When Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare was released at the end of 2007, it quickly became the most critically acclaimed game in the Call of Duty series so far. It finally moved away from the World War II setting and into the modern age, which gave developers Infinity Ward the chance to create a brand new storyline for players to enjoy, as well as giving them a whole range of modern weaponry with which to kill each other. With a stellar multiplayer side it quickly became one of the best and most popular shooters, even going so far as to consistently challenge Halo 3 as the most played online game on Xbox Live. So when I first heard that Call of Duty: World at War was making a return to World War II, I was both surprised and concerned at the same time. Would Treyarch be able to make a game that matched up to the awesome Modern Warfare while returning to an era that has been done many many times in games before? The answer to that question is unfortunately no, but that still doesn't stop it from being a pretty enjoyable romp.

Call of Duty: World at War takes a detour from the usual settings of World War II and serves up the action in the less known areas of the Pacific battles involving the US Army in Japan, and the Russian Army's reversal of fortunes at Stalingrad and the push back into German territory. The US action puts you in the boots of Private Miller, initially a POW who is rescued by Corporal Roebuck (who is voiced by Keifer Sutherland), and tells the story of the US Army's battles in Peleliu and Okinawa. Here you'll be tasked with taking an airfield, burning out bunkers and taking on angry Japanese kamikaze soldier’s intent on stabbing you repeatedly in the face. The Russian missions are seen through the eyes of Dimitri Petrenko, who initially aids Russian sniper Sergeant Reznov (voiced by Gary Oldman) in a scene that was almost directly lifted out of the film Enemy at the Gates (if you've seen it, the scene where Vassili Zaitsev first meets Danilov in the fountain). After that you'll help the Russian Army drive deep into German territory before finally getting to Berlin. The storyline is pretty decent but the problem I have in these games is that we all know what's going to happen. We know who won the war so there isn't really too much room for twists and turns in the story, something that was possible in Modern Warfare due to its fictional storyline. 

The missions themselves are a decent mix of situations and scenarios. There is a sniper mission for the Russians that is very good, though not on par with the sniper missions from Modern Warfare. You get to drive a tank and cause huge amounts of destruction, blowing up buildings, towers and opposition tanks. There is a gunner mission in a plane where you must first make an assault on a load of transport ships, then defend yourself from Japanese aircraft while trying to rescue survivors from the watery wreckage of your own ships. These missions are all nicely spread out and give you a much needed break from the constant combat on offer in the other missions.

If you've played any of the Call of Duty games before, you'll know that one of its strengths is also one of its greatest weaknesses, and that is just how linear the game is. Bar the occasional choice of whether to branch off left or right, the game effectively forces you down a specific path to make sure you get where it wants to you go. It means that the action is heavily scripted which allows for some great set pieces in the game, but also means that replaying the same mission again will see you face exactly the same obstacles and enemies in exactly the same place. There is also the issue of respawning enemies. Again there are good points and bad points to them. The good point is that having respawning enemies stops you from just hiding at the back and letting your team-mates do all the work for you, you have to move forward and kill people yourself to stop them from spawning some more. The downside is that if you don't time your forward move properly then you'll find the enemies respawning very close to where you are, leaving you very exposed and very likely to find yourself full of holes. World at War has several of these sections but thankfully doesn't seem to rely on them too much so they never feel more than an occasional issue.

There are other issues in the game that creep in more than occasionally, and they can ruin the experience for you slightly. The first problem I had was finding myself being shot by enemies I couldn't see. I don't mean enemies that were camouflaged, but enemies that were being hidden from me behind trees, yet were somehow still able to see me and shoot me. As they were behind trees their muzzle flash was also hidden which meant finding the guys shooting me was difficult and became annoying at times. Even more annoying though, especially on the harder difficulties is how the enemy seemed to have taken advantage of a "buy 1 get 20 free" offer on grenades. On Veteran difficulty the grenade warning indicator can almost be a constant message on your screen, and being anywhere close to the blast can be enough to kill you. They can be insanely accurate with their throws as well, landing the grenades at your feet even though you're crouched nice and low behind some cover. There will undoubtedly also be occasions for you when you try to sprint from cover to cover only to find you run straight into a grenade that goes off a split second later. It certainly makes Veteran difficulty a challenge though so if you enjoyed the same difficulty on Modern Warfare then you should certainly enjoy the challenge available here. Just make sure you have plenty of patience and non-breakable items nearby.

Overall though the single-player side of the game is enjoyable, but I couldn't help but feel it had taken a step back from Modern Warfare. Maybe it was the setting, maybe it was going back to old weapons, maybe it was a storyline we've all been involved with before. In truth for me at least it was all three. If you're a huge fan of World War II games then you'll undoubtedly enjoy World at War immensely, but if like me you feel it's time they moved on to a different war zone then your enjoyment will certainly be tempered somewhat.

Just like Modern Warfare though, the multiplayer side of things is excellent. Set up in a near identical fashion to Modern Warfare, you have a wide variety of game types to pick from, such as Team Deathmatch, Domination, and Search and Destroy. The ranking and perk systems from Modern Warfare are back, though the Perks are now slightly tailored towards the World War II era. You can still create your class when you reach the required level, add a clan tag, and complete various challenges for bonus XP. The included maps are a nice mixture of close range and long distance maps, giving you a chance to try out different classes (such as Sniper or Light Gunner) to find out which suits you best for each map. Whether the multiplayer in World at War is superior to that of Modern Warfare will really come down to an individual preference for the weapons and maps on offer in each game. If you feel that you've played the Modern Warfare maps as much as you can, then this could well be the game for you.

Alongside the standard multiplayer action, there are 2 other ways to get your friends involved. The first way is a new feature for the Call of Duty games – co-op play. You and up to 3 friends can go through the majority of the campaign together (a few missions are missing as they don't lend themselves to having more than 1 player). This is a great addition to the series and I'm sure will be standard fare for the future. The second way is also a new feature, called Nacht der Untoten (which is German for "Night of the Undead"). Up to 4 players will stand together against a never ending stream of undead Nazi's intent on killing you and eating your brains. Unlike the Horde mode in Gears 2, there is no end to this and you'll play until everyone is dead, gaining score as you kill the undead and repairing windows.

Graphically the game uses a modified version of the Call of Duty 4 engine, so if you've played that then you'll know how nice the graphics will look. Character models are detailed and animated beautifully, smoke effects and explosions fill the air, and the weapon models are all excellent. The modified engine also brings with it the ability to shoot through weak surfaces, so if you can see someone hiding behind a thin wooden crate, shoot them anyway as the bullet penetration will be enough to get through and put a few holes in them. New to this engine is the ability to set things on fire, handy when you're toting a flamethrower in several missions. If you see an enemy sniper hiding in a tree, simply set fire to the tree to take care of him. It all adds up to a great graphical experience that helps immerse you in the game world.

Also drawing you in to the whole experience is the exceptional sound. The game has 2 great voice actors in Keifer Sutherland and Gary Oldman who deliver their lines with a believability you can't help but appreciate. Gary Oldman really proves what a versatile actor he is though, as you'd be hard pressed to actually recognise his voice as he pulls off a brilliant Russian accent. Alongside the vocals are the outstanding sound effects. Everything from machine gun fire to explosions to the sound of a grenade landing by your feet is done exactly how you'd think it sounds. With a good sound system you are really drawn into the battle and I wouldn't blame anyone for ducking if they heard a bullet whizzing past them.

Call of Duty: World at War is not the easiest game to judge. Looking at the game on its own merits, it has a good single player side with some exceptional multiplayer action that some people will find very hard to put down. However, I still can't help but feel that it's failed to surpass Call of Duty: Modern Warfare. That perhaps isn't altogether that surprising given just how good Modern Warfare is though, so perhaps I'm being a little critical on World at War for that. If you feel you can go back to World War II one more time, or just after a new multiplayer experience then I wouldn't hesitate in recommending this to you.

Discuss in our Forums