controller1.com

videogames and stuff

Review: Modern Warfare 2

Reviewed on Xbox 360 and PC. Also on PS3. Developed by Infinity Ward. Published by Activision

Call of Duty’s beginnings as more or less a straight copy of Medal of Honor Allied Assault (which was more or less made by most of IW when they were at 2015) don’t really set the scene for this latest game. Call of Duty was never a popular franchise with the hardcore player who were more interested in Counterstrike, Quake III, Battlefield and Unreal games. It was a hit, but with the people who enjoyed Saving Private Ryan and Band of Brothers- a more casual type of PC gamer. It was a mainstream hit, but always looked down on by people who were in clans or lugged their 21 inch CRT monitors to LAN parties, fragfests and virginal circle-jerks. All that changed with Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare which ditched the WWII setting of the previous CoD games and sold more copies than a street vendor in Moscow selling genuine Rolex watches.

c1_mw21931

CoD4 was a surprise hit with the hardcore and even the Treyarch WWII-based World at War sold well. So MW2 was so big that almost every publisher put back a large number of their biggest titles to early 2010 just to get out of MW2′s way. But how does it play?

SINGLE PLAYER (may contains traces of nuts and spoilers)
The single player story had a lot to live up to. The WWII CoD games had a basic story to get you into a mission but the overall theme was “defeat the Axis powers before the end of 1945.” CoD4, not being based on anything in particular (parallel to the current wars around the world), need a more defined story. MW2 takes that, runs with it, amps up to 11, char-grills it, over-inflates the bouncy castle and just generally makes the stakes higher. Before we had a nuke going off in an unnamed Middle Eastern country of GAFghanistan, a main character dieing and a race to stop things getting worse. In MW2, it gets worse. An undercover American operative being implicated in a terrorist massacre of civilians in Moscow causes an all-out war. The story is told in two parts with half of the game played from the perspective of SAS operatives and the other half as a US army Private attempting to de-red dawnify the Continental United States. The scale of the story is rather undersold since most of the set-up is done in the form of rather dry voice overs during the loading screens that lack the punch of the similar screens during WaW’s load screens. And it’s way too tempting to just skip these as soon as possible.
c1_mw21934

The actual game itself is great even though it’s the same as the original MW. Just different settings and perhaps a tad more over the top in its scale. The game is intense for most of the time you’re playing, which isn’t all that long. IW have thrown in a lot of things to mix things up constantly, from snow mobiles to rafting. But mainly, there are lots of levels that make you think “Hmm, I did this on CoD4.” Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
Graphics are crisp and clear with a constant 60fps on 360 and since it’s an enhanced version of the engine used on CoD4, it will run well on most medium spec computers. Sound is the usual fantastic mix of effects and voice, now with added Hans Zimmer music. Even though the game on consoles runs at technically a sub HD resolution, there is very little to indicate low resolution. It looks crisp and runs smoother than peanut butter at a gigolo convention. The only major gripe is the jam gun the enemies fire at you. This is the new blood effect that splatters across the screen to let you know you’ve been injured. Fall from a reasonable height and you will tear a major artery in your eyes.

c1_mw21937

MULTIPLAYER
Well, since a large number of people skipped the single player of CoD4 entirely and have been playing the multiplayer fairly solidly for two years, you’d think IW would just make new maps and be done (after all, that’s more or less what Treyarch did for WaW). But no. IW have ramped it up to the nth degree. CoD 4: MW’s ranking and perks system helped extend the appeal of the multiplayer modes in this post WoW/ achievement whore world we live. MW2 takes that, jolts it 50, 000 volts up each leg and give it a raise. Now you have a far bigger combination of perks and weapon options, customization kill streaks, emblems (though I’ve yet to see anyone not use the pot leaf), tags and so forth. So not only can you select which killstreak rewards you receive, you can also have a deathstreak, which helps you out if you get spawn-raped by a camping sniper noob who’s been playing for 17 hours and hates the game. This thing will have legs since the number of combinations means it will be a while before everyone just uses the same three or four combos as they did in CoD4.
c1_mw21932

The netcode is probably a bit better than CoD4 and WaW, but the matchmaking still is a pain since it will routinely hook you up to a game where everyone else in another country- something that doesn’t make the game all that much fun. They could learn a thing for two from Bungie when making peer-to-peer networked games work. Of course, MW2 also brings the PC player into a realm they don’t normally visit: p2p networking without the latest episode of Lost to show for it. In my brief playthough on PC game online, I had no issues, but I did only play two rounds. The problem is you can’t play on a dedicated server as you can for most other PC games, nor can you choose what server you are on- It’s all Matchmaking with one player as the host (whether they like it or not). So far the main issue is listening to the whingeing of the master race (though they have a point- the best online console experiences -Halo 3 aside- have been those with the dedicated server model). My CoD4-playing colleagues at work have been entertaining me with their attempts at playing the game together at lunch. They don’t want to play private games since they won’t get XP. Oh well. Infinity Ward! You got some ‘splaining to do!

There’s also a third mode called Spec Ops which can either be played solo or coop (either splitscreen or online). I haven’t tried it since I can’t see any reason to play this with so much crap in Multiplayer to unlock.

So there you have it. Game of the Year? Well, it’s certainly the shooter of the year and the multiplayer game of the year, for me at least. It’s knocked down on PC simply there’s no reason for the basic server stuff to have been stripped out unless Activision want to start charging for maps on PC as well. Which is likely.

Controller1.com rating 3/3 on console (2/3 on PC)

  • Share/Bookmark

Now Playing: THE SAME AS EVERYONE ELSE (MW2)

So like everyone else on the planet with a 360, a PS3 or a reasonable PC, I’ve been playing Modern Warfare 2 on 360. It’s definitely a game where you could tell there was a legacy to live up to and even surpass. And that IW are using their immense power and goodwill to force some unpopular features on PC users.

I reckon I’m about 2/3 of the way through the single player and like MW2 it’s split between an SAS group and standard US army troops. Whereas CoD4: MW was in a more believable milieu that built to a climax that wasn’t totally far fetched, the sequel just goes nuts straight off the bat. Though the story is just an excuse to hang the set pieces on (as always) but instead of those real time cutscenes you would often get at the start and end of the level, we have the briefing screens where the story unfolds as a narration over computer screens. Unlike World at War, which used a similar device to explain the jumps in its barely there story, MW2 puts it all in these scenes and nine times out of ten, I’m just skipping these to get to the action. Note to IW: I WANT TO SHOOT THINGS. CUT THE BULLSHIT AND LET ME, LIKE, SHOOT STUFF DOOD!

SPOILER WARNING, SPOILER WARNING, SPOILER WARNING…

There is a level fairly on, called No Russian. This is the controversial level you may have heard of. It is so controversial that IW give you the option of skipping it altogether. If you don’t want the game spoiler, skip to the next paragraph. You are an undercover US soldier trying to get to the game’s antagonist by infiltrating his group of terrorists. It’s all there to make a story point, but it is one of the most powerful gaming sequences you will ever experience as you are part of a massacre. Now there are two parts and you can choose not to shoot the civilians, but once your group is attacked by the SWAT teams, you have no choice but to shoot them if you want the game to continue. Of course, how many people will also just shoot the civvies in the first half of the level also makes an interesting moral dilemma but I think many of the people who play this might not get the subtlety.

END SPOILERS

The multiplayer is also great and once I started that, I had a hard time going back to the campaign but I wound up alternating between the two. It’s fun but i can’t help thinking they’ve turned this game even more into WoW with the infinite variations and complexity the game now requires in order to do well in an online match. The jump in and play ethos Activision and IW use to justify their decisions on the PC version don’t really gel with the game which really appeals to hardcore users. If I hadn’t played CoF4 for two years, I would find the options bewildering instead I merely see them as overkill since most people will work out what the best combos are, and what the most hated ones will be and stick to those.

Haven’t tried Spec Ops but that doesn’t sound all that appealing to me. Maybe when I have friends over. I also have the PC version on it’s way so I should be able to see if it’s at all redeemable.

  • Share/Bookmark

A plea to Infinity Ward

  • Share/Bookmark

MODERN WARFARE WARFARE

The PC master race is up in arms with Infinity Ward over certain specs of the PC version of Modern Warfare 2. These basically bring the PC in-line with the console versions in terms of networking much to the consternation of the tweak everything crowd.

So if you run the PC version you now have:

a maximum multiplayer game of 9 on 9 (same as 360 and PS3)

no ability to lean in MP (same as 360 and PS3)

having to connect to a master server to authenticate (same as 360 and PS3)

no dedicated servers, but peer to peer networking (same as 360 and PS3)

matchmaking rather than server browser (same as 360 and PS3)

I am not rabidly going to rant about these changes, but by the same token I am not particularly pleased. The thing that made me buy the PC versions of WaW and CoD4 was the fact the P2P networking of the 360 versions was just not up to scratch compared to Halo 3. There was almost always a very noticeable lag between firing a weapon and the hit being registered on the 360 version of both CoD games. Yes, Valve’s p2p code is far worse but there was one reason why I was looking forward to the PC version. Also, where I live, we have pretty low internet quotas from ISP’s mitigated by the fact that if I play on servers hosted by my ISP- that is ‘free’ bandwidth. So, poo.

On the other hand, there seem to be many issues with CoD games of people ‘hacking’ the game. Though most calls of hacking are against people using ordinary in-game perk combos that the 1337 players are apparently above using (unless they’re losing). Oh dear. So you will connect to IWnet and then the matchmaking will begin. This is what I dread most as the thing that made WaW particularly bad in this regard was the fact that I would end up playing in games with a host who was in another country, leading to a frustrating time playing a game I knew could be good with good pings.

Some developers will see the reaction and make concessions. IW seem loathe to do this based on the time it has taken them to patch their games in the past. Do I think there’s a chance there will be something in the future? Yes and no. After all, PC players made such a small proportion of the overall CoD4 and WaW population that I think IW may just ignore them. Thing is, the thing that I used to love about CoD1 and CoD2 was that the ‘hardcore’ PC players stayed away from the game in favour of CS, Unreal and Battlefield, meaning it was pretty easy to get into. CoD4 becoming a hardcore as well as mainstream hit kinda killed the fun for anyone not in a clan.

John Carmack has also hinted at Rage not supported dedicated servers as well. DICE, however are using this as a wedge to drive PC players to Bad Company 2, which is not a bad thing since for everyone since BC was a really great game and would be great on PC.

So do you listen to your player base or do you use your extraordinary power to enforce your will? Let’s see how this plays out this week when the game is released

  • Share/Bookmark

Call of Duty: World at War review

Reviewed on PC (Single Player), Xbox 360 (multiplayer). Also on PS3, PS2, Wii, DS, PSP.  Developed by Treyarch. Published by Activision.

So, despite the dire predictions of Call of Duty World at War being a total disappointment compared to Call of Duty 4: Modern Combat, Treyarch have surprised us all and delivered a worthy successor to the most popular CoD game of all time.

CoD WaW follows a US soldier in the Pacific being led by the hand by 24’s Keifer Sutherland interspersed with playing a Russian soldier in the final assault on Berlin. It doesn’t try to out do CoD4’s sniper mission or the Gunship level. It has its own slants to those CoD4 signatures and adds a tank level and flying boat level. The shooting is EXACTLY the same as that in CoD4, which is what everyone who loved CoD4 but wanted more asked for.

Keifer’s gravelly tones tell you to shoot that. You shoot it. He tells you to shoot that, you shoot. “Those Jap bastards,” he says and you aim and open fire. Flames are a big part of this game. You wield a deadly flame thrower in some levels, including one level where it subs for the machine gun on a Russian tank. The flame thrower is a really nice weapon- much more usable than the one in Gears 2. The weapons are typical WWII fare with KAR98, M1 Garand, Thompson SMG, etc but they handle very nicely. There are a few large battles where progress is a little more difficult since Treyarch love their “infinitely re-spawning enemies until you cross a threshold” trick but overall the level designs are solid and fun to play. You may not have been to these locales, but if you’ve played previous CoD4 games, you have played them.

You can play the campaign either by yourself or in coop mode and once you’ve beaten it you get the Zombie mode “Nacht der Untoten,” which is basically a short version of Left 4 Dead. It is awesomely fun and highly recommended to give it a go. Pity there aren’t more levels but I guarantee this will be expanded upon at some stage. I’ve found that I’m unable to get online in the PC version so I’ve been playing a few rounds of this before I boot up CoD4 every night. I love it.

Multiplayer offers the usual modes, Search and Destroy (CS), Capture the Flag and Deathmatch modes. I mainly play Team Deathmatch but it compares quite favorably with CoD 4 and CoD3 multiplayer (CoD3, also by Treyarch did feature excellent Multiplayer modes). If you’ve played CoD4 MP, then you know what to expect. Just substitute Recon plane for UAV, Artillery for Airstrike and Dogs for choppers. That’s right, get to 7 kills without dieing and you can unleash the dogs. So long as you have no problems shooting digital dogs in the head, you’ll have a blast. Think of it as retribution for all the times in Nintendogs when your Alsatian took a crap when you were walking it. One thing that makes me think of CoD3 is the fact you can drive tanks in multiplayer. Overall, highly enjoyable. They even used Keifer to announce “Team Deathmatch” when you play as an American.

Graphics are excellent. I mean, they are jaw droppingly gorgeous on PC and console versions. Even in multiplayer, the 360 version ran at a  smooth as butter 60 frames per second. Sound is also excellent though the weapon are a bit weedier sounding than CoD4 (but at least the sounds are different). The Flash cutscenes opening each level are also interesting and different from what you’d expect in a WWII-set game.

Since FPS WWII games set in the Pacific are pretty thin on the ground, the only competition is really the two rather poor EA Medal of Honor games (Pacific Assault and Rising Sun) and this game just wipes away all memories of those travesties.  So, no it isn’t better than CoD4. It is close in many respects and doesn’t fail in any one particular area. That said, its an entertaining game in its own right

controller1.com rating 2/3 (or 3/3 if you love Call of Duty games and can’t face any more CoD4 MW) As Keifer says when the Marines win a multiplayer game “Out-fucking-standing!”

  • Share/Bookmark
controller1.com © 2008. Theme Squared created by Rodrigo Ghedin.