User Reviews (21 - 31 of 110)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

It's as if you're right there

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 4 / 5
Date: June 04, 2006
Author: Amazon User

Call of Duty 2 is the game to get if you want to be put into the shoes of an average soldier in WWII. Either advancing with your fellow comrades-in-arms in a giant charge against blazing machine guns or fleeing down an alley in Africa with your squad-mates firing a few quick shots behind you to slow the oncoming German wave, the experience is yours. The battle of Pointe Du Hoc is probably one of the most notable missions, and is one that throws you onto the beaches of Normandy, surrounded by chaos and death, climbing up the cliffs only to meet machine gun fire. Once at the top of the cliff, you really get a sense of the enormity of the battle: pill boxes blazing, small skirmishes happening in the trenches that crisscross the land, pockets of German soldiers firing into the chaos, and all the while more rangers fight to survive on their way from the beaches to the battle. This is just one of many missions for you to take on. In this game you feel like a real team player. You are one person in many, fighting along side your allies; a fellow soldier may have just saved your life only to get shot down himself. This reality is the greatest strength of Call of Duty 2 (or COD2), and is worth a good deal.

The atmosphere of the game is amazing, but its game play is another story. In general, it is solid, although there are a few annoyances. There is nothing really revolutionary about the game play itself. The enemy and ally AI in the game works well, and the play against it is fairly smooth most of the time. The flaws here are most obvious when you fight against the AI in an open courtyard, or in a forest setting. They will run to a piece of cover and almost always stay behind it for the duration of the engagement, poking their heads out to fire a few shots. This makes for some pretty boring battles as you sit behind your cover, poke your head out the side, aim at their cover, and shoot when they pop out. The good news is that besides this, the AI is believable and smart, making for a good adversary.

One innovative thing about the game play in COD2 is the health system. Now, instead of having a bar of health, you have what you could call "rechargeable health". Basically, if you get hit too much in a certain period of time, you'll become injured, and the screen will start flashing red. If you continue to get shot, you'll die. If you get under cover for a few seconds you'll recover, and are back to full health. Some people may feel this system is ridiculous, others may feel it is the best thing that ever happened. I feel that the best system would be something in the middle, as having a static health bar is unrealistic. A wound can't stay exactly the same; it's either going to get worse or better. This new system isn't realistic either, though, as a few seconds after being shot a few times, you can be good as new.

What gets in the way of the reality of play is the occasional "Rambo effect". Enemy soldiers can go down in only a few hits, and when encountering a huge swarm of the enemy, you have the ability to mow them down as they approach. Other times you'll hide behind cover and pick off masses of enemies before they reach your position. So enroute to an objective, you, a "normal soldier", can kill an astounding number of the enemy. This does take away a bit from the mood of the game at times, although the overall atmosphere is still most definitely there.

This is a great game to get if you like WWII, fighting alongside allies, and being immersed in full-scale battles. Those things are by far its strong points. However, if you're just looking for a great FPS game without regard for realism it might be better to stick with something like FEAR.

A CoD2 Multiplayer Commander's View

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 4 / 5
Date: November 18, 2006
Author: Amazon User

Having played multiplayer online FPS game for a number of years I think I can honestly say this is one of the best FPS games I have ever played. Not only does it have wonderful graphics but from a system admin's view it just keeps getting better. With all of the custom maps and custom mods available you cannot get bored with this game. In multiplayer mode it is fast paced and will keep you playing for hours.

Very fun game that stays true to "Call of Duty" with new surprises.

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 3 / 3
Date: November 25, 2005
Author: Amazon User

A few years ago, the original "Call of Duty" was released to great reviews and seemingly redefined the entire World War 2 First-Person shooter genre.

Fast-forward a few years, and after a great expansion ("United Offensive"), we have ourselves a sequel - Call of Duty 2.

The first thing you'll probably notice in Call of Duty 2 is the graphical improvement made over the original game. Although it's not an absolutely amazing leap, there are many moments and graphical improvements in the game that will really make your jaw drop. As an example, smoke effects in this game look extremely realistic - much better than any other game has managed to pull off. In certain settings, the lighting on the German soldiers is also extraordinary and gives a lifelike appearance that has caused me to gaze in awe more than once. This game does require a powerful machine to run, however, so if you've got a below-average PC, I'd heavily recommend a hefty upgrade before attempting to play this game.

The sounds themselves are also quite amazing. Throughout the levels, the crackle and popping of gunfire can be heard from every direction, and the weapon sounds themselves are also improved.

Although Call of Duty 2 uses very similar mission design and concept, the game does have a few unique features that make it stand out from the original.

For one, the single-player missions are as intense as ever, but many now give the option of several paths in order to make it to a particular objective. As an example: Do you fire back at a machine-gunner stationed inside of a house, or do you look for another way around - possibly a way to flank him? It's mission design like this that really makes this game enjoyable.

Often times, you'll be faced with some crazy objectives as well. Whether it be fending off a huge German counter-attack or planting sticky bombs on a deadly-and-moving Panzer, the pace is frenzied and the battlefield seems very lifelike.

Another new feature on this game is the fact that there is no longer a health meter. Now, instead, when you are badly injured the screen will begin to pulsate with a red outline; this gives you a warning that basically lets you know that if you take any more hits, you'll likely be killed. If you successfully find cover and hide for a few seconds, the pulsation will end and you'll be back to normal. This may sound like a concept borrowed from several console titles (Halo, for example), but don't let this "health regeneration" nonsense fool you - this game is very challenging, and you will find yourself in deadly situations more often than not. I can't even count the number of times I've been caught off guard and been forced to find cover in such a frenzy that I nearly fell out of my chair - and that's not counting the number of times that I've failed to find cover and, well... you get the picture.

The campaign itself allows you to play as the Russians in their defense of Stalingrad, the British in their assault on the German positions in the African desert, and the Americans in the Normany invasion and onwards.

The missions themselves are fairly similar in that they all require you to participate in huge firefight after huge firefight, but there is some variation in between that really sets the game apart and keeps you from getting too bored. For example, in the British campaign, at one point you'll be commanding a tank (yes, actually behind the controls), and firing upon German Panzer tanks as you and your squad attempt to get close enough to them so that their more powerful armor and weaponry will have a tough time defending agains the faster, weaker British tanks. This was truly an exhilarating experience and helped set the British campaign apart.

Although the campaign doesn't take very long to beat, it offers tons of fun, and since the A.I. will do nearly everything in their power to stop you (grenades, taking cover, you name it!), there is nearly endless replay value for every level in the game.

Besides the single-player portion of the game, there is also a fairly decent multiplayer portion to have fun with as well.

If you've ever played Multiplayer on the original Call of Duty, then you should know what to expect coming into this game. The average game modes are there (Deathmatch, Team Deathmatch, Capture the Flag) along with a few other modes, so there is still a great amount of fun to be had here - whether it be before, after, or even during your progress in the campaign.

However, multiplayer is also where this game really disappointed me. As any original Call of Duty player should know, the expansion to the original, "United Offensive", brought vehicles into multiplayer and completely changed the way the game was played. The vehicles themselves really offered something new and balanced the game like never before - it was definitely a huge step from Call of Duty. In this game, though, vehicles are no longer to be found, and the few maps available are fairly small in size. I feel that the developers could have put in a bit more work here to put out some bigger maps and easily put some vehicles into the mix. After all, the campaign allows full control over tanks, so why can't multiplayer allow the same?

Despite the short campaign and the fairly feature-limited multiplayer, however, this game is still very enjoyable and should please any fan of the World War 2 genre or even of the original Call of Duty.

If you are looking for a new, great World War 2 shooter for PC (not that there has been a shortage of them), look no further than Call of Duty 2.

Not since Counter Strike

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 3 / 3
Date: December 14, 2005
Author: Amazon User

This game, like most first person shooters of this genre are gradually becoming geared more towards the multiplayer experience. So those that have only played the single player portion of the game are missing out on half of the experience. I have to say that this game reminds me of an evolved Counter Strike. Fast paced, fast turnover, and intense multiplayer action. The fact that you don't have to rely on goofy health packs keeps the game fast paced. Everything you want in a multiplayer shoot'em up is here. Lots of nooks and crannies for campers to hide...but not for long. The maps are easy to get quickly acquainted with and you don't spend half your time walking or trying to hitch a ride to the hot zone like in Battlefield 2. The gun responses are fantastic with the sniper rifle having scope drift and the M1 Garand cartridge making a clang when the cartridge pops out. Nice touches! Let me just say, if you are deciding between Call of Duty 2 and Battlefield 2 and you enjoyed Counter Strike more so than Battlefield 1942, then this is your game. Buy with confidence.

Super

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 3 / 3
Date: January 08, 2006
Author: Amazon User

Though I had to buy a new Video card to play this (GeForce 6600 for DDR) I must say it was worth it. The graphics on this game are perhaps the best I've ever seen. Everything looks amazingly real. The people, the buildings, tanks, water, smoke etc. Everything is just almost to real at times.

The Sound to is amazing and should play out fine on any half decent sound card. You should not have to upgrade sound at all.

There are only a few complaints I have. 1: It's just to short. There are Ten Campaigns to go through and each is about 20 to 45 minutes long. Some longer than others. There should have been a much more detailed and lengthy campaign here. For instance: The Normandy invasion I was a bit bummed about because one of the major battles took place on the beach. I knew a WW2 vet and he was a medic. He told me that when medics saw A soldier go down they took the Soldiers helmet because Nazi's targeted the red Cross on the Medics Helmet. The point being, the landing on the Beach was a huge part of the war, yet the game people had you land by the Cliff's and scale up there which took two seconds. Not all that realistic.

2: I was disappointed that after the final American Campaign the game was done. Sure you had different levels to try. The hardest being nearly impossible *heh* but what happened to Japan guys?! *Chuckles* Not only was the Beach landing left out, there were no Japanese battles? How many Islands did we have to land on and fight amongst Jungles? A few for sure. That would be awicked Campaign right there. And what about the Infamous Sea Battles with the Japanese? There surely could be a PT boat campaign or a Battleship Campaign or what about the infamous air battles?!

And the Online part needs far more options and I'd like to see the glass in windows and lightposts get blown out when you shoot them or doors fly open when you bash them with the butt of a rifle.

Now don't get me wrong by the critism. The fact is, I've never played a game quite so realistic or fun in my life and i'm nearly 40. It's just there is ahuge potential for so much more here. Perhaps it is all in the works but if not PUT it in the works.

Oh and for more tips game makers of CoD2? You can capitalize and Make A Civil War version and a Revolutionary War version. As I said, there is a tremendous potential here and I look forward to seeing what you do with it.

Worth the single player game

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 3 / 3
Date: February 24, 2006
Author: Amazon User

Game is loads of fun just like its COD. Games play is identical to COD graphics and sound has taken a step up. I really like the single player version of this game. I am a BF2 and BFSF multiplayer gamer and found COD2 has a different type of play that is really hard for me. A lot of my friends love. I just like the single player mode. Game play is great.

Too Much of a Good Thing

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 3 / 3
Date: April 17, 2006
Author: Amazon User

When I take each level by itself, this is an awesome FPS. Great graphics and gameplay that is truly impressive, as has already been stated in other reviews here. On the basis of each level on its own I would have given this game five stars. But for me, as a complete game, there is still something missing in the overall fun quotient of this effort.

If you enjoy being emersed in a constant and frantic slugfest where your mere survival is as important and often MORE important than any missions themselves, then you'll be well pleased with COD2. That's the way combat is. But admittedly, I miss less frantic levels such as the dam and battleship missions in COD and the more personal interactions with Capt Foley, Sgt Moody and Capt price in both COD one and the Expansion pack. On COD2 the inclusion of Capt Price again comes across to me as a mere after thought. Hell, he was killed during the battleship mission on COD!

And I can't help but compare how fun Medal of Honor Allied Assault was, and still is, with its variety of missions, personal interaction and superlative music score.

I think the omission of health packs in favor of rejuvenation is a plus to this game but I would prefer to save where I want to rather than where the programming decides it should be. Having to replay a segment over and over again when you are "killed" gets very annoying. But on a plus side there are always plenty of cool weapons laying around to trade with as well as lots of ammo. And unlike previous games if you can lay your mits on an MG-42 you can really tear up some infantry and turf! Lots of fun!

Overall, a little more variety would have taken COD2 over the top and won five stars from me.

The best WW2 FPS makes a great comeback...

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 3 / 3
Date: July 26, 2006
Author: Amazon User

COD1 and COD: United Offensive were fun, but the graphics were'nt great (they were for they're time) and it seemed as though winter would never end. Not in COD2, in COD2 we get to fight in Africa and on the beaches of Normandy at Point Du Hoc, not to mention some great new voice work and amazing, picture realistic, graphics. You can't say this doesn't deserve to be a sequel because the game is so different from the original that if it had a different name I wouldn't know it was related to COD1.

I have an X700 PRO and the graphics on this game are so undemanding that I can run the game on max settings and get no lag.

Plus the game sounds great and the new voice clips add a new demension to the game that COD1 never had. The AI seem to be almost human in they're responses.

I've played this game 3 times through and I'll never get tired of it, no one can touch Infinity Ward when it comes to WWII FPS games.

It's just too bad that COD3 is only being released on console.

where do i start...

4 Rating: 4, Useful: 5 / 8
Date: December 07, 2005
Author: Amazon User

i'm a HUGE cod fan. i've played call of duty: united offensive. till i was virtually comatose :D anyway.. i was very excited about COD 2. in a way it's a disappointment and in a way it's not. simply put, it's a very different game from UO. UO is one of the top video games ever made, due to its realism and excitement. it makes you feel like you're really in a war. i never feel like i'm really in a war in COD 2. i feel like i'm playing an improved version of counterstrike: source. is that a bad thing? no. fun is fun is fun. all i care about really is having fun. how is this game different? well.. the pace is fast. someone called this game "arcade," that's a good description. there's less "camping" out, less strategy, and more running around quickly, less carefulness about it altogether. the graphics are great and the game runs much smoother than UO which is a big positive. i had lots of problems running the intensive video of UO.. not with this one! also the maps are MUCH smaller. every single multiplayer map here is tiny. personally i think that's a good thing because i hated the boring tank maps in UO. also smaller maps mean MORE ACTION!!! there's none of the boring walking around for 15 hours with no action like in UO. i literally think i spent more time WALKING in UO than actually fighting!! what's the point of that? the point of a game is action! still, this isn't 100% a good thing. the maps need to be bigger, because smaller maps skew the action towards automatic weapons instead of rifles and sniper rifles. i used rifles a lot in UO.. in this game, it's like what's the point? you can do anything you need with an mp44 or bren, and you'll use the "room clearing" weapons (sten, tommy gun) a lot too. there's also a new weapon, the trench gun (known as a shotty or shotgun) that you have to run up to people fast and close with and shoot them once to kill them. a lot of people hate this weapon and some servers ban it (getting killed by them out of nowhere sucks) but it can be pretty fun too. no artillery, no vehicles, and no set spawn points to "rape" are VERY VERY VERY good improvements. instead of dealing with a stupid tank or getting blown up the second you step inside one, you have control of your destiny, the way COD always should have been. also another feature i love is voice chat. you don't need teamspeak software, you simply get a headset, plug it in and you can talk with voice to your teammates. only a few people use this, but i find it to be very fun. no more typing out messages to your team! just say it and keep moving! other things.. some things about cod 2 are silly. skulls to indicate where an enemy is? red dots showing where an enemy is? that's kind of dumb, but luckily servers are editing these options. if you hop on any server, it's likely they won't have these things. this game is kind of the antithethis of UO where everyone camped... you can't camp much in this game. this means you can move around with more confidence instead of looking at every corner for campers every time you move. also less rifles means you get killed less with long-range enemies. is this game as good as UO? no. but with the improvements over the annoying aspects of UO, i've played ONLY cod 2 ever since! i tried to play UO for a little bit and couldn't stand it. a better game would be one where elements of cod 2 and UO are blended together, but until then, this is simply a fun, fast-paced action game. i was unimpressed with the single player, but who gets cod for the single player??? it's all about playing against real human beings. things i forgot.. the way cod made the grenades in this game was DUMB. an indicator tells you where it's going to explode, making nade kills virtually impossible. but servers have taken this indicator option away too, and made it where you can "cook" (prime) nades, which makes nades much much more fun. friendly fire is much less fun because there's so much crowding and small maps that it makes it more of a nuisance sometimes than a good thing. you'll end up having to check your compass for friendlies before you throw a grenade. still it's not too bad.

one more note: all the idiot moderators who don't want people cussing need to get a life. they have no problem with kids playing a violent game where you kill 30 people in one match, but they want to have control over the players, telling them they can't use "naughty" words and kicking them if they question the idiot's authority. if you think words are worse than violence, you have a serious mental problem and need to be locked up. i want to play a game, not have some moron tell me what to do like i'm still in school. long live profanity!!!! however i have noticed more friendliness and cussing in COD 2 which is great. so many jerks play UO... cod 2 is a game for "the people." enjoy! :)

edit - i use rifle a lot in this game now (except on certain maps such as burgundy). there is a pretty steep learning curve with the rifle, but once you get used to it, it's a lot of fun. as in UO, if you're using rifle or sniper rifle, it helps a lot to pick up an mp44 or short range weapon for close combat). there's also a decent amount of room to use the sniper rifle (depending on the layout of the map). sadly, there is still an extremely limited number of maps in COD 2 as of august 2006 (though there are some custom maps on many servers), but it's a VERY addicting game nonetheless.

It is pretty but annoying and sometimes aggravating.

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 5 / 9
Date: May 23, 2006
Author: Amazon User

Here is an honest review from someone who is above the age of 20 and has played games since Pong was introduced.

First off, it is pretty and graphics are spectacular. The sound is nice and the added effects make the game a pretty sight.

Now the bad.

1st off, the AI in this game borders on retarded. Your squad members are of no help and Activision has not solved the problem with them getting in your way and/or watching you fight as they sit back and wait. It as if they are enjoying the show.

2nd, the missions are set in a way that you have to follow a selected path with no variations whatsoever. It would be as if the path should be marked with a glowing light. You cannot find a better angle of attack or anything you have to go where it wants you too.

3rd, grenades come from NOWHERE forcing you to run, sometimes you have nowhere to go and you get killed, sometimes the grenades come from a ghost or one of the crates or gas cans because there is no one there.

Not being able to save is the worst feature in the game. The selected stop points are ok, but sometimes they are frustrating to sit and work with your moronic squad mates, killing all of the germans by yourself and having to die because of a ghost throwing a grenade and having to do it all over again.

If Activision would fix that moronic part of the game and allow you to go anywhere you want it would be perfect, but it is fun if you can tolerate the many aggravations of the game.

I have had to walk away from it several times. The lack of health packs makes it annoying and sometimes aggravating since your squad mates are of no help and finding a hiding spot is sometimes impossible when as soon as you try and catch your breath, a grenade comes from nowhere.

If they come out with a call of duty 3, they have to fix these issues, or I am saving 50 bucks.

If you are looking for a fun game, this would be it, if you can handle all of the shortcomings of it. Be ready to test your blood pressure and aggravation level.

Do not get me wrong, I find it sometimes fun, but I find myself having to walk away from it alot more than I want too and it takes away from the enjoyment level.

Call of Duty 1 is much more enjoyable and a little easier in my opinion.

Review Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next 

Actions