Omg... I really don't like IGN now. They are so biased towards reviews. They gave a 10 for sound on Modern Warfare 2, but BFBC2 was so much more realistic and only got a 9.

They also docked points off this game because it was too short and more linear than the first game. I mean seriously... MW2 was an hour shorter [IGN says the BFBC2 was 6 hours long in campaign], also there's a more open wide world in Battlefield then in Modern Warfare 2. Also they could have said the bad points about Battlefield the same on Modern Warfare 2. Short, didn't hit that "epic" feeling.

And also in the video review, the reviewer talks about how when he joins games, they finish right away. That shit always happens in Modern Warfare 2 and Battlefield has better servers.

Sorry, I'm just mad :|.

funny how according to them DICE almost nailed the presentation but they give it an 8, with a statement like that i'd expect a 9 or 9.5...anyways no big deal...

Ho my god only 8.9, WTF!!!!

Reviews never have any say to me on whether I'm buying a game or not. Sure I would love for the reviews to be positive for a game I want but it really doesn't matter.

I'm glad it's not a bad review though. I actually just saw it on IGN and came to see if it was posted.

Vodka will be pleased.

Call of Duty killer mayhaps?

OMG!!! whats wrong with 8.9? gr8 score IMO somthing not worth moaning about geez...

QFT.

MW2 looks old hat.

BFBC2 isn't quite on par with the graphical strength of KZ2, but I think it's actually nicer to look at it thanks to the varied use of colour and incredible vistas/draw distance.

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2
Review by Mark Bozon

Battlefield: Bad Company 2
Review by Erik Brudvig

Just in case everyone thought IGN was the internet handle of one person and their opinion, it's not. 

Just wanted to give a little more perspective about the Battlefield: Bad Company 2's reviewer to people here.

Think it should of at least gotten a 9, but whatever, I feel like they compared the game to Modern Warfare too much.