I was excited about Modern Warfare 2 at first, because holy shit, it looked great. Everything I saw from E3 was incredible looking, and left me frothing at the mouth to get a hold of what would certainly be the cinematic action experience of the year.
Yet Infinity Ward seems to be deliberately ruining any excitement their latest effort once held for me.
One caveat before you delve too far into my argument here: I loved World at War. I thought Treyarch did a superb job considering they are the Call of Duty "B-team". I went through the campaign co-op with a friend of mine and played several missions with 4 players. I still throw on nazi zombies every now and then because the fighting is frantic and addicting with 3+ players. This is great, I thought. Finally a Call of Duty that incorporates what I've been looking for in the series: squad-mates that consist of my friends. This was a major deficiency I noted in the first Modern Warfare. The entire game you're running around with a cadre of troops, yet it's exclusively a single player affair? Why is Gaz forever destined to be a simple NPC? This made no sense to me. Which brings me to my first reason MW2 can go to hell:
1) Utterly baffling lack of co-op play
But there IS co-op in MW2! True, there is, but only 2 players? This is a step backwards. Infinity Ward actually addressed the 2 player co-op concerns. They would have you believe that 4 player co-op just didn't work. That it was a cluster f***.
Umm...not in my experience. The 4 player co-op campaign in W@W worked flawlessly. When a cinematic moment occurred in game, every player sees this moment as though he was playing by him/herself. This technique is simple, but effective. Still waiting on a legitimate answer as to why this couldn't be incorporated into MW2. If there is one, please illuminate me.
Since I've seen how nicely implemented and fun 4 player co-op COD can be, I'm only left with the conclusion that Infinity Ward deliberately excluded it out of some inflated sense of elitism. Since World at War had 4 player co-op, Infinity Ward will be damned if their game will stoop to copying the formula designed by the dreaded B Team. Modern zombies? Don't make Infinity Ward laugh. Modern Warfare 2 is too cool to be fun. This is further evidenced by this article:
http://www.gamerzines.com/ps3/news/infinity-ward-treyarch-mw2.html
This sickens me for two reasons: Infinity Ward is basically saying they won't take any good ideas created in the previous COD installment simply on principle, but also that they are allowing their infighting and dirty laundry to be plastered all over the internet. It's childish and ignorant, and makes me feel even more defensive of Treyarch.
2) Infinity Ward's emphasis on competitive Multiplayer
Another admission: I loathe competitive multiplayer in first person shooters. The only competitive shooter I'm willing to (and do often) play is Team Fortress 2 simply because it is the most balanced multiplayer experience out there. The brilliance to the check and balance system in play in the game is unparalleled, and it makes the spawn > die > spawn > die mechanics of every other shooter seem blunt, stupid and unappealing. Modern Warfare, halo, and gears of war multiplayer is like a merry go-round. TF2 mutliplayer is Disneyland.
Infinity Ward is clearly throwing all their weight behind creating a great competitive online experience, and I really couldn't care less. All the new perks and classes in the world won't stop the core mechanics of the game from being boring, repetitive bullshit dominated by twitch FPS players have mastered the games controls to the point that it is prohibitively difficult for new players to get a foot hold. Pass.
3) $60 PC version? GTFO.
This is a just a joke. Ignoring the fact that NO games cost $60 on PC, I don't like that this could serve as the first step towards higher prices in PC gaming overall. What's to stop another company, say Ubisoft, from charging $60 for their PC version of Assassin's Creed 2 now? Activision does it, why not them?
I've bloviated enough. Just wanted to throw this out there and see if anyone else will be waiting for MW2 to be bargain bin before they pick it up. I just can't justify a day one purchase anymore given Infinity Ward's behavior. That, and I'll already be in 4 player co-op heaven with Borderlands and Left 4 Dead 2. MW2 can go to hell.
I almost feel as if we are bending what was said about the co-op being a cluster of badness. Perhaps (Mind you this is a stretch) it was more aimed at the experience they were looking for in their game. Something to the point of MW2 being a more single player oriented experience over co-op.
While I wholeheartedly respect that, (if indeed that is wheat he meant) it still feels like a major letdown. What if Left 4 Dead 2 came out and it was only 2 players instead of 4? It is 2009, and we as the gaming community should expect MORE from game makers, and not less. When they start taking away features, then charge more for their games questions need to be raised. If we don't get a proper answer, then I look forward to buying MW2 when it is $20 at a brick and mortar store (Or on Steam).
In the meantime, I guess I'll have to enjoy the pure delight of unloading my mini gun into crowds of enemies as my friend snipes over my shoulder. TF2 FTW.
But it always pisses me off when TF2 players say that their game is the greatest and all other online shooters are boring. You know what? I played TF2. I found it ridiculously boring and could not see what all the fuss was about at all.
But, whatever, just my opinion.
Heres hoping that we find out that Treyarch and IW are the same team, and MW2 will have 4 player Co-op and Russian Terrorist zombies.
Understandable about TF2. I didn't mean to imply that there was NO learning curve whatsoever with TF2, there definitely is one and it is fairly steep, so I can see how it would be boring to some. That said, once you get the hang of things I feel the systems in place allow the player a helluva lot more room to adjust their play style on the fly than the other shooters I mentioned. For example: if you find that you suck as a Scout in TF2, you can switch classes quickly and see if Sniper is a better fit (or whatever is required by your team at the moment). If you find that you suck in Modern Warfare...then you just suck.
I kept imagining an expanded version of the Resistance 2 co-op idea, and how amazing that could be if done by Infinity Ward. I still think I will get MW2 someday, but you better believe I'll be playing the crap out of Borderlands well after this game comes out.
COD4 is one of the most finely crafted single player FPS experiences ever made. Period. You can argue that you don't like the game and what it had to offer, that's fair enough, but as far as the quality of graphics & sound, pacing, mechanics and set pieces are concerned, the game is pretty high up the bar. To argue that they would be neglecting the single player campaign in favor of multi-player is absurd.
IW have chosen to spend their time creating a tightly woven co-op experience so that two characters can feel like a part of the story; it wont just be "here is the exact same thing for all 4 players at the same time", which I think is a good idea. You might want 4 player coop, but it doesn't mean they should shoehorn it in to their game because it CAN be done.
On top of that, like you said, they are working on what seems to be an absolutely ball-bustingly awesome online mode, that adds a truckload of features on to the already loved classics; we can only hope they've balanced it a little better. As for being crapped on in MP mode, you just need to play a few rounds, get used to the maps and earn a few percs.
As to the $60 PC game remark. Here in Australia, PC games range from $80-$110 new; so expensive that its actually cheaper to import them from the US. I think you should spend less time complaining about what Infinity Ward haven't done, and commend them more on what they have achieved. Modern Warfare was cinematic gaming polished so well you didn't even mind the lack of character development or generic story, and I think MW2 is only going to expand upon that.
"COD4 is one of the most finely crafted single player FPS experiences ever made"
-I never said that it wasn't. I loved Modern Warfare, it was one of the finest shooters I've ever played. Also, I wasn't making the argument that the single player will be ignored, clearly it won't be. I'm making the argument that the game will have significantly less replay value now that I know it is only 2 players. I will go through the campaign with a friend maybe twice, then since I don't really care about the multiplayer, that'll be it. If the competitive MP in COD4 is your cup of tea, great - it isn't for me, just a difference of opinion. I'm saying that 4 player co-op either in the campaign or a nazi-zombies-esque mode would have extended the replay valuefor me greatly.
-Arguing that I should shut up about high prices because you have to pay more is irrelevant. You're the one who should be complaining, not me, Australians have it the worst. But if you want me to rollover and accept that because Modern Warfare 2 is this amazing game that Infinity Ward is justified in overcharging for it, I won't. Games cost enough as it is, and I'm not going to support any efforts to make them cost even more, you shouldn't either.
Still, they clearly are putting the emphasis on competetive online multiplayer, and it's going to be fantastic. I put in about 60 days on CoD4, and I expect to put in the same amount of time on MW2, so if any game has ever been worth my $150, this is it. They are fully justified in the price because it offers so much play time.
If competetive online play isn't your thing, than it's not worth your money, but it's certainly worth whatever their asking for it if you're interested in hours of competetive online play.