Something went wrong. Try again later
    Follow

    Call of Duty: World at War

    Game » consists of 21 releases. Released Nov 11, 2008

    The fifth installment of the Call of Duty series, bringing most of the gameplay and graphical improvements of Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare back to World War II conflict. It is also the first Call of Duty game set in the Pacific Theater.

    Somebody Call the Doctor

    Avatar image for lunarbunny
    Lunarbunny

    1055

    Forum Posts

    5590

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 2

    User Lists: 1

    Edited By Lunarbunny

    So I played through the single player campaign of the copy of Call of Duty: World at War and finished today, and played a few hours of multiplayer... I actually like the game more than I expected...at least the multiplayer section.

    The single player I played on Hardened and it pissed me off repeatedly. Notable points of boil-over anger include sniper duels in Stalingrad, the trenches of Seelow, the castle on Okinawa, and anything remotely related to the Reichstag. It's nowhere near as fluid as 4 was, but that's kind of what I expected from Treyarch. Nazi Zombies is actually more fun than I expected, but even then it's still a throw-away section added as (depending on how you see it) a nod or competition to Left 4 Dead. The music could be a little less distortion guitar, it didn't seem to fit to the period very well.

    As for multiplayer, well, of course it's basically Call of Duty 4 with old new guns and a couple maps with tanks. I actually like the tank maps as they're the size I wish that some CoD4 maps would have been for larger PC battles (PC limit is 32, which is probably hackable to 50 like some CoD4 servers). The tanks are stuck in first gear and unless you're running the Greased Bearings perk, track the turret slow as molasses, but it's probably more balanced that way. I'm enjoying it, especially because hardcore feels less spammy than CoD4 (at least until somebody drags a PPSh-41 in). My personal weapon choice has been the G43 with silencer, and I've been exercising my mouse clicking finger...which is the reason for this title post. I tested myself on this silly webapp at 6.5-7 clicks per second after playing...which means I can basically run the G43 at a rate of fire similar to if not greater than the StG44 in the game. Hopefully I don't get any repetitive stress injuries...

    My only lament is the ACOG telescopic sight is still a piece of shit...slightly less of one...but still.

    Avatar image for lunarbunny
    Lunarbunny

    1055

    Forum Posts

    5590

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 2

    User Lists: 1

    #1  Edited By Lunarbunny

    So I played through the single player campaign of the copy of Call of Duty: World at War and finished today, and played a few hours of multiplayer... I actually like the game more than I expected...at least the multiplayer section.

    The single player I played on Hardened and it pissed me off repeatedly. Notable points of boil-over anger include sniper duels in Stalingrad, the trenches of Seelow, the castle on Okinawa, and anything remotely related to the Reichstag. It's nowhere near as fluid as 4 was, but that's kind of what I expected from Treyarch. Nazi Zombies is actually more fun than I expected, but even then it's still a throw-away section added as (depending on how you see it) a nod or competition to Left 4 Dead. The music could be a little less distortion guitar, it didn't seem to fit to the period very well.

    As for multiplayer, well, of course it's basically Call of Duty 4 with old new guns and a couple maps with tanks. I actually like the tank maps as they're the size I wish that some CoD4 maps would have been for larger PC battles (PC limit is 32, which is probably hackable to 50 like some CoD4 servers). The tanks are stuck in first gear and unless you're running the Greased Bearings perk, track the turret slow as molasses, but it's probably more balanced that way. I'm enjoying it, especially because hardcore feels less spammy than CoD4 (at least until somebody drags a PPSh-41 in). My personal weapon choice has been the G43 with silencer, and I've been exercising my mouse clicking finger...which is the reason for this title post. I tested myself on this silly webapp at 6.5-7 clicks per second after playing...which means I can basically run the G43 at a rate of fire similar to if not greater than the StG44 in the game. Hopefully I don't get any repetitive stress injuries...

    My only lament is the ACOG telescopic sight is still a piece of shit...slightly less of one...but still.

    Avatar image for hamz
    Hamz

    6900

    Forum Posts

    25432

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 2

    User Lists: 5

    #2  Edited By Hamz

    The public beta for this game on the PC turned me right off. I'm surprised you could actually part with money for this game. Honest to god I found the multiplayer to feel so broken, but like you said it atleast had larger maps than most of the ones in COD4.

    COD:WaW for me felt like the stereotypical place filler until Infinity Ward released their next game in the series. It neither improved or fulfilled what COD4 did for me. After some days on the public beta all I wanted to do was go back to my beloved mini uzi + steady aim combo in COD4.

    Also there are a number of servers for COD4, or there were when I still played, that had a 60 player limit. Shipment was just chaos with that many people, not only did it lag but the amount of grenade spam and martyrdom hate was astounding lol.

    Avatar image for lunarbunny
    Lunarbunny

    1055

    Forum Posts

    5590

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 2

    User Lists: 1

    #3  Edited By Lunarbunny

    See, I took the easy way out: I put it on my Christmas wish list. That way I can enjoy it without parting with any of my own money for it. I would be sad if I paid any more than $30 for it. But as it is I can pop-pop-pop away with my G43.

    Avatar image for purerok
    PureRok

    4272

    Forum Posts

    4226

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 2

    #4  Edited By PureRok

    The beta was crap, but the retail version of multiplayer feels a lot different (at least to me). Now that I can play on Headquarters on Hardcore on maps that don't suck (basically, any map without tanks), the multiplayer is a lot better.

    I love the acog in CoD4, so I bet I'll love the telescopic sight.

    Avatar image for jayge_
    Jayge_

    10269

    Forum Posts

    2045

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 1

    User Lists: 3

    #5  Edited By Jayge_

    People who thing ACOG/telescopic sights in COD suck are people who have no idea how to use them.

    Just saying.

    In the right hands they are brilliant.

    Avatar image for gameboi
    Gameboi

    655

    Forum Posts

    0

    Wiki Points

    0

    Followers

    Reviews: 0

    User Lists: 2

    #6  Edited By Gameboi

    I still prefer CoD4 for its modern weapons, but I've been playing quite a bit of WaW the past few days, and have no issues with it. Still a Call of Duty game, and still as fun as ever.  Hate the dogs, though.

    This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

    Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

    Comment and Save

    Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.