Having come from a tradition of PC gaming that included the Jane's Combat Simulations line of games and an affinity to the ultra-realistic Silent Hunter series of games, I personally find a game like, say, Assassin's Creed to be more believable than Modern Warfare 2. And so, I decided to point out a few places where Infinity Ward got careless with their research. Hopefully, you guys can learn a few things too.
 
First off, weapons: 
 
Myth: The AT-4 is portrayed as a guided weapon system. Both it and the Javelin anti-tank missile is used in an anti-air role.
Reality: To my knowledge, no guided variant of the AT-4 exists. The inclusion of the HS tag (assuming it stands for "heat-seeking") is likely creative license by the developers. Though the Javelin may theoretically be used in a surface-to-air capacity, as its infrared seeker is more sensitive than that of the FIM-92 Stinger (though on the downside, that would mean it's more easily fooled by heat-based countermeasures i.e. flares), the Javelin can be fired in a direct trajectory, making it more useful against slow-moving aircraft (the top-down function is used to penetrate the weaker armor on the top of armored vehicles. 
 
Myth: The Enhanced Battle Rifle variant of the M-14 rifle is referred to as the M-14 EBR. It is used in a designated marksman capacity.
Reality: Though the EBR is essentially a modified M-14, the proper nomenclature is "Mk14 Mod 0 EBR," as it is a weapon designed for the Navy SEALs (weapons tailored for the SEALS are referred to with the "Mark" designation, rather than M, for example the Mk. 23 handgun and the Mk. 48 light machinegun). In addition, the designated marksman (or if you prefer, sniper) version of the M-14 is called the M-14 DMR (Designated Marksman Rifle). The Mk. 14 was designed to extend the reach of the standard infantryman beyond that of an assault rifle without the cumbersome nature of a full on sniper rifle (as such, the real life Mk. 14 does have a full-automatic firing mode). 
 
Next, missions:  
 
Rangers Lead the Way: 
 
Myth: The M-134 "Minigun" has supplanted the M-2 .50 calliber machinegun as the standard armament for Humvees. 
Reality: Perhaps a reasonable extrapolation, though I've only seen miniguns mounted atop civillian SUVs, meaning if they would be used in the future by some form of mechanized infantry unit, it would be by civilian defense contractors rather than full on militaries. It would make more sense however that the US Army would continue to develop the remote-controlled CROWs system for the venerable "Ma Deuce", as the army is far more concerned about keeping troops safe than making them look badass (which mind you, is as it should be). 
 
Wolverines! 
 
Myth: Army Rangers hold-out against waves of infantry using remote TV guided missile launched from a Predator drone. 
Reality: TV guided missiles have largely been phased out of service in favor of far more accurate and reliable infrared, laser, and GPS guided weapons systems. The only armament used by a Predator drone is the laser-guided AGM-114 Hellfire missile, of which no TV guided variant was ever produced. 
 
The Only Easy Day... was Yesterday 

Myth: While inserting commandos to retake an oil platform, Flight I Los Angeles Class submarines (commonly called the "688" class) are used. This is indicated by the names of the submarines, USS Dallas and USS Chicago and the fact that their dive planes are mounted on the conning tower.
Reality: The Flight I boats of the 688 class are by the time of the events of Modern Warfare 2 outdated and close to being decommisioned. They have predominantly been supplanted by the 688i ("I" for "improved") and the new Virginia class fast attack submarines, which are more suitable for arctic operations as described in this mission, as their dive planes are mounted on the bow and in addition, carry 12 vertical launch tubes for the launch of Tomahawk land attack cruise missiles. In addition, the Los Angeles class is ill-suited for insertion of SEAL teams and the like, as submarines such as the retrofitted long-hull Ohio class SSGN guided missile submarines and Seawolf class subs, such as the USS Jimmy Carter, have been repurposed for this type of mission.      
 
The Gulag 
 
Myth: F-15E "Strike" Eagles, supposedly sortied by the Navy, conduct SEAD (Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses) with AGM-88 HARM missiles in preperation for the airborne landing of TF 141. The NATO brevity launch code "Fox-3" is used. 
Reality: "Fox 3" indicates the launch of an active-radar guided, fire-and-forget, AIR-to-AIR missile, typically of the AIM-120 AMRAAM (Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile) family, or the now phased out of service AIM-154 Phoenix used by the retired F-14. The proper verbiage used to indicate the launch of an AGM-88 HARM (High-speed Anti-Radiation Missile) would be "Magnum." In addition, the HARM has an effective range of 60 miles, permitting the launching aircraft to engage air defenses well out of the range of all but a few SAM modules (the SA-10 "Grumble" or the SA-21 "Growler" for example). The range at which the Strike Eagles are launching would put them in the envelope of mechanized and man-portable infra-red guided ground-to-air missiles, such as the SA-14 "Strela" and the SA-16 "Gimlet" for example, which are significantly harder to evade due to their high-aspect turn radiuses. Also, Infinity Ward are under the mistaken assumption that the F-15E is a naval aircraft, The F-15 lacks reinforced landing struts and tail-hook for it to be suitable for carrier operations. In addition, the E and F variants of the F/A-18 Superhornet, which are used by the navy, excel even more so in SEAD operations than the F-15E.      

 
Contingency 
 
Myth: Captain Price and the rest of TF 141 raid a Kamchatka submarine base to commandeer a Russian ballistic missile submarine. 
Reality: The submarine depicted is of completely ficitious design, the most glaring inconsistency is the fact that its silhouette  does not match that of SSBNs deployed by the Russian navy (i.e. the Delta IV class, the Typhoon of Red October fame, and the newly produced Borei class). The second giveaway is the fact that on careful examination, the submarine has 18 vertical launch tubes, whereas the Delta and the Borei has 16 and the Typhoon has 20.

Very nice. There's really too many to fit in one thread, though. Is this going to just stick to SP, or are we opening the MP can of worms?

Completely fictitious design... 
Glaring inconsistency... 
Combat simulation... 
  
Not to rain on your parade, but no one cares.

There`s a lot of games that have these kind of inaccuracies. Its inevitable. I`m not sure about Operation Flashpoint 2 or Arma II though.

I'm glad you know your gun technology, but I think Infinity Ward is more concerned with balance and fun than actual realism.  With Modern Warfare 2 being a mass market video game (and not a technical manual or even a hardcore simulation), I think fun is #1.

Impressive
 
but you know it's a video game

it is a video game. i do like the gun ones.   when did any terrorist attack the white house and get in. never so it is a fictional parts of the game. 
 
models 1887 can't really be reloaded the way with akimbo. a person's arms would rip off if they did that.

The ACOG sight loses its crosshair due to an EMP... which is odd since the ACOG scope doesn't utilize electricity.
 
The AK 47 isn't compatible with NATO sights. 
The M203 grenade launcher was designed for the M16 and the M4. The ACR, SCAR, TAR 21, F2000 all have their own grenade launchers.
 
But it's an arcade shooter... so I'm not complaining.

You did illustrate some good points, but one in particular is actually an up and coming trend in the military--specifically the Minigun/Humvee problem you had. The minigun is actually making its appearance alongside the "Ma Deuce" heavy machine gun progressively, although in smaller numbers. CROWS system is again and up and coming trend in the military that hasn't seen mass production yet. While a fantastic system that protects the user inside the vehicle, it's still a fairly new piece of tech that is rather expensive to manufacture, and build onto a platform. I do agree though, it be more practical to see the system in use in Call of Duty, would make for easier missions to boot.
 
Everything else I totally agree with you, but without all the perks and creative licensing, the game probably wouldn't be as fun/fair as it is now right? Really, it's just one of those discrepancies that you just have to get over. Realism over fun is a huge money maker! :)

Good eye you have there. Sadly I don't think many people will take too much notice and state "it's just a game". But you do make a good point. Kudos.

Pretty educational post, thanks for taking the time to point that stuff out. On some weird nerdy level I find this sort of stuff highly entertaining to read :)
 
Hopefully people take time to read it all the way through and not just rush to post "Dude it's a game, shut up!". Just because it is a game doesn't mean we can't educate ourselves on the solid true facts that the game itself tries to relay but manages to be inaccurate about!

" I'm glad you know your gun technology, but I think Infinity Ward is more concerned with balance and fun than actual realism.  With Modern Warfare 2 being a mass market video game (and not a technical manual or even a hardcore simulation), I think fun is #1. "

" Pretty educational post, thanks for taking the time to point that stuff out. On some weird nerdy level I find this sort of stuff highly entertaining to read :)  Hopefully people take time to read it all the way through and not just rush to post "Dude it's a game, shut up!". Just because it is a game doesn't mean we can't educate ourselves on the solid true facts that the game itself tries to relay but manages to be inaccurate about! "

The stuff you posted is pretty interesting however the game would probably be less fun if they went into aspergian detail about all the minutia of military equipment.

That's impressive duder. Good thing your here to lay it straight.

alot of the guns are reloaded wrong too :p 
 
not to mention firing 2 shotguns on the move (and from the hip) would be close to impossible with any accuracy

" alot of the guns are reloaded wrong too :p  not to mention firing 2 shotguns on the move (and from the hip) would be close to impossible with any accuracy "

No amountt of painkiller drugs would prevent you from being shredded into 50 pieces from a 50 cal round, much less survive it if you got shot in the foot/leg with one.
obviously its for balance but its just another one of those things
 
I would also think an AC-130 specter gunship with its 105 MM howitzer and 45 MM Bofors cannon would cause alot more devastation then knocking chairs and cans around in a map.

These inaccuracies don't make the game any less fun. But at the same time they're interesting to see. So, with that, I'll give something: did you know, the F2000 model in this game is actually an F2000 Tactical?

All you have to do is look at the story they tried to give MW2 to see how unreal everything was in the entire game.

Sweet post dude.

"Sadly, World at War is arguably better than this Modern Warfail 2 rubbish "

i love how you all get annoyed at the lack of realism in an arcade shooter. 
 
Play Arma 2 thats a pretty sweet game and way more realistic.

yeah they got a lot wrong but at least ghost is real 
 

I thought the second you drove down a hill in a snowmobile and made a jackie chan esk jump over a giant ass chasm it was obvious reality was sacrificed for "awesome!"

How about a throwing knife doing more damage than a bullet?  Killing someone with them is definitely satisfying though, so I'll allow it.

"I'm glad you know your gun technology, but I think Infinity Ward is more concerned with balance and fun than actual realism.  With Modern Warfare 2 being a mass market video game (and not a technical manual or even a hardcore simulation), I think fun is #1. "

Here's everything I noticed based on my military experience. 
 
- I've fired a standard AT-4 and can confirm that it isn't a guided missile, just a straight rocket. 
- Standard Army-issued M4s are NOT fully automatic. Just single shot, and a very inaccurate 3-round burst mainly utilized for shooting while driving. 
- You don't mount a fucking mini-gun to a HMMVV. Those vehicles only use M240B, .50 Cal, and the Mark 19 grenade launcher. In some small cases, you might mount a SAW.   
- Th Army would never give you as many resources as the soldiers did in the campaign.
 
Those are the major issues I have noticed and in reality, I have used all those weapons. All your other complaints are also true, and for those I don't know for sure sound accurate.

" Here's everything I noticed based on my military experience. 
 
- I've fired a standard AT-4 and can confirm that it isn't a guided missile, just a straight rocket. 
- Standard Army-issued M4s are NOT fully automatic. Just single shot, and a very inaccurate 3-round burst mainly utilized for shooting while driving. 
- You don't mount a fucking mini-gun to a HMMVV. Those vehicles only use M240B, .50 Cal, and the Mark 19 grenade launcher. In some small cases, you might mount a SAW.    - Th Army would never give you as many resources as the soldiers did in the campaign.  Those are the major issues I have noticed and in reality, I have used all those weapons. All your other complaints are also true, and for those I don't know for sure sound accurate. "

" @EpicSteve said:

" Here's everything I noticed based on my military experience. 
 
- I've fired a standard AT-4 and can confirm that it isn't a guided missile, just a straight rocket. 
- Standard Army-issued M4s are NOT fully automatic. Just single shot, and a very inaccurate 3-round burst mainly utilized for shooting while driving. 
- You don't mount a fucking mini-gun to a HMMVV. Those vehicles only use M240B, .50 Cal, and the Mark 19 grenade launcher. In some small cases, you might mount a SAW.    - Th Army would never give you as many resources as the soldiers did in the campaign.  Those are the major issues I have noticed and in reality, I have used all those weapons. All your other complaints are also true, and for those I don't know for sure sound accurate. "

DAMN SON! Why? "

The online play has even more glaring inaccuracies.  Let's examine the Harrier.  First, no Harrier ever has had, nor ever will have a gun turret mounted underneath the pilot - that is where the landing gear comes out.  Second, Apaches (and similar attack helicopters) cannot fire straight down under the belly of the aircraft with the nose gun & they cannot fire at angles the pilot can't see (such as behind the aircraft).  
I cannot count the number of times online that I have been killed by a Harrier or an attack helicopter at an angle that the aircraft is incapable of firing at.   And how many times has anyone actually seen an Apache hover over a battle??  Don't they usually engage from a distance??  And what about pumping 3 fulls magazines from the Hbar into the belly/wings of a Harrier & it doesn't even start to smoke??   Is it too much to ask Infinity Ward to actually RESEARCH the weapons & vehicles that they are putting in their games?? 

Yes, the game is fun, but the fun factor really starts to diminish when you get killed in a manner that is not possible.  The aircraft should not be given special abilities that they do not have.  And where the heck is the first map pack for this game??  The current maps mostly suck (Underpass, Karachi, Invasion, Quarry, Skid Row, & Favela are the best ones). 

" Yes, the game is fun, but the fun factor really starts to diminish when you get killed in a manner that is not possible.  The aircraft should not be given special abilities that they do not have.  And where the heck is the first map pack for this game??  The current maps mostly suck (Underpass, Karachi, Invasion, Quarry, Skid Row, & Favela are the best ones).  "

Because I'm sure they were going for realism... /sarcasm
 
Unless your game is Red Orchestra, there are going to be a lot of unrealistic aspects of your game.

At least the casings kick to the right, not left. Looking at you Battlefield...

the AA12 would not be as balanced as it is in the game... that thing is scary dangerous in real life :|

Hmmm very interesting. 

It's a videogame.  A purposefully unrealistic video game.  Who cares dude?