Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

I'm very butthurt about Modern Gayfare 2

Reject_666_6

Arcane
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Messages
2,465
Location
Transylvania
Nostradumbass said:
Wyrmlord said:
Hell, it's the lowest user rated game on Metacritic among recent releases.

only because it's a shitty port. it's a pretty good game otherwise. if you don't like cod, then you won't like mw2.. should be pretty obvious. but as a cod game, it's the best yet by far.

MW2 is inferior to CoD4 in many ways, actually. There was a table floating around here that listed all the features that CoD4 had that MW2 just lacked all of a sudden. I haven't checked the PS3 metacritic page yet, but on the X360 page the game still has a much worse userscore than critic score, so obviously the players could tell that there were many things wrong with this game.

EDIT: Here's the table. It only has multiplayer, cause the singleplayer is already below any criticism.
features.jpg
 

Nostradumbass

Scholar
Joined
Sep 23, 2009
Messages
1,886
Location
chasing ass & leg Dick: multiheaded
that's what i meant: shitty port. all those things (console, mods, maps, recording, etc) aren't standard on console games and wouldnt be considered "cons". its cos its a shitty console port that those things are missing. so yeh, in terms of multiplayer its a step back from cod4 on pc for sure, but on 360 it's actually better (since there never were all those things in the console version anyway). but anyway, i play cod games for the single player anyway, so not really an issue for me. and the single player IS better in terms of gameplay than cod4... there's just the lack of a lean function which is noticeably annoying, and the retarded story. other than that, it's a blast. plus no more infinite enemies.
 
Joined
Jun 14, 2008
Messages
6,927
Mechanics-wise, it's exactly same as MW except no ifinite respawns and guns differ from one another.

Oh, and more blood
 

Wyrmlord

Arcane
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
28,886
@GarfunkeL
Nah, just that you seem to be of the lot which is more receptive to recent games.

Not that it implies you have low standards, but just that it seems you don't mind trying out silly games released recently just to salvage a little bit of fun out of it.
 

Reject_666_6

Arcane
Joined
Oct 30, 2008
Messages
2,465
Location
Transylvania
Nostradumbass said:
that's what i meant: shitty port. all those things (console, mods, maps, recording, etc) aren't standard on console games and wouldnt be considered "cons". its cos its a shitty console port that those things are missing. so yeh, in terms of multiplayer its a step back from cod4 on pc for sure, but on 360 it's actually better (since there never were all those things in the console version anyway). but anyway, i play cod games for the single player anyway, so not really an issue for me. and the single player IS better in terms of gameplay than cod4... there's just the lack of a lean function which is noticeably annoying, and the retarded story. other than that, it's a blast. plus no more infinite enemies.

What about the high ping for any non-North American players? Or the fact that you can't choose which server to play on now; it's automatic matchmaking? Or, above all, the max number of players being severely reduced? These are all carried over to the console versions and they're big steps back from what CoD4 had to offer. Sure, you could say that you live in the USA, and you always manage to have fun with whoever you're grouped with, and that anything over 24 players was a bloodbath anyway, but that would be missing the point entirely. Big features were removed and/or gimped, ergo the multiplayer is inferior.

And that's without even mentioning the utterly retarded "OMG HES DOING A KILLING SPREE WE SHOULD DEPLOY THE TACTICAL NUKES NOW!11!".
 
Joined
Jun 14, 2008
Messages
6,927
Yeah but consoletards don't care because they don't know what ping is, they always use matchmaking anyway, and they think less players is better.

Because they're consoletards.
 

Admiral jimbob

gay as all hell
Joined
Sep 29, 2009
Messages
9,225
Location
truck stops and toilet stalls
Wasteland 2
Emotional Vampire said:
Mechanics-wise, it's exactly same as MW except no ifinite respawns and guns differ from one another.

Oh, and more blood

It was also too fucking boring to play more than a few levels of. Campaign was utterly uninteresting, and they nailed the complete lack of satisfaction of firing the guns with such precision it could only have been intentional. Even the flamethrower didn't make up for it. Fucking Treyarch
 
Joined
Jun 14, 2008
Messages
6,927
POOPOO MCBUMFACE said:
Emotional Vampire said:
Mechanics-wise, it's exactly same as MW except no ifinite respawns and guns differ from one another.

Oh, and more blood

It was also too fucking boring to play more than a few levels of. Campaign was utterly uninteresting, and they nailed the complete lack of satisfaction of firing the guns with such precision it could only have been intentional. Even the flamethrower didn't make up for it. Fucking Treyarch

u mad

so mad u lost bumface
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom