DO NOT BUY Call of Duty： Modern Warfare II

Hello and welcome back to a new video. So

recently I've been playing the brand new

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, and as an

avid fan of the Call of Duty franchise and

video game series and also military

shooters in general, I just knew I had to

play this game. Unfortunately, so far it's

been kind of disappointing, rather boring,

bland, and uninspired. And might I also

say that it is rather lacking in luster.

So after doing some extensive and vigorous

gameplay testing of this brand new Call of

Duty game on the multiplayer online modes,

I have to say that none of the modes

really bring anything new to the Call of

Duty or even the first-person military

shooter genre at all in general. And as a

pro Call of Duty player who's been playing

the Call of Duty games ever since the

first one ever came out, since I was a

very young teenager, I have to say that

this brand new iteration of Call of Duty

doesn't really bring anything new to the

table. It doesn't really seem like they've

innovated or come up with anything

interesting or original or unique.

Instead, it just feels like they've kind

of copy and pasted other game modes from

games such as Rainbow Six Siege, which I

am also an avid fan of. Having played over

5,000 hours in Rainbow Six Siege, I have

to say that some of the modes in Call of

Duty: Modern Warfare 2 seem like they're

just trying to rip off Rainbow Six Siege.

For example, there's these game modes in

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 such as

rescue the prisoner and protect or defuse

the bomb, or just holding choke points.

Rescuing the Prisoner mode just feels

exactly like Rainbow Six Siege, but

without any of the interesting things that

Rainbow Six Siege has. It just feels like

a really bland, watered-down, diluted

version of Rainbow Six Siege and maybe

even other military shooters. It's very

basic, very bland. It doesn't really bring

anything new in terms of interesting

gadgets or interesting gameplay mechanics.

It's very bog-standard. You just run

around shooting each other with machine

guns. You get some very bland and basic,

unoriginal gadgets like drone strikes or

drones that can fly up and then find

enemies and mark them for your teammates.

But it doesn't really bring anything new.

It's supposed to be called Modern Warfare

2, but there's nothing actually modern

about this warfare. It just feels like the

same kind of warfare you're used to from

the '90s, the 2000s, the 2010s. I don't

really see anything that's modern that is

in this game. One of the things I really

hated about the special gameplay modes,

such as the Rescue the Prisoner mode and

the Protect or Defuse the Bomb modes, is

that you only get one life. Once you've

died, you have to wait until the next

round begins, kind of like in Rainbow Six

Siege. It just feels like they're copying

Rainbow Six Siege at this point, but it's

kind of frustrating because Call of Duty

is supposed to be known as fast-paced

shooting action game where you're not

really supposed to be sneaking around

trying to be tactical, and death isn't

really something that matters much. You

just die and you respawn straight away.

That is what Call of Duty is known as,

but with these special game modes, it

forces you to sit out for the rest of the

round once you've died. And I don't know

why they're doing this. It's like they're

trying to get the same kind of feeling of

intenseness that Rainbow Six Siege has,

but it just makes you feel like you're

frustrated because you want to jump back

into the action, but you're forced to wait

until the next round begins. Now, in my

opinion, there's 2 different kinds of

military shooters. There's small team

squad-based shooters like Rainbow Six,

where it's just 5 versus 5 and it's in a

very small map, a very small area, and

there's like a very cozy, intense

close-quarter combat kind of feeling to

it. And then on the other end of the

spectrum, you get larger-scale military

shooters such as Battlefield, where you've

got huge amounts of players, usually 50

versus 50 or even 100 versus 100 players

in some video games, where you have a big

map and you've got loads of vehicles, and

the main objective is to team up in

different squads and tactically and

strategically take over these different

points using the vehicles and stuff. Now,

Call of Duty doesn't really fall into

either. It's not really a large-scale

shooter, but then it's not really a

small-scale shooter either. It's kind of

like in the middle, and the problem is it

doesn't really do anything very well. It

doesn't really do the whole let's have a

big map with a load of vehicles on it. It

doesn't do large-scale battles well

because it doesn't even have them in the

first place, and even if it did, it would

just be a complete mess because the game

engine that Call of Duty uses is kind of

janky. If you can see by the video

gameplay, obviously my PC is having some

kind of problem because it's not playing

this video footage at very smooth rates.

But even without my recording, even when

just playing the game where it's much

smoother, there seems to be very weird

animations and weird glitchiness and weird

camera shakiness. It gives me a headache

and makes me feel kind of sick. And on the

other end of the spectrum, Call of Duty

doesn't even do the close-quarters, cozy

and small-knit, small teams versus small

teams kind of tactical gameplay very well

either. So it kind of makes you wonder,

why exactly is Call of Duty such a popular

shooting game? It's very bland and boring,

and maybe that's what people like. Maybe

people don't like the gimmicky things like

the big large maps with all the vehicles

in stuff like Battlefield, and maybe they

don't want all of the gimmicky gadgets and

defensive tools that you can find in

Rainbow Six Siege. I personally much

prefer Rainbow Six Siege with all its

different operators that have all unique

machineries and gadgets and abilities that

they can deploy during the mission. And I

prefer the gameplay mechanics of Rainbow

Six. I like the idea of having one team

defend and the other team attack, and the

defending team has to barricade and set up

traps inside of a house. I think that's a

really cool and unique idea that only

Rainbow Six Siege does really well,

manages to pull off. Any other game that

tries to copy this concept either just

does a really terrible job or they get

sued by Ubisoft. And the problem with Call

of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 It doesn't

really have any interesting gimmick. I

guess the whole gimmick to the game is

that it's just like a very bland

run-and-gun shooting action game, but I

don't know why you would choose to play

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 over

something else that's more interesting

like Rainbow Six Siege. So after playing

this game for several hours and trying out

all the different battle modes and levels,

I didn't really like any of the maps. I

thought the maps are very bland and

boring. They do try to have some Rainbow

Six Siege Siege-esque maps where there's

one in Amsterdam and it kind of reminds me

of the bank level in Rainbow Six Siege

where there's like a big building by a big

road and there's police SWAT teams

outside. Well, not exactly SWAT teams,

but SWAT vehicles just parked outside and

you have to go inside the building. But in

comparison to the maps in Rainbow Six

Siege, the maps in Call of Duty Modern

Warfare 2 all kind of fall flat. They're

not very interesting. The level of detail

in the maps are not that great. You can't

really interact with the objects. There's

not really any destructible environments,

and the level of detail in the objects

lying around on tables and stuff like that

is rather poor and not satisfactory to my

standards. I personally don't really see

what the appeal of this video game would

be, and I have no idea what kind of person

would willingly spend £60 on this very

bland and boring multiplayer shooting

game. There's not really anything

interesting that it does. It doesn't bring

anything new or unique or original to the

table. And honestly, I'd rather just play

Rainbow Six Siege or maybe Battlefield if

I wanted a larger-scale military shooter

game. So unfortunately, for these reasons,

I can't really recommend this game, and I

think I'd have to give it a 6.2 out of 10.

Maybe if it comes down in price a little

bit, maybe if it has a 50% or 75%, I might

consider picking it up again. But as is

right now, it's just very bare-bones and

way too expensive for my personal taste.

Thanks for watching and goodbye.