Reviews and Problems with Call of Duty: World at War
Showing 1-10 of 96
Call Of Duty: World at War PS3 Review
29 May 2010
Excerpt: Whilst Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare was a run of the mill FPS, its modern setting was a breath of fresh air for the series, one that granted, developer Infinity Ward, liberating freedom compared to the constraints that come with basing your game off a real war.
Conclusion: So, sorry Jacob, I can’t help you here with your quest to annoy your Mum into letting you play the game. I suggest you stop though, if you keep it up you’re not showing maturity. I know its awful feeling left out and I’m sorry for it.
Conclusion: is a solid shooter and if not for the W.W.II theme, could have been the best yet. SIngle player mode felt too linear, a little rehearsed at times and action is a little jerky, but I still wanted to finish every mission.
Excerpt: Modern War was a difficult title to follow up. Therefore in that sense World at War is a little lacking to one of the best first person shooters, at least in my opinion. That is why I do not truly see this as a follow up, especially since Modern War 2 is the true follow up to CoD 4.
Excerpt: Gamers aren't a very open minded bunch it seems. From the moment Activision announced that Treyarch, the development studio behind Call of Duty 3, was working on Call of Duty: World at War the game couldn't get a break.
Excerpt: "Stunning." That's the only word that can adequately describe the graphics in Call of Duty: World at War . Everything around you is crisp and clear, down to the faces of your compadres and enemies.
Conclusion: Built on the CoD 4 engine, World at War retains that title’s polished presentation and pacing; stunning visuals, supported by highly produced set pieces and scripted moments immerse players in scary-real scenarios of orchestrated chaos.