Modern Warfare 2 Stimulus Package now gouging PS3 and PC owners too

We weren't very kind to Modern Warfare 2's Stimulus Package (three new maps, two recycled CoD 4 maps) when it was released on the 360. The $14.99 map pack is a perfectly adequate DLC addition, but the same expense could easily score you a bigger, better, and less rip-off-ey hunk of entertainment.  

But if MW2 is still your multiplayer obsession, who are we to say that you shouldn't expand that experience? For those who haven't picked up another game in months, the pricey expansion is a valid use of money. If that's the case, check out our quick-and-dirty Stimulus Package strategy guide so you can march into the new maps with the tactical advantage.

If you're as cooled-off on MW2 as we are, look toward the future. Treyarch's new CoD entry looks surprising, and while Infinity Ward falls apart, its founders are starting from scratch with Respawn Entertainment. Oh, and EALA/DICE's Medal of Honor reboot has promise, too, especially given DICE's success with Bad Company 2. The war game war is heating up.

May 4, 2010


  • db1331 - May 5, 2010 12:13 p.m.

    See, going by that they should go in and dock at least one point from the MW 2 review. Not that it would change anything though. That game was just a blatant cash grab. Now I just have to wait and see if dedicated servers are confirmed for Black Ops before I even bother following that game.
  • TURbo - May 5, 2010 2:33 a.m.

    @Tyler This was the editor's note from the review. Editor's Note, Nov 9, 2007: We've changed this game's score from the original 9 up to a 10. The reason is simple: the more we play the game, especially against real people online, the more we grow to love it and the less we mind its few faults. It's still not perfect or even particularly evolved from the first three CoD games, but it's nonetheless one of the most finely-tuned, expertly crafted games we've ever played, and we would be wrong not to give it our highest recommendation.] Well I did love COD 4.
  • HeroHugh - May 4, 2010 11:50 p.m.

    I didn't read what Typey McGee up there just wrote, but in regards to the argument about scores. Seriously? "Why didn't you give the game what I think it should get?!" ... Wow. "HEY! You guys changed your opinion when the game changed!! WTFZZ!?" Really..?
  • crumbdunky - May 4, 2010 11:41 p.m.

    I'm with db1331 over the review scores we see these days but it certainly ISN'T just GR who fall into the trap. How many outlets/sites this week have pointed out how Reach's MP beta is a breath of fresh air for a Halo series that had clung too closely to formula for too long? I've seen a ton of 'em and mainly at sites that gave the last Halo full release a 10/10 perfect score. Those aren't criticisms that they couldn't see at or before launch of Halo 3's mp as they were all present in the beta. Fact is the pressure to be excited about these massive releases has left us in a position where a seven is average(at many, many sites/mags) and many fans won't entertain games getting below an eight! In this environment what does that say about the merit of games getting perfect scores? I realise the ten to one scale isn't great for showing degrees of difference but limiting ourselves to just, at best, the top half of that range is suicide and leaves us with nowhere to go if, say, a sequel improves on the template of an original that already got a ten. And, sure, I get that people will argue that ten/ten doesn't necessarily equate to perfect but the thing is it SHOULD because how would you tell apart two games if one got a ten just for being amazing and then another turns up that, hypothetically, is all things to all men-the actual perfect game? Obviously, it's in the words and how you yourself understand them that the detail of critique is found(and God to, or so we're told)and where the better understanding of whether a game is worth your cash or not but we crave the short cut and meta scores are the ultimate one stop resource so these over eager tens do effect our lives when they shouldn't. So, either drop the scores altogether(how I wish that would happen and stop all the fanboy arguments over point two of a meta percent!)or start using a better range of the scores available. even moving to a true percentage offers more room to move for a reviewer. Also, a ten/ten for MW2 ios just a bad opinion even if you consider the game to have no release day on line issues, bugs and glitches that still continue to this day. The story is daft, full of holes(and unlike HR where there was an excuse in that they were doing a much more complex job with multiple routes being taken into account, MW2 is as linear as they come and still full of idiocy), had "No Russian" included for NO reason other than the notoriety it gleaned them which cheapened us all(IMHO), was the third practically identical COD in consecutive years and over used some dialogue(Oscar effin Mike indeed!)to the point of farce. Also we still have points where it feels like respawn central. So, to me at least, tat ten always looked a bit generous es when the graphics got favourably compared to games which look a GOOD deal better than it. The lack of dedicated servers on ANY platform also would have lost a mark at release for me when it's the biggest on line shooter going in 2009. By that it was plain corners were being cut for the bottom line and it's now plain in the number of bugs. Where was the QA? Why no beta? It seemed plain to me the constant shouts of "premium" from Acti to defend the game from any criticism were hiding something less than perfect and something worth way less than a perfect score. @plain like vanilla-yeah, BFBC2 wasn't worth a ten but both campaigns were painfully trite.The issue, for me, isn't that this game got a ten and another didn't but that way too many do manage a ten(and, again, certainly NOT just here)and it damages the credibility of the whole review score process from everyone's viewpoint, surely? Scores aren't going anywhere(sadly) and the next best thing(though unlike getting rid of the scores it won't actually get any bugger to READ the reviews which should be the point)would be a univerasally accepted range and scoring system for review scores so every site was singing from the same hymnsheet, no? Get them all to use the full range and do away with the "safe" seven? Would be amazing, imho, and putting the perfect score aside for the perfect game would really make me happy. 10/10 is an ultimate and as such should only be achieved by a game that manages perfection-another ultimate, no? Even OoT wasn't perfect, not even for it's time. There were issues even with that game and it's still the closest(at it's release) that I've experienced to perfection according to the technical limit of the day. The sense of awe and expectation when riding Hyrule Field for the first time is something that lives with many of us to this day but even that wasn't perfect and a score in the high 90% range is what it should have got. Just because the ten is there shouldn't mean we use it every time we get excited or see other people doing so. I don't, fr one second, think ANYONE feels MW2 was perfect so it's perfect score was bound to annoy some(just like GOW3 or any other ten/ten would upset people)-no game's gonna be perfect.
  • n00b - May 4, 2010 9 p.m.

    that's why i ignored the game all together
  • db1331 - May 4, 2010 8:57 p.m.

    Noob, MW 2 isn't a PC game. It's an Xbox port. They couldn't even be bothered to patch in PC standards like SLI support or lean. Anybody who bought it on PC was a fool. Anybody who bought it on PC and expected free DLC was a blind fool.
  • GamesRadarTylerWilde - May 4, 2010 8:54 p.m.

    @n00b Agreed! Once upon a time, new PC content was free by default for every game. I'm not saying that devs/pubs don't deserve to make a little money off their additional content sometimes, but it used to be a service for dedicated players, not a cash grab. Now, not so much... unless we're talking about a company like Valve. ;)
  • db1331 - May 4, 2010 8:53 p.m.

    You know what Tyler, you actually made a good point about hindsight. I will give the argument to you this time. And funny you should mention Okami, I started my third play through of it last week. I'm almost halfway through the opening video. It still feels like the first time. Such a great game.
  • n00b - May 4, 2010 8:51 p.m.

    you guys are all complaining about the wrong thing. remember how the pc guys got the map expansions for free for COD4
  • GamesRadarTylerWilde - May 4, 2010 8:48 p.m.

    It's been fun having the age old review score argument for the billionth time (once every week or two seems about right), but I'd better get back to work! ;)
  • db1331 - May 4, 2010 8:48 p.m.

    Subtracting from BC2's score for a bad single player campaign is retarded. Nobody buys a Battlefield game for the single player. That's like rating a beautiful woman a 9/10 because she doesn't like pizza. Nobody gives a damn. They just want to sleep with her/play multiplayer.
  • REIGNx777 - May 4, 2010 8:46 p.m.

    @db1331 - I think you're putting too much value in reviews of games. If you hated Doom 3 then you hated it. If someone else didn't, then that's their opinion. It shouldn't mean that yours is invalid (Doom 3 has an 87 on metacritic for what it's worth) To your second point, the same can be said. I think you're putting too much weight on review scores. If God of War 3 gets a 10 here on GR, sure, maybe it doesn't hold as much weight as a 10 from another high-profile site that has a 100pt scale, but does that change the quality of the game? Not a bit. Seacrest out.
  • GamesRadarTylerWilde - May 4, 2010 8:43 p.m.

    @db1331 Transcension of greatness is something seen largely in hindsight. Even your own statement, "change the way future games are made," proves that. We pay homage to those games over and over with features and post-release opinions. Consider a review an in-the-moment assessment of whether or not a game is worth playing, and suits your gaming preferences. Of course we're going to acknowledge artistry or lack of it in reviews, but we can't exactly predict how well a game will hold up. BTW, buy Okami.
  • PlainLikeVanilla - May 4, 2010 8:40 p.m.

    To everyone complaining that MW2 got a 10 while BFBC2 only got a 9 needs to remember that BFBC2's campaign was shit.
  • GamesRadarTylerWilde - May 4, 2010 8:38 p.m.

    @TURbo I don't remember the circumstances regarding CoD 4's score (I probably wasn't involved), but I'm sure there was a perfectly rational cause.
  • db1331 - May 4, 2010 8:37 p.m.

    Oh come on. Doom 3 was TERRIBLE. It was generic dark space hallway after generic dark space hallway. Are you trolling me? All I'm saying is the way you do your reviews should allow room to separate the great games (Modern Warfare, God of War 3, Gears of War) from the games that transcend greatness and change the way future games are made, like an Ocarina of Time or Resident Evil 4.
  • REIGNx777 - May 4, 2010 8:36 p.m.

    @turbo I'm sorry, but using a normal distribution for game reviews is a retarded idea. First off, that assumes that GR is reviewing all types of games, from boring stuff to shovelware (if you want a true bell curve) Secondly, what if a year is uncommonly full of fantastic games that deserve a 10? You're saying that some of them should be 9's instead just so you could keep the distribution intact? Makes no sense. *Recaptcha [damage Mexico] - dat's racist
  • TURbo - May 4, 2010 8:32 p.m.

    @db1331 Why would I want a game's review score to reflect this date in time? That's like having a depreciating review score. MW2 is a 10 at release, and should go down a point every 8 months until it is obsolete.
  • TURbo - May 4, 2010 8:30 p.m.

    Tyler Wilde instead of complaining about the MW2 score, I'm going to complain about the COD 4 review on GamesRadar. It was a 9, and then you changed it to a 10. That sounds fishy. I'm lumping you in as a reviewer because it says GamesRadar US. For a ten point review scale system, should reviews be rated by normal distribution like a bell curve, so only 10% of the games every year get a 10? So far MW2 was the most successful day one, week one, month one sales, most preorders before release, and had a 200 million marketing budget. Which there is always an audience that complains after a 2 million day one seller, because it failed to live up to their height.

Showing 1-20 of 34 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000