Call of Duty: World at War

[andromeda23]

I recently got COD:WW beta demo in my hands, I'm big fan of COD franchise so I decide to have a go before pre-ordering. The only conclusion I have from that demo (except it's demo and all possible conclusions regarding demo verions of anything) is that game developers just insulted me as a nobel video games player. This game is an insult. It looks like World War II mod for Call of Duty 4 instead of actuall stand alone game (Making Red Orchestra for Unreal Turnament brobably took more effort that making this). Multiplayer gameply is almost the same if not the same: you have the same perks, you can create custom class: select perks, weapons, granades. Game engine is the same (no issue here COD4 engine is sweet). But why, why did they went such a cheap way? Why World War II? Are there no other ideas for a video game?

 

[bluerahjah]

It's because, as Treyarch has said, they felt that WW2 had not been completed, and in a way, they were right. Every other WW2 game before this has always really focused on the German assault, and never on the huge impact that Japan and the isles really had. While I agree with going this route for the campaign mode, and of course finally getting the co-op ability for campaign, they definitely should have at least modified the CoD4 engine, instead of outright using it as is.

 

[andromeda23]

I think because it was one 100% safe way to make game disapear from shop shelfs the magic WWII. I'm sick of WWII. And it's not even the WWII thing, but just making WWII theme to the existing game. And you still have Comies fighting Fritz. They should be ashamed.

 

[Flour]

I like how you're complaining about multiplayer while in 4(5?) years, the only thing IW changed for it's multiplayer was a perk/exp system.

But partially I agree, Treyarch/Gray Matter should never have gone to make their own games. They made the CoD1 expansion and it was better than the original game.

 

[andromeda23]

I like the whoe perk/exp system in CoD4. I was nice. Keep me going. Btw MP in CoD was always fast paced. Force re-spawn gives you the ability to get back into the fight much faster (sick when have to wait even 15 sek. not even saying about end of the round), but here, like I said previusly, we have WWII mod for CoD4, for which they are asking a full price. Someone will probably say: You don't like it, it isn't obligatory that you have it. That is true I say. And I'm not going to buy it.

 

[djeeten]

I just hope they give it a longer single player campaign this time.

 

[DeleteMe1112311]

Despite the horrid english I share Andromeda's opinion. I had already decided not to buy Call of Duty: World at War as soon as I heard it was about WWII. It would need to get perfect recommendations from at least 2 dozen reviewers I actually respected before I'd be willing to rent it.

 

[andromeda23]

I

I just hope they give it a longer single player campaign this time.

I wouldn't count on it. Especialy with co-op you will go trought campain with the speed of light.

 

[andromeda23]

Despite the horrid english...

Hey, what's wrong with my english??

 

[djeeten]

I

I just hope they give it a longer single player campaign this time.

I wouldn't count on it. Especialy with co-op you will go trought campain with the speed of light.

I'll probably wait until the game hits the bargain bin then.

 

[Sir_Montague]

To be completely honest with your dismay, I am excited for the ability to play through a campaign that finally includes both of the theaters of WWII... I am tired of the everlasting presence of WWII games in the FPS genre, but it is part of our history that shouldn't be forgotten, no matter how many virtual axis soldiers we kill... It is going to be a great game though.

 

[Syphonz]

(Making Red Orchestra for Unreal Turnament brobably took more effort that making this).

Red Orchestra: Osfront 41-45 is a much better FPS than 90% of WWII shooters. Just because the learning curve is as harsh as a cruel ***** mother, doesn't give you grounds to bash it.

 

[andromeda23]

To be completely honest with your dismay, I am excited for the ability to play through a campaign that finally includes both of the theaters of WWII... I am tired of the everlasting presence of WWII games in the FPS genre, but it is part of our history that shouldn't be forgotten, no matter how many virtual axis soldiers we kill... It is going to be a great game though.

Ok, if we approach to the video game as a memento of our history (I still think is just a way of aking money, beside it was the only conflict where yanks were not the "bad guys" but enough politics). In that situation where is Italy, Infamous Gustav line? We had Africa in CoD2. What about Norway and their role in WWII? Where are the death camps mentioned? Hells Highway? Brithish and French ignorance towards Third Reich agression in Czech? Sir_Montague I have to disagree with you.

And I almost forgot does the American Campain in COD:WW ends with droping the A-Bomb??? That's very important thing to remember.

 

[andromeda23]

(Making Red Orchestra for Unreal Turnament brobably took more effort that making this).

Red Orchestra: Osfront 41-45 is a much better FPS than 90% of WWII shooters. Just because the learning curve is as harsh as a cruel ***** mother, doesn't give you grounds to bash it.

I'm afraid you didn't understand me correctly: I worship Red Orchestra. It's awsome game, quite difficult, very realistic and fun to play.

 

[CapnDork1337]

Didn't both Medal of Honor and The History channel make WW2 games about the Japanese front? If so the one point I have heard in defense of the new CoD just went out the window.

 

[Lt. Dragunov]

At first when i heard of cod5 it seemed as if it could bring some new stuff to the table, but it seems as its just cod4 in disguise of WWll. Now im sure we all can agree americans did good in WWll, but dang enough is enough.

 

[Syphonz]

(Making Red Orchestra for Unreal Turnament brobably took more effort that making this).

Red Orchestra: Osfront 41-45 is a much better FPS than 90% of WWII shooters. Just because the learning curve is as harsh as a cruel ***** mother, doesn't give you grounds to bash it.

I'm afraid you didn't understand me correctly: I worship Red Orchestra. It's awsome game, quite difficult, very realistic and fun to play.

Ok then, My sincerest apologies.

 

[andromeda23]

At first when i heard of cod5 it seemed as if it could bring some new stuff to the table, but it seems as its just cod4 in disguise of WWll. Now im sure we all can agree americans did good in WWll, but dang enough is enough.

They didn't. They drop big, bad bomb on civilians and never said: We are sorry.

 

[andromeda23]

Not only those. Also Deadly Dozen: Pacific Threat. Poor game but still.

 

[Sir_Montague]

To be completely honest with your dismay, I am excited for the ability to play through a campaign that finally includes both of the theaters of WWII... I am tired of the everlasting presence of WWII games in the FPS genre, but it is part of our history that shouldn't be forgotten, no matter how many virtual axis soldiers we kill... It is going to be a great game though.

Ok, if we approach to the video game as a memento of our history (I still think is just a way of aking money, beside it was the only conflict where yanks were not the "bad guys" but enough politics). In that situation where is Italy, Infamous Gustav line? We had Africa in CoD2. What about Norway and their role in WWII? Where are the death camps mentioned? Hells Highway? Brithish and French ignorance towards Third Reich agression in Czech? Sir_Montague I have to disagree with you.

And I almost forgot does the American Campain in COD:WW ends with droping the A-Bomb??? That's very important thing to remember.

That's true that they probably won't include or might just braze on more than a few of those topics, and I wish they could fully include a campaign for each of those in every aspect of COD:WW... But they won't. They do have to milk the franchise for more, but that's just how business works... I wish they'd include Italy though, fighting against the major, major axis powers would be great, and I'd love to see them work together and be able to work against them... Btw, I've been around Poland and seen the death camps at Belzec, Lublin, Auschvitz, Birkenau, etc... And I'm sure many of them will be included, they were an integral part of the war and history.
On top of that, people loved the multiplayer from COD4, and are still frequenting their servers everyday on every system, so why change it too radically? I'm not speaking entirely in defense of the fact that they are reusing the same engine again (yes I will agree that its just laziness and a way to milk the consumer for money), but COD4 was a great game. Activision probably felt that something should compensate for the fact that they are yet again taking a step back and releasing another WWII game, and that compensation was keeping the same engine. Consequently also keeping the same style of multiplayer online, and the same class-perk system. Keep in mind I'm not speaking entirely in defense of them because I think this should be done differently, but if they HAD to release a WWII game, I'm glad it's set like this.
Obviously you've played the beta out and I haven't though... So tell me, what is included, and what can I look forward to?