Review: Call of Duty: World at War

Let me first start off by saying that if you read this review, it will be assumed that you somewhat enjoy WWII shooters and recognize that it was the most epic battle to ever happen on planet earth.

And with that we come to the best shooter based on that war, CoD: World at War. The japanese front has been tried and done before by the Medal of Honor franchise and although not a complete failure, it was less than spectacular. I think that jungle wars are the hardest to render, the environments so thick that they will be the real challenge in FPS to come. This game has the best jungle environments on a console (Crysis for PC).

The mission structure is the same as most WWII shooters, kill the mortar team, eliminate all enemy shooters, plant explosives etc. We are bored of the same thing because the military essentially does the same things over and over again. This game does manage to seperate itself from the crowd. Flamethrowers, extreme gurella tactics and unique Russian front levels all stand out. The multiplayer is as good as Modern Warfare, but again, if you dislike WWII then you will probably think it is horrible. Since mission structure is very linear you may feel like youve been there and done that, but i ask you, how many times have YOU played the pacific theatre?

I mean, you actually get to drop the atomic bomb and see first hand the charred flesh of nagasaki and hiroshima. Oh wait im just playing too much Fallout 3 because that game kicks this ones ass. God I hope Gears of War 2 doesnt get game of the year.