More Reviews
REVIEWS Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Rebor Review
Just a small update to the existing review for the PS4 version of the game. What are the benefits to upgrading? Check here to see. ~Ed. Nick Tan

Cut the Rope: Triple Treat Review
Cutting the ropes has never before made gravity so… pricey.
More Previews
PREVIEWS Sniper Elite 3 Preview
Sending bullets through the hate.
Release Dates
NEW RELEASES Trials Fusion
Release date: Out Now

The Amazing Spider-Man 2
Release date: 04/29/14

Bound by Flame
Release date: 05/09/14

Wolfenstein: The New Order
Release date: 05/20/14


LATEST FEATURES 4 PAX Indie Titles to Look Out For
We've given attention to all the higher profile games at PAX EAST, but now it's time for the indies.

Ouya's Best Games Coming to the Platform
The Kickstarter console is slowly establishing itself with a couple of creative gems on the way.
 
Coming Soon

LEADERBOARD
Read More Member Blogs
FEATURED VOXPOP shandog137
So much more than war...
By shandog137
Posted on 04/18/14
The recent blog, Peace in the Era of Call of Duty  really made me think about war games that dig deeper than simply a kill streak reward. The first game that came to mind was Spec-Ops: The Line and although I haven’t played it, I began to wonder if it did the war genre as...

Call of Duty: World at War Member Review for the Xbox360

ACDC345 By:
ACDC345
02/18/09
PRINTER FRIENDLY VERSION
EMAIL TO A FRIEND
GENRE FPS 
PLAYERS 1- 18 
PUBLISHER Activision Blizzard 
DEVELOPER Treyarch 
RELEASE DATE  
M Contains Blood and Gore, Intense Violence, Strong Language

What do these ratings mean?

Slowly I settled down on the couch to play Call of Duty World at War. The first thing that ran through my mind was, "Dude, this is basically Modern Warfare, in the 1940s!" I'm not entirely sure if this can be considered a good or a bad thing. To start off, I'd say that this game for the most part was, okay. Believe me, this game wasn't all that bad, it just felt, used. Think back to Medal of Honor:Rising Sun. That was one of the worst games I'd ever played, and Japanese, well they just don't feel like something that belongs in World War 2. The same goes for Call of Duty World at War, for the most part. The Russian levels, were, familiar, but they were familiar enough that they were more enjoyable than the American levels . The only problem I had with the Russian levels was the tank mission. If they were doing as Modern Warfare did, they should have completely left out the tank mission(if you want to avoid the tank mission, and have a friend or friends, more than one controller and somerwhere for them to put their butts then I advise playing this game in split screen multiplayer or online). The American levels, they got boring pretty fast. The biggest kick I got was using a flamethrower to burn out a group of Japs, and impaling them with a bayonet. Otherwise, the American missions were basically fighting Nazi's that are in the jungle, and charge out of nowhere at you. Enough ratting on the American levels, now lets move onto the zombie part of the review. Yep, I said zombies. As rediculous as it may sound, on a multiplayer, or singleplayer leisure mission, you fight, Nazi Zombies. Basically you and 3 other dudes fight off zombies in an old building, resembling one of the buildings in one of the American levels. If your reading all of this just to hear about the online multiplayer, then boy do I have a big dissapointment for you. I don't play online so if you want to here about it either go back and play Modern Warfares online play, or read GR's review. So all in all Call of Duty World at War is almost a play it safe sequel, and it just wasn't as good as Modern Warfare.


More information about Call of Duty: World at War
 
comments powered by Disqus

More On GameRevolution