Call of Duty 2 Gets 8.8 from Gamespot

[The Iron Weasel]

Gamespot's review of Call Of Duty 2 (http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/callofduty2/review.html) is up.

Call of Duty 2 is just about everything you would hope for and expect from the sequel to one of the most successful World War II shooters of all time. Its varied campaign, excellent sound and gameplay design, and generally good AI make it a worthy successor to the original. At the same time, though, it's still a World War II shooter, and if you've grown weary of them, then Call of Duty 2's lack of new material might turn you away. It can also be murderous on your computer if you have modest hardware. What Call of Duty 2 does do well is nail down just about all aspects that define an ideal first-person shooter. If you liked the original and have been thirsting for more, Call of Duty 2 will definitely deliver that.
I can agree with most of what was said, but I think they gave the graphics way to low. Its easily on par with the best of the best in terms of graphics.

Having seen their screenshots which deserve an 8 and compared them to when I played the demo on my PC, the latter looked way better.

[F3nyx]

That link goes to the second page of the review.

I was disappointed that they didn't add some level of ragdoll physics. There's really no excuse anymore for having to watch the same death animations over and over.

[The Iron Weasel]

That link goes to the second page of the review.

I was disappointed that they didn't add some level of ragdoll physics. There's really no excuse anymore for having to watch the same death animations over and over.

In some games it really, really, really gets to me, but I didn't even notice in the demo.

[Paltry]

it got a 10 for graphics

[The Iron Weasel]

No, it got a 10 for sound, and an 8 for graphics.

[sTubbs]

it got a 10 for graphics

No, it got an 8. It got a 10 for sound. While GameSpot is usally a bit tougher than other sites when it comes to visuals, and 8 is low compared to what I have read on other sites. The general consensus there is that this easily compares to the other top notch games on the market, and may even be the best looking yet.

[icronic]

it got a 10 for graphics

That was sound you were looking at, it got 8 for graphics.

It's kind of hard to judge though. After playing the demo, I thought the environment looked great, and all the explosions and especially the smoke, but the weapon models and the player models were pretty bad, and the animation was just god aweful. So 8 kind of seems fair to me.

Either way if this game manages to continue the kind of insanity that the first had, it's bound to be incredibly fun.

[Atorak]

Wait, wait...

What did it get for graphics?

[The Iron Weasel]

I dunno i thought the player models were awesome, and the weapon models were better then any other ww2 game to date. The animations wern't that good though.

[Chagrinful]

Oh so they enjoyed the Halo style health in the WW2 game, alright thats really credible, even PC gamer did a lil glup this is shit type thing in their preview, COME THE FUCK OFF IT HALO STYLE SHIT IN A WW2 FPS UTTER BULLSHIT! King Kong maybe nobody will play that POS anyway but in a WW2 FPS thats just fucktarded.

[The Iron Weasel]

Look at the screens, it looks like they played at 1024x768 with no AA, and on the dx7 mode.

[The Iron Weasel]

Oh so they enjoyed the Halo style health in the WW2 game, alright thats really credible, even PC gamer did a lil glup this is shit type thing in their preview, COME THE FUCK OFF IT HALO STYLE SHIT IN A WW2 FPS UTTER BULLSHIT! King Kong maybe nobody will play that POS anyway but in a WW2 FPS thats just fucktarded.

When I first heard about it, I thought that it was going to drive me nuts. Like get my money back or die nuts. But when I tried the demo, didn't bother me. I dunno maybe I was psychologiaclly prepared.

[sTubbs]

Look at the screens, it looks like they played at 1024x768 with no AA, and on the dx7 mode.

I was thinking the same thing. That is what I would expect the game to look like if they had forced it on to the XBOX. Everything looks flat and the aliasing is downright atrocious.

[The Iron Weasel]

I was thinking the same thing. That is what I would expect the game to look like if they had forced it on to the XBOX. Everything looks flat and the aliasing is downright atrocious.

Yeah something is definatly not right there.

[Chagrinful]

I was thinking the same thing. That is what I would expect the game to look like if they had forced it on to the XBOX. Everything looks flat and the aliasing is downright atrocious.

Thats the smell of a freshly ass raped Console Port to a PC game that we'll all grow to LOVE when the Xbox 360 get fully underway.

[The Iron Weasel]

Dude, I've played the demo on my pc, and it look WAY, WAY, WAY, better then that.

[MSUStud911]

The PC demo is amazing, even on medium. I dunno about those screenshots, but the game it motion is very impressive.

[sTubbs]

Thats the smell of a freshly ass raped Console Port to a PC game that we'll all grow to LOVE when the Xbox 360 get fully underway.

I do not really understand what you are saying. Are you saying that the game looks bad on the PC because of the 360? Or are you saying that 360 version will look better? In any case either argument is moot, as those screens should look better on a reasonable PC. The screen caps that other sites have taken are far more reasonable.


EDIT: NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! Why does the guy above me have an avatar photo? I thought the consensus was to leave EvAV as clean as possible! One of the nicest things about coming here is that it is easy on the eyes.

[zeeeg]

I believe they gave the graphics a lower score because of framerate issues on systems which should be plenty capable. That's what I understand from actually reading the review anyway.

[The Iron Weasel]

I believe they gave the graphics a lower score because of framerate issues on systems which should be plenty capable. That's what I understand from actually reading the review anyway.

Then F.E.A.R. should have gotten a 6 for its graphics, tonnes of people have framerate issues with that game.

[Gpig]

Yeah, the Iron Weasle is right about how if they lowered the graphics score due to how it runs on lower systems it would have lowered FEAR tremendously. I thought the Call of Duty 2 demo looked almost as good as FEAR(or as good, they're kind of different). I thought both looked gorgeous. Speaking of that, playing Quake 4 feels good. It feels good to be playing a game that doesn't suck using the Doom 3 engine.

All of these games are only good on great systems though. I would pass on all 3 if I didn't have a great computer.

[Liquidize105]

FEAR 6 for graphics? Are you kidding? A ton of people are having cd protection problems, but the game runs well.

[Morrolan]

Oh so they enjoyed the Halo style health in the WW2 game, alright thats really credible, even PC gamer did a lil glup this is shit type thing in their preview, COME THE FUCK OFF IT HALO STYLE SHIT IN A WW2 FPS UTTER BULLSHIT! King Kong maybe nobody will play that POS anyway but in a WW2 FPS thats just fucktarded.
Like fingernails on a chalkboard... oh lord...

[The Iron Weasel]

FEAR 6 for graphics? Are you kidding? A ton of people are having cd protection problems, but the game runs well.

The Cd protection is causing performance problems to my knowledge. Also I was exaggerating.

[F3nyx]

Thats the smell of a freshly ass raped Console Port to a PC game that we'll all grow to LOVE when the Xbox 360 get fully underway.That's odd... I don't smell anything except troll.

[Liquidize105]

The Cd protection is causing performance problems to my knowledge. Also I was exaggerating.
From what I know, the "problems" are not in performance, but actually starting the game and playing it for an extended length of time without having it freeze up/crash the system.

My feeling is that COD2 has too much bump mapping, to the point of distraction and disbelief. Tossing in a ton of shaders doesn't necessarily make it better.

[The Iron Weasel]

Well I beat the game without any crashes, and it ran well, for the most part. But at some points it was just plain bad (perfomance wise, the game was phenominal).

My feeling is that COD2 has too much bump mapping, to the point of distraction and disbelief. Tossing in a ton of shaders doesn't necessarily make it better.

Did you notice that there is almost no bump mapping in their screenshots?

[Liquidize105]

Well I beat the game without any crashes, and it ran well, for the most part. But at some points it was just plain bad (perfomance wise, the game was phenominal).



Did you notice that there is almost no bump mapping in their screenshots?

What do you mean by bad? Does it chug, split, turn into a slide show? Have you tried turning down some settings and re-trying those parts? It could be the game or your system. It's a new release after all with a lot of particle effects.

As for gamespot, I can't view their screenshots, no matter which brower I use. I don't know why.

[The Iron Weasel]

What do you mean by bad? Does it chug, split, turn into a slide show? Have you tried turning down some settings and re-trying those parts? It could be the game or your system. It's a cutting edge game.

As for gamespot, I can't view their screenshots, no matter which brower I use. I don't know why.

Dude, I have a AMD Athlon 64 FX-57, a Nvidia 7800 GTX, and 2 gigs of Corsair TwinX gaming ram...i dont think its my system. And yeah I fiddled with some of the settings and it was fixed for a bit. Also Nvidia released some new drivers, and I haven't played F.E.A.R. since i beat it (before the drivers were released)

[Lactose]

I dig the user reviews :) (9.4 average so far).

I've pretty much accepted that CoD2 (on PC) is going to score much higher with gamers than reviewers. Oh well, better than the other way around I guess.

I swear the text of the reviews is some of the most positive I've seen, yet the scores are mediocre.

[The Iron Weasel]

I dig the user reviews :) (9.4 average so far).

I've pretty much accepted that CoD2 (on PC) is going to score much higher with gamers than reviewers. Oh well, better than the other way around I guess.

I swear the text of the reviews is some of the most positive I've seen, yet the scores are mediocre.

Well, i wouldnt call a 8.8 a mediocre score. But gamespot is harsher then most on reviews.

[Liquidize105]

8.8 is a good score for a sequel.

I would say that most sites are too lenient. GS sticks to the traditional 8 (good game, a few a year), 9 (great game, once in a while), and perfect 10 (never).

[Twigz'N'Berries]

I respect everyone's opinion on the issue of the graphics. To each his own and some people are sticklers for every detail.

However, I got to play it at the IGN Live show. The techs at Best Buy had set up several gaming rigs with 42' inch HDs and surround sound systems. The graphics on that game was sick!! I assure you, the game looks gorgeous, but more importantly plays great. I can't say I know how good the PC version looks, but I know I'm not dissapointed by them at all on the Xbox 360. CoD2 was easily the most popular game at the show. It overshadowed Shadow of the Colossus which was directly across from it.
NFS looked ok. It looked slightly better than current gen systems, but lacked traffic on the road. I mean, there were barely 1 or 2 cars (basically traffic) on the road with the other 3 cars. Tony Hawk was a joke. Slightly improved textures and better framerates. The Best Buy guys had trouble finding people to play it.

Oh, the Xbox 360 controller is very light and very accessible. They did a hell of a job on it. Its amazing that it looks pretty much the same, but handles so differently.

[Morratut]

A Halo style health bar in a WW2 fps? That is fucking stupid.

I haven't played this yet but i imagine it would get on my nerves :(

[H.Bogard]

The graphics in this game are OK....compare them to F.E.A.R. and the other next generation titles coming out and you'll see what gamespot means.
On the other hand , I TOTALLY disagree with the fucktards complaining that the game is a system hog, it runs on a goddamn geforce TI for fucks sake!

[Fyd]

look at the screens of the review, its like they have been playing without AA, see the sniper screen....

[Malovech]

Ok a simple question, can I turn off the idiotic Halo 2 healing bs?

[drakkarim]

if i've grown weary of ANYthing its the same old terrorists/robbers vs US/police shit games i see all over.

[Paltry]

That was sound you were looking at, it got 8 for graphics.

oh...

Oh so they enjoyed the Halo style health in the WW2 game, alright thats really credible, even PC gamer did a lil glup this is shit type thing in their preview, COME THE FUCK OFF IT HALO STYLE SHIT IN A WW2 FPS UTTER BULLSHIT! King Kong maybe nobody will play that POS anyway but in a WW2 FPS thats just fucktarded.

Dude, its not any more fucktarded than health packs. Neither system makes any fucking sense but the halo style lends itself to smoother less disjointed style of play. And honestly, we've all been using health packs since wolf 3d, isnt it about time we got a taste of somin new.

[Mr.Green]

Halo's health system is the best. EVAR! Suck it down heathens! http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y43/christianchr/Emoticons_2/worthy.gif

[fitbabits]

Wait, wait...

What did it get for graphics?
:D Fucking classic!

[The Iron Weasel]

The graphics in this game are OK....compare them to F.E.A.R. and the other next generation titles coming out and you'll see what gamespot means.
On the other hand , I TOTALLY disagree with the fucktards complaining that the game is a system hog, it runs on a goddamn geforce TI for fucks sake!

The games graphics are easily on par with F.E.A.R., and Half-Life 2 from what I saw.

[Syrinx]

What do you mean by bad? Does it chug, split, turn into a slide show? Have you tried turning down some settings and re-trying those parts? It could be the game or your system. It's a new release after all with a lot of particle effects.


I had major slideshow issues on FEAR with certain outside levels. I'm also pretty sure it wasn't my system either (FX-53 / X800XT). Indoors, it ran great.

[F3nyx]

The games graphics are easily on par with F.E.A.R., and Half-Life 2 from what I saw.I'm pretty sure that COD 2 doesn't have anywhere near the level of lighting effects in FEAR. As far as I know there's no dynamic soft shadows in COD 2, and very little normal/specularity mapping on environment textures.

[The Iron Weasel]

I'm pretty sure that COD 2 doesn't have anywhere near the level of lighting effects in FEAR. As far as I know there's no dynamic soft shadows in COD 2, and very little normal/specularity mapping on environment textures.

CoD 2, doesn't have the lighting no. But there is tonnes of normal mapping and such.

[Lactose]

I'm pretty sure that COD 2 doesn't have anywhere near the level of lighting effects in FEAR. As far as I know there's no dynamic soft shadows in COD 2, and very little normal/specularity mapping on environment textures.

The characters and vehicles cast nice soft shadows, you can see them in some of the screenshots. Also, most everything is normal/specular mapped (some even have gloss maps).

Ok a simple question, can I turn off the idiotic Halo 2 healing bs?

You should try the demo before you ask. I haven't seen any complaints about it in demo-response threads.

[The Iron Weasel]

I think that the Halo style health is dumb in theory, but works fairly well in practice. But at least in Halo it made sense because your shields were recharging. This its like your wolverine waiting for your wounds to heal.

[Achilles]

A Halo style health bar in a WW2 fps? That is fucking stupid.

I haven't played this yet but i imagine it would get on my nerves :(First of all there isn't a health bar. For everyone that really likes the 100%-0% health bar thing, this solves several problems. First having to pick up med-kits, which really is dumb if you think about it and goes back to the days of power-ups. Second is ending up with a save at 10% health in a tough situation, so the next time you're shot you're killed for the foreseeable future. Third is having to look down at the UI. You don't in CoD 2, you know when you're about to be killed, and you either die or back off and wait. No health management is a good thing to me, especially in a game that's trying for fluid and exciting gameplay.