Call of Duty: World at War Review (Irish Team)

Call of Duty: World at War has been the subject of much hype and anticipation since its announcement back in May. Being, essentially, the sequel to Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, World at War has had very high expectations set for it. While ultimately the game falls short of its predecessor, it is still an excellent game and it comes very close to matching Call of Duty 4’s high level of quality. People may argue however that it is not entirely fair to compare these two games, which were developed by different developers, they share so many similarities that it is only natural to compare the two.

Developed by Treyarch, the developers of Call of Duty 3, World at War leaves modern warfare behind it and instead returns the series roots, the war torn battlefields of World War 2. Following in the footsteps of Call of Duty 4, World at War’s campaign mode follows the stories of two characters; an American soldier fighting in the lush jungle on the Japanese front and a Russian soldier battling through drab German cities and flat countryside with the Red Army towards Berlin. With largely forgettable characters and a story that could have been improved considering its basis in reality the single-player story mode is perhaps the one great stumbling block of what is otherwise an excellent game. While the changes in setting between missions are refreshing and keep the environments from becoming stale and too familiar you never really feel like you get to know any particular character and some of the main moments in the story have less of an emotional impact as a result, this flaw is highlighted even further when you consider the thrilling story and relatable characters in Modern Warfare campaign.

Apart from the setting differentiating the paths of the two main characters the enemies they face fight you in completely different ways. The Germans fight like any other enemy in a first-person shooter game but the Japanese rely mainly on ambushes, this means that on the higher difficulty settings you must adapt your playing styles to suit both types of enemies. On the Pacific theater section of the campaign one minute you could be strolling along a road through a jungle apparently no danger in sight and then all of a sudden the road could be teaming with Japanese soldiers and you have to find cover immediately or you’ll torn to shreds. The Japanese soldiers aren’t afraid to get up close and personal either and you will frequently see ‘Banzai’ attackers charging at you with their bayonets raised above their heads so your knife will turn from being a handy commodity into a necessity.

Call of Duty: World at War is powered by the ‘Call of Duty 4’ engine so its visual style closely resembles that of Modern Warfare’s. The lighting effects on objects and people have the same look that they did one year previously as well as the characters movement animations. It is definitely noticeable however that the engine has been significantly tweaked to produce better overall visuals, this is especially noticeable in certain areas such as the Japanese jungles or the water in the game.

Since it uses the same engine the game feels almost identical to its predecessor. The movement feels the same, the view-bob, the sprinting, the knife attacks, the shooting… so in other words nearly everything. As I am sure you know Call of Duty 4 played amazingly so to say that World at War plays nearly identically can only be a good thing. However some of the guns in the game don’t feel as powerful as perhaps they should and this was the first thing I noticed when playing the game, I couldn’t exactly put a finger on it, maybe the sound of the gun shot was quieter or maybe the guns had less recoil but having played a lot of Call of Duty 4 the previous night it was definitely something I noticed. But as I progressed in the game I became accustomed to the weapons and this didn’t bother me anymore.

Perhaps the main hallmark of the Call of Duty series has been its incredible multiplayer, and Call of Duty: World at War is no exception to this legacy, it still offers the same addictive multiplayer to be found in Modern Warfare. The game essentially has everything that was in Modern Warfare’s multiplayer added to the game and improved upon. Perks are making a return including some new addition, players can once again create their own classes to suit their playing styles. Prestiging makes a triumphant return and the level you have to hit before you can prestige has been raised from 55 to 65. One of the complaints with prestiging in Modern Warfare was that players got no bonus from prestiging however that has changed in World at War. If a player prestiges they will unlock extra custom class slots, a small incentive I’ll admit but an incentive none the less. Overall I have also found the multiplayer to run a lot smoother than it did in Call of Duty 4.

One of the big things in Call of Duty 4’s multiplayer was ‘kill streaks’ in which a player could call in a recon plane for a kill-streak of 3, an air-streak for a kill-streak of 5 and a helicopter for a kill-streak of seven. This system has returned with World at War but it has been modified to fit in with the era of technology in the game. You can still call in a recon plane once you get a kill-streak of 3 which does the same thing of showing enemy positions on your map as it did previously, when you get a kill-streak of 5 you instead call in an artillery strike which fundamentally works the same way an airstrike did. The big change however lies when you achieve a kill-streak of seven, instead of calling in a helicopter to provide fire support you call in a pack of dogs who charge around the map killing enemies in their way, they are quite vulnerable by themselves but their strength relies on their speed and weight of numbers. The dogs also serve a tactical purpose as well, since they seek out your enemies if you follow one of the dogs they will inevitably lead you to an enemy, this works particularly well if the enemy is hiding and you can be led right to them.

Apart from these tweaks to competitive multiplayer as well as the inclusion of new modes the games main multiplayer strength is the addition of a ‘co-operative’ mode. The co-operative mode offers numerous ways to play through the single-player campaign online or offline. You can play split-screen co-op mode offline or you can play online with up to 3 other people. The game ramps up in difficulty for each extra person in your co-op game, the amount of enemies at particular points will increase dramatically and it can be very tough, even with the extra players, to battle through the increased numbers of enemies. If a player is downed by an enemy you can run over to them and revive them although you cannot fire a weapon will you are reviving someone leaving you vulnerable for a brief period of time. The co-op offered is split into two modes; ‘Competitive Co-Op’ and ‘Campaign Co-Op’. Campaign co-op is basically the main single player campaign just played with more people, more enemies etc. The competitive co-op however gives players points for each kill they get as well as extra points for special kills such as headshots or knife attacks. This adds a competitive element to the mix resulting in some really fun online play. You can also find special items called ‘Death Cards’ that and another layer of depth to the co-op, one can be found hidden on each of the game’s 13 missions and they offer special abilities that either make the game harder or easier e.g. Enemies die only from headshots.

Once you complete the main single player campaign you unlock a special co-op mode called ‘Nazi Zombies.’ This seems quite out of place however I have found it to be immensely enjoyable and it has turned out to be one of my favourite multiplayer modes. The mode places between 2-4 players in a run-down house and the players are simply tasked with staying alive for as long as possible. It is broken down into rounds and the number of zombies, health, AI’s and speed increase with each round. You earn points for each zombie you kill and you can spend these points unlocking new sections of the house or purchasing new weapons. The difficulty starts very low but it quickly ramps up until you’re only just barely surviving by the tenth round. If a team-mate is downed by a zombie you can revive them similar to in the main co-op modes, only one player has to be alive at the end of each round and then the others will respawn although they’ll lose the weapons they have already bought. T seems to me like a mixture of Left 4 Dead and Gears of War 2’s ‘Horde’ mode.

Overall I have found Call of Duty: World at War to be an immensely satisfying game. While it may not be quite as good as its predecessor it still takes the same winning formula and integrates it with very positive results. If you are looking for a brilliant multiplayer experience or indeed a decent single-player game World at War is the game for you….But! the main thing it highlighted for me was how brilliant a game Call of Duty4: Modern Warfare was, as I’m sure you can tell from my cross comparisons, and how much I am looking forward to Infinity Ward’s next instalment in the Call of Duty franchise….

Score: 8/10

By: Rory

*Reviewed on the Playstation 3*