We Hate Modern Warfare 2

[Stigmata]

I hate the affect they have on gameplay. When you meet someone in battle you both aim and slow down to a walking speed, slowing down gameplay. Accuracy is also considerably less precise - the sight bounces around and introduces an element of luck. Add all this to a game in which it only take a few hits to kill and you get camping. Too slow, too much luck, and tactics which involve hoping to see the enemy before they see you. Teamplay and tactics are more involved in shooters that are about fluid movement, reactions and twitch aim.

I still say you just don't like MW2's implementation of it.

Iron sights should ideally add a decision to mid-to-close range encounters: Do I slow down to ensure accuracy, or do I keep my mobility and fire from the hip? If there was an accuracy penalty while you were in the transition from hip-fire to sights, then this decision would exist, and tactics would be more complex. But your accuracy starts increasing linearly as soon as you pull the left trigger, so there's no benefit to mobility in one-on-one encounters.

 

[Viperidae]

When you meet someone in battle you both aim and slow down to a walking speed, slowing down gameplay.

The game is trying (keyword trying) to be realistic. You're playing the wrong game.

Accuracy is also considerably less precise - the sight bounces around and introduces an element of luck.

Wat? I haven't tried MW2, but unless they drastically changed the sighting system since MW1, I don't understand this argument. Ironsights made the cone of fire much less sprayful, as well as limited your fov. How the hell does that increase the amount that the shooter is relying on luck? Machinegunners who never used ironsights were way more prone to luck. Why? Because of spray and pray.

Too slow, too much luck, and tactics which involve hoping to see the enemy before they see you.

Unfortunately, that's what real fighting's like. You're playing the wrong game.

Teamplay and tactics are more involved in shooters that are about fluid movement, reactions and twitch aim.

Um, how exactly? My team is smart enough to cover all entrances to a building, while we have snipers/machinegunners inside laying down huge fire to kill everyone outside? How is that not a tactic? Successful tactics are not necessitated by movement. They are anything that enables the killing of the enemy in more efficient ways with minimal loss to objectives/personnel.

---

I don't know why this series' terribleness is hard to understand. Modern Warfare has bad team tactics, yes. I don't think anyone will disagree with that. But it has about 10% to do with the actual mechanics of shooting.

The reason the game has terrible gameplay is because of

1) Retarded map design

The maps are pathetically small. Most maps are smaller than deathmatch maps in Quake style games. Put 16 players in them, and it all boils down to whoever gets to the best camping spot first--an issue you touched on, but this isn't bad because it's simplistic tactics, but because there's usually only one or two of such spots on each map.

2) lolstreaks

This escalates to the even stupider killstreak system, which just rewards said camper in an multiplicative fashion. You trying to rush my sniper hideout? Bam, chopper to the face. MW1 had it just beyond the point of tolerance, especially on shitfests like Wetwork. From reviews and videos, MW2 seems to have just taken it into the realm of ungodly, asinine, paralysingly dumb.

3) Respawning

On the few--FEW--maps where there aren't camping spots, the run-and-gun gameplay style that you desire so much is actually possible. However, again owing to the maps' size, the respawn system destroys any hope of having a fun time. You can respawn behind your killer 3 seconds later. In team deathmatch. There is no way to know that this will happen, or prepare for it.

And don't get me started on grenades.

 

[Shift]

Whereas the series on general terms was bad online, it really came alive with clanning however. For instance MW1 clan leagues impose a mod that basically stripped everything down to a few weapons, 1 grenade each, 1 sniper per team, and no red dot sights or anything. Throw that into to a 5v5 or 6v6 which was generally the amount you had in clan games, then it led to amazing tactical fights. It was just down to pure skill and how well your team worked, therefore, and the same goes for all the CoDs right back to the first (apart from CoD 3 and 5), that the core mechanics of the game are excellent imo.

Its just with all the add ons and killstreak bullshit they've thrown into it now, and the overpopulated servers and small maps, that the core shooting mechanics of the game have been sugar coated so much that you can't really appreciate it because you are too busy fuming at being grenade spammed, or being killed by an invincible chopper.