Why did Price launch the nuke? Why did Shepherd betray you? What did the Russian guy want with Price in the first place?
Stay tuned, and we’ll find out in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3
Because Michael Bay said so.
Price launched the nuke in order to create an EMP to disable the Russians over North America. Shepard betrayed you because you were the ones that knew he knew had the disk.
He betrayed you to take the disc in the first place. Maybe a better question is “why did Price betray you by taking the disc?” What did he gain by doing that?
I’m guessing that something on the disk links Makarov and Shepard? I got the feeling that Shepard engineered the whole Russian invasion from the get-go, and Makarov ends up helping you against Shepard because he knows he’s a loose end that Shepard is coming after as well. It was all convoluted and hokey, but the crappy story only served as a flimsy excuse to use the game’s set pieces anyways.
Slighitly OT but related, and I didn’t want to start a new MW2 thread. But is that stupid goddamn riot shield one of the most idiotic things we’ve ever been lumped with in a shooter?
I would be perfectly happy if it stopped pistol style rounds. that would be OK. IF they wanted it to stop assault rifle rounds I would still be happy if they got rid of it being transparent and make it solid metal shield. (Maybe a little viewing slit in the thing), like you see some SWAT teams using.
But a shield made from a transparent material that can blithely shrug off rounds from high powered assault rifles and light machine guns?! From point blank range. Grrr :mad::mad:
I think you’re badly misremembering how high the bar for ‘most idiotic things in a shooter’ has already been set. 
Stick it with Semtex. Use teamwork. Shotguns seem to go through it. Aim for the feet.
Or hold your grenades long enough to explode over the top of them. It seems to work well in multiplayer, though, especially in game modes like Sabotage, where shield holders can protect bomb defusers from the inevitable spam and random shooting that goes on.
The “Rocket Launcher Round Blowing Up On The Wall Next To The Meaty Bits” tactic is fun too.
Don’t forget that the game story is set something like 5-10 years in the future. Maybe these aren’t simple plexiglass shields, they’re made of nano carbon zero-point flux capacitor material 
Also, assuming the game accounts for actual performance, assault rifles aren’t high-powered.
Supposedly, Infinity Ward spent a ton of time at the range shooting these guns, but I’m not so sure anymore. Either that, or a whole lot of compromises were made for balance’s sake.
What I didn’t like about MW2 was that it felt more like watching a movie than playing a game. For example at the first mission where you man the minigun you can simply stand back and watch. The only time player participation is needed is when an enemy car is blocking the way of your Hummer and you have to blow it away.
At the second mission you have the mountain climbing scene: simply press left and right mouse buttons. At some point you lose your grip and McTavish saves you. Still there’s actually very little for you to do.
The whole game is like that. Short periods of action followed by cutscenes where you have little to no participation. Also the levels are too linear. Alternative routes are blocked off so there’s only one route to follow. You can’t explore the map because there’s nothing to explore.
If you want to explore a map, you’ve got the wrong line of games. This much you should have known after Call of Duty 1. I think it’s getting “worse” these days, but only if you see it as a negative, of course.
Precisely.
When you look at the damage ratings between the Barrett and the WA sniper rifles, the difference on the bar is tiny. Hello!! This is a godamn 50 calibre round I’m firing!! Nothing more frustarating than hitting a guy with the Barrett and watching him shrug it of and keep going. :dubious:
On the topic of the OP, I’ve never found the storylines in Call of Duty to be very coherent. But the story isn’t the star; it’s the action, weaponry, and multiplayer that people seem to really look for. That’s what I always look for when I pick out a shooter to play. I had the same experience with Black, which came out a few years ago for PS2 and Xbox. The story was convoluted as hell, but the game was supposed to be basically gun porn.
One shooter that I enjoyed that also had a pretty good (supernatural) story was Fear, and its sequel.
Depends on the difficulty. On the hardest setting the RPGs can take you out in the first mission. The climbing bit I agree about though…and the whole almost-falling-but-getting-caught-in-the-last-instant-bit is done to death.
In fact it was done in the first one where you almost miss the helicopter jump getting off the sinking ship.