Call of Duty: World at War Comments by Dan Whitehead

@KingsXKing
"Ur talking bollox so with some artistic merit exploitation is fine is it?
So the TV series World At War is porn then.
Get a grip FFS"

Well, without going offtopic too much, Art can be seen as being about communicating insight in some aspect of humanity. It's not primarily about commercial profit. So if the same archive footage were presented in the context of an artwork, most likely it wouldn't be exploitation. For example, there is that famous picture of a dying soldier in the spanish civil war, who has just been shot but has not fallen to the ground yet. It was popular in the pacifist movement as a poster, often with "WHY?" written on it, in large letters. Because it conveys such a strong emotional message and a rather fundamental insight in the nature of war, it's not exploiting that soldier's death and preserves his dignity.

Activision/Treyarch on the other hand probably included these executions to generate a bit of buzz and "controversy". After all, nothing sells like hype. And that's quite despicable.

"After all, nothing sells like hype. And that's quite despicable."

You should watch "Flags of our Fathers"...despicable is what we humans do..on a daily basis.

i think the japs back then were more ruthless, whats wrong with showing the executions? after all they were pepared to kill by suicide attacks. its a part of history. im not saying americans didnt execute people, but it probably wasnt official, unlike the japanese - where it seems like they were lined up and shot by, or in full view/knowledge of army officials.

If thats the case then perhaps they should consider a career change.

Why? Games getting stale due to endless sequels is a valid criticism.

would be valid if they never gave it an 8.

"Why? Games getting stale due to endless sequels is a valid criticism."

Because as a professional games reviewer, he/she should be objective. What about people who are new to gaming and have never played a CoD game in their puff before?

The things he/she complained about were present in CoD4 and they hardly warranted a comment in that game's review, yet they were also present in the two previous console outings (CoD2 and Cod3). So by your standards, it was already 'stale'.

Its the lack of consistency that makes it a joke of a review, imho.

Btw, I'm not buying WaW...to me it has all the shit (crap matchmaking/hit detection/perks/kill streak rewards) that made CoD4 one of the worst in the series.

I'm pretty bored with WWII shooters by now too, got bored of COD4 eventually as well so I doubt I'll be picking this up. I enjoyed COD4 for a good long while, but it's a bit of a one trick pony and didn't take long for me to go back to Halo. I can see this game lasting an even shorter amount of time before I get bored - or infuriated by the dogs! Halo 3, for me, never gets old. With the many different tactics you can employ, amazingly balanced weapons and levels, and a damn good choice of vehicles and game modes keeps the gameplay fresh for what seems like forever!

Plus, is it really that dificult to actually read the text and make your own mind up. Stop going on about the bloody score, it's really very very dull.

@Fab4

No, he shouldn't. Reviewing games is entirely subjective. Let's not get into that tired old argument again, it's been done a million times.

Karstux - You know that Cappa photo was a fake? There's different levels of exploitation, obv (just thought I'd mention it).

I agree with your sentiment but not your terms: a documentary like World at War, which would use archive footage, is not art. It is trying to convey something, but craft does that. Loth as I am to simply distinguish between craft and art as the only thing that matters, but it helps here: a documentary etc is craft. That Cappa photo is 'art' in one sense and 'craft' in another, it has the special status - 'fake' in one sense, 'real' in another.

BUT ANYWAY, pointless attempts in a comment aside, art is not innately non-exploitative, but I agree with your idea. Entertainment/educative is a difficult line for these games, and one feels, intuitively, that they sway towards the former at the expense of the latter. But then they'd argue, so what? And so it goes on...

Oh and lovely to see other people saying 'but wait, CoD4 had those problems too....!'. Damn right it did.

games should be reviewed on that one games merits ALONE.

a game reviewer who has played EVERY WWII shooter in the last 10 years shouldnt mark this down because HE has seen it all before. this will be a breath of fresh air to people who have played nothing but space alien/contemporary shooters.

Well, if people actually read the review instead of focussing on the score, then that wouldn't be a problem would it? I actually like a review to be written in context to other games of a similar type.If it wasn't, and this was the first WWII shooter - or even FPS game! - the reviewer has ever played, he'd give it a 10. But it isn't, and he shouldn't. It's impossible to avoid a direct comparison as it's a sequel, and by all accounts, a game worse than it's predecessor. So, to ignore all other games in the genre whilst doing a review - let alone the previous games in the series - would be pretty damn stupid in my opinion.

EDIT: Bad grammar/

'games should be reviewed on that one games merits ALONE. '

As MasterNameless argues, that's silly.

If I reviewed on its merits alone, I'd have no reference point. I wouldn't know what was up or down, good or bad. It'd all be sublime or bizarrely jarring, due to not having experience with the medium. Which is impossible, at the same time.

@Schrodinger (no umlaut, soz!)

Woops you're right, one P. As for the stageyness, I'm inclined to say, yeah. Get the exposure at that exact moment? In the open? When someone's shooting (apparently)? Good on him if so! ;)

Certainly read like a 7 to me. Will not be picking it up today. Will wait till next year and pick it up second hand.

COD4 mulitiplayer would have been an 11/10 if it didn't have that stupid martyrdom perk :(

COD5 is just a lazy skinning of COD4 - NEXT!!

flaky ai, corridor gameplay, grenade happy instadeath, magic invisible nazi mind control flee-enators, shitty campathon multiplayer for interfacingly challenged consoles.

substitute nazi for arab and you've got cod4 so why didn't you give it a 10?

Wi Review?

shame. i hoped these guys would make at least a 9 game just to equal IW. think will get this when the price drops considerably :P.

/thinking about buying mirrors edge...

What about people who are new to gaming and have never played a CoD game in their puff before?

Well in that case you can still play CoD 1 - 4.

a game reviewer who has played EVERY WWII shooter in the last 10 years shouldnt mark this down because HE has seen it all before. this will be a breath of fresh air to people who have played nothing but space alien/contemporary shooters.

See above and add on another WW2 shooter that has been released. Games should should absolutely be compared to other games, what other measure is there?

schrodinger wrote: "What is the difference between 'Saving Private Ryan' and this game, for instance? Why should one be allowed, the other one banned? "

Hmmm, good point, I think the real question is: do you think saving private ryan is art? I would say yes, even if it's not spielberg's best IMO. Is COD WAW art? No way. You'd better compare COD to michael bay's pearl harbour or a chuck norris flick, that would be more accurate. Same thing with rainbow six, BTW: those video game takes on realistic serious subjects are embarrassingly stupid, tasteless and condescendent, which tends to prove that video games shouldn't try to tackle those issues, unless they find some better ways to tell their stories and design their shooters.

On the other hand, I don't think COD should be banned, it just makes me mad when i hear comments saying that this franchise provides "a realistic warfare experience" (that was written on the back of COD2's box). If shooters designers had any balls + ideas, they would make a game about WW1. They make games about WW2 simply because it's an easy, good vs evil scenario, and because of the iconic figures and places (omaha beach, reichstag, okinawa, whatever).

'The picture you're talking about must have been crap "art" because that is the first i have heard about it, maybe they need Treyarch too. '

AHAHAHAHAHA. So you've 'heard' of every 'great' piece of art in history? Well done you, I didn't realise you were God.

@ParanoidZombie
+1

I'll be avoiding this as well. Getting Fallout 3 instead.
COD games need to grow up. The annoying teenagers who swear by it eventually will :)

Reads like an 8 that was being reviewed in overly critical mode.

Nobody else gonna mention it?

local LAN network - redundancy fail.

As for KingsXKing's comment about the Capa picture being crap art cos he's never heard of it... wow. Robert Capa was one of the most famous war photographers ever, and did stuff like photographing the D-Day landings. Try a doing a search on his name.

I thought COD 4 single player was way overrated - COD 3 had a better single player campaign and better graphics, with a lot more tense action.

Thanks for pointer but I find little entertainment in googling or wikipedia to boost my knowledge.

Eh? It's not supposed to be entertaining, in this context.

I like being truly down with my homies that is why my being here.

Well, yes. Quite.

@RedSparrow - http://www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/... (just in case you're interested)

'@redsparrows

I'm not into much "art" so thanks for the demi god comparison sorry to say your a bit way off.

Maybe ur the mysterious gingerary street toff name of Banksy, u seem a little touched.

If not maybe you could jog on and have a wank by a Damien Hirst.'

Wow, not only did you miss my point, you missed the fact that in no way was I pushing some artistic snobbery.

You said you haven't heard of it, so it can't be that great.

That, artistic knowledge or not, is absurd. Apply it to any field of human endeavour. Have you ever heard the name of certain amino acids that your life depends on? No? They musn't be important then. It's not about snobbery, it's about simple logic and knowledge.

+ thanks for the link, I'll have a looksee. I've always come across things that have said it's teh staged, but I'll have a good read of that.

Edit: interesting eh! Well, I'm prepared to accept his hypotheses, I'm no expert on Capa by any means. But all that aside, the point still remains, as was agreed :) I think this is the most interesting comments thread on a big game I've seen for a while, hah.

"I thought COD 4 single player was way overrated - COD 3 had a better single player campaign and better graphics, with a lot more tense action. "

Generally speaking, I liked COD4 SP for its uber production values but it was way too short, like taking-the-piss too short ...

Am I the only one who thought cod4 was merely just "ok"?

Sure i ENJOYED it (unusual for me with fps games) but it was hardly the 2nd coming!

EDIT: Note- I didnt play it online - I never play fps games online as i already know the outcome - I suck!

God, there are a lot of tossers playing this game online tonight. I did have a briefly entertaining campaign co-op session on whatever the 'hard but not very hard' difficultly setting is called. Hopefully the co-op and zombie modes will justify the buy for me.

Btw, anyone pick up a 28 pounds (f**king US keyboard) Asda copy? My Asda had sold out. Annoyingly had to pay 35 pounds from Zavvi.

No Smelly, it seems a fair few on here alone feel the same. I really couldn't get past the obvious mechanics behind it all, and while it was fun, it's so rigid that it's nothing that makes me feel like I am playing a truly brilliant game.

>No Smelly, it seems a fair few on here alone feel the same.

There WERE cool bits (such as after the nuke, etc).

But the game iteself was very "meh".. with the difficulty spiking and dropping more than the current stock exchange.

Felt VERY scripted.. Im sure it's ACE in multiplayer (if you like that sort of thing - i dont).. Actually that MAY be why i didnt like halo 3 (Only ever really judged it on the single player).... Bioshock has no excuse though :-)

Well, thats disappointing - COD4 was really something special, I will probably still get this for multiplayer but it's a shame that it's not going to blow people away like the last game.

Still, for a totally new experience that breaks boundaries, we are probably going to wait more than 1 year of development time.

/waits for Operation Flashpoint
/hell freezes over

@smelly
Absolutely not. COD4 was about as sophisticated as Chuck Norris. Of course nothing to stop the mainstream from enjoying it :P I did finish SP mode, and it was hilarious and fun in places, but nothing to keep me from uninstalling it. Just be glad your tastes are different.

Review totally read like a 6/7 at best, then score got bumped to a respectable 8 so as not to upset the masses / important game franchise?

EIGHT?

KingsXKing, are you being cruelly ironic, or are you really that stupid to be unable to understand that a statement like 'It's not great cos I don't know it' is bullshit?

the game is better than cod 4,more intense and more tweaks like the flamethrower,molotov cocktail,the new gore effects incredible.Treyarch are really good in making ww2 games,they are passionate people

Respawn,Respawn, Respawn, Respawn, Respawn, Respawn, Respawn, Respawn,

Just not acceptable to compensate for shit AI. Fucking brutal as we would say in Dublin,

Haha, anyone saying this is a good game or that Treyarch are decent developers need marching out and shooting, much like the Japanese do in this game. Couldn't develop their way out of a paper bag.

The differences between IW games and Treyarch games is not just 'ones slick' 'ones an action-fest', it's that the former develop a nuanced, smart and rewarding game experience, and the latter don't have a grip on how to employ simple game mechanics in a modern shooter. Treyarch are - at best - stuck making the middling FPS games that dominated the 90s. At worst, they're completely irrelevant.

I still say COD 4 was way overrated...COD 3 was so much better...Action, tension, graphics, explosions, suspense, effects still look and play better then 4. And a longer game too!

aint played very far in single player, but multiplayer is the shiz baby, loveing it. So many great games to play so little time, im off for 3 days straight now so bring on good times! my xbox live tag is OveN Ch1pZ if u want to add a english speaking welsh person lol.

'The differences between IW games and Treyarch games is not just 'ones slick' 'ones an action-fest', it's that the former develop a nuanced, smart and rewarding game experience, and the latter don't have a grip on how to employ simple game mechanics in a modern shooter. Treyarch are - at best - stuck making the middling FPS games that dominated the 90s. At worst, they're completely irrelevant.'

Does 'nuance' mean 'horribly obvious, artificial and archaic enemy spawns/set pieces'?

@redsparrows

I need to an example of "cruelly ironic" to answer that supposed metaphor

--

For my own sense of respect for your poor brain, I'll tell myself you're being ironic.

Calm down harmonica...cod4 has respawning a go go until you walk over set points..half life it aint

Criticising COD's respawning mechanic is a bit weak, that's just how the game works. It was much more annoying and apparent in COD2 and COD3, they toned it down in COD4 so that in your average run through it wasn't really much of an issue - in fact lot of points didn't have respawning set.

"Does 'nuance' mean 'horribly obvious, artificial and archaic enemy spawns/set pieces'?"

Nuanced means it has nuances, fairly obviously. Do you really want to get into pointing out how many games rely on genre tropes? Pretty much of all of them.

http://www.snappygamer.com/2008/11/17/ca...

No, I don't want to get into genre conventions and the like, I simply don't think the word 'nuanced' applies to a game where soldiers spawn endlessly until you walk down a corridor, resulting in the sudden disappearance of what was before a stream of angry soldiers after the last stragglers have been shot. And then repeat for 5 hours.

Also, criticising something is perfectly valid even if it's the 'just the way it works': otherwise we could have some horrible situations where we can't criticise cos it's 'the way things are' ;) My real gripe with CoD4 comes from the multiplayer, and the horrible spawn-ringing that is possible. Take bog, the house spawn. The enemy team can camp around it, from the market and from the 'bog' area, and you can't escape. You move and die. Over and over. And it doesn't take it into account.

King, you have missed the point entirely, and your point about language is even further away from anything ever that was a) relevant and b) actually correct.

I call BS on the score. My god this game is boring and unoriginal. I played for 3-4 hours yesterday for review-purposes and had to struggle not to eject the disc and just break it then and there. A total disappointmend only made more so by the stellar predecessor and current titles like Gears2. The worst thing is I have to go back and play more today. Cheap, cheap, cheap. And The fact that Eurogamer gives a rotten title a rating of 8 is unbelievable. Shame. Cosmic shame.