OhGizmo! Review – Call of Duty: World At War

9
528

codww24

By Luke Anderson

I’ll be the first to admit that the whole “World War II” game concept has been overdone. I’ve lost count of the sheer number of titles with that exact theme that have been released in the last few years. That’s not to say that they’re all bad games, it just makes you wonder when a game franchise lasts longer than the war it’s based on. But I digress. I’ve been playing the latest installment of Call of Duty for a little while, and it’s about time that I shared my thoughts.

The first thing you’re going to notice when you get into the game is that the graphics are incredible. There are some times when it’s kind of cool to just stop and take in the lush foliage of the jungle, of course that’s usually disturbed by the bullets flying by. The level of detail is certainly not lost when it comes to the more gory parts of the game. It’s not terribly uncommon to see someone lose a bloody limb or two, which I’m sure holds true to what actually happened to some during the war.

codww06

The game plays much like the previous installments of the franchise, which really isn’t a bad thing. The controls are smooth, the progression through each level is steady, with very dense and detailed maps. The AI isn’t the most intuitive, with enemies that love to run right past you, or allies that occasionally seem to be on break in the heat of battle. It is a minor annoyance, and isn’t frequent enough to really throw off the game.

If multiplayer is your thing, then World at War will certainly deliver. You’ve got 8 different modes of play with 13 maps to choose from. Co-op is always a blast, but when you add in Nazi Zombies it gets even better. In case you hadn’t heard, after completing the game you unlock this special mode in which you and three friends have to fight of endless waves of Nazi Zombies. Seriously, it just doesn’t get much better than that.

codww23

So yes, we’ve probably got enough World War II games to last a lifetime, however, Call of Duty: World at War shows us that there is always room to improve. While CoD4 was an excellent game, I’d definitely say that World at War raises the bar. If you’re into first-person shooters, especially military-based shooters, you’re going to love this game. It is currently available for the PS3, Xbox 360 and PC platforms.

[ Call of Duty ]

9 COMMENTS

  1. Yeah, definitely too short on the single player side. Finished it within a day and then played around with multiplayer for a week. After that I got rid of it. Back to COD4 for me. It didn't bring anything worthwhile to the table, pretty much the same gameplay just with crappier weapons. Hopefully this will be the end of COD's WW2 era.

  2. Yeah, definitely too short on the single player side. Finished it within a day and then played around with multiplayer for a week. After that I got rid of it. Back to COD4 for me. It didn't bring anything worthwhile to the table, pretty much the same gameplay just with crappier weapons. Hopefully this will be the end of COD's WW2 era.

  3. Two things. First, about the only thing that this game has over Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare is that it has co-op single player. Other than that, it doesn't stack up in any area. Single player or especially multiplayer (the addition of tanks, dogs, and crappier weapons is awful). And second, CoD4's subtitle is Modern Warfare. They are the same game.

  4. I cant really say anything that hasnt already been said by others in the comments here. I suspect Luke and the others have shot their literary wad on CES material and thought this would be a viable piece of techno-fluff news. As pointed out theres so little difference between this COD and the last one to garner a blurb in OhG. That coupled with the game being in the store for over two months and Im wondering when the OhGizmo review of Baldurs Gate is going down?

LEAVE A REPLY