AC2 or MW2???

passingthrough

its a tough choice, i have both prequels and enjoyed both. i play online a bit, not an awful lot but maybe on a wet saturday or a few hours during the week so its not totally for the online aspect of it.

anyone got any opinions on my choice??

Jet Black

I've bought the two of them and each has massively improved on the last. I would say whichever one you liked best from the original one's id buy. Assassins creed 2 is single player only. MW2, you could probably get a week out spec ops and single player, the online is excellent thou:-)

Y2J_MUFC

MW2

zero19

MW2 not a fan of AC myself

thenightrider

If you dont play on line id go with AC 2 the first one was great and you would gt alot more play out of it

Dcully

To me it always comes down to which give more game time, MW2 wins hands down with its multiplayer.

tman

Depends on whether you're into multiplayer really...
I never got into the multiplayer side of MW1 (far too much elitism), so haven't bothered with MW2 due to the supposed 6 hour singleplayer campaign.

AC2 is supposed to have a very healthy lifespan in comparison - up to 20 hours just for most of the story missions

Undead

Just get both...problem solved.

Branoic

I got MW2 last week, and will be trading it in for AC2 this week. I enjoy the multiplayer but I'm really a single player gamer. I play games for the story, not for competition. While MW2 was fun while it lasted the lenght of the singleplayer campaign was a joke - breezed through it in two casual sittings and felt ripped off.

TechnoPool

ye but COD has always been geared towards the MP aspect of the Game since the first one really.

Burning Eclipse

Branoic wrote: »

I got MW2 last week, and will be trading it in for AC2 this week. I enjoy the multiplayer but I'm really a single player gamer. I play games for the story, not for competition. While MW2 was fun while it lasted the lenght of the singleplayer campaign was a joke - breezed through it in two casual sittings and felt ripped off.

What about Spec Ops... And what difficulty did you complete it at? It's fine to say you feel ripped off, and it certainly is short, but perhaps you've not seen all the single player component of the game has to offer?

hightower1

Burning Eclipse wrote: »

What about Spec Ops... And what difficulty did you complete it at? It's fine to say you feel ripped off, and it certainly is short, but perhaps you've not seen all the single player component of the game has to offer?

This was an insult of a one player game, 6 hour campaign and spec ops? Sh*t, all the good missions are two player but even so spec ops is another hour at most.
Another developer company cons out with the feeble excuse of on line gaming. I hate on line gaming with a passion as its for competition freaks who feel an insecure need to feel better about themselves by beating others, I dont care if someone is better or worse at something as long as I have fun.

Rockstar did the same with grand theft, lets face it .... it wasn't the game it was meant to be. Every grant theft game was great cause it game ya a huge real living city to play in...PLAY being the operative word..... mad motorbikes, monster trucks, choppers , skydiving.... they leave it out of gta4...seemed strange at the time until now we see all the extra cash they make from releasing "downloadable content" or as I call it...."half making the sequel, not bothering to evolve features from the last game in fact not even including the last games features just so you can include them at a later date for more money content".

Sequels should include everything good from the last game, add more and then evolve the concept. Now we have online gaming thats not the case....until 6 months later and then you can pay another lump of cash for to make the game what it should have been at release.

Developers are using this as a crutch, oh why bother actually making a proper one player game thats WORTH 60euro when we can just say after its the multiplayer that will make it live longer for you. I miss the days when games were one player experiences and multiplayer was an additional feature not the other way around. I miss PROPER ACTUAL GAMES. 6 hours campaign isnt even a days work.

Gta did it, mod2 has done it and I will eat my fictional hat if mass effect wont do it. Its insulting.

donmeister

Have MW2 since last week, got AC2 yesterday, only played abit of it. Both excellent games but has to be MW2 on top because of the ridiculously good online mode.

chrislad

Branoic wrote: »

I got MW2 last week, and will be trading it in for AC2 this week. I enjoy the multiplayer but I'm really a single player gamer. I play games for the story, not for competition. While MW2 was fun while it lasted the lenght of the singleplayer campaign was a joke - breezed through it in two casual sittings and felt ripped off.

Casual!? Of course you breezed through it!!! Went through on Veteran, and while it wasn't exactly a long game (or that difficult, truth be told, compared to COD4 or WAW), it lasted me about 12 hours.

tman

chrislad wrote: »

Casual!? Of course you breezed through it!!! Went through on Veteran, and while it wasn't exactly a long game (or that difficult, truth be told, compared to COD4 or WAW), it lasted me about 12 hours.

I played through MW on normal, and I'll play through MW2 on normal... Some people actually play games for the journey, not the challenge...