View Full Version : CoD: World at War
World at War Info (http://pc.ign.com/articles/883/883374p1.html)
Well it finally seems like they are moving towards the Pacific...and it doesn't look tooo bad.
World at War Trailer (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QB9ApSJ9nJo)
Baby Boomer
06-24-2008, 22:33
I think Treyarch have learnt the lessons, and looking at thwat made COD4 so popular. And too say... it looks like a good game from what IGN said. It will be hard too emulate the jungle warfare (Its been attempted) but if they manage to pull it off (And it seems like they are, flamethrowers, sniper tactics, charges and those horrible captures...) it will hopefully rocket to the top.
Disappointing about only two campaigns though. I would've liked to see a Australian or British campaign in Singapore or Papua New Guneia (*cough* Australia was the first to beat the Japanese *cough*) but in the US Campain I can see the oppurtunities (Would they dare include Pearl Harbour?) but the Russian one could easily be replaced by a Australian, or at least Commonwealth campaign.
I never got what was bad about Treyarch, I've never played COD3 so I can't offer my opinion on that, but United Offensive was pretty good.
I think Treyarch have learnt the lessons, and looking at thwat made COD4 so popular. And too say... it looks like a good game from what IGN said. It will be hard too emulate the jungle warfare (Its been attempted) but if they manage to pull it off (And it seems like they are, flamethrowers, sniper tactics, charges and those horrible captures...) it will hopefully rocket to the top.
Indeed. I'd have to agree there. I hope they'll stick to no rail shooting moments (except for the russian campaign maybe) and MOH: Pacific Assault which demoed and died lol. I just hope I get a new comp that can run it lol...
Disappointing about only two campaigns though. I would've liked to see a Australian or British campaign in Singapore or Papua New Guneia (*cough* Australia was the first to beat the Japanese *cough*) but in the US Campain I can see the oppurtunities (Would they dare include Pearl Harbour?) but the Russian one could easily be replaced by a Australian, or at least Commonwealth campaign.
Yea that's true. An Australian would have been a nice one at that...sad thing is is the Russians (afaik) never really ran into any resistance when they trundled down Manchuria(maybe somebody could shed light here). I'm also reading about rumors that a Berlin siege mission or two will be included...ala, end of first game shifted to Asia and fight Japanese type thing...
I never got what was bad about Treyarch, I've never played COD3 so I can't offer my opinion on that, but United Offensive was pretty good.
Neither have I but UO was actually one of my favorite games from the series due to the openness of their MP maps and tank hunting was the bomb!
Does it actually say the Russian campaign will be against the Japanese? As you say it would seem an odd decision since AFAIK it was a fairly one-sided campaign.
Does it actually say the Russian campaign will be against the Japanese? As you say it would seem an odd decision since AFAIK it was a fairly one-sided campaign.
Maybe, and yea it was quite one sided. Now looking again it might be in Europe judging by the look of the buildings in one of the screen shots.
Baby Boomer
06-25-2008, 06:43
Does it actually say the Russian campaign will be against the Japanese? As you say it would seem an odd decision since AFAIK it was a fairly one-sided campaign.
No, it doesn't, but seeingas the US Campaign is in the Pacific, and the Eastern Front regarding germany has been done to death (With fought every battle concerning the Red Army, importantly).
Though the Russians encountered 'little' resistance, little resistance is still resistance. The numbers might not seem alot, but it was still people shooting at them. We've fought in Moscow, Stalingard, Kursk and the Red Army surge against Germany in Eastern countries. They could still do St. Petersburg, and maybe the Winter War but...
No, it doesn't, but seeingas the US Campaign is in the Pacific, and the Eastern Front regarding germany has been done to death (With fought every battle concerning the Red Army, importantly).
Though the Russians encountered 'little' resistance, little resistance is still resistance. The numbers might not seem alot, but it was still people shooting at them. We've fought in Moscow, Stalingard, Kursk and the Red Army surge against Germany in Eastern countries. They could still do St. Petersburg, and maybe the Winter War but...
Agreed, if anything they should have done the continuation war in '39 I think it was~:confused: in which both sides were a little more even matched. Yet, personally, I'd rather have seen an Australian campaign on New Guinea or a British campaign in Singapore or Burma which would've been really cool.
C'mon now let's get serious here. Do you guys really like the singleplayer campaigns in these games? Really? Word? I mean for one run through and for one run only I can take it, but after that do you still enjoy that endless scripted horde running at you, until you move forward enough to cancel it? Is that really fun? Man I don't care where and in what forces you fight or for what flag, that gameplay is horrible.
What kind of multiplayer World at War will offer, that is the real deal. What will this game have what CoD4 didn't delivered?
I hope it lives up to all its predecessors. UO was a great game, I really liked the added amount of weaponry, etc and CoD3 although not that great, lay the foundations for the great MP of CoD4, so I'm pretty sure Treyarch will do a good job.
(*cough* Australia was the first to beat the Japanese *cough*)
Sorry, but if I'm not mistaken the first time the Japanese were defeated was the first assault of Wake Island in December 1941. :wink:
C'mon now let's get serious here. Do you guys really like the singleplayer campaigns in these games? Really? Word? I mean for one run through and for one run only I can take it, but after that do you still enjoy that endless scripted horde running at you, until you move forward enough to cancel it? Is that really fun? Man I don't care where and in what forces you fight or for what flag, that gameplay is horrible.
What kind of multiplayer World at War will offer, that is the real deal. What will this game have what CoD4 didn't delivered?
Well...in a way yes I do care about the SP to a degree and I do get tired of the scripted hordes but it doesn't stop me from gunning through them and beating the game. And the multiplayer I suspect, will be pretty cool, as with the Japanese being able to climb trees with their snipers, which is just speculation. CoD's multiplayer has improved over time, and apparently hit the mark in CoD4 (which I have yet to play due to being above my specs:wall:).
Evil_Maniac From Mars
06-26-2008, 01:22
Another America-centered game about the Second World War. Bravo. I love originality. How about a game from the point of view of the Germans? Or if that's too controversial for Americans, the Finns? Fighting communism? You'd think that'd go down well in America especially, but who am I to guess?
I wonder why they don't do a WWI installment, a German campaign might not be so controversial then. Plus still scope for an American campaign.
Evil_Maniac From Mars
06-26-2008, 03:28
I wonder why they don't do a WWI installment, a German campaign might not be so controversial then.
I don't understand why they can't do a WWII one (though I would love a good WWI shooter for a change). I mean, Red Orchestra and the Company of Heroes expansion didn't exactly raise a firestorm. Since CoD is a big franchise, some nuts will complain, but, frankly, who cares about them?
This could be good indeed, this game I mean, here (http://www.krawall.de/web/Call_of_Duty_World_at_War/preview/id,31464/s,,c) is a nice review, though in german only.
It says the russian part is playing against the germans until you finally take Berlin, the multiplayer will have a coop mode and that Treyarch had two years time to make a good game this time, not just one like before and that they really seem to try and make this a good game among other things.
I kind of forgot about the games throwing endlesss waves at you, that's one of the main reasons I never bought CoD4, completely takes the fun out of it for me. :no:
Maybe this one will be different. :sweatdrop:
Baby Boomer
06-26-2008, 10:48
I kind of forgot about the games throwing endlesss waves at you, that's one of the main reasons I never bought CoD4, completely takes the fun out of it for me. :no:
Maybe this one will be different. :sweatdrop:
I think it will be. In the First Impressions they seem to be emphasising, and glorying, in the new Japanese tactics. Perhaps, probably not, but perhaps Treyarch is dropping subtle hints in with the concepts such as the dead soldiers who pretend to be dead but hit you from behind, or the snipers and warriors who hide in the jungle and strike from anywhere.
Yes, this seem to pose a pretty good game; it just depends if they can execute it properly, there are alot of ways it could possibly stuff up.
Always shoot the guys laying on the ground. Got it.
Evil_Maniac From Mars
06-27-2008, 05:21
Always shoot the guys laying on the ground. Got it.
:no:
Efficiency, my dear friend Ichigo. Grenades.
:shame:
Grenades are a dime a dozen. While bullets are a cent.
It sounds pretty sinister in a war is hell kinda way, I like.
Baby Boomer
06-27-2008, 12:49
Always shoot the guys laying on the ground. Got it.
:smash:
THey would be too kind. Flamethrowers would work much better... :beam:
There's a pretty cool trailer out for it, got it from a german site you have to register for though, so no link.
The Stranger
07-06-2008, 19:02
CoD2 was the best... CoD3 sucked lollipops... CoD4 I never played because I don't like modern shooters that much...
this trailer looks oke
Hm.....
Let's hope they have no über weapons in the MP this time. :beam:
The Stranger
07-07-2008, 03:40
ehhehe :P oh well, a skilled marksman can counter a spraynoob any time
ehhehe :P oh well, a skilled marksman can counter a spraynoob any time
Or a good rifle butt to the back of the head never hurt nobody:sneaky:
PanzerJaeger
07-12-2008, 18:42
Nothing will beat Red Orchestra for realism, excitement, and pure replayability... except an updated version of Red Orchestra. :2thumbsup:
Nothing will beat Red Orchestra for realism, excitement, and pure replayability... except an updated version of Red Orchestra. :2thumbsup:
:yes:
On other hand RO is actually a bit over of the top of realism, rifles are way too accurate. Even so, the game is sweeeet.
TevashSzat
07-15-2008, 16:30
ehhehe :P oh well, a skilled marksman can counter a spraynoob any time
Not true. I remember one particularly sad round is CS 1.6. Basically, the noob bought the awful machine gun with a huge clip and horrible recoil. When he saw like 5 people charging at him, he started shooting and spraying at everywhere except for the people charging, but then the gun's recoil somehow got him 4 headshots, and sprayed to death the last guy.
Thoughts about the multiplayer in Call of Duty 4 on X360.
First of all, perfect controls. There is perfectly fitting sensitivity setting available for me and every actions are mapped out on the controller perfectly. When it comes to all games I've played so far on X360, CoD4 has best controls.
Secondly, sweet smooth gameplay. Form shooting guns, reloading them to kill and movement animations. As long as there is no lag Call of Duty 4 is highly enjoyable game, graphical lag exists due to smoke grenades and when a lot starts to happen right next to you, but that is manageable.
So sounds pretty much like perfect game. Then there are some small problems, the party system isn't working like it should. The spawning system was better before the last patch. Also unfortunately for some reason you are usually forced to play with hosts at United States. I don't mid at all to play with people at US, it's just that I don't like the lag. The game is kind of unplayable when it lags even just a little bit. There definitely should have been a continent filter for matchmaking. For example in Halo 3 you can prefer good connection for your games, and it seems to be working though not perfectly sometimes you still end up playing like with Canadians.
I'm really tired of air strike and heli support. There should have been a Team Deathmach mode without air strike and helicopter support available. No three nades of the three, grenades, flash and stunt. Only one flash or stunt nade should be allowed with single grenade. So Special Grenades x 3 and Frag x 3 perks must go. No martyrdom and melee should be allowed, melee is incredibly cheap because of the way it's implemented now. Basically I love the intense fight with guns only in CoD 4 and I would love mode like that.
I don't know what kind of multiplayer will World at War have, but I'm quite skeptical about it. I expect improvements over CoD4, but I was sold with beta so demo or something like that should be available. When it comes to Call of Duty 3 the developer has a lot to improve. The gameplay in CoD3 feels quite laggy. Overall I'm skeptical, I think that World at War will make money, but people will still be playing CoD4 a lot more than World at War.
Well see, imho, it looks like they gave into the really pathetic players who can't buy a kill because they don't use strategy or teammates to achieve an objective! I hope that these guys wise up and make it enjoyable along with some larger maps for good movement and firefights...I hate the Carentan type maps...
Oleander Ardens
07-16-2008, 20:37
Sorry to come in but Red Orchestra caugth my interest lately. Does there still exist a vibrant community?
Sorry to come in but Red Orchestra caugth my interest lately. Does there still exist a vibrant community?
I dunno...go checkout their website: Red Orchestra (http://www.redorchestragame.com/)
PanzerJaeger
07-17-2008, 03:47
Sorry to come in but Red Orchestra caugth my interest lately. Does there still exist a vibrant community?
Comparatively small but very active. Don't let the learning curve demoralize you either, the payoff is that much better when you figure things out. :2thumbsup:
Marshal Murat
07-19-2008, 16:16
CoD:W@W Co-Op Gameplay (https://youtube.com/watch?v=gupFeZX8xBc)
So awesome stuff here, shows you what the game is like. First minute (1:10 ish):2thumbsup:
Not true. I remember one particularly sad round is CS 1.6. Basically, the noob bought the awful machine gun with a huge clip and horrible recoil. When he saw like 5 people charging at him, he started shooting and spraying at everywhere except for the people charging, but then the gun's recoil somehow got him 4 headshots, and sprayed to death the last guy.
Sounds pretty much like every round on Russian maps in CoD 2. :beam:
Mailman653
07-20-2008, 02:14
Eastern Front and flamethrowers in the Pacific, can't go wrong with that.
OT: RO is still going strong, last time I played was a few months ago and there are no shortage of servers which is aways a god thing. Plus there are two big mod projects in the works as well, one which takes place in Africa, the other adds Romanian soldiers and equipment with new maps too.
Mailman653
09-16-2008, 16:33
A new COD already? W&W is not even out yet, and what's this about "ray guns"? ha ha....
Infinity Ward Confirmed on Call of Duty 6 (http://pc.ign.com/articles/910/910404p1.html)
Mailman653
09-17-2008, 21:43
There is a new trailer out, it shows off four player coop, looks pretty cool, but what's up with the voice acting? Is it me or do those Russian soldiers sound awfully American. I hope that's a beta video or something, talk about an immersion killer of your playing the Russian campaign and everyone sound like they just got off a boat from Iwo-Jima and changed uniforms. They got Japanese voice actors, surely they could of gotten voice actors to speak English with Russian accents.
http://media.xbox360.ign.com/media/142/14222038/vids_1.html
PanzerJaeger
09-22-2008, 07:59
There is a new trailer out, it shows off four player coop, looks pretty cool, but what's up with the voice acting? Is it me or do those Russian soldiers sound awfully American. I hope that's a beta video or something, talk about an immersion killer of your playing the Russian campaign and everyone sound like they just got off a boat from Iwo-Jima and changed uniforms. They got Japanese voice actors, surely they could of gotten voice actors to speak English with Russian accents.
http://media.xbox360.ign.com/media/142/14222038/vids_1.html
Ugh.
1) Voices
2) Modern SF style maneuvering
3) Only one German, the sniper, seemed to have been issued fully functioning ammunition...
This just looks like a reskinned COD4. If the MP is as ridiculous, all is lost.. :no:
They got Japanese voice actors, surely they could of gotten voice actors to speak English with Russian accents.
Or how about voice actors speaking real proper Russian with attitude?
Maybe they haven't implemented Russian voices yet and they were just showing off their brand new toy?
Veho Nex
09-23-2008, 22:55
the flame throwers make me sad...
This is like an exact replica of CoD4 with new skins.
The rockets are like Grenades with a flaming tail, instead of being armor piercing they're all HE
Mailman653
10-09-2008, 04:58
http://pc.gamespy.com/pc/call-of-duty-5/917198p1.html
Three page preview.
Well... so far so good! I do hope they don't go overboard with the recycling of enemy AI in the Pacific levels ~:( and I guess also in the European ones too. I like the re-edition of tanks into the gameplay. I liked United Offensive's for the MP use of the tanks. Hunting them around the maps were a lot of fun. Sadly, I was unhappy in that I heard no mention of any type of "reality" mode. I guess we'll have to wait and see what come up! But... overall I'm pleased with the review :2thumbsup:
For past three days I've been playing BETA for about over 10 hours. I've been designated Team Deathmach player. Shortly WaW has same features as CoD 4, but the gameplay is a little bit different than in CoD 4. Biggest difference between the two is the guns. Some fixed things are included, but mostly most annoying things still exist in the game with addition of new ones. That's about it.
For past three days I've been playing BETA for about over 10 hours. I've been designated Team Deathmach player. Shortly WaW has same features as CoD 4, but the gameplay is a little bit different than in CoD 4. Biggest difference between the two is the guns. Some fixed things are included, but mostly most annoying things still exist in the game with addition of new ones. That's about it.
Well the difference is obvious... Contemporary warfare and World War Two...
And what about the MP maps? Are there any large ones for good 'ole fights at long range since tank appear to be included in the MP? I hate the Caen grenadefest type maps...
Also, did they include the arcade play and realism play?
Well the difference is obvious... Contemporary warfare and World War Two...
And what about the MP maps? Are there any large ones for good 'ole fights at long range since tank appear to be included in the MP? I hate the Caen grenadefest type maps...
Also, did they include the arcade play and realism play?
Yeah, ummm now that I think about it, the irony is that while the level cap is at 11 the "game" is actually quite enjoyable. You can't camp as the UAV (recon plane in WaW) jammer is not available, same goes for land mines (instead of claymores) and two grenades (instead of three). This keeps game intense but unfortunately spawn system is horrible, opponents still can kill you ludicrously easy without aiming at all. For realism I would be playing Red Orchestra, there is nothing as good as that game out there.
I just don't get it, how hard it is to implement a mod for WaW and CoD 4 where skill is what matters. Gametype without perks, artillery support, ludicrous dogs and tanks. With UAV ability so that the campers can't sit and shoot you in the back. Make aiming the gun what matters, none of that Halo BS. Why on earth this is so hard when there is hardcore available and all that. Besides in CoD 4 you can host your own games and one of the settings that you can set is NO for perks and NO for air support. And they can't implement that for ranking games? Amazing!
Maps are okay I guess, it's just hard to tell what it will be when all perks will be available. The gameplay changes with them.
I like tanks.....
Are they a mp only feature? I'd love to play a tank in the campaign.
Yeah, ummm now that I think about it, the irony is that while the level cap is at 11 the "game" is actually quite enjoyable. You can't camp as the UAV (recon plane in WaW) jammer is not available, same goes for land mines (instead of claymores) and two grenades (instead of three). This keeps game intense but unfortunately spawn system is horrible, opponents still can kill you ludicrously easy without aiming at all. For realism I would be playing Red Orchestra, there is nothing as good as that game out there.
I just don't get it, how hard it is to implement a mod for WaW and CoD 4 where skill is what matters. Gametype without perks, artillery support, ludicrous dogs and tanks. With UAV ability so that the campers can't sit and shoot you in the back. Make aiming the gun what matters, none of that Halo BS. Why on earth this is so hard when there is hardcore available and all that. Besides in CoD 4 you can host your own games and one of the settings that you can set is NO for perks and NO for air support. And they can't implement that for ranking games? Amazing!
Maps are okay I guess, it's just hard to tell what it will be when all perks will be available. The gameplay changes with them.
Ack!? A "UAV"... what the heck :inquisitive: That's lame. Have they made an engineer class to lay the mines?? Because if anyone can do it then mines are going to be EVERYWHERE :wall:.. and do they tk your own teammates? And the spawn is huh.... it always has been lol, why is this ALWAYS overlooked haha... have you said anything about it? Besides any bugs or ideas?? And I wish I could play RO, as it is... it doesn't work on my comp :wall:
And I've heard that about CoD4... have they mentioned anything about adding that in for 5?
And that is true that is. I'm excited for the jungles maps though... can't wait :2thumbsup:
I like tanks.....
Are they a mp only feature? I'd love to play a tank in the campaign.
Tanks are in both MP and single palyer campaign. However, what they offered with CoD: United Offensive (Expansion pack for first CoD). The Base Assault mode specifically where tanks played key role, will probably not be in WaW. I personally loved that mod.
Ack!? A "UAV"... what the heck :inquisitive: That's lame.
Well it's called a "Recon Plane" this time, but works exactly like in CoD 4.
Have they made an engineer class to lay the mines?? Because if anyone can do it then mines are going to be EVERYWHERE :wall:.. and do they tk your own teammates? And the spawn is huh.... it always has been lol, why is this ALWAYS overlooked haha... have you said anything about it? Besides any bugs or ideas?? And I wish I could play RO, as it is... it doesn't work on my comp :wall:
And I've heard that about CoD4... have they mentioned anything about adding that in for 5?
And that is true that is. I'm excited for the jungles maps though... can't wait :2thumbsup:
Umm... Well, there are no classes just like there were no classes in CoD 4 either.
The "land mines" are WWII version of claymores in CoD4, yes anyone with that specific perk for them can use them.
There are MP game modes where friendly fire is on, then everything including mines will give damage to you and your team mates.
The stock version (or vanilla) of CoD 4 had nicely working spawning system for Team Deathmatch, except for Countdown map. As you died you spawned as much as possible far away from your opponents and that was great. For some ludicrous reason they changed that, so that now you spawn close to your team mates. This results in to two incredibly frustrating problems, possibility of dieing right after you spawn and getting killed by spawning opponent (next to you, in front of you, or right behind you). This same garbage exists also in World at War BETA version.
Mailman653
10-16-2008, 22:34
Recon planes? errr.... I highly doubt many WWII battles had the luxury of that. I like the Pacific and Berlin '45 themes, but I think I'll have to rent this one first before I start bugging family to buy the game for the holidays. :inquisitive:
Well it's called a "Recon Plane" this time, but works exactly like in CoD 4.
I know... but that's still lame...
Umm... Well, there are no classes just like there were no classes in CoD 4 either.
Oh...well I haven't had the chance to play the game so I wouldn't know :no:
The "land mines" are WWII version of claymores in CoD4, yes anyone with that specific perk for them can use them.Oh so you need to reach certain level then?? Or whatever...
There are MP game modes where friendly fire is on, then everything including mines will give damage to you and your team mates.Dangit...
The stock version (or vanilla) of CoD 4 had nicely working spawning system for Team Deathmatch, except for Countdown map. As you died you spawned as much as possible far away from your opponents and that was great. For some ludicrous reason they changed that, so that now you spawn close to your team mates. This results in to two incredibly frustrating problems, possibility of dieing right after you spawn and getting killed by spawning opponent (next to you, in front of you, or right behind you). This same garbage exists also in World at War BETA version.
Well bullocks :wall:~:(
Mailman653
10-17-2008, 17:29
Some beta impressions.
http://xbox360.gamespy.com/xbox-360/call-of-duty-5/920984p1.html
Mailman653
11-10-2008, 17:01
It seems to be getting a lot of positive feed back, although I'm still undecided about it. I look forward to reading some reviews in the coming days. I recently saw a few videos on IGN, it looks cool, but the character was carrying a 30.cal and a flamethrower.....come on, who runs around with a 30.cal as if it were a BAR, it's like the WWII version of Rambo and his M60. Plus I think you shouldn't be allowed to carry anything heavier than an M1 or a Thompson when you have the flamethrower, those things were heavy and had limited fuel.........as opposed to the videos where the character seems to move just as fast with the flamethrower as he does with that 30.cal, and did I mention that the flamethrower apparently has a recharge meter so once you spend your fuel, you just wait a few seconds and it recharges again.:inquisitive:
tibilicus
11-13-2008, 00:41
I pre ordered my copy.
So far on metacritic however it's no where near the high score of COD4, critics are very criticle of the single player but have said mostly positively good things about the multi player which is what im buying it for.
I also played the BETA and to be honest if you didn't like COD4 you wont like this. Also it seems a bit easier now almost, that might just be me but my Kill to death ratio on COD4 was 2.5 on this it was 3.10. Might just be the standard of play on the 360 mind.
PanzerJaeger
11-13-2008, 01:26
This game is turning out to be the anti-RO.
Realism mods won't even begin to be able to drag this laughable take on WW2 down to reality.
What's happened? The Medal of Honor series hasn't had a decent game since Allied Assault and now Call of Duty seems to be straying from what made the first one such a great game. These were, of course, not nearly as realistic as RO but they were at least based conceivable notions. I could not believe what they had done with the MP in COD4. It was horrible on so many levels. If they felt they had to do ranks and stuff, they could have at least set it up like America's Army, which still retains some element of believability. Maybe I'm spoiled on RO, but I did play COD online for more than a year and it was realistic enough for a guy like me and fun enough for your average boy wonder arcade shooter.
I guess people constantly want newer and cooler, and there just isn't that much else to add to the genre, so they have to come up with ridiculous gimmicks like UAVS and landmines. I don't know how Pacific and Airborne Assault did for Medal of Honor, but I cannot argue with COD4's success. Its the 3rd most popular FPS with 15,000 players on daily, next to ROs 1500... maybe I'm the one with the problem, not COD. :shame:
Bob the Insane
11-14-2008, 22:17
Hmmm... The CoD games have always been more "Band of Brothers" then they are "History Channel".
In that regard CoD:W@W simply continues the trend. In fact, wipe CoD3 from you mind and drop this in between CoD2 and CoD4 and Treyarch could be forgiven their sins. All the proper CoD functionality is back with leaning, mantling over objects and through windows, etc...
The lighting in the game is great, but i had to turn the in game brightness way down from the default to stop the night time being almost as bright as day. Sound it fine though some of the weapons are a little weak for some reason (the stg44 in particular sounds like it has a silencer attached). The music is interesting as it as kept the modern edge similar to CoD4. Gameplay is standard shooter. The AI in CoD games is always hard to qualify because everything is so heavily scripted and it is the same here.
I have played the game to completion on Hardened over the course of two evenings. It was fun, very CoD in flavor and full of continous action. It is really cool having Kiefer Sutherland's substantual voice over as both the narrator and Marine Sergeant in the Marines campaign. Gary Oldman's is convincing too for the Soviet campaign, but because he does a good accent (to my western ears anyway) it is hard to tell it is him.
The core stories in both campaigns focus on simple survivial. We already know the grand scheme of things and how things turn out in WW2, so the storys are simply surviving great events. Actually, the Soviet campaign in CoD:W@W pretty much matches the Soviet Campaign in the original CoD, starting at Stalingrad and ending up with raising the flag over the Reichstag (minus all the "Enemy at the Gates" references, well not completely as you still have the sniper in the fountain bit). This is pretty interesting as it shows off all the advances in the engine...
The Marine campaign is fun and the harder of the two with all the jungle and tall grass and ambushes. The flamethrower is interesting in that it not only kills the enemy but burns away the undergrowth (the molotov cocktails in the Soviet campaign can do the same thing). If it was not for Farcry 2 having a better implimentation the flame effects in CoD:W@W would be all new and interesting.
Overall, this is 100% CoD, totally linear, action packed and hollywood in style. Lots of fun if you enjoy an honest shooter and are not completely burned out on WW2.
Addtionally, the Nazi Zombie bonus level is really fun, wait for it at the end of the credits...
Mongoose
11-22-2008, 17:58
What about grenades? Is COD 5 like COD 4, where I could get a kill about 1/3 of the time that I just randomly threw a grenade in the air? Granted, most of those throws were radar assisted, but still. If they can solve that and the spawning/choke point issues, while keeping the other aspects of Call of Duty MP, I'll be completely happy.
I don't think I have been killed by a grenade at all yet actually, and only have one kill from a random grenade, which was a fluke. If anything they seem underpowered...
And the guns aren't at all balanced imo, before you always had the M16 as a good backup gun for any level player, but now the guns at the higher levels are far better than the ones you start with, it can be hard sometimes...
The Medal of Honor series hasn't had a decent game since Allied Assault
Heroes 2 on the wii is amazing, singleplayer is the some old but the multiplayer is fantastic.
The ppsh-41 is absolutely amazing.
Overall the game isn't too bad. It's basically COD 4 in world war II time.
Mailman653
11-25-2008, 17:42
The ppsh-41 is absolutely amazing.
It usually is in most games :yes: Although most complain its a "newb" gun because you basically point and shoot and hope you hit something.
tibilicus
11-26-2008, 03:21
It usually is in most games :yes: Although most complain its a "newb" gun because you basically point and shoot and hope you hit something.
To be honest I think they did a good job of balancing it for the multiplayer.
Fair enough it comes with an insane high rate of fire but the damage is drastically reduced to balance it.
the MG42 is good enough for me, haven't unlocked the PPSh yet, especially with the unlimited ammo glitch :laugh4:
So finally got it, best looking game on the Wii for sure. It's pretty much what I expected it to be, fun but shallow first person action. Campaign is fun. Multiplayer is a blast, but 8 players isn't very impressive compared to Medal of Honour's lagless 32 player battles, most weapons feel much better though but the bolt action rifles aren't nearly as satisfying. It also doesn't control anywhere as smoothly, doubt WAW has the staying power.
Hmmm. Thinking about getting it, and at the same time thinking about not...
Hmmm. Thinking about getting it, and at the same time thinking about not...
If I can be of any help, I would get Modern Warfare and wait for the price-drop. Don't get me wrong it is good, but not as good as modern warfare and you spend only half of the time in the jungle, soviet campaign is the same old, good, but same old. Multiplayer is good, but again modern warfare is better. It really is a terrific game, insane production-values good 'story' and it is at times quite nightmarish you will have a blast, but again WW2, WW2 weapons, WW2 pictures, movies. And surprisingly a beach landing what are the odds of that.
I think the multiplayer is much better than cod4. And I prefer the Russian part of the campaign too :laugh4:
Bob the Insane
12-21-2008, 18:54
I agree... The MP in COD5 is basically the CoD4 MP improved...
Also for the PC, the little enhancements that CoD4 had only on the 360 are available from the begining on the PC too in CoD5...
And the War mode is great, one of the more popular ones. Plays like TDM but with a purpose (other than killing)...
Play with FF on, it is really the only way... :2thumbsup:
Pontius Pilate
12-21-2008, 18:59
can you customize your multiplayer character in COD 5? like, can you choose either Allies or Axis and change uniform colors, helmets, etc.?
Tiberius of the Drake
12-21-2008, 21:28
unfortunately not, at least not on the 360, but most games have you on a set team anyways.
Kekvit Irae
12-22-2008, 05:58
Why is the Winter War so neglected in war games? The one country that resisted the Red Army's advance, and they get swept aside in favor of Germany vs Russia.
AggonyDuck
12-22-2008, 17:25
Why is the Winter War so neglected in war games? The one country that resisted the Red Army's advance, and they get swept aside in favor of Germany vs Russia.
Well how the Winter War was fought is one important factor in that. Simply put, creating a 'motti' and then letting it stew for a few weeks or months doesn't make for a very good game, although admittedly the nature would be very interesting for a shooter.
Kekvit Irae
12-22-2008, 18:05
Well how the Winter War was fought is one important factor in that. Simply put, creating a 'motti' and then letting it stew for a few weeks or months doesn't make for a very good game, although admittedly the nature would be very interesting for a shooter.
A lot more interesting than seeing the Great Patriotic War for the millionth time. :tongueg:
Boyar Son
12-23-2008, 04:04
do all of u play on pc? im on KOB S&D servers some times. name is "--BAM--"
Marshal Murat
12-23-2008, 16:37
Well how the Winter War was fought is one important factor in that. Simply put, creating a 'motti' and then letting it stew for a few weeks or months doesn't make for a very good game, although admittedly the nature would be very interesting for a shooter.
I would love to see a Winter War campaign, from the Finnish point of view. I can think of 3 sweet ones right now. Since the last two would be in the dark, it would be even cooler.
1. The battle in the early weeks, where Russians captured a hunting lodge/hotel and the Finns assaulted the lodge? I can't remember the name, but it sounded pretty cool.
2. A recon against Soviet field kitchens
3. Ambush of Soviet column on an ice-road.
PanzerJaeger
12-23-2008, 16:59
A lot more interesting than seeing the Great Patriotic War for the millionth time. :tongueg:
Says you! ~;)
The recent shift from the endless Normandy scenarios to the Eastern Front is a welcome change to this WW2 FPS veteran. I am just happy this genre has remained popular despite the reviewers constantly bemoaning "yet another WW2 FPS". It'll be a sad day for me when people finally get tired of them... :shame:
COD manages to be somewhat fresh despite, but I am really tired of Saving Private Ryan the game. With Saving Private Ryan violins and bagpipes like in MOH. Thankfully WAW is much more raw, it really helps for a shooter when you see chunks of meat flying of people when you shoot them. That isn't very well done on the Wii sadly but on the PS3 it's glorious, reminds me of the new Rambo movie.
Does anyone other than me get some epic lag/bad frame-rate on the PC version. I know it's not my computer, since I can play CoD4, Oblivion and the like with high graphics and no lag. It's really starting to bug me.
Merry Christmas to me!
Shot a Jap in a tree!
Stormed the Reichstag
On a gut Tag!
Merry Christmas to me!
I like the game. The Pacific campaign seemed fresh, though I did not like the beach landing on Pelelieu, it was basically Call of Duty 2 again. However, the new banzai charges, new weapons and a very nice remake of the Eastern Front got me into it. I have to say, I liked the Russian levels a lot better, and anyone who played the game should agree, when you first exit out of a ruined building to a rainy, dark Berlin night, rubble and burned houses among you, tanks moving up streets, and paper floating, it is something to behold.
The lag is unbearable, I'm returning it tomorrow. It's my graphics card and an incompatibility with the texture resolutions I think. But, it bugs me since the minimum specs are lower than mine (in the spoiler), but I can't even stop the lag when I'm playing on low settings. And it bugs me even more because CoD4 uses exactly the same engine, and I can play that with high graphics. WTF!
Intel® Centrino® 2 Processor Technology-Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor P8400
Genuine Windows Vista® Home Premium
3GB Dual-channel44 DDR-2 SDRAM
500GB SATA Hard Drive
256MB ATI Radeon™ HD 3450
Mailman653
12-26-2008, 20:38
I have to say, I liked the Russian levels a lot better, and anyone who played the game should agree, when you first exit out of a ruined building to a rainy, dark Berlin night, rubble and burned houses among you, tanks moving up streets, and paper floating, it is something to behold.
Did you fight only generic SS units, or did you see a mix of SS, Volkstrumm, Heer, HJ and a hodgpoge other uniforms ranging from Luffwaffe, Kriegsmarine and NSDAP? :laugh4:
The lag is unbearable, I'm returning it tomorrow. It's my graphics card and an incompatibility with the texture resolutions I think. But, it bugs me since the minimum specs are lower than mine (in the spoiler), but I can't even stop the lag when I'm playing on low settings. And it bugs me even more because CoD4 uses exactly the same engine, and I can play that with high graphics. WTF!
Intel® Centrino® 2 Processor Technology-Intel® Core™ 2 Duo Processor P8400
Genuine Windows Vista® Home Premium
3GB Dual-channel44 DDR-2 SDRAM
500GB SATA Hard Drive
256MB ATI Radeon™ HD 3450
:hugs wii:
Marshal Murat
12-28-2008, 21:10
:hugs wii:
Yes.
Warluster
01-02-2009, 08:51
Well, I haven't tried MP yet (Too many other games) but I was very impressed by the SP campaign.
By the reviews I was expecting a mildly interesting campaign which was just a bit above CoD3, and it turned out the exact opposite. The American campaign was good, and certianly the beach landing was pretty good (Especially with the rockets, loved that at full volume) but with only three battles. I thought they'd include Iwo Jima (Though I guess that would be historically inaccurate, *grumbles*) or something beforehand. THe Russian campaign though was the exact opposite; I found that one of the best SP campaigns I've played in a while. THe great music and that crazy Sergeant, and the addition of great.. moments? Love the Berlin and Reichstag battles. Defintly one of the best campaigns in a War FPS.
The problem which ruined it for me was how short the damned thing was. Also the Shuri castle bit at the start, in the Okinawa levels seemed very bland and boring, hated that level, and it only got good in the end.
If it wasn't for CoD4 this would've blasted FPS's out the window in my opinion. Its almost a shame the next one is Modern Warfare, but I am sure it'll be good. Though I only wonder what they can do. I thought CoD4 wrapped things up pretty good, so they'd have to include a diffrent viewpoint or a new war. Maybe they'll remember the Forgotten War of '51?
Kinda hoping for a Vietnam COD, I really liked the american levels, there was such a hardcore nightmarish edge to them. That, and burning japanese to death is much more fun that it should be this game is rediculously brutal at times. Jungle combat just feels that more cruel and brutal with the banzai charges and all. The Russian campaign is good as well but something's lacking.
Kekvit Irae
01-05-2009, 01:12
After finally playing this game, I have summed up my thoughts in three words: This game sucks.
The flamethrower, while fun to use and has unlimited ammo, has an extremely short range in comparison to enemy flamethrowers. You're better off shooting Tojo out of the trees than you are burning him out.
ANOTHER Stalingrad level? ANOTHER "Capture The Reichstag" Berlin level?
The vehicle levels, while the best part of the game, are too short to be very enjoyable.
Nazi Zombies, while fun for a few minutes, soon loses its appeal after the first play.
A veteran CoD player will blow through the campaign in just a few hours. If you don't care for multiplayer (like me), don't even bother buying this game. At least CoD4 had an arcade mode to extend the lifespan of the campaign.
In short, Treyarch has made yet another CoD3, and they didn't even hide the fact that it's just a rehash.
Mongoose
01-10-2009, 04:49
The campaign is insanely short. To be perfectly fair, though, COD 4 wasn't much better. I finished in about 4 hours, and I'm not even that good at FPS games. Infact, I'd actually say that if anything, 5 is abit longer than 4.
I agree that Treyarch didn't do that great of a job from a purely single player perspective, but they really weren't any worse than Infinity Ward.
Mailman653
01-23-2009, 18:47
Well, I finally got the game...its ok. I never played COD4 so I can't compare the two so I suppose my view is fresh. The AI sure loves throwing grenades at you.
COD4 is still at second place on the online community, second to Gears of War 2. World at War is at fourth place.
Mailman653
01-24-2009, 00:07
I just went through five rounds of TDM and I'm very disapointed, makes me wanna go back to RO. Japanese with German guns? Germans with American guns? They really dropped the ball on realism there. Then of course everyone from a newb to a pro uses a SMG or an MG so that leaves people like me, a bolt action user, get abused everywhere.
Something I did like was the Coop campaign, where you and up to four people can play an SP mission together.
Lastly i was playing on bootcamp mode which is supposed to cap players at level 8 skill yet many of the guys on the server were level 40 and up, whats up with that? OH and one more thing, I saw the most absurd thing just now an MP-40 with a friggin scope.
Marshal Murat
01-24-2009, 00:18
With some of the camera locks, I just spray and pray with my Thompson or MG. Bolt-Action rifles are only good on Asylum or a bigger map. Now, it's suicidal to run around with a scoped rifle.
I like the Gewehr use it on all maps, spray and pray MP-40 noobs get rifle nade MUHA
a completely inoffensive name
02-05-2009, 07:28
SMG's are used by most newbs who just hope to spray and pray. I pride myself on MP-40 with bandolier, double tap and steady aim with fat clip attachments. I use my MP-40 like a surgeon to cut down three guys in the same room before they can even pop up their sights on their bolt action rifles.
a completely inoffensive name
02-08-2009, 09:42
sir you should be shot.
about what, using SMG's in general, or using the Mp-40 or the perks. I have switched from Mp-40 to Type 100 because I find its not as cheap as Mp-40 (too powerful for an SMG).
Why so serious? Was kidding mia muca, use what feels best to you. For me that would be the Gewehr, nice attachment and a beast on all distances. I am growing towards the Garand because of the bajonet, get most kills stabbing, very satisfying because it looks so sick :yes:
Mailman653
02-08-2009, 19:46
I haven't gotten the M1 yet I don't think, I already got all the attachments to the Springfield so now I'm using the Ariska, hopefully once I get the all attachments for it I'll get the K98 or the Mosin unlocked.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.