Call of Duty 2
Intro: Call of Duty 2 is, well, a World War Two shooter. If you couldn't figure that out from the start, then you're special in more ways then one. I digress. Anywho, this (like I mentioned before) is a WW2 shooter that lets you take on the perspective of three different soldiers in different scienarios. One of the soldiers is in the British Army, fighting in Africa, one is a Russian soldier fighting for his motherland, and respectivily, an American Solider fighting during D-day. All of these scenarios are quite exciting for the history-nerd, such as myself.
Gameplay: This game is part typical FPS, and one part ground-breaking (in terms of a WW2 shooter). It's a typical shooter in the sense that you have to shoot bad guys with guns over and over (and some cases over and over agian), and that's the foundation of the game. There's nothing that really makes this a unique FPS. Now, when you look at this game through a different perspective (one of a WW2 shooter fan) you can tell that there has been some major advances for the whole WW2 genre in this one little game. These advances include: the controls, level design, AI, and just how much damn fun this game can be sometimes. All of those advances are characteristics of this game that make the gameplay great. The only thing that holds the gameplay from getting a perfect score (in gameplay) is the fact that it can tend to get repetitive from time to time (as the case with most FPS's these days).
Graphics: The graphics are good, but there's a catch. This is supposed to be a "next-gen" game. To me, this just looks like a great looking Xbox game, but nothing like what I'd imagine my 360 to churn out in terms of graphics. Depending on how powerful of a PC you may have, the graphics could outdo the 360's. In conclusion, the graphics are good for a current-gen game, but for a next-gen game...ehhh...I think they could've been better. Keep in mind that the graphics don't make the game, so it won't really hurt this game's score all that much.
Sound: This game goes above and beyond in terms of sound. Everything sounds just how they would've sounded on the different battlefields of WW2. Each gun (with one or two exceptions) has it's own unique sound, and it doesn't stop there. The AI have great voice-acting, which makes the game even more enjoyable. In this game's case, the sound makes the game the most realistic World War Two shooter out on the market right now (well, in terms of sound).
Controls: Usually I don't like it when developers stray away from the Halo-control style in their FPS games. This just tends to make the controls too complex and confusing. This game is the exception. The development team made some controls that are almost so good that they can actually be compared to Halo's controls. The only time that you may get confused with the controls is when or if you play Halo 2 right before you start playing Call of Duty 2. Other then that, you really shouldn't have hard of a time with the controls.
Replay: Sadly, this game doesn't have that much replay-ability. Once you go through the story on any difficulty, you're pretty much done with 95% of the game. The other 5% that you can play over agian is the multiplayer, but the developers made it so difficult to play with other people on this game. You can't system link unless you have sixteen Xbox 360's, sixteen TV's, and sixteen controllers. So, if you want to realisitically play multiplayer, you either have to do four player split screen on one xbox or play Xbox live by yourself (agian, you the developers made it impossible for the game to have good multiplayer by not allowing guests). On Xbox Live, there's always the problem with lag and being disconected for various reasons from time to time. Supposedly, these problems have been fixed in past updates though. Essentially, the multiplayer is dissapointing in so many ways, and the campaign isn't worth replaying agian once you got those achievement points.
Overall: This game is a great game in some aspects, but only a good game in other aspects. The multiplayer would've been amazing if only Activision made it realistic to have system link and guests on Xbox live. The game is quite short, even on the toughest difficulty I beat the game in one week flat. And sadly, the graphics are sub-par for something we expect a next-gen game to look like. Seems like I pointed out alot of problems, but one can't forget that the story and the gameplay are excellent (even if it is short). I almost seem hypocritical, but believe me, what I just said is true.
Gameplay: This game is part typical FPS, and one part ground-breaking (in terms of a WW2 shooter). It's a typical shooter in the sense that you have to shoot bad guys with guns over and over (and some cases over and over agian), and that's the foundation of the game. There's nothing that really makes this a unique FPS. Now, when you look at this game through a different perspective (one of a WW2 shooter fan) you can tell that there has been some major advances for the whole WW2 genre in this one little game. These advances include: the controls, level design, AI, and just how much damn fun this game can be sometimes. All of those advances are characteristics of this game that make the gameplay great. The only thing that holds the gameplay from getting a perfect score (in gameplay) is the fact that it can tend to get repetitive from time to time (as the case with most FPS's these days).
Graphics: The graphics are good, but there's a catch. This is supposed to be a "next-gen" game. To me, this just looks like a great looking Xbox game, but nothing like what I'd imagine my 360 to churn out in terms of graphics. Depending on how powerful of a PC you may have, the graphics could outdo the 360's. In conclusion, the graphics are good for a current-gen game, but for a next-gen game...ehhh...I think they could've been better. Keep in mind that the graphics don't make the game, so it won't really hurt this game's score all that much.
Sound: This game goes above and beyond in terms of sound. Everything sounds just how they would've sounded on the different battlefields of WW2. Each gun (with one or two exceptions) has it's own unique sound, and it doesn't stop there. The AI have great voice-acting, which makes the game even more enjoyable. In this game's case, the sound makes the game the most realistic World War Two shooter out on the market right now (well, in terms of sound).
Controls: Usually I don't like it when developers stray away from the Halo-control style in their FPS games. This just tends to make the controls too complex and confusing. This game is the exception. The development team made some controls that are almost so good that they can actually be compared to Halo's controls. The only time that you may get confused with the controls is when or if you play Halo 2 right before you start playing Call of Duty 2. Other then that, you really shouldn't have hard of a time with the controls.
Replay: Sadly, this game doesn't have that much replay-ability. Once you go through the story on any difficulty, you're pretty much done with 95% of the game. The other 5% that you can play over agian is the multiplayer, but the developers made it so difficult to play with other people on this game. You can't system link unless you have sixteen Xbox 360's, sixteen TV's, and sixteen controllers. So, if you want to realisitically play multiplayer, you either have to do four player split screen on one xbox or play Xbox live by yourself (agian, you the developers made it impossible for the game to have good multiplayer by not allowing guests). On Xbox Live, there's always the problem with lag and being disconected for various reasons from time to time. Supposedly, these problems have been fixed in past updates though. Essentially, the multiplayer is dissapointing in so many ways, and the campaign isn't worth replaying agian once you got those achievement points.
Overall: This game is a great game in some aspects, but only a good game in other aspects. The multiplayer would've been amazing if only Activision made it realistic to have system link and guests on Xbox live. The game is quite short, even on the toughest difficulty I beat the game in one week flat. And sadly, the graphics are sub-par for something we expect a next-gen game to look like. Seems like I pointed out alot of problems, but one can't forget that the story and the gameplay are excellent (even if it is short). I almost seem hypocritical, but believe me, what I just said is true.
