Hmm, the embed isn't working (though I recall that's an issue with Zero Punctuation videos).

>> ^Thallium:
Hmm, the embed isn't working (though I recall that's an issue with Zero Punctuation videos).


Just tried it again and works fine for me.

>> ^brycewi19:
>> ^Thallium:
Hmm, the embed isn't working (though I recall that's an issue with Zero Punctuation videos).

Just tried it again and works fine for me.


There it goes!

it didnt work on the main page, but once i clicked into its own page it worked fine.

Solid Soap? Sign me up! As a side note to this fairly accurate review (though I enjoyed the story myself) the multiplayer is apparently painfully easy to either hack or work around. It is however, extremely fun of course, dipshits aside, but one must always deal with dingleberries in these things.

err...it'd be nice if you put a "Spoiler Alert" somewhere in the description or title.. because he keeps talking about the protagonist getting killed off, and that's a pretty big spoiler in the game..

What he doesn't mention about the controversial mission is that *spoiler* the undercover agent who takes part in the terrorism is killed by the terrorists immediately after the incident whether he shoots the civilians or not, which makes it that much more pointless. Multiplayer is fun tho.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
What he doesn't mention about the controversial mission is that spoiler the undercover agent who takes part in the terrorism is killed by the terrorists immediately after the incident whether he shoots the civilians or not, which makes it that much more pointless. Multiplayer is fun tho.


Though, as the plot is conceived, the events of that mission HAVE to play out that way, so that the rest of the plot can be facilitated. I chose to play that mission rather than skip it, so I'm not sure how they handle the exposition of the events of that mission should the player choose to not play it.

Summary of MW2: It may be a waste of time, but it's not a waste of a lot of time.

And the less said about Bobby Kotick, PCs and stupidity, the better.

Who here expects to get spoilers whenever they see a Zero Punctuation review? I'm pretty sure he reveals multiple aspects of the storyline of each game with every review of his.

Also if you have any interest in Modern Warfare 2 you've already played it. And if you've already played it, you've already finished it.

>> ^mysdrial:
Summary of MW2: It may be a waste of time, but it's not a waste of a lot of time.
And the less said about Bobby Kotick, PCs and stupidity, the better.


Did you actually just diss PC gaming? I appreciate that there's consoles for people who don't want to build up a nice gaming rig, and that's fine. But do understand you're gaming on an inferior system.

>> ^entr0py:
Also if you have any interest in Modern Warfare 2 you've already played it. And if you've already played it, you've already finished it.


As one of the few, I haven't finished it yet. But I think it's as good as the first one so far.

I suppose he doesn't go into enough detail to cover the absolutely hemorrhaging catastrophic PC-multiplayer failure of this game.

It could have been the next big online "scene" thing, with big money involved. cod4 was kept alive in the online scene for a long time thanks to people modding the game and all the customisation really kept the game popular for a long time. It basically kept IW afloat, kept them in business, and allowed them to make mw2.

IW, in their infinite wisdom, thought that customisation and modding was theft and piracy. They decided that they could SELL people these updates rather than let the community make content for itself. As such, they removed dedicated servers - you play on a P2P system not too far off from the xbox/console style where your ping is always very high as you connect to another person's computer. You have to use the matching system which basically matches you with the lowest ping server in the style you request that it can find. This ensures heavy lag for a lot of people, moderate lag (over 100ping) as an average, and virtually unplayable for a few. When the map changes, they have a system of "migrating" you which basically tries to keep your experience uninterrupted but mostly disconnects you. One of the IW guys actually was quoted "I've been playing mostly with 100ms and that's just fine!"

They disallowed any kind of modding or customisation, instead opting to bring out DLC for the PC. This includes not allowing any kind of demo recording and there's no developer console.

Because of the P2P system, you are limited to a very small number of people playing in a server, meaning large battles aren't possible anymore because a person's pc (which is hosting the game live) just isn't usually capable of handling so many connections.

There's a shed load more. http://www.modernwarfail2.com/about/ . They really screwed up and shat all over the PC fans which basically kept the franchise alive and allowed IW to make a lot of money with this game. They did a direct port from console to PC not only because it was easy, but also because it allowed them to control the game rather than the community. Whilst console users are used to all the above complaints and have chastised PC users for their pickyness, PC users are used to much better things and the PC multiplayer of this game is abhorrent to them.

Yeah, the game actually does have a console, dedicated server support and leaning. It's all been unlocked by hacking. There's some shoddy business decisions behind all of this. Problem now is, there's unofficial dedicated servers but no cheat protection.

the >> ^dannym3141:
I suppose he doesn't go into enough detail to cover the absolutely hemorrhaging catastrophic PC-multiplayer failure of this game.
It could have been the next big online "scene" thing, with big money involved. cod4 was kept alive in the online scene for a long time thanks to people modding the game and all the customisation really kept the game popular for a long time. It basically kept IW afloat, kept them in business, and allowed them to make mw2.
IW, in their infinite wisdom, thought that customisation and modding was theft and piracy. They decided that they could SELL people these updates rather than let the community make content for itself. As such, they removed dedicated servers - you play on a P2P system not too far off from the xbox/console style where your ping is always very high as you connect to another person's computer. You have to use the matching system which basically matches you with the lowest ping server in the style you request that it can find. This ensures heavy lag for a lot of people, moderate lag (over 100ping) as an average, and virtually unplayable for a few. When the map changes, they have a system of "migrating" you which basically tries to keep your experience uninterrupted but mostly disconnects you. One of the IW guys actually was quoted "I've been playing mostly with 100ms and that's just fine!"
They disallowed any kind of modding or customisation, instead opting to bring out DLC for the PC. This includes not allowing any kind of demo recording and there's no developer console.
Because of the P2P system, you are limited to a very small number of people playing in a server, meaning large battles aren't possible anymore because a person's pc (which is hosting the game live) just isn't usually capable of handling so many connections.
There's a shed load more. http://www.modernwarfail2.com/about/ . They really screwed up and shat all over the PC fans which basically kept the franchise alive and allowed IW to make a lot of money with this game. They did a direct port from console to PC not only because it was easy, but also because it allowed them to control the game rather than the community. Whilst console users are used to all the above complaints and have chastised PC users for their pickyness, PC users are used to much better things and the PC multiplayer of this game is abhorrent to them.
I think some people have made dedicated servers available by hacking the game, not sure though. All of this was true as of release date



the whole level system would make the game incopatable for proper dedocated server play , i think its fine as a console game , but they should have maby worked on the game for another 7 months doing a proper pc version esentauly as separate product.

basicly dice have got it right , look at the dice console games v the dice pc games (bf2,bf moder combat , bad company ) they do the same game but redesign aspects of it for each platform.


also the single player is utter shite its utterly pointless to play , its pretty much the same as the first one stupid bugs and bad level design + when they do good stuff they never capitalise on it I don't think infinity ward have muh of an idea about single player games design. but it seems that the majorty of people dont give a shit its like holywood films people just want to see shit blow up they don't care about anything evan slightly engaging on another level. whats more annoying is the game takes itself seriously if it took the piss out of itself to some exstent but its like infinity ward think its a war simulater.


all in all its a really good multi player console shooter game.

I never played CoD for the multiplayer, so I won't get into that, but I have to admit I was really disappointed with the singleplayer, considering how I expected this to be at least as good as the predecessor. I was especially disappointed with the story and the dialogue - it just seemed so way off from MW1. Specifically, I have to say that General Shepherd is one of the most poorly written characters I've seen in any game recently, and unlike MW1, almost all dialogue reminded me of wannabe cool-dark tough-guy dramatics.

There were a couple of moments that I really liked, such as endings to Favela, the beginning (right after the nuke) and the end of the West Wing level (the homage to The Rock), and the part right after the boat chase near the end, and ironically enough, I liked most QTEs, which I usually hate in any game. But above all my main gripe with MW2 was how chaotic and frantic the combat gameplay felt (I guess that's what Yahtzee was referencing with "constantly having to look left and right"). I just don't understand how in Spec-Ops, the defense missions are real easy for me even on Veteran, while in SP, I died some 20 times defending the safehouse in one of the last levels on Regular difficulty. And if the AI had been really smart, that hadn't been a problem, but instead it's just that the game throws too many enemies at you.

Oh, and the snowmobile chase sucked. A lot

Back in the day, you could only play yatzy with several people (or "multiplayer"). And it was fun, damn it!

The civilian shooting was very satisfying, one of the better points of the single player campaign.

>> ^sillma:
The civilian shooting was very satisfying, one of the better points of the single player campaign.


Please don't live near me.

*promote

Self promoting this video back to the front page; last published Wednesday, November 25th, 2009 11:18am PST - promote requested by original submitter brycewi19.

Hey, for everyone hating on IF's disdain of PC gamers... DICE has delayed the PC beta of Bad Company 2 because they "decided to drastically increase the PC Beta's capacity to insure as many people as possible could participate."

DICE gets my money when BC2 comes out. Infinity Ward can suck those puppy intestines.

It seems I can't go into any Modern Warfare 2 discussion without someone making the same lame points against the PC version. And it's always coated in the same "Our community made you big, IW! And this is how you repay us? You intentionally did this! You love to see us in pain!!" type of betrayal that just comes off as kind of silly. And this has been going on since months before the game's launch.

I understand I am of the minority with this perspective, but I just couldn't be happier with how the PC version is. I've been a PC Gamer for a long time, and there were so many things I HATED about it. But with MW2, I no longer have to worry about landing on dedicated servers where all of the game settings are messed with to make the experience absolutely absurd. I don't miss having to wait before playing every game because the server forces you to download random content like the audio-clip of UT's "HEADSHOT!" or a bad retexture someone did to make the knives all look like dildos. I no longer have to filter through one server after another of people intentionally killing each other to build their rank up (or how EVERYONE is the highest rank because they all used this lame method). I no longer have to deal with servers that play the same map repeatedly over and over again. And I also no longer have to deal with these TERRIBLE community-made maps of badly textured wide-open areas where people can openly just shoot one another. The list goes on and on, quite honestly.

Instead, I get a game that's balanced so that everyone plays the game the way it was meant to be played. And you know what? It's a great game. I almost bought into the nerd-rage before the game came out, but quickly realized that instead, I've got a title that I haven't been able to stop playing since. And I'm not the only one. Just ask the hundreds of Steam-users who started a Modern Warfare 2 boycott how they're enjoying the game.

It's one of those things that people can't stop bitching about, but only during their breaks between enjoying the product. IW "shat" on the pc community? Please.

I'm completely happy with NEVER running into these types of servers.

I'd just like to point out that the naysayers above me who cast off my criticisms of MW2 multiplayer cite the sort of typical stuff of people who are inexperienced with computers or online gameplay. The sort of people whose only desire is to load up a game (mw2), click play, and be playing. That's completely fine, i'm not insulting you guys by any means, but you are unqualified to say that my (and others) comments are wrong or 'whining'. You guys really haven't experienced online gaming to its fullest.

1. Suggesting that "community made maps" are awful and annoying - do you even realise that games companies pick mappers, artists and designers up FROM THE INTERNET? Many get hired BECAUSE of their community driven work on mods, and maps, and such. There are thousands of custom maps and mods, just as there are thousands of films, games, cars. Some are amazing, some are terrible. That's how it goes. You wouldn't have such diverse and interesting games, with such amazing art and mapping if it weren't for community driven development.

2. Levelling system not suited to dedicated servers - you can't be serious. There are LOADS of games with levelling systems that involve dedicated servers. This is so wrong i can barely begin to..... i'm lost for words - battlefield 2 had it over 5 years ago. What on earth are you talking about?

3. "I no longer have to worry about landing on dedicated servers where all of the game settings are messed with to make the experience absolutely absurd" - In MOST other games, you can search for dedicated servers by specific settings and gameplay, giving you hundreds of results to choose from, which you can then cherry pick and, if you find one you like, you can favourite it and revisit. You CANNOT do this with IW's new system.

NOT having dedicated servers and a server browser is LIMITING your choice, it is LESS choice, and LESS free for you to find what YOU like. Whether that be custom sounds, maps, stats padding servers, or the THOUSANDS of servers for you to choose from that are STRICTLY against that kind of thing and play vanilla style with absolutely no custom map rotations or ANYTHING.

The problem the poster above me has is ignorance and selfishness. Yes i said it. You complain about custom maps which you think suck and therefore you want NO ONE to be able to play on them. Do you realise that when we use a server browser to search for dedicated servers, we are both able to filter out gamestyles we don't like? You can block those servers from appearing in your list, if you took 5 minutes to do so!

I don't like vanilla gamestyles, so i filter them out. I don't complain about it, i don't say you're an idiot for complaining about it.

You don't like modified gamestyles, but you don't filter them out, you join them and bitch about it. You complain, and then call people idiots when they say 'how come we can't play our unique style?'

You really have no leg to stand on here, whatsoever. Our complaints are absolutely sensible. It's like saying that vegetarian meals shouldn't exist because you're not a vegetarian.

"Wahhh, i got a vegetarian meal and it was horrible, i hated it, it ruined my experience." Well don't fucking order vegetarian food then, don't say that they should REMOVE vegetarian food from the menu - it doesn't affect you in the slightest, you can still get your meal just how you like it, but it seems you don't want anyone else to get what they like

Also, seeing as you posted what end up being trivial links that mean nothing, i'd like to post a few meaningful links of my own:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Call-Duty-Modern-Warfare-DVD/dp/B0021AETOU/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=videogames&qid=1259260808&sr=8-3
http://www.amazon.com/Call-Duty-Modern-Warfare-2-Pc/dp/B00269QLJ2/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=videogames&qid=1259260829&sr=8-3

There's a reason the star ratings are so low (and they were lower in the first few weeks after release)

The way they have it now is fine for a jump in and play console game , it will provide 2-6 months of enjoyment for the average player but will be replaced pritty fast by another game.


Pc FPS gamers expect more. Normally when a stable game comes out that has a solid foundation + a large starting user base it makes it ripe for mods that expands the game play in ways that would not be traditionally conciderd to be commercially viable.


Pc gamers have not to worry when the new Dice engine games come out on pc they will allow for some really good mods. Dice have managed to fix the net code issues from the previous engine and have also implemented destructible terrain.


so long as you remember that Mw2 is a console arcade shooter then you will enjoy it , The reason people got annoyed is that they were expecting it to be along the same lines as , mw1 , halflife2, Bf2.

like most blockbuster console games MW2 is largely Hype it works to sell console games Its allso a Safer bissiniess stratagy , and one that has proven to work for the last 10 years. games like NFS shift and forza 3 have done the same thing the game play is fairly bog standerd but they pack in a large amount of conntent and pritt6y grafics then spend milloins on advertising it to make out that its the best game ever.
enevitably game sells well but 4-6 months after its replaced by another game , but thats exactly what the publishers want as this means more sales .

also there is no denying the pc version of this is a really pore console port.

I wish games developers realized that its unacceptable to litraly port the game over with no changes.
so many games are utter shit on pc but are fine as console games.

What's frustrating is that publishers will blame the lack of pc sales on piracy and not the fact that they keep churning out shit conversions.

I only recently got a 360 and now i am using that as an arcade/traditional games platform , and I use my pc as a driving simulator. + for games like penumbra or pc specific titles and mods.

>> ^Abel_Prisc:
I understand I am of the minority with this perspective, but I just couldn't be happier with how the PC version is.


dannym3141 is right. Almost all of your complaints can be easily avoided by filtering the server lists and keeping track of favorite servers. What terrible excuses for justifying the removal of dedicated servers.

And complaining about custom maps is just about the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Yes there are some godawful ones out there, but some of the best content in PC gaming are fan made. Modding games have been an integral part of PC gaming since before DOOM 1. Some of the best maps, and even games themselves come from the community. Just look at CS, DOTA, and all those great community TF2 maps that were later made official by Valve. You say you've been a PC gamer for a long time, but your attitude reveals that you are surprisingly ignorant of the PC gaming scene.

Well said, really ^

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2009/11/19/wot-i-think-about-that-level/

Shitty Game Sells Millions; Publisher Rejoices; All Future Games Are Shitty.


You can really only blame idiot, dipshit, clueless kids who buy this bullshit as the cause of gaming's increasingly lower standards of quality.

I still can't figure out either a developer or distributor motive for the move to remove dedicated servers/mods.

They're not saving money, the features are clearly already in there since they were unlocked with a hack. It's not like it makes sense to set a precedent for future games either, may as well start it with a game where you don't even consider developing mod/dedicated server support.

It's not like this somehow enables them to charge for DLC whereas otherwise they couldn't. They easily could have done so anyway, because even PC gamers would likely pay for well made content no matter how discontent they are with the decision to charge. It's not like mod support somehow changes this dramatically.

The idea that IW want to restrict balancing and various adjustments that competitive mod makers made is plausible but still comes off as ridiculous considering they have never really made an effort to be competitive friendly and must surely know that people playing competitevely will never settle for the like of AI controlled choppers and air strikes in their game.

>> ^RedSky:
I still can't figure out either a developer or distributor motive for the move to remove dedicated servers/mods.
They're not saving money, the features are clearly already in there since they were unlocked with a hack. It's not like it makes sense to set a precedent for future games either, may as well start it with a game where you don't even consider developing mod/dedicated server support.
It's not like this somehow enables them to charge for DLC whereas otherwise they couldn't. They easily could have done so anyway, because even PC gamers would likely pay for well made content no matter how discontent they are with the decision to charge. It's not like mod support somehow changes this dramatically.
The idea that IW want to restrict balancing and various adjustments that competitive mod makers made is plausible but still comes off as ridiculous considering they have never really made an effort to be competitive friendly and must surely know that people playing competitevely will never settle for the like of AI controlled choppers and air strikes in their game.



they did it with this game because it allows them to more fairly (easily) implement the level and weapon unlock system. (MWF2 is clearly a console game designed around many aspects of console gaming and what the core fps console gamer wants) ( you could design a level up and wepon system that worked on dedicated servers but this is a console game and its cheaper to have users host the games so why bother paying for servers when you can force that on the users)

also the whole non dedicated game lobby server method works well for console games allowing people to jump into a multilayer game quickly without having to do any looking for servers. (console gamers want quick gratification of a reasonable stranded nor necaserally game play that pushes the art form forwards)

I do however think it is just cheep of them not to provide the servers themselves so that users are not hosting them , like how Dice dose it with bf 1943, they host the games but you just jump into them through a quick join system.


I think in general the quick join non dedicated option works well for console games. the reason why they don't work for pc games is this.

1) pc gamers want more sophisticated game play and expects mods and additional content
2) pc gamers normally expects multilayer with 20+ people avrage home internet cannot cope with this
3) pc gamers are all running different kit and require the host to provide a bass line and administratoin to remove hacks cheets and ping advantage (for a host)
4) pc gamers like a solid fixed location that they can go to for the exsperance they want from a game different servers are like different pubs accentually they all sell the same thing but the music setting and bar staff are different.
5) pc gamers use external software with there games for voice (joining games with friends in) and aquiring mod and map content, pc gamers dont like to be forced to use the process that the developer or publisher is inforcing as in most casses its shit compared to a specifcly made alternative.


in the end a PC is OPEN games platform games have to be developed for them with this in mind
console games are a CLOSED platform and there for you develop them specifcly to capatalize on the aspects of that closed platform.

the reasoning why developers simply port the shit over to pc is a) its less effort / risk than designing something that works for pc b) console architecture is much closer to pc than it used to be c) the profits derived from pc are considered a bonus they don't really give a shit due to the profits that can be derived from the console. why bother wasting time doing a decent pc port when you could have the same team of people work on DLC / new games and earn just as much money at almost no risk.

*dead

This video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by critical_d.

*length=4:27

The duration of this video has been updated from unknown to 4:27 - length declared by ReverendTed.