Actually, the DC missions had absolutely nothing to do with the previous game. They just came up after the airport massacre. But anyway, since I think you were trying to say how the point of the DC missions is to let you see everything happening, I agree. Yes, I think it was great they did that. But my gripe with them is that they went on for too long to ultimately achieve nothing. If they had somehow related it to getting intel, such as maybe invading a Russian hold-up or locating a downed military vehicle for intel pertaining to the story, that would be way different.
I really don't understand at all your next point of not linking to previous games in a series. I seriously hope you never consider anything related to storylines in your future, because a sequel that picks up from the previous game should not have a "new" story ("new" as in "not related to other games). Anyone who plays the sequel should play the previous game first. In a perfect story, the sequel would integrate explanations of events from the previous game into its story, but it's not at all required. In a sense, I almost feel that the opening credits video of MW2 was slightly unnecessary, although I do think it is good they included it as a recap.
As I said before, I really don't give a shit about the multiplayer. If I did, I would still be playing Modern Warfare. I would also have the game for the Xbox so I could join in with my friends. But the truth is, I really don't care for it. I don't care for Halo 3 either and I played that for like a year and a half straight after it came out. I have TF2 and I haven't even played it online yet, and I've probably played a maximum of 20 games in L4D.
Bookmarks