Google+

Call of Duty: World at War review

Back to Article

63 comments

  • LuRcH - May 27, 2009 3:55 p.m.

    WaW is alright.. could be better though, seems like they put a rush on it. The colors are another issue, its nearly impossible to tell who's where in the dark spots, or even walking right past the emeny without noticing it.. mainly due to the fact that we rely on the gamer tag to be a certain color, and half of the time it doesnt work right. WaW isn't the best, I think, for online gaming.. Modern Warfare is though, its not as dark, nor is it as diffcult... even though I play veteran levels.. its still diffcult for myself in WaW to even win. Another issue is cheating... I know that Xbox360 claimed that no one can cheat within the systems but thats a lie.. if you look at the number one spots for all the game ranks you'll see that, the person that has that rank.. is impossible to achieve. My kill / win ratio is around 89%, whileas there's is 100%.. with one death?? Call of duty needs to create a system that doesnt allow anyone to cheat, regardless of location. I just hope that Modern Warfare 2 is much better than WaW
  • calipber - April 13, 2009 9:08 p.m.

    I have to dissagree with GR. TA failed with cod3, the only fun part was fighting nazis hand to hand and pulling pins on their gernade belt. Cod: waw was better from their last one but not a smash hit like cod4. Fighting undead nazis, and a good story line was fun, but some things were either just to unbelievable or outright dumb. the graphics were o.k. and all but TA shouldnt do another sequal. TA its time to make your own game and stop stealing Infinity Wards thunder and stealing movie story lines to. *cough* Russian sniper beginning. i give this game a 6/10
  • infiniti101 - March 14, 2009 3:24 p.m.

    Thanks very much for the review. I just got it and it's everything you said it would be - BRUTAL. ;)
  • BurntToShreds - February 24, 2009 11:56 p.m.

    I love how they added the gore. Makes it more realistic, no? Seeing a soldier in a landing craft getting a chunk of his skull blown off, dismemberment from a bouncing betty, watching Japanese soldiers crawl away legless from a rocket strike, watching Nazi soldiers being burned alive, and a stream of blood as your knife leaves someones body. Treyarch really went out of the way to show us the true horrors of war.
  • Daywalkr - February 2, 2009 9:06 p.m.

    This game isnt as good as COD4 but the basic idea is the same, the ranking system is almost identical,65 levels,prestige. You unlock weapons and perks(abilities) as you rank up in a wide variety of game types. The only new one I can think of is War but they just added Merc TD and Team Tactical. The Campaign only was interesting because I kept getting closer to unlocking Zombie mode,which now is for everyone. The Missions were pretty boring, and since everyone is in NXE parties, forget team coordinated attacks in Camp. or MP. There are a few weapon flaws such as, with stopping power on, you can kill someone in a one bullet headshot with MP40, however an extremely high velocity Bolt action rifle cannot.Care to explain Treyarch?
  • GaMeZ4LiFe - January 2, 2009 6:19 a.m.

    I think this game looks like it is going to be quite fun, I really enjoyed COD4 so I will most likely love this game as well.
  • ghegin - December 26, 2008 3:47 p.m.

    i think that cod4 is better, as the guns in world at war suck ass. The missions are longer and better in world at war. Oh and by the way, world at war is not cod5 it is only world at war. They are making cod5 next January.
  • GamerTagsSuck - August 9, 2009 9:16 p.m.

    Read all the comments on people saying that zombie mode would suck and that people would hate the game. Haha. And IW will never make another CoD game. If I'm right, they sold the rights to CoD to Treyarch.
  • Thegamingkid - July 22, 2009 5:30 p.m.

    HA! People say that World war 2 as a game had its jucies sucked dry! Well wait till they play this game! WWII still has it!
  • slipknot555and666 - July 15, 2009 4:40 p.m.

    yea man im willston chirchill and the english won
  • yyz131 - July 15, 2009 12:08 a.m.

    You really can't compare this game to Far Cry 2 or Fallout, those games are free-roam, so you play them completely differently. So, the ratings aren't entirely accurate. Cwf, the reason Treyarch doesn't make a Vietnam game is because there are so many veterans alive today, a lot more than WWII veterans. They saw people get blown to pieces, and Treyarch correctly decided to not put them through it again , even in a game.
  • thatonekid1995 - June 23, 2009 5:31 a.m.

    i think the game is shaky but really Oreomaonkey? comparing this masterpeice to BF: bad company? i bet you're a crackhead. BF sucks more than a 90's live action game from top 7
  • SoleDash - April 16, 2009 4:12 p.m.

    Really!
  • SoleDash - April 16, 2009 4:11 p.m.

    This game is great! The story missions are very realistic, it almost feels like your there! The multiplayer is totally awesome with the hardcore mode on (No hud on your screen)! This game is worth buying!
  • m4ggot - March 30, 2009 5:09 p.m.

    The people saying this is crap are harsh. Yes, CoD4 is much better, but this is easily the best WW2 game ever made. i thought (before I played the demo) that it would be utterly crap, but it's brilliant!
  • osmokes - February 18, 2009 8:58 p.m.

    This is probably one of the worst rip-offs in the history of videogames. Call of Duty: World at War was made by Treyarch. A terrible game developer company that is making money by ripping off Infinity Ward's initial success with the original Call of Duty. Call of Duty: World at War uses the same engine as Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (the only difference is now limbs can come off). Therefore you are playing COD 4 with a World War II skin. You would therefore think that the gameplay is totally identical. It truly is not. The guns feel weak and crappy, the animations are slow, the textures change from light to gray, the dialogue is just awful (I hate Jack Bauer). The AI animation is awful. Also why the fuck does every Nazi have rolled up sleeves? The Tank combat is a joke and full of glitces. Fire (the one new feature worth any note) doesn't work half the time. The second to last mission is one of the few that requires smoke grenades, however, your russian allies didn't see fit to allow for those, instead they are replaced by shitty molotov cocktails. Multiplayer is a bastardized version of Call of Duty's excellent multiplayer. Tanks add to it, but they are clumsy at best. The Dogs are cool. What the fuck is Tabun gas? No soldier carried that like they would carry frag or smoke grenades. OVERALL - Call of Duty: World at War is terrible version of Modern Warfare. I blame everyone who has purchase any game from Treyarch for this mess. I am BOYCOTTING Treyarch and anything involved with their company. Infinity Ward's Call of Duty games are the only true Call of Duty games.
  • TheMasterBroque - February 7, 2009 2:29 a.m.

    This game is freakin AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The way the game makes you feel is awesome because you never know what's around the corner. :-)
  • gamer49 - January 11, 2009 10:32 p.m.

    i can't stop playing the zombie game. the story mode is realy fun.
  • CaptainDucktacular - January 3, 2009 10 p.m.

    You know, when I first found out that this game would be another worthless WWII shooter, I was dissapointed. But after owning it for around two weeks, I couldn't be more enthusiastic. It's gorgeous, realistic, and WAY more dirty and destructive than its competition. I love this game so much. It really captures the violence and suffering of WWII, and I think the story is great. Memorable moments like a certain Sgt.'s death, along with the choice to save a certain t.v. star are amazing to me, as I came to enjoy the two characters. Also, the final moments of the game really stuck out for me. And the one thing that makes this game a great addition to the series? Simple. News that this ISN"T Call of Duty 5, and there is a sequel to COD4. Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2. Happy hunting!
  • Rhesus - December 30, 2008 1:19 p.m.

    It's not a bad game. It's just all the hype from Call of Duty 4, makes it look worse in comparison.

Showing 41-60 of 63 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

More Info

Release date: Nov 11 2008 - Xbox 360, PC, Wii, DS, PS3 (US)
Nov 14 2008 - Xbox 360, PC, Wii, DS, PS3 (UK)
Available Platforms: Xbox 360, PC, Wii, DS, PS3
Genre: Shooter
Published by: Activision
Developed by: n-Space, Treyarch
Franchise: Call of Duty
ESRB Rating:
Mature: Blood and Gore, Intense Violence, Strong Language
PEGI Rating:
16+

OR…

Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.