Y en español lo hago!

Este juego es asombroso! pero mataron la versión de PC haciendola como si de consola se tratara :S

?/10

• from

The game is pretty fun, but the first call of duty modern warfare has a better storyline, and a bit more fun to play

• from

Personally I have always liked the Call of Duty series, I have played it ever since the first one came out. I will admit, that Call of Duty 4 was a hard act to follow, but I was sure that Infinity Ward could do it. I was not surprised, when people came crying that the game was a disappointment, and it was not worth buying, and all the other things that are said about most sequels. I personally love the game, good story, great gameplay and graphics, and superb multiplayer. It is a little bit of a letdown after CoD4, but it is still worth playing, and if you have a powerful PC, it is extra enjoyable. I lament the loss of dedicated servers, but it isnt that much of a problem. It isn't worth boycotting an excellent game like this because of one little black mark on its rap sheet.

• from

OK, I know on all platforms they sold over 7 million copies, 12% was PC. It looks like they put forth 12% of effort to port this marvel from console. Come on! No advanced graphics options, is this PC or what? No lean? Can't kick hackers? Host migrating? No actual ping displayed? No mods? No dedicated servers?

But I bet we will get plenty of DLC.

SP is fun, I'll give you that. Scripted to hell, but it is still fun. Graphics is very crisp. Problem is it's about 4 hours long. Good movie these days is about $10 for 2hr+ flick. So about $5/hr of entertainment. With CODMW2 you shell out $60 for 4hr, thus paying $15/hr.

It is sad fact that game development of major A title cost upward of $40 million. Mainstream gaming has been heading console direction for a while. This is very good example of the trend.

• from

I bought this game expecting something horrible according to all of the reviews I've been reading about it and all of the clout regarding dedicated servers being removed and whatnot. What I got was a decent and fun game that well exceeded my expectations.

I had already purchased Call of Duty 4 some time around a year ago. It was fun for a bit, but got boring after awhile when none of my friends would play the game. A short bit later, I heard Modern Warfare 2 was coming out, and I expected a re-hash of the same material and of course the same game. Over the course of a few months, the game turned into nothing but controversy with the removal of the console and dedicated servers along with having only a four hour campaign, paid-for DLC, and a price tag of a whopping $60. Now, logically, a person like myself who had already played Call of Duty 4 for a good while was pretty turned off by the mere thought of removing features and stepping the price up. I was against purchasing the game for a good while until my one friend offered to pawn up a gift card for me just so I would buy it. I decided to wait before accepting it, and instead, out of curiosity, I reinstalled Call of Duty 4 just to see what I had missed for so long and what I would be losing. I was swamped with nothing but a myriad of horrid servers running PunkBuster and employing rules such as "No swearing", "No shooting from the hip", and "No jumping around corners". Suddenly, the thought of no dedicated servers became all too appealing to me.

After some thought and more careful reading about what the game had in it, I bought it. I'll just say right off that I have been playing it for about two weeks straight now and I have not once touched the single-player campaign. The length of it is really irrelevant. The real meat of the game is in the multiplayer.

I've only had around three-five issues with lag during my entire experience of about 48 or so hours of playtime and matches into the hundreds already. The lack of Punkbuster prevents me from getting kicked or banned because of a false-positive or something as silly as a colored name (as it would in the original). Additionally, I've been able to play with all of my friends on Ventrilo easily without having to bother getting them to find my server or upgrade their version, and we've been pretty happy with the game for quite awhile now, more-so them since they had been playing for a near month before I joined in. The sheer amount of content to be unlocked in the game is massive compared to the first one, and unlike the PC version of COD4, you can actually prestige this time.

Just about the only issues I've had with this game are the lack of a console to configure things such as keys easier, a lack of votekick or voteban to oust wallhackers and aimbots, and a sloppy balancing of the weapons. We've come across a good handful of wallhackers during playtime, but it isn't too out of hand. The only other complaint I have is the lack of balancing on the weapons front. You might as well call this game Call of Tube: Modern Grenade Launcher 2. Anyone who has played it knows exactly what I'm talking about. Most of the other weapons can get cheap kills, but really it all just boils down to what weapon you want to cheap kill with, since most of them tend to fit this criteria.

So, all in all, the bottom line for this game is:

Pros:

-No dedicated servers (can't believe I'm saying this, but it's true, no more 12-year-old owned servers).

-Tons of more content compared to the first game.

-No Punkbuster.

-Easy install and setup.

-Easy to jump into.

-Hardly any issues with lag. The server host picker isn't that bad, after all.

Cons:

-No console.

-No votekick/voteban for hackers.

-Tons of balancing issues on the weapons front, especially GRENADE LAUNCHERS. I can't stress that enough.

A 4 out of 5 for me.

• from

I purchased this game hoping it would be a successor to earlier versions. However, the campaign was quite short and the multi-player is so ill equipped it made for no replay value. If you get in a game, it's usually very laggy, you jerk around the screen. If you manage to get a host, you can't really kill him much or he'll just quit, then you're back to square one finding a new game. Infinity Ward forgot to make anti-cheat protection and there's rampant 'wall hacking' and 'aimbotting' going around. It's not worth it. I would suggest trying Modern Warfare 1, it's of higher quality than this.

• from

Terrible stuff happened to the PC version.. read anyone elses review to find out why. No sense in repeating.

• from

First of all, I know I'm going to be mauled by the majority of PC Gamers for my 4 star review, but this review expresses MY opinion of the way I experienced this game.

I'm not much of a multiplayer gamer, mostly because I'm pretty bad. My vision is poor and so are my reflexes (getting old) and I almost always only have time to die and respawn in any of the multiplayer games that I play. I'm also a VERY casual gamer and don't have time to play games all that much (probably explains why I can't get better at FPS multiplayer). I squeeze in half an hour here or an hour there a couple of times a week to play.

Because of this, I was never really interested in the multiplayer aspects of this game, so consider my review just about singleplayer. The dedicated server thing needs dedication on the player's part also to play regularly with groups and such, so with my time limitations I can't do this, and so it does not apply to me.

*SPOILERS*

I liked the storyline of the game, and the ending was not that bad either. I really like the intense gameplay that this game offers and the graphics are very good and smooth on my GTX260. I run the game with almost everything on "high" and get great framerates. Having played and beat GTA4, the No Russian mission wasn't all that shocking to me. The ending of that mission ticked me off though.

I loved the US missions (played in US soil). It was sort of surreal to see such familiar suburban locations turned into a warzone and combat in fast food joints and such. The Brazilian missions were the toughest in my opinion.

*END SPOILERS*

I beat the game in about 10 hours of gameplay in Regular mode (everyone seems to have beat it in 6 hours in hardened or higher, so that shows how bad I am compared to serious gamers). I am going to do it in hardened again, so it should give me many more hours of gameplay. I liked the twists in the storyline even though it is kind of hard to keep track of what's going on story-wise when you're trying not to die.

I don't really have any regrets for spending four bucks an hour for this type of entertainment (I picked it up when Amazon had it for the one-day sale). I got my adrenaline rush and am about to get some more, when I replay it in Hardened. I don't know if I should even bother with Veteran, because I had a hard time finishing the Pripyat/Chernobyl mission in the first Modern Warfare in just Regular.

I liked the voice acting, cutscenes and pretty much most aspects of the singleplayer game except for the ones listed below.

Now the cons. Even though it took me 10 hours, the singleplayer storyline could have been longer. I thought it was longer than MW1 though. The endless enemy respawn thing is just plain irritating at times, especially in the Brazil missions - you have to always keep moving forward without eliminating all enemies for the game to let you clear an area.

It's not really worth more than what I paid for it, which was forty, and I would not have purchased it if it were any higher. I think what they're doing by charging more for PC without offering anything extra is just a bad move.

Also the steam association is irritating as well. I had steam already installed, so I didn't mind, and I do not resell my games once I buy them, so those aspects of steam is okay by me. What I don't like is the fact that you have to log in to your steam account to play single player. This suxxors a$$ors and I can't lend this game to friends once I'm done with it. Just because of this, I have decided not to buy future retail games that lock me to steam (if I get it on Steam for six bucks, I don't mind but if I pay more than 30 for it, and buy a retail physical copy of it with discs and stuff, and I'm buying it from somewhere other than Steam, I sure as hell should be able to lend it to whoever I please as long as only one person is playing it at a time. Steam does not let you play the same user accounts at more than one computer EVEN if you're playing DIFFERENT GAMES and that really is bad design. "Hello steam" during their holiday sales and for letting me play some good games for dirt cheap, but goodbye steam when it comes to expensive games.

• from

My only gripe is that the game is way too short, just like the first one.

• from

This game is great. Far, far better than what most people are reviewing it as, here. There are a few things that would probably improve upon the game, yes, but that's what patches are for, and I'm confident that things like support for games with more players (instead of the 9 on 9) and the ability to lean (which would be nice, but you actually don't miss it as much as you might think) will arrive at some point in the near future. A lot of people are complaining about the cost, I don't care much about that, but most games these days are $50 or more when they first come out, so what's the big deal? Is every PC gamer a cheapskate these days? Dedicated servers would be nice, and maybe we'll eventually get them, but I don't really think it makes the game any less fun. There are tons of options and perks and weapons and things to do, especially in multiplayer, and I think any fan of FPS should pick this one up and try it for themselves instead of taking other people's opinion.

• from

First I just want to say that Amazon shipped this game fast, as usual ;)

The game itself: Single player campaign is interesting. The storyline is a bit confusing, but there are some nice scenes that will evoke some emotional responses.

Multiplayer is similar to the first Modern Warfare, with a bunch of tweaks. Biggest let down though is the fact that we dont get dedicated servers. Usually its ok, but sometimes you get stuck with a crappy host, and you have to stick it out because leaving the match early forfeits your bonus AND counts as a loss.

• from

Great game dedicated servers would be nice but the match making isnt so bad its not great but its not bad their is no to little lag in this for me

Short story but good story

Onlines fun

Still IW is lame.

• from

Wont go into detail. But bad mistake making the pc-game play like a little kids game system..

• from

I have enjoyed playing MW2 but like most, I agree that the campaign is far too short. I completed it in about 5-6 hours. I dont play online, so the apparent limitations dont concern me.

There are several things that could have been better though.

- Longer Campaign mode

- Ability to look or lean around corners

- Ability to carry more weapons

I probably wouldnt recommend the game, its good but if you already have Medal of Honor or Soldier of Fortune 2...dont bother with MW2. MW2 is more of the same and in many ways not as good.

• from

The single player is nothing short of epic: underwater, ice climbing, in space, perfectly done. The campaign almost seems like a conglomeration of several different types with a boat chase as well. I loved playing the single-player campaign although I feel as if they should've made it longer. The material was there but it seemed like they wanted to secure enough story for a sequel.

Not worth $60. Luckily I preordered mine from another site for much less than that. In order to charge that price, no wait, NO video game should ever cost $60.

The multiplayer is completely different. It is almost an exact copy of Xbox matchmaking; you select the game type and the game pairs you with like-minded individuals. I am unsure of whether the ranks actually mean you play with other people of your rank. The first online game I played I was on a team with a rank 61, yet the match was fairly balanced. While many find this new system retarded for the PC version, I don't mind it much. For example, with MW1, searching through an endless list (several thousand) servers to find a game that I wanted to play took a lot of time. People are complaining about the time it takes while sitting in the game lobby yet for me it took less than 20 seconds for the initial pairings. After that, there are "intermissions" of varying times, some as long as 30 seconds. I usually create and edit classes during this time. I never once had a lag issue, although I do have a 12.5 Mbps connection.

I'm running Windows 7 Pro with a XFX GeForce 8600GTS 256MB, 4GB RAM and I can crank the graphics to the max, however, the game glitches in single-player for a brief second which has made me die many times. After changing the graphics to the lowest that went away but NO ONE will want to play on the lowest graphics settings. IW needs to fix this in a patch. Also, toward the end of the single-player campaign the game tries to load the last level but crashes to the desktop. A lot of people were having this problem so after reading forums online, I changed the graphics to lowest and completed the campaign. Frustrating? yes and it needs to be fixed. By the way, the audio is incredible in 5.1 surround. The game takes over 11 gigs of space, so it comes on two DVDs.

Whoever thought of removing the lean feature was a moron. If this game is supposed to be realistic, actual people would lean around a corner instead of completely moving their body into the line of fire. I don't know why they did this but it needs to come back.

Special Ops and Co-op mode are fun and playing with your friends in something other than multiplayer online is awesome.

There are hundreds if not thousands of unlockables! This is where the game is exciting. 10 prestige modes = 700 ranks!

Using Steam as the game browser is kinda dumb. I mean if you have a lot of Steam games it makes sense but for just one, not really. My guess is that they are using it to better keep track of your profile and achievements. Also, your serial key is registered on the Steam servers and with your Steam account. They say this is to "prevent piracy".

Overall, the game brings a lot of new things to the genre and is fun to play but the lack of a longer single-player campaign, no lean, addition of the required third-party Steam software (if you refuse to install Steam you can't play the game) of which is not labeled on the package at all brings the rating down to 4 stars. It could've been 3 stars but the fun factor brings it up. Don't listen to people who say no dedicated servers = the worst game ever because the multiplayer still works and is fun to play.

• from