After putting several hours into the multiplayer, I can say that MW2 is much less about camping/waiting than the previous games. The maps are designed in a way that there are no truly powerful locations to camp, each spot has multiple weaknesses.

Also, once you get to level 31, you only get one claymore, and you give up your single grenade. With only one claymore, you can only cover one weakness, so you can't stay in one place very long.

I am moving around much more in this game than I ever did in WaW or MW.

COD:MW2 is a shooter that is latching onto the “MLG” trend of console games and trying to further it while at the same time appealing to a more casual audience, they somewhat were able to combat the merging of casual and hardcore in the original modern warfare with the addition of the hardcore mode, which all can agree in MW2 is worthless and promotes even more camping then its counterpart.

Things like gun balance, map layouts, and kill streaks severely hinder any competition, favoring luck and patience to tact and skill (and the answer is no patience in this situation is not a tactic). The Specifics of every issue in the game are to numerous and to time consuming so to sum things up quickly i would say care packages (the word Random should never be even close to the word competition but yet this thing exists), any akimbo shotguns, the Famas, and the SCAR have made this game unplayable for me.

I agree the weapons in WAW weren't as accurate but a lot of the weapons can be compared to the MW weapons. Gewehr 43, Type 100, MP-40, M1A1 Carbine,Thompson, FG42 can all be compared to the FAL, P90, MP-5, M1A1 is a Single shot M16, UMP and SCHAR. And the maps are really similar in terms of size and how they are structured in both MW2 and WAW.

But you make some convincing arguments and I know a lot of people feel the same way you do about WAW.

I think MW2 is a great game, but at the same time it's nothing to innovative. I love it because it does what it knows right. The spec ops mode was cool and challenging. I feel a game like Uncharted 2 is more worthy of a game of the year title. The story was great but short, even when I played on veteran it only took me 5 hours to complete.

I'm glad to hear MW2's single player is great, because I don't do much multiplayer. Haven't played the game myself, but it's on my list. I'll probably wait until it comes down in price though, at least less than $20.

Getting a helicopter that lets you shoot anyone one the map sounds like it would be fun at first, but I imagine it would get old after someone else gets it a few times. I'm not a big fan of sniping, either. After listening to the podcast, I think I'd just ignore the multiplayer.

I don't think the weapons were the same at all. The accuracy of most of the guns was worse than those in MW 1 and 2.

Most of the new perks were lame.

They increased the level cap to 65...but you could tell Treyarch didn't have enough rewards to give you per level so sometimes you would get a measly two or three challenges.

The tanks were god awful and made things unbalanced. They were too strong offensively AND defensively. It should've been one or the other.

The killstreak rewards needed to be tweaked. The air raid would go on for too long and would also create a hindrance to your teammates by stunning you. The dogs seemed to be able to do damage to you even if you knife them first.

Some of the maps were terrible to me. (Downfall, Seelow, Outskirts).

I didn't really care about the singleplayer very much so being able to play it with other people wasn't really an incentive to me.

The zombie mode was alright, but I'd rather play Left 4 Dead.

I've also become sick to death of the WWII genre. I've been playing those games since Medal of Honor on the PS1 so MW1 and 2 are a nice change of pace and I prefer modern weaponry over WWII.

I really dont like Spec-ops that much , multi-player is A LOT better this time around. The campaign is better all around , the story is soooo damn good that I wanna know what happens next!! Sitting around waiting to kill someone is a part of any game , but people will call you campers . . . so you want me to run around getting shanked?? I think not!!!

I agree it was overrated, and they appealed to the casual gamers way to much. But the Single player and Spec Ops are really good, and the multiplayer is alright, could use some work.

What didn't you like about WAW the weapons were almost the same as we got in COD4 the maps are just as big as the MW2 maps so what is it that made it worse than MW2 or COD4? Just curious because i honestly don't see much of a difference from these games. And keep in mind that WAW was the first game to give us a true co-op mode and it was 4 player co-op.

Call of Duty has always been about favoring those who dedicate more time to it. That's its pull: you see people with awesome perks and weapons, you think "wow, I want that," you keep playing, much like loot in WoW or any similar reward system. If anything, it increases replayability.

It basically comes down to this: if you're having fun, great. If not, play something else.

I really feel that MW2 is unbalanced. Sure, we all knew multiplayer would be the focal point - but I still feel cheated on the single player. Story was good, action sequences neat, but overall, it felt too short. It was more of an introduction to multiplayer.

Speaking of multiplayer, it definitely favors those who bought the game early or play hours upon hours on end. You almost have to grind to have a chance. The stronger weapons and perks (which do nothing for me) are only available to higher levels, leaving beginners feeling left out. This would be understandable if a good matchmaking system were present - one that groups users on skill level. However, the new players are thrown in with the pros, giving those who play the game religiously easier kills.

Bottom line is, in multiplayer, the rich get richer, the poor suffer. Compared to Halo's matchmaking system, it just seems sloppy.

I like the series, still haven't picked up the new one though.

I to, am a fan of the first one and not the second one. I found your podcast to generate discussion without generating hateful or insulting responses to those of the opposing view. While MW2 is overrated, I do enjoy playing with the riot shield. If they patched the riot shield back into MW1 I would be amazed. The main thing I dislike is the game adding silencers to snipers. They were hard enough to find in the first game. I do not like that they took the "wield two primary weapons" perk away, or the fact that shotguns are now in the "secondary" slot. They are as powerful as normal guns. Keep them in the normal slot.

I have got to agree that the game is great, but not GOTY material. You nailed it right on the head about the map packs being available right away, Its friggin rediculous. I dont even want to get started on the content that is already free on the pc and you have to pay for on Live ie Left 4 Dead expansions... I still love Live but I would like to see the prices come down some and maybe some free content similar to Qore on PSN. Love the intro music and great podcast.

Most sequels have difficulty living up to their predecessors. I agree that the story was stronger with MW1, but there is still a lot to like about MW2...maybe not GOTY, but definitely a 9 out of 10.

I personally prefer MW 1 too as well. It does everything right. Like some of the above posters said, its more realistic, as far as the slowly progressing and aiming down the scope goes. With all the Halos and other FPSs out there, Call of Duty stands out, almost as its own genre within a genre. The WW2 thing has passed and now developers are looking into different directions, which is a breath of fresh air. Im looking foward to whats to come and different areas they explore. All in all, MW 2 shouldnt get GOTY. Its good, dont get me wrong, its just not say Bioshock or MW 1 good. Nice podcast btw.

MW2 is overrated, but its still a really good game. No game could live up the hype it was getting in the press. Camping, dual shotgunning, and spawn killing are major issue and were not really fixed since Call of Duty 4. The glitches online now, such as the javelin glitch are really ruining the game. The story also switches too many time between people and is not as good as the previous game's story.

MW2 is overrated but is still a solid game. On the multiplayer side of things, camping is prevalent but can be dealt with if using the proper equipment and communication. Also, the killstreaks can all be countered easily with a competent team. All the air support can be taken out almost instantly (except for the AC130) and the addition of killable UAV and UAV jammers makes them more balanced. On the flip side, a bad team that ignores enemy killstreaks can ruin a game... :/

For my money, I get the feeling that MW2 can't make up its mind, and that's where it loses me. I can appreciate a game that is painfully realistic in stark contrast to a more "arcadey" type of shooter (like Halo or Left 4 Dead). Nothing against these games, I actually prefer them in a multiplayer context to harsh realism. I've felt in MW2 that when you add some more of the ridiculous elements you're going to lose me somewhat. Either make it real or don't. Don't tell me a solider is going to dual wield...anything. On top of that, I'm not wild about the "perks" in the slightest. Just me.

Nice podcast. My concern is with MW2 as well (along with MW1) was that there were no achievemensts for the multiplayer. I also have a hard time playing online for more than an hour (on MW1), mostly due to this reason. The weapons perks isn't really enough IMHO. However, I do like the single player and controls more than Halo 3, and that's what keeps me playing the series. I'll probably buy MW2 at a cheaper standpoint sometime next year.

I listened to the pod cast. Well done. I was highly impressed with MW2 for the first 60 minutes or so. After that, I just realized that I was impressed because I was looking forward to the title for a long time. After it's boiled down, it's just - ok. It's fun, don't get me wrong - it just does not push the boundaries to take it to the next level. It's just more of the same ole - same ole. Keep up the great work and thank you for the contest.

First off, great site! I just found it thanks to CAG and love it, definitely bookmarking it.

Now to the Podcast, as someone that hasn't yet purchased MW2, it's almost refreshing to hear that it's not GOTY, especially given all the hype it's gotten! I've been known to fall victim to gaming hype and, while sometimes that's good (Halo 3, Bioshock, Orange Box), it can also be bad (GTA IV - sorry, didn't like it!).
It's still on my xmas list since so many of my friends play it, but it's good to know it's not THE game I need to get :)

Thanks again!

I would agree the game is over rated, but then no game was going to live up to the hype MW2 has received! Regarding the multi-player what I have played (only a few hours) I like, especially the wide variety of weapons and addons. My main issue at the moment is the level of camping late appears to be occuring and the resulting over use of the killstreak (Chopper, Predator, etc).

I agree that MW2 is definitely over-rated. I've played a little and I'm not much of a fan of the huge maps. I've always preferred smaller maps in my multiplayer FPSs with lots of corners so you can't really camp and it forces you to work the angles. It's all about getting the jump on your opponent. There's lots of corners in MW2 but the importance of angles is non-existant because you can't jump and there's not a lot of variety in elevations. So the pacing lends itself to patience aka camping. Lots of distance work too. I've never been good at sniping or anything because my eyesight is kinda crappy. I think my astigmatism affects it, I hear a lot of people with astig complain about distance shooting and low-light levels. But some of it's me, and some of it is the game itself, and I will definitely be waiting on MW2. My friends all bought it so it's a matter of time before I end up with a copy somehow.

ugh, i havent plyed mw2 to giv my opnion, sucks i want that classic,lol

The complaint about the map rotation is something I don't understand. Anytime I play the map rotation is as varied as it was in CoD4 and 5. Sure...every once in a while I might repeat a map...only because I switch servers though. Otherwise...I just don't see the problem.

I do agree about the Scrambler perk. It seems like a useless perk because it only makes your enemies aware of your presence.

I also agree camping seems to be happening a lot more in this game than it ever did in CoD4. It's even worse when you have someone hiding in a corner staring at a heartbeat monitor.

In terms of being killed with the Chopper Gunner killstreak. If you have the Cold-Blooded perk on...you aren't highlighted with a red box for the chopper gunner. And in terms of getting the Chopper Gunner killstreak...you don't really have to camp to get it. I've gotten many times and I don't camp. If you use a care package killstreak (4 kills) you can get it. Or if you use a good kill streak combination you can also get it. I use Predator Missile (5 kills), Harrier Strike (7 kills), and Chopper Gunner (11 kills).

I don't think this game is overrated. I find it more addicting than CoD4 and CoD5 (I was disappointed with World At War, though...but I could write a whole other comment about that).

I agree 100%. When COD4 came out that's what i was saying. People were going nuts for it, as was i, but unlike everyone else I understood that if you took the online aspect out of the game it's actually not that great of a game. They didn't have any Co-op mode and the 4 player split screen was a joke. Why isn't there an unranked mode in COD4 or a mode you can play with guests on your Xbox or PS3? Any FPS that lacks both guest support and a complete Co-Op option shouldn't be considered for GOTY because they aren't giving us a complete package.

Look at L4D2 and ODST two recent FPS that have great multiplayer but even though the game is meant to be played with 4 people you can only play with 2 people on the same console. You've got to be kidding me. That's just a slap in the face by the devs. Games like this force us to play online multiplayer when really it should be standard to allow us to play 4 players on one console.

Not including achievements regarding MP is a great idea because you will never be caught with lunatics who are just going for achievements. MP goes back to the roots: playing it just for fun. It also helps the people who mostly enjoy the single player/co-op campaign the most (like me).

It's too bad there isn't a co-op story mode, but at least they put in Special Ops. Lack of co-op alone for a FPS in this day & age doesn't allow me to grant it GOTY either. Batman:AA gets a pass because it's BATMAN (not Robin). But I am not sure if I can give a solid GOTY title to anything this year.

I also agree that it doesnt deserve game of the year. It is like you guys were saying way to open and has way to many spots to hide in where you will never die and are able to get a lot of kills. It also doesnt feel like cod 4 or even 5 at all. I also feel that the kill streak rewards are good but mostly kill the game play since some camper could just get a harrier, than ac-130 or gunner, than a nuke very easily which ruins the game for everyone. I also hate camping very much but do it a lot in this game becuease if you dont, you will most likely get killed from some guy hiding on the other side of a wall and no matter how many times you try to kill them, they still always manage to kill you. Also, as many people will agree, the single player was a joke. only 5 hours and had no real story to it. it was ok, but could have been a lot better.

I've got to agree I don't feel MW2 is game of the year. I think it's a solid game but not GOTY.

Single Player - Lacks substance, is short, and the lack of coop kills me.

Multiplayer - I agree with the fact that the map system is weak - the rotation seems really weak and the mutliplayer maps as a whole aren't fantastic or varied enough for me. I enjoy multiplayer, but only due to my friends playing it. I'm guessing their reserving better maps for DLC. I greatly prefer the Spec Ops mutliplayer, I only wish it was expanded and I could get more players in the game.

I think the Single player had some shock value moments In it just to get people hyped for the game. The snowmobile part was just for advertising. The level wasn't anything special at all. I also wonder why the put in the terrorist scene. It just didn't make sense to the plot as to why Russia would invade just for that. But after all its just a game so I guess plot doesn't matter so much.

Now for the Multiplayer, the main reason why people bought this game. I think its bit of a mixed bag. The first thing I hate is the riot gear, I wouldn't mind it so much if it didn't kill with melee. Also the new killstreaks promote camping. It also ruins S&D when you have no respawns and a chopper gunner is killing your team. There are some new things I like: Two attachments,heart beat sensor(this can be a pain if you don't use ninja),and callsigns and emblems are nice.

Overall the game is still great and I think It will get GOTY. But I think Infinity Ward was so focused on what could they do, they didn't think if they should.

Love the intro music, instantly memorable (since I remembered it instantly from the first Kill Kast). Thought it was cool you mentioned the Condemned series. I played the second game, loved it. Liked it so much I even bothered to 1000/1000 the game, which required some boosting for a couple of the ranked MP achievements. The combat system was pretty good IMO, wish there was more forensics in the game though.

As for MW2, I have to agree that most of the maps are way too big. If I was a PC gamer, I would be extremely pissed with the heavily reduced player counts (I think COD4 supported 32 or 64 players), among other things.

I have to disagree with your statement that camping takes no skill. First, you have to find spots where you will get a lot of action, but be able to control/protect against being flanked. This requires a bit of analysis and experimentation to find all weaknesses of a given location.

I'm gonna be a bit controversial, and say that I think Treyarch is actually better at designing maps than Infinity Ward. The maps in WaW are a beautiful chess match. Every position where you would want to camp has just enough weaknesses/exposure to prevent total domination. Every approach has just enough cover that someone could slip by unseen if you look away for a second.

Next, you must have good intuition, and use the information available to you to know/guess where enemies are or are coming from, even when there is no recon plane (which there won't be, because your teammates probably suck).

You have to actually have good aim and be able to get your shots off before the enemy. If they already know your position, then you are really at a disadvantage, so you have to be that much sharper. You also have to recognize friend or foe instantly, no waiting for a green or red nametag to pop up.

You have to know how to play the hand that you've been dealt. If you get spawned in a crappy spot, you have to have the skill to move stealthily. Animal's eyes are specialized in detecting motion, this is why run and gunners die so much. You have to know when your position is compromised, and be able to retreat to a new spot (where you proceed to slaughter people who are coming for you in your old spot :D )

Also, lag plays a big part in the game. Running and gunning, you are dead before you even know it most times. You could unload half a clip into someone before you realize that you died and your bullets don't count. Even knowing that someone is about to come around the corner doesn't always matter. I've started shooting before they even appear, and still I'm the one that dies.

Ultimately, if you don't know how to oust a camper, then just stay away from their spot. I actually get giddy when I come across an enemy camper,
especially if they are in one of my favorite spots.

Whenever someone starts whining about campers, I remind them of D-Day. The Germans didn't come out of their bunkers to play "fair". Or I ask them how many times a real soldier gets to respawn. If you are 10-10 in a match, that means you contributed zero points to your team's score, and in fact may have a larger impact (by giving the enemy more recon planes, artillery/airstrikes, and dogs/helicopters)
.
Back on topic now, my final comments will be on MW2. Testing out the first few maps, I got really nauseous. Not sure how I feel about the graphics. Some things look super realistic, but a lot of things look too sterile/crisp. Checking out Rust, that is a good looking level. Didn't get that sick feeling at all on that one.

I think the kill streak rewards are a bit over the top. You get something for almost every kill starting at three. It removes some of the tension/anticipation (trying to go from 3 to 5, or 5 to 7, etc.). The one you were talking about where it highlights everyone on the map is just ridiculous. Not saying I won't use it if I get it, but it's just too powerful.

So basically, I agree that MW2 is not Game of the Year.

I'm a big fan of MW2's multi-player. But then I expect more of that kind of pacing in Call of Duty. Patience is a virtue in MW2, much as it was in WaW in most gametypes. It ain't for everyone obviously, but I enjoy it based on the fact it's different from Halo, which is the game I spent most of the last eight years playing (in terms of shooters).

I can understand where the complaints come from, but I can't agree with them.

I agree with you on the part that Modern Warfare 2 is overrated. I don't think it's all that bad, but I'm actually one of the few who haven't gotten it T_T(I was planning to buy the Hardened Edition on Black Friday, didn't happen.) But, from everything I've seen so far, everything is a bit blown out of proportion. Camping, I think is BORING, the kind of "camping" I do isn't sitting and wasting time for someone to come by. If I do camp, I run around in the general area. But, about 30 seconds in, I say screw it and go guns blazin'. Also, one thing I don't understand is why is it that they incorporated so much into the MP. There aren't even any achievements for MP at all. Yet, it's almost only MP. There are SO many things to unlock in MP. I sort of see MW2 pretty a MP game. There is so much crap you can unlock not one an achievement.(I'm not an achievement whore.) It's just that the franchise now-a-days seem solely reliant on MP why wouldn't they add even more incentives? DLC pisses me off, it's a pain to wait for a GOTY edition to come for the DLC, due to the wait. Seriously, PUT IT IN THE DAMN GAME. Sure there trying to base it upon Gamer-feedback(so they say)but, sometimes you can end paying about half or even more than what you originally bought the game for also not to mention what a waste of space it can be. MW2 can still be fun but, it's nothing to praise heavily. BTW, Halo is the same thing with camping, but in CoD you can easily get taken down, you can hear someone caming and start shooting before they even turn the corner. The reason campaign is running and gunning is because you actually have a mission to-do, that's where they put the sense of realism in, you being in a war that goes on today.

I think the podcast was pretty well done. Real in-depth on MW2, I like how you guys aren't being mainstream, one thing though is that everyone spends too much time with the big-time games. What about a game like Borderlands? I'm sorry if I missed a little comment on it but, the podcast was long a bit. I like more but shorter ones.

Nuke is ghey
My take so far.

Thanks

The problem is if get rid of that aspect you have to basically turn it into Halo, and you loose any sense of realism. It's easy to run and gun when you don't die in three or four shots but in MW2 you do. So, you cant put the game down for being what it's meant to be, and that's a realistic shooter. Also, the single player missions involve more running and gunning simply because its harder to die and the enemies are more numerous/stupid. Now if it was as easy to die in the single player game as it is in multilayer I doubt anyone would play it.

I don't care to play more than an hour. I put several into Call of Duty 4, and I know all about the several ranks and perks. I just have no time and no desire to get into Modern Warfare 2's multiplayer. Obviously sitting/waiting has long been an integral part of the experience but never to this extent. I understand and implement this type of play whenever necessary, but I am not a fan of how the game has evolved into primarily a waiting game, when even the single-player campaign doesn't encourage you do the same.

Sitting and waiting has ALWAYS been apart of COD you only move when you know its safe or no one is going to come to you. If you want a bunch of running and gunning play Halo or a different game type like Domination where you are forced to capture points. Also, if you haven't played for more than an hour then you are really missing out. A lot of the better perks and weapons are gained after playing much longer.