More Reviews
REVIEWS Firefall Review
Repetitive gameplay makes this fall a little boring.

The Walking Dead: Season Two Review
At this point, you’re not coming back for the zombies. Let’s get down to business.
More Previews
PREVIEWS Lara Croft and the Temple of Osi Preview
Lara Croft takes another crack at the isometric adventure, and this time she makes Egypt angry.
Release Dates
NEW RELEASES Madden NFL 15
Release date: Out Now

Destiny
Release date: 09/09/14

FIFA 15
Release date: 09/23/14

Persona 4 Arena Ultimax
Release date: 09/30/14


LATEST FEATURES A Comprehensive Guide to Dealing with Controversy in the Video Game Industry
Need help wading through the latest misogyny/homophobia/racism/corruption debate in the gaming industry? Paul Tamburro’s here to help!

inFamous: First Light Battle Arena Hints, Strategies, Tips [Stream Over]
Watch as I build out our feature of useful tactics for players in Sucker Punch's wave-based and arcade-awesome arena mode.

LEADERBOARD
Read More Member Blogs
FEATURED VOXPOP samsmith614 Since game design is a business, I decided to see what's really selling well for the PS4. I did this search a week ago, and at the time, out of the top 20 bestsellers on Amazon 10 had not even been released yet. By now some have been released. But others still have not. And yet others...

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