The maps are generally well constructed, however some are just too big. The matches are a lot of fun and contain a good mixture of close quarters combat and long distance shooting. Franky it is excellent, the problem is if you are not a newcomer to the series: it is no Modern Warfare. Overall, the campaign mode is incredibly enjoyable to play through but the main criticism is, its even shorter than the campaign mode in Call of Duty 4. It doesn't hit you with the same 'wow' factor as the levels in the predecessor but its still a great level. One level replicates the fantastic Chernoybal snipers levels from number 4 but moves the action to Stalingrad. It lacks the intensity and brutality of Modern Warfare's campaign mode but makes up for this with its interesting set pieces on the Eastern Front and in the Pacific. Now the most important factor whats the game-play like? For those who delve into the campaign, its almost on a par with Modern Warfare. The sound quality in the game is as impressive as its predecessor as well. They take some getting used to if you've played Modern Warfare meticulously but the details on everything are very realistic and its refreshing to see a game set in different locations such as Russia and Japan. World at War has a different feel to those of Modern Warfare as its set in World War II but the graphics are still impressive. As happens on all games the first impression you have is of its graphical capabilities. Anyway, what is done is done and Treyarch tried to make the best game they could. However, it followed in the footsteps of the fantastically addictive Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. If released two years earlier this title would be a game that everyone would be waxing lyrical about. When creating Call of Duty: World at War, Treyarch didn't stand a chance. One can only hope many more World War Two games will be produced of such excellence so that we may continue to grow in our understanding of that time and our respect for what the heroes endured eternally. Beautifully produced and superbly scripted and scored, this will remain a classic for those of us who salute the brave combat veterans of the bloodiest conflicts in history. There are few too many such fantastically exciting moments to mention but time after time you will find yourself pushed to the limits of your endurance and suffering the fatigue of intense combat in unendurable environments. The war with Japan is especially stupendous with maniacal banzai charges that will have you running for your life and an astonishing attack accomplished as you ride on a machine gun mounted elephant. I am perplexed by the response of some reviewers to the fact that this is Second World War game and another stirring tribute to the soldiers who made such horrendous sacrifices to defeat the Axis and save freedom for all. While I admit I am a bit behind the curve on video games and play on a Play Station 2, this is still a stunning experience of war and an incredibly exhausting, frightening, and challenging World War II game. To sum up, if you want to play a really involved FPS any call of duty will do ya, however world at war is special and will keep thrilled for much longer than other games. Zombie mode offers a great break while offering merit. The improvements from its predecessors are many although some of the maps don't seem to have been thought through. The multiplayer offers players a long term service and the map packs are a welcome enhancement. The content is much more mature than seen before and this adds to the other-all experience. The graphics are stunning and the gameplay is challenging yet rewarding. As for the single player campaign its 10/10, its lenghty and diverse, it captures you in a atmosphere never seen before in a ww2 shooter. If you stuck in having never played cod4 you would be amazed, having played cod4 it isn't so stunning. If your looking for an opinion on which game is better I honestly couldn't say. I played the game and tried not to compare it to cod4 but as it is so simular it's hard not to. It seems a lot of people are just unhappy that they've gone back to ww2 and that initial annoyance has tarred their judgement. I've read so many articles rubbishing and treyarch and I can't help but wonder if they've even given this game a chance.
0 kommentar(er)
