Call Of Duty 5 Review

Critics review on the new Call of duty 5 ( COD 5 ) video game .

26th March 2009

Call of duty 5 : World at War

Call of Duty: World at War is a game of over expectations and nuance. It pales in comparison to the changes that Call of Duty 4 made to the franchise, but that doesn't make it a bad game. In fact, Call of Duty 4 was so epic that one might argue that any game similar to it, in effect, must also be good.

Well, developer Treyarch pretty much did a copy/paste job from Call of Duty 4 to World at War, with some slight changes. For instance, there's now more gore. And... Err... Well, that's about it. Other than weapon changes and a few extra game modes, we're essentially getting the same game in a different package.

The story of World at War seemed significantly shorter than that of Modern Warfare to me. Maybe I just got through it quicker, I'm not sure, but when I beat it in a mere two days and Call of Duty 4 took me at least four days (in my first run-through, that is), it makes me wonder. Even though it was shorter, it was still fun. In my opinion, it wasn't quite up to par with the story mode of Call of Duty 4, but it still gave me a good time, and the Zombie Mode at the end made it all worth while. (Yes, I played this when it first came out -- when you had to work for the best part of the game.)

Speaking of Nazi Zombies, one word. Amazing. Nazi Zombies is just about the only thing that keeps me going back to World at War nowadays. It's incredibly innovative, and just loads of fun, even with just the one available level (for now!). With friends over, it gets even better. The basic concept is that nazi zombies are trying to kill you. You're trapped in a building with unlockable weapons, fixable barriers, and unlockable areas (that bare more weapons, and give you more room to run around).

The online multiplayer for World at War is... Well, it's alright. It's essentially Call of Duty 4, with different maps. Worse maps, for that matter. When I was playing Call of Duty 4, the maps were suspenseful... I remember that map on the ship. Camping under that stairway, setting claymores, hiding in/on crates... There was a lot to go for. Most of the maps in that game were like this.
World at War basically takes that concept, swallows it, and spits out lots of similar maps (in that they're very basic). It gets old after a while. Of course, the leveling system is still there, which gives you an incentive to continue playing, but with these maps... It's not that worth it.

The co-op mode is awesome. This was probably the best improvement that very well could have been implemented in Call of Duty 4, but had been overlooked. Playing through a game is fun, but playing through it with friends intensifies the experience, as you feel as if you're more connected to the game, and it just all-around feels more... Strategic. It adds a lot.

All-around, Call of Duty: World at War is everything Call of Duty 4 was, but worse. It's got a few things that might make you want to check it out, but I'd say to rent it, at the very least. If you've already got Call of Duty 4, you'll be pretty disappointed at the lack of innovation.

Score, based on expectations: 6.5/10

Score, with no expectations/bias: 8/10