Call of Duty: Vanguard

Call of Duty: Vanguard is a great Call of Duty entry with absolutely stellar ser pieces, fantastic visuals, and plenty of modes surrounding an excellently fun campaign. The only downsides are the muddied stories… not to mention what is happening in the company that published it. Highly recommended for CoD fans and people looking for a bit of mindless fun set in WW2.

Call of Duty: Vanguard is As Expected: The Video Game. You get the polish, the excitement, the rush the series always delivers within the stylised World War 2 setting. This year, the single-player campaign is undoubtedly the standout action blockbuster, with the Multiplayer serving chaotic fun and Zombies mode failing to try something different. Pick it up if you’re already a fan.

Call of Duty: Vanguard brings some interesting improvements to the multiplayer mode and the gameplay is quick and deadly -a departure from last year’s Black Ops: Cold War. On the downside it makes you feel that you are playing a modern shooter and not a WWII one. The campaign looks great, although it doesn’t contain any memorable moments. Zombies mode is even more accessible to new players, but is in dire need of content.

Call of Duty: Vanguard has a solid and fun multiplayer mode as well as a jaw-dropping technical outfit. Too bad that the single player has not enjoyed the same care and presents itself as one of the least convincing experiences in the history of the brand.

Despite recurring flaws, Call of Duty Vanguard manages to be convincing with its interesting campaign and its rich multiplayer. The zombie mode should have been fully stuffed at launch though. Once more, perfection is not for this year, but the new Call of is still OK.

For those looking for more of the same, Call of Duty: Vanguard does exactly that. It’s the same, great-feeling FPS with a fresh lick of WWII paint complete with all of the weapons, locales and caveats that come with it. It’s not a revolutionary entry for the series, but it’s not a particularly poor one, either.

Its narrative is fractious and slight, compared to Sledgehammer’s previous work, but the chance for a chaotic, target-rich experience with friends exerts a stronger pull than usual.

Call of Duty: Vanguard is built like a rollercoaster so you have your highs, your lows, and moments that flatline. There’s no question its three modes are fun to play and offer fans enough content to keep them busy for some time, but this is Call of Duty, after all. Until Activision does something completely different with the series, don’t expect it to feel too different each year.

With a reasonable campaign, a great multiplayer mode and a good but scanty Zombies mode, Call of Duty: Vanguard is a nice new part. Whether that is enough is something you know best.

Call of Duty: Vanguard is a brave and accomplished charge from Activision into World War II. The intelligent way the campaign was assembled escaping from documented events but honoring the different archetypes of the piece combatants, made us sorry that we are not standing in front of a game with a heavier single player component. The core of CoD really is the multiplayer experience which seems faster and with various experiences but with the same good old feel, albeit with an MP40 in hand.

If you enjoy WWII shooters, you’ll still have a good time with Call of Duty: Vanguard. Sledgehammer Games have graced the WWII era once again with their innovative approach to multiplayer and packed it full of maps. The campaign, albeit short, gives you a unique view of WWII at the heart of one of the deadliest squads. And the Zombies mode? It exists, but the less said about it, the better.

A reliable entry full of variety and worthwhile content, that simultaneously leaves an aroma of staleness that is beginning to taint the whole Call Of Duty franchise.

It’s a great shooter game, CoD always is, but it's not the best in the series and the overly used WW2 backdrop is wearing thin. The pandemic would have played a part in this and kudos to the developers for still delivering a big game despite the lockdowns.

Call of Duty: Vanguard is another incredibly solid but also super safe instalment in the series. Its campaign may be over in a hurry but it's still a fairly memorable one, featuring good characters and outstanding visuals. Multiplayer is another robust package, hosting a ton of content and the promise of more to come. The less said about Zombies the better, but this is a Call of Duty game doing Call of Duty things. Whether that's of any interest or not, you likely already know.

Compared to Black Ops Cold War, Vanguard has a vastly improved multiplayer that feels like a solid foundation for Sledgehammer Games to build on throughout the seasons of post-launch content but with an underwhelming campaign and Zombies mode that seemingly needs a lot of work to win back the hardcore fans, it's not a bad Call of Duty title but it's certainly not one of the very best...Having spent several hours playing all three modes, I can safely say that it's definitely worth buying, specifically for the multiplayer which is surprisingly good for a change.

Like every year, Call of Duty tries to satisfy all gamers, no matter what they are looking for. Solo adventure, multi-competitive, collaborative zombie, free-to-play battle royale. A turnkey offer, XXL menu style, which this year lacks care at launch. We see it through the countryside which despite its exoticism offers nothing exceptional or memorable to experience. This is also seen in Zombie Mode, which at launch is only a rough sketch of what it should be and unfortunately lacks content. In the equation, the multi comes out with its head held high, offering several well-felt new features and still lively gameplay. More and more turned towards the “live service” and the updates of season, Call of Duty signs, with Vanguard, an episode of end of cycle, which asks only to evolve to improve and which turns out to be more enjoyable overall than the overall experience of Black Ops Cold War.

Call of Duty Vanguard is a good vintage. Far from being revolutionary, he at least has the will to offer a new perspective on World War II. We quickly become attached to this motley group. It is especially on the multiplayer side that there is much to say. The good idea is to take the gameplay of Modern Warfare to the letter, or even too literally, because this brings the flaws of the title of Infinity Ward. Activision doesn't want to jostle gamers, offering content that has been seen and reviewed for years while adding a few well-felt niceties like Champion of the Hill mode. Clearly, the multiplayer is a bit above Cold War, would be only in the sensations controller in hand and on the gunplay in a general way. Call of Duty Vanguard is not the opus of the revolution, but clearly does the job, offering agame that will hold up for the year to come.

The thing about Call of Duty games is that, with each yearly iteration, you pretty much know what you're getting--and that's largely the case here. It's both a blessing and a curse for Vanguard, however. Elements of Vanguard feel like good additions to the franchise, but its ideas also don't always mix well with the series' framework. That framework is still strong, and the solid gunplay, exciting multiplayer, and inventive moments of the campaign are worth seeking out. But forcing those two parts together exposes the seams in Call of Duty: Vanguard at times, weakening both parts of the game rather than pushing either one to the forefront.

It follows the formula of a Call of Duty game, but delivers each element just a bit worse than it's predecessors. Call of Duty: Vanguard is a game that will surely grow and improve over time, but what we have at launch is something that at least fails to cater to what I was hoping for in any aspect of the game. The single player campaign is ridiculous even if it does deliver some moments of high action; the multiplayer is a mess, at least for someone with my skillset; and zombies is simply unfinished. It'll get better, but what we've got right now just isn't all that good.

After the disappointing Cold War, Vanguard was the game that many fans have put their faith in. But due to rocky start, the countless bugs the completely unbalanced multiplayer and the incomplete zombies mode, this year’s Call of Duty is just another nail in the coffin of once great franchise. Shaken by various scandals on every front, it is clear that Activision does not care about anything else just cashing in the yearly checks. It is sad that the collaboration between Sledgehammer, Treyarch, Raven Software, Beenox and Highmoon cannot produce something more than Vanguard. The first Warzone season might improve things starting with 2nd of December, but I will not hold my breath.

Even though the campaign is extremely predictable and the multiplayer is plagued with tones of issues, Call Of Duty: Vanguard is, after all, still a Call of Duty title, and will appeal to all hardcore Call of Duty fans.

This is a treacly origin story for a crew we wouldn't be on seeing again. [Issue#366, p.104]

Call of Duty: Vanguard is not the full package fans have and should expect from a franchise that consistently tops the sales charts. There are not enough positives to overcome the fact that the amount and quality of its content is sorely lacking. This is a blast from the past in the worst possible way.

Undead-battling co-op survival mode Zombies – an acquired taste I’ve regrettably never managed to stomach to any degree – rounds out a solid portion of CoD that can’t quite shake the notion it’s merely providing target practice until Vanguard’s Pacific-themed Warzone map enters the fray next month. Then again, perhaps that’s actually the point.

Call of Duty: Vanguard reminds us of the Call of Duty titles from over 15 years ago. And there is nothing wrong with a somewhat stripped-down reboot, but in this case, it feels like a lack of development time is the main reason for the cutbacks. The single player campaign looks terrific and plays great but has very few memorable moments. The zombie mode on the other hand lacks a lot of content at launch. Luckily, the main online mode offers plenty of content and the gameplay is as addicting as ever – even though everything feels very familiar.

Overall, it feels like a game that doesn't want to disturb and has no soul of its own.

Only by leaving WWII in the rear-view mirror does the game live up to the innovation promised by its subtitle.

Call of Duty: Vanguard offers an at times spectacular campaign and a fun multiplayer mode. Yet the authenticity of the Second World War is all but gone, with missing historical maps, teams and uniforms, leaving me wondering why the developers even chose this setting to begin with.

A lackluster campaign, a soulless Zombies mode, and a fun but diminished multiplayer offering round out a rather weak launch for the iconic FPS series.

Call of Duty: Vanguard contains a single-player campaign that is very promising on paper, but lacks the exciting finesse of previous Call of Duty games. On the other side, the multiplayer is fun and has a lot of good designed maps. The Zombies mode misses the mark completely with re-used assets being used from the rest of the game, simple to be filled with zombies, lacking any intriguing parts what makes zombies worthwhile. The whole game is technically a mess, but luckily the online part is fun.

At launch, Call of Duty Vanguard feels like a solid step-up from Black Ops Cold War, but falls short of the benchmark that was Modern Warfare 2019. Together, Vanguard's three pillars make for a game that we’re frankly surprised is as cohesive and enjoyable as it is.

Call of Duty: Vanguard is a very problematic game, that game at a very wrong time for Activision. Bad maps and uninspiring multiplayer and zombies modes are accompanied with a good story to create the game that needs to challenge both Halo Infinite and Battlefield 2042 for the throne. As a long time series fan - I wish them the best of luck - they're fighting an uphill battle here.