Call of Duty: World at War Comments by Dan Whitehead

Not as good as CoD 4 then, as expected. Still, I'm sure it's a great game, probably wait for the bargain bins though.

I'll pass this one.
Stupid Activision... A COD4 Expansion would have been very high in sales along Gears 2. They're just too greedy.

I am enjoying the single player campaign just wish it were longer I fear I have almost completed it. I have not gone online yet I will finish single player first.

I would love a Call of Duty game that covered Stalingrad. The Russian Campaign in 2 left me wanting more.

Hopefully my friend has just picked this up from Asda for me - for 27 blinkin' pound coins.

Sounds a bit meh. Will probably pick it up 2nd hand in the new year for the single player, complete it and then re-sell it.

The multiplayer beta wasn't a patch on COD4 for me.

I guess if they keep making the same game over and over one of them will turn out to be halfway decent.

Such a hypercritical review, and yet it still ends with an 8?

Lordy. Oh well, at least this confirms everything I suspected about this game. I lost literally days of my life to COD4, but got bored of the beta for this within minutes.

Pass.

Not bothered about the single player personally, so the comments about flaky AI and corridor gameplay doesn't bother me at all. The MP beta was good enough for me to warrant buying this, should be fun especially the Nazi Zombie slaughter fest and Co Op mode. Even if its not as good as 4 just got to wait another year till the next one and provided IW don't jump ship I can't wait! I'd much prefer to pass the time than a COD4 expansion and then have to wait 2 years until another full game comes out, really don't know why everyone is complaining!

@Peew971

Amazing idea, sport. You should be on the Activision board.

If, instead of this, they'd gotten the whole of Treyarch to do new maps for COD4, that would have been money well spent.

Now they're stuck with another shitty sequel.

Again, just like the Mirror's Edge review, this read like a much lower score than it received...

(opening, rather tastelessly, with what looks like real archive footage of Japanese military executions)

They are indeed, according to the internet. Funny how mediawatch-uk haven't said a peep. Is this violence okay cos it's historic, whereas fictional violence where no-one gets hurt isn't okay cos it's evil?

BTW, have you noticed how the cover for this game looks distinctly modern?

Not one Captain Manwaring in sight

It's almost as if they're in denial.

I agree, review was very critical. I never liked Call of Duty, but 4 changed my mind and hooked me for a long time..... I was really hoping for more of the same. dang.

edit: my spelling sucks yet again

Someone has to say it

Reads like a 6

Gotta agree that the review sounded more like a 6, guess it was just saying its a great game..but here are the the flaws. Wont be getting as ME is out as is Res 2 soon while LBP arrives tomorrow.

Played it a lot, and an 8 is bang on the money.

8 sir? Totally read like a 6

I don't disagree with your ultimate conclusion, and it's fine knowing that going in, but I disagree with this:

So, ultimately, we've got all the highs and lows that have come to define the Call of Duty experience but made less enticing this time around simply because we're back in World War 2. For all the eye-popping bombast and cinematic presentation, we've played variations on these scenarios dozens of times already, in this and other wartime franchises, and the effect is dimmed as a result. Dashing up yet another beach is no longer the heart-stopping experience it once was. As with the blockbuster movies it so slavishly models itself on, World at War's solo campaign is an undeniable thrill, but a shallow one.

World War 2 is an enduring and fascinating period of human history. Certainly there is scope for a bit more variation in battles explored by WW2 games, but all the same it's a period of history made all the more fascinating by its basis in reality.

The fact of the matter is, there are far more 'contemporary' or 'futuristic' shooters than WW2 shooters, so to me the whole 'oh my, another WW2 shooter' point feels so horribly laboured.

What's more disturbing to me is the seemingly tasteless way this devastating conflict is treated. You mentioned the tasteless intro but also the caricature voice acting in the mp beta was a bit of a turn off. Not to mention the concept of things like 'death cards' and 'NAZI ZOMBIE MODE!'. That last one sounds like great fun, but try and treat the subject matter with the dignity it so obviously deserves and be a bit more delicate about it.

Points about multiplayer's flaws are well made. All the same CoD4 online had myriad idiosyncratic problems yet I kept coming back to it. There's still a lot of value in the game's multiplayer here, as I see it, if you're a fan of CoD online.

I'll probably buy it today. Have an exam so could do with a post-exam pick-me-up.

So far what I can say about COD - World at War - I only got it today - is that is not COD4. However, any FPS that has 'Jack Bauer' as its leading character is bound to be exciting!!! The game does not add or take much from COD4 gameplay as it uses the same engine. Meaning, COD5 has a good and solid story mode - flashy scenes, narrated by a great actor, topped up by real footage of the real war that shaped the world that we live on.
MP its fun! The maps are diverse and much different from COD4. There are some few and minor innovations such as - 'dog attack instead of helicopter (still unsure whether i like it or not), vehicles (tanks) - and a couple of new perks. Now, the big drawback to me on this series: THE GUNS. One of the most exciting points of COD4 is its guns!! Nothing better than an up to date arsenal of guns to choose from. All in all still a great game, probably the best WWII game, but not as good as COD4... :)

No way is this game as good as MGS 4

8/10? What? WHAT?!

Also, let that be the end of World War II games, please. It has been milked to death.

I find it weird that (in single player terms at least, not played the multi which sounds the same, but with dogs and tanks), it sounds like it follows pretty much the CoD pattern, as expected, and sounds to be well done (a la CoD4), but CoD4 was called phenomenal et al. I know it was a year ago...but corridor shooter....blatantly obvious spawn mechanics/set pieces. Ah well. Not interested in this in the slightest, but fair play to those who enjoy it!

I really want to play the single player game, mainly for the visuals. That's about it. Wham bam thank you kamikaze-san.

I don't think the review read like a 6, nor am I one to bother with that sort of comment. Rather, I think the review was very well written and told us fans of COD exactly what we wanted to know about the game. It seems the main problem with the game is the lack of innovation (the WWII setting AGAIN) and Treyarch's inability to address the flaws of the previous versions ( the 'dumb' AI, the invisible checkpoints etc.). Im going to rent it tomorrow evening, and give the multiplayer a try, just to see how it compares to COD4.

Also, that 'saving private Ryan' trophy sounds pretty easy to obtain, I wonder if all the others will be as unique. I bet we will get stuck with plenty of 'Completed Level 1' etc. bronze trophies.

I'm waiting with bated breath for the Japan release. If there is one.

"Corridor gameplay. Outdated features. Flaky AI."

All things that CoD4 had, in spades, yet it still scored better. CoD4 didnt even offer Co-op or Zombie survival. Methinks the reviewer is biased either towards modern weaponry, or IW.

I do feel 8 is a fair representation of the game. COD4 felt pretty fresh, while as the reviewer has said WW2 has been done to death (but i still dont mind it). The game is what you expect, scripted fun... If you like WW2 shooter games then its one to get.

Im properly fed up of CoD, A new game every year is too much, it should be every 2 or 3 years. But we all now thats not how Activision do business.

Methinks the reviewer is biased either towards modern weaponry, or IW.

Or maybe he is sick of hearing about and playing CoD games.

Did Japanese soldiers really run about shouting BANZAI! and trying to stick machine gun wielding Yanks with a sharpened chopstick, or has someone been reading too many Commando/Union Jack Jackson comics?

Dodgy racial stereotypes FTW!

@ potato_fan

I completely agree.
I think alot of Halo hate comes from the people who are shit at it.
It is the greatest multiplayer game I have ever played. When it is plaed at a high level and you can sit behind someone who is really good it becomes an entertaiment in itself. It is so polished and varied.
It is the standard to which all Xbox games are now judged.
Even Gears multiplayer falls way short of the Halo achievement.

"Or maybe he is sick of hearing about and playing CoD games."

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

so 8 more than it should of got then

The series moves backwards again....strange.

back to Berlin for the climactic assault on the Reichstag

er... ok, where did we play this before?

bakaro!

I want this as I love the beta, but it's gonna loose out, far too much to buy already. Anyway, maybe I'll put it down for a Christmas present.

Oh sorry I shouldn't say that. It's piracy and 2nd hand gaming that affects sales isn't it, nothing to do with the completely retarded all out the gate at once mentality the games industry has ;)

Review didn't mention the music. it is godawful.


It has a very synthesized, modern sound much like a tom clancy game, complete with the occasional screaming electric guitar going DERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRnnnnnnn like the checkpoint riff in gears.


totally out of place.

I've finished it, and 8 feels about right to me, although I must say the text doesnt say 8 to me.

The russian/german levels are 100 times better than the south pacific IMHO, and it felt very much like COD2 (and dare I say it - better) in parts.

There is a lot wrong, ai is very dodgy, and in particular with your own squad, you can be tucked into some pretty sparse cover, and one of your men who has been scripted to use that cover will come and hunch down next to you - pushing you out into the line of fire. Happened frequently to me.

I played it on hardened and it took about 10-12 hours for me. I know I'm shit, but some of the sections were seemingly impossible until I found the hidden "trigger point" to stop the enemy spawning - thats the mopst irritating thing of all.

Kudos to treyarch, because its a far better effort than cod3 (which I absolutley loathed) but still falls short of the IW instalments.

I like it. Prefer it to 4. Co-op campaign is brilliant.

The review seems like it has been written for an intended audience (Treyarch dissenters) which may well be why it's at odds with the score it provides.

Read like 6 or 7 to me. Basically, a shooter is all about the AI and the freedom in which you're allowed to approach a situation. Itsounds like the game fails at both junctures.

i got turned off cod4 pretty quickly. i was looking for a battlefield 2 clone for the ps3 to accompany warhawk. i was mistaken. unfair perks, inability to kill someone who's charging me in a knife attack, the noob m16 and the biggest one: getting your arse handed to you by the americans who'd had the game for a few days before us brits, ie. no rank restricted rooms. so i left it for a few weeks and went back to the less mardy warhawk. goes back to cod 4 to find literally everyone playing was a prestige rank and i get pwned big time. and no, i dont believe you get better playing better people. its not fun being slaughtered imo

anyway, this sounds like more of the same. i wish there was a demo for things like this (i know there is for codwaw), it would have saved me some money (cough *gears* cough) but the success of cod4 will be enough for this to sell. unfortunately. that'll keep treyarch involved in another game that wont be as influential on game design as cod 4 was, single player and the early stages of multiplayer, infinity ward owned.

"its not fun being slaughtered imo "

Get good at the game then ;)

A fair score IMO after the three hours I played this for last night. Looks great, sounds great, gameplay good, level design not so good. There's too many blatantly invisible walls scattered around for my liking that take you out of the game and come across as unbelievable.

For example, on the first level there are *open* doorways you cannot enter, steps you cannot go up and pathways you cannot take even though there's no obvious logical in-game reason why apart from the developers don't want you going that way. On the last sniper level I was playing there's even a bit where you go up a ladder but you cannot go down it once the next setpiece is triggered because the game wants you to go a different way. It's a real shame that the game feels so restricted, it makes it seem far more linear than it needed to be, and the developers have clearly missed an opportunity to have multiple routes and objectives through each level.

Also the hateful respawn points are back with a vengeance and more glaringly apparent in this game than the previous ones. You can spend ages at certain points fighting off enemies because you didn't move forward to a specific point which then triggers the next set point. It's about time this archaic design choice was abandoned in favour of something a bit more random and realistic IMO.

Overall it's a good game in terms of atmosphere and excitement but the game design lets it down IMO. I'd give 7.5 so far although that's only for the single player campaign.

back to Berlin for the climactic assault on the Reichstag

er... ok, where did we play this before?
Recycling is good for the environment. And for developers who run out of ideas so reuse something from the very first game in the series!

Um, read as a 7/10?

To be honest, Whizzo, the whole WWII setting is getting very familiar now so it's unavoidable. Even the Pacific setting has been used at least twice before in Medal of Honor: Pacific Assault and the awful console versions of that game for example which came out at the same time (don't remember what it was called though). A lot of the Pacific levels in this new COD feels straight out of the PC version of MOH: Pacific Assault to me.

"COD is a rubbish series and COD4 should have go
t an 8 as well. Get the fuck over it. As far as shooters go, nothing comes close to the depth and polish of Halo 3."

not sure that's popular opinion :p

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?art...

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?art...

Treyarch 0 - Inifinity Ward 5.

@aphexstwin said: and no, i dont believe you get better playing better people. its not fun being slaughtered imo

Hm. So you get better by playing lesser good people? Doesn't sound right me thinks.
Personally I didn't find it a problem at all to level, and I'm not especially good at anything multiplayer. :-)

COD:WaW = Theme Park Ride = RENTAL!

Using real death scenes in a commercial game with no artistic merit whatsoever - that's exploitation at its lowest, and completely strips the game of any claim to be somehow respectful to the real(!) people who fought and died in this war. They should be ashamed.