Hello folks and welcome to my final review before the festive season. With December 25th coming up, most of you gamers are probably wondering what game you should ask for (or get) next. Well, this is one game that is sure to be on your gift list.

The last few months has seen the release of some major titles, be it Little Big Planet, Far Cry 2, Call of Duty: World at War, Dead Space, and most recently; Resistance 2. I’m not here to influence your decision in any way as all are great games. However, I am here to give my opinion on the new Call of Duty – okay its not so new anymore but can it beat COD 4?

The short answer is a little bit of a maybe – it is a yes/no situation. Call of Duty 4 brought the First Person Shooter genre to gun-playing, and atmospheric nirvana, bringing in nostalgic value for me as i could almost compare the game to GoldenEye on the Nintendo 64 (see my COD 4 review), and if it wasn’t for the low replayability, that game would have rocked. However if I was going on about COD 4 for this entire paragraph, I apologise, but that should just show how much I appreciate the game. Anyway back to COD:World at War…

World at War has a very engaging single player campaign, again from two perspectives as before in COD 4, but in this case the two perspectives are not connected by an interlinking storyline with the events happening in one place affecting the other. You play an American Marine, and a Russian Soldier. Both stories start off considerably well, with the American side of the conflict based in the Pacific, and the war on the Japanese.

It is quite a progressive story, jumping years at a time. There is some squad moments and a good narrative but its nothing ‘Brothers in Arms: Hells Highway’ hasn’t pulled off more successfully. And the only problem I have with the war on the Japanese that is it has been done before - quite well in fact; in ‘Medal of Honour: Rising Sun’. Yes, Medal of Honour: Rising Sun may not have been as good as this game in the sheen and fluidity department but I think it was more fun, and I just felt while playing through the American perspective on COD: WAW that I was treading familiar territory. (Might I also add that MOH: RS also had almost all the features this game has online, including online and split screen co-op – I remember me and a friend spent a good few hours playing this game on co-op, and I especially remember this one level that involved an elephant ride. We spent hours trying to kill the blasted elephant, it was really funny. The music when you rode on it was funny too.)

The Russian story is more classic and straight forward gaming, by which I mean; you know your enemy. and everything is familiar, a throwback to the greatness that COD 4 was. Nothing will surprise you here (except a falling pillar on the second last level), and I think I enjoyed these missions more. Not because they were easy (which they weren’t), but because who doesn’t love blasting Nazi’s.

The level design, while very dark and grey in contrast to the vibrant greenery of the Pacific islands, was more somehow satisfying and, I don’t know, it reminded me of all those war games I’ve played. Still at the very last moment of the story, wounded and possibly about to die, you crawl forward and haul the Russian flag over Berlin, and you get that sense of pride and a tearful remembrance for the men and women that died for liberty. You actually felt like you just fought the whole war and boy that pride as the Red flag flutters is a sheer joy.

I enjoyed this game far more than COD 4 when it comes to making you feel for the war and get all emotional at the end. (When you play the game you’ll know what I mean.) Anyway about the other features and attributes – COD: WAW uses the same game engine and control design as COD 4 (why change something that isn’t broke?) and has some lovely visuals. The gun battles with the old WW2 (World War 2) weapons are made all the more nail biting as their inaccuracy comes into account. which makes the online fairer on newbies than COD 4 was online. This game I believe also has some very nice game modes. My favorite being Nazi Zombie, which puts you back into the boots of American GI’s and pits you against hoards of Zombies for points to get the best weapon. (I have lasted to round 12 thus far online, but I know someone who made round 20.) However what got me about the sound track is, although i can appreciate the attempt of trying to distance itself from the classical scores of the MoH games, is simply put “out of place” the freaking music just doesn’t always fit with the emotion it should be trying to draw from the player. Again that is just my opinion, as for most of the game, I was at a point where I got so sick of the electro, rockish score that I turned the music off completely. Good new is the weapons feel, shoot, and sound as they should.

The Verdict – Call of Duty; World at War is more enjoyable over the COD 4 game, with trophies to keep you going on the single player, and the online mode. Meanwhile some may argue that stepping back to the WW2 setting has ruined the new direction COD 4 took. This is, in my opinion, not true. WAW is a fine addition to the COD series and I expect great things from makers Treyarch, and Infinity Ward (COD 4 maker) in the future.

The Score -

Graphics - 9

Gameplay – 10

Sound/Score - 7

Plot - 8

Replayability – 9

Final Score – 8.6

Award – Best Online Shooter.

Award – Best Mini-game (Zombie Nazi).

–
Join www.killermovies.com/forums/ and discover a new world of online socialising. From discussions about comics, books, games and films to Role Playing in any manner of variety. There is something for everybody.

Hope to see you there..

PSN ID: Jedireaper