We already know we won't be getting any campaign co-op in Modern Warfare 2 when it launches this fall.  Instead players will be teaming up in a mode called Special Forces, which as been described as something similar to the Mile High scenario in Call of Duty 4.

If you've paid close attention to our database entries for the game, you'll notice that we've only listed the game as a two player co-op title.  We've had a lot of folks send us notes that this wasn't correct, and the game was four player, but all information up until this point seemed to point otherwise.  Today, Infinity Ward has confirmed Modern Warfare 2 will feature co-op for two players.

Read The Full Article: Modern Warfare 2 Limited to 2 Player Co-Op

While I am looking forward to Special Ops the most, I am supremely pissed about the two-player co-op. One of the screenshots shows what looks to be six friendlies, plus enemies shooting from off-screen. Bad move!

I think thats pretty horrible indeed. Its a real shame.

how about you give us at least 4 player and let US decide what we like? sheesh... this one fell off my maybe list. i'm sick of developers deciding that we don't really want what we ask for.

I really hate this kind of excuse: “We don’t do co-op in our story because we’re crafting a very specific experience and we don’t want to ruin that by cramming co-op into it. We take the moments that work really well with co-op, we bring them out and we put them in Special Ops.”

They never admit they won´t make co-op campaign because it is much harder to do. What a shame.

I was recently talking to a game developer and he said that is harder making 2 players co-op campaign than a crowded deathmatch.

Ugh, this is why I ended up playing the Zombies co-op mode much more than the rest of World at War. Will Special Forces become the next Nazi Zombies?

i don't know if i buy that either. bungie and epic sure make it look easy. maybe if CoD games weren't so scripted it wouldn't be as hard to include co-op.

This one's off the radar for now. Gimped co-op mode is one thing, but keeping it to only 2 players? Not for me.

I remember the original CoD games were themed around the idea that "No one fights alone". I know that this technically isn't a CoD game, but I wish they kept that theme going with good co-op.

I respect Infinity Ward for not making a co-op mode for the campaign. World at War is horridly unbalanced if you play one-player and it's just annoying throughout most of the campaign. Then if you play with four-players, the game is FAR too easy. This way everything will be far more balanced.

or they could balance it with 4 player...

You like being stripped of options? Let me ask you this: would you pay the same amount for a car without power windows and a tape deck as you would for a car with power doors/windows, CD deck, and sunroof?

You are being way too simplistic here.

In your analogy, it would be like buying a Geo with power windows / cd player / sunroof for the same price as a BMW w/out the extras.

Some people might want the Geo, but others might want the BMW.

Each addition costs Infinity Ward money.

So instead of being a jack of all trades they have gone for focus on the campaign / 2 player co-op.

Yes, it sucks that it won't have 4 player co-op. But if it means that the rest of the game is that much better, I'll accept that.

There are dozens of great co-op games that feature cinematic content during game play. At this point, saying "it just doesn't fit" is like saying "we're just too lazy".

Am I? Why can I get World at War on the COD4 engine with TWO four-player co-op modes, and I can't get ONE four-player mode for Modern Warfare 2? I'm not even talking about the lack of a co-op campaign...

Infinity Ward used Twitter as a social experiment and asked what the community wanted to see in MW2. An overwhelming number of CUSTOMERS said "4 player co-op". Of course, this was too late into development, so Infinity Ward is feeding us this "we don't want to ruin the experience" line, forgetting that here at Co-Optimus, our experience more often than not depends on the people we play with.

So why is it that Treyarch can deliver a Geo with the extras on Infinity Ward's platform -- keeping in mind that World at War is STILL the top played game on Live -- but Infinity Ward can't deliver a BMW with the same extras?

And Infinity Ward wants to eclipse the Halo 3 launch? Pffft. Good luck, fellas...Halo 3 has a four-player co-op campaign and splitscreen online.

Looks like I'll be skipping Modern Warfare 2 just like I did #1. No co-op - no purchase. And crippling it with limited 2 player co-op is as bad as not having any co-op at all. They don't give me the play I want... they don't get my money. Regardless of World at War's 'ease'... it's still a blast with my 3 buddies, on hardest, competing for the kills and points. And zombie mode... ahhh, zombie mode. Oh well... hasta la vista #2.

I love IW, but there egotistical lazy ass excuses for not giving us a lengthy campaign,story co-op, or even a 4 player co-op horde mode are really getting annoying.

Are they not as efficient with time as treyarch? Can they not work there magic and make MW2 a bigger better game then cod4? Or are they just masking there laziness with arrogance?

This deal seems like its getting worse all the time, and is looking like WAW might have been the superior game for me.

I will NOT buy this game for $60 unless special forces is layed out more like a campaign mode then a horde/nazi zombie type of mode, and if its about 5 hours worth of content.

mw2 will unfortunately still sell like hotcakes....

not to mention halo 3 has been out for two years and will soon have another game on the same engine w/ 4 player co-op etc. two years!

don't get me wrong, i like the CoD games, they just don't have the co-op and split-screen features we want. i really haven't gotten enough playtime out of any of them since my wife can't play. if they had decent split screen at least i'd probably be way more of a CoD fan.

I'm going to preface this post by saying I haven't played either game so I'm going by what I have heard.

Just remember not everyone likes having to play with 4 people (I do), especially if they don't have extensive friend lists.

Twitter isn't exactly a quality sample of what the majority of the community wants. It is a targeted niche. I remember reading somewhere that it is like 5% of the twitter users have some high percentage of tweets.

Did the first Modern Warfare have 4 player co-op? No.

Finally, just because a game is at the top sellers doesn't mean shit. Everything I've heard about CoD5 is that the campaign is mediocre, and that the real selling point is zombie mode (co-op). What was CoD4's primary selling point? (Again I'm assuming) the multiplayer, not the co-op.

Both are legit types of gameplay.

So once again I ask you, would you rather they focus on one area (and make it great) or a bunch of different parts and make it just another generic shooter. Because while you may not agree with the choice they took, doesn't mean it is a matter of them being lazy.

Resources are not infinite.

I'm just glad that it will have some kinda co-op gameplay. Mostly because.. I like to play co-op games with my RL friends and it's not easy to make time so that everyone could play at the same time.