Customer Reviews

Call Of Duty 2

5 star:		(26)
4 star:		(9)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(6)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Call of Duty 2 makes no jump in the art of the WW2 first-person-shooter (FPS) but it is a refinement on the previous titles. If your system could play Call of Duty well you probably won't have any trouble with your hardware on this one. Graphics are better especially the smoke and the environments are the best yet in a WW2 title. Sound is outstanding for both sound-effects and voice. The human models are well done but not to the standard of Half-Life 2. AI is much improved as well.

The best new features are the missions and damage modeling. You are not tied to one path as much as in previous games. There are multiple routes and approaches to take to finish an objective although still not as free form as one would wish. One big change is that your damage/health is no longer displayed. You get red flashes and blurry vision when you are taking too many hits. Simply getting out of the line of fire for awhile will heal you. This is by far the best approach to damage/health in a FPS yet. It prevents you from being penalized for a bit of bad luck when in an area without medkits. It also eliminates the whole silly searching for medkit concept completely. If you take too many hits without a breather you will die but the game will restart at the last save. This whole approach keeps the game moving and overall has a much better feel to it. All FPS shooters should adopt this approach.

Perhaps the single best feature is that even if you do almost nothing the mission will progress. This works out very well on those few missions where you are either stuck or can't quite figure out what you have to do or, better yet, you just want to do something else. The missions are still heavily scripted which limits replay a bit but they are done in a more segmented way that allows for the mission flexibility. You can at least replay the game trying different approaches to the missions.

One minor downside to the game is the save system. You cannot make any manual saves. But the game does auto-save at key points and these are rarely a problem. Some are perhaps not quite where you would want to save but close enough. Again the system keeps you in the game and keeps things moving.

There are other issues as well: MG42s with endless ammo and no overheating. The tank missions are bit too fast moving; it is almost like flying fighters instead of tanks. Another annoyance is the three campaigns; you are forced to go in the order of Soviet, British, and American. There is also still no way to play the Germans. The game is very brief as well, maybe 20 hours or so to complete everything.

Overall while in makes no giant leaps for the genre it does make some solid advances and the overall quality makes it the best WW2 shooter yet. Anyone new to the genre will love it and veterans should appreciate it as well. The game even gives a refreshing twist on D-Day with Pointe Du Hoc missions. Recommended.

OK, OK...I know what your thinking. You see all these 4 and 5 star ratings before my review and say this must be a fluke.
It isn't. There are many people that are die hard loyalists of this series. No matter how repetitive this game is, they will always give it high marks.

At first, I really thought this game was great. My first hour of play was exciting. Then the old faults and linear problems popped up like in the first edition of COD.

Trust me, try playing F.E.A.R. and you will see how lame and outdated this game model is. $50 is way too much to spend on this game.



THE BAD -

1- VERY SHORT PLAY TIME
I finished this game on the veteran setting in under 7 hours. I sincerely was not trying to beat the clock. I like to take my time and savor every moment of a game. I was hoping it would last....it didn't.

2- GRAPHICS ARE FAIR
The graphics engine is new in this sequel which is a blessing but you better have a fast CPU and VGA card my friends to get quality visuals! There are moments in this game when the rain, weather effects and large numbers of enemies are cranking out so hard on you that your processor or card will start to chug and vomit. Sure you can solve this problem by turning down the settings, but what is the point of a new graphics engine based game if you can't enjoy the beauty right????

3- LINEAR GAMEPLAY
Once again...the COD developers have proven themselves to be the kings of linear/forced gameplay! What is linear gameplay? It means that basically, you only have one path to follow, and triggers spots to hit to change the gameplay. Example - Say you have to destroy 3 artillery crews. You have to follow down one particular path in a town, you must clear the buildings and the enemies don't stop coming at you until you clear out one artillery base. You basically spend this game rushing forward head first into every single battle, causing great frustration and it does get old and boring after the 5th time in a row. If you think your going to hide behind a wall, pick off the enemy and clear the building...your going to run out of ammo! In other words, you don't have a choice. Full speed ahead. In some cases that is fun and exhilirating. At other times, it sucks.

You also know when enemies are going to hit you too. Linear game play is predictable. You attack an area, clear it, then move to attack the next target. As you approach, the enemies pop out ahead of you and get into formations. Lather, rinse and repeat....YAWN!!!!!

4- AUTOMATED ATTACKS
In some of the battles, there are secure spots to hide in. However, once you're there, you'll get bombarded with grenades. I watched where they came from...lol No enemies are there, they just magically are thrown from the ground. This is to prevent you from taking advantage of shelter and once again...forcing you to run head first into the battle. LAME!!!

5- NO HEALTH PACKS
THIS REALLY SUCKS! It has a new system. Instead of hunting down health packs to recover and fight on, you automatically rejuvenate! I could take bullet after bullet and not die. Ergo, there was no risk!!! No price to pay for being foolish. Here is how it works. An enemy pops up and pelts me with bullets. As I get hit, my health endurance goes down. If I don't take cover so I can recover, I will die. The screen starts to get more and more red as an indication of how close to death you are. Hide behind a wall for 5 seconds to recover and your good to continue.

In some ways, this seemed like it was a neat idea to try. Overall, I think it is a failure. It was too easy for me to beat the game because I did not have to preserve my health levels. On the other hand, it was nice not to have to collect health packs. Still, it was too easy.

6- CAN'T DISABLE THE STUPID MUSIC!!!
Once again, Activision...in cooperation with their tremendous egos...has decided that they know best and you don't matter. So guess what...? You cannot turn off or turn down the music in this game. They repeated the same offensive tactic from COD. This is so annoying. The realism goes out the window when the music is so loud and intrusive that you cannot hear explosions or bullets! I am not joking...it is really that loud at times!


However, I know software, so I hacked critical files in COD and I hacked COD 2 to disable the music! Up yours Activision! For other people that cannot do this...look around at some game cheat sites. I will be posting the instructions in HOW TO form.

7- THIS IS BASICALLY COD and COD:UO in a DIFFERENT WRAPPER!
Basically, if you have played COD or the expansion COD:United Offensive...you have already played COD2. Yes, it is that sad and that much of a let down. In fact, I honestly feel COD and COD:UO are better in a majority of ways.

8- COMRADES GET IN THE WAY
Activision still has not fixed the issue of your idiot squad mates not getting out of the way quickly! Nothing is worse than entering a door and having the enemy lob 2 or 3 grenades at you. You try to get out the door but your moronic mates are just standing there blocking the door. BAM, POW....your dead! Start over and don't enter the building. Lesson learned!



THE GOOD

1- IT IS FUN
I am not saying this game is horrible or not worth playing. I am simply saying it is not worth $50, it certainly has been done so there is nothing new or dynamic about this game that you have not felt in the original COD and that there are other games out there like F.E.A.R. that really will blow you away with creativity.

This game does have its moments. I love WW2 FPS games.

SUMMATION -

This game was long awaited and could have been great. It turns out, that it is not that great. Been there, done that. No one made a hardcore effort to introduce something new and fresh to the FPS genre.

Save your money and either wait for this to go below $35 or go buy COD and COD:UO and get 3 times the band foir your buck if you have not already played them or finally and definitely the best option...go buy F.E.A.R. or Quake 4. Both of those games are much better than this and will keep you happier for a much longer period of time.

I have been playing this game for several weeks now. The graphics in this game are much better than the previous versions. There is much more debris (burned-out and burning hulks of tanks, halftracks, etc.) and terrain (thicker bushes, high grass, trees) adding much more realism to the game. This added detail also adds greatly to the multiplayer experience because now you will find you need to use tactics more instead of running around aimlessly. Patience, concealment, and tactics pay off far greater in this version.

This game has changed a lot (enemy radar, no healthpacks, no running, grenade detector, better graphics, better maps) and in many ways stayed the same. It's different, it's the same, but overall, I think it is much better than the previous versions.

I'm a huge fan of WWII shooters, and if you are too, you should buy this game without reservation. It's loads of fun, and you play different battles for a change. I'll list some good and bad below.

Bad Stuff:

1) Short: As other reviews have noted, I was surprised by the short game time. I wasn't paying attention, but I beat in two days (let's say 10 hours of play, tops). After finishing the epic Half Life 2 lately, this was pretty bad.

2) Not much of a sequel: This game seems to follow the Halo 2 system of sequels. Much as Halo 2 really was just a short, over hyped attempt at a massive Halo online game (and just a short, cheap rehashing of the first Halo for the single player), COD2 feels the same. The multiplayer is a BLAST, but it feels like that was the real design here instead of the single player stuff.

Middle Ground Stuff:

1) Graphics: The graphics aren't bad, but they didn't blow me away. I liked the look of it, but again, recent efforts are a leap ahead of this graphically. The smoke effects are AWESOME and very helpful for game play, so the game isn't without innovation, but they lacked the crisp texture of Half Life 2 (not to be a fanboy).

2) Linear Game Play: Some reviewers are complaining about linear game play. Well, guess what, it's a shooter with a story line, so I didn't expect anything different. You have to follow certain cues. The levels are rather large with a short load time, and if they were more expansive or the story harder to follow, the game play would suffer. The action is great, and the objectives are always crystal clear, so no complaints about the linear game play. I hate shooters where I'm wandering around wondering what to do next, and this never happened here. I always knew where to go, and if linear game play is the price I pay, it's a welcome price. This genre doesn't lean to open ended game play, so I think this like complaining there's not enough violence in a romantic comedy.

3) AI: The AI is mixed. At times, you get pre-generated Nazis perched out waiting to ambush you, but sometimes if you charge a building, the flank you and pull off some nasty surprises. If you charge the same building on a re-play, you'll not they use totally different tactics. Even throwing grenades isn't a sure thing since sometimes they throw back. You get a mix of good and bad AI here pending on the level and circumstance.

Good Stuff:

1) Health System: COD2 avoids the unrealistic magical health packs that heal you and put you back in the fray perfectly healthy (where's the realism there?!). Instead, you can suffer a certain amount of damage right away and still live. If it's too much damage all at once, you die (a grenade, a torso or head shot, etc). However, if it's a small wound, your vision gets screwy, and your aim gets worse, and you recoup in a few seconds if you can take cover. Repeated hits, though, and you die on the spot. It enhances the crouch, lay, stand system by making cover make a real difference. It feels rather like a Halo "force field" system, and it works well. Instead of watching a health bar and scrounging for band aids, you use your head and stay frosty, and you'll survive a firefight. The health system makes you think instead of waste time doubling back for that health pack you left at the Nazi desk three building back. Well done, great game play.

2) New Battles: While staples such as Stalingrad and D-Day are there, you play a different part of those battles. You do a lot of the African campaign and some unique European battles you haven't done before. The battles on Hill 402 at the bunker are pretty awesome. I've seldom been as engaged by a WWII shooter as I was killing mortar teams and fighting a mounting Nazi advance, scrounging for ammo during brief lulls. Well done.

Overall, this game is great. It's short, so you may wait for it to drop 10 bucks, but the online play more than makes up for the brief nature of the single player. If you're a WWII shooter fan, this is a must for your collection. You'll have a good time and enjoy some COD2 mechanics.

After playing FarCry, this game is extremely disappointing.

The single player mode has 3 campaigns (American, Russian, British). They are all fairly short and the objectives are simple and often boring. Each map is like the most boring map of another game.

The maps are small, but that doesn't matter because most of your time is spent defending fixed positions in chaos. Sure that may reflect some reality of war, but this is supposed to be an entertaining game, not a transcript. Why not make us sit still in a boat for hours too?

The only map I really liked was the D-day landing in which the allied forces had to climb a cliff, then take out some big guns.

I found two other maps somewhat interesting. One involved attacking and defending a hilltop, another is a confused escape from a city. Both were unique in their setting and situation, but the game fails to provide much of a story within the mission.

Some maps required the planting of explosives, but took place in a limited setting. It's just more of the same temporary survival.

What you will definitely not find in this game is the variety of missions in the original Medal of Honor, the wide open spaces of FarCry or Battlefield 1942, or the extended plot of almost any other game. The player's character has a name and writes letters in each campaign, but they are so short and lacking in purpose that you won't really care.

Multiplayer is not bad, but half of the servers are using old maps from the first CoD. Apparently the new ones aren't very popular. Like the last CoD, the multiplayer maps are all annoyingly named by russian, french, and german cities making it kind of hard to remember what the heck map you wanted to play. But they can't really give them descriptive names for the setting, because then they would all be "bombed out city." You don't have beaches, ships, mountains, etc.

One good thing about the multiplayer is it downloads maps and mods you don't already have, all right from in the game. You don't have to go hunt for files on the internet to join a game. Same as on CoD1.

First off, this review is based only on the Single Player version of Call of Duty 2. I only play Single Player. I don't play Multiplayer. I have played all the Single Player Missions in Call of Duty 2 all the way through. So what do I think after playing Calling of Duty 2? Only this is by far the best "First Person PC Shooter" game out there.

Before I played the full version of Call of Duty 2, I played the Single Player Call of Duty 2 Demo (You played one of the British soldiers against the Germans during the North African campaign in November 1942). I was disappointed in the demo. You can't jump over walls or enter most buildings in the demo. You can't fire the German 88mm guns (4 German artillery guns) in the demo. The Call of Duty 2 demo is linear. I thought the full version of Call of Duty 2 would be the same as the demo. Boy, was I wrong. Do not judge the full version of Call of Duty 2 by what is on the demo or how it is played. First of all, most of the Single Player missions in the full version of Call of Duty 2 are non-linear. Second, you can jump over walls and enter most buildings in the full version. Third, you can take over and fire the German 88mm guns in the full version. You can take different approaches to accomplish different objectives in different missions throughout the full version game. This makes the game very replayable so you can play different missions over and over again and try different approaches to win missions.

The Single Player Missions are divided up so that you play the Russian campaign first (1941-1943), the British campaign next (1942-1944), and the American campaign last (1944-1945). All the Single Player Missions take place in either Europe or North Africa during World War II.

I am really impressed with this game. I just love the new damage/health system. No more looking for medical kits throughout the game. I always thought that in "First Person Shooters" games it was really stupid to waste time looking for a medical kit to try to stay alive. In real war, you don't find medical kits laying all over on the ground.

The graphics are really good and the amount of detail in the missions are unbelievable. For example, the amount of detail put on the German tanks and the German halftracks are the best I have ever seen in PC World War II game. The uniforms and weapons for both Allied and German troops are very detailed. I have never seen more realistic fires burning from vehicles and buildings than in this game. This game has got the most realistic smoke I have ever seen.

Okay, you want realism. Check out all the dead animals (Especially all the dead cows and horses laying around on the ground with flies buzzing around the corpses) and all the dead German and Allied soldiers laying all over the ground.

The sounds in the game are great. The weapons sound real good and so does the voice acting. You can hear the sound of distant gunfire constantly throughout the whole game.

The AI is really good in this game. The German soldiers hide, attack, and retreat when they need to and so do the Allied soldiers. I remember when I threw a grenade at some German soldiers and one of the German soldiers actually picked up the grenade and tossed it back at me. I couldn't believe it.

I read a lot of books about the actual missions that took place during World War II and guess what? The Single Players Missions in the game are the same as the missions that actually took place during World War II. The game developer (Infinity Ward) did a very good job recreating the actual missions from World War II. After playing Call of Duty 2, I would have to say this game deserves the "PC Game of the Year" award. This game shows what real war is about. World War II Veterans would be impressed with this game.

I can't wait until the Call of Duty 2 Expansion Pack or Call of Duty 3 comes out. I can honestly understand now why Call of Duty 2 is one of the main title games to come out for the XBox 360. Call of Duty 2 is a totally awesome game which I would highly recommend to everyone to go out and buy. You won't regret it.

Call of Duty I was definately fun. It combined intense First Person Shooter with an involving mission oriented story arc that kept you glued to your chair and the monitor. The multiplayer aspects were excellent as well with varying mission types a healthy mod community and fun gameplay.

Now we have Call of Duty II. Does it live up to its predecessor? You betcha. Not only have the graphics improved and oddly enough I thought gameplay graphics were better than the intro movie, but the AI and missions have intensified for the Single Player campaign. There wasn't too much vehicle interaction in the game with the exception of riding in a Lorry and driving a Crusader tank in North Africa. However, by the time I had done two missions in a Crusader tank I was ready to get out..hehe.

The Single Player campaigns will take up a bit of your time depending on the difficulty you set it on. Easy setting is a joke and you really have to try to get killed and as you ramp up you have to be very careful and make use of available cover and grenades. Grenades are much more common in Call of Duty 2 and very very useful. On the harder settings those bullets really start to hurt so tossing smoke and fragmentation grenades around is really the only way to go. Sticking your head up above cover will get you dead in a heartbeat on the harder difficulty settings.

Multiplay for Call of Duty II has a very healthy community of gamers. A plethora of servers out there with a variety of different games - Capture the Flag (My favorite), Search and Destroy, Team Deathmatch, Deathmatch, etc.

Overall this is a great game if you are a fan of First Person Shooters or liked the movie Saving Private Ryan or the HBO Mini-series Band of Brothers. You really get into the action and just wait until you storm Point du Hoc.....

It's not radically different from COD 1, but the improvements in graphics, physics and AI make it a great gaming experience. Graphics: Sharper, better shadows and lighting, and more realistic-looking environments--also the explosions, smoke and flames are greatly improved. Physics: bodies twist and fly as the bullets hit them, and explosions launch soldiers into the air, catapulting them backwards with their force. AI: Last night I was playing my first round, and chucked a smoke grenade into a crowded room. After spraying the space with a submachine gun, I crouched in a corner, waiting for the smoke to clear. Out of the shadows, lit from behind, I saw a German soldier creeping up, actually HUNTING for me. It was a chilling sight.

Naturally, I waxed him.

It could just be me, but I think there's a bit more gore. One thing that is totally creepy--if you wound an enemy, they'll struggle to get back on their feet, and many times will pull out their sidearm and try to shoot you as they lie on the floor. Be certain they're dead--administer a coup de grace.

One other big change--recovering from wounds without healthkits. It sounds lame, but it actually makes the flow of the game much smoother. Hiding in a corner, hoping nobody spots you while you recover actually makes the situation more tense...

Well worth the price.

"Call of Duty" lovers will be eagerly awaiting the arrival of another "United Offensive" Expansion pack after finishing this stunning WWII fps. In 2004 the next best single player shooter to "Half-Life 2" was "Call of Duty 1". Needless to say COD2 brings us yet another damn fine sequel effort to rival anything else on the shelf. COD has firmly taken over where "Medal of Honour: Allied Assault" first got our attention in trying to recreate the "Saving Private Ryan" experience for us all. The COD series is built on the same concept as MOH except there is more action, more high-octane moments and a very different type of enemy AI. COD2 has upgraded the enemy and platoon squad AI from COD1 so that your comrades can identify the enemy and instead of scripting each action sequence as in COD1, COD2 depends on AI so that a rerun of any level will play differently although the situations remain the same. COD2 also has a lot more going on in terms of what you can pilot and drive although not freely but as part of the storyline. COD2 retains all the cinematic intensity that its predecessor successfully claimed and even expands on each of the earlier episodes over the course of a four year WWII period to give us Moscow 1941 - Red Army Training, Demolition, Stalingrad 1942 - Repairing the Wire, The Pipeline, Stalingrad 1943 - Downtown Assault, City Hall, Comrade Sniper, El Alamein 1942 - The Diversionary Raid, Hold the Line, Operation Supercharge, El Daba 1942 - The End of the Beginning, Libya 1943 - Crusader Charge, 88 Ridge, Tunisia 1943 - Outnumbered and Outgunned, Retaking Lost Ground, Assault on Matmata, D-Day 1944 - The Battle of Pointe du Hoc, Retreat? We're Advancing in Another Direction, The Silo, Caen 1944 - Prisoners of War, The Crossroads, The Tiger, The Brigade Box, Hill 400 1944 - Approaching Hill 400, Rangers Lead the Way, The Battle for Hill 400 and Germany 1945 - Crossing the Rhine, where you get to play as either a Soviet or a Brit or as a member of the US forces. Missions range from basic training, defending against attacks, counterattacks, planting explosives, repairing cut field wires, contacting HQ via the field phone, disabling Panzer II tanks, crawling through pipelines, taking out enemy snipers, destroying fuel barrel supplies with some of the best explosion effects seen in any game to date, destroying ammo depot supplies, gathering enemy documents, defending lower lines by using close-range weapons and artillery support, clearing out bunkers, radioing in for artillery bombardments, taking a Mosque, driving tanks, holding out for 5 minutes till support arrives, clearing the buildings in the town, sniping the artillery crews from a Silo tower, finding wounded Americans, transporting the wounded, taking a farmhouse and barn, taking out mortar crews and if that is not enough... securing a hill from a German advance. The smoke effects are absolutely photorealistic and have set a new benchmark for graphics quality. The textures might let the game down a small bit, including very blocky building designs or similar house interiors that are repeated at several points in the game but the environments and maps are genuinely war like all the way through and can not be faulted. The enemy AI and your own team AI are much more realistic than COD1 and your team is reliable. If you get too close to the enemy you will engage him in close quarter combat. Although Call of Duty was never meant to be a war simulation, but more of a 1st person war adventure, to be honest, does exactly what it says on the tin. So apart from the staged element, which actually ads to the game, it is more of an experience than a game you will turn to time and time again, however it is worth it for the experience of the single player mission alone. It is also much longer than COD1 and OU, where COD1 had a 1.5 day game span and UO had 3, COD2 will last you for well over a week if you play one mission a day. The pandemonium of war is all here in a spectacular fashion because the story is a winner as you play a mini version of BAND OF BROTHERS and ENEMY AT THE GATES. Like COD1 you even feel loss at the end but for some reason the connection to your comrades in COD1 was a lot stronger because it was more scripted. The AI detracts from that connection a little bit, but I am only cribbing. Although Directx 9 is the standard for all the cutting edge new first person pc shooters, COD2 has been designed around Directx 7 technology. Only the new Geforce 7800 GT cards can seem to handle DX9 quality. If you don't have a very high end machine then selecting DX7 may prove to be the best result and funny enough is probably how COD2 should be played. Test it out to see. If you are looking for a war multiplayer then go for "Battlefield 2" (it is the war simulation that everyone plays for multiplayer) but do not miss COD2 single player! COD has always been a contender for game of the year and COD2 is no exception.

Pros:
- Cinematic gaming.
- Best new war game and a worthy 1st person shooter.
- Awesome war atmosphere.
- Smoky explosions.

Cons:
- Needs a high spec system to run on full settings.

I was never big on WW2 games untill I played Call of Duty. I immediatly loved the game for its intensity and realistic war combat and scnerios and the sequeal is just as intense, if not more intense infact i cant believed it pulled off a rated teen rating because the game is quite violent I guess they had to cut back on the gore unlike BROTHERS IN ARMS which does not cut back on the violence and gore. I have a SONY desktop with a 3.0 ghz motherboard 512 ram and a radeon X800 and I could even get the game to play on a whopping 1600 by 1200 pixels setting. It does lag just a bit JUST A WEE BIT but thats only if im playing on a 1600 setting which most people dont play on. Settings lower than 1600 it runs really smoooooooooooooothee! as long as you have at least 512 mb and a decent graphics card like a 9000 radeon which is like sold for 50 bucks you can play this game on decent settings of 800 or 1024. I recommend an ATI 9250 or an Nvidia FX5200 both of which are around a 100 bucks. Taking it from a guy who thought medal of honer was boring, this game is AWESOME!!!