Another terrible World War Two game to add to the others in the exhausted genre and made by Treyarch to top it all off. This was the general reaction from gamers when they heard about the follow up to the critically acclaimed Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. But as November 14th (11th in America) crept closer, expectations rose thanks to good previews and spectacular screenshots. By the time Call of Duty: World at War was due to be released it was eagerly anticipated and in high demand.

Treyarch had an uphill battle to overcome their own reputation and the now legendary CoD 4, but despite this they’ve managed to create a game that feels new, crisp and compelling in a genre that most gamers got sick of years ago. By setting the game in the Pacific, playing one Pvt. Miller as you fight your way to Okinawa, Japan and in Russia, playing Pvt. Petrenko, fighting towards Germany, Treyarch have managed to make a run of the mill World War Two game into an original and gripping first person shooter.

The opening torture scene supposedly “sets the tone” for the rest of the game. This is true, Treyarch have clearly attempted to show it isn’t holding back with this game, however, its attempts at unnerving us feels unsuccessful and the trend is followed throughout the game. For example, the suicidal banzai chargers who run at you with their bayonets lowered often miss and run in circles behind you and your comrades for a minute before attempting to gut you.

The storylines for both characters are good however; the American campaign which had the most exposure in trailers and screenshots feels poor compared to the Russian campaign which concludes with an enthralling siege of the Reichstag. In both campaigns, the developers try to replace the usual patriotism with vengeance as the main motive of you and your fellow soldiers. The Russian campaign seems to do this better than the American one though. The narration of Sergeant Reznov –voiced by Gary Oldman- after each Russian mission is the main reason for this. Telling the player of the atrocious acts of the Germans as you move closer to Berlin. The similarity between the torture scene and attempted execution of Pvt. Miller in Japan in the opening of the game and the executions of German prisoners by fellow Russian soldiers once you get to Berlin shows the obvious anger of the soldiers of the Red Army and reinforces the idea of fighting for vengeance not for your country.


Apart from the slightly disappointing American campaign other small annoyances spoil an overall good game. One of these annoyances is over the brilliance of your enemies grenadiers. The Japanese and German armies are apparently made up of nothing but their countries top baseball pitchers, able to make every grenade land close enough to kill you but not close enough to throw back. Another of these annoyances becomes evident if you survive this perfectly aimed bombardment of grenades. When you moving to take cover from the grenade’s blast radius, it isn’t uncommon to get cause on protruding scenery or get trapped behind your cover by AI following you as they too run from the grenade.

Despite these flaws, the game overall is good, the Russian campaign more than making up for the slightly below par American missions. Many of us however, where looking for more than “good” for the follow-up to Modern Warfare. Call of Duty: World at War is a good game, but isn’t even in the same league when compared to its older brother.

8/10

Lewis

Labels: Call of Duty, Review

Discuss this article in our friendly forums

Sign up to our community today and discuss our articles, debate over upcoming games and organise matches and playsessions with like-minded people just like you.

Liked this? Spread the word - share with your friends!