Call of Duty 2 PC

User Score
8.4

Generally favorable reviews- based on 628 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 31 out of 628
Buy On

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jul 12, 2011
    10
    The best Call Of Duty and World War 2 game that I've ever played! Very immersive game, the sound is loud and realistic. A long game, if compared with its predecessors. I recommend this game for all the fans of first person shooters, especially for those of the WW2.
  2. Jul 16, 2011
    10
    After many Call of Duty games, I have to say that this is still the best Call of Duty in the market. The campaign is not so full of itself like our modern CoD games, it's just a simple World War 2 shooter with you playing as the three major Allies (Russian, Britian, U.S.). The campaign itself plays out wonderfully, very fluid and memorable quotes from Price. The multiplayer is mostly why IAfter many Call of Duty games, I have to say that this is still the best Call of Duty in the market. The campaign is not so full of itself like our modern CoD games, it's just a simple World War 2 shooter with you playing as the three major Allies (Russian, Britian, U.S.). The campaign itself plays out wonderfully, very fluid and memorable quotes from Price. The multiplayer is mostly why I write this review now. This has the multiplayer that the current CoD games should have sticked with. Instead of grinding your profile in order to get better weapons, all the weapons are available to you right from the start, each having their ups and downs, but a very balanced set of weapons so that you don't have to worry about a overpowered weapon (which happens a lot in the current CoD games). The original maps were very well layed out, making camping a lot less viable than in the current CoD games. Though this game is very old and not many play this anymore, I decided it would be right to write a review of my favorite CoD game and hope the best that they can bring back the way multiplayer used to be. Until then, the CSS is still very active so there's that. Expand
  3. Nov 2, 2011
    9
    Despite all the changes and gameplay changes since, CoD 2 still remains one of the overall best Call of Duty games to date. The Multiplayer mode offers a simplistic, yet rereshingly addictive playstyle. It's the campaign however, where COD 2 shines. Each stage (American, British and Russian) is divided into seperate acts; whilst this might hurt the storytelling side of things, each levelDespite all the changes and gameplay changes since, CoD 2 still remains one of the overall best Call of Duty games to date. The Multiplayer mode offers a simplistic, yet rereshingly addictive playstyle. It's the campaign however, where COD 2 shines. Each stage (American, British and Russian) is divided into seperate acts; whilst this might hurt the storytelling side of things, each level feels unique with an appropiate level of tactical choice. The graphics and sound are simply stunning; from fighting in the streets of Stalingrad to the Normandy landings; the chaotic and confusing nature of warfare rings through every single moment without ever letting up. Overall, though fans of more open-world MP games like Battlefiled will find much to be desired here, it still offers one heck of a viseral kick for the Single Player crowd. Expand
  4. Danneh
    Apr 14, 2009
    10
    This is the only game i have rated a 10/10. I love this game so much. Here is the rundown of my rating Graphics: "Holy crap these are nice graphics!" after 2 years of not playing this game. Call of Duty 2 may have the best 2005, maybe even up to 2007 graphics. 10/10 Single Player: The best single player i have ever played. No more. 10/10 Multiplayer: Amazing. There are full games even This is the only game i have rated a 10/10. I love this game so much. Here is the rundown of my rating Graphics: "Holy crap these are nice graphics!" after 2 years of not playing this game. Call of Duty 2 may have the best 2005, maybe even up to 2007 graphics. 10/10 Single Player: The best single player i have ever played. No more. 10/10 Multiplayer: Amazing. There are full games even now. You can buy this game just for the multiplayer 10/10 Sound: Fitting. 10/10 Well, this is my review of Call of Duty 2. BTW Jag has awful spelling. The game developer is Infinity WARD. Second, it is British, no 2 T's. Third, Its battalion, not bentallion. NO, call of duty is NOT the best history lesson. Last, it's recommendations, not recamendations. Expand
  5. Jul 31, 2011
    9
    A true gem of it's time. I continue to enjoy this game much more than the newer Call of Duty's despite the years due to its simplicity and pace. Single-player is lackluster in plot-line but provide very well made level-designs despite its linear progression.,
  6. Cangaceiro
    Feb 22, 2008
    10
    This game have good graphics and is nice for multiplayer game with a lot of servers and is the best game action for me.
  7. Oct 2, 2010
    10
    Respect for this game being the 3-rd game on my pc.Very beautifull crafted from all sides.Weapons vehicles tension enemies allies all form a almost perfect combination.Wining combination.
  8. Dec 6, 2010
    8
    Slightly Repetitive. Nice Design, way better than any of this new stupid rambo style adventure call of duty franchise. This is probablly one of the best shooters ever made. It just lacks good tactics and it feels like a Run N gun the entire time. Very fun and addicting if you dont mind running through shooting everything.
  9. Mar 6, 2012
    10
    My all time favourite call of duty, partly for nostalgia, mostly because this is the call of duty that separated cod from the rest of the gaming world, It was well thought out save for a couple of glitches, which actually made the game more fun to play because you could jump through a window and outside the map just for the hell of it as some servers were dedicated to nothing but this.My all time favourite call of duty, partly for nostalgia, mostly because this is the call of duty that separated cod from the rest of the gaming world, It was well thought out save for a couple of glitches, which actually made the game more fun to play because you could jump through a window and outside the map just for the hell of it as some servers were dedicated to nothing but this. otherwise the weapons were all laid out nicely, balanced apart from the higher capacity of one of the russian smg's and having stripper clips on the enfield rather than individual rounds like the mosin nagat or kar98k which made loading faster. after all of the call of duties being released to date, the custom maps, balanced teams and the fun I had far outweigh any of its flaws, and by flaws I mean call of duty 3,4,5,6,7,8 Expand
  10. Dec 30, 2011
    7
    Weaker than the original COD, I never actually liked the idea of health regeneration without the usage of getting health packs and armor and all recent COD games do. Also the graphics and parts of the gameplay made me dizzy.
  11. SVK
    Nov 14, 2005
    0
    This games does nothing to the genre. Nothing special in it. Nothing special at all. And that is the bad thing. Too many games have already done everything this game doing, and they have done it much better, so threre is no reason for this game to exist. NO SCORE. Single gaming (think in all platforms) is in deep crisis. Sad. They (most of developers) can not make cool, stylish, original, This games does nothing to the genre. Nothing special in it. Nothing special at all. And that is the bad thing. Too many games have already done everything this game doing, and they have done it much better, so threre is no reason for this game to exist. NO SCORE. Single gaming (think in all platforms) is in deep crisis. Sad. They (most of developers) can not make cool, stylish, original, special games anymore, they want US to make games by ourselves while multiplaying, cause much more things in MP depends not from developer, but from gamer. Making MP games somehow easier for ballancing and ... MUCH easier for imagination of developer. So there are too many of them... This is the dead end for games, i think. Expand
  12. ShneisideO.
    Oct 13, 2006
    4
    Cool levels and scenes but really boring because of no plot. I still have not finished it. It got way to boring.
  13. RyanW.
    Oct 20, 2006
    3
    Nothing new here, samegameplay as CoD, Small up in graphics. Weapon sound and recoil is unrelistic, no ragdolls. I get a constant 170 fps, It just dosn't seem all that great. A bad $50 if you ask me. CoD 3 looks like it should be more of an expansion that a whole game.
  14. JatinD.
    Apr 20, 2006
    10
    Game of the year for 2006 definitely. Absolutely brilliant the best war game of all times.
  15. Paul
    Oct 28, 2005
    4
    Single player is OK, It plays exactly like the original CoD just prettier. However sibgle playeris not where the games longevity lies. Multiplayer is rubbish. A huge step back from the original CoD. Plays more liek a console game ported onto the PC. I can cope with the bad points below in single player, but for multiplayer they are a huge problem. 1. NO PUNKBUSTER (anti-cheat) Single player is OK, It plays exactly like the original CoD just prettier. However sibgle playeris not where the games longevity lies. Multiplayer is rubbish. A huge step back from the original CoD. Plays more liek a console game ported onto the PC. I can cope with the bad points below in single player, but for multiplayer they are a huge problem. 1. NO PUNKBUSTER (anti-cheat) unbelievable that a game which could potentially have a huge online following doesnt have this. 2. Health regeneration (encourgaes campers) 3. Grenade indicator - no need unrealistic 4. Bunny hopping is back 5. Jumping while aiming down iron sites 6. No Sprint key 7. Grenade hot key = nade spamming and very unrealistic I could go on. The seem to have taken the original V1 build of CoD and turned that into CoD2 rather than building the game on pathced version with all its refinements and improvements. Why they did this I dont know. Seems to have been rushed out pre-christmas as an xbox360 release game. Hopefully we will see patches and improvements for PC users soon. A huge disappointment so far. Expand
  16. SadinK
    Nov 5, 2005
    2
    Nothing is good about this game. None said anything about bad frames. This is my spec p 3,0 , 1600 ram and x800xt and i need to play on the lowest q. Like they said before spend your money on other things or games , Cod2 is not worth it. Shame on you Infinity Ward.
  17. JohnD.
    Mar 26, 2007
    6
    While the flashy graphics and new features make the game look a while lot better on the box, playing it shows how it really did little to improve the experience. It makes you feel like your in a war movie, but in that lies the problem. Movies are never as realistic as they aim to be. The seriousness of the situation gets blown away by the lack of realistic weapon characteristics and While the flashy graphics and new features make the game look a while lot better on the box, playing it shows how it really did little to improve the experience. It makes you feel like your in a war movie, but in that lies the problem. Movies are never as realistic as they aim to be. The seriousness of the situation gets blown away by the lack of realistic weapon characteristics and unrealistic game play. You will be constantly saying "Theres no way anyone could do that in real life" However, it does appeal to those younger who either don't care about realism or are there to just play. But then it puts into question, why make a WWII game if you chose to ignore so many of the characteristics of WWII? Expand
  18. SabrickSkunks
    Nov 3, 2005
    4
    1. rehashed game play: I've played this game before, many many times in many different scenerios, congratulations on the slightly better graphics but it doesn't warrent another game. 2. regenerating enemies: the bulk of the enemies you kill will be regens that spawn in random locations, you kill more people in this game than serious sam and quake 4 combined. 3. unrealistic game 1. rehashed game play: I've played this game before, many many times in many different scenerios, congratulations on the slightly better graphics but it doesn't warrent another game. 2. regenerating enemies: the bulk of the enemies you kill will be regens that spawn in random locations, you kill more people in this game than serious sam and quake 4 combined. 3. unrealistic game play: (i remember when i saw the G4 special on this game. the word that would not stop being repeated was "REALISTIC" im affraid that was a lie, here is why a. you kill literally HUNDEREDS of enemies in the first level alone, no real WWII ground soldier did this. The number of enemies you have to kill makes each kill cheap, uninspired and fake. b. enimies are idiots, they run towards you with guns a blazing and make no effort to stay alive like a real enemy would c. you can walk, run and even jump up and down while looking through your scope on your gun d. maybe the biggest failure of all: no health. when you get hit enough times you start breathing heavy and then you have to lay down for 4 seconds and your good to go. keep in mind it takes 20-30 shots to your body before you get to that point. so you can be shot 1000 times and still be fine e. too many other things to list, bottom line: this is just another WWII game and makes no effort to do something different, please stop making these games. Expand
  19. EliasO.
    Oct 14, 2006
    3
    It makes me sad that I wasted 50 bucks on this game, when that money could have been alot better spent. This game is definetly not worth the high price tag.
  20. AlexanderV.
    Dec 22, 2006
    2
    Definitely not an improvement upon its predecessor. The guns are nerfed and it was engineered for toddlers. Not recommended.
  21. TonyB.
    Dec 6, 2006
    1
    Don't waste your money or time on this game. Activision/Infinity Ward has completely let go of this game. Call of Duty 2 is in desparate need of a patch that does not seem like will ever come. Looks like Activision/Infinity Ward took a page out of the EA handbook and let a game tank due to lack of support. Remember MOH:PA? It's too bad too because COD 2 has/had a load of potential.
  22. MikeR.
    Dec 31, 2008
    5
    If you've played Medal of Honor or the first COD, you'll find nothing new here. The single player campaign feels identical to the first COD with better graphics. It's simply a rehash of the first game, except rifles are now so weak they're irritating to use (2 to 3 shots to kill with even bolt action rifles makes them next to useless). The missions in Africa were a If you've played Medal of Honor or the first COD, you'll find nothing new here. The single player campaign feels identical to the first COD with better graphics. It's simply a rehash of the first game, except rifles are now so weak they're irritating to use (2 to 3 shots to kill with even bolt action rifles makes them next to useless). The missions in Africa were a nice change, but seriously, enough of Stalingrad already. The multiplayer took a huge step back as well, as it is essentially the same bland multiplayer from COD without the anything from the expansion that made it actually worth playing. This game is certainly not a classic. Expand
  23. Mar 6, 2012
    6
    Whilst the game itself it ok and the graphics were updated. No punkbuster support for 6months i dont see how this game got above 80. Feels like the first cod to be more interested in the console users than the pc users...sad really.
  24. Nov 21, 2011
    8
    this is the Call of Duty for n00bs... as the CoD and CoD UO pros called it. CoD2 is a great game and the CoD that went mainstream. i always waited for the CoD United Offensive part II which never came... but the community (something that the game makers today DO NOT WANT) made the mods to resemble a little to United Offensive and because of that, even in 2011, the game is still one ofthis is the Call of Duty for n00bs... as the CoD and CoD UO pros called it. CoD2 is a great game and the CoD that went mainstream. i always waited for the CoD United Offensive part II which never came... but the community (something that the game makers today DO NOT WANT) made the mods to resemble a little to United Offensive and because of that, even in 2011, the game is still one of the most played games. btw.. it's way better than the insult titles to PC gamers called Modern WarFAIL 2 and 3. Expand
  25. Dec 30, 2012
    10
    The best fps shooter made to date. Great gameplay, great graphics for its time which are still very much playable. The fact it beats games brought out in 2012 is shamefull or those developers..... the games industry needs an injection of imagination.......
  26. asdfasdf
    Aug 2, 2006
    10
    fun game. for the people who say this game has bad graphics are either just mad at the game or have a crappy pc. it runs decent on mine on about medium graphics, i had to look up on how to do some tweaks in console to make it run better but thats cause my pc isnt so great.
  27. JonathanS.
    May 7, 2007
    8
    I wondered a bit about if i should give this a 8 or a 7, ive played this for around 1½ month, and beaten the campaign. The grafics are great and i really like the weapons and you really feel like a mortal, not like some other game where you only drop to half you health when you get headshotted by a shotgun. The game is very liner which makes it quite boring to do the same missions I wondered a bit about if i should give this a 8 or a 7, ive played this for around 1½ month, and beaten the campaign. The grafics are great and i really like the weapons and you really feel like a mortal, not like some other game where you only drop to half you health when you get headshotted by a shotgun. The game is very liner which makes it quite boring to do the same missions again, and scince there arent that many this really sucks. When you play online you will quickly find out that the punkbuster doesent always work, it doesent always kick aimbot users.expect to get headshotted by someone just jumping and looking over the wall for 0.2 sec. this can be quite frustrating. The reason i gave this an 8 was beacourse, atleast when you play veteran (expert mode), you really feel like being in a war where the germans shot at you and also hit when you look over the sandbags, so dont expect to be able to ranbo and this i really like, and i think that in every wargame it should be like that. The maps are really good and i love that you also get to be a tankcommander, so this is allround a good game but not great due to its many flaws. Expand
  28. M00NLiGhTW00DS
    Jun 21, 2007
    10
    The best war game I've ever played. Graphics are more realistic and maps are bigger than Counter Strike Source.
  29. Jag
    Apr 1, 2008
    8
    Call of duty 2 is a world war2 shooter developed by infinity word. As always in call of duty games you see the war from differant perspectives. first you'll be trying to retake you homeland when you play as a russian soldier Vasili Koslov. Then you take part in the Brittish Commonwelth forces in the African campain and Normandy. Than you land at Piont Du Hock with the second ranger Call of duty 2 is a world war2 shooter developed by infinity word. As always in call of duty games you see the war from differant perspectives. first you'll be trying to retake you homeland when you play as a russian soldier Vasili Koslov. Then you take part in the Brittish Commonwelth forces in the African campain and Normandy. Than you land at Piont Du Hock with the second ranger bentallion. The single player campain is intence and engrossing however it lacked an indepth story and charicters. The game kind of seemed like a wicked insane history lesson. While I apressiate the nolage it has given me it still would've been nice to see some well developed charicters thatwould actualy have personallitys. But with of without story or charicters this game rocks. The weapons were satisfyingly authentic and a delight to use. The single player was good. But its only half the fun. The multi-player is very well done. It is fair and very fun. One thing that I'v only seen in this game is killcam. Killcam lets you see how someone killed you from a first person perspective. So now things arn't going to be as frusterating and people have second thoughts about cheating. The modes are deathmatch, team deathmatch, search and destroy, HQ.and my personal favorite capture the flag. All these modes are great and overall this game is one of my personal recamendations for world war 2 shooters. Expand
  30. TimW.
    Nov 16, 2005
    6
    I was really wondering at first why there was such a big disparity between the 'professional' reviews and the user reviews, but now I have played COD2 I tend to agree with the lower, user ratings. This is more like WW2 quake, which is not what attracted people to COD originally and kept them there. The video game reviewers obviously like the Quake FPS style of the new game, COD I was really wondering at first why there was such a big disparity between the 'professional' reviews and the user reviews, but now I have played COD2 I tend to agree with the lower, user ratings. This is more like WW2 quake, which is not what attracted people to COD originally and kept them there. The video game reviewers obviously like the Quake FPS style of the new game, COD veterans or anyone who prefers a little 'virtual realism' won't. Personally I like: the improved graphics, and the way the AI will fall back when flanked, or actually hide behind cover to ambush you, or charge you when you least expect it. I like the feeling of being in a bigger, more verbal war, with shouted warnings from the AI telling you what is going on. I don't like: that my PIV 3 with 1G of memory and 128MB ATI 9800 has to run at 800x600 for the game to be playable, or that multiplayer has no BASE maps, or the new invincible health mode made necessary by the thousands of respawning enemies. If you are into multiplayer though, look for a 'tactical realism' server where this health effect is disabled and a couple of well aimed shots will kill you. Expand
  31. Filip
    Dec 15, 2005
    10
    The best PC game of year 2005!
  32. JesseC.
    Dec 31, 2005
    9
    By far the most engaging and atmospheric WWII game yet. You'll feel like you mean something to your squad, and at the same time you don feel like Duke Nukem - one man army. By combining beautiful graphics, a great soundtrack and sound design this game makes you feel like you're in WWII, at least as much as a video game ever could. Great buy!
  33. CoD-er
    Oct 30, 2005
    7
    It has some cool new elements but it lacks the original mission objectives from COD (UO.) Also, I hoped for a better ending for the game, it just didn't feel rewarding. Also, Paul is right about MP. Great gfx and stuff though, but in the end it was just a run-n-gun game. Makes me look forward to Commandos: Strike Force even more. :)
  34. IanC.
    Dec 2, 2006
    7
    Due to lack of patching by the games developer, the game Call of Duty 2 has taken a severe blow. Although the allowing of steam to host their game was a very good business tactic, they needed to keep game content fresh and new, and fix the major bugs that were in COD2 v1. But strategy, but it is a great premise for a game. Missing the ragdoll in this. Seriously, most games should have it Due to lack of patching by the games developer, the game Call of Duty 2 has taken a severe blow. Although the allowing of steam to host their game was a very good business tactic, they needed to keep game content fresh and new, and fix the major bugs that were in COD2 v1. But strategy, but it is a great premise for a game. Missing the ragdoll in this. Seriously, most games should have it now in their system. Ragdolls are the new breaking glass. Just have to have it in game. Expand
  35. JustinA.
    Jan 7, 2006
    10
    Excellent in single player mode... but the guys playing online are far too good to play against as a beginner... frustrating but im getting better!! but absolutly brilliant overall!
  36. NickB.
    Jun 24, 2006
    1
    I wasted my 50 bucks on this game, the box says it's the most realistic game, guess what, it's not, graphics look good but the textures are proposterous, it has no physics only, Punkbuster sucks and it's all fast-pace arcade action. I prefer Red Orchestra: Ostfront 41-45 and Hidden & Dangerous 2: Sabre Squadron. I even prefer the old Call of Duty.
  37. Godebrandt
    Sep 4, 2006
    7
    I think 7.5 is a more than fair score for CoD2. What CoD
  38. JustinB.
    Jan 5, 2007
    8
    This game is pretty hard to rate overall, and I'll explain why... The first few missions, the Russian campaigns, prove to be very engaging. Playing Call of Duty (the original) several years back, I generally knew what to expect from the sequel. However, the game play this time around has proven much more intense (screaming Nazis, etc). I was pretty blown away during the first three This game is pretty hard to rate overall, and I'll explain why... The first few missions, the Russian campaigns, prove to be very engaging. Playing Call of Duty (the original) several years back, I generally knew what to expect from the sequel. However, the game play this time around has proven much more intense (screaming Nazis, etc). I was pretty blown away during the first three or so missions. It goes without saying the graphics are a jump up from the original, but not as huge a leap as you might think (at least from what I can recall of the first). However, despite the graphics being good, especially the weapons models, I was never "wowed" at any point in the game, visually. In my opinion, the game really peters out after a while, which is the complete opposite of what one of the professional reviewers had stated here on metacritic. Despite changes in environments, locales, cities, etc, it just really seems to be a rehashing of the same senarious over and over again (ie: go here and kill these people, or do this then blow that up, etc). Granted, I'm guessing this is what war is all about, but the game just got to seem very static, scripted, and generally distant from the player. Perhaps 15 or so years of playing first person shooter games has jaded me, but COD2 does get somewhat boring. Not so much where you wouldn't want to finish it, but I probably wouldn't play this through a second time...but then again, I can't think of any FPS ever that I've replayed entirely start to finish. There are a few missions that might have some replay value on a rainy day, but I cannot see myself going through the entire COD2 saga again. In terms of length, I actually thought on more than one occasion that the game was over, and yet it kept going. The first one or two times I was like, "Okay, cool, more game play." After the third or fourth false ending, I was getting genuinely tired of COD 2. To give you an idea, I finished just about half the game the first day I got it. The next day I played a few more missions. Then it just kind of sat for a while. I would say over the course of two or three weeks I played a mission here and there, then finally finished it up. I may have never ended up finishing it, but I'm the type of guy that always has to complete a game/movie/book once its started, unless its really horrible (ie: Tom Clancy novels). Anyhow, I won't drag this out any longer than needed. I would recommend this game, for one, because it is a notable improvement over the first, and for two, the first half of the game is genuinely captivating. Like I said, however, it really gets old after a while, so bear that in mind. I would say the best part of COD2 is the nostalgia it provided...during my sophomore year of college, around the time when COD1 originally hit the shelves, I played LAN multiplayer endlessly with a few of my buddies. COD2 immediately brought back the unique feeling this franchise has. Overall, recommended...but if you only have enough money for one game, I would look elsewhere. Expand
  39. Stephen
    Mar 30, 2007
    10
    This is an amazing game from the realistic game play and sounds and the amazing multi player and single player options this game is truly amazing.
  40. Sr.DelaAxe
    Mar 8, 2007
    10
    Perfection is an understatement. Though there are many multiplayer WWII shooters that can easily top the online aspect of CoD2, the single player is one that will leave you breathless and with your jaw flat on the floor. It is the only single player campaign that has actually gotten tears out of me, seeing your fellow allies come in to save the day at the end of a mission after what is Perfection is an understatement. Though there are many multiplayer WWII shooters that can easily top the online aspect of CoD2, the single player is one that will leave you breathless and with your jaw flat on the floor. It is the only single player campaign that has actually gotten tears out of me, seeing your fellow allies come in to save the day at the end of a mission after what is possibly the most intense battles you'll ever play on any shooter is just overwhelmingly inspiring. If you don't have it, get it. Expand
  41. MarkM.
    Apr 30, 2007
    9
    People are too uptight about realism in games. Even the most realistic to life games have their flaws. Wether its the game itself or the players themselves. The true fun in this game is all about the action, and that it isn't so complex to figure out. Don't get me wrong a game of Red Orchestra is fine now and then. This games strength is the map design. People who thinkPeople are too uptight about realism in games. Even the most realistic to life games have their flaws. Wether its the game itself or the players themselves. The true fun in this game is all about the action, and that it isn't so complex to figure out. Don't get me wrong a game of Red Orchestra is fine now and then. This games strength is the map design. People who think technically about the balance between war torn realism and balanced map gameplay, probably agree this game does very well. Most important, is the amount of fun it is to play a multiplayer. Sure, you can have fun playing Red Orchestra also. But you'd have a longer time getting used to the controls and gameplay style. Not to mention its growing popularity makes for more challenging players. Expand
  42. BenD.
    May 9, 2007
    10
    One of the best games I've ever played. Great graphics and great level design. To all of those people who complain about the levels or gameplay, it's a WW2 shooter. It's not UT.
  43. Hanick
    Jun 30, 2007
    10
    Great game , awesome in multiplayer , single player keep you on edge smooth gameplay wild sound effects definitely not a game for the weak hearted.
  44. MarcB.
    Aug 12, 2007
    9
    Heyyo, +Incredible SinglePlayer Campaign, one of the best in an FPS to date. +Multiplayer hitreg is the best I've seen yet, even in full servers with laggers if you shoot them, they die, unlike the Source Engine's interpolation style, which BF2/2142 failed to emulate. +Great graphics, the specular lighting and bump mapping is done really well, very detailed models. -Online Heyyo, +Incredible SinglePlayer Campaign, one of the best in an FPS to date. +Multiplayer hitreg is the best I've seen yet, even in full servers with laggers if you shoot them, they die, unlike the Source Engine's interpolation style, which BF2/2142 failed to emulate. +Great graphics, the specular lighting and bump mapping is done really well, very detailed models. -Online suffers a bit of bunnyhopping, and nadespamming. -No MultiPlayer mode bots that work good, so online you have to find a server already going, and maybe half of the 7000 servers are empty. -Steam version of the game will only launch into singleplayer via shortcut or XFire, they need to fix the Steam AppID's for the COD series. My brief review. Expand
  45. SuwannapoomN.
    Sep 8, 2007
    7
    I got COD2 from steam. The game crashed during cinematics randomly because I used Windows Vista. And because I had played COD and it's expansion before, this game didn't much new excitement. Anyway, I have to say it's the best single-player WWII FPS to date. The graphic is really nice and the story is well made.
  46. WhateverK.
    Nov 12, 2005
    9
    Great game.
  47. XyzBole
    Nov 17, 2005
    3
    A big disappointment after a great 1st part, and even better UO. It looks nice, but feels like a bad movie. With health regeneration all you have to do is run towards the enemy like Rambo and duck behind a wall or something till your health improves and then run at the enemy again. You'll get shot about half a million times, but that just doesn't matter. Not as nearly as fun as A big disappointment after a great 1st part, and even better UO. It looks nice, but feels like a bad movie. With health regeneration all you have to do is run towards the enemy like Rambo and duck behind a wall or something till your health improves and then run at the enemy again. You'll get shot about half a million times, but that just doesn't matter. Not as nearly as fun as the 1st part. Expand
  48. RichardL.
    Nov 18, 2005
    5
    Call of Duty 1.5 Graphics are basically the same as Call of Duty 1, and there's no new physics system. Is this still the Quake 3 engine? Graphics are pretty standard apart from the addition of 'Bloom' effects. Overall singleplayer is repetitive, yet entertaining whilst it lasts - expect to only get about 9 hours of single player gaming with this one. Multiplayer is complete Call of Duty 1.5 Graphics are basically the same as Call of Duty 1, and there's no new physics system. Is this still the Quake 3 engine? Graphics are pretty standard apart from the addition of 'Bloom' effects. Overall singleplayer is repetitive, yet entertaining whilst it lasts - expect to only get about 9 hours of single player gaming with this one. Multiplayer is complete crap, and many of the online maps are EXACTLY the same as those seen in Call of Duty 1. Still no controllable vehicles - havn't the developers played Battlefield 2? Definitely not worth the $50 pricetag for content recycled from Call of Duty 1. Expand
  49. AdamL.
    Nov 29, 2005
    10
    Just Shows that Consoles aren't beating computers yet.
  50. Mobius
    Nov 3, 2005
    8
    Looks and feels just like the first COD but if you loved the first COD and found it a good game then you can expect more of the same and thats no bad thing.
  51. Ryan
    Dec 15, 2005
    10
    more of the same and for me that aint a bad thing at all why change if it aint broken. also count yourslef lucky because those people who got a eggbox360 have to fork out £20 more for a game that is no way as good as the PC version.
  52. MattC.
    Dec 1, 2005
    10
    CoD2 is a huge improvement on CoD1. The new physics sytem built from the ground up showing its quality throughout the single player game. Though SP can be challenging, the new bar-less health system enables people to play without fear of dooming themselves later on. Models and graphics all look amazing and almost as good as half life2. Multi-player is also highly polished, with CoD2 is a huge improvement on CoD1. The new physics sytem built from the ground up showing its quality throughout the single player game. Though SP can be challenging, the new bar-less health system enables people to play without fear of dooming themselves later on. Models and graphics all look amazing and almost as good as half life2. Multi-player is also highly polished, with regenrating helath playin little part in the game, as all it takes is one well aimed bullet to force you to respawn. Smoke grenades and lower ping time mean games are more challenging and smoother. All ht eold maps are there with a couple of new ones, but re-edited to make them more streamlined and to prevent the experienced gamer form getting too complacent. Overall extremely worth the price. Expand
  53. NickH.
    Dec 31, 2005
    8
  54. Rubenvandebelt
    Jul 12, 2005
    10
    It's is the best shooter on release!!!
  55. BrandonF.
    Sep 18, 2005
    10
    The best game ever!!!
  56. Mike
    Nov 30, 2006
    10
    I bought this game an year later after it came out. and I am shocked in how good it is! Excellent gameplay and the graphics are still great! Looking forward in playing Call of Duty 3!
  57. MarkusW.
    Oct 16, 2006
    10
    Call of Duty 2 is in my opinion the best WW2 Game on the market. I love this paking atmosphere as in Call of Duty. The story is exciting and the mission varied. The graphic is also good and so I think that Call of Duty 2 is good successor. I am happy, when the third part will be released.
  58. DylanS.
    Jan 17, 2006
    10
    Wow... its good to se a game build on its strengths.
  59. MattN.
    Feb 21, 2006
    6
    A disappointment overall, the game play is very simplistic much like Quake 4 but nowhere near as entertaining (or good to look at) for some reason - I think it's the lack of gore and the respawning enemies this is my pet hate with this game - nothing robs you of a sense of accomplishment like fighting a never ending stream of enemies. And for such a frantic shooter the weapons are A disappointment overall, the game play is very simplistic much like Quake 4 but nowhere near as entertaining (or good to look at) for some reason - I think it's the lack of gore and the respawning enemies this is my pet hate with this game - nothing robs you of a sense of accomplishment like fighting a never ending stream of enemies. And for such a frantic shooter the weapons are pretty weak - the rifles are all a bit similar though the Bren gun is nice. It's also surprisingly demanding on your PC (my machine P4 3.4Ghz, 2 Gigs RAM, Geforce 6800), I have to run many of the settings at low quality and it's not as if it looks like Half-life 2 or Far Cry. I probably to need to hurry up and get myself an SLI rig (not for this game though!!). Expand
  60. ChrisK.
    May 29, 2006
    9
    Most players who are used to Quake 4, Unreal Tournament, and many of the face paced quick person shooters will probably dislike this and many other World War games. Despite the realism featured in Call of Duty 2, several players want more gore, more blood, more time, more... just plain more. To be more open-minded here, players will always want more and perfection is hard to achieve Most players who are used to Quake 4, Unreal Tournament, and many of the face paced quick person shooters will probably dislike this and many other World War games. Despite the realism featured in Call of Duty 2, several players want more gore, more blood, more time, more... just plain more. To be more open-minded here, players will always want more and perfection is hard to achieve especially if the players aren't all the same. Call of Duty 2 single player has to be the best war experience I've had since Medal of Honor: Allied Assault. Beautifully done Activision. As for multiplayer, this presents itself as one of the best challenges COD2 has to offer. It is also fun, ofcourse. At the moment, the best feeling is waiting for your enemy to turn around and blasting him away with a shotgun. Expand
  61. C.Leitch
    Jul 13, 2006
    2
    When i first opened up this game and started playing i had to constantly reffer to the main menu where it said "Call of Duty 2" to convinse my self that this was any differnt from the orriginal. All thats changed is a few more multiplayer levels (the existing ones arent changed in the slightest,) and a new single player game. The graphics are horrible and the performance of the graphics When i first opened up this game and started playing i had to constantly reffer to the main menu where it said "Call of Duty 2" to convinse my self that this was any differnt from the orriginal. All thats changed is a few more multiplayer levels (the existing ones arent changed in the slightest,) and a new single player game. The graphics are horrible and the performance of the graphics are in my oppinion a brand new level of low. Not worth 50 bucks... not even worth the download bandwidth. Call of duty 1 had an excuse for the characters to move like clowns, with half life two in between these 2 relieases, this game does not. Expand
  62. AnonymousMC
    Jan 11, 2007
    6
    100% liner gameplay, ennemys can come running out of a room for ever, even though the room is closed of with only one exit! It is not realistik at all, in any way or form. It looks okay, and it sounds okay but its not that fun, because the gameplay never changes! It's the ame alle the way through.
  63. JayY.
    Jan 1, 2007
    9
    Whilst the feeling of let down is highly prevalent when compared with it's prequel, when taken on it's own, it is frankly one of the best WWII shooters available on the market.
  64. WhateverK.
    Jan 16, 2007
    10
    Great game.
  65. JoeMan
    Mar 14, 2007
    8
    Only play the multiplayer its fun but the game online is such bs because of many of the shots made by another player is stupid such as getting a head shot through walls or you shot gun not registering other then that the game is fun and even better to play in a clan.
  66. JasonC.
    Apr 8, 2007
    10
    I bought this game back in December 05, I am still playing the multiplayer game. This game absolutely rocks, highly recommended.
  67. Jeremy
    May 9, 2007
    8
    It wasn't a bad game, but i would stick with Call of Duty United Offense if u like this series.
  68. BrandonF.
    Aug 13, 2007
    10
    The best game ever!!!
  69. ZinayH.
    Aug 4, 2007
    10
    The best WWII Game Ever!
  70. BlakeL.
    Jan 21, 2008
    10
    Awesome multiplayer and intricate campaign. Definately going to be classic.
  71. YourMom
    Jan 21, 2008
    10
    Nice really good game the multiplayer is awesome and the single player has a really good story. Best WWII game!
  72. Wildsnail
    Feb 13, 2008
    8
    Graphically quite nice and relentless action from start to finish but it does get a bit repetitive and I miss the quieter exploration sections of story-based FPSs. If you just want stripped-down linear action without the boring bits, this one's for you!
  73. MaxI.
    Nov 1, 2005
    7
    Single player: lots of fun. As Paul said, same as COD but prettier. Multiplayer: awkward. The auto-regenerating health is a genuinely unattractive feature. Even though it's far more detailed and aesthetically refined than COD, the gameplay feels a bit....clunky. Even playing on a loaded server with 30 other people, the game action just isn't as HOT as COD and COD UO. Lack of new Single player: lots of fun. As Paul said, same as COD but prettier. Multiplayer: awkward. The auto-regenerating health is a genuinely unattractive feature. Even though it's far more detailed and aesthetically refined than COD, the gameplay feels a bit....clunky. Even playing on a loaded server with 30 other people, the game action just isn't as HOT as COD and COD UO. Lack of new modes in MP game is too bad; a real missed opportunity (perhaps will be patched into in COD2: United Assault or whatever..fork out another $50). The new HQ mode is horrid; mashes the worst element of SD into what was a perfectly exciting game mode in COD. And what's with the total lack of vehicles? I fully expected to be able to FLY this time around, maybe a spitfire and possibly a bomber....at least in the SP mode.... Expand
  74. Silo
    Nov 18, 2005
    7
    Loved the single player. Multiplayer is a joke, if you play a killcam server you will see that there is a huge time differential between what you and your oponent see as real time, skill takes a backseat to ping as you can unload a clip into a person and they'll one shot you before you blink. Been playing CoD for a year and was really hoping that would improve in 2, almost seems worse.
  75. Superman
    Nov 2, 2005
    6
    let me make something abundently clear: i wish the devolpers would STOP making world war 2 games! i get it all ready ive played through it only a bazillion times i mean come on do something original make your own war wh not!!? over all an okay game that would be beter if the subject matter were more original.
  76. [Anonymous]
    Nov 25, 2005
    9
    Everything I wanted in the original COD and more. Many on here bash the the regenerative health, but I see this as a step forward. While in the easier modes you may be able to be shot a bunch of times, that is why it is the easy mode. In veteran only one shot takes you to the bloody find cover screen, or your dead. The only way you could survive is if you got nicked sniping and quickly Everything I wanted in the original COD and more. Many on here bash the the regenerative health, but I see this as a step forward. While in the easier modes you may be able to be shot a bunch of times, that is why it is the easy mode. In veteran only one shot takes you to the bloody find cover screen, or your dead. The only way you could survive is if you got nicked sniping and quickly pulled back in before getting shot again. AI as solid as it can be, decently matched between the teams. You rarely feel like your doing all the fighting. Graphics are good, a solid title. Expand
  77. BitBurn
    Nov 26, 2005
    9
    Just got the game. There's no doubt in my mind that I have just played the best 2 hours of "war-genre" FPS ever! Haven't tried the multiplayer mode but I hear it's not that good. Regardless, the single-player missions are phenomenal. Great interactions between characters, great missions, and nice graphics. Fun! Fun! Fun! Okay I know war sucks but hey it's just a game. Just got the game. There's no doubt in my mind that I have just played the best 2 hours of "war-genre" FPS ever! Haven't tried the multiplayer mode but I hear it's not that good. Regardless, the single-player missions are phenomenal. Great interactions between characters, great missions, and nice graphics. Fun! Fun! Fun! Okay I know war sucks but hey it's just a game. Downsides? There's no "manual save" function. But that auto-save is not that bad and saves often. If you liked the first one, you Expand
  78. MikaP.
    Nov 4, 2005
    5
    Singleplayer campaigns are great, but multiplayer doesn't give the kicks United Offensive gave. Seems like developers focused on xbox too much and forgot all the good features of UO
  79. KelR.
    Nov 5, 2005
    3
    On it's own this game would be something decent. However, to all of us original COD fans this game is quite a let down. I was anticipating this game for months, thinking that it would have the same awesome gameplay, that the original did, but with better graphics. Well, the graphics are only slightly better, but they really messed up the gameplay with things like grenade warnings, On it's own this game would be something decent. However, to all of us original COD fans this game is quite a let down. I was anticipating this game for months, thinking that it would have the same awesome gameplay, that the original did, but with better graphics. Well, the graphics are only slightly better, but they really messed up the gameplay with things like grenade warnings, the Halo-esque health regeneration, and (the biggest dissapointment) no real innovation in the multiplayer department, in fact they did away with features like base assualt. Apparently, because the game is an X360 launch game, they dumbed down the things that make it so much fun for the PC Expand
  80. StephenJ.
    Nov 6, 2005
    6
    No Base Assault in MP, shame shame shame! Many may not like it, but many do, and TDM get's boring quickly.
  81. MarkB.
    Nov 7, 2005
    2
    What a disappointment. Waited many months for this sequel but it is a major step back from Infinity Ward. Mutliplayer is crap.
  82. BenG.
    Dec 1, 2005
    10
    The most intense video game I have ever played.
  83. JakL.
    Oct 15, 2006
    0
    Even worse than the first one... another unrealistic arcade kids game.
  84. JensM.
    Dec 22, 2006
    10
    Great game.... Equal to CS(:S)
  85. TylerP.
    Dec 8, 2006
    9
    I can't beleive anybody is giving less then a 6 on this. The graphics are great, the gameplay is fun, and different every time. The only ways it's not realistic is if you're a pansy and you play on anything but veteran. How do you know the recoil is wrong? Maybe the guns back then actually shot that way. It's not like technology was at it's best. The missions are I can't beleive anybody is giving less then a 6 on this. The graphics are great, the gameplay is fun, and different every time. The only ways it's not realistic is if you're a pansy and you play on anything but veteran. How do you know the recoil is wrong? Maybe the guns back then actually shot that way. It's not like technology was at it's best. The missions are new and full of versatility. I'm sorry if a VIDEO GAME seems like it's for kids. That IS what they were first made for, after all. I took a point off for 3 reasons. 1. No ragdolls. 2. You run into a hill that a normal human could climb, and it doesn't let you. (good news is,t ehres not a lot of those.) 3. You cant change your cross hair size or options for it. I really wanted to make it smaller, like you can do nciely in games like Counterstrike source. Hopefully they allow it on the Steam version, which I'm getting at this moment. Overall, I definitely suggest buying this game. It's worth your 40-50 dollars. Expand
  86. Somerandomguy
    Mar 24, 2006
    10
    This is truly a masterpiece. The removal of the health bar from COD 1 and the improved physics of the character's movement is impressive, and the multiplayer maps have been enhanced and updated. The soldiers' uniforms have also improved. The fact that I can see this despite my poor graphics card is enough for me.
    The only negative points I have are that to play COD2 with
    This is truly a masterpiece. The removal of the health bar from COD 1 and the improved physics of the character's movement is impressive, and the multiplayer maps have been enhanced and updated. The soldiers' uniforms have also improved. The fact that I can see this despite my poor graphics card is enough for me.
    The only negative points I have are that to play COD2 with reasonable graphics and steady-flowing gameplay the user must have a computer that is relatively new. An excessive number of bodies on the battlefields can also slow down the computer, and there are plenty of those wherever you look.
    Overall, I think the bots are much better and the multiplayer maps are well-structured.
    Conclusion: Excellent
    Expand
  87. MattB.
    Mar 26, 2006
    10
    this game has the best single player of any game that i have played, except for halflife 2, and multiplayer is insane!! why didn't you rate it higher
  88. minbari73
    Nov 16, 2005
    9
    have a p4-2.8, 2gig ram and a 6600gt and this game runs great - if you use the games idea of what you're system can handle you will get 640 resolutions and low quality everything...bump it up!
  89. Jeremiah
    Nov 28, 2005
    6
    This is the same game we've played for the last 6 years. The same WWII setting. The same ripoffs of melodramatic WWII movie scenes. The same super-linear levels. It seems like there are so many more compelling aspects of war that can be explored - the strategy, relationships between battles, ect... I never once felt attached to my comrades in this game. They just felt like the same This is the same game we've played for the last 6 years. The same WWII setting. The same ripoffs of melodramatic WWII movie scenes. The same super-linear levels. It seems like there are so many more compelling aspects of war that can be explored - the strategy, relationships between battles, ect... I never once felt attached to my comrades in this game. They just felt like the same cannon fodder clones I am shooting at. I never felt a sense of risk or danger because of the game's Halo-esque health regeneration. Both allies and enemies are so devoid of fear or personality-distinct human reactions that they might as well be robots. The action is repetitive - kill enemy behind crate, kill tank, kill sniper in window, rinse, and repeat. Luckily, I got my copy for free with my graphics card, but it still bugs me that pretty games with shallow gameplay seem to be the trend and most "professional" game reviewers give such undeserved praise to them. Expand
  90. SamF.
    Dec 17, 2005
    9
    The Mixed Reviews Coming from this Title is Understandable, Everyone expected a new type of gameplay but instead got exactly the same game with a prettier package and new Maps. I Really would have given this game a 10 if it had been less linear, but having the same linear gameplay mostly is really unforgivable. There are areas where you have multiple objectives that you can do in any The Mixed Reviews Coming from this Title is Understandable, Everyone expected a new type of gameplay but instead got exactly the same game with a prettier package and new Maps. I Really would have given this game a 10 if it had been less linear, but having the same linear gameplay mostly is really unforgivable. There are areas where you have multiple objectives that you can do in any order but its still very linear. The graphics though are the only major advancement as far as smoke grenades and effects. The Game also took away medkits which are replaced with Seek shelter and magically heal. ALthough many people hate this feature , it actually adds you to run to cover like in real life. Of course nothing that the game will include can imitate real life ...ex. You get shot IRL and your usually dead ...game over. So no matter if its a med kit that heals in an instant or taking cover, it truly does not take away from experience. I can't understand the very low scores some have given this game , but I was around during Pong so I am amazed at the Graphics and gameplay in a game as good as This series. Expand
  91. KaiC.
    Dec 16, 2006
    10
    Online play kicks so much ass and the single player is better.russia,england and america are great to play as in one single game. the guns and missions rock.
  92. V-Man
    Dec 19, 2006
    9
    This is an almost perfect game, as it throws in everything you would ever want from any WW2 game ever, and it is a triumph over the World War 2 genre in general. It has the best levels I've ever seen, and some of the greatest graphics and execution in a first person shooter I've ever seen. The only thing I found lacking was a few features in the first 2 COD games, such as This is an almost perfect game, as it throws in everything you would ever want from any WW2 game ever, and it is a triumph over the World War 2 genre in general. It has the best levels I've ever seen, and some of the greatest graphics and execution in a first person shooter I've ever seen. The only thing I found lacking was a few features in the first 2 COD games, such as alternate fire modes, and that sort of thing. Expand
  93. Mar 10, 2012
    10
    The best of call of duty,this is the best one in my opinion,had a good story,great multiplayer and a friendly quiet community not some bloody messed up game built around the presitge system for try hards.
  94. Aug 28, 2013
    8
    Very intense fun gameplay, definitely better than all the newer CoDs. It has features that are finally being presented again in Ghosts, such as the lean feature.
    And surprisingly the graphics still hold up quite well today. I'll even go ahead and say this game has better textures than most modern games.
  95. Sep 11, 2012
    10
    Why People Want Modern Warfare? COD 2 İs Best COD Game And World War II İs Better Than World War III. Atmosphere is incredible.I Dont Understand Why People Hate WW2 Games?
  96. Nov 22, 2012
    9
    This game has quick hitting action with the ultimate game experience
  97. Dec 1, 2012
    5
    Probably the best Call of Duty game.
    Mediocre graphics and gameplay, boring story and very slow game rythm.
    Anyway, it is a very good game, compared to the other CoDs.
  98. Jun 19, 2013
    9
    Arguably the best Call of Duty game of the series. Excellent voice acting, graphics, and overall effects that added to the realism and immersion experience. Truly an amazing game. I still remember storming the beaches of Normandy with this game. Love me some M1 Garand action, though the Thompson does the job nicely too. While very linear in progression, you can't help but feel that you'reArguably the best Call of Duty game of the series. Excellent voice acting, graphics, and overall effects that added to the realism and immersion experience. Truly an amazing game. I still remember storming the beaches of Normandy with this game. Love me some M1 Garand action, though the Thompson does the job nicely too. While very linear in progression, you can't help but feel that you're really helping to take back Europe from the Nazis.

    Additionally, the online multiplayer aspect of this game was phenomenal. I spent many hours of my fledgling online FPS career with this game (after a long hiatus from Counter-Strike made me extremely rusty) and it was a welcome substitute for CS.
    Expand
  99. Mar 8, 2013
    10
    Call of Duty 2 is the best shooter game that I have played. Why? One of the most fun and addicting campaigns ever. The levels are challenging and many times take multiple tries, but challenging games are fun. The campaign is fairly lengthy and is divided into three great sections (Russian, British, USA).The levels provide intense action, especially Pointe-du-Hoc, which is arguably, theCall of Duty 2 is the best shooter game that I have played. Why? One of the most fun and addicting campaigns ever. The levels are challenging and many times take multiple tries, but challenging games are fun. The campaign is fairly lengthy and is divided into three great sections (Russian, British, USA).The levels provide intense action, especially Pointe-du-Hoc, which is arguably, the greatest shooter game level ever. So much intensity in that level. This game still proves that WWII trumps Modern Warfare games. Expand
  100. Jul 7, 2013
    10
    The last great bastion of the Call of Duty series. Everything that has come since, with the exception of CoD 4: Modern Warfare, has been a carbon copy of its predecessor. The story, feel, and execution of this game in both campaign and multiplayer is solid and engaging. I look back fondly on it.
Metascore
86

Generally favorable reviews - based on 64 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 62 out of 64
  2. Negative: 0 out of 64
  1. 80
    When something is this well done, just because you've seen it all before doesn't mean it's not worth seeing again.
  2. 80
    Pulling its trigger condenses everything that's right about Call of Duty 2 into a single moment. Online or off it is the epitome of visceral thrill seeking.
  3. 85
    I find implementing regenerating health to be a little troublesome. It allows you to experience a kind of combat only a mythical super-soldier could withstand, and in so doing, propels the game from gritty authenticity to John Woo fantasy.