http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/08/arts/television/08battle.html

(Tried to figure out how to do a hyper link..cant..sorries..)

Thoughts about the article? Agree? Dissagree?

I find it odd he points to the single player as being better then MW2's single player. I personally enjoyed both..but felt MW2 was more epic.

EDIT: oh so it automatically hyper links? cool.

BC2's single player was definitely NOT better than MW2's.


Nevertheless, BC2 is still the better game.

I liked BC2 better, then MW2, but they were both great games, The sound on BC2 was amazing, in sounds really good in 7.1, If they added destructable everything in MW2 it would be even better, that is where they should go next.

About equal.
As far as the multiplayer goes yes, but the singleplayer in MW2 is way better. Also has a cool co-op mode.

I have to agree. I thought the single player in MW2 was absolutely terrible. It's so short (it took less than 6 hours on Veteran) and it is just a mass of set-pieces that don't blend well or create a good story.

Really? I mean im not knocking your opinion or trying to create a flame war...I liked BF single player as well..and the overall idea of why and how the russian's invade was rather...impossible...but i thought how the missions played through was pretty cool. I felt BC2 story flowed better but some of the music score in mw2 was just awesome and epic...really fit the mood IW was trying to create. 

Still bc2 beats mw2  hands down in multiplayer IMO