User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 300 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Negative: 44 out of 300

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Mar 15, 2014
    For those wondering why CoD should return to WWII, play this game. Right now, it's dirt cheap. The campaign has a good story, and it's shows the grittiness of war. If we should return to WWII, I want to see what the North African campaign and the Italian campaign would look like with the engine we used since MW1 (no better yet, make an entirely new one). Online still exists, but it's littered with hackers. Wish Treyarch would still patch this game, even though it's 6 years old. Many companies still support their games, even if they're 10 years old! So buy this game if you don't have it; it's one of the last good CoD games (Oh, and here is where the Zombies mode started so try that out too). Expand
  2. Mar 8, 2014
    In my opinion, this is definitely the best looking Call of Duty game I have ever seen, the game was fun, gritty and perfectly represented the anarchy of war, particularly on veteran difficulty which made me feel like I was actually there.
  3. Jan 3, 2014
    Treyarch did a job well done here. While some might not like how WaW took the engine from MW1, I personally think it is acceptable and make the game better. The campaign is set in World war 2 and is boring at some points. WaW carried over MW1's multiplayer basically copying but adding tweaks and making changes but is still the fine Call of Duty experience. The true pride of the game is the Co-op mode. This is the best Co-op to ever be released within a COD game. The package came a total of 3 Co-op set modes. (1) You could do a Co-op campaign mode to play together with. (2) You could have a competitive Co-op mode to rack up points against others. (3) The legendary Nazi Zombies mode and one of the best Co-op experiences this generation. Nazi Zombies packs you in a map with up to four players, and you survive an unlimited number of rounds. You may think it's just another dumb survival Co-op experience, but it really stands out from the unity required from each player. You can ditch the group and try to survive on your own, or you can keep with them and try to survive as a pack. New Treyarch COD games just don't have that original zombie survival feel also compared to this game. In reality, from its definite Co-op experience, this could be the second best game in the franchise, and is a game that should have deep interest for FPS Co-op fans. Expand
  4. Oct 29, 2013
    Not too epic but really awesome, has great missions and has NAZI ZOMBIES mode, but the zombies are creepy, not to epic game, even though, the final mission isn't really cool, just run to the base and put the flag.
  5. Sep 27, 2013
    the gameplay in this game is great, but unfortunitely the story mode is very lacking and boring. The graphics look dated but still good. The Nazi zombies mode is awesome but only one map is free and the rest are $10, multiplayer is fun but i only played it in 2-player split screen. Overall this is a decent game, it can be really fun at times but that dosint make up for the lackluster story mode, only buy it if its $8 or cheaper otherwise youd be wasting your money. Expand
  6. Aug 17, 2013
    8.4 out of 10 (rounded off to 8).

    It is simply the best World War II game to date, but it is a theme that Call of Duty has been doing for at least 5 games now (including "Finest Hour" and "Roads To Victory") and it is a disappointment after the fresh breath of air that was "Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare". Nevertheless, World at War continues carrying the fun multiplayer experience we
    came to know from the previous game, as well as introducing an incredibly addictive "Nazi Zombies" mode.

    If you love games glorifying America's perspective of World War II, then this is the game for you.
  7. Dec 28, 2012
    My favourite Call of Duty game. The simplicity of CoD4 plus the awesome maps and WW2 atmosphere makes for a very, very fun MP game. It may not be addictive as, say, MW2, but the fun factor more than makes up for that.
  8. Dec 18, 2012
    On its own this game is fun and a nice change from all the modern fps. But following cod4 this was one of my biggest disappointments in my gaming history. It didn't innovate at all from its predecessor and is worse in ever regard. However despite being inferior to modern warfare, the winning formula is maintained and you still have a very entertaining game. This also had my favourite Zombie mode. Single player: 7/10
    Zombie Mode: 9/10
    Multiplayer: 8/10
  9. Nov 11, 2012
    This is the best Call of Duty in the series. MW is a crappy lame boring series that put me to sleep..Cannot wait for the true COD made by the better company. BO2 is gonna rock.
  10. Oct 8, 2012
    I reckon this was the last truly great campaign the CoD franchise made. This game draws you into the horrible events that occurred during the Second World War. The way this game makes you feel is that you can die at anytime and you are always expecting to be shot at out of nowhere. What makes this different to all the other CoD's is that you aren't a one man army in this game and you have to hide and take cover if you want to live. If you play like the way you play in Black ops or MW3 you will certainly get your face shot off instantly by the enemy. The online play to was also fun but was improved upon by Black Ops. Expand
  11. Jun 22, 2012
    My favorite CoD by far... I love the campaign, because it shows me how things in WW2 worked. The american campaign is not that exciting, but if you say that the russian campaign sucks, you are retarded. The multiplayer is just like CoD4: Great maps, medium quantity of weapons and it's really balanced. The zombies were the most awesome things, 'cause nobody would ever expect that from a CoD game.
  12. May 27, 2012
    My personal favorite COD that features World War 2.
    The campaign is amazing, co-op zombies is awesome and you get bayonettes with which you can stab people!
    Multiplayer is the reason this game got a 9/10. The maps are great but the weapons are boring.
    In general great game.
  13. Mar 31, 2012
    I really love COD: World at War. I personally find the WWII setting much more interesting than the Modern Warfare equivalent. I prefer the online matches, too. The bare bones nature of it appeals to me. No heartbeat sensors, death streaks or game ending nuclear bombs... Just you, a gun, a few mines and maybe a pack of rabid attack dogs. FPS heaven! The single player campaign is descent, but doesn't hit the same highs as the likes of Modern Warfare 2, BUT... You can play the entire thing in two player co-op which more than makes up for it. Going through the missions with a buddy in tow is hellaciously good fun. Ultimately, this is probably the best multiplayer FPS that I have ever played... Which is high praise indeed! Expand
  14. Mar 17, 2012
    This is the best Call of Duty ever made, better than Modern Warfare 1. And that actually sounds kind of drastic, so let me explain why.

    First off, this game has quite possibly the best Campaign ever. Not only is this game returning to the roots of Call of Duty, which is very nice, but it's actually going out of it's way to feature a different setting for it's Campaign missions! I don't
    remember the Pacific Campaign or the Russian push towards Germany being done in previous CoD games, so that's a big plus. And this Campaign has Reznov, the best character to come out of the franchise. Also, the Co-op was a nice addition to the game, as it lets you run through the Campaign with friends or online strangers, so that was very nice of Treyarch to add in. As for the Zombies... it's Zombies. It's a very fun mode to play, especially with friends. The multiplayer takes what CoD 4 did right and improved it. Not only are the perks done much better (Besides second chance **** that perk)), but the guns and the maps are also improved upon. You will not fight an overpowered or underpowered gun in this game, besides the MP40. The tanks were also a nice addition too.

    But I still haven't explained why I think WaW is better than CoD 4. My reasoning is that while Modern Warfare 1 had a very solid Campaign as well as a very solid Multiplayer... that was it. CoD 4 had two solid modes to play around in, WaW had 4. So there's where I stand. This game is much better due to power in numbers.

    So, all in all, this game gets a 9 for solid gametypes all across the board. The hiccoughs in the multiplayer bump it down a little, but only a little. This is still a wonderful game and my personal favorite in the CoD franchise.
  15. Feb 9, 2012
    Honestly the reason why lots of people put this a low number was because cod 4 was a REALLY good game and this isn't as good as cod 4 BUT its still great. From the great guns in multiplayer to the amazing zombie co-op this game has a great potential . OK the single player is short and a little average with pretty dumb ai (to the point that a Japanese soldier would run past all my teammates and come for me) but the co-op and multiplayer are where this game shines .

    Story: 5 ai:3,5 plot:7,5 notes: ai are dumb but the plot isn't the Normandy beach for the thousandth time!!! it's the fall of Berlin and stuff like that! Overall don't buy this game just for the single player. Co-op: 9 ai: 3,5 plot: 7,5 note: Same as the 1 player just with a friend!The Nazi zombies are the heart of co-op without it it wouldn't be the same!

    multiplayer: 9 if any new patches for the glitches if not 8 replay-ability : 9,5 fun: 7,5 note: this would in my opinion be better than cod 4 multiplayer if treyarch stopped the hackers and glitchers .

    OVERALL: 9 note: this game is really fun a must buy for the ww2 fans and for cod 4 fans really good work treyarch!!!
  16. Feb 7, 2012
    Thought the campaign was good, not great. The graphics were good. Yes it is the same copy and paste game but thats the same with all COD games. My only hate of this game is the multiplayer. The multiplayer was fun until the hackers infested it.
  17. Jan 7, 2012
    I hate this game, it's the worst call of duty of all time the multiplayer sucks and so does the campaign. there are only 2 good things about this game. 1: support. 2: zombies. Just play the other cods and skip this one.
  18. Dec 13, 2011
    Call of Duty: World at War lacks gameplay and graphics comparing to other CoD titles. Yes it has it's own good sides and WW2 theme can appeal some people. After playing Modern Warfare-titles this game feels like playing almost a PS2 title. Not that it's all bad - I like older platforms. The game offers some nice modes (co-op zombies is addictive and fun, you can play campaign also co-op) and online gameplay works good. Singleplayer is just like in almost every shooter game - repeatitive with not really interesting persons - fast-paced action with a few (not interesting) plot twists. So basicly, this title is OK shooter, with a few good sides and lots of things you see in every other shooter. I would recommend this is you really like shooters (or co-op games), but not otherwise. Expand
  19. Nov 9, 2011
    Let me get this out...I...HATE zombies. hate it. so, other than that. Really good game. Best story mode of any cod I think and the multiplayer is pretty good aswell. Just feels good and has good lasting appeal.
  20. Aug 17, 2011
    The single-player is decently long and interesting though it didn't have many OMG moments. I didn't play the multiplayer. "Nazi Zombies" is great fun especially with friends or random people of the internet. The graphics looked a bit grainy but the lighting was good
  21. Jul 16, 2011
    I have played several Call of Duty games and have enjoyed them all with the exception of this entry. My problem with the game isn't that Treyarch developed it, I have no problem with that. My biggest concern in regard to the game is just how much of a bland and boring retread it is of the World War II genre, providing nothing out of the ordinary to keep the player entertained.

    This game
    shines in terms of production value without question, but pretty graphics, great sound and lighting only go so far to mask the average shooter underneath. The game lacks interesting characters or involving story. The campaign is short, well under 10 hours to complete, and the level design is standard for what people have come to expect out of a WWII shooter. My biggest problem with this game is just how safe Treyarch played it when developing the title. The original Modern Warfare had events that were almost larger than life, with your character escaping a capsizing ship, and a nuclear bomb scene that is arguably the most memorable thing to take place in a war themed shooter. This is why it's unfortunate that this game turned out so plain, and is ultimately a hold-over for those waiting for Modern Warfare 2. Expand
  22. Jun 10, 2011
    This game was really not good, the story wasn't good at all, the offline and online multiplayer wasnt that great, Black Ops, Mw2, and Cod4 are all way better, the one good thing about this game is that Zombies was super fun!
  23. Dec 15, 2010
    Unlike Modern Warfare 2, you get World at War for its campaign, which it excelled in. The graphics are something of a Call of Duty selling point, Infinity Ward has been making great looking shooters for years now, and Treyarch hasnt been up to the standards of their older and more experienced brother in the franchise, but this game is still a great looking game.The gameplay is something that everyone knows and loves, and the story is the classic World War 2 story that Call of Duty worked on for years. But beyond all that, this is still a great game, and i never really was able to play all of older ww2 games, so i didnt mind the setting. The campaign is easily that shinny part of this game, but you cant forget what really made this game and Treyarch so famous, Nazi Zombies. This is the first time a COD game went into the undead setting, and it worked really well and made this game a must have back in the day because finding out how far you could get and what strategy to use to stay alive was exciting and adrenaline boosting. Mulitplayer, while nothing to be ashamed about, became outdated quickly after Infinity Ward made it so amazing in both of their Modern Warfare games. Is it bad? No, it is still a great multiplayer and the ideas are refreshing after playing so much MW multiplayer. This game would have become one of the best in the COD series if it wasnt for Modern Warfare, but that dosnt mean that it isnt good. This game is really cheap now at any retailer, so it isnt a waste of ur time or money, pick up a copy on your way to get Black ops, thats wat i did and i dont regret it. Expand
  24. Nov 30, 2010
    This is the greatest Call of Duty to date. I have played Cod 4 and let me tell you compared to this game it is terribly overhyped. World at War is Way better. The guns may not fire as fast but they do way more damage and are longer ranged than most guns in COD 4. Sargent Reznov is a truly remarkable charcter who is not only excellent with a PPSH but is just an epic charcter to begin with. The Flamethrowers are an excellent addition to an already awesome lineup of weapons and the scene where Chernov dies is truly remarkable and sad at the same time. Zombie mode is pretty fun even though I have yet to get to play the games multiplayer.The game has wonderful graphics especially the Stalingrad level, the Berlin levels, and all of the pacific levels. The AI is greatly improved from Treyarchs other titles. Meleeing does not half freeze the game like in the PS3 version of COD 4 which was really annoying. Another amazing thing is the Black Cats level which was one of the first levels I have played in a World War two game or any game for that matter that almost left me in tears of how well made it was. In my opinion this is the greatest WWII shooter ever made and quite possibly the greatest Shooter Ever made. A true Must Buy. Expand
  25. Nov 19, 2010
    In this ordr W@W,MW2, and Black Ops. W@W is great because there isn't as much camping as in MW2 or Black Ops(which is why i quit). Plus I love the World War 2 area guns. Yes grahpics are the greatest. but, I still love it.
  26. Nov 16, 2010
    Probably the best WW2 game out there to date. Excellent game, very authentic, many WW2 guns to choose from. Highly realistic, Believable story, with a very fun online multiplayer. I highly recommend the game to any WW2 fan, you can even drive tanks! Plenty of add on maps, zombie features for extra fun, this is defenitly a collectors item!
  27. Oct 28, 2010
    This game didn't live up to the high expectations of it there was a few flaws. firstly the campaign was mildly enjoyable a bit repetitive but good. probably the best aspect of the game nazi zombies was very enjoyable and a good teamwork builder. The multi player wasn't that good the maps weren't well designed the game play didn't have the high experience modern warfare had.
  28. Oct 19, 2010
    Good game in solo mode. Had a difficult time distinguishing between friend and foe. Grenades pissed me off from start to finish. On-line Nazi Zombie play is great. Graphics - 9 : Story - 4 : Controls - 8 : Gameplay - 6
  29. Sep 27, 2010
    Even though there are countless WWII games out there, this one seems to still be interesting. Other games taking place during that era are generally monotonous, but this has some life to it. And to add some more differences to the game, the Nazi Zombies campaign surprisingly gets pretty playable.
  30. Sep 20, 2010
    The campaign is trash, they did a terrible job with the plot line and character development. The mulitplayer and been eternally ruined with the MP40, the only reason this game is not a 4 is because Nazi Zombies are alone worth 60 dollars.
  31. Aug 22, 2010
    World at war is a very underrated game, simply because of its predessor, cod 4
    I found while cod 4 was a great game, it was too over powered
    World at war's campaign is intense and has loads of things to do in it
    Coop, suped up multiplayer, and NAZI ZOMBIES, which is exelent along with some friends
    The multiplayer itself seems alot more fun rather than addictive like cod 4, which I prefur

    Overall, dont listen to people that say that cod 4 is the better one, because this game is better in its own little ways
  32. Feb 7, 2012
    Thought the campaign was good, not great. The graphics were good. Yes it is the same copy and paste game but thats the same with all COD games. My only hate of this game is the multiplayer. The multiplayer was fun until the hackers infested it.

Generally favorable reviews - based on 45 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 41 out of 45
  2. Negative: 0 out of 45
  1. Call of Duty: World At War needs better character development and more "oh my God" moments. However, it's still a terrific first-person shooter. The combat is tight, the presentation shines and the multiplayer, particularly Nazi Zombie mode and co-op campaign, will keep you blasting enemy soldiers for weeks.
  2. Treyarch did a remarkable job of breathing new life into the WWII shooter. They followed the conventions outlined by Infinity Ward to a tee and, as a result, created a shooter that is every bit as good as last year's entry. Of course, there isn't a whole lot of innovation this time around, but the increased Multiplayer options, new settings, and great enemy A.I. should more than satisfy all but the most jaded Infinity Ward fanboys.
  3. Call of Duty: World at War is a solid entry to the franchise, offering some pretty intense gameplay and nice new online features. However, the return to WWII means that it feels like a game you’ve played before.