CoD: World at War

[Decker]

World at War Info

Well it finally seems like they are moving towards the Pacific...and it doesn't look tooo bad.

World at War Trailer

[Baby Boomer]

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.

[Decker]

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!

[PBI]

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.

[Decker]

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]

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...

[Decker]

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 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.

[Praxil]

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?

[naut]

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.

[Decker]

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).

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

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?

[PBI]

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]

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?

[Husar]

This could be good indeed, this game I mean, here 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.
Maybe this one will be different.

[Baby Boomer]

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.
Maybe this one will be different.

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.

[Csargo]

Always shoot the guys laying on the ground. Got it.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Always shoot the guys laying on the ground. Got it.

Efficiency, my dear friend Ichigo. Grenades.

[Csargo]

Grenades are a dime a dozen. While bullets are a cent.

[Fragony]

It sounds pretty sinister in a war is hell kinda way, I like.

[Baby Boomer]

Always shoot the guys laying on the ground. Got it.

THey would be too kind. Flamethrowers would work much better...

[Husar]

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]

CoD2 was the best... CoD3 sucked lollipops... CoD4 I never played because I don't like modern shooters that much...

this trailer looks oke

[Viking]

Hm.....



Let's hope they have no über weapons in the MP this time.

[Ferret]

PPSH FTW!

[The Stranger]

ehhehe :P oh well, a skilled marksman can counter a spraynoob any time

[Decker]

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

[PanzerJaeger]

Nothing will beat Red Orchestra for realism, excitement, and pure replayability... except an updated version of Red Orchestra.

[Praxil]

Nothing will beat Red Orchestra for realism, excitement, and pure replayability... except an updated version of Red Orchestra.

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]

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.

[Praxil]

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.