Black ops is "better" than MW2
1) The killstreak system in MW2 seriously disadvantaged newer players in that it allowed more experienced players the quickly stack killstreaks with often ridiculous results (see YouTube, "fastest nuke") This is totally frustrating for the newer players (cattle) as constantly respawning only to be destroyed immediately by a hail of chopper fire and predator missiles is totally lame. This system is also frustrating for those smugly conquering the team that wasn't fortunate enough to be populated with the experienced players only to have to opposition rage quit.
2) The cod points system is more balanced and fun than the MW2 system because it allows players to more readily customize their loadouts to suit their style and the tactical situation.
3) The most common argument in favor of MW2 is "quick scoping" This was dumb, unrealistic and detracted from the competitive nature of the game. BO patched it in anyway so the whole thing is a wash.
2. COD MW2 has a balanced and didactic system which allowes player to customize their gun baced on their skill.
But a major issue with BO is the currency system. COD points are aquired through player matches and wager matches. These points are an interesting addition to the game but they become useless because as soon as you have purchased a gun you automatically get access to every attachment and camo (except gold).
unlike in MW2 where you actually had to earn the special attachments, you can straight away buy the best attachment for that gun without even firing it once.
3. Black Ops is the fact that they spent so much time trying to balance perks and killstreaks that they completely unbalanced the weapons. Shoguns are incredibly short range, okay fine, but they are also incredibly prone to hit markers.. umm i think at short range you'd die one shot from a shot gun.. Snipers are also now inadequately slow, inaccurate and stupid. In fact if your not using one of the 20 or so SMGs and ARs you'll find yourself at a severe disadvantage playing online.
1. MW2 was great in the fact that most maps were suited to every weapon type and it was up to the player to decide on their class layout and gaming style.
2. According to Product Review's poles  46% people think CODMW2 is better than COD BO as oppose to the 26% who this the contary.
3. MW2 is a more successfully executed FPS.
The precision of guns, equipment and even the sound effects they generate are more realistic and streamlined in MW2.
4. It is clear that COD MW2's graphics are superiorBlack ops graphics are on a way lower level, the sound effects are nowhere near as crisp and the general gameplay is seemingly arcadish compared to MW2. I mean look at Nuketown ! Or the sound of the Famas! It sounds like a lawnmower!
These flaws may seem minor but the fact is they ultimately affect the overall gameplay and in turn your gaming experience.
1. Assuming the purpose of creating the game was to create an enjoyable experience for the most number of people and entice them to come back time and time again to use your product, what sense does it make to include the nuke, which essentially ruins everyone's experience because one person is doing exceedingly well. By the same logic it is insanely fun to scream at the top of my lungs in the library and scare everyone studying, but its looked down on because it ruins everyone elses experience. Further, you didn't specify which map you thought the spawn slaughter occurred on? I genuinely don't know because I believe that it could happen on any of them.
2. The customization of the guns in MW2 is based on the continuous monotonous use of the same gun, not on skill. A totally unskilled player will certainly unlock all the attachments for any given gun eventually. I believe you are mistaken about the use of the COD points. Once a gun is purchased all attachments are not in fact unlocked, they must all be purchased individually at different prices which can be done at the players discretion. The argument that you don't have to earn the attachments is faulty because the attachments are purchased with cod points, which are EARNED based on performance in games and wager matches.
3. It is true that in BO they reduced the effectiveness of shotguns, making them less potent than MW2, however, I argue in MW2 the shotgun was severely overpowered AND was only a secondary weapon. Also, the nature of any FPS is that some weapons will rise to the top in efficiency. In MW2 everyone used the UMP or the ACR, in BO most people use the AK 74 or FAMAS. This is realistic though. The vast majority of the worlds militaries employ one of two weapon platforms, the ak47 or the M4.
1. This is your opinion, with which I agree. I also think that the maps in BO are equally if not better designed.
2. This data is from TWO DAYS after BO was released, it is unrealistic that anyone formed a complete opinion in two days. At gameranking.com BO is listed as the 5th most popular xbox 360 title CURRENTLY. MW2 is not CURRENTLY ranked.
3+4. Respectfully, you are mistaken on the graphics quality issue. BO was the first COD game to use motion capture technology. Also, BO utilizes a frame refresh rate of 60+ per second while MW2 maximum refresh rate is 60. MW2 did not have the option to take advantage of these technology advances and is understandably less refined.
Nuketown is designed to represent a 50's-60's era bomb test site and is intentionally cartoonish. Having never fired a famas in real life, I can't speak to how it actually sounds. I have however mowed a few lawns and no lawn mower I used ever sounded like that!
The fact is that BO had the distinct advantage of building off of all of the successes of MW2 and leaving out many of the flaws. I appreciate you debating with me, despite being at the serious disadvantage of advocating for an obsolete product. :)
In the first month of sales BO brought in over a billion dollars of revenue, a feat only accomplished by one other product in the history of entertainment. This smashed ALL OTHER SALES RECORDS including, MW2.
In conclusion, BO is in fact more realistic, more user friendly, more enjoyable for EVERYONE and more played than MW2.
Black Ops is "better" than MW2 ?
1. Regarding the purpose of the game I can most definitely agree on that but, I firmly believe MW2 is able to fulfill this purpose adequately.MW2 is able to combine many of the elements players wish to obtain from the experience.
A. Re spawn massacre
In the game I have self control, so when I get killed I don't blame it on the game I blame it on the individual playing it. I just remind myself... "STUPID NOOBTUBERS" or "SNIPING CAMPER". The only time this happens is under the right circumstances in High rise . In addition, the re spawn massacre can also be seen as a way to challenge players. Players can learn alot from the game in these epic moments of epic destruction.
I find nukes to be one one of the most enjoyable aspects of the game. I genuinely don't see how a nuke will ruin everyone experience. The nuke enables you to convey your potential as a player. MW2 allows you the power to manifest a weapon that will win the game no matter what and save your team from loosing. How awesome is that. In BO all you can get for you hard work and dedication for the game is ... attack dogs. Yeah that's right when you present the game with all you experience and dexterity BO grants you some dogs. MW2 gives you one of humanities most feared weapon ! and for this reason MW2 excels .
2 Customization In MW2 you don't have to use money that's limited, and you can just choose from all the guns that you've unlocked. And as for all the crazy stuff that happens in MW2, that's what makes a game fun; an escape from the realism of life. Blackops has cod points which allow you to get what you want when you want it, but that takes away the effort of aiming for head shots so everyone just blasts away at your chest. I can't really make a comment about the 74u and the UMP, both appear overpowered but people have stopped using them as much.
3. Weapons I have a strong preference of MW2 over blackops, mainly because of the weapon choices. In MW2 there are well rounded weapons, FAMAS is strong but is burst fire, ACR has almost no recoil but has lower damage. In blackops however, the famas and AUG are basically the same but with different bodies and slight recoil differences, the M16 in blackops seems extremely off to me, I have played well over 40 hours and never received a one burst kill, the sniper rifles have severe disadvantages and the maximum fire rate on the FAL and pistols is so low that I get mod blocked constantly for trigger finger. I believe that for us smarter and wiser folk, MW2 will always be the better game.Blackops was a waste of money and MW2 was far more worth the price.
I will let the video speak for this one. It is clear the MW2 graphics are prodigiously better and more detailed.
Unique Advantages of MW2 
The only thing BO seems to be better at is selling itself, which it only accomplished due to the fact that it fed off MW2 fame.
Bottom line is MW2 is more appealing and engaging than BO and it is not obsolete by any standards! 
I think I have made it clear why MW2 is the "better" of this two memorable games.Thank you for debating with me, it was fun ;)
DYTBob forfeited this round.
My opponent has sadly forfeited, please extend all my arguments.
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|