Since I am on This Topic

I've been reading reviews for Battlefield: Bad Company 2 and noticed that a lot of them seem to share in the idea that the single player campaign isn't all that great. When I read statement like, "...the single-player game is just plain not fun, (citation)" I can't help but wonder if we're playing the same game. I certainly would never go so far as to say that his opinion is wrong. Only the reviewer knows how much fun he/she is either having or not having. I'm not the entire way through the campaign yet (admittedly... I'm only about half way through the game) but I'm having a great time with it. I'm not trying to spark a war about it, but I'm enjoying myself far more with this campaign than I did with Modern Warfare 2.  
 
I don't think the reason for this is any kind of specific defect with Modern Warfare 2, but I enjoy the slightly more open approach to missions in games like Battlefield and Crysis than the 'trench-style' shooters like Call of Duty. If there is one thing I think that should be easy to admit about the Call of Duty series, is that they all feel exactly the same. I had to take two runs at completing Call of Duty 4 because I lost interest (fortunately Modern Warfare 2 was much shorter). 
 
I dig that there are a lot of people that are into these games. That's awesome. You can't argue with the amount of time and effort the teams who made them put into their design. I definitely lean toward the Battlefield side of execution as opposed to the Call of Duty side. I think this has more to do with the kind of games I like to play in general, as opposed to there being something fundamentally wrong with the way these games are designed.  
 
I leave it open to discussion then I suppose. Do you really feel like the single player portion of Bad Company 2 isn't fun?