The Call of Duty series has exploded into a hugely popular game and this installment in the series came under huge expectation and scrutiny. Due to this expectation I think it disappoints slightly. The expecation of course was not unfounded, 'Call of Duty 4' is arguably one of the greatest games ever made however it is important to note that the people who made this game are different to the people who made 'Call of Duty 4'. This game has an excellent single-player campaign, which will test veteran gamers to the limit at times, while also providing a good base for beginners to work from with the good range of difficulty settings. The campaign has various missions, which differ enough to keep it fresh and interesting throughout. It is sometimes frustrating, especially since your enemies seem to have a never ending supply of grenades landing around you, but it is great fun nontheless. The campaign is split into battles where you play as an American in the Pacific against the Japanese and where you play as a Russian against Germany on the Eastern Front. This works really well and provides great diversity throughout the game. Each set of missions have different characteristics, which as I say, keeps it fresh. Graphically it's a stunning effort from Activision. The attention to detail is amazing sometimes.
Online play is hit and miss. Activision have borrowed a lot of 'Call of Duty 4's' aspects and implemented them into their game. It's not a bad idea, as Call of Duty 4 got online play arguably nearly spot on but it lacks a bit of originality and sometimes doesn't work in the World War 2 setting. The 'perks' you can choose are cluttered with perks nobody really uses and some of them are just ridiculous sometimes, such as leaving a live grenade behind if you die. This is an example of borrowing from 'Call of Duty 4' and personally this sort of perk, for the sake of realism and general fun, is just annoying. The maps are varying and many of the provide great arenas to play in. Different maps suit different games that you play, whether it be 'Team Deathmatch' or 'Domination', etc. The voting system is a welcome inclusion therefore, as players in the same game can vote whether they want to skip the map for another one. It's difficult to put my finger on just what is lacking from the online play of 'World at War'. The general feels seems a bit clunky, the animation of people running is comical at times. The inclusion of vehicles I feel is a big blunder, as people going round in tanks can really ruin the online experience sometimes. Tanks are very difficult to destroy and they can restrict where you go on a map, leaving a very frustrating experience at times, especially if the game you are playing has a specific objective such as capturing a flag. The range of weapons is generally good but some aspects are histrorically inaccurate. Aiming systems such as a black spot on top of guns were hardly commonplace during WW2. Radar systems telling you precisely where enemies are weren't either. These are just two examples of inaccuracies. However, sometimes I feel it is best to sacrifice historial accuracy for the sake of fun in the game, within reason. I think 'World at War' achieves this sometimes and other times it's just annoying; that is of course, if you get annoyed about these things like I do.
Overall it's a superb game but it's not without flaws. Well worth a purchase if you like first-person shooters and personally I enjoyed the return to World War 2 war scenes. However, following 'Call of Duty 4', this does disappoint a little, but only a little.
How helpful would this review be to a person making a buying decision? Rating guidelines
Sorry please ignore my last comment, I misread the review.
paulpry118 03.07.2009 15:19
If you email Ciao they will remove this review and you can then put it under the correct catagory of COD 4. When this has been done, let me know and I will rate it the VH that it deserves.
Advantages: Famaliar and fun gameplay with nice visuals and audio to boot Disadvantages: Doesn't bring too much new stuff and the people look like plastic
Jul 1st, 2009
very helpful by (100%):
