the game then why does it matter if they removed a few thing. Also if you love looking at models so much then kill them then look at them. For god sakes I hate seeing people bitch over a few really unneeded features (Yes I do play PC games)



Because we can and I hate it when greedy assholes like Activision and Infinity Ward fuck the PC port over, not that YOU care since it sounds you play more console than PC (typical console gamer mentality?).



ADF said:


> Looks like someone managed to get mods and dedicated servers in.



How long before Jewtube pulls it because of some bogus copyright claim by IW? I see nothing infringing on a player recorded video.



CommodoreKitty said:


> Hey I just wanted to interject for a second and say:
> 
> this is a good game you guys should be playing it.



It probably would be a good game IF IW DIDN'T FUCK THE PC PORT UP!


----------



## Lazydabear (Nov 17, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> Dragon Age: Origins is a far better game than Modern Warfare 2.


 

Blood Splatter on your face game?


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 17, 2009)

Lazydabear said:


> Blood Splatter on your face game?



I wish I could turn that off, it kinda gets in the way during the dialog scenes. Maybe I can turn it off. At least the blood splatter in DA:O doesn't look like raspberry jam.


----------



## Adrianfolf (Nov 17, 2009)

Glaice said:


> Because we can and I hate it when greedy assholes like Activision and Infinity Ward fuck the PC port over, not that YOU care since it sounds you play more console than PC (typical console gamer mentality?).
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No I play my PC more than I do my consoles. But I don't see how they fucked it up by removing dedicated servers. I mean there have been some PC games with matchmaking and not dedicated servers but no one complained about those so why is Mw2 any different? Please do not use that stupid argument "Its a PC gaming cornerstone" I want justifyable reasons why its a bad thing?

Also on a side not of me being more of a console gamer. I had to upgrade my PC with a 500GB HD just to fit the mass amounts of PC games I own


----------



## Mikael Grizzly (Nov 17, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Actually yeah, sales do equal quality. When a game sells more than -anything else ever in entertainment- and gets flawless scores across the charts, and is labeled GOTY before the end of the year by many it is good. You may not like it, but -everybody else- does. Nobody cares what you, and the -very- small amount of morons who want the game their way or they won't try it, think.



Professional reviews don't mean squat, since game "journalists" are nothing more than hype whores. My point about sales stands.

And please, GOTY awards? That's pretty much the most hilarious award, since every magazine and their mother has one and pretends they matter.

Fact is, MW2 is a decent game, but nowhere near the hype people (including you) try to perpetuate.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 17, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> No I play my PC more than I do my consoles. But I don't see how they fucked it up by removing dedicated servers. I mean there have been some PC games with matchmaking and not dedicated servers but no one complained about those so why is Mw2 any different? Please do not use that stupid argument "Its a PC gaming cornerstone" I want justifyable reasons why its a bad thing?



No more 3rd-party mods, meaning the PC people will end up having to pay for DLC as well.  IWNet was just a means of content control as everyone can see now, as there are many many hacks for the PC version already.  Activision made PC gamers pay production royalties, despite ever having to actually do so in the past...  Just a couple _minor details._


----------



## Runefox (Nov 17, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> No more 3rd-party mods, meaning the PC people will end up having to pay for DLC as well.  IWNet was just a means of content control as everyone can see now, as there are many many hacks for the PC version already.  Activision made PC gamers pay production royalties, despite ever having to actually do so in the past...  Just a couple _minor details._



It's a slippery slope that ActiBlizzard is more than willing to go down. Instead of community-built maps, you'll have DLC map packs that exclude you from certain online games if you don't have them (forcing you to pony up for the extra content), and I'd be willing to place money on the idea that they'd open up "dedicated servers" insofar as you pay them directly for the privilege to have such a thing. They keep talking about how people are asking for features and willing to pay for them, and constantly hinting about making online gaming a pay-to-play feature (even considering they don't even really need to keep up any particularly large infrastructure for it since all gameplay is handled by the clients).

I can't remember the last time I bought an Activision game - I think it was back when CoD4 was launched - but I won't be buying any more in the foreseeable future. Would I like to play MW2? Yeah. Would I play it if I had it? Yeah. But not if it meant giving money to those bastards and lining Kotick's pockets.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 17, 2009)

I'm probably just gonna acquire it for single player.  :V


----------



## TehSean (Nov 17, 2009)

It would be nice if someone wrote a review instead of just getting into a pissing contest about why we aren't buying it and resorting to name-calling.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 17, 2009)

TehSean said:


> It would be nice if someone wrote a review instead of just getting into a pissing contest about why we aren't buying it and resorting to name-calling.



?


----------



## Adrianfolf (Nov 17, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> No more 3rd-party mods, meaning the PC people will end up having to pay for DLC as well.  IWNet was just a means of content control as everyone can see now, as there are many many hacks for the PC version already.  Activision made PC gamers pay production royalties, despite ever having to actually do so in the past...  Just a couple _minor details._



I can see your point there. 3rd party maps are a lot of fun to play sadly I never got to experance this on COD4.  But one thing I never found for COD4 or really bothered to look for was actual MODs like what UT99-2k4 had


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 17, 2009)

Adrianfolf said:


> I can see your point there. 3rd party maps are a lot of fun to play sadly I never got to experance this on COD4.  But one thing I never found for COD4 or really bothered to look for was actual MODs like what UT99-2k4 had



The thing with newer games is that they've just started becoming less and less accessible for modding.  No one ever wants to release an SDK for their game anymore, because that would lose them money they could make with $10 DLC.  I mean, I find DLC to be pretty fun, but after about one or 2 they just stop making them, leaving the game to just sort of stagnate in its own age.  Modding always manages to keep things fresh.  Hell, I keep going back to PlanetElderScrolls to check out what neat thing for Morrowind I can find.  I tried Call of Duty 4, and while there was some modding, it was never truly expanded because of Activision's need for content control.


----------



## TehSean (Nov 17, 2009)

Runefox said:


> ?



That's nice and all, but I'm trying to suggest that users here submit reviews of the game instead of verbally lynching eachother for supporting or not supporting it.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Nov 17, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Actually yeah, sales do equal quality. When a game sells more than -anything else ever in entertainment- and gets flawless scores across the charts, and is labeled GOTY before the end of the year by many it is good. You may not like it, but -everybody else- does. Nobody cares what you, and the -very- small amount of morons who want the game their way or they won't try it, think.



Well there's your problem.

Looks like he's your typical masses/idiot gamer. Let's beat him up!


----------



## TehSean (Nov 17, 2009)

The sales of Okami would reflect that it was a failure then.

Moving on, people have figured out how to open up the Dev Console in ModernWarfare 2. It allows the p2p game's host to tweak the game's rules for ALL PLAYERS. It is not exclusive to the host, but the other players do not have control over the game's rules and may be forced to play how the game is tweaked.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rqLUDfl26Y

It will be interesting to see how IWnet responds to this since Microsoft and Valve have set punishment standards as of late.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 17, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Actually yeah, sales do equal quality



So by that logic Grim Fandango is the worst game of all time?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grim_Fandango

Bare in mind, it was universally praised across the board by game reviewers, yet sold poorly



> When a game sells more than -anything else ever in entertainment- and gets flawless scores across the charts, and is labeled GOTY before the end of the year by many it is good.


So when a game gets a biased review by a ton of console indoctrinated reviewers it is automatically good? If the game is hyped the shit out of by Activision and brainwashes people, then it's good. The game itself could be a turd in a gamecase but if it sells more then a couple dozen million copies it is a masterpiece?



> You may not like it, but -everybody else- does. Nobody cares what you, and the -very- small amount of morons who want the game their way or they won't try it, think.


You may like it. But not everyone does. You sound exactly like a fan of Twilight or Eragon. Saying to "teh Hatorz" that only the "morons" hate it and "no one cares what they think" Truth is no game is perfect and only trying to overglorify a game's superiority based off sales is childish. Sales only reflect how deeply a company has pressured gamers into buying it.

I did actually kick myself and play Modern Warfare 2 at a friend of mine's house. It was... okay for a consoleised shooter. But it was definantly not deserving of it's massive hype Activision gave it and is not a "best game of all time" by any regards. In a few years people'll forget about it, claiming the next "Modern Warfare" will be 10x greater.

The point is, people liking a game is a matter of opinion, and this is an internet forum where we are allowed to voice them. Liking/disliking a game is a matter of opinion and calling people morons just because they don't like a certain game is ludicrous. It makes you look mentally challenged and unable to form an intelligent opinion for yourself.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 17, 2009)

@TehSean: More proof that IWNet was a last-minute addition.

@Newf: FFS, man, you realize that if any of those "reviews" aren't glowing, ActiBlizzard would pull their advertising, right? And Mr. I-Didn't-Like-The-Game gets kicked out onto his ass for screwing up.

None of that means anything. Congratulations and thanks, from the bottom of my heart, for perpetuating the downfall of the medium, especially since you've done my share of the buying by pledging to buy not only the 360 version, but the PC version as well. Bravo.


----------



## TehSean (Nov 17, 2009)

Again: It would be nice if the most vocal supporter of the game would change their tone and move away from their self-endowed superiority.


----------



## sabe (Nov 17, 2009)

OMG i love murdern Wolfur 2  It is like the best game ever! Add me on Xboxlive if you wanna play with me. I will play with anyone hehe and i love playing with other furries just seems more fun! My name is ChronicRise on XBL (if i already posted im srry i forgot....) Now add me so we can pwn the noobs like furries do! (also I am off topic and im srry bout that just wanna get some peeps to play with)


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 17, 2009)

sabe said:


> OMG i love murdern Wolfur 2  It is like the best game ever! Add me on Xboxlive if you wanna play with me. I will play with anyone hehe and i love playing with other furries just seems more fun! My name is ChronicRise on XBL (if i already posted im srry i forgot....) Now add me so we can pwn the noobs like furries do! (also I am off topic and im srry bout that just wanna get some peeps to play with)



A typical XBL fag.


----------



## Torinir (Nov 17, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Well there's your problem.
> 
> Looks like he's your typical masses/idiot gamer. Let's beat him up!



I like this plan.


----------



## sabe (Nov 18, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> A typical XBL fag.


What do you mean by fag lol?


----------



## Kommodore (Nov 18, 2009)

I am in school right now so I can't go into that much detail but quality and sales are related but ultimately separate issues. A game with high sales is clearly _profitable_ but it may or may not be high quality. Hypothetically speaking, if a new book or movie were to come out that was shittastically popular, and a game was made of it, you can assume that it would have (relatively) high sales. The game could be the most buggy piece of shit out but it would still be "profitable." More factors go into the sales of a game besides it inheritance quality, like brand loyalty and hype. To say that a game that has high sales is by extension high quality makes the false assumption the people buy games based on quality alone.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 18, 2009)

sabe said:


> What do you mean by fag lol?



Do you want to know what a fag is, or why he called you one

A fag is a derogatory term for a flamboyantly gay person. TL;DR Its an insult that means you love penises in your mouth



sabe said:


> OMG i love murdern Wolfur 2 It is like the best game ever! Add me on Xboxlive if you wanna play with me. I will play with anyone hehe and i love playing with other furries just seems more fun! My name is ChronicRise on XBL (if i already posted im srry i forgot....) Now add me so we can pwn the noobs like furries do! (also I am off topic and im srry bout that just wanna get some peeps to play with)



He most likely called you one because you ran your mouth off like an Xbox fanboy on Xbox Forums. Hence why he called you an xbl fag. Your post is almost word for word what nearly everyone on Xbox forums says in the Modern Warfare 2 section. Except replacing Furries with "Gamers".


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 18, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> Dragon Age: Origins is a far better game than Modern Warfare 2.



I've been playing that game and no it isn't.


Mikael Grizzly said:


> Professional reviews don't mean squat, since game "journalists" are nothing more than hype whores. My point about sales stands.
> 
> And please, GOTY awards? That's pretty much the most hilarious award, since every magazine and their mother has one and pretends they matter.
> 
> Fact is, MW2 is a decent game, but nowhere near the hype people (including you) try to perpetuate.


Lol "it's not the best, everybody that says it is doesn't count!"


WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Well there's your problem.
> 
> Looks like he's your typical masses/idiot gamer. Let's beat him up!


See above.


CryoScales said:


> You may like it. But not everyone does.


Actually just about everybody does. Hint, it sold more copies than anything else in entertainment has, ever, in the launch day and everybody that plays it loves it.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 18, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> I've been playing that game and no it isn't.



That really says something about your taste.

That it's horrible


----------



## Wreth (Nov 18, 2009)

How the fuck does sales tell you how good a game is? Many people will play it for the first time after they bought it, they need to buy to play. A game could be a piece of shit that everyone sells back to the shop, but it was still bought at first.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Nov 18, 2009)

I have a feeling NewfDraggy is either a 360 bot or a troll.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 18, 2009)

Zoopedia said:


> How the fuck does sales tell you how good a game is? Many people will play it for the first time after they bought it, they need to buy to play. A game could be a piece of shit that everyone sells back to the shop, but it was still bought at first.



I'm looking at you, Kane & Lynch! I know _I_ did. Hell, I almost did for CoD4 I hated the multiplayer so much.

I'm getting pretty tired of this. Newf keeps repeating the same crap and everyone keeps correcting him, but he doesn't care, saying "NUH-UH" and posting the same crap he posted prior. So it's basically "NUH-UH" "YUH-HUH" "NUH-UH" "YUH-HUH" "NUH-UH" "YUH-HUH" "NUH-UH" "YUH-HUH"... *ad nauseum*.

To quote Futurama, "She's stuck in a loop, and *he's* a moron!"


----------



## Sinjo (Nov 18, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Actually just about everybody does. Hint, it sold more copies than anything else in entertainment has, ever, in the launch day and everybody that plays it loves it.


Including Halo.



Zoopedia said:


> How the fuck does sales tell you how good a game is? Many people will play it for the first time after they bought it, they need to buy to play. A game could be a piece of shit that everyone sells back to the shop, but it was still bought at first.


Read some Reviews :V


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 18, 2009)

Sinjo said:


> Read some Reviews :V



Halo 3 got top scores :V

That shows how credible reviews are V:


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 18, 2009)

Runefox said:


> I'm getting pretty tired of this. Newf keeps repeating the same crap and everyone keeps correcting him, but he doesn't care, saying "NUH-UH" and posting the same crap he posted prior. So it's basically "NUH-UH" "YUH-HUH" "NUH-UH" "YUH-HUH" "NUH-UH" "YUH-HUH" "NUH-UH" "YUH-HUH"... *ad nauseum*.



Actually I'm in the right here, these poor excuses for gamers dislike a game without trying it, you yourself included, all because it's "missing" features nobody needs.

It's the game of the year, and as much as I love Assassin's Creed 2 it will be what I play more often due to the online.

Not one single person here talking shit about MW:2 has played it, yet you act like whatever anybody who has doesn't know anything. Every single one of you people that are against MW:2 don't know anything about the game.

"Do you like MW:2?" "Nope it's the worst thing ever, and I haven't even played it!" lol.

Do the gaming industry a favor and try it, at least then you can say you didn't like it, and be actually correct. But just because you don't like it doesn't mean nobody else doesn't, currently more people are playing it than any other shooter online. Totally a bad game. You know, sells more than anything else, has more people playing than anything else, has the best reviews, and even pulled the majority of the boy-cotters into loving it. But nope, it's bad because there's parts missing from it compared to the last game.

Fail.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 18, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Actually I'm in the right here, these poor excuses for gamers dislike a game without trying it, you yourself included, all because it's "missing" features nobody needs.
> 
> It's the game of the year, and as much as I love Assassin's Creed 2 it will be what I play more often due to the online.
> 
> ...



I pirated it.  It's not worth money, not for the gameplay but for Activision.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 18, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Actually I'm in the right here, these poor excuses for gamers dislike a game without trying it, you yourself included, all because it's "missing" features nobody needs.
> 
> It's the game of the year, and as much as I love Assassin's Creed 2 it will be what I play more often due to the online.
> 
> ...



I bought it. I played it. I posted about it. You completely ignored my post. 

Sorry, but you're in the wrong here.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 18, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Actually I'm in the right here, these poor excuses for gamers dislike a game without trying it, you yourself included, all because it's "missing" features nobody needs.


Sure, it's missing dedicated servers and they're trying ever so hard to weasel their way into getting people to pay for it. I suppose you're right - That in itself isn't bad. However, the fact that the game did well despite this paves the way for more bullshit in the future, not to mention that "professional" reviews are useless in this scenario because as exemplified by the fiasco with Gamespot and Kane & Lynch, a company threatening to pull its advertisements holds much more weight than the feelings of a reviewer. Hence, if these people want to keep their jobs while reviewing high-profile games that are advertised everywhere, they'll say it's the best thing since Jesus invented sliced bread.

Frankly, I think I would like it - Hell, I keep saying as much. I've never said I wouldn't like it or didn't like it. But I refuse to buy it, or any Activision/Blizzard game, until this bullshit comes to an end. The little disposable money I get can be better spent elsewhere than by perpetuating the downfall of PC gaming as we know it and lining Bobby Kotick's pockets made out of $100 bills and baby skin for another Call of Duty game that's the same as its direct predecessor, which in turn was the same as Call of Duty 2.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 18, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Actually I'm in the right here, these poor excuses for gamers dislike a game without trying it, you yourself included, all because it's "missing" features nobody needs.
> 
> It's the game of the year, and as much as I love Assassin's Creed 2 it will be what I play more often due to the online.
> 
> ...



Just assuming a gamer hasn't played a game and is berating it is ignorant and an unwarranted assumption. It shows that you are unable to make an actual criticize or opinion for yourself and just want to justify it like the overly biased faceless gamers do.


----------



## CinnamonApples (Nov 18, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Actually I'm in the right here, these poor excuses for gamers dislike a game without trying it, you yourself included, all because it's "missing" features nobody needs.
> 
> It's the game of the year, and as much as I love Assassin's Creed 2 it will be what I play more often due to the online.
> 
> ...



Played the game the day my friend bought it. It felt no different than previous FPS shooter I've played... not one bit different. And as far as I can tell the narrative is nonsensical, but as I've previously stated not many people seem to care about plot-lines nowadays (hell, the success of movies like Transformers 2 and 2012 can attest to that).


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 18, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> I bought it. I played it. I posted about it. You completely ignored my post.
> 
> Sorry, but you're in the wrong here.



Actually I'm kinda doubting you played it, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt instead of being a total ass. However, I do doubt you would like it if it had the things different about it and cod4, meaning I doubt you like cod anyway.


CryoScales said:


> Just assuming a gamer hasn't played a game and is berating it is ignorant and an unwarranted assumption. It shows that you are unable to make an actual criticize or opinion for yourself and just want to justify it like the overly biased faceless gamers do.


"You're wrong because your opinion isn't as good as mine"
Actually most of these people have said they haven't played the game and won't play the game because they heard xxx. So my assumptions aren't actually assumptions, I know they haven't played the game. Only one of the people in this thread that dislike MW:2 has actually played MW:2.


CinnamonApples said:


> Played the game the day my friend bought it. It felt no different than previous FPS shooter I've played... not one bit different. And as far as I can tell the narrative is nonsensical, but as I've previously stated not many people seem to care about plot-lines nowadays (hell, the success of movies like Transformers 2 and 2012 can attest to that).


So basically you're saying it's not one bit different from other shooters; actually yeah, yeah it is different. There's a lot of things that made it different than other shooters (the leveling system for instance, and the perks), but if you mean different than COD4(/5) then you're also wrong. Many new gameplay elements, additions, etc is different and the thing that these people are complaining about is it being different in a few aspects anyway. You saying it's "not one bit different" is actually arguing against these people disagreeing with me, because they're upset it's too different from cod4 and other shooters on a few things.


----------



## Yukiru (Nov 18, 2009)

Well while you guys do that stuff, I'll just leave this here.

PSN: Kitpaws
Looking for some furballs to play with.


----------



## CinnamonApples (Nov 18, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> You saying it's "not one bit different" is actually arguing against these people disagreeing with me, because they're upset it's too different from cod4 and other shooters on a few things.



I'm not siding with anyone. =p I'm just expressing my _opinion_, which I suppose is inherently wrong according to you. I reiterate, *I* felt as if it was no different than other shooters, because aside from a few bells and whistles, it's all the same exact thing (and yes, the same could be said for pretty much every genre).


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 18, 2009)

CinnamonApples said:


> I'm not siding with anyone. =p I'm just expressing my _opinion_, which I suppose is inherently wrong according to you. I reiterate, *I* felt as if it was no different than other shooters, because aside from a few bells and whistles, it's all the same exact thing (and yes, the same could be said for pretty much every genre).



Every game is generic, really. There's only a few games that aren't and they slowly fade into being generic shortly after launch. Using that against any game is quite silly unless the game really has no traits that make it unique at all, and even there you have some market.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 18, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Every game is generic, really.



So your saying Modern Warfare 2 is generic?


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 18, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> So your saying Modern Warfare 2 is generic?



In the sense it's a shooter. How un-generic can a shooter be?


----------



## TehSean (Nov 18, 2009)

Splinter Cell was fairly ungeneric in its Mercs vs Spies multiplayer, combining 3rd person combat with shooter action and a lot of acrobatics.

Typically, when someone wanted to make a successful shooter, they looked at DOOM. Then, they looked at QUAKE, and ever since we got bored of Team Fortress Classic on Half-Life 1, developers have been re-hashing Counter-Strike, sticking floating gun-toting cameras on a fixed plane with limited Z-Axis Access with ladders and space bar taps.

But yeah. A game like Splinter Cell managed to mix it up and create a very tense game mode despite the highly limited player count. It was watered down significantly in sequel games to increase the number of simultaneous participants.. :-( 

Splinter Cell gave players a lot of physical actions that only made sense. The ability to CLIMB, to LEAN, to VAULT, to LIFT, to GRAB. So much level interaction beyond butting the tip of my rifle against doors to open them! Gosh! I have HANDS?! 

Some people reason that "equipment is heavy", and I reason that they're "full of shit" when talking about that sort of level interaction that is missing from even the most modern FPS games... Specifically full of it where their brains should be. Why, I could drop some of my equipment, or throw it up to the ledge, and then climb up after it.

Or build the game around 'weight class' and reduce the number of agile-actions or increase the time it takes to exercise them... So a heavy would be sluggishly climbing while a spy would have done backflips at the crest and climbed the wall several times by the time the heavy stands up at the top.

Sooo.. THERE'S AN EXAMPLE! 

Another example would be Natural Selection, a RTS-FPS mod for HL1 with its sequel in development and available for pre-order( I ordered the Spec Edition months ago despite the game being over half a year away from release), but the things it accomplished were done more unsuccessfully by Alien v Predator games.

But anyway... Modern Warfare 2. My friends really dig it. That's putting a great deal of pressure on me to get it! 
Because. 
Hey. 

Gaming with friends? = Always a win.

Nowwww I just have to find a way to be frugal about it, or just cave in to full price, like so many others did... hurf.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 19, 2009)

TehSean said:


> Then, they looked at QUAKE, and ever since we got bored of Team Fortress Classic on Half-Life 1,



Oh god Team Fortress Classic was so awesome


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 19, 2009)

Splinter cell wasn't un-generic, and to call it a shooter is a bad idea seeing as it's stealth action. You can go through the entire game without having to fire a single shot. It's also not a first person shooter, though we were talking about shooters in general third person shooters always seem -different- than first person ones, and of course they are. The perspective has changed.

So that's not actually an example that works for you:
Not a shooter
Not first person
It's a generic stealth action game, there's like six splinter cells and it follows metal gear solid type of gameplay, as well as other types of stealth action games that came before and after it.

Natural Selection, like you said is an RTS-FPS mod, but it's still fairly generic. There's nothing it's done something else hasn't, though that's not a bad thing at all, I just don't see how it could be a bad thing for MW:2 to just be an enhancement on previous shooter experiences. I've never played the mod though, so I can't say much about it being un-original.


Also, I paid about $77 for Assassin's Creed 2 for the 360, and I paid the same price for MW:2 for the 360. Though I didn't actually buy MW:2, my boyfriend did and I'll be buying it on the PC for myself; on the PC it's $59.99+tax for all our games, and the price change to $60 for you guys doesn't actually effect us Canadians. Which is why I don't care about it and laugh at you people complaining about paying the same price as us. I don't necessarily mean you TehSean, just everybody complaining about the price in general.

However I don't agree about the price changes and not giving the options for console, dedicated servers, etc (I'm glad they removed lean though, still. I fucking hate corner campers), I don't agree that it breaks the game in any way. It's still fun, and an enhancement on every front COD4 succeeded in and then some.


----------



## TehSean (Nov 19, 2009)

I guess Gears of War isn't a shooter because it was third person then.

You had the option to play Splinter Cell very overtly except in missions that specifically ordered against it.

Anyway, I was talking more about SC's asymmetric multiplayer. Asymmetric game modes are very very scary to a lot of devs for reasons of balance. Therefore, it moved away from the norm, which was to follow in the vein of Counterstrike and just give everyone identical abilities and guns, rewarding the winners with a more advanced selection of powers and gear..

Yeah, FPS is pretty generic, but anything can be reduced to its building blocks, so you have to take these observations with a grain of salt. We can sit here and generalize the world to death, but that's not interesting to do all the time and it makes it hard to appreciate anything through that sort of die-hard cynicism.

ANYWAY! lol I guess part of my ire is the fact that Activision wasn't afraid to stage negative publicity stunts with its President going "urr hurr hurr, I'd charge gamers more if I could"

He probably could have, given the reaction of most boycotters. Aaaaand. I don't get paid a whole lot, so I'm looking to stretch my weakened U.S. dollar


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Nov 19, 2009)

Well he confirms a 360fag, that should show how much you should care for his opinion.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 19, 2009)

Yeah but the thing is, right now on splinter cell pandora tomorrow or chaos theory there's nobody playing online at all, and on double agent there's only a few people playing and getting into a good server is hard unless you just play with friends. It was fun for the first day or two, but then it becomes boring without new/unlockable content and nothing to shoot for while also applying a slow-paced gaming experience that usually has you waiting for them to come to you and it usually never happens.

And I didn't say it wasn't a shooter because it was in third person. I specifically said I didn't mean that, too; I said it wasn't a shooter because it's actually a stealth action game. It's not a shooter. At all. It's labeled stealth action, in the same boat as Metal Gear Solid is. But I did say third person shooters always feel un-generic, because they are. There's not as many third person shooters as there are first person ones, and because you see them less it feels less generic when it actually is probably more generic. (Kane and lynch was pure generic side a few unique gametypes, but at first it doesn't feel that way due to the third person)


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 19, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> Well he confirms a 360fag, that should show how much you should care for his opinion.



Actually I'm a PC-fag, I own Assassin's Creed 2 for the 360 solely because it doesn't come out on PC until early 2010 and the game came out for 360's there two days ago. I've waited for this game for a while, and the only reason I'm not playing it this very moment is because I'm heading off for the night. I wish I had it on PC, but I can't and I'll just torrent it when it does come out on PC anyway. 

I've played MW:2 on 360 a bunch of times, but I kinda dislike joy/controllers for FPS's. Love them for games like assassin's creed though, which is why I have a 360 PC controller.

I also own Bad Company 2 for the 360 and Mirrors Edge (got that on PC though, too, so I never play the 360 one. Same reason, came out on PC at a later date than console), oh and COD4 (and cod4 on PC, for the same reason yet again because it was a simultaneous release on console and PC) but who cares about cod4 at all.

Other than those reasons, and games like Bad Company which are console only, I'm actually strictly a PC gamer.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 19, 2009)

But you're gay, so no one wants to listen to you.


----------



## Alvine33 (Nov 19, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> -Nobody gets 40ms-60ms ping average. Nobody.
> *Dedi server pings will still be better than MW2's 100 ping local.*
> -Ability to record was poor in COD4, it's more simplistic to use a program such as FRAPs to do such things and nobody used COD4's built in one anyway. It was useless and a waste a time to develop something inferior to a free product that specializes in such things.
> *Running Fraps (which isn't free; the free version only lets you record 30 seconds at a time) will give you a performance hit since you're capturing the screen. CoD4 record only records the game data, that can be recreated client-side.*
> ...


Replies in bold.


> Also this list was released before the game was released.
> This was released on some forum, made by some community member who, again, hadn't played the game and was going by what he was told solely.
> 
> Whoever made such a list should really re-make it, and not stretch it all out in hopes to make it one-sided and trick people who don't know/notice the difference.


Does that make the facts wrong?



> He also left out the massive amount of maps, weapons, *mods*, and etc that was added to the game. As if content matters or something though, right? Pfft.


wat.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 19, 2009)

Alvine33 said:


> Replies in bold.


Please don't do that.


> Dedi server pings will still be better than MW2's 100 ping local.


For a minority of people.


> Running Fraps (which isn't free; the free version only lets you record 30 seconds at a time) will give you a performance hit since you're capturing the screen. CoD4 record only records the game data, that can be recreated client-side.


I know FRAPs isn't free, but others are.
Yeah video recording is totally more important than gameplay. Though I do agree it would be cool to have, personally I don't really care all that much and I'd rather have a good game than mediocre and that option.


> There isn't even a kickvote option.


There is a quit game option. Though this is something I can see them fixing my reasoning is the same as the above answer.


> Now we wouldn't have this problem if we were on dedicated servers, would we?


-Yeah, some people are always going tt have a better ping than other players.
-You'll have to mute people anyway, as if muting somebody is such a difficult task you need to waste admin/mod time to do it for you or something.
-How is not having servers to select a problem?


> So the only way to try the game before you buy is to pirate or play at a friend's house.


Just like 90% of all the games out there, but because this game that I've condemned without trying doesn't have it, so it's a problem.


> Yet other PC games are still $50. Why is that so hard for you to understand?


Awr, US-bitch has to pay canadian pricing on one game, and one game only, you better complain to somebody about having to pay what we pay for all our games.


> Does that make the facts wrong?


Apart from using the same details in different writing, and some of the things were actually out-right wrong, no not at all. (/sarcasm)


> wat.


Weapon mods, killstreak mods, etc.


LotsOfNothing said:


> But you're gay, so no one wants to listen to you.


Oh you. <3


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 19, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Awr, US-bitch has to pay canadian pricing on one game, and one game only, you better complain to somebody about having to pay what we pay for all our games.



The US has never had to pay production royalties on PC games, meaning PC gaming's starting to take a turn in the wrong direction for everyone soon enough.  Think about it, if Activision managed to get away with charging royalties here, what makes you think they won't try to pull it elsewhere in a later release?




NewfDraggie said:


> Oh you. <3



I know, I'm such a little scamp~


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 19, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> The US has never had to pay production royalties on PC games, meaning PC gaming's starting to take a turn in the wrong direction for everyone soon enough.  Think about it, if Activision managed to get away with charging royalties here, what makes you think they won't try to pull it elsewhere in a later release?


Though true I personally don't see a problem with charging you what we're charged. Now if it were to raise the price of its actual value higher I would be a little annoyed, seeing as the US dollar right now is basically equal to the Canadian that means charging the same is just fine. The price hasn't actually changed so much as the value of the US dollar has dropped and more is required to equal the same amount as before. 

But if that were to change I would be a bit upset myself, not like anybody can't just torrent PC games anyway but online games usually require purchase (or a lot of fucking around if not), and some other games I like putting money into if they're good enough to deserve it.

Right now, to me, the cost hasn't actually changed. It's the prices for other games that hasn't actually changed. I see it as unfair the US is charged less than the rest of the world for all games, among other goods.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Nov 19, 2009)

You're the only person I've ever seen who said only few people had ping problems.

STOP. RUINING. GAMING.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 19, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> You're the only person I've ever seen who said only few people had ping problems.
> 
> STOP. RUINING. GAMING.



Uh, nobody I know has any ping issues in MW:2. Nobody.
You can see people's ping's, and in every game everybody has <100ms. Every single game.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 19, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Actually I'm kinda doubting you played it, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt instead of being a total ass. However, I do doubt you would like it if it had the things different about it and cod4, meaning I doubt you like cod anyway.




I love CoD. I liked CoD4, but not as much as the original. 

My feelings for MW2 are mixed, singleplayer aside, the multiplayer is great, albeit a bit chaotic and twitchy. But IW.net is (in my opinion) a failure.

And here.http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197973823578

I've got MW2.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 19, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> I love CoD. I liked CoD4, but not as much as the original.
> 
> My feelings for MW2 are mixed, singleplayer aside, the multiplayer is great, albeit a bit chaotic and twitchy. But IW.net is (in my opinion) a failure.
> 
> ...



Ah, ok now I see. Well, have you tried with friends? All games are bettering with other people. :3

Try doing those special ops missions, they're really awesome. Especially the AC130 one.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 19, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> Ah, ok now I see. Well, have you tried with friends? All games are bettering with other people. :3
> 
> Try doing those special ops missions, they're really awesome. Especially the AC130 one.



I've been wanting to do the Special Operations missions, but sadly most of my Steam friends don't have Modern Warfare 2.


----------



## Wreth (Nov 19, 2009)

So basically, what we have learnt is that Newf is incapable of admitting he is wrong and doesn't even take the other persons points into acount to consider, but instead just things of a way to counter them.

Oh wait, we all knew this.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 19, 2009)

Zoopedia said:


> So basically, what we have learnt is that Newf is incapable of admitting he is wrong and doesn't even take the other persons points into acount to consider, but instead just things of a way to counter them.
> 
> Oh wait, we all knew this.



Yeah, I'm totally wrong. When it's pretty much impossible that I'm wrong about the game being good all because a few people don't like it. Yeah, totally. Fucking morons on this forum multiply every week.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Nov 19, 2009)

Meh.  My only beef is that the Barrett .50 cal sniper rifle is a starter sniper rifle.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 19, 2009)

Shark_the_raptor said:


> Meh.  My only beef is that the Barrett .50 cal sniper rifle is a starter sniper rifle.



I want my M40A3 dammit.


----------



## StarGazingWolf (Nov 19, 2009)

On the contrary I've been enjoying the barrett. I couldn't snipe worth a damn in CoD4 but I've been really doing well with it this time around. Need to stop playing multiplayer and finish the campaign though XD


----------



## Azbulldog (Nov 19, 2009)

The Barrett has too much kick, I prefer the WA2000. I was using the Intervention but the snipers seem to do less damage than before, even with stopping power, so bolt action just doesn't satisfy right now. No wait, I think it's the silencers.
Almost have the M21EBR unlocked.


----------



## StarGazingWolf (Nov 19, 2009)

I was going to switch to the WA2000 as my friend told me its a step in the right direction but after taking the time to unlock all the attachments for the barrett I can't quite bring myself to switch guns. Silencers a plus but they do seem to drop the power to at least a 2 shot kill (obviously not for headshots but that's a given)


----------



## ADF (Nov 19, 2009)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_y_MhoQv3I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQh7SoBiP_Y

If I played these sort of games I expect I would be very mad at this.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Nov 19, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> I want my M40A3 dammit.



I know.  It's the best.  ;_;  But I will have to say that the Intervention is a pretty good substitute for it.  >_>  I'll have to unlock the ACOG for it and see how that does.


----------



## StarGazingWolf (Nov 19, 2009)

I really hated using the AGOC scope on the barrett. It was enough to almost put me off the rifle altogether but I suppose if it works for you then it works!


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 19, 2009)

Thermal scope is <3.
Thermal + silencer on the intervention is like, <3!


----------



## StarGazingWolf (Nov 19, 2009)

I second that, I use the thermal scope on the barrett on levels like estate and wasteland. So many easy kills just waiting to happen. It feels a little too good sometimes XD


----------



## xjrfang (Nov 19, 2009)

DragonRift said:


> I completely understand and agree with what Activision has done with the PC version.  It's absolute bullshit.
> 
> But that's not going to stop me from buying the 360 version, though.    It doesn't matter how many people boycott the game... they're still going to make a shitload of money.  So your choice is either to sit it out and play something else, or simply get over it and just get it for your PS3 or 360 instead.



Or download an illegal copy? stick a big FU to Activision, and still play lol.


----------



## lilEmber (Nov 19, 2009)

xjrfang said:


> Or download an illegal copy? stick a big FU to Activision, and still play lol.



So badass.


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 19, 2009)

NewfDraggie said:


> So badass.



Kotick doesn't deserve my money.


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Nov 19, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> Kotick doesn't deserve my money.



Have fun with that.  BD


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 19, 2009)

Shark_the_raptor said:


> Have fun with that.  BD



Wat


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 19, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> Wat



I don't think he knows what "Kotick" is


----------



## Shark_the_raptor (Nov 19, 2009)

LotsOfNothing said:


> Wat



Um, have fun not giving Kotick your money?


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 19, 2009)

Shark_the_raptor said:


> Um, have fun not giving Kotick your money?



Just don't play his overhyped games?...


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 19, 2009)

CryoScales said:


> I don't think he knows what "Kotick" is



He needs to learn him an asshole.


----------



## TehSean (Nov 19, 2009)

Found a copy for 20 dollars off. BAM.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Nov 20, 2009)

Well at least we know who to blame when gaming becomes more or less about giving scraps after paying full then paying more to give more of the content.


----------



## TehSean (Nov 20, 2009)

Collapses of industries have always resulted in innovations and experimentation.

One curse of success is how much it encourages other devs or the same dev to.. well.. never deviate out of a fear of alienating the fanbase..


----------



## sabe (Nov 20, 2009)

What is everyones favorite guns to use and why? I usually use the famas with silencer and red dot because the burst fire is nice with the damage.


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Nov 21, 2009)

I can't wait for the second crash of gaming.


----------



## CryoScales (Nov 21, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> I can't wait for the second crash of gaming.



Well the gaming crash came about when the market was flooded with cheap consoles and people made crappy third party Atari cartridges. Since gaming is so tight nit right now I doubt it would come about like that.


----------



## Runefox (Nov 21, 2009)

GUYS GUYS

IW released the sales numbers.

Or at least the percentage of units sold.

MW2 on the PC did AWESOME! Everyone who said it wouldn't is a loser. It was 3% of total MW2 sales! Woo! Stop boycotting, everyone! They won't get the message with _that_ sales tour de force!

I'm gonna go buy three copies!


----------



## WolfoxOkamichan (Nov 21, 2009)

It would've been nice, but too bad the consoles still sold well. =/



CryoScales said:


> Well the gaming crash came about when the market was flooded with cheap consoles and people made crappy third party Atari cartridges. Since gaming is so tight nit right now I doubt it would come about like that.



Well now we have nickel-diming era and the era of the "casual audience". All it takes is a massive backlash, and boom, Ninty, Sony and MS go dead.


----------



## ADF (Nov 21, 2009)

WolfoxOkamichan said:


> I can't wait for the second crash of gaming.



If the industry crashes again I think it will come from rising costs.

We are already seeing it this generation, just look at the vast increase in cross platform and 1st party development. 3rd party exclusives are slowly becoming extinct, it's just not cost effective any more. Sooner or later the cost to make a game will result in cross platform games surpassing 1st party exclusives, a game with three audiences to tap can justify a higher budget than one only targeting one platform. 

When that happens consoles companies will no longer be able to differentiate themselves with games. They will have to look outside of games to stand out; which would go to explain the large focus on motion sensors, stereoscopic 3D, facebook and even rumours of Firefox hitting PS3.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 21, 2009)

ADF said:


> and even rumours of Firefox hitting PS3.



Can't you already install firefox on your PS3 if you've got linux on it?


----------



## ADF (Nov 21, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> Can't you already install firefox on your PS3 if you've got linux on it?



Sony is no longer supporting Linux on the PS3, but yeah Linux on PS3 did support firefox.

The rumour is they are integrating it as a replacement for the existing PS3 browser though.


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 21, 2009)

ADF said:


> Sony is no longer supporting Linux on the PS3, but yeah Linux on PS3 did support firefox.
> 
> The rumour is they are integrating it as a replacement for the existing PS3 browser though.



Aw, that sucks that they don't support linux anymore. :<


----------



## Runefox (Nov 21, 2009)

Ishnuvalok said:


> Aw, that sucks that they don't support linux anymore. :<



Well, the PS3 phats can still do it, the Slims were the only ones to lose the ability.

... Having done it, I can tell you that Sony's crippled it quite well. Without access to the GPU, the CPU is constantly pegged trying to render windows and stuff, and flash video is out of the question.


----------



## bennyboy1995 (Nov 21, 2009)

any1 used nuke in it yet  ive had 3 now


----------



## LotsOfNothing (Nov 21, 2009)

bennyboy1995 said:


> any1 used nuke in it yet  ive had 3 now



Oh jesus your typing is horrid.


----------



## bennyboy1995 (Nov 21, 2009)

sorry i have to do it on my psp it would take ages to write proper


----------



## Ishnuvalok (Nov 21, 2009)

bennyboy1995 said:


> sorry i have to do it on my psp it would take ages to write proper



That's still not an excuse.


----------



## Aleister The Wolf (Nov 22, 2009)

im getting tired of random teammates and would like to get a group together for onlne multiplayer. just for fun, not competitive.  I'll be on in about 3 hours, message me on live if you want to play, if I get enough people we might even do private matches. (BTW I typed this on psp)


----------

