Medal of Honor vs CoD6 Modern Warfare 2

How many times have you been in the pre-game lobby on Xbox 360 live watching the countdown timer waiting for a game to start, (you can see the map you're about to play in the bottom left of your screen), when the 'vote to skip' counter starts climbing and the map skip vote gets passed? You're then left thinking 'why the heck did they vote to skip a great map?'

And let's face it, there's not a huge number of maps to play on Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2, so what is it about maps which people like and dislike in particular?

It would appear that ever since the launch of the Call of Duty Modern Warfare series, maps have changed from the type of large open expanses like Call of Duty 3 where you could kind of see what was going on, to the close-proximity 'running around like a headless chicken' maps with which we are all now familiar!

This may be why the first of the Call of Duty Modern Warfare series, although excellent, couldn't be played and enjoyed to the same levels of entertainment as Call of Duty 3 (still a favourite and sure to bring a smile to anyone's face especially just before joining an online game on Xbox live when you hear all that carnage from in-game play!).

So what is it?

Is it the fact that with the Modern Warfare series, you can get stuck-in to the action faster or is it some other reason? Do tell ...

In a way, it's a shame the game developers have moved to modern warfare exclusively. I for one would love to see this level of gameplay and realism applied to the WW2 arena. After all, the popularity of this type of first-person shooter came about from World War 2 games like Medal of Honor and Call of Duty 3.

So how about it game developers? Let's have a new series of WW2 games featuring the same graphics engines and realism as Modern Warfare. Just imagine the detail on World War 2 tanks, weapons, aircraft, soldiers and their kit? Sounds terrific.

What do you think?