Call of Duty: World at War

embraceuk1

embraceuk1

Original Member Since 2001
30 December 2001
Indiana USA (Scottish)
Nottingham Forest
Yes its made by Treyarch and its back to WWII.
Anyway:
cod_wow_scan_top.jpg


Being built upon a refined version of the same engine that powers Call of Duty 4, World at War is expected to emphasize fear and tackle darker themes than those in earlier titles. Interestingly, today's trailer announcement notes that the video will be available over the Xbox Live Marketplace from June 21-22, suggesting that players on platforms such as the PS3 or PC may be able to poke their heads up from the trenches to watch it soon afterward, though nothing has yet been announced.
 
WWII ... probably going to give it a miss, I'm sick of WWII.
 
WWII is better than modern warfare. COD4 got very, very boring extremely quickly. The first 3 had replayability in spades.
 
Eh? Every WWII game is the same, same weapons, same scenery, same backgrounds, same soldiers, same same same :((
 
andish2001 said:
WWII is better than modern warfare. COD4 got very, very boring extremely quickly. The first 3 had replayability in spades.
Click to expand...

Madness!

COD4 is one of the top 5 (maybe 3) games of this generation. The SP is short, but I love the replay value they added by opening the arcade mode upon completion and I would say COD4 is arguably the best online experience available of all time in any game.

The older CODs were ok, but WWII has been done to death and unless Tryarch have come up with something absolutely revolutionary, then they have made a grave error of choice.

The fact its supposedly built on the COD4 engine gives me some slim hope, but why not Vietnam, South American militia, or even futuristic war?
 
pboreham said:
Madness!

COD4 is one of the top 5 (maybe 3) games of this generation. The SP is short, but I love the replay value they added by opening the arcade mode upon completion and I would say COD4 is arguably the best online experience available of all time in any game.

The older CODs were ok, but WWII has been done to death and unless Tryarch have come up with something absolutely revolutionary, then they have made a grave error of choice.

The fact its supposedly built on the COD4 engine gives me some slim hope, but why not Vietnam, South American militia, or even futuristic war?
Click to expand...


whoa whoa whoa... "he best online experience available of all time in any game." thats ridiculous
 
What makes COD4 a top game of this generation?

i have seen it all done before in FPS's
 
andish2001 said:
WWII is better than modern warfare. COD4 got very, very boring extremely quickly. The first 3 had replayability in spades.
Click to expand...

:SHOCK:

COD4 is amazing!!

I'm definitely going to be getting this, I haven't played a WW2 game for ages to be honest, I think the last one I played was on PS2 at least a year ago. COD4 impressed me for next gen so I'll try the fifth one.
 
I'm not going to say I'll get it or not get it, I will judge by the videos and maybe some later reviews. If they can make some changes which others games miss, then they can pull it off.

But as said above, for me COD4 is one of the best online experiences on console gaming. Why? The graphics are decent, the ranks/promotions are very simple and easy to follow. The maps aren't bad at all, some are crap but some are just fantastic. And not only is the online experience amazing, they kept the story short but effective and addictive.

Without a doubt, I still play COD4 now and I enjoy it, and still love it since 4 months ago.
 
So is it the guns of WW2 you all have a problem with?

I loved COD1 and even better COD2 online on the PC - they were perfect. I played COD4 SP and it was alright but it didn't blow me away - people go on about the graphics but i played it in SD and then later i tested it in HD to see what the fuss was and i cant really say i noticed anything astounding - 2D grass and flat dull floor and wall textures.

Online i hear is great but i tried it and i just couldn't get into it as much as i had with the pc versions or 1 & 2.

I would have preferred a different era though here - they've done WW2 before so i don't see the point in going back there again for more of the same. I think Vietnam was the obvious choice and then maybe a futuristic space age era the second.

I'm guessing they had a load of left over crap from COD3 and thats what swayed their decision.
 
It's based around the Pacific and South Asian WWII battles is it not this time? Something COD series has yet to do, plus it has 4 player Co-Op campaign from what I'm reading.
 
I doubt it'll be split screen Matt, I'd say it'll be online a-la Gears or R6V2 etc...

Still, I'm not happy with the WW2 theme again. Vietnam would have good or else more modern, maybe even the first Gulf war setting.
 
Gulf war ... now THAT'S a thought!

I loved the first Conflict Desert Storm game set in the gulf - that should have been the next COD game - maybe thats where IW will be taking us to next?
 
Yeah I loved Desert Storm! I think it would be great if they made a COD game set around the same time.
 
I just read on my Xbox dashboard, (from a ad) in 3 days there will be a world-wide trailer or something for CALL OF DUTY: World War.
Something along those lines, I don't quite remember from the top of my head.
 
They need to go way back in time. Lets get on some horses and do a cavalry charge with a sword. Get the muskets out and take 2 years to reload. Would be a stabfest. Lets fight some god damn Zulu. Now if a game developer could make that kind of war era exciting enough, I'd be very impressed.
 
lol god damn film. Problem with that era is the yanks can't come in with their marines.

Are we going to have the SAS coming in swearing and talking tough in this game? Probably not eh. What's the history behind this pacific world war 2? I'm not good at history. Did the yanks do anything worthwhile? apart from drop a bomb.
 
just1moreperson said:
lol god damn film. Problem with that era is the yanks can't come in with their marines.

Are we going to have the SAS coming in swearing and talking tough in this game? Probably not eh. What's the history behind this pacific world war 2? I'm not good at history. Did the yanks do anything worthwhile? apart from drop a bomb.
Click to expand...

yeah a shit ton of yanks died taking the philipines and other parts of this area, not too mention the naval and aerial battles.. And yes the marines were heavily involved. You never heard of Iwo Jima?

"Yet for the soldiers and marines who assaulted the countless beaches, the Pacific war was even more brutal and deadly than the war in Europe. Japanese defenders always dug in, reinforced their bunkers with coconut logs, and fought until they were killed. They almost never surrendered. On Betio in the Tarawa Atoll in November 1943 the marines suffered 3,301 casualties, including 900 killed in action, for a bit of coral 3 miles long and 800 yards wide. At Iwo Jima in February and March 1945 the marines lost almost 6,000 dead and over 17,000 wounded and fought for five weeks to take an island less than five miles long."
 
The marine part I was on about the zulu subject before.

But thank you for the information. Sounds interesting and could be a good game if done right for sure.
 
Visitors to GAME stores via little poll boxes, and visitors to the website. I suppose the devs could have stormed the site with votes but I wouldn't have thought so. Didn't expect it to win though, I was expecting Zelda (that finished 2nd), GTA IV or Rock Band.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom