Call of Duty: World at War Wii

Call of Duty: World at War Image
Metascore
83

Generally favorable reviews - based on 19 Critics What's this?

User Score
7.6

Generally favorable reviews- based on 78 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Summary: Utilizing the Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare engine, Call of Duty: World at War throws out the rulebook of war to transform WWII combat through a new enemy, new tactics and an uncensored experience of the climatic battles that gripped a generation. As U.S. Marines and Russian soldiers,Utilizing the Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare engine, Call of Duty: World at War throws out the rulebook of war to transform WWII combat through a new enemy, new tactics and an uncensored experience of the climatic battles that gripped a generation. As U.S. Marines and Russian soldiers, players employ new features like cooperative gameplay, and weapons such as the flamethrower in the most chaotic and cinematically intense experience to date. Call of Duty: World at War introduces co-operative play, bringing fresh meaning to the "No One Fights Alone" mantra with up to four-players online for Xbox 360, PS3 and PC, or two-player local split-screen on consoles. Nintendo Wii will also support a unique co-op mode for two players. For the first time ever players can experience harrowing single-player missions together for greater camaraderie and tactical execution. The co-op campaign allows players to rank up and unlock perks in competitive multiplayer by completing challenges and earning experience points, adding continuous re-playability and team-based gameplay. Whether playing competitively or cooperatively – if players are online with Call of Duty: World at War – they always gain experience points. Based on a player’s experience rank and rank of the player's friends, Call of Duty: World at War scales dynamically to provide a deeper level of challenge. [Activision] Expand
Buy On

Trailer

Please enter your birth date to continue:
You are not allowed to view this material at this time.
Autoplay: On | Off
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 17 out of 19
  2. Negative: 0 out of 19
  1. Arguably the best WWII game ever. Simply put, if you like first-person shooters this is absolutely essential.
  2. Overall, with Call of Duty: World at War, Treyarch successfully did two things: they made World War II shooters relevant again and brilliantly followed up one of the best games of this generation. On the Wii, they also successfully modified a very technically demanding engine to less powerful hardware.
  3. ong after players have finished the solo mode, they’ll still be enjoying the best online multiplayer game for the Wii.
  4. If you're looking for a great FPS on the Wii, Call of Duty: World at War definitely fits the bill. With its impressive graphics, cinematic and brutal storytelling, varied missions, and excellent multiplayer offerings, this is a must play title for mature Wii gamers.
  5. Call of Duty: World At War for Wii has been developed thinking of the potential of the Nintendo console, being better than the thrid installment of the franchise. The atmosphere is amazing with brilliant audiovisual components. It's a great experience in the campaign mode but the multiplayer is limited. The best World War II shooter for Wii.
  6. Nintendo Power
    80
    Call of Duty will always sell big based on its name alone, so kudos to Activision and Treyarch for not phoning this one in. [Jan 2009, p.91]
  7. If you’re a Wii fan of first person shooters, Call of Duty: World at War is a great game and one very worthy of owning with its great story and very well done online multiplayer gaming.

See all 19 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 17 out of 29
  2. Negative: 4 out of 29
  1. Dec 21, 2011
    10
    this is one great game that shows the wii is able to host cod title the controlls are good the online is good and the campaign is simplythis is one great game that shows the wii is able to host cod title the controlls are good the online is good and the campaign is simply amazing it is a must have title on the wii Expand
  2. YosoufM.
    Nov 18, 2008
    9
    An absolutely fantastic FPS game for the Wii. While it doesn't have everything the 360/PS3/PC versions have (limited co-op mode, no An absolutely fantastic FPS game for the Wii. While it doesn't have everything the 360/PS3/PC versions have (limited co-op mode, no split screen multiplayer, no zombie mode, etc )due strictly to hardware limitations, it still has great controls, a memorable story mode, and by far IMO the best online multiplayer FPS experience so far for the Wii! Expand
  3. Nov 4, 2013
    9
    Another fantastic CoD game for the Wii. Would be 10/10, but it did have a few very annoying "sticking points" (i.e. parts that were for meAnother fantastic CoD game for the Wii. Would be 10/10, but it did have a few very annoying "sticking points" (i.e. parts that were for me almost impossible to beat, and all of them pretty early on in the game) and I liked the control setup for CoD 3 better. Great campaign storyline, and even has an online mode for players who are into multiplayer. Expand
  4. ChaseI
    Jun 27, 2009
    8
    This game is really fun no doubt. It has good controls and a alright multiplayer. If you are looking for a really good fps on wii get The This game is really fun no doubt. It has good controls and a alright multiplayer. If you are looking for a really good fps on wii get The Conduit. It has a much better online multiplayer component and better controls. But Call of Duty World at War is still an alright game Expand
  5. Jul 30, 2016
    7
    As of right now, it's harder to recommend considering the multiplayer is permanently down. Even without the multiplayer mode, World at War hasAs of right now, it's harder to recommend considering the multiplayer is permanently down. Even without the multiplayer mode, World at War has the best WWII single player campaign on the Wii. It has two stories in one package, one revolving around American troops in the pacific and another of the Russians pushing their way into Germany. This allows for varied environments, weapon types, and gameplay mechanics. It is one of the darkest and cinematic Call of Duty games; it really does feel like Saving Private Ryan as a video game.

    Playing it on the Wii is kind of a mixed bag though. While it's graphics are impressive for a Wii game, it's nowhere near the same as playing it on other systems. The frame rate is pretty low too, usually around 25-30 fps many times dipping into the 10 - 20 range. The controls are also mixed. I'm a fan of using the Wii remote as a gun, though it didn't have as many interactive movements that made other shooters on the Wii unique. And of course, there is no zombies mode or multiplayer for replay value. Still, you can get this dirt cheap used, and it's totally worth it for the campaign.
    Expand
  6. Feb 26, 2016
    6
    I FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE FACT THAT THE SOVIETS ARE GLORIFIED IN VIDEO GAMES AS LIBERATORS. THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS THEY ENSLAVED, NOTI FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE WITH THE FACT THAT THE SOVIETS ARE GLORIFIED IN VIDEO GAMES AS LIBERATORS. THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER IS THEY ENSLAVED, NOT LIBERATED, CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE. THERE IS NO DENYING THAT THE AUTHORITIES OF THE SOVIET UNION, AT LEAST DURING THE STALINIST ERA, WERE AS TYRANNICAL AS THE AUTHORITIES OF NAZI GERMANY, IF NOT MORE. AND YET THE WESTERN GAME DEVELOPERS, WHO DON'T KNOW JACK ABOUT HISTORY, PAY HOMAGE TO THOSE RED FASCISTS.

    World at War comes as a… bag mixed of single- and multi-player campaigns. As of the day I'm writing this review, Nintendo is about to shut down their wi-fi connectivity. Due to obvious reasons, I don't wanna tease myself with something that'll be taken away from me for keeps, so I skip the multiplayer mode. Anyhow, the Wii has never been known to have a top-notch online play, so why bother with it, right? Let's erase what is left to the displeasure of its fans. Although multiplayer, easily, constitutes like a good half of this product, and "Wi-fi connectivity" proudly announces the cover, never more will you be able to enjoy it. Poof, vanished into thin air.

    So, what is the single-player campaign like? Right off the bat, if this is the future, or rather the present, of first person shooters, then do count me out. Granted, old school shooters couldn't boast of epic storylines but they, at least, would give you some freedom. Maps were yours to explore, or so I remember. In WaW, you have none of this freedom. The game is scripted and fixed beyond belief. Devs err on the side of caution not to let you roam free. You're being led by the hand at all times. Oh, you wanna take a stroll to the left. Not a bright idea - a felled tree blocks your path. To the right you can't go either, a boulder won't let you pass this time around. Mind you, there's a background for you to admire,. This forest, with all certainty, goes somewhere; only, where remains shrouded in mystery.

    Cause them devs know good that all you wanna do in a game like this is jog straight ahead. And all the potential of the FPS genre is tapped when you hide away behind some cover, lying in wait for the enemy to reload. Then charge and hope you'll be a quick enough runner and gunner to make a pitiful attempt at shooting your enemy. Or, alternatively, wait and have your squad mates, actually, complete the whole game on your behalf. Then… it goes full circle, until the very end, with so little variation that the tank level strikes you as being from a different game. The outcome is that, thanks to some control freaks who made this game, you get an experience even more linear than the original Red Steel. I'll say it like I mean it, it is a simplified, if not simplistic, fps game. I recall playing the first installment to the Call of Duty franchise, and compared with it, World at War feels tenfold as linear.

    So I heard someone in the audience say that the original Medal of Honor games were predictable as well, if not more, and generic, for that matter. Rationalize all you want, there was something to the first two MoHs that in WaW is gone missing. If only its programmers had the guts to let some fresh air in, the game could benefit from it, cause by the looks of it, they can't seem to take it in stride. The storyline gotta be so down to earth from beginning to end. MoH, in contrast to WaW, was tongue-in-cheek, almost like cabaret, which doesn't exactly mean that it could not take itself seriously.

    It has become a stock phrase as far as this console is concerned - WaW is "graphically appealing for a Wii game." That said, on a bigger flat screen TV, textures are as blurred and muddy and bland… and what not that it gets you thinking. I myself have been thinking, which isn't every day, and what I came up with is that the Wii limitations as a piece of sh… hardware are no excuse for this game's looking far worse than the Call of Duty classic, still less of an eyesore that WaW, which came out five years later.

    The AI deserves an honorable mention. To say it leaves much to be desired won't do it justice. Enemy soldiers have a strong inclination to get stuck in a rut every so often and squat as if it were a PE class, as if they believed would overcome an obstacle in front of themselves by performing an infinite number of squats. Sometimes, they stand motionless, without any intent to attack you. It's a sad view to look at. But what can you do? You saw it, you would agree. A wise thing to do under such circumstances is reset the level, start over and take it like a man.

    Is it worth playing? Yes, as a curiosity, as a herald of the advent of more linear, repetitive and frustrating gameplay. I can only recommend this game, if you find it at a reasonable price.
    Expand
  7. Nov 4, 2010
    1
    I liked the story but I couldn't get over how bad the graphics were. It looked like they took the Xbox360 game and dropped the graphics toI liked the story but I couldn't get over how bad the graphics were. It looked like they took the Xbox360 game and dropped the graphics to where it's barely playable but able to work on the Wii. I'm sorry Wii-mote lovers but I feel like I have more control with a mouse or two analog sticks. If you like FPS's then do yourself a favor and get Goldeneye because it's a billion times better. Collapse

See all 29 User Reviews

Awards & Rankings

#11 Most Discussed Wii Game of 2008
#30 Most Shared Wii Game of 2008