Played about 3 hours of this tonight (on the 360) and, so far, I am quite impressed. It doesn't quite reach the dizzying heights of Call of Duty 4 but is still a very good game in it's own right.
The game is based around 2 characters, one is an American soldier fighting the Japanese and one is a Russian solider fighting the Germans. The "story" is told through old war videos and voice overs from Sergeants who fought alongside your character. The American Sergeant is voiced by none other than Keifer Sutherland and I think I heard Gary Oldman too (if I am not mistaken), nice little bit of useless information for you there!
Gameplay is pretty much your standard Call of Duty affair so if you have ever played one then you will be right at home here. However the good thing here is World at War plays more like Call of Duty 4 than Call of Duty 3, which means it plays really well! Everything from the controls to the way the visual style of the game is pretty much like Call of Duty 4. Although visually it doesn't really get to flex it muscles as much due to some of the loactions the missions are set in, still pretty though!
The obvious difference is that this is World War II game, so none of that modern warfare stuff anymore. You are back to the good old Thompson, M1 Garand, MP40, Paznershreck and so on! The new addition here is the Flamethrower and what a great addition it is! You get access to it pretty early on when you're the American soldier and it is great for taking out groups of enemy soldiers. It might be inclined to say it a tad overpowered cos you don't run out of ammo as such but then again you do have to wait for it to "re-fuel" so that balances it out slightly. Add to that the fire that comes out of it looks very nice!
So far the missions that I have done have been pretty good, a couple of them have been quite brutal and intense. Infact the game shows it brutality for a very early stage, the first cutscene infact. I don't think there has been a Call of Duty game this "in your face" with it's brutality. It's nothing like limbs and head flying off everywhere, it's hard to explain so I guess you will have to experience it for yourself.
The sections where you are fighting the Japanese are the most intense as they can pretty much pop out from anywhere. They hide in the grass, water and even trees, then when you get near them they just charge (or snipe if they are in a tree) you with no fear of their own life. I think I have only played two of the Russian soldier sections so far, they were pretty good too but not as intense as when you're fighting the Japanese soldiers. The very first Russian soldier section was very reminiscent of the great sniper section from Call of Duty 4, not as good (obviously) but a decent attempt at recreating something similar.
The only small negative I have so far is that the AI, both enemy and friendly, is a bit erratic at times. For instance sometimes an you will be right next to an enemy shooting them but because they saw one of your team-mates first they will shoot them and totally ignore you. These occasions are quite rare though and in the heat of the battle can be overlooked, so nothing too major.
In the end most people will ask, "Is it better than Call of Duty 4?". Probably not (as I mentioned in the opening) but it is still definitely worth playing even if you are "tired" of World War shooters. It is set during World War II but these are not the same battles you have fought before so don't let that be a stumbling block. You also have online co-op, the excellent multiplayer (which most you have played by now) and the all new Nazi Zombie mode!
When it comes down to it this is a just a very good first person shooter/war game
The game is based around 2 characters, one is an American soldier fighting the Japanese and one is a Russian solider fighting the Germans. The "story" is told through old war videos and voice overs from Sergeants who fought alongside your character. The American Sergeant is voiced by none other than Keifer Sutherland and I think I heard Gary Oldman too (if I am not mistaken), nice little bit of useless information for you there!
Gameplay is pretty much your standard Call of Duty affair so if you have ever played one then you will be right at home here. However the good thing here is World at War plays more like Call of Duty 4 than Call of Duty 3, which means it plays really well! Everything from the controls to the way the visual style of the game is pretty much like Call of Duty 4. Although visually it doesn't really get to flex it muscles as much due to some of the loactions the missions are set in, still pretty though!
The obvious difference is that this is World War II game, so none of that modern warfare stuff anymore. You are back to the good old Thompson, M1 Garand, MP40, Paznershreck and so on! The new addition here is the Flamethrower and what a great addition it is! You get access to it pretty early on when you're the American soldier and it is great for taking out groups of enemy soldiers. It might be inclined to say it a tad overpowered cos you don't run out of ammo as such but then again you do have to wait for it to "re-fuel" so that balances it out slightly. Add to that the fire that comes out of it looks very nice!
So far the missions that I have done have been pretty good, a couple of them have been quite brutal and intense. Infact the game shows it brutality for a very early stage, the first cutscene infact. I don't think there has been a Call of Duty game this "in your face" with it's brutality. It's nothing like limbs and head flying off everywhere, it's hard to explain so I guess you will have to experience it for yourself.
The sections where you are fighting the Japanese are the most intense as they can pretty much pop out from anywhere. They hide in the grass, water and even trees, then when you get near them they just charge (or snipe if they are in a tree) you with no fear of their own life. I think I have only played two of the Russian soldier sections so far, they were pretty good too but not as intense as when you're fighting the Japanese soldiers. The very first Russian soldier section was very reminiscent of the great sniper section from Call of Duty 4, not as good (obviously) but a decent attempt at recreating something similar.
The only small negative I have so far is that the AI, both enemy and friendly, is a bit erratic at times. For instance sometimes an you will be right next to an enemy shooting them but because they saw one of your team-mates first they will shoot them and totally ignore you. These occasions are quite rare though and in the heat of the battle can be overlooked, so nothing too major.
In the end most people will ask, "Is it better than Call of Duty 4?". Probably not (as I mentioned in the opening) but it is still definitely worth playing even if you are "tired" of World War shooters. It is set during World War II but these are not the same battles you have fought before so don't let that be a stumbling block. You also have online co-op, the excellent multiplayer (which most you have played by now) and the all new Nazi Zombie mode!
When it comes down to it this is a just a very good first person shooter/war game
Comment