Xbox Gaming in South Africa

Another year, another Call of Duty game. You may wonder how Activision accomplish the task of pushing out a Call of Duty game every year. Currently there are two development studios that make COD games. Firstly there is Infinity Ward, who created the first installment as well as COD2 and COD4: Modern Warfare. Then there's Treyarch, who is responsible for COD2: Big Red One, COD3 and now Call of Duty: World at War. Treyarch is normally the studio that gets rushed to finish a game, and they usually don't get things quite right - falling short of the standards set by Infinity Wards. Being a 3D software developer myself, I have huge respect for all gaming companies but I review games as a gamer, not a developer. I am also a big COD fan and have played just about every game that bears the COD logo, including the awful COD: Finest Hour. So how does this new COD stack up? In one word… meh.

Call of Duty: World at War follows the COD formula closely, perhaps too closely. The game is set once again in World War II, with you taking on the role as a U.S. Marine or Russian soldier… again. You'll be playing with guns like the MP40, the Kar98, Springfield, MG42, Thompson and BAR… again. As much as I love the history of WWII, I am fairly disappointed that it is the setting for COD:WaW. Sure you battle the Japanese this time round but it has been done in other WWII shooters before. When do we get to play as a German soldier in a WWII game? The story is not much of a story, and you just drive the German and the Japanese back as usual. It has some nice scripted sequences but what COD game doesn't? The game feels very linear and reminds me a lot of COD2, especially the Russian campaign. COD4: Modern Warfare was amazing and even the single player campaign was exciting and refreshing. Going back to WWII means that COD: World at War doesn't really offer anything new. The only deviation they do make from the standard COD formula is added blood and gore, which is a nice touch.

COD: WaW uses the COD4 engine and technology, and it shows. The framerate, visuals, controls and mechanics are the same and much better than Treyarch's previous attempt known as COD3. Although it's good to see this technology in use, it does make the game feel more like a WWII themed, total conversion of COD4: MW than a new game. And unfortunately somewhere along the line some things got broken.

The AI in COD:WaW is terrible! Enemies and allies alike will shoot at their opponent hundreds of meters away, even though another one is standing right next to them getting rid of some excess lead. Your fellow soldiers are incapable of assisting you when ambushed and enemy soldiers seem to have no trouble throwing a grenade from miles away that land right at your feet while you are behind cover trying to heal up a bit. The character development is poor and you hardly feel anything for your AI comrades.

This is also the only COD game that features co-op play. The single player campaign doesn’t match the co-op exactly and this is a bit of a problem. Since most people would probably prefer to finish the campaign solo at first to get all of the story and most of the achievements, co-op doesn’t really offer anything new. You can play competitive co-op where players battle for points but it kinda defeats the purpose of co-operative play. Point is, there is no real reason or attraction to replay campaign on co-op.

There is a nice little bonus for finishing the single player campaign though. Doing this will unlock Nazi Zombie mode. It is a mini-game similar to Gears of War 2's Horde mode, where you attempt to survive increasingly difficult waves of enemies (in this case, Nazi zombies). You can play this solo or with up to three friends in co-op mode. This is a lot of fun! Pity there is only one map to play on and you don't rank up your multiplayer stats either.

The visuals are good but the character animations are awkward, landscapes bland and generic. Special effects like fire, rain and foliage are also not quite up to today's standards. You've pretty much seen it all before and nothing stands out.

On the versus multiplayer side of things, not much has changed from the beta we looked at previously. Sure there are more maps, playlists and weapons, but all the problems remain. All except the lag. This has thankfully been improved and playing against internationals is bearable. Hosting does seem to be quite a problem for us locals though, which means online games filled with local players are not as plentiful as hoped. For the first couple of hours the multiplayer seems fresh, different and exciting. But being a long time player of COD4 I soon became bored and frustrated. The whole setup, rankings, perks and gameplay is way too similar to COD4, and the changes/additions Treyarch made only made it worse. Things like drivable tanks and a horrible respawn system disrupts the balance of the game. It's also difficult to see and hear players due to the brown and dreary look of the WWII maps, along with terrible spatial sound effects. This only helps to increase the phenomenon known as "camping".

This really is a difficult game for me to review. In its own way it is a good game, enjoyable, decent length, good multiplayer and enough polish. But I think Infinity Ward has raised the bar for COD games and this one doesn't cut it for me. I am a big fan of COD4 and unfortunately I cannot help but compare COD:WaW to it. It uses the same technology, has the same gameplay and multiplayer. Even the game's cover picture and menu looks incredibly similar to that of COD4. If you are looking for a successor to COD4, then this definitely is not it. However, if you still like simplistic WWII games or you have never played COD2 or COD4, then I can recommend this to you. You will enjoy it.

Rating: