Modern Warfare 2: Single player story discussion *SPOILERS*

I just had a though, the name 'Ghost' could hold massive meaning in itself. Also, the fact he wears a mask could well be to cover a terribly scarred and destroyed face.
 
Calexico said:
Shepard was the general commanding the invasion in MW1 (when all the troops got nuked). therefore he wants to get revenge...by killing thousands more? I dunno, the whole story line was very....bad.
Click to expand...
He wants to have an incredibly well funded military, and a military nation. Maybe he feels he was caught with his trousers down and is overcompensating after the nuke.
 
It was good, but not quite as good as COD4 in my opinion. COD4 I found more hard hitting, this just seemed like COD4 again, just in different locations.

However, still pretty good, although not perhaps worth the entry price.
 
ahhhh just finished it, took 6-7 hours. Played on the second highest diff level. Was good fun.
 
Last edited:
I finished it on Hardened in about 6 hours too, enjoyed it a lot. Just thought the storyline was a bit lol. Russians invading USA? ISS Blowing up? Firefight at burger king?

:o

Still very engrossing though :)
 
COD4 never gripped me and I still haven't finished it. MW2 on the otherhand... wow what a game! So cinematic and great fun. Only downside is that I found the story hard to follow (and hard to believe really! Russia being able to full on attack America?!)

Also I don't quite get what happened to the nuke? Did it blow up in space rather than on land? Was that intentional?
 
Jasebta said:
I don't understand why the ISS disintegrated :\
Click to expand...

indeed it seems to imply that the nuke somehow made a very powerful blast wave in a vacuum :confused:


But seriously Russia launches a ground invasion of the continental US and there was no nuclear response?


I find that somewhat difficult to believe.
 
The game lacked something, maybe it was the way the story was told, in MW1 the loading screens would outline the next mission, as in what you actually had to do whereas MW2 tried to make itself into more of a movie. The story was to confusing, had to Wikipedia it at the end to figure out who everyone was, I didn't enjoy playing like 4 or 5 different characters.

Still the graphics were ok, the missions got better near the end but as I said at the beginning, it really lacked something, wasn't anywhere near as good as MW1.
 
I never played mw1 how is it graphically compared to 2 ?

I loved the single player but im finding the MP more and more frustrating and sometimes so random - Its more than just an FPS its having a 3rd eye to watch the damn map 24/7 somethign im so not used to doing.
 
Modern Warfare 2 is graphically better looking than the first, but only slightly. They both use the same engine and what not, but in my opinion, the campaign is better than the second one, so it'd DEFINITELY be worth going back and having a play through. :)
 
It wasnt until I actually completed the game I remembered who Price and Soap were lol

See they could be doing a movie and the voice actor who played him is gonna be in it.
 
The russian invasion missions were basically a modern take on 'Red Dawn' and I loved them!
 
right down to the wolverines title,

Its not a bad story, but its more Bond than Black Hawk Down this time.

Theres a place for both.
 
The story was just too stupid, Shepard being a traitor wasn't remotely explained, and frankly why Shepard was in this random base at the end, wasn't explained, he was just there? No one else knew he was a traitor supposedly? Why didn't once they found out, tell someone and bring the entire US army down on him?

THe nuke was ridiculous, it may have stopped some electrical equipment in Washington, but because of the fast attack, Washington was being evacuated and was overrun with Ruski's, yes some choppers went down and tanks may have stopped working, why the sudden massive decrease in numbers of soldiers. They never really explained that it stopped the west coast invasion, nor was the invasion on once city, nor did all the helicopters fly over from Russia so clearly they had a vast backup of aircraft carriers, subs and planes not far out too sea. Their first move would have been to bomb airbases before they launched. I have no clue how taking out a small area of electricity stopped an entire invasion.

Some of the missions were fantastic, some, like the Burger Town one was just stupid. Oh, we left some anti air missiles in that burger town, go get them, oo, the turret's on another Burger Town, lets run over there.

I think there should have been some more defensive, being overrun and forced out missions and obviously the entire story was lacking at every stage.

Why on earth would the CIA stick someone in to kill thousands of civilians, when they had him there and could take them out and capture the guy they needed at any time before hand? As someone said, Michael Bay esque, write a thread bare nonsensical story to cover the action they wanted in there, than write a story and include sensible action.

Why the US Navy was pounding the hell out of the Gulag, well, can anyone tell me? They were there to resue someone, it wasn't a military bunker, it didn't have the Russian PM in, it wasn't a strategic base, it wasn't a military base, it was a building. WHy on earth would they insist on blowing up prisoners and risking the team. The only reason they were there, was to save the one prisoner, it was beyond daft tbh. Even if it was a fun level.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom