Call of Duty: World at War

Call of Duty World at War is the sequel to the insanely popular Infinity Ward shooter Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare.  Call of Duty World at War was developed by Treyarch the developers of Call of Duty 3. Treyarch and Infinity Ward have been rotating the developement of the Call of Duty games. It is a known fact that Call of Duty World at War suffers from the stigma that is Call of Duty 4.  Despite failing to fully reach the greatness of Call of Duty 4, Call of Duty World at War delivers a satisfying climactic experience. 

Call of Duty World at War takes the series back to the 1940’s and World War 2.  This decision was greeted of course with strong harsh criticism. It is a known fact that the World War 2 setting is one that has been overworked but if one company had to do a World War 2 shooter I would choose Treyarch. Call of Duty World at War follows two storylines just as Modern Warfare did.  The two storylines are the Soviet resistance and invasion of Nazi Germany and the “Island Hopping” battles involving the US and Japan.  The Soviet storyline follows one Private Dimitri Petrenko who just barely survived the German invasion of Stalingrad. The Soviet campaign has a section dedicated to sniping that has the feel of the Modern Warfare mission “All Gillied Up.” The battle in the Pacific follows U.S. Private Miller who also barely survives an enemy encounter with the help of his fellow patriots. 

The cinematics in Call of Duty World at War are superb. You are not greeted with your typical video game cutscene but instead greeted with real World War 2 footage played with the narration of Kiefer Sutherland. It doesn’t sound too unique, however it adds a nice dynamic to the game. Call of Duty World at War also has an enormous and satisfying amount of nationalism. Treyarch did a fantastic job of conveying the sense of nationalism through the soldiers. All of the main characters are nicely done and have some great voice acting and impressive mannerisms.

I also can’t forget to mention how impressive the characters and the environments look. Call of Duty World at War uses an enhanced version of the Modern Warfare engine but the locations and settings of the battles truly bring out the beauty in the engine. The most impressive graphical feat is your weaponry. The amount of detail put into each and every weapon is not only impressive but just plain amazing. The actual weaponry is really what you would expect though. You have your typical Thompson, Springfield and Type 100. Some other Japanese and Russian World War 2 weapons have been added but nothing that really catches your eye outside of a gun with a bayonette. Not a chainsaw bayonette though. 

One of World at War’s strenghts was its ability to deliver climactic gameplay. Don’t worry no spoilers will be given but you should know that the endings to the Pacific battle and the Sovet, Nazi battle are pretty epic. The final battles not only do a great job of ending the game but they truly feel like they could put an end to all World War 2 shooters from here on out. Medal of Honor and Brothers in Arms may have something to say about that. I honestly felt like the ending to World at War was the ending to all World War 2 shooters. Its that nice of a closure. The single player isn’t all pure greatness though. The game suffers from the same short story that Call of Duty 4 suffered from. It’s somewhere around 5-7 hours which isn’t terrible but at the same time it leaves you wanting more. This game also plays alot like previous Call of Duty games. Not that that’s necessarily a bad thing but if you’re familiar with the franchise you this may feel a little redundant. 

Once you have completed the single player campaign you unlock the Zombie Nazi mode. This mode is easily the most unique thing to ever hit the Call of Duty series. You and up to 3 other players are put in a building and are forced to fight off wave and wave of swarming Nazi Zombies.  Each Zombie you kill earns you points which you can then use to purchase new weapons or new areas of the building. The gameplay can be really fun with 4 players working cooperatively to fend off Zombies, however you are only given one map so its replay value is limited. That being said its still a very refreshing addition to the series. 

O.k., so now on to the meat of Call of Duty World at War, the real reason you bought this game, the multiplayer. Do you remember Modern Warfare’s multiplayer? Of course you do. Well, this is essentially that just set in WW 2 with WW2 weapons. That isn’t necessarily a bad thing though. Modern Warfare’s multiplayer was phenomenal by all means. This also doesn’t mean World at War’s multiplayer is phenomenal. Some of the maps feel a little big and many times the addition of tanks just isn’t much fun. Especially when you are given 2 RPG’s and it takes nearly 4 to take out an enemy tank. World at War uses the ‘Create a Class’ system that Modern Warfare used. This is certainly a plus. Also returning are your challenges and prestige modes. That being said, World at War’s multiplayer is certainly satisfying just not quite as much as Modern Warfare’s. See, there’s that stigma at play. 

All in all World at War is truly a satisfying sequel. I don’t think anyone would even question this games greatness had Modern Warfare not been created, however this game wouldn’t be anything like it is if it weren’t for CoD 4. There is a lot to be seen in World at War. It offers a great storyline and some amazing graphics. World at War can be enjoyed by casual players and FPS freaks alike. You definitely need to check World at War out even if you keep telling yourself you won’t play another World War 2 shooter.

8.5/10