Jump to navigation

Table of contents

Page Previous 1 2 Next

Advertisement

Call of Duty: World at War Hands On

Xbox 360 PC PlayStation 3 Hands On by Kieron Gillen

28 October, 2008

Page 1 of 2. Page 2 ->

A London press event over fifty years after World War II, and it's still being fought. At least for one last time, as this Call of Duty - reading between the lines - seems to be Treyarch's capstone to the period. And another battle quickly surfaces when I ask producer Noah Heller, who handles the game on the Activision side, about whether the developer feels upset about how they're viewed, considering they turned around the maligned Call of Duty 3 in less than a year. Do the angry internet men frustrate him?

"You know? I agree with them," says Heller. "People online shouldn't forgive us because we made an okay game in nine months. As a company, Activision made a decision to only give us nine months. And the consumer should be mad because development teams aren't given enough time to make games. I don't want them to turn around and say, 'You guys did fine with the time you had - good on you! Good effort!' but I would like them to come back and say, 'I'm not going to judge you based on that now that I know what you had to make that game. I'll give you a second chance'."

Perhaps the good thing is that, after all the doubt, Call of Duty: World at War actually looks like redeeming Treyarch's reputation. The press event ties in with the recent beta, as well as showing off the co-op parts of the game. "It's pretty late for a beta," admits Heller, "but what we get from it is a lot of background work - with our network and understanding where the traffic is going back and forth. Stuff we get from the beta may help with the patch, if we end up doing one, but probably more importantly for downloadable content."

'Call of Duty: World at War' Screenshot 1

The flamethrower throws flames. Truth.

A late beta is an increasing trend - betas becoming the new demos, effectively. Because while the caveat that it's not a real version is always there, people judge them as exactly that. "It's a challenge. There's a tension between it being good enough so the players get excited about the game, and it has to be early enough so it can help us make decisions on the game," says Heller.

The co-op play is the bigger change to the Call of Duty formula. Four-player multiplayer online, with a couple playable in split-screen, is a fundamental difference. I get to play a couple of missions, one from the push into Berlin towards the Reichstag and another in the pacific theatre. On one level, it's familiar - there's always been friends with you in Call of Duty, they just haven't actually been real people - but on another, it changes everything. It doesn't go as far as Gears of War or any of its followers in being heavily co-op specific, but there are multiple routes in certain areas. "We tried a couple of different things," says Heller, "like co-op puzzles where you have to come from this angle, and you have to come from this angle. It just didn't feel like Call of Duty. What we want is the red-shirts on your armies. We wanted them to be your buddies, not just some guy who comes in and dies."

So while we're dealing with a corridor shooter, it's a wider corridor to make room for your comrades. All the levels, bar two, can be played in this way. (One, because it's a sniper mission, and the other because it's the classic on-rails shooter aboard a machinegun-covered Blackcat or Toothrat or Bosscat or something. Which is a kind of plane, apparently).

To Page 2 ->

Advertisement

Are you excited about Call of Duty: World at War on PC/PlayStation 3/Xbox 360?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games

Thanks!

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Comments: 1-15 of 15 in total

Poster
Comment Low-scoring comments hidden. Log in to see them!
Gnort
28/10/08 @ 13:51
#1
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Gosh, zombies sure are popular at the moment.
Gazza_UK
28/10/08 @ 14:02
#2
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Gametrailers has a video on the zombie stuff, looks like real fun! CANT WAIT!!

KingOfSpain
28/10/08 @ 14:03
#3
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Zombies seem really at odds with the feel of COD. I'm not sure this is going to work very well.
DUFFKING
28/10/08 @ 14:35
#4
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
So just don't play the mode, it's an unlockable extra, not a part of the game to be taken seriously, surely.
shotgun44
28/10/08 @ 14:46
#5
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Ha, the zombies bit sounds like this might be bought after LBP, Fallout 3, Dead Space, Far Cry 2 and Bioshock. My wallet is cry!
bodypopper
28/10/08 @ 15:02
#6
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
If by some miracle I manage to finish Resistance 2, Gears 2 and LBP in 7 days while still managing to 'have a life' I might just get this in the week of release ;-)
Edited 1 times, most recently on 28/10/08 @ 15:03
metalangel
28/10/08 @ 15:19
#7
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
First dogs, now zombies.

Call of Duty: Train Wreck, anyone?
paketep
28/10/08 @ 15:22
#8
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I'll admit that I've been one of Treyarch's harshest critics, and WaW is looking good to me.

Still, even if it's awesome, I don't think it should have been called Call of Duty. Infinity Ward should be the only ones releasing CoD games. Shame on you, Activision.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 28/10/08 @ 15:22
viper_h
28/10/08 @ 16:19
#9
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Those dogs are fucking awful. At least you can shoot down the chopper fairly easily in CoD4, or hide indoors. The damn dogs just keep coming.
Eighthours
28/10/08 @ 16:37
#10
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I'm still mildly worried about this, if only because of the "me too" multiplayer, which is too similar to COD4's for my liking. Even though I loved COD4. Confusing, eh?
PierrePressure
28/10/08 @ 17:13
#11
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Too.Many.Frickin'.Games.
Fab4
28/10/08 @ 18:45
#12
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"Still, even if it's awesome, I don't think it should have been called Call of Duty. Infinity Ward should be the only ones releasing CoD games. Shame on you, Activision."

Then don't buy it. Wait the extra year until IW make another one, because you would have to wait if they were the sole developers. Activision are the only ones who own CoD, not IW or Treyarch.

Personally, I think IW ruined the series by making it modern and introducing the perk system. Plus their netcode is the biggest load of shit...unless ofc you happen to be from the US.
clockworkzombie
28/10/08 @ 22:36
#13
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@Fab4
I totally agree.
I have tried to play the beta 4 times now, the lag has been so bad, I try and find a different group but the effort seems wasted.

Single player for me first anyway. Multiplayer for when I have finished single player. Though I have purchased Fable 2 and Fallout 3 so multi may have to wait.

Edit.

I should have noted that my total agreement was for the part of your comment relating to net code and lag. I like CoD4 and have not troubles with modern settings.
Edited 1 times, most recently on 29/10/08 @ 01:03
ChrisOTR
29/10/08 @ 06:13
#14
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Hmmm. Online cooperative zombie slaying. It's almost like there's another game arriving in the next few weeks with that idea...
Pedrolot
29/10/08 @ 08:08
#15
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Packetep. That clearly is aload of bull. How can you be a critic when your opinions are clearly biased?

Shame on you.

Comments: 1-15 of 15 in total

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

X View gallery