19.5.2010

That is right, for me this game is the best call of duty EVER!!! I know an awful lot of people are sick of WWII but believe me, this type of WWII is new and never been done. Firstly when I say 'New and never been done' I mean that 1st: CoD have never set a WWII game in the Pacific yet 2ND: A WWII with such amazing graphics has never been done 3RD: It feels like a refreshing gameplay experience in the WWII genre 4TH: It is amazing value 5TH: It is a truly imense game.Ok, so why is it so much better than MWII? I'll tell you.Firstly Campaign: Short at 15 missions, but it took me longer than the 19 mission MW2 campaign on Hardened. Those are 5 very good missions, ranging from: Burning out trenches with flamethrowers,taking airfields, night missions, going into the heart of Berlin etc. My favourite is Blowtorch and Corkscrew, a night mssion in Japan. I felt tha tit had more variety to MW2 and the levels were the type to keep me playing over and over again. But the campaign doesn't need to be long, after all you have online, nazi zombies with a mate solo or online and more to keep you occupied plus the campaign. I can't emphasise how much fun and re-playability the campaign holds.Online: Modern Warfare 2 does have immense online, but the only mode that I prefered on MW2 was sabatage, and if you haven't played it yet on MW2 I honestly suggest you do. But CoD 5, for me at least, offers many more maps that I like and generally better gameplay. AND as a bonus, not so many campers. Thank you lord. The reason, I guess for having less campers is because less people play it anymore. I die alot in MW2, not that it bothers me (I get around 15-20 kills so I'm happy :)) but when I went back to CoD 5 after only playing MW2 for a week I found that I was more hooked on the online than before, and I seemed to be better at it! There are enough things to unlock to keep you interested, but the overall interest level is kept there by the sheer fun of it all. I prefer hearing Gary Oldman or Kiefer Sutherland's voice instead of MW2's guys (I don't know who voices them). Treyech failed with CoD 3. We thought they sucked. Infinity ward boost it back up - especialy online. Treyech come back with an even better game that wasn't, for me, knocked out of place by MW2. Less irritating kids, more mature players. Ahhhh yes an evening with cod 5 :). That is the overall online, now it broken into more detailed sections. Firstly Maps, a big thing in online, cos if you don't like the maps, it ain't any fun right? Well Treyech succeeded in creating a lot of great maps, from night ones in shacks, to finger on trigger, high kill score Dome map,outskirts, another great. As I got this game late I could immediately download the Map Pack bundle. I'm glad I did. 9 more amazing multiplayer maps, plus 3 more nazi zombies maps: including the rather scary Zombie Asylum. One of my favourite online maps is Asylum. It is frantic and there a re constant shoot outs in one area..... damn good fun :D. Overall great online maps, whether you buy extras or not.Perks: Quite a few, not nearly as many as on CoD 6, but still a great variety, from: more damage given, more damage taken, more bullet penetration into walls etc. Great fun choosing them.Unlocks: Weapons come slowly, and I rarely use the ones I unlock (I use Thompson mainly) but for those who create a class for every submachine gun then you'll be glad to know there are 10 create a clas slots, not 5 like on MW2. Weapon mods are great fun trying out, although not many for some weapons. I like the Type 99 but there were only two mods: Bayonett and bipod. For tyh ethompson you have: supressors, larger magazines and a black dot sight (what i use). For rifles like the M1 garrand you can get grenade launchers, scopes, bayonetts, flash hiders all sorts.Annoying kids: None that have really encountered yet. Maybe 1 or 2 but not that many, not ven on Nazi zombies. Really saves me having to click the 'mute' button every round. Phew.Killstreaks: OK MW2 has like 20 or something stupid, this has, OK again, 3. For 3 killsit is a Recon plane, 5 it is an artillery strike and 7 dogs. Thank goodness there are no care packages in this. I'm sick of nervously lobbing a signal, then having to protct my self till it arrives. Or usually I die and someone else uses it. I get soooooo sic of it. Then I start fuming (I'm not that great at cod so when I get a care package it is not very often) slip in CoD 5 and ahhhhhhh simple gameplay fun. No Killstreaks to choose from, just 3, 5 and 7. Simple, easy and damn fun.Gameplay: Like I stated above, amazing, better than MW2 worse than BFBC2 (that is Battlefield Bad Company 2). Really great twitch gaming. Faulters on sabatage but I just slip in the MW2 disc whenever I fancy some hot Sabatage or modern combat.Nazi Zombies: I slip in CoD 5. 'Ok' I think, 'Should I pay online, a mission or nazi zpmbies?' That is why this game is such flippin good value. Not only is it better than MW2, but you can choose to play either great online, campaign, co op or solo. If you buy the Map Pack for 2000 microsoft points you will get the 3 extra Nazi zombie maps. So all-in-all oyu would have 4 maps. All offer different scary gameplay whether alone, with a friend or online. Online is the best ever, giving you hours of entertainment. Many people still play CoD 5 only for the zombies, but I play it because I prfer it. It is awesomre to shoot those zombies up, and lets face it, Infinity ward must of thought 'What the hell?' when they saw this and how popular it was. Their thing to equel this: Special ops. Ok special ops are good - for a while. Ops on MW2 are ok alone or with a friend and offer loads of fumn missions, but, hang on Infinity ward, where is the online? Personelly I don't see why they didn't include online play with a random person on special ops. It would have made it more fun and addictive. Nazi zombies may only have 4 maps, but hell are those 4 great maps. I can spend hours on just one map. One single special op on MW2 takes me 8, 10 or 15 minutes depending on the difficulty. Rubbish compared to CoD 5. Anyway back to nazi zombie. each map gives you different gameplay, weapons anfd hardness. You soon find your favourite maps. Mine are Zombie Asylum and Nach De Untoten (I think that is what it is called). As i said, each have different hardness. For instance the Nach De Untoten map is the best for getting to high levels, whereas Zombie Asylum is harder, yet still fun.Graphics and sound: To top all of what I mentioned above you have the fabulous graphics and sound. The graphics are, especially if you play in HD (I don't but I have seen friend play it in HD), without doupt amazing. It isn't as good as MW2's graphics but it isn't far off. From water riples to cuts on your hands this games visuals are amazing. as for sound it isn't as good as modern games (Bad company 2 or MW2 etc) but it is definitely realistic. No faults at all in this dpatment.Is it better than Modern Warfare 2?: To me, yes. It is amazing value, because it give 3 different things that can be played online or solo that are so much fun. Campaign great preplayability, Zombies great fun online especialy and online itself lengendary. GET IT (if you don't have it already).MW2 scores (I'm sorry but I must show you how much better this game is, so i'm giving scores on both, I will later review MW2 itself though):Campaign: 8.5/10 Short, fun but very repitive. On regular can be completed in 5 1/2 hours.Special ops: 7.9/10 Face it Infinity, you can't beat Nazi Zombies. Varied, but short. Fun, but hey, where is online with a random person? Online with friends only? Rubbish.Online: 8.9/10 Great but soo many campers. I'm also sick of worrying to death whenever I get a care packadge. Sabatage mode shines though.Overall: Ok, not as great as CoD 5 though.CoD World at war:Campaign: 9.2/10 Great, hard on hardened, really replayable. Great missions, very varied.Nazi Zombies: 9.9/10 Superb, even if it only has 4 maps, those are 4 good maps. Endlessly fun. Buy it even for this. If you haven't experienced it yet, you should. You know you're gonna die, but when you do, you think 'I'm gonna get to level 19 not 18 this time.' You don't.Online: 9.8 Better than MW2? Yep, a hell of a lot better. Not so many campers or killstreaks, no care packages. Better maps, overall a better experience. Great all the time. Legend.If I don't own either, what should I get? I would get cod 5 as it is better value, a better campaign, nazi zombies beat ops, and online, better. No tactical nuke. Thank goodness.The best WWII yet, and probably to come.MW2 isn't rubbish, no it is awesome, but this is better. No WWII game has bean done like this before, with this campaign online or graphics. Weapons are great. The new flamethrower is awesome. Anamazing game. Amazing. Get it. It isn't old, no, it is just getting into man hood.

9.1.2009

It must be hard following on from what was one of the most popular PS3 games. However, I reckon they've done a good job. I do not and have never owned COD 4, but have heard about it from friends a lot, and from the way they talk of it, it sounds really good. Most people say COD 4 is better COD 4 was Modern Warfare, which means better guns because its now, not 70 years ago. I am new to the COD series but personally I think this one is awesome! I like that it has real black and white pictures of the war, and that feeling that you are fighting in a battle that really did happen. COD 5 has a realistic sense of battle - At first everything is quiet, all you can hear is grasshoppers and yourself walking.There is no music. Then suddenly one gunshot and everything changes - the music is dramatic with heavy drums beating and you can't see a lot but you can hear heavy gunfire. You fire randomly towards the enemy! Also the game is about cover. You need cover to survive in the game: if you get shot then your screen goes kinda red and you hear a heartbeat. If you get seriously hurt then your screen goes black and white and you hear nothing except an sharp high noise. Also you can knife people (R3) which is really fun cause you can sneak up behind them and kill them! Although this usually only happens on split-screen or online. Talking of this...Split-ScreenGreat fun lots of laughter like online! You can choose from most mission maps, however sadly there are no vehicle maps to choose from but this is hardly a let-down. Gameplay is like online.OnlineSame thing except you can have veichle maps! There are levels and you unlock new guns at different levels. You can customise your own class (create a primary weapon, side arm, primary grenade, special grenade, perk one (bazooka, satchel charge, flamethrower etc.), perk two perk three). There are challenges to do and by doing a challenge you unlock something, like a sniper scope for a rifle, or a bipod for a machine gun. There are 65 levels (as far as I know) and it takes roughly 400 points to level up at my stage (I'm level fourteen). Considering you get 10 points for each kill this is quite good! You can do online co-op including nazi zombies! There are lots of different game modes including Boot camp (only avalible from under level 8) and Team Deathmatch, free for all (all against all), War, Ground War (war and team deathmatch), Search and Destroy, Sabotage, Veteran (Expert only team deathmatch), team tactical (small team games) and loads more. Loads of new guns to unlock and maps include: Airfield, Dome, Hangar, Castle, Cliffside, Courtyard and new maps from map pack 1 include Station, Nightfire and Knee Deep. All maps are pretty big, although some are massive.GraphicsVery good, especially fire effects - grenades are AWESOME! They feel natural when you play them - exactly like real life!Solo (career mode)Excellent, will keep you interested and is VERY cool. Good Storyline too, especially when compared to Modern Warfare. The campaign switches between being an American trying to escape from a Japanese torture base and then get revenge, and being Russian, creeping out of a camp and advance on Berlin. This game is all about tension and speed and reaction time. Also practically all the time you just avoid being killed. This makes it fun! It took me about a month to complete (about 1 hour gameplay a day on average).Co-opNice feature - really addictive but with a few problems. You can't do some of the really good solo fun missions and the screen isn't split screen, its one screen in one corner and one screen in the other, with a picture in the middle. This makes it hard to see what your doing. However now I am used to it it's fine. The thing I found weird though was that you can't do 4 player :( although not a massive let-down I was a bit dissapointed. Hopefully this will change with COD 6.Nazi ZombiesMy god this is so fun and so addictive. They have done it really well so it never gets tiring and it's really hard. It's kind of spooky because there are five different windows and they come from each window. You can go upstairs and open a door with "help" scrawled on it. You start off with a pistol and 500 points and you buy your weapons. This makes it much harder and much spookier - once I was upstairs and I ran out of ammo I had to sprint past the zombies buy my ammo and get back again I managed it becuase it was only round three. From round four onwards things get really kayotic and they come from all directions. My record (with a friend) is half way through round 7. In round seven they start running and some of them sprint. From round 6 some start crawling becuase you don't see them and then you realise they're right next to you! A zombie can kill you within about two seconds of being near you. As the rounds go on the zombies get harder and harder to kill - round one = one knife round two = two knifes etc. Zombie mode really improves you as a player of the whole game as you have no radar, so you will learn to look more.Also with the game pack I bought I got zombie asylum - this is even better! It's not night but it's much darker, and the zombies are much stronger and harder to kill. There are about 10 big rooms to explore, not 4 like the Night of the Dead one. There are more windows generally and there's a big courtyard where there is a small explosion and they come out of the ground. They make CRAZY noises which are quite scary and this house is more like a haunted house, not just different rooms. They have thought about cobwebs, drains which are constantly running, lots more zombies breaking through the wall and lots more guns. The random weapon box appears with a teddy bear after about 5 goes and there is a baby laugh and it dissapears! This is really quite scary. If you have four players you are seperated and to be together you have to get to the power room, which is the room flashing blue. So for this you have to think to stay alive! This addition definately makes the game a must-buy!Apparantly COD 6 will go back to Modern Warfare - I'm looking forward to what they can do next!I am aware this is very long so hope you enjoyed reading and feel free to leave any comments!

7.2.2009

You know, I sometimes catch myself wondering what it must feel like to have a brother like Barack Obama, Muhammad Ali or Chuck Norris - someone so incredibly successful and respected in their field that nothing you could possibly do with your life would ever measure up. Now I realize I only need to ask the nice people at Treyarch how it feels having to compete with Infinity Ward.As everyone who's ever played First Person Shooters will know, the Call of Duty series has had a somewhat checkered history, alternating between creative brilliance and formulaic tedium over the past several years. Then Infinity Ward went and brought the series bang up to date with Call of Duty 4,and game critics the world over proclaimed it (rightly so) as the best thing since 3D graphics. The game has since gone on to be more popular than breathing.Publishers Activision promptly demanded a sequel. When they were bluntly informed by Infinity Ward that a sequel would be anything but prompt, and that rushing a game through development with no regard for quality rarely results in blockbusting sales, Activision turned their eye on Treyarch, who were brought in to helm World at War.But how to create a sequel to one of the most popular FPS's of the past decade...With World at War, Treyarch certainly done their level best to go one better than their Infinity Ward brethren, throwing in top-notch graphics and an impressive voice cast (Kiefer Sutherland and Gary Oldman, no less).But does it measure up?Unlike Modern Warfare, World at War takes us back (again) to WW2, with the story alternating between American and Russian campaigns, because we all know us Brits were busy drinking tea and eating jam scones while this whole war lark was going on. Anyway, the action jumps between the Pacific and Eastern Front theatres, with each mission providing a markedly different gaming experience.First, the American campaign. You play as an American GI, taking on hordes of Japanese soldiers as you battle across Peliliu Island, and then the notorious struggle for Okinawa. This campaign is without doubt the more gruelling and brutal of the two, with booby traps, ambushes and suicidal Japanese charges to contend with. Deformable character models mean there's almost no end to the gruesome injuries you can inflict on your enemies, including setting them on fire. Yes, flame throwers feature prominently in this campaign, and their use is strongly encouraged. Kiefer Sutherland is also on hand, lending his distinctive gravelly voice to the action.The only real sticking point in the Pacific campaign is the mission that pointlessly sticks you in the gun turret of a recon plane. This section stuck out for me as repetitive, clunky and not particularly rewarding.The Soviet campaign is arguably less compelling, partly because it's so familiar, with Call of Duty favourites like Stalingrad and Berlin well represented, although it's nice to see the oft-forgotten battle for the Seelow Heights featured. Still, the fresh graphics help to inject a bit of fun into proceedings, and the final storming of the Reichstag is a genuinely challenging bit of gaming (even if it's been done before in the same bloody series!).And yet, for all the things it gets right, it feels like there's something missing from World at War. For a start, the WW2 setting doesn't do it any favours. How many times do we have to revisit places like Stalingrad before someone admits that there's nothing more to be done with it? And after playing as a highly trained SAS or Delta Force operative in Modern Warfare, battling through as a lowly conscript with bog-standard weapons feels like a bit of a climb-down. And there's no over-arching plot to tie everything together - the Pacific and European campaigns are totally disconnected, removing the feeling that both sides are working towards a common goal.I don't know - maybe it's just that fact that WW2 has faded from the public consciousness lately, replaced by newer and more relevant conflicts, that makes World at War feel strangely pointless.But as with most FPS's, World at War stands or falls based on its multi-player modes. In this respect, it's definitely on par with Modern Warfare. Maps are varied and interesting, providing plenty of opportunities for interesting tactics, and the weapon selection incorporates everything used in the single player campaign, though as before, you have to progress up the rankings to unlock better guns.Overall then, I give World at War four out of five. It's a solid, competent and occasionally impressive shooter that doesn't quite live up to the legacy of its predecessor.

24.1.2010

First of all, I'll state that i own this on Xbox 360, so i can't comment on the issues which are relevent to the PC only.The Campaign:The campaign is fairly mediocre. There's the usual stuff in there. Kill some enemies, run forward, kill some more enemies, run forward again. Nothing amazing here, although there is a good deal of variation with the flamethrower, plane and tank level. I advise not attempting Veteran if you don't like being frustrated. There's grenade spam everywhere, and If you even miss a single enemy, they can take you out.Not a bad campaign, considering that it's not the main focus of the game by a long shot, although it's nothing that will leave you gobsmacked.Worth a play through on normal, or hardened.The Multiplayer:The multiplayer is actually very good. Some things have been improved on vastly since cod4, such as spawns, grenade power and the variation in the weapons. No longer will you find yourself trapped in your spawn, unable to do anything (still not the best spawns of any game by a long shot, but a DEFINITE improvement. Anyone saying otherwise is just plain and simple ignorant). No longer will you be constantly barraged by grenades thrown randomly over buildings.Some people seem to be complaining about tanks being overpowered, although it's actually extremely easy to take them out. Two satchel charges, and it's dead. One satchel if correctly placed can actually destroy a tank from full health.The variation in the weapons is great. Every weapon feels completely different to the next (can't be said for cod4 or mw2). Using a number of different weapons is highly enjoyable, and the flamethrower, although not the best gun by a long shot, is amazingly fun to use.There are however, three rather annoying down sides to the multiplayer:-Mp40s- The mp40 is widely agreed to be extremely overpowered. It will usually kill in two hits, even without stopping power, and the clip size with the round drum attachment is just ridiculous.-Juggernaut- Probably the most annoying perk in the game. The number of bullets it takes to bring someone using this perk down is just too big. If you like to snipe, this perk will annoy you more than any other, as you'll often not get a one hit kill when you otherwise would.-Bouncing Betties- The frustration when you come across one of these hidden away somewhere randomly is huge. They are practically free kills for the planter, and require no skill to use whatsoever. They can become no problem when using Bomb Squad, which allows you to see them through walls, but this does mean you cannot use bandolier, which is a must on some guns, such as the PPSH-41 or the STG-44.Nazi Zombies:Ah, now on to the truly amazing part of the otherwise mediocre game that is World at War. Nazi zombies is endless hours of fun, especially when teaming up with 1-3 other people. Even the very minimalistic first map is great fun, where it's just you, some guns and a whole lot of zombies. You'll find yourself constantly wanting to beat your highest round, and when you download any of the map packs, the fun is increased many fold. The addition of perks, new weapons, teleporters, dogs, the pack-a-punch, a tonne of easter eggs, electro defences, and much larger, more detailed maps turns this from a nice little side minigame to what is worthy of being a game on it's own.Even if you do not enjoy the multiplayer, i highly reccomend buying the game simply for nazi zombies (unless you don't have any friends, in which case steer well clear. Playing with randomers online will leave you pulling your hair out in frustration at their stupidity and unbelievably low level of skill)The third map, Shi No Numa, should probably be avoided if you consider yourself to be somewhat skilled at Nazi Zombies. To a more skilled player this map is incredibly easy once you understand it's mechanics, and there are strategies which can lead almost any player to any round they desire. Of course if you can restrict yourself and not use a strategy like this, then it is still great fun.I have one complaint about zombies however. The presence of glitches which allow people to obtain any round they wish means that the leaderboards for every map are not legitimate. Runs which should be in the top 50, or even top 10 are pushed down into the thousands by the abundance of glitchers and modders.Summary:Without nazi zombies, this would be an above average game. The addition of zombies makes it an outstanding one. A must buy.

24.8.2010

I played this game again today, many months after its release and was blown away at how I'd forgotten about it. I played a little bit of the campaign, then a bit of multiplayer, then three of my friends joined me to 'battle an army of undead nazis' as the game puts it.Let me start with the campaign. You play as both Private Miller, part of 'Carlsons Raiders' during the American conflicts against the Japanese. Most of this half of the campaign takes place on Peleliu Island, where the American Raiders fought for three months more than they believed they would. The other half of the campaign sees you playing as a Russain soldier named Dimitri as you push Germans out of Stalingrad and eventually further into Germany,ending at Berlin itself in the final days of the war. The campaign is extremely fun to play, graphically brilliant and a huge jump for creators Treyarch since Call of Duty 3. The American campaign places you in forests and even a castle but yet still adds a gritty tempo that is followed easily by the Russain campaign, which starts you off surrounded by hundreds of dead fellow soldiers, just to prove itself as one of the darkest WW2 games around. The whole campaign keeps a steady pace and changes scenery often enough to not become repetetive but not so often as to become confusing. There isn't much in the way of plot or storyline, but not much can be done for this as it is set in WW2.Next I headed off to the Multiplayer, which, as many people remind us, copies CoD4: MW's ideas of classes of perks, but as it is still in the same series I don't see how that is copying, even if it was made by different companies. The multiplayer has many different maps, some a bit too similar to each other for my liking but still varied enough to fulfill its task of keeping you amused for hours. There are a few little snags, such as the return of the damned 'rapid fire' controllers, but the developers cannot be blamed for this. The idea of adding vehicles again was a bad move. CoD3 failed because of its vehicle based combat parts, and MP maps on WAW that include tanks follow the same chain.So by this time I've completed the Campaign, and maybe even become bored with the multiplayer. What now? The bonus mode that left me dazed, confused, and completely content. The bonus mode I'm talking about is obviously Nazi Zombies. Four player co-op that leaves you stranded in a building with barricaded windows and a horde of Undead Nazis trying to break in and, obviously, try to eat your brains. You can stop them by repairing windows and building up points by killing zombies to buy guns from the Mystery Box. This small feature quickly became a huge hit amongst fans and casual gamerss alike and is possibly the only reason my copy of WAW isn't in a GAME Pre-owned Shelf somewhere right now. The additional maps available to buy as DLC add even more layers of brilliance; Verruckt, the zombie asylum, gives the darkest scenes and areas of the game so far, including a dentists chair smothered in blood. It also added new features such as perk machines to give you added bonuses and the Teddy bear, a small bear hidden in the random weapon Mystery Box that changes its position in the map. Once you begin playing any later maps you will start to hate this bear with all your heart. Following the successful new map, two more have been released, Shi No Numa the swamp and Der Riese the factory/research facility. These two maps introduced four playable characters, each one nationality of Allied/Axis forces from the game, and a storyline full of little hidden audio files and easter eggs. watch videos on Youtube to discover many of these parts. The new features that came with these maps would make this review even longer than it already is, so I will leave you to find out. On that note, I will summarise. A great campaign, amazing multiplayer and a Nazi Zombies feature to blow you away. 10/10

5.1.2009

Call Of Duty World At War does a lot of things very well. It provides action packed solo play, with jaw dropping set pieces and high octane gameplay. Brilliant online, with furious shootouts and a variety of modes in the same vein as its predeccessor Modern Warfare. And along with this comes the new co op mode. With both split screen and online for up to 4 players it adds a new dimension to the series and shows good thinking by the guys at Treyarch, out to prove they aren't just aping Infinity Ward.However, to an extent this really is just COD4 in a WW2 uniform. No matter how hard Treyarch tried they were never going to be able to create a completely innovative experience.But if you think about how successful COD4 was, there was really no need for them to do so. All the framework was there, they could have easily altered the visuals and levels to look more World War twoey and it still would have sold a million copies.However, selling loads of copies doesn't make it a good game, and thankfully, along with co op, a few more new features have been introduced and the graphics engine tarted up slightly to make this truly a game in its own right...almost.You see, its not COD4 it should have been worried about copying. The fact is that COD WAW does something worse. It takes a lot of its features from every other WW2 game ever made. The beach landing, from Medal of Honour Frontline and other levels from this series, the tanks from Battlefield 1942, the emotive crap from Brothers in Arms, it's all there and unfortunately if you've played any of the above, very noticeable.If you look past this though, COD WAW really is a sensational shooter. It's gritty, it's gorey, it's fast and above all, it's fun. The slight annoyances from COD4 seem to be fixed.The story is just as involving, with an American and a Russian storyline this time around. The voice acting is all up to scratch (Gary Oldman is brilliant as SGT. Roznov in the Russian campaign). The levels are still linear and scripted, but it's all linked together well enough to hide that. The controls are identical to COD4's streamlined system and as one of the series many strong points had no need to be changed. Weapons are a bit weak and clattery, but that's the setting's fault not the game. Those used to the clean cut sound of the bullets leaving your barrel, the minimal recoil and large clip sizes are in for a shock. For when they pick up an M1 Garand and hear it clanging and banging when they send a bullet booming away, and see the muzzle flying up as if to bash them in the face, they'll be panging to get that MP5 back in their virtual mits.The online multiplayer adds a couple of new modes and some more perks to. However the camos will be sorely missed and the headshot challenges don't feel worthwhile without them. Also the dogs are incredibly annoying, awarded for getting a 7 kill streak, they kill you in 1 hit on the hardcore modes and mean you have to walk around staring downwards when the enemy has them because they attack at your feet. Other than this its the same pumped up action as ever.Co op can be played online or split screen and both are good fun. Offering a new squad dynamic to the campaign. With competitive co op as well it's a frantic points race and makes for some great laughs. The nazi zombie mode awarded on completion of the solo game is perfect for this. It's COD WAW in its element.Overall, Call of Duty World at War is a decent addition to the series and offers a fair amount of new stuff to, albeit with the same WW2 formula underneath. The graphics are brilliant and levels are beautifully detailed. Gameplay is as sharp as ever and the controls are perfect for a console shooter. However, it's just not as re-invigorating an entry for the series as its predeccessor and therefore scores:8/10Roll on Modern Warfare 2

18.11.2008

I had no problems installing this game. I have played the first couple of missions and I really cannot see what the issues are with the gameplay in comparison to COD 2 and 4 although a little more choice in how missions are completed would be welcome. One disappointing aspect was starting the Japan missions at the point in the conflict when America starting winning.The graphics are on a par with COD 4, i.e. excellent but with very playable framerates which I think can only be a good thing.If the game made a tremendous leap forward in the graphics department then most including me would struggle to play it. I think the smart move for Infinity Ward, given the current economic climate,would be to take account of the fact that most people do not/will not have the spare cash to upgrade their pcs next year and concentrate their efforts on improving gameplay instead of graphics.I recently played COD 4 again and although it was enjoyable enough for the most part I am not convinced a Modern warfare sequel, involving the US/British forces facing a terrorist threat would have enough new material available to be that much different from MW. Once you take away the wow factor of using modern weapons MW is not that much different from COD 2. This is probably the reason the single player mode in MW was so short in the first place.COD 6 I think should perhaps either go down the 'World in Conflict' route with a 'what if' scenario between NATO and the Soviet Union or choose a conflict like the Vietnam War where superior firepower was negated by the harsh terrain. Also would it not be fun to be able to play both sides in single player. The Vietnam War in particular would offer up a number of very different and varied scenarios depending on which side you played and could include jungle warfare, city street fighting and green beret/CIA assasination missions in Laos etc.Whatever the conflict although graphics are important I think Infinity Ward should definately concentrate on overhauling the gsmeplay or risk COD becoming tired looking like the PES or FIFA soccer games series.For instance:Players could be given more choice (less direction)on where to place explosives etc . Players should learn by trial and error rather than follwing well defined signposts.There should be at least 3 ways to complete missions and the enemy should be allowed to use their initiative to outflank you and vice versa. Every door should open, so what if you end up having to retrace your steps. C'est la Guerre! You should be able to go anywhere you want in a single player map. Stray too far into enemy territory and you end up surrounded.Every building and object should be destructable.The health aspect is an improvment on simply picking up medipacks however there should be a limit placed on the number of times a player can recover from their wounds by taking cover in any one mission. On the third time the player should be given the option of finding a first aid station or restarting the level.Players should be able to call in fire missions whenever their artillery is available and in range not just whenever the game script allows them to.If secondary tasks remain uncompleted in one mission this may have an impact on the players ability to complete the next mission.Overall I think I would give this game 8 out of 10. It is not a groundbreaker like MW however a lot of effort has clearly been put into this game by Treyarch and it has done a pretty good job overall and compares well with MW.I think the line can now firmly be drawn now under the WW2 scenario though at least in regard to the COD series.

19.11.2008

Hi game addicts here is a true synopsis of call of duty world at war as follows:-The solo campaign mode:- rated out of *****1)Graphics:-Dont look realistic but are smooth and crisp but also a little cheap looking, ***2)Gameplay:-very good! the playability and handling of the weapons is brillant once you truly master them and get passed the accuracy issues in which case you have to be pacifically on target with any moving swing shots. At first you will try and not get any successful shots and you end up assuming it is impossible but all you have do is time your shots that very vevy! little bit late in accordance to a completely aim first and shoot straight shot and this actually is more rewarding because its more difficult and adds to the skill factor once youve got the hang of it.(so dont give up). The running is unlimited and feels good, plus speeds things up abit. The game after this becomes addictive but the sniper rifles are virtually unfun because they are very unsteady and bob up & down also to sluggish for realism purposes. *****longevity:-loads of levels plenty of extra content such as the unlockables that will press you on through the game to get all the items and also has replay value. *****Multi-player mode:-1)graphics:- The same2)gameplay:- only average because the weapons handle that bit differently due to more of the tilting mechanism from side-side which spans more of the screen before you are on a parallel level with the proper smooth movement of the weapons and nearly ruins it! They should hae kept it the same as the compaign mode and because of the detail of the accurracy required it makes it too hard and you dont get a feel good factor out of it as much. Hiwever the sniper rifles are very much improved compared to the single player mode as they dont have any of the flaws but are a bit to fast and responsive but still an improvement.longevity:- Just because of the above flaws mentioned it is only good as a basic point and shoot type senario plus it only has 1-8 players which limits how many kills you can acheive this becomes a bit repetitive and the unlockables add warranty to the game but so;me; are pointless such as weapons as they should be compulsary anyway.Breakdown:-[+] great campaign mode[+] plenty of missions[+] weapons handle well[+] difficult but skillful[+] cinematic feel[+] good story[+] swearing is a good addition[+] good variety of weapons[-] sniper rifles have too many flawsbreakdown:- multi-player[+] online at last[+] power ups and upgrades[+] sniper rifles are better[+] great new features such as (call the dogs) & (bombardment)[+] not bad but not good either when it could have been[-] weapons dont handle as well as solo mode[-] acuracy makes things too difficult at times[-] sometimes a bit to fast and hardcore[-] seems a bit rushed[-] more a simple point and shoot multi player[-] some items are pointless unlockables[-] abit of a let down overall[-] no divisions to all the different types of weapons availableOverall:- cant fault the solo mode but multiplayer requires alot extra thought should of stuck to the solo mode engine precisely in multiplayer and it would have been highly playable. Plus catergorised each of the weapon types separately in any match to make it more even also slow the game down abit!Ps:- In multi-player get rid of a bit of the tilt and get more control over your weapons by twisting the remote to one side once you have activated the manual aim and before you shoot!

27.11.2008

Call of Duty 4 was (and still is) one of my favourite games. I spent countless hours playing online and I loved the single player. COD4 was so good that even the Mrs found the multiplayer a 'good waste of time' and at times I had to fight to get a game! I'm happy to say that in many respects COD:WAW is just as good as its predecessor. Here's what I've found so far:THE GOOD- Controls and 'feel' to the menus is pretty much the same as COD4 so you can get strait into the action- You can now play the campaign in co-op- Veteran difficulty still offers a challenge for experienced gamers- Online ranking up system updated, there's more categories to earn points,you prestige at 65 (rather than 55 in COD4)- Tanks are available in the multiplayer! They aren't invincible however and I feel they don't unbalance the game at all.- Online maps, so far I have found to be very good. Only 1 that I don't like (Makin)- Game play is still very good both on and offline. Not exactly the same as COD4 but close enough.- Graphics are excellent. Not better than COD4 but lets be honest that would have been very difficult- Instead of UAV, Airstrike and Chopper you now have Recon Plane, Artillery Bombardment and Dogs. Love calling in the dogs.- New perks and a new perk catogary for vehicles- A boot camp option when playing online that you play from rank 1-8 for new playersTHE BAD- Still no online achievements- Most of the single player achievements have to be completed as single player, you can't get them by playing co-op- Online, rifles seem pretty useless (not sniper rifles). You hit people and it doesn't register and have to get a head shot to kill them!- Have experienced some 'bullet lag' online that I didn't in COD4. Possible teething problem?- Perks like juggernaut are still there. IMO with them adding a boot camp option they should have limited the 'noob' perks to the boot camp and make them unavailable once you start playing properly- The multiplayer on this game will take up days and days of my life!.... wait is that such a bad thing?The best way of describing it is think COD4, swap it over to WW2 and then tweak it a little bit. Its not better or worse, its different. I'd highly recommend this to any wanting a worth while online multiplayer experience. There are games (GOW2, Dead Space) that can offer better single player experiences but as GOW2 online seems to be a bit of a dud the COD:WAW looks like the new king of the multiplayer!EDIT: A couple of months on I would just like to add that altough it is a worthy addition to the COD series, it frankly isnt as addictive or as good as COD4. The single player is pretty poor to be honest, gets worse as you go on. And there have been several glitches in the online play (hopefully to be patched soon). Still worth getting but doesn't hold a candle to COD4.

22.12.2008

Well then, where do I start?Call of Duty - World at War in my opinion is THE best game to date on the PS3. This is brimming with FUN, FUN and more FUN!The story mode is great but what I am in love with, is the online mode.Right now I am level 56 and trying to enter into my first Prestige (of which there are 10) which starts after leveling up from level 65. The weapons are varied and there are loads of perks to fit and suit individual player styles and each gun, performs like a real gun as in, if you shoot somebody, it is very, very, very realistic - the blood & gore is not there for the sake of it but a true representation of what war is like - UP CLOSE & PERSONAL .The online mode can be taken seriously (for thos of you concerned about your overall stats etc)or you can just run wild shooting aimlessly and hoying grenades left right and centre. You can be tactical or tactless; it really is up to you.Getting a kill is really very satisfying and the number of ways you can bring about somebody's demise is amazing. The thud of your bullets connecting with an enemy or the sound of "DING" when you get a headshot really adds an extra something to this game. I also find myself taking advantage on other senses than that of sight i.e:- sound. You can often hear the enemy's footsteps nearby so if you are experienced, you can use this to your advantage and position yourself to get a pre-emptive first strike.Get a number of kills in succession and you are awarded as follows:-3 kills and you are awarded with the Recon Plane to locate all of the enemies on the map (you can use a perk to be camouflaged from recon planes).5 kills and you are awarded with Artillery which can not just devastate the enemy but disorientate/stun them.7 kills and you are awarded with Savage Dogs; these are my favorite and always bring lots of kills.There are a number of maps and I think out of them all there is only 1 map that I am not keen on, which is The Asylum. The rest are GREAT!There are plenty of Match Types such as Deathmatch, Team Deathmatch, Capture the Flag, Sabotage and more. You can hook up with a pal & make your own in game team (where you will appear to each other as blue rather than the standard green). It really is limitless and totally brilliant feature.I recently bought Resistance 2 for its online content and am really trying to persevere with it but it is so difficult when you have COD WaW. It's like going out for a meal with Dot Cotton whilst you've got Jennifer Ellison waiting for you at home. You just want to get on with the good stuff and for this reason alone, I cannot see any shooter in the near future coming close to the brilliance of COD WaW.Call of Duty - World at War is everything that I require from a game. It is absolutely SUPERB! 10 out of 5!Regards

15.11.2008

First off impressions was that this should have been COD3 but we didnt get that, instead we got COD4, which took it to modern warfare and one of, if not the best shooter game so far. I play COD4 religeously so I wanted COD5 to be at least worthy of the next gen with COD4 game play. I wasnt too disappointed either. Great graphics, great gameplay, excellent maps. Treyarch have really delivered on the solo, co-op and multiplayer online side of things. An outstanding improvement on the COD3 title, and an admirable post COD4 title.I had my reservations about Treyarch delivering on this after COD3 but I'm glad that I preordered it and I've put COD4 to the side for the time being so that I can play COD5 all the way through.I rated this game 5 star for fun play and 4 stars overall.

21.2.2010

We all know that this one is based upon World War II, although I've played many games with similar concept such as the Medal of Honour series, I haven't had as much fun as playing this, the Soviet campaign seems to have been somewhat influenced by the film "Enemy at the Gates" as the opening scene is somewhat similar to that of the film. The American campaign is fun but pales as it continues on, those tiresome Banzai ambushes and tree campers do get annoying after a while - and that is on the Regular difficulty. As been outlined before the grenades are an issue. The enemy seem to be in surplus of them and seem to be EXTREMELY good at second guessing where you are going to move next,

30.11.2008

Off the cusp of possibly the most successful FPS to date, Call of Duty 4, there was no doubting the high expectations people would hold for the next installment. Treyarch have done something very clever as they have taken everything from the old series and enhanced on it, apart from the campaign mode that is, but I'll go into that in a minute. The graphics and basic intense working engine are increased to an epic scale which I honestly can't describe, you get close to 50 AI soldiers on the screen in the more intense battles. This year the Call of Duty series goes back to its roots with the world war 2 depictions. Some said it was a bad idea given the success of the last installment,

27.11.2014

Bought this because I had a real yearning for a decent WW2 shoot 'em up. The reviews for many were less than great. This one was the lesser of many evils. So... as far as first person shooters go, how does it fare?Firstly, it's a world war two FPS so don't be disappointed when you don't get ultra-modern blasters and hover tanks. You get bolt action rifles, sub-machine guns that kick the aim all over the place, and you spend a lot of time running like hell from grenades. It is excellent in it's close to realistic old school physics. Great sound effects and visuals, just do yourself a favour and don't try to stick to all the advice shouted by your colleagues.

14.4.2009

After the success of the forth one lots of people were wondering if going back to World War 2 was a mistake! Well I can tell you that not one bit this game is still as exciting and playable then the 4th and previous. The forth one still remains my favourite of the Call of Duty games but this is by far no means far off. I started getting into the series from the 2nd one and being an Achievement whore I played through on Veteran and even though it was mega hard I found the experience so much more rewarding. COD3 slightly divered and then they set the bar with the 4th game but this one is fantastic for a world war two games.

Call of Duty: World at War - Reviews

Info

Analysis

Detail