Wait a second, you couldn't do it...GrinningManiac said:
So it's not challenging.
Oh, I see.
OT:Never played MW1, my friends say it's good though.
Poll: Modern Warfare 2: For Better Or Worse?
- Thread starter jonnymobs
- Start date
Recommended Videos
So it's not challenging.
Oh, I see.
OT:Never played MW1, my friends say it's good though.
Modern warfare 2 expanded the multi player from the first in everyway. The guns, killstreaks, attachments, perks (etc). So yes I like modern warfare 2 much more.
Tough choice.MW2 has more of everything which can be a good or bad thing.MW1 just seemed more balanced overall.Still the fact that I'm playing 2 instead of 1 would lead me to vote for 2
i like mw1 because it wasn't as noob friendly, i mean the only nooby problems were juggernaut and the noobtube. but in mw1 i felt that if you were a bad player, i killed you. if you were a good player, then we would actually have a good fight. mw2 feels designed to make it easier for noobs to get kills, everything from the killstreaks to the thermal scope (and there is alot more)
And just what do you think hardened and challanging is supposed to mean? It usually means they make the enemies more invlunerable and add more enemies to the level.GrinningManiac said:
MW1 had fresh ideas (the Perk system and Create A Class were still pretty new at the time, and the fact that it was still relatively balanced was amazing), and it had some small semblance of realism to it. MW2 still has a few bugs to iron out, it's a retread of an older concept, and those damn akimbos are still ridiculous--how the fuck does someone fire a 12 gauge shotgun with one hand without hitting themselves in the face, and then reload it with one hand as well?
Plus, MW2 screwed up offline multiplayer quite badly. Even if the MW1 offline classes were a little bit limiting, at least it was fast and fun. MW2 makes each player wait their turn to create a class, and watching my friends go through every possible variation of an M4 between every game is slow and boring. We sometimes spend more time watching each other navigate menus than we do playing the game.
Plus, MW2 screwed up offline multiplayer quite badly. Even if the MW1 offline classes were a little bit limiting, at least it was fast and fun. MW2 makes each player wait their turn to create a class, and watching my friends go through every possible variation of an M4 between every game is slow and boring. We sometimes spend more time watching each other navigate menus than we do playing the game.
I agree with this person.Daystar Clarion said:
I hate so many maps in MW2, because there's just so many spots for people to camp or the way the map is designed makes whoever gets the first killstreak dominate (Looking at you, Wasteland). But if I had to choose which game was hands down more fun, then I would pick MW2 easily.
eh? they're both excellent games so why should we stick to just one?Pr0 InSaNiTy said:
Regardless I chose MW2 because (and i can't believe I'm about to say this but) I am bored shitless of CoD4, when you get 10th prestige blah blah blah there's nothing left to strive for so it starts to feel monotonous, and it's nice to have the variety in terms of customisation. Plus MW2 introduced the ACR, need i say more?
off topic I challenge any campers in these forums to play the f**king game properly or hurl themselves off the white cliffs of Dover.
I don't think I really have a true preference. I like MW2 for the tons of guns (most of which are actually useful) and for letting people screw around with perks to change up their play style. But I absolutely hate assault rifles (seriously the no recoil drives me bananas).
I dunno why but the first seemed a lot simpler and felt easier to just get into and play, and it actually felt mildly rewarding to try and work as a team. I don't know why but the first game let you hide in moderate spots and you could actually hide in them. I don't know why but in the second people seem to spot your ass no mater how much you try to hide. I really don't know how or why this happened. The second also feels a lot more campish, there are some matches where people won't move more than like 25 feet outside where they spawn.
So in the end the first game get my vote, but just by a small hair.
I dunno why but the first seemed a lot simpler and felt easier to just get into and play, and it actually felt mildly rewarding to try and work as a team. I don't know why but the first game let you hide in moderate spots and you could actually hide in them. I don't know why but in the second people seem to spot your ass no mater how much you try to hide. I really don't know how or why this happened. The second also feels a lot more campish, there are some matches where people won't move more than like 25 feet outside where they spawn.
So in the end the first game get my vote, but just by a small hair.
I don't like either but MW2 seemed more balenced, why reward someone who's doing well with more kills.
In my opinion I find that on game types like domination MW2's maps are just a slight bit unbalanced (Yes hang your head in shame Wasteland) I agree with those saying modern warfare two has a larger amount of customization, although I feel modern warfare 2 had more bugs and glitches at release (I put this down to the demand for the game than shoddy game design but they still should have done a bit more testing).
Story writing was much better in modern warfare 1 I felt that mordern warfare 2 was trying to ripoff Jame Bond: Nightfire (with the whole snowmobile and space scenes).
So to wrap it up modern warfare 1 has my vote.
Story writing was much better in modern warfare 1 I felt that mordern warfare 2 was trying to ripoff Jame Bond: Nightfire (with the whole snowmobile and space scenes).
So to wrap it up modern warfare 1 has my vote.