The ending of the single player isn't very satisfactory. It's obviously leading us into another sequel.

what i don't get, is makarov is an ultranationalist, the ultranationalists now have power in russia, but makarov still fights against russia?

He wanted to provoke war between Russia and the United States, hence the massacre of civilians in "No Russian" with US weaponry.

I gotta admit, the plot of this one is a bit confusing. :p

Yeah, i wish we had gotten to kill makarov too. And that at least a few other members of 141 survived.

The twist with Shepard cleaning house was also confusing somewhat.

Yeah, and the fact the first part of the game hes in routine combat (generals dont roll up to the front lines) and using a colt anaconda?

Well the revolver for the general might just be something to make him unique. Though I don't know about him being on the front line right where the action is. The very first mission of action where we see him picking you off the ground, hostiles were shooting across the river. A simple sniper could have easily picked off the general. Now later on when the general arrived to personally kill Roach and Ghost, that's more of his own thing.

My real problem is that they don't follow up with a debriefing about why the Russian attacked, the extent of the damage and are there any Russians left in the US? Then about what is Shepard's angle in all this?

The Russians attacked because Makarov framed the United States for the massacre of the civilians in "No Russian".

But to what end?

you see green flares on all the monuments in whiskey hotel, which means the city is back in american control. what the russians were trying to accomplish by airdropping in that few troops....no idea. Its pretty much a pointless strike. And how did they just sneak in like that?

COD4's plot was pretty believable and well written. MW2...well.....wtf?

BTW, i love how people think the riot shields a great weapon. I just sidestep, even just slightly, and knife them.