WOW-GS members giving COD MW2 Low Scores ! ?

[QUOTE="Xsan3"]

[QUOTE="psychobrew"] So now we have to pay $60 to have a valid opinion?psychobrew

Why would you buy it if you think the game is going to be bad? The people who buy it will no doubt be biased in favor of it, so the scores are biased no matter how you look at it. All indications are this will be a sub par PC game. It might be fine on a console, but PC gamers are used to so much more.

There are hundreds of bad games per year that a lot of us don't buy. And a lot of those games are reviewed by thoughtful critics that are actually paid to be subjective. Of course, even they can be a bit optimistic at times.

Thing is, how could anyone actually give a game review when they havn't evenplayed it? Think about movies. There are plenty of great movies that I didn't think I'd like because of a particular actor - but turned out to be a great movie - despitemy predetermined aspect of that actor.
Example:Sandra Bullock,Matt Dillon, Tony Danza, Ludacris - (Movie: Crash)

So anyway, before people make some outlandish review of what they don't know, they should actually play the game at some point before making a formittable review.

[QUOTE="Baranga"]

[QUOTE="psychobrew"]

Why would you buy it if you think the game is going to be bad? The people who buy it will no doubt be biased in favor of it, so the scores are biased no matter how you look at it. All indications are this will be a sub par PC game. It might be fine on a console, but PC gamers are used to so much more.

da_bomb123

All indications are that the MP will be downgraded. Downgraded doesn't mean not fun, just less fun. Fun is what matters most.

I'm afraid the biased in favour of it thingy is a very flawed logic. Interested doesn't mean biased. If it were so, nobody would be disappointed by their purchases.

I see no point in rating a game if you don't play it. It's downright trolling.

That's like saying I can't give Bush 'a bad rating' without first having experienced him being in office for 4 more years.

That's like saying I can't rate MW2 without first having experienced all the DLCs and balance patches over the game's lifespan.

[QUOTE="psychobrew"]

Why would you buy it if you think the game is going to be bad? The people who buy it will no doubt be biased in favor of it, so the scores are biased no matter how you look at it. All indications are this will be a sub par PC game. It might be fine on a console, but PC gamers are used to so much more.

All indications are that the MP will be downgraded. Downgraded doesn't mean not fun, just less fun. Fun is what matters most.

I'm afraid the biased in favour of it thingy is a very flawed logic. Interested doesn't mean biased. If it were so, nobody would be disappointed by their purchases.

I see no point in rating a game if you don't play it. It's downright trolling.

[QUOTE="da_bomb123"]

[QUOTE="Baranga"]

All indications are that the MP will be downgraded. Downgraded doesn't mean not fun, just less fun. Fun is what matters most.

I'm afraid the biased in favour of it thingy is a very flawed logic. Interested doesn't mean biased. If it were so, nobody would be disappointed by their purchases.

I see no point in rating a game if you don't play it. It's downright trolling.

Baranga

That's like saying I can't give Bush 'a bad rating' without first having experienced him being in office for 4 more years.

That's like saying I can't rate MW2 without first having experienced all the DLCs and balance patches over the game's lifespan.

IW already said they're not going to patch in the features that PC gamers want so your point is moot.

[QUOTE="psychobrew"]

Why would you buy it if you think the game is going to be bad? The people who buy it will no doubt be biased in favor of it, so the scores are biased no matter how you look at it. All indications are this will be a sub par PC game. It might be fine on a console, but PC gamers are used to so much more.

All indications are that the MP will be downgraded. Downgraded doesn't mean not fun, just less fun. Fun is what matters most.

I'm afraid the biased in favour of it thingy is a very flawed logic. Interested doesn't mean biased. If it were so, nobody would be disappointed by their purchases.

I see no point in rating a game if you don't play it. It's downright trolling.

[QUOTE="Baranga"]

[QUOTE="psychobrew"]

Why would you buy it if you think the game is going to be bad? The people who buy it will no doubt be biased in favor of it, so the scores are biased no matter how you look at it. All indications are this will be a sub par PC game. It might be fine on a console, but PC gamers are used to so much more.

Tyrone77

All indications are that the MP will be downgraded. Downgraded doesn't mean not fun, just less fun. Fun is what matters most.

I'm afraid the biased in favour of it thingy is a very flawed logic. Interested doesn't mean biased. If it were so, nobody would be disappointed by their purchases.

I see no point in rating a game if you don't play it. It's downright trolling.

Didn't they change the angle of view as well? I could be wrong about that.... Interest doesn't mean you buy the game either. You have to want the game in order to buy it and you're not going to want a game you expect not to like, at least for a series as well known as CoD. Sure, there are some games people gamble on because they think it could be fun, and the customer reviews for those games will be much more accurate.psychobrew

As far as I remember it was an angle of 65 in MW too, but the difference is that here you can't change it from the console. Hey, at least it's not 57, like in Bound in Blood!

It's not fair for Average Joe to see the game rated 1.3 on IGN simply because of the multiplayer, when the SP and the co-op might prove to be a lot of fun.

Speaking of which, I'm quite annoyed by people that ignore those features of the game. That's more than 10 hours of content outside the MP, more since co-op is highly replayable...

IW already said they're not going to patch in the features that PC gamers want so your point is moot.

da_bomb123

Doesn't mean it won't add fun features. Or are the PC gamers so stubborn that they won't enjoy Pepsi when they want Coca-Cola?

[QUOTE="psychobrew"] Didn't they change the angle of view as well? I could be wrong about that.... Interest doesn't mean you buy the game either. You have to want the game in order to buy it and you're not going to want a game you expect not to like, at least for a series as well known as CoD. Sure, there are some games people gamble on because they think it could be fun, and the customer reviews for those games will be much more accurate.Baranga

As far as I remember it was an angle of 65 in MW too, but the difference is that here you can't change it from the console. Hey, at least it's not 57, like in Bound in Blood!

It's not fair for Average Joe to see the game rated 1.3 on IGN simply because of the multiplayer, when the SP and the co-op might prove to be a lot of fun.

Speaking of which, I'm quite annoyed by people that ignore those features of the game. That's more than 10 hours of content outside the MP, more since co-op is highly replayable...

IW already said they're not going to patch in the features that PC gamers want so your point is moot.

da_bomb123

Doesn't mean it won't add fun features. Or are the PC gamers so stubborn that they won't enjoy Pepsi when they want Coca-Cola?

[QUOTE="psychobrew"] Didn't they change the angle of view as well? I could be wrong about that.... Interest doesn't mean you buy the game either. You have to want the game in order to buy it and you're not going to want a game you expect not to like, at least for a series as well known as CoD. Sure, there are some games people gamble on because they think it could be fun, and the customer reviews for those games will be much more accurate.Baranga

As far as I remember it was an angle of 65 in MW too, but the difference is that here you can't change it from the console. Hey, at least it's not 57, like in Bound in Blood!

It's not fair for Average Joe to see the game rated 1.3 on IGN simply because of the multiplayer, when the SP and the co-op might prove to be a lot of fun.

Speaking of which, I'm quite annoyed by people that ignore those features of the game. That's more than 10 hours of content outside the MP, more since co-op is highly replayable...

IW already said they're not going to patch in the features that PC gamers want so your point is moot.

da_bomb123

Doesn't mean it won't add fun features. Or are the PC gamers so stubborn that they won't enjoy Pepsi when they want Coca-Cola?

I don't doubt that they'll add features that are 'fun' for some but that's not what we're talking about. In any case, as I explained earlier, the 1.0 ratings are fully justified.

[QUOTE="Baranga"]

[QUOTE="psychobrew"]

As far as I remember it was an angle of 65 in MW too, but the difference is that here you can't change it from the console. Hey, at least it's not 57, like in Bound in Blood!

It's not fair for Average Joe to see the game rated 1.3 on IGN simply because of the multiplayer, when the SP and the co-op might prove to be a lot of fun.

Speaking of which, I'm quite annoyed by people that ignore those features of the game. That's more than 10 hours of content outside the MP, more since co-op is highly replayable...

[QUOTE="da_bomb123"]

IW already said they're not going to patch in the features that PC gamers want so your point is moot.

Xsan3

Doesn't mean it won't add fun features. Or are the PC gamers so stubborn that they won't enjoy Pepsi when they want Coca-Cola?

If PC gamers feel strongly about it, they can give whatever damn score they please.

I doubt that SP + Coop are worth the bulk of $60. I know some people who've played CoD2 for 2,000 hours, nearly all of it on MP. k0r3aN_pR1d3

its all about the MP, no dedicated servers=super fail. mostly 6v6 is just gay ground war is the only one that will go to 9v9, hardcore basically isnt in the game. fail fail fail fail.

nice maybe IW will get it and fix the game

6.1 :lol: but doesn't matters, it's a few votes, it will increase to 9 soon enough. Also, thanks for reminding , I forgot to give it a low score myself, going to give it now :Pnaval

so you played it then, how was your experience with IWnet?

Sure, I'm a COD fanboy

Xsan3

Nice of you to admit it - but fanboys opinions are worth ZILCH

BTW - quality and graphics of the game alone are enough to gain an above average score (8.5)

Xsan3

You had a point until I read this. Graphics are almost as bland as the source engine, it shows almost no improvement. I wouldn't call 9v9 quality when it could go to like 16v16.

[QUOTE="Xsan3"]

BTW - quality and graphics of the game alone are enough to gain an above average score (8.5)

ChubbyGuy40

You had a point until I read this. Graphics are almost as bland as the source engine, it shows almost no improvement. I wouldn't call 9v9 quality when it could go to like 16v16.

As the brilliant reviewers from IGN have put it: "Infinity Ward has worked to make sure the experience on PC is identical to that of 360 and PS3, and while I'd say the team has succeeded overall, that's so a good and bad thing for various players."

Well, no SH*T. I hate IGN and I hate those people who think PC gamers want the same thing as consoles. THAT is what is wrong with the game.

The single player campaign is 6 hours! That's $10 an hour! THAT is what is wrong with the game.

No more dedicated servers means no more gaming community that flourished on MW1. THAT is what is wrong with the game.

The PC is dying because of crap like Mr. IGN stated. Consoles can go screw themselves. Why can't developers let PC's be PC's?

Oh, and yes, I HAVE played this game. And NO, it does NOT deserve it's high ratings.

[QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"]

[QUOTE="Xsan3"]

BTW - quality and graphics of the game alone are enough to gain an above average score (8.5)

blade55555

You had a point until I read this. Graphics are almost as bland as the source engine, it shows almost no improvement. I wouldn't call 9v9 quality when it could go to like 16v16.

It looks better and the levels are bigger. I finished COD4 today again to refresh my memory and MW2 is quite a big improvement. The graphics are much more detailed, the physics are much better, the particle effects are very good, the lightning is improved... It's somewhere between Mirror's Edge and FEAR 2. Better than FEAR 2, that's for sure.

[QUOTE="blade55555"][QUOTE="ChubbyGuy40"] Yea when the reviewers said the graphics look better it really doesn't look any better then cod 4 >>.Baranga

It looks better and the levels are bigger. I finished COD4 today again to refresh my memory and MW2 is quite a big improvement. The graphics are much more detailed, the physics are much better, the particle effects are very good, the lightning is improved... It's somewhere between Mirror's Edge and FEAR 2. Better than FEAR 2, that's for sure.

As the brilliant reviewers from IGN have put it: "Infinity Ward has worked to make sure the experience on PC is identical to that of 360 and PS3, and while I'd say the team has succeeded overall, that's so a good and bad thing for various players."

Well, no SH*T. I hate IGN and I hate those people who think PC gamers want the same thing as consoles. THAT is what is wrong with the game.

The single player campaign is 6 hours! That's $10 an hour! THAT is what is wrong with the game.

No more dedicated servers means no more gaming community that flourished on MW1. THAT is what is wrong with the game.

The PC is dying because of crap like Mr. IGN stated. Consoles can go screw themselves. Why can't developers let PC's be PC's?

Oh, and yes, I HAVE played this game. And NO, it does NOT deserve it's high ratings.

ZeppelinE6

I didn't say anything about graphics warranting a high score, I just commented on their affirmations.

The SP is very good. Reminds me a lot of the first COD. Also, no more enemy respawning! And it's more difficult too.

IW Net was reporting a lot of gamers online last night, 32,000 or so. 22,000 playing on steam right now. That could go up since the game has been out for really one day, and weekends boost numbers. The real test will be how it is doing in a fortnight.nutcrackr

Holy crap so many rant reviews...

Just buy or don't buy.

Finally got to spend some time on Multiplayer. I must say taht its of course not as good as the previous versions...I miss the server setup as before, but I'm still enjoying it to the fullest. So no reason to smear the game and give it crappy scores . . . but whatever, to each thier own.

I have it and like. Guess I am the minority. Wait a sec, there are thousands of people online playing... I wonder if THEY are giving low scores. Hmmmm, I bet not! I miss having 64 players and sometimes the matchmaking pauses when the host leaves but so far my games have been pretty damn smooth.

I also like not having to play with level 65 players on opening day and having to search for "lost" servers that I added to my favorites and I also like playing with people who actually paid for the game (like myself). I also like being able jump in and out of games when I get the time to sit down and play here and there. The graphics ARE better than CoD4, so I am not sure how people are saying they are not. And to say this is a cheap console port is totally wrong, play the last few Rainbox Sixes, THOSE are.

ya what the f*** people just complain about dedicated servers, its not that BAD! its a lot easier to group up with friends and play in a match together. also dont complain about 6v6 or 9v9 because look at the scale of the maps, its like cod4 maps they are tiny and if you played on a server that had more than 26 or so people it would be chaotic cause theres too many for such a small map. it's still plenty easy to find someone to kill in this game because of the small scale. stop complaining and look at the content in the game and appreciate it such as the perks that they have completely balanced and all the challenges and attachments for every weapon, EVEN PISTOL!jrorl63

ya what the f*** people just complain about dedicated servers, its not that BAD! its a lot easier to group up with friends and play in a match together. also dont complain about 6v6 or 9v9 because look at the scale of the maps, its like cod4 maps they are tiny and if you played on a server that had more than 26 or so people it would be chaotic cause theres too many for such a small map. it's still plenty easy to find someone to kill in this game because of the small scale. stop complaining and look at the content in the game and appreciate it such as the perks that they have completely balanced and all the challenges and attachments for every weapon, EVEN PISTOL!jrorl63

I asked a lot of people last night how they liked the new Multiplayer server idea, none of us like it - but not enough to obviously not want to play it.
And everyone that I had spoke to mentioned they actually thought the game is Overall Good..

I also like playing with people who actually paid for the game (like myself).

dtrem1

How does IW.net help you play with people that haven't pirated the game?

[QUOTE="jrorl63"]ya what the f*** people just complain about dedicated servers, its not that BAD! its a lot easier to group up with friends and play in a match together. also dont complain about 6v6 or 9v9 because look at the scale of the maps, its like cod4 maps they are tiny and if you played on a server that had more than 26 or so people it would be chaotic cause theres too many for such a small map. it's still plenty easy to find someone to kill in this game because of the small scale. stop complaining and look at the content in the game and appreciate it such as the perks that they have completely balanced and all the challenges and attachments for every weapon, EVEN PISTOL!Xsan3

I asked a lot of people last night how they liked the new Multiplayer server idea, none of us like it - but not enough to obviously not want to play it.
And everyone that I had spoke to mentioned they actually thought the game is Overall Good..

[QUOTE="Xsan3"]

[QUOTE="jrorl63"]ya what the f*** people just complain about dedicated servers, its not that BAD! its a lot easier to group up with friends and play in a match together. also dont complain about 6v6 or 9v9 because look at the scale of the maps, its like cod4 maps they are tiny and if you played on a server that had more than 26 or so people it would be chaotic cause theres too many for such a small map. it's still plenty easy to find someone to kill in this game because of the small scale. stop complaining and look at the content in the game and appreciate it such as the perks that they have completely balanced and all the challenges and attachments for every weapon, EVEN PISTOL!jrorl63

I asked a lot of people last night how they liked the new Multiplayer server idea, none of us like it - but not enough to obviously not want to play it.
And everyone that I had spoke to mentioned they actually thought the game is Overall Good..

And you'll keep getting more of what you get by supporting this game on the PC.

[QUOTE="Xsan3"]

Sure, I'm a COD fanboy

gosmo

Ding, ding, ding.

The truth to fan reviews...

10 = fanboy. One who refuses to look at the game objectively.

1 = hater. Most likely hasn't even played the game.

The truth to fan reviews...

10 = fanboy. One who refuses to look at the game objectively.

1 = hater. Most likely hasn't even played the game.

Johnny_Rock

[QUOTE="Johnny_Rock"]

The truth to fan reviews...

10 = fanboy. One who refuses to look at the game objectively.

1 = hater. Most likely hasn't even played the game.

woonsa

You're opinion is not accepted.

I agree with the view that you can't really rate or review a game objectively unless you have played it. There are other ways to express your dissatisfaction with a game you haven't played, such as these forums, online petitions, blogs and other soap boxes, etc.

In the case of MW2, I doubt that anyone at either Activision or Infinity Ward cares at all about User Ratings or Reviews. They dismissed out of hand the online petition, and they have shown a complete disregard for the feedback regarding technical issues with the game on their own forums. They will judge the success of the game on sales, and later how much DLC is bought.

So if you want to send a message to IW, simply don't buy the game. If you have a problem with the game, be sure to report it via Activision Support if you want something done about it, because posting on IW's official forums will get you nowhere.

[QUOTE="woonsa"][QUOTE="Johnny_Rock"]

The truth to fan reviews...

10 = fanboy. One who refuses to look at the game objectively.

1 = hater. Most likely hasn't even played the game.

Johnny_Rock

You're opinion is not accepted.

It's "your."

You're = You are.

Your = Something you have or take ownership of.

Basic English 101. Thanks, come again! :P