Check this out:

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/modernwarfare2?q=modern%20warfare

Metacritc Meta Score: 8.9

User score: 1.4 (as of this moment).

Seriously people.  WTF?  You have collectively shown yourself to not know a blasted clue about games, and care to throw out all sane discernment over an axe to grind.

And when a game gets a lower user rating than Big Rigs, we have a problem:

http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/bigrigsovertheroadracing?q=big%20rigs

Come on, 3.5 out of 10 there, while MW2 is less than a 2?

It's wrong to voice your opinion instead of being a sheep and buying in to the hype?

deserved, I hope it gets lower.

It has multiplayer that has less features than most mid '90s games.

Also a single-player worse than most modern games. I don't know why but 1.4 seems like a too high a score for this waste of CDs that they call a game.

Those are not real opinions. It's frustration.

The game obviously does not deserve such a low score and people are blinded by their emotions (which is not very objective).

And look at this supposedly "professional" review:

http://www.gamearena.com.au/pc/games/title/modern-warfare-2/reviews.php?id=5033868

ahah it's just pathetic.

after the way they treated PC gamers with this crap plus its unimpressive and clearly rushed single player i say those 1.5's are justified

The same argument can just as easily be made for all the high scores - people are just be blinded by the hype (or fat cheques from Activision).

Please tell me how this is a good game deserving of a more than 5. I'll say hwhy it doesn't.

Single-player is lackluster comapred to modern games, it's worse than the first MW.

Multi-player is just shitty, period, it's jsut crap and nearly unplayable.

What's your reason for scoring it highly?

And in this thread is people indicating that it is justified to consider MW2 on the PC worse than Big Rigs.  I can understand venting frustration and so on.  But to end up being totally off-base, is absurd to me.