MW2 is a bit of a joke comparatively, it's like playing a toy version of Battlefield, designed for people who cannot or have no desire to conceptualize greater strategies than securing vectors around static geometry with automatic weapons while waiting for magical automatic killstreaks to become available. There is no wall separating you and the vehicles in this game, they don't spawn in the skybox. You have to pilot them, and if you suck at that there's a good chance you'll crash the chopper and it will explode.
I had no problems maintaining a 2+ K/D ratio in MW2 and (ab)using killstreaks, but even my buddy who would constantly pull back-to-back nukes agrees. Even if we don't get to the Apache and destroy everyone with it at base 3+ in Rush, there are a million more things that can happen between A & B that make any given game of Battlefield an objectively more interesting experience.
It would be like comparing Counter-Strike to Battlefield 2 all those years back. CS will always have tighter controls, hit boxes and registration and therefore always feel like a more "raw" shooter. It's also played and rendered at a fraction of the scale, has no vehicle support, static maps, one game mode, and it's basically all about K/D whoring. If that's the style of game you prefer, no feature set will convince you otherwise.
