Call of Duty: World at War

"A Nice Makeover for a Great Game"

Call of Duty: World at War is a WWII game. Yes, we've seen tons of these games, pretty much covering every single fight and every single location that a bullet was fired during the conflict, yet somehow people still seem to enjoy them. COD:WAW does a good job of representing the conflict however, if only because it tries to be Call of Duty 4 with a twist.

First off, the game does in fact use the COD4 engine, and this is apparent from the instant you grab your first gun and fire it. Everything feels the same, and fans of Modern Warfare will definitely feel at home. Every thing flows smoothly, there are crazy scripted battles with all of the explosions and drama just like you'd expect, and it all looks good...and sometimes annoyingly familiar. Treyarch has tried to replicate the success of Infinity Ward's COD games and taken tons of crap for it, because it just wasn't quite of the same quality, just exceedingly average. With this game they completely copied IW, and sometimes it can be just a tiny bit irksome.

Strangely, instead of improving upon the game engine, they seem to have knocked down a few notches. Though it is very hard to point out any one specific thing that doesn't feel quite right, the flaws are there. Just there. It all seems to feel just a tiny bit screwed up somehow, whether its the balance, graphics, level design, it was just obvious while playing that the game could use a little more dev time. There simply isn't polish. All of the professional reviewers ,however, seem to gloss over this fact, maybe simply out of fear of the fans freaking out.

Now, all of this trash talking may lead you to believe I don't enjoy this game, but that is simply not the case. Treyarch made a very solid follow up to Call of Duty 4, and the addictive gameplay shines through, with slight improvements to the aspects of the game that weren't screwed over by the lack of time. The most notable improvement would have to be the campaign. Call of Duty: World at War takes an extremely gritty look at war in general, with a colossal amount of blood, gore, and torture in comparison to previous games in the series. Limbs now fly off, the game actually opens with you watching a fellow soldier get torn up and tortured before having his throat brutally sliced open, and soldiers scream in pain as they catch on fire and burn, or are shredded by a HMG. This all adds to realism and helps to immerse you into the gameplay more and assist in allowing a player to gloss over any previously mentioned minor flaws.

The campaign is noticeably longer with well designed missions, dramatic scripted scenes, interesting characters and varied tasks. While the general objective is still pretty much get from point A to point B while completely mindless task C, it somehow remains very fresh without providing any branching paths or anything like that, which now seem to be present in many FPS and action games. Vehicle levels are now present, and not anything like the strangely detached gunship mission from COD4. All of them throw you into massive, in your face, it-hit-the-fan-now battles, even the new air combat level, which provides a crazy adrenaline rush as you hurry through crowded passages in the plane to switch guns or rescue drowning survivors from the ocean. Its all very fun, though maybe only for your first time through, at least by yourself.

In this version of war, you can now drag a friend along. 3 friends actually, while playing online. The addition of co-op for this game absolutely saves the"main game", as most of the missions are fully playable, with all but 2 obviously lone-wolf missions available. You can find a match over XBL, or play a private match with friends, and everything can be played competitively, with a well-designed scoring system and even challenges to help boost your multiplayer rank. This is a welcome addition to the franchise and Treyarch in no way screws this up. There is even a silly Nazi Zombie mode thrown in as a bonus for completing the solo experience, in which a maximum of 4 players defend against endless waves of nazi zombies in a small bunker, with little power ups and weapon stashes present. While not very deep, its a fun mode that should be seen as a just-be-glad-its-even-there mode, though hopefully they realize the potential there and release more than one map for it. However, most players will be interested in the XBL multiplayer, made wildly popular by COD4, and I've had my fair share of battles by now.

Treyarch performs the task very well by making almost everything from COD4 show up, then adding its personal touches to it. Custom classes return, as well as perks, prestige mode, the unlocking and ranking system, etc. Even the lobbies are pretty much the same. Granted there are the minor tweaks to these things, such as new perks and the extension from a 55 level cap to 65, but its hardly game changing. Some things however are very nice to have, such as improved after match results, laying out your nemesis, how many times each of you killed each other, your KDR spread, how you earned your points, and much more. It just feels better. The gameplay however, is where treyarch took a risk and may or may not pay the price for it in the long run. The maps feel awkward when coming from the constant battle and small levels of Modern Warfare, as they're considerably larger, with many levels being obviously made for snipers or long-range single shot rifles, and the maps made to be small just feel cluttered.

The most important thing to note is the addition of tanks, which can be incredibly annoying in my opinion. Granted they add something new to the series, but it does NOT feel like Call of Duty at all, and I can't say I welcome it. When the opposing team somehow manages to get 4 of their 6 players into their own tanks, it becomes very unfair and unbalanced, with no real place to run as you'll be blown to pieces if you even try and poke your head out to fire the bazooka. Many a match I have found myself swearing my head off at the "tank whores" that use it as their primary method of killing. Also, a feature removed from the game now is weapon camouflage. While it may be obvious to many people that it was pretty much non-existent or widely used in WWII, it now leaves absolutely no incentive to get headshots with any weapon, as well as no reason to keep playing after you hit the final prestige, which once again, has been capped at 10. Not surprising. I find this omission to be frustrating and pointless, because 90% of players don't give a crap about whether or not the camo was around. The vast majority just want some form of it again. Maybe someday in a patch.

Prestiging in COD:WAW though, adds something refreshingly creative, as you gain another custom class on your first, second, fourth, seventh, and tenth prestiges, summing up to 10. This now gives players a reason to keep starting over other than to see the next symbol next to their name, however many players may still find this generally worthless.

Overall, Call of Duty: World at War does a good job of creating the addicting game play and ridiculous expectations of Call of Duty 4, if only because it copies the formula. That said, this will in no way change the face of FPS or gaming as we know it, but it is a nice distraction while we wait for Infinity Ward's next smash hit in the series. Hopefully. Call of Duty: World at War steals all 8 of its wounds out 10 from COD4, but really, whos complaining when a great game gets a slight makeover.

Reviewer's Score: 8/10, Originally Posted: 01/05/09

Game Release: Call of Duty: World at War (US, 11/10/08)