Call of Duty: World at War - the Review

Discuss anything from Age of Empires to Wasteland. Any gaming talk that isn't Fallout-related goes here.
Post Reply
User avatar
Frater Perdurabo
Paragon
Paragon
Posts: 2427
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 11:51 am
Location: Võro

Call of Duty: World at War - the Review

Post by Frater Perdurabo »

This might become lengthy but bear with me - it's worth it.
If you really cannot be arsed to read, then scroll down to the Co-op section and also read the Tactical section, rest isn't all that importnat.

So last week I decided to buy CoD:WaW after having seen a friend play it numerous time at his place. I've never been a fan of the CoD series - the only other one that I had played is Modern Warfare, which I thought was OK, but not amazing. I've always been an avid FPS'er, by that I mean that I played Counterstrike fanatically and used to put the hours into Quake 3 as well - two classics (and when it comes to SP campaigns, Half-Life and Quake 2 are obviously the best ever). Besides those, I've always thought that the FPS world has been offering very little, but that view of mine has changed with CoD: WaW.

Introduction:
The setting is WW II, and it's solid.
The weapons are realistic, very well balanced and there are loads.
You can also control tanks and their turrets.
There are various types of grenades:
-standard frag
-smoke
-flash
You can also get Bazookas, Bouncing Bettys (anti-personnel landmines) and satchels.
Sprinting - the normal sprint for a bit, then rest. However, there is also a new sniping mechanic, when you zoom in your crosshair moves, by holding Shift (the sprint button), you hold your breath and the crosshair steadies. This needs "recharge" time, just like sprint.
Regenerating life - it works well.


Let's start with the Single Player campaign:
The first thing that I thought when I tried this was - Squad-based, this is shite. I like taking my time when I play these games so having the squad pace me was a bitch. However, I have to admit that you get into it and it's not actually bad. The key here is playing on the hardest difficulty - your squad is practically useless and you can just pick your own pace. The missions are interesting and albeit linear, very enjoyable, because still a large number of approaches is offered. You can carry two weapons with you but you can pick up a new weapon from any corpse so you can change weapons whenever you want to, which is really useful since you need to change between the rifle / machinegun approach a lot. Although I'm not terribly far in the SP campaign, the missions thus far have all been very interesting and varied. Quite frankly, if you are into the World War II setting, then this is definately worth it for the SP campaign alone.

Multiplayer:
This is another aspect that either makes or breaks the game. Fortunately, this time it makes it. There are various game modes, standard Team Deathmatch, Domination (UT style), etc. The maps are interesting and generally accommodate weapons well, if you are a MG person, you can play every map with it, same for rifles and snipers. Obviously shotguns are at a disadvantage, but that would be a no-brainer.

Customizability is great, rather than picking the standard sniper, MG, etc role for each map, you can create custom classes, where you can pick your:
-weapon and its accessory
-sidearm
-types of grenades
-types of accessory, i.e. Bazooka, satchel or Bouncing Betty
-3 perks - this stuff is great, you can pick a total of 3 perks (1 from each category) which provide little bonuses, i.e. steadier aim when croucing, more health, increased bullet damage, as well as more unique ones like martyrdom, second chance.
-vehicle perk - customizability of vehicle controlling, i.e. increased turret rotation speed or slower reload time for turret.

From every match you earn experience (whether you won or lost, your kills, streaks, etc all contribute) which is in turn used to earn ranks (start at 1, max is 65) that unlock more weaponry, perks and achievments. It's really quite fun because you feel like with every match you've accumulated "lasting value" to your account. Completing achievments unlocks various things, i.e. getting 100 kills with a certain weapon will open up an extra for it, i.e. aperture sight if you so wish.

Skill:
The thing about CoD: WaW MP is that you don't have to be really good to get in there are start killing. The prime skill in the game as it seems to me is map knowledge, know your map = know your enemy. After that come aim, reactions and teamwork. Higher rank gives access to more weapons and perks, but essentially it doesn't really matter since the weapons are well balanced.

You are also rewarded for streaks, getting kills without dying allows you to call in a recon plane, dogs and artillery.

Hardcore: Hardcore game mode removes the HUD entirely which is refreshing, it also removes the radar so you are dependant on the standard map and your co-ordination skills. These are the settings by which people play on the PC anyway, is the impression that I get. On the PS3 (that's what my friend plays it on) you can choose between hardcore and normal game modes, however the PC allows customization of the server.

Tactical: If I hadn't discovered this on my first day, I probably wouldn't be playing this game right now. Standard COD: WaW DM is very chaotic, everyone running around all over the place, very noisy, packed and often frustrating since you have enemies spawning behind you. Tactical is not a mod, it's a simple ruleset set by admins for players like themselves who enjoy this kind of gameplay. The rules of tactical are:
-no running, except to avoid direct fire, grenades or artillery. This goes for both running and sprinting.
-curbed perks, so no annoying ones i.e. second chance and martyrdom.

In essence, this slows gameplay down loads and means that it's not a twitch action drool shooter, but actually makes this game very tactical and makes you use your brain. I play on tactical servers 90% of the time and it's extremely fun and rewarding, needless to say, most realistic war simulator that I've ever played. For thouse sickos among you that love sneaking behind enemy lines and getting knife / bayonet kills on their snipers? This is the game for you. You are rewarded for your patience and your smarts.

Co-op:
There is a co-op campaign, supposedly seperate from the SP campaign, but I haven't tried it yet. However where co-op really excels is under:
Nazi-Zombies:
Possibly the best survival FPS gamemode created thus far. The players (1-4) can choose between one of the four maps and make a holdout against the waves of nazi zombies that try to invade the setting that you're in. First map is a classic and it's amazing, I'd say that it's definately better for 30min of fun than L4D will ever be. By killing zombies, you accumulate points for which you can buy new weapons and open further boundries inside your sandbox. It gets extremely tough quite quickly and you cannot win, which makes it great fun.

Overall, CoD: WaW gets:
:subhuman::subhuman::subhuman::subhuman::subhuman:
out of:
:subhuman::subhuman::subhuman::subhuman::subhuman:

I highly recommend everyone to get the PC version, since I'm not sure that tactical is available on the PS3 and it also allows more customization. On top of that, all the map packs on the PC are free and you can also mod.
Kashluk

Post by Kashluk »

How close is WaW gameplay-wise to CoD 4: Modern Warfare? I really enjoyed that game and I've heard good things about the nazi-zombie coop.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsKdbWNi ... re=related
User avatar
Manoil
Wastelander's Nightmare
Wastelander's Nightmare
Posts: 3697
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:05 pm
Location: Drifting Onward

Post by Manoil »

You never mentioned the "Grenades at War" aspect. The game has earned that very moniker because AI has a fetish for throwing perfect grenade tosses to fuck your shit up at every turn. Seriously-- it's maddening.

Nazi Zombies is fun, but it takes too long to get the opportunity to use the energy weapon upstairs.
User avatar
Frater Perdurabo
Paragon
Paragon
Posts: 2427
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 11:51 am
Location: Võro

Post by Frater Perdurabo »

Kashluk wrote:How close is WaW gameplay-wise to CoD 4: Modern Warfare? I really enjoyed that game and I've heard good things about the nazi-zombie coop.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FsKdbWNi ... re=related
I didn't really play Modern Warfare so much as to be able to make a direct comparison and I didn't play the multiplayer at all - however the impression that I'm getting is that WaW is a lot slower. The levels are larger and open, i.e. your mission is to infiltriate a building and there are a number of approaches. On the other hand, Modern Warfare felt a bit like a tunnel shooter with all those cities, streets and corridors and it always felt like someone was rushing you. It makes sense in the context, but it's just not my thing.

Once again, Nazi Zombies is the shit. So much fun, you guys have to try it. Make sure you use voice communication though - communication is everything when you get to the harder waves.
Manoil wrote:You never mentioned the "Grenades at War" aspect. The game has earned that very moniker because AI has a fetish for throwing perfect grenade tosses to fuck your shit up at every turn. Seriously-- it's maddening.

Nazi Zombies is fun, but it takes too long to get the opportunity to use the energy weapon upstairs.
To be honest, the grenades don't bother me one bit. Other players are good at throwing them - that's fine, everyone starts at the same level and you can master them yourself.
As for the campaign - I think it's fine, even on the hardest difficulty. You've always got a grenade indicator that lets you toss them back as soon as they land, or at least you know which direction to run in. In any case - the checkpoints are numerous and you never really have to replay chunks of the game.
User avatar
Wolfman Walt
Mamma's Gang member
Mamma's Gang member
Posts: 5243
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 1:31 pm
Location: La Grange, Kentucky
Contact:

Post by Wolfman Walt »

Really? Perfect score?....You dissapoint me.
susan's twin
ASSHAT
ASSHAT
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2009 10:16 pm

Post by susan's twin »

Thanks for this review of a game that came out last year
Blargh
Ãœberkommando
Ãœberkommando
Posts: 6303
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2003 7:11 pm

Post by Blargh »

But what THEY truly wish to know :

Was it superior to Childeren of Men (sic) ?

Ehue. :drunk:
User avatar
Manoil
Wastelander's Nightmare
Wastelander's Nightmare
Posts: 3697
Joined: Wed Feb 22, 2006 12:05 pm
Location: Drifting Onward

Post by Manoil »

Wolfman Walt wrote:Really? Perfect score?....You dissapoint me.
I was under the impression Sir Perdurabo found nothing in this world sacred
User avatar
Frater Perdurabo
Paragon
Paragon
Posts: 2427
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 11:51 am
Location: Võro

Post by Frater Perdurabo »

Wolfman Walt wrote:Really? Perfect score?....You dissapoint me.
The reasons for that are twofold:
1) Primarily the score was given on the :subhuman: scale. Were it, for example, on the :spacecat: scale, it would have scored only a mere :spacecat::spacecat: out of :spacecat::spacecat::spacecat::spacecat:

2) Even thought I myself am also a cynical bastard and admit that there are things wrong with this game, I am judging it by the things that it gets right, which are multiple. You can really just knuckle down and start putting the hours in and pay very little attention to the bugs and aspects that annoy you - they are far from game breaking. When I give a perfect score, I am still saying that it's not perfect, for perfection doesn't exist (like saying "never" with the "never say never" clause).
Essentially why I gave WaW 5/5 is because it reinstated my belief in FPS'es which, quoting the words of the ZP dude can be summarized as "piss stained swamplands of the gaming industry". The game is great, give it a go.




HOWEVER, if you want to hear the other side of the story, here are things that annoy me - and how to counter them.
-sometimes a grenade can get stuck inside you. You hear some fucker throw a grenade, it hits you on the head and you start legging it, but it gets stuck to your body and you run around like a suicide bomber until it explodes. Fucking annoying, but rare.

-spawning. The maps, especially the new ones that came out with the recent map pack (and by the way, maps are amazing. Very well balanced and very interesting, as well as "immersive" (fuck I hate that word now, fuck you Bethesda) are fairly small, so you have to pick your server carefully.
How spawning works in this game is that you don't have predefined spawn points, you spawn next to a teammate of yours, wherever he may be. This is great, because it keeps the skirmish dynamic, positions are always changing and team deathmatch doesn't turn into a spawnrape. In theory, the idea works great, however:
as aforementioned, the maps are quite small, sometimes you get one sneaky bastard behind your lines, which is easy since there is no team communication in pubs. People are dying every second, so you might think that you are safe, but then a fucking batallion spawns behind you. It used to be very fucking annoying and it made you basically pick your position accordingly - not whether you had just covered an area or not but to make sure that you had your back to the wall, for that was the only time that it would be safe.
However, I don't really join servers with more than 20 people. 10 a side is the maximum that I can handle because I hate twitch gaming clusterfucks, I prefer playing with my brain. As long as the numbers are relatively low and you know the maps, you are fine. The game really is way more tactical than any other FPS that I've ever played before at public level (CS is way more tactical at pro level, but that's another story).


-the bugs. A few that I've encountered thus far:
unhandled exception: this was the same bug with the previous CoD and it sort of annoys me that they haven't fixed it. It is caused by a variety of reasons, all of which come up in google. Mine was easy to fix and now it's been running smoothly ever since.
sound: it used to happen that when I had the game on my speakers and I then unplugged them to use a headset, my game sound stopped working until I restarted the game, which was a bitch, but now I'm in the habit of just switching from speakers to headphones before I start the game. No biggie, but annoying.
susan's twin wrote:Thanks for this review of a game that came out last year
No real mention of it in DaC archives - I did make a quick search beforehand :chew:
I know that DaC hasn't ever really been into FPSes so I thought the chances of somebody having reviewed this would be basically minimal anyway. Give it a go, the game's great!
Blargh wrote:But what THEY truly wish to know :

Was it superior to Childeren of Men (sic) ?

Ehue. :drunk:
I'm not going to find out. Children of Men is one of those movies during which I fell asleep at arounf 45 minutes and I'm not fucking going back. It doesn't matter how "great" and "significant" of a point a movie makes - if it's boring as hell - it's a piece of shit.
Now for a great English movie, I'm sure that you've seen Withnail & I, Master Blargh. Probably one of the best movies ever made.
User avatar
Wolfman Walt
Mamma's Gang member
Mamma's Gang member
Posts: 5243
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 1:31 pm
Location: La Grange, Kentucky
Contact:

Post by Wolfman Walt »

I just don't get how you could dig this game more than Modern Warfare. Yea, Modern Warfare isn't the EPITOMY OF FPS (till halo 4), but I dunno. I just thought Modern Warfare did everything....better.
MR Snake
Chinderella
Chinderella
Posts: 2228
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 8:07 pm
Location: Fapping in my mothers basement

Post by MR Snake »

Wolfman Walt wrote:I just don't get how you could dig this game more than Modern Warfare. Yea, Modern Warfare isn't the EPITOMY OF FPS (till halo 4), but I dunno. I just thought Modern Warfare did everything....better.
A fucking greed.
Do these glasses and my two chins make me look sexy?
User avatar
POOPERSCOOPER
Paparazzi
Paparazzi
Posts: 5035
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2003 1:50 am
Location: California

Post by POOPERSCOOPER »

I really liked your review Frater, it was in depth and informative. My friends are always playing either COD4 or COD: WaW like non stop its the only game they play since they have came out pretty much. I played COD4 and I didn't really enjoy the single player because feels like you aren't really doing shit and all your enemies respawn if you wait too long which I found the worst part of the game. Re spawning enemies to keep a constant rush or whatever just feels too old to be in games anymore. COD4 is like a dumbed down shooter if I dare say, all scripted to look cool.

I never got into the multiplayer because at the time I was playing the game on my SDTV on xbox so it was gay and the single player didn't leave that much of a good taste in my mouth.
Join us on IRC at #fallout on the gamesurge.net network.
User avatar
SenisterDenister
Haha you're still not there yet
Haha you're still not there yet
Posts: 3489
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 3:03 pm
Location: Cackalackyland

Post by SenisterDenister »

The multiplayer for World at War pissed me off, why can't they use the weapon limitations for the armies like they had in all the previous WW2 games they made? A russian spawning with an M1 Garand fighting a german that spawned with a Sten MkII doesn't make much sense to me.
User avatar
cazsim83
250 Posts til Somewhere
250 Posts til Somewhere
Posts: 2978
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 5:23 pm

Post by cazsim83 »

Frater wrote: To be honest, the grenades don't bother me one bit. Other players are good at throwing them - that's fine, everyone starts at the same level and you can master them yourself.
As for the campaign - I think it's fine, even on the hardest difficulty. You've always got a grenade indicator that lets you toss them back as soon as they land, or at least you know which direction to run in. In any case - the checkpoints are numerous and you never really have to replay chunks of the game.
scanning this post I saw "rape" and "masturbate".

I'm logging off now - my sanity needs it.
User avatar
Superhaze
Hero of the Desert
Hero of the Desert
Posts: 1686
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2007 4:21 am
Location: Far north

Post by Superhaze »

Hey! How are you doing? I am fine.

I love war, so this must be the game for me. But I wish i could fight in stalingrad fo reelz, becuz the graphics would be so much better. lol.
nikdevid
SDF!
SDF!
Posts: 3
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2009 6:21 am

Post by nikdevid »

Howmany of you complete this game!! I need some help and instruction for solve some hard stages.. Is there any cheat codes for finish all bluddy animies??
User avatar
Wolfman Walt
Mamma's Gang member
Mamma's Gang member
Posts: 5243
Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2003 1:31 pm
Location: La Grange, Kentucky
Contact:

Post by Wolfman Walt »

Did you try the same tactics you just pulled on the English language?
User avatar
Frater Perdurabo
Paragon
Paragon
Posts: 2427
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 11:51 am
Location: Võro

Post by Frater Perdurabo »

nikdevid - you must truly be horrible at this shit. My girlfriend completed many of the early missions on Veteran even though she had never played an FPS before, or on the computer for that matter. Took her a while, but she still pulled it off.
User avatar
Megatron
Mamma's Gang member
Mamma's Gang member
Posts: 8030
Joined: Fri Apr 19, 2002 1:00 am
Location: The United Kingdoms

Post by Megatron »

whoa whoa, time out. Rewind! what the heck are you doing letting girlfriend on call of duty, no simple woman can be allowed to see the horrors of world of war 2.
:chew:
Our Host!
Post Reply