The Everything MewTwo (Modern Warfare 2) Thread
- Thread starter wilsonscrazybed
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Has anyone notcied a difference between the Red Dot Sight and Holographic?
The only one I can see is that the holographic obscures your view more.
The only one I can see is that the holographic obscures your view more.
I like how they kept Stopping Power, but removed Juggernaut.
Nice one listening to the whiners IW, you fucktards. You can't just have one of them, remove them both or keep them both.
Nice one listening to the whiners IW, you fucktards. You can't just have one of them, remove them both or keep them both.
The whole perks system has been changed around, so stopping power now must be chosen instead of some other useful perk.Lukeydoodly said:
Also, Juggernaut is still there as a crutch when you die three times.
Juggernaut was more powerful than stopping power in COD4 because it also protected against explosives and falling damage.
I'm more pissed off that they kept Martyrdom in.
Yeah it's a deathstreak but I've been killed by it more times than I would like already. Stupid cheap perk.
People are still using Martyrdom? I honestly thought those that got to Lvl 27, I think, wouldn't bother with it.miracleofsound said:
I must be weird, because I had absolutely no urge to pull the trigger in the Airport (except maybe to shoot Makarov in the back). I only opened fire when it got to the point when you can't progress without actually participating.
I like the fact that IW have obviously listened to what Yahtzee has said about the SAS in his COD4 review, about them being morally questionable psychotic thugs, and have then gone on to design Soap as a crazed Scottish skinhead...about as morally questionable, psychotic and thuggish as you can get.
Yeah, but we also thought that in COD4 the gold star tenth prestigers wouldn't bother with it too...but they sure did.sasquatch99 said:
*This post is about the single player campaign and therefore contains a spoiler (but if we're discussing the game I guess that doesn't matter because you've already seen it!)*
For the first time in nearly 20 years of following the industry (i.e. playing) I think I'm going to side on the moral critics with respect to the airport scene.
I thoroughly enjoy violent games and like everyone else am frustrated when these bogus "its turned my child into terrorist" claims and the argument doesn't need repeating.
However...
The airport scene I think is very questionable. Violence in games (and film for that matter) is often used to justify a setting/motive for a particular character. Dictators mow down protestors, terrorists kill innocents to spread terror etc. Even the main heroes/heroines (the ones we cheer for) have been violent in certain situations but that last part only works when the ends justify the means (thats another discussion entirely).
The build up to this scene leads you to believe that you are undercover and therefore will be required to do things that are morally wrong in order to maintain your cover. Fair enough. When you finish that level however you die - without any justification for your actions. It doesn't even add anything to the plot. So you've just killed a lot of innocent (albeit virtual) people for no reason nor justification as a player. Had the character in the game then gone on to find some useful intelligence or removed a key player or prevented a nuclear bomb going off, this would be forgiven.
I cannot believe that there are people who enjoy shooting people for the sake of it, even in a game. Are people so pathetic as to buy a game to shoot aimlessly for hours on end, not allowing themselves to be immersed in the game itself and therefore be thrilled and entertained? I'm a PC gamer so maybe its a console thing that I don't understand but I think they went too far on this one.
For the first time in nearly 20 years of following the industry (i.e. playing) I think I'm going to side on the moral critics with respect to the airport scene.
I thoroughly enjoy violent games and like everyone else am frustrated when these bogus "its turned my child into terrorist" claims and the argument doesn't need repeating.
However...
The airport scene I think is very questionable. Violence in games (and film for that matter) is often used to justify a setting/motive for a particular character. Dictators mow down protestors, terrorists kill innocents to spread terror etc. Even the main heroes/heroines (the ones we cheer for) have been violent in certain situations but that last part only works when the ends justify the means (thats another discussion entirely).
The build up to this scene leads you to believe that you are undercover and therefore will be required to do things that are morally wrong in order to maintain your cover. Fair enough. When you finish that level however you die - without any justification for your actions. It doesn't even add anything to the plot. So you've just killed a lot of innocent (albeit virtual) people for no reason nor justification as a player. Had the character in the game then gone on to find some useful intelligence or removed a key player or prevented a nuclear bomb going off, this would be forgiven.
I cannot believe that there are people who enjoy shooting people for the sake of it, even in a game. Are people so pathetic as to buy a game to shoot aimlessly for hours on end, not allowing themselves to be immersed in the game itself and therefore be thrilled and entertained? I'm a PC gamer so maybe its a console thing that I don't understand but I think they went too far on this one.
Hmm you make a good point.miracleofsound said:
It still seems like Stopping Power is the best choice out of the selection though, ah well.
It's the traditional movie plot device of simply showing the villian doing a deplorable thing [massacre, rape, evicting poor tenants into the rain, etc] as opposed to characterising him as a deplorable person which requires more effort on the part of the script. Makarov is bad because he does bad things, andbatterj2 said:
By extension, Shephard is bad for ordering you to do terrible things. As if you couldn't tell he was the bad guy just by his bad guy voice and mumbling about "army bases of steel."
You've never thrown hand grenades off an overpass in GTA just to see how far cars can drive before they explode? Never eaten a civilian in Prototype for no reason other than that you could?batterj2 said:
Moreover, they were videogame civilians, those jerks who wander lemming-like in front of your gun in other games and force you to start a mission all over again. It's nice to finally have some revenge on the suicidal morons, though rather amusing that in that mission the terrorists themselves are treated as civilians usually are, and if you shoot them you fail the mission despite the mission not achieving anything even if you succeed.
superbleeder12 said:
makarov is still alive, the dead guy in the safe room at 4766 elm grove or whatever, the raven guy, theres so much unexplained. i hope they explain it at some point without just making a direct sequel to suck anoth £45 off me
What I meant was, is there any gameplay difference? I heard on another forum that the sticky aim is stronger on the holographic sight, but not sure if that's true or not.Evil Tim said:
Yeah, it seems that way to me too. I have one class with Cold Blooded instead, and it seems to need to take 5 or 6 SCAR H bullets to bring people down, as opposed to 2 or 3 with SP.Lukeydoodly said:
That could be the silencer depowering the gun too though.
No way. Either Cold-blooded or Hardline are better perks. You might die a little more in an even man on man fight but with Cold-blooded you rarely get taken down from Predator Missiles, an AC-130 etc or those Thermal bastards who pick you off even though they shouldn't be able to see you and you can't see them. You die a whole lot less and it's also very good for sneaking up on people and stop them from being able to sneak up on you. Hardline makes a big difference in getting those kill streaks as I always seem to be one short. More kill streaks means more things helping you get kills. You might die a bit more, maybe, but you'll get a whole lot more kills. It isn't that hard to kill someone without SP anyway. Short controlled bursts, good aiming and a play style so that you are the first one to fire makes you dominate the match.Lukeydoodly said:
While I too am conflicted over the scene, I disagree that it does nothing for the plot:batterj2 said:
Makarov killing your American character and leaving his body there is what causes Russia to go to war with the US