 |
|
||||
|
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
How Metascores Are Calculated
75
Age of Booty
Stars indicate the most critically-acclaimed games. |
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]
All critic scores are converted to a 100-point scale. If a critic does not indicate a score, we assign a score based on the general impression given by the text of the review. Learn more... 100
Yahoo! Games
Call of Duty: World at War is clearly one of the top games of this year, and a must have for any action gamer.
 100
AceGamez
Its fairly brief but dramatic and adrenaline-fuelled campaign has been greatly enhanced by the excellent co-op mode and XP incentives, while its multiplayer is every bit as good as CoD 4, making this arguably the definitive Call of Duty experience thus far.
99
Game Chronicles
Treyarch has taken all their expertise with the COD engine and borrowed all of the fantastic multiplayer tech from Modern Warfare to create the ultimate military shooter, a shooter so satisfying and complete you won't care what war it is you're fighting.
97
PGNx Media
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.
92
GamingTrend
Call of Duty: World at War is a fantastic title.
92
IGN
This is a solid, confident shooter with plenty to offer the casual and hardcore alike.
92
Team Xbox
Call of Duty: World at War was a surprisingly satisfying experience all around. Developer Treyarch really showed that they could be trusted with the keys to Dad’s car, and made a game that could be compared favorably to anything Infinity Ward has done.
92
Cheat Code Central
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.
90
GameSpy
Although the campaign storyline isn't nearly as engaging as the one seen in "CoD4," there should be enough memorable set pieces and intense sequences to keep you riveted throughout. The addition of a co-op mode brings a great deal of replay value to the proceedings, especially once you start throwing the death cards into the mix. Ultimately, it's the multiplayer and co-op action that will keep us coming back for more.
90
Gameplayer
Call of Duty: World at War has had a lot of time spent on it, it takes full advantage of (and in some places improves upon) one of the best FPS engines there is, and its unflinching approach to the mature subject matter gives the immersion-factor a kick up the guts. Does all of this make Codwaw worthy of a purchase? Hell yes.
90
GamePro
Developer Treyarch did a fantastic job of not reinventing the wheel with World at War. Rather, they took the best elements of Modern Warfare and expanded upon them. The end product is a thrilling experience that injects some of the visceral punch back into World War II.
90
GameZone
There is a nice mix of action and intense moments that will leave you grabbing the controller so hard you will think it will break. Even using the various vehicles in multiplayer is a breeze.
90
Official Xbox Magazine UK
Those worried that World War II has been done to death, fear not. Treyarch's willingness to push the boundaries has uncovered a side to the war few developers even knew existed, and we'll be damned if it doesn't make for one hell of a game to boot.
90
VideoGamer
A stunning game that doesn't miss a beat from start to finish and includes one of the most feature packed multiplayer components of any game released this year.
90
Kikizo
It's nothing revolutionary, but you can't fail to enjoy World at War and it ticks every box rather convincingly.
90
Gameplanet
The single-player campaign involves a riveting and emotional story, and the inclusion of co-op is fantastic. The game itself however is heavily weighted towards multiplayer, as was its predecessor.
90
AtomicGamer
But this one is a blast to play, and so I give it a hearty recommendation despite having been skeptical all along about the quality of another Treyarch WW2 game.
90
Kombo
Call of Duty: World at War is an excellent shooter.
90
MS Xbox World
Any fan of Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, is probably going to want to add Call of Duty: World at War to their collection.
90
Total Video Games
World at War also sees the implementation of four-player co-operative gameplay online, and two-player split-screen, with options for a meta-game or just regular co-op. Despite its smooth running, the co-op isn't the most effective we've seen - getting further in the game on co-op won't unlock those missions on Solo - which seems a bit backward compared to other titles.
90
Level7.nu
Sticking with the premise of previous titles, the meat of this title is in the online mode. If this isn't your cup of tea the longevity of this title is limited to say the least. Treyarch were handed the best console fps-controls and online mode and all they've really done with it is to set it in a new era. If you're up for a great fps experience set in the WWII-era, this is a great title to buy.
89
Jolt Online Gaming UK
Even though Call of Duty 4 took the series out of World War II, developer Infinity Ward raised the bar significantly, and that has left stand-in Treyarch with a lot of work to do. In the end World at War hasn’t topped that effort, but it has at least benefited from the attempt, with the result being another really good, very comprehensive WW2 shooter.
88
Game Informer
World at War finally gives us a reason to visit the Pacific Theater with its fun cooperative and multiplayer modes. But the “been there, done that” single-player missions and overall derivative tone keep this very good game from achieving the greatness of its predecessor.
88
3DJuegos
World at War is a great new entry in the epic saga. The new Call of Duty just misses the inspiration that Infinity Ward brings to every project, and which Treyarch still aspires to. This new game offers everything we were waiting for, and has better value in its co-op campaign.
88
IGN AU
Its repetitive and lazy single player sins vanish beneath the screams of your mates’ laughter across your Xbox Live headset. The multiplayer might be a totally unoriginal rip-off of everything that CoD 4’s online game did so well, but why wouldn’t it when the original is so brilliant?
87
GameTrailers
Call of Duty: World at War is a great game that feels all too familiar, yet it's undoubtedly the best shooter based on the conflict. Comparisons between it and Call of Duty 4 are inevitable, but even on its own merits, it's a paint-by-numbers affair. The single-player campaign is intense and the cooperative play is engaging, but the competitive multiplayer, despite some added perks and tweaks, is subdued by the era it so accurately replicates.
87
Ferrago
CoD 5 is a very solid FPS that can sit proudly enough on the shelf next to it's predecessors. If you are not turned off by the idea of returning to WWII, you'll have five or six hours of enjoyable shooting in solo mode, and probably many more in the team deathmatch and war modes online.
87
IGN UK
The WWII setting compounds the wearying feeling of over-familiarity, but the solid engine that powers the game ensures that it’s often the most spectacular take on the conflict yet, and one that’s certainly the most exhilarating.
86
Game Over Online
While not on par with Infinity Ward’s Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, World at War is better than Treyarch’s last entry, Call of Duty 3.
85
NZGamer
Call of Duty: World at War feels at times like a little brother holding the hand of the more confident Modern Warfare, but keep in mind that it definitely shares the same genes.
85
Computer and Video Games
The short-lived campaign doesn't quite reach the highs of Modern Warfare, but the ever-solid shooting and multiplayer mechanics make this a great shooter.
85
GameSpot
World at War brings proven Call of Duty mechanics back to WWII with great success.
84
Gamer 2.0
Treyarch has made vast improvements from their COD 3 work and delivered a solid product.
80
Thunderbolt
It’s too much like its predecessor. For a lot of people this will be a great thing, whilst others may find the formula wearing a bit thin. It’s an enjoyable experience but may leave you wanting something more.
80
X360 Magazine UK
COD: World At War is a battered warrior that more than earns its stripes. Leading the charge with a meatier and lengthier single-player campaign, Treyarch has won the battle in producing a true standout in the series.
80
Gamer.nl
Call of Duty: World at War has a good, but not so memorable single player experience and a fantastic multiplayer. The cooperative mode is the best thing about the game, so people without Xbox LIVE Gold should wait for the game to appear with a budget price.
80
Gamervision
an ordinary game on an extraordinary engine. The faults are mostly swept aside by the gameplay, which is taken straight from Call of Duty 4, and the multiplayer should be different enough to pull those stuck on its prequel away in favor of a change of location and weapons.
80
EuroGamer
The addition of a robust and varied co-op option helps to mitigate the disappointment of the by-the-numbers traditional multiplayer modes. However, looking back to Kristan's review review of Call of Duty 3 you'll find the exact same complaints being raised two years ago. Corridor gameplay. Outdated features. Flaky AI. They're all still here, albeit masked by even more whiz-bang effects than ever before.
80
G4 TV
World at War can't fill Modern Warfare's combat boots despite an earnest attempt by the developers to replicate the experience in a World War II setting. At the same time, the game still offers some genuine fun with an impressive amount of bang for your hard-earned buck.
80
GameDaily
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.
80
Giant Bomb
Call of Duty: World at War is a perfectly competent game with exciting multiplayer options and a campaign that's worth playing. But in most of the ways that actually count, last year's game was better.
80
Meristation
Following the work of Infinity Ward with "Modern Warfare", Treyarch has made a good work following those steps as close as possible, while adding elements of their own. The grim scenario of the Russian campaign is a clear highlight and a triumph for the studio, and the same could be said of the four player cooperative mode. However, we miss more evolution on the graphics engine, and some elements added to the multiplayer experience don't convince us.
80
360 Gamer Magazine UK
You know what to expect, so just take that expectation and make it a little prettier, a little glitchier and quite a bit shorter. And add more burning Japanese men. It’s Modern Warfare in period costume with the crusts cut off, which will probably work more in its favour online but results in a slight single-player downgrade from last year. World at War is a nearly-there title with some surprising gameplay niggles. But it’s still a step up from "Call of Duty 3."
75
Official Xbox Magazine
World at War is like watching a fireworks show that you’ve seen a few times before. You’re simply not wowed by the buildup, the grand finale, or any of it anymore. When - not if - the next sequel arrives, it’s going to have an upstream swim against an apathetic tide of familiarity.
75
1UP
The single-player's a solid step forward from "Call of Duty 3," and the cooperative multiplayer should give the game some legs...but I just wish competitive multiplayer had grabbed me the way Modern Warfare's did.
75
GameShark
The multiplayer is as solid the series has seen yet and is capable of carrying the game, but it is disappointing to see the single player campaign waste so much potential.
75
Game Revolution
Even though Treyarch took Dad’s precious wheels out for a less reckless spin this time around, World at War is still senselessly eating away at Call of Duty’s mileage.
70
DarkZero
In contrast to last year’s effort, none of the game’s high points are as memorable, and in addition, quite few gunfights start to border on routine as you get further into the game. For that reason, combined with the selection of other erratic blemishes named above, World at War is a notably less appealing game.
70
WonderwallWeb
If you loved the last game then you will like this one and it is also a good starting point for newcomers, but series veterans might want something more.
70
Boomtown
World At War puts on a great show, but it's the last time I'm going to be able to watch this same show without getting bored. Activision will most likely continue to make a lot of money selling us the same magic tricks even though we've been able to see the wires for some time. Where's the ambition in that though? Don't excellent games sell more than okay games?
60
Destructoid
Ultimately, the single player campaign is atrocious and I had a rotten time playing it. It seems to take everything that was frustrating about Modern Warfare, magnify those elements, and then leave out the interesting objectives, characters that matter, and anything that leaves a lasting impression beyond anger and disappointment.
60
Edge Magazine
Treyarch has taken just enough from COD4 to make World At War a broad success, but it remains firmly in its shadow. [Christmas 2008, p.90]
60
Variety
The impressive graphics, compelling mutiplayer and even the basic gunplay in World at War are all iterations of "CoD 4," minus that game's character, urgency and relevance. The result is a forgettable, mostly middling shooter that will sell decently, but fall far short of "Modern Warfare's" boffo 10 million-plus units.
Christian G. gave it a1: Matt M gave it a3: JD L. gave it a7: Brennan C. gave it a10: Manny D. gave it a10: Dan B. gave it a10: Spencer H. gave it a9: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
