More Reviews
REVIEWS Boss! Review
PlayStation Vita owners looking to exercise a little frustration can look to this rather low-fi title about creating a monster and destroying everything in your path.

KINGDOM HEARTS HD 2.5 ReMIX Review
Part 2 of Square-Enix and Disney's cooperative compilation cash-cow is ready to milk the series for another go, but does the milk taste sweet or is it spoiled?
Release Dates
NEW RELEASES Guilty Gear Xrd -SIGN-
Release date: Out Now

Kalimba
Release date: Out Now

Persona 5
Release date: 12/31/14

Motorcycle Club
Release date: 01/01/15


LATEST FEATURES Downloadable Content Walks the Line Between Fun and Frenzied in Middle-earth
I don’t even care all that much for the Lords of the Rings brand, which makes the content falling under Shadow of Mordor’s Season Pass a pleasant surprise.

Ugly Christmas Sweaters for Gamers
If this awful trend is going to persist, you may as well do it your way.

LEADERBOARD
Read More Member Blogs
FEATURED VOXPOP KevinS
RIP Ralph Baer (1922-2014)
By KevinS
Posted on 12/07/14
RIP Ralph Baer (1922-2014) I really, really hate writing obits. I really do. But I take it as a personal honor to be able to say good things about the men and women I respect, whether in this industry or just in my life, and Ralph Baer is the reason all of this exists in the first...

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