Quantcast

Call Of Duty: World at War


Summary | News | Previews | Features | » Review | Cheats | Guides | Screenshots | Videos | Comments | FeedRSS

Every inch a "proper" Call of Duty game, this is a great WWII shooter

Words: Andy Hartup, GamesRadar UK
« Back to Article

 
62 Comments
Order Comments: Newest First | Oldest First
evilsanta23  - 1 year 17 days ago 
seriously. this game looks great. who cares if its not as good as cod4 cause it'll be hard to make a game as good as cod4. y r people hatin on treyarch and anothr world war 2 game? treyarch made a good game. cant people accept that?
Report
R38P3R  - 1 year 17 days ago 
hopefully CoD6 will be 'modern' again
Report
GodlikeApe  - 1 year 17 days ago 
I'm looking forward to a COD game set in say, the Boer war, muskets and cannons with a touch of spear-throwing! What could be better than that?!
Report
jamesnash  - 1 year 17 days ago 
I love short games, why drag a game out?
short sweet games like cod4 made me want to go back for more!
id never play a 30+ hour game again and a lot of the gameplay is repetitive anyway
Report
secondshooter  - 1 year 16 days ago 
Just because it's not made by Infinity Ward and doesn't have a 5 at the end of the title means that the game sucks and is not part of the main series? Last I heard, WaW was the 5th game in the series, and IW is making number 6. And keep an open mind; Treyarch is perfectly capable of making good games. Don't bash the game without playing it just because IW didn't make it.
Report
Beaver  - 1 year 16 days ago 
please some one tell he did not say they added a zombie mode!
Report
Spartan523  - 1 year 15 days ago 
Common give treyarch a chance, they are a solid dev. with a lot of exp. COD3 sucked but they had slightly over a year to do it, they couldnt do much of what they wanted. with more time COD3 could have been alot better,W/ COD:WAW they had alot more time.
Report
MadCowDisease  - 1 year 14 days ago 
^^^^
It was less then a year actually, and the average FPS takes 2-3 years.

As for the guy that said it's crap because it's not Vietname, COME ON, do you think American media will be happy to see an American game reminding them that they lost?
Report
Juggernaut140  - 1 year 14 days ago 
"BAAAAAAW, NO MODERN WARFARE EVEN THOUGH THERE ARE MORE MW GAMES THAN WW2 GAMES!!!!!"

Get over yourselves IW fanboys.
Report
MadCowDisease  - 1 year 14 days ago 
^EPIC WIN.
Report
Viggars  - 1 year 13 days ago 
Many people have spent the last year being playing COD4's repetitive multiplayer.
If you ask me people will get bored of COD WAW very quickly, especially with so many other high quality games on the market at the moment. If you want an alternative, I recommend Far Cry 2.
Report
Defguru7777  - 1 year 13 days ago 
I think that they used the word "brutal" in this review more times than in an episode of Metalocalypse.
Report
oreomonkey  - 1 year 10 days ago 
I like how everyone is complaining that Treyarch made it... If Infinity Ward would have made it may have been better I'm not going to argue that. But it takes two years to make a game this good and if Treyarch hadn't made this one, the next one wouldn't have come out till next year and we would have had to wait 2 years. So quit complaining that Treyarch made it. GO buy it. PLay it until Infinity Ward makes theirs and if u like IW's better than trade in WaW and get the other one.
Report
TheTrooper424  - 1 year 4 days ago 
I truly regret ever buying the game. The single-player is amazing but the multi-player is the worst (in the series) by far. I cant play it for thirty minutes without quiting in frustration. Treyarch really messed up on this one. Why wont they set the next CoD in the future...lmao!! Light-sabers anyone?? : D
Report
bovice  - 11 months 26 days ago 
this game seemed to be "rushed". The graphics are good, but when I play it.. where the heck are the solider at when the shoot at you? I spent 1 hour on Veteran level to complete the 3rd mission.. I couldn't find some of the ones that were shooting at me. They were either to far, or to dark to see them.

Online is really good... quite a challenge if you ask me, but it's really good.
Report
R38P3R  - 11 months 23 days ago 
still by far the best WW2 shooter ever, but definitely not as good as CoD 4.
Report
Cwf2008  - 11 months 23 days ago 
Lol the next Call of Duty game should be COD: The American Revolution. Now you too can experience all the thrill of standing in formation while getting shot at by redcoats, being able to fire off 3 rounds a minute, and having a reload time of about 20 seconds! You and your enemy shoot at each other only to miss? Dont worry: Just reload and stare at each other. Maybe by the time you reload your enemy will have died of boredom!
Report
pjbuhl  - 11 months 12 days ago 
are you kidding?!?!? who cares who its made by this game still looks great none the less and i might ad though that i would rather have gears of war 2 than this, it still looks like a fantastic game....and to jimsondante um.....there is no way a game has 100 hours of story mode......8 hours is good.
Report
XiXPapaMoonXiX  - 11 months 4 days ago 
Phenomenal game...More gritty than others and great story...a longshot from COD4 though
Report
ghegin  - 11 months 4 days ago 
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.
Report
Showing 21-40 of 62 Comments
« PREV 1 2  3 4 NEXT »
Latest Videos
This video player requires Flash 9 Player or later. Please download the latest Flash Player.
» More videos
The Knowledge

Call Of Duty: World at War

Genre: Shooter
Release date: 14 Nov 2008
Published by: Activision
Developed by: Treyarch
Franchise: Call Of Duty
Multiplayer Modes:
Offline
2 player CO-OP
Online
18 player VS
4 player CO-OP
9 AWESOME
Read the review
Latest Articles About This Game
Call of Duty: World at War
Every inch a "proper" Call of Duty game, this is a great WWII shooter
Xbox 360 Review  -  11 Nov 2008