I don't want to sound like, well, one those guys. You know, the guy that always claims that sequels suck and everything old is good and everything new is crap. They constantly lament about how the "old stuff" from [fill in the blank with any rock band] is much better than the "new stuff." They whine and pine for the glory days of movie-making, for example, while arguing that today's video games are weaker despite the more intense and realistic visuals.

But here's the thing. Sometimes they're right. And for the small number people
out there that indirectly warned me that Call of Duty 2 was just okay and didn't
measure up to the original, well, I'm sorry I didn't listen.

I had been dying to play Call of Duty 2. The original Call of Duty blew me away
and easily ranks on my top 5 best first person shooters ever. It was visceral,
it was grand, and it was bloody brilliant. So when Call of Duty 2 came out, I
figured it couldn't miss. Word of mouth as well as many reviews were very kind
to the sequel, especially the Xbox 360. Well, I can't say I've tried the 360
version yet, but I have played the PC and Mac version of the title (which I own)
and here's basically what I got for my $50.

Same graphics.
"New" missions that seemed eerily similar to previous CoD games.
Smoke grenades.
A "grenade indicator."
No health meter (instead, you get a red, blurry screen and panting/gasping that
sounds as if it's been lifted from a porno).

Here's the thing. If I had never played CoD 1 or the United Offensive expansion
pack, well, I probably would have rated CoD 2 as a pretty rockin' game. But to
play a game that takes the same formula/graphics/outline of the original and
adds very little -- well, it just feels more like a glorified expansion pack
than an all new sequel. All in all, it was a short and uninspired game that
immediately made my top 10 list of most disappointing sequels. The multiplayer
functions on CoD2 are good, but I've never judged a game's merit on its
mutliplayer death matches first. One thing I had hoped to see changed was the
NPC functions (seriously, tons of allied soldiers get chewed up on some of the
campaigns yet somehow replacements soldiers materialize out of thin air and you
never seem worse for the wear); it would be great to be able to give orders,
make critical decisions during battle, and see the missions depend more on
protecting your troops, for example.

It'a hard to fault Activision or Infinity Ward; they're raking in the dollars
from CoD2, especially on Xbox Live for the 360 [see Aaron's post below]. But
unless they come up with some new developments for Call of Duty 3 -- how about
more detailed NPC interaction? Maybe a little more strategy? -- then I won't be
making a third tour of duty with this one.