Call of Duty: World at War Comments by Kristan Reed

360 exclusive?
Isn't this multiplatform?

^^^ Had the same question after seeing how it's tagged on the front page. But then the last paragraph reads "Call Of Duty: World at War will be coming to PC, 360, PS3, and Wii in November.", so the Xbosx eclusivity is just an honest mistake on EG's part.

I'll bet MS would have rather liked it to be exclusive tho... it will probably sell by insanely well, but there's nothing in this preview that interests me in particular. Will most likely sit thsis one out unless it's another 10/10. Which it won't be, I'm willing to bet.

Just a tagging slip, thought so. It probably was the 360 version they had on display anyway.

@ Olemak: These days, every manufacturer loves them exclusives and never says no. ;)

"They're really not afraid to die."

Surely no AI enemy in a FPS has ever been afraid to die? Most don't even bother to take cover.

Heh.
Can we please have Sutherland/Bauer yell "WHO DO YOU WORK FOR!" just once in the game?.

Number of enemies that have surrendered in the Call of Duty series up until now: 0.

Calling "enemies that don't surrender" an exciting new feature is a bit much.

Calling "enemies that don't surrender" an exciting new feature is a bit much.

Or a bit not much, depending on the perspective ;)

I don't think it's a tagging error. EG usually review/preview the 360 version, and I guess they tag them as such because they can't really comment on other platforms' versions.

Hold on.

Having enemies that actually can be forced to surrender. Wouldn't that be more interesting?

@Beek:
Haha, your previous comment made me think of SWAT 4, which is the one game I've ever played that lets you bellow on command. By coincidence, it's also one of few games where you can make enemies surrender.

Well, they've tagged cross-platforms games with all the platforms before though. Even when they were only shown the 360 version.

I'm under the impression it's a slip. Otherwise they'd be giving people the wrong impression that the game is a 360 exclusive.

Not that this game in particular is that appealing anyway... oh well.

@ Beek

Good point. Maybe they should set the next one in France.

/runs

@frostcircus

I knew I'd seen that somewhere before! Thanks for that.

@Raz76
Vive La Resistance!

So I'm not the only one raising his eyebrowns upon reading "They're really not afraid to die.", most stupid remark ever made.

COD7: Retreat of the surrender monkeys.

/runs

I see what you did there.

It still annoys me that the British aren't in this game!
It was one of the things that made COD stand out from the rest imo

ww2 - no thank you.

we should make a list of all the ww2 games up to now, engrave their titles into a big stone and beat every developer with it who comes up with the refreshing idea of making a ww2-game.

No classical score? As much as I love it, is anyone else concerned they'll do a Dynasty Warriors and use synth rock soundtrack that shouldn't fit (but weirdly almost does)?

In the video, the constantly-running-towards-you sword wielding Japanse soldiers just look somehow wrong.

It is like they are running at 35mph, in the manner of some robot attacker. I'm assuming that because they aren't afraid to die, hosing them all down with the flame-thrower probably won't put them off continuing to run towards you in an attempt to get a cheap decapitation?

Loved COD4, so part of me is looking forward to this, but another part of me... isn't.

The comment about enemy AI not being afraid to die is superb spin. You have to respect the inventiveness of proclaiming a constant flaw in game AI as a new feature.

i've got no doubt the single player will be ace, but i'm a little concerned as to whether or not the multiplayer will be as good as COD4... anyone having similar thoughts?

looks like it could be good then. i'll buy it just for jack bauer.

Crap.

If you want to make WWII fresh do it from the German's perspective. I'm so tired of yankee-doodle heroes.

Having enemies that actually can be forced to surrender. Wouldn't that be more interesting?

Good point. Maybe they should set the next one in France.

Having enemies that can be forced to fight. Now that would be interesting!

@DFawkes
"No classical score? As much as I love it, is anyone else concerned they'll do a Dynasty Warriors and use synth rock soundtrack that shouldn't fit (but weirdly almost does)?"

I'm hoping for a Prince of Persia Warrior Within style angry rock/metal soundtrack. That way when your character is shouting obscenities at his enemies it'll feel even more mature! Maturity is shouting, swearing and blood after all. :)

"angry rock/metal soundtrack"

this would definitely put me off playing the game, at least with the sound on

@smernicki
""angry rock/metal soundtrack"

this would definitely put me off playing the game, at least with the sound on "

I was kidding there btw just having a dig at the idea that unpleasant is the same as mature.

Let's see..

- More mature = more violent
- Shitty AI = Crazy fanatical suicidal japanese that NEVER SURRENDERS
- Stereotyping of japanese as being fanatical and suicidal
- You get to burn those bloody japs with flame tanks, motolov cocktails and the good ol' flamethrower
- "unsanitised...no-holds-barred, no mercy attack" on Berlin as the russians, promising "an ugly, violent, grown-up depiction of what it was actually like." So is the "rape the locals" ability mapped to a specific button or is it context sensitive?

Number of german soldiers that've meekly surrendered in previous Call of Duty games: 0

co op makes this a must
why 4 didnt include it is beyond me!

re: enemies not afraid to die comment

I think what he was alluding to was a previous comment made by some other Treyarch bod (can't be arsed to find it, but may try and dig it up later), whereby the Japanese AI enemies won't necessarily do the whole "duck behind cover, pop-up like a cardboard target to loose off a few rounds, then let you flank them and shoot them in the face" malarkey. Instead, when it seems like they're getting overwhelmed or pressed too much, they'll fix bayonets and charge you, quite often resulting in your death.

Brothers In Arms, Medal of Honour (damnit, not gonna spell it without the 'u'), Call of Duty, Resistance, Halo - pretty much every FPS has AI that 'reacts' by seeking cover. Whereas this time round, the Japanese are quite prepared to die - they have no digital sense of self-preservation. So I think that's what he was getting at.

As an aside, it amazes me that so many people who hate/dislike/ are indifferent to this game and Treyarch seem to invest so much time and energy telling everybody else how much they hate/dislike/etc. Why not spend all that time finding something you *do* like and talking about that? Maybe tell the guys responsible how much you appreciate it? Same amount of effort, except you feel good and they feel good.

Mind you, hating something has always been part of trying to be cool, so maybe you little kids should just carry on being so insecure.

/Those who vehemently declaim another's interest are usually diverting attention away from their own.

I am glad to see there will be some stalingrad action. I loved the russian campaign in two, easily the best part.

CoD's gone down hill since 2. 3 was a total waste of time - poor AI, bad visuals, online was a laggy joke most of the time. 4, as popular as it is, has no real strategy (As most modern warfare games don't): the maps are too small, all the guns are pretty much the same, it's just a run 'n' gun game.

Hopefully, Treyarch do a better job of this one than they did with 3.

Frankly I've never been interested in any of the CoD campaigns. Infinitely respawning enemies is a lame game mechanic, and forces any strategy out the window in favour of run'n'gun.

CoD is all about multiplayer, and it rocks in that department. I'd prefer it if they went a bit UT and dropped the campaign altogether. Then they could expand the multiplayer.

@bioreit
"re: enemies not afraid to die comment

I think what he was alluding to was a previous comment made by some other Treyarch bod (can't be arsed to find it, but may try and dig it up later), whereby the Japanese AI enemies won't necessarily do the whole "duck behind cover, pop-up like a cardboard target to loose off a few rounds, then let you flank them and shoot them in the face" malarkey. Instead, when it seems like they're getting overwhelmed or pressed too much, they'll fix bayonets and charge you, quite often resulting in your death."

Yes, I think most of us realised that. I dunno about you but in an FPS I always find it easier to hit targets who're walking/running straight towards me, it takes a lot of the difficulty of aiming out of it. Mind you if there's 10 of them and I just have a Garand then yes, it could be unpleasant. That said, charging into melee through gunfire is as great and advance in AI tactics in as it was in real life tactics (i.e. very rarely a good idea). If the game somehow manages to judge the charges just right then it might be something, however from the videos I've seen (the plane crash in the swamp and another later section in a Japanese camp) the Japanese just streamed out of the background howling and getting mowed down by the G.I.s/Marines. In fact I think that in the plane ambush all the Japanese soldiers charged without firing a single shot.

"As an aside, it amazes me that so many people who hate/dislike/ are indifferent to this game and Treyarch seem to invest so much time and energy telling everybody else how much they hate/dislike/etc. Why not spend all that time finding something you *do* like and talking about that? Maybe tell the guys responsible how much you appreciate it? Same amount of effort, except you feel good and they feel good.

Mind you, hating something has always been part of trying to be cool, so maybe you little kids should just carry on being so insecure. "

Can't we all just get along? Criticism isn't bad in and of itself and if you like or dislike something then you're entitled and encouraged to say why (especially on a comments page). An opinion, even a strong one, is (normally) nothing to be ashamed of. As for hate, well I've seen nothing here that I would consider hate. Dislike yes, indifference yes even flat out dismissal but hate? No. I think that's too strong a word.

I particularly like your little kids "slur" at the end; it's always funny when someone ends a call for tolerance, acceptance or reason by calling people names. You're a stupid-face, btw. ;)

"/Those who vehemently declaim another's interest are usually diverting attention away from their own. "

I agree, what interest are you diverting our attention from? :)

@ sneetch

Regarding the charging thing again, once more, I can't lay my hands on the trailer right now, but I recall seeing one where on any 'proper' difficulty setting (i.e. not the easiest one), the Japanese would charge at you in hordes and you'd have very liimited ammo and time to defend yourself. Basically, you'd probably die, forcing you to rethink your strategies next time. That EGTV trailer with the plane crash (on co-op mode) I suspect was on the easiest setting. Could be wrong, but there are very few gameplay trailers recorded on hard...

Take a look back at previous comments made on World at War articles, screenshot galleries and the movie trailer on EGTV - there's plenty of hate and bile directed at both the game and Treyarch, as well as dismissive and ambivalent attitudes. And no, criticism on its own is certainly not a bad thing, but people just constantly saying "it's Treyarch, it'll be rubbish, they shouldn't have bothered" is hardly constructive, is it? It's negative and pointless.

Hey - I'm only stooping down to their level. The difference is that I'm big and mature enough to know *when* I'm doing it and actually think of a genuine reason to do it, rather than just hate something because I want to fit in.

I'm diverting attention from people who seem to want to just add to the hate. Good enough? What's your excuse?

I don't know why some people don't like that WaW was WWII based, it's a great time period, especially for video games. I also think that it'd be awesome if they had infinity ward do a WWII Call of Duty.

And then again, some people just thought it was a pretty friggin' stupid idea to have treyarch do it instead of infinity ward.