MW2 reviews are too generous

I'm not denying the fact that it is a great game. But still it does not deserve full 10/10 reviews it has been getting or the 9.8. Those scores should only be assigned when game is original, genre defining and vey well done.

It is very well made but it provides nothing truly new to gaming. It should be awarded little over 9 tops. This game is not the best game ever it's only a Michael Bay movie as a game but with more interesting story.

Many reviewers are saying in their reviews that looking past the few flaws (especially in the PC version) it is almost perfect game. No! This is not what you're suppose to do. You are suppose to look into those flaws and bring them up to discussion so that some day developers might learn from them.

I remember time when reviews were actually in depth, sharp tongued and sometimes even gave bad grades because the game was bad. Apparently the new style is that you make a 2 page commercial for a game that has been dummed down for the masses.

If this is the way gaming journalism is going I'm booking a ticket to the 90's.
 

[fetussandwich]

"a game that has been dummed down for the masses"

Do you even realize you're insulting yourself?

[KingJM]

he means the review has been dumbed down

[fetussandwich]

He can't even spell dumbed. It's not a difficult comment to understand.

[HolyOrangeCows]

Reviewers never seem to care about campaigns anymore.

If the campaign is 4 hours long and the game has a multiplayer, they say it has a high replay value and give it a 9+/10.

[ape007]

my friend,don't get me wrong,mp is amazing,I love mp so much especially in cod,it give endless hours of fun BUT

single player is single player

mw2 campaign was great but 2 things I hated about it

1- the stroygame flow is too confusing
2-I really liked cod 4's soundtrack more,mw2 has great songs but mw1 beats its ass in music

IW,mw2 is awesome but I hope you guys push the campaign more next time as you do in mp,more ideas,different design\thrills

and I hope they introduce a new powerful engine,maybe save mw3 for next gen consoles

[mylesbarfed]

i fully agree with this blog post.

[peeps]

very true tbh. the ammount of hours i've sunk into this game already is pretty crazy, but it's still not a major step up from cod4. you could say 'don't fix what isn't broken' but i've seen a lot of reviews critisise games for not doing anything new.

mw2 does what it does really well, and for that it deserves it's 9's, but it really does feel like reviewers are actually affraid to mark the game down because it's such a big release.

[ceedubya9]

It is a bit short, but the length didn't seem that bad to me. It felt long enough to get its point across. Making it any longer didn't seem to make much sense.

There is the Spec ops mode, which you could say is an extension to the single player experience. You can play that on your own, although I'm sure its not as fun that way. I think the game is very deserving of high 9 scores based on its overall package. Of course, if you were never into Call of Duty in the first place, there is nothing here to make a non-believer change his/her mind.

Like you said, the game doesn't really offer anything new to gaming. However, some other top games (Uncharted 2, Ratchet and Clank, ODST, Left 4 Dead 2) didn't really offer anything all that new either. In these cases, you may have had a bump in graphics, a few more modes added on to the core experience, or maybe just more of the same. But, they are still considered well-done, fun, or just all around great achievements. Should we knock these games because they don't reinvent their genres? Or should we just enjoy them for what they are?

Based on your standards you believe, none of those games I listed should probably get more than an 8.5 to a 9 at the most. Because none of those games hit all three of your standards for a high scoring game.

[kissmeimgreek]

Id rather play a 6 hr long campaign thats a blast to play from start to finish, than a 12 hr game that bores me half the time.

[paul0388]

Uncharted 2 deserved the 10's though, ODST and the rest of the other games, on the other hand, did not.

Uncharted 2 was different because it wasn't just mindless action. The gameplay and story were equally well done and pulled off flawlessly. I always knew the who-what-when-where-why when playing Uncharted 2, I just didn't get that from Modern Warfare 2.

[ceedubya9]

So how does any of that really make Uncharted 2 different from the first one? Everything you said about Uncharted 2 can be applied to Uncharted 1. The game really didn't do anything different from the first game.

And that's not a knock against U2 either. It didn't need to do anything new. It just needed to stick to its guns, so to speak, and provide a fun experience.

I'm not saying whether or not the game deserves a 10, as just as you can say that the others don't, I can easily say that this game doesn't. Its all opinion.

But, I stand by what I said. I know a lot of people here will disagree with me all day because its the "in" thing to love Uncharted and hate on MW2. And, as I said before, based on Got2be's on standards on what a high scoring game should be, all of the games I listed, including Uncharted 2, should not be highly rated games. Like I said, this is based on his own standards that he himself believes.

[Jinxstar]

I think considering this a "blog" is generous. Should have been a forum post.

[Digitaldude]

MY opinion is, isnt it obvious? They are way to generous. And they know it.

[HolyOrangeCows]

It's how they get views.

[Perkel]

good article, nailed it right

[Immortal321]

you notice when they review a ps3 exclusive as a full game it's reviewed score gets deducted for small story.
[killzone2]-gamespot 9
best visual of 2009, and great multiplayer, great animation, smart enemy AI, and with a decent hourly story.

But MW2 gets a good score for having a good multiplayer.
[MW2]-gamespot 9
good visual, great multiplayer, small story.

[ceedubya9]

Were the games reviewed by the same person? If not, standards between reviewers can differ, which could cause a difference in score between similar type games.

MW2's campaign is short, but its probably slightly shorter than average length. Plus, there is a co-op mode, which Killzone 2 does not have. And although they are completely different, some may see MW2's multiplayer as more substantial and K2's. Really though, the only thing that separates Killzone from other shooters is the graphics. But, that's not to say it isn't a good game.

Still though, how many people still play that compared to the original Modern Warfare?