Why World at War is better than Call of Duty 4

OXM UK explains why Call of Duty: World at War will be better than the previous effort in the series, Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare.

Among the reasons listed are World at War feels more dramatic, has more options to keep the game fresh and co-op.

[SDS Gamerfiend]

Call Of Duty 4 is much better than this game! Infinity Ward FTW!!!

[PS360PCROCKS]

Ok play the game first and don't be a rabid fanboy. I agree that IW is better and I liked COD4 and think it's an amazing game. I played the beta and I liked COD4 online WAYYYY better. I cancelled my pre-order on this one to rent it instead because the SP does look like it will be really good.

[Radiodread]

you're going to be proved wrong. I'd say that they both offer different flavors of Call of Duty, but in terms of gameplay and graphics they both on par.

[damnwrx]

Hopefully the weapons are upgradeable if not, it will be a rental...

[vickers500]

If by "upgradable" you mean you can add attachments to it like cod4, then yes, weapons are upgradable. Instead of a red dot sight, you have something that looks the same, except its a black cross (+) instead of a red dot.

[sinny]

Im playing the beta and WaW is far worse than Cod4 . I will not buy this game, maybe i will play it on a friend's house or something for the SP. But the MP it's lame.
Having played the R2 beta that is the only action game im waiting right now.

[kornbeaner]

I guess fanboys aren't only for consoles anymore.

I'm in the R2 beta, between R2 and CoD:Waw Beta the CoD beta is far more polished then R2. Granted both have bugs, but at least I am able to rank up through out my whole playtime in CoD. Unlike waiting 10-15 to get into a ranked game in R2. Both need to be fixed, but CoD is showing more polish then R2 when it comes to MP.

[WildArmed]

describe this 'polish'...
you point out it takes 10-15 to get into a ranked game.. while i get in a few seconds >_> Not every1 has the same issues.
If your talking about graphics, big whoop COD5 has better graphics coz it only needs to accomodate 16 people in its multiplayer.. while R2 holds 60.
Plus, COD4 seems better IMO, im not liking the fact that this is gonna have vechiles.

Oh the 2nd and 3rd points basically are repeats.. 2 and 3 both mention co-op >_> (in the article)

[kornbeaner]

1. While it might take you a few seconds to get into a ranked server on R2 it takes me on average 10-15 mins to get into a ranked game no matter where and when I try. Also there are times when I do get into a ranked game back to back, but why is it that when the ranked game is over I get kicked out back to the main shell? I would like to play more then 1 ranked game at a time, you know so I can rank up. Also I have been dropped from 3 ranked games which blows. While my experience seems to differ from yours I know there are many people who have experienced what I am.

So when it comes to ranking up and staying in games CoD:WaW wins

2. Weapon balance is also better in CoD. Outside of the shotgun which seems very under powered in both, CoD weapons are better balanced.
The weapons in R2 are good but most of them are very underwhelming if your berserker is not activated.

Overall weapon balance is also something CoD:WaW does better.

While I only list 2 points of polish those two points are big when talking about playing a game hardcore and just every once in a while.

Now for the thing both games can/need change.

Spawn points in both game are hideous. There are countless times in both games where I would die spawn in front of the player who just killed me and die again, while coo for the cheap kill it sucks to be that guy, so both games need to fix that issue.

Also to address the "Graphics" I never once mentioned graphics as a sticking point and if I have to choose I would pick R2 over CoD:WaW because there are no weak texture find anywhere in a R2 map while I did find some in the CoD beta.

Overall both games can be great, but R2 has more balancing issues that it has to account for also, seeing as R2 will run on dedicated servers, if they plan to only use these dedicated servers to run their ranked game then they better have tons of them, because I see no point in playing a game for hours at a time without ranking up, which is what I find myself doing during the R2 beta and it's wearing thin already. I don't plan on accepting that aspect on a full retail version of the game. If I can go from ranked game to ranked game in the retail version of R2 then I'm all game, but if the retail game suffers from the same issues the Beta is I plan to wait for the greatest hit release of the game for the SP portion of the game.

[TheUsedVersion]

You need to contact Insomniac if you are having a problem. Once logged to the R2 site click on this link:

http://www.myresistance.net...

You can send a message to Bryan Intihar at Insomniac detailing the problem you have. Sounds like its on your end but if you want to let them know, then they would greatly appreciate it.

[Swiftfox]

Personally, I think TriArch is using Call of Duty 4 as a spearhead rather than a hurdle. They don't have to beat Call of Duty 4 they just have to BE Call of Duty 4.

All reports have showed that it looks like Call of Duty 4, plays like Call of Duty 4, feels like Call of Duty 4. Have you seen the box picture of Call of Duty World at War? Look familiar? (I.E Call of Duty 4) All they have to do is ride the wave of Call of Duty 4's success this Christmas.

Call of Duty 4 snagged alot of new fans the the series, I bet TriArch is hoping those fans will pick up Call of Duty World at War on princable.

Will will tell if the game can carve a nitch for itself against the likes of Resistance 2, Gear of War 2, and Far Cry 2 this Holiday.

[WildArmed]

They are just trying to appeal to the COD4 fanbase (which is HUGE). They shouldnt down play COD4 since they are basically taking COD4 and giving it a paintjob. Big whoop it has co-op.. COD4 still has the best multiplayer (yet). The guns in COD4 were quite balanced and appealing.. i wonder if i'll find a similar feeling in COD5
(yes i plan to buy it in Jan..or June.. or i might just rent it eventually)

[ceedubya9]

If it isn't broke, why fix it? There isn't much need to innovate if you have a proven formula to work off of. The Halo series hasn't changed a whole lot over the years, but most people are satisfied with that because it offers a familiar experience that people already loved. This was a safe bet for Treyarch, and it only makes sense.

[SL1M DADDY]

If they do that then yeah, I will buy it for certain. I am renting it first from Gamefly but if it turns out to be as good as COD4, they heck yeah I will buy it. I am still playing COD4 and have actually owned it for both the PS3 and 360 so you could say that they might even get 120 bucks of mine if it in fact can best COD4. But, I am sceptical as those are some pretty big shoes to fill.

[Imallvol7]

I never hear ANYTHING about this game except for comparisons to other games.

[Drealmcc0y]

I have the beta, and while its good, its NOT as good as COD4.
Treyarch just totally copied and pasted what IW have done.
Treyarch suck.

[kornbeaner]

CoD 4 did not have Tanks in them and CoD: WaW does which forces players to account for something else then just a foot soldier. also they have CTF and War which are welcomed additions to the game.

Also the maps in CoD:WaW are better in every aspect then the ones find in CoD4.

IMO.

[felidae]

yeah, i also think it's better ..

[James Vanderbeek]

I havent played the game but every video of gameplay they have shown looks the same as the past COD games.. same weapons, same looking bad guys, and same looking action..

The real question here is can world of war stand up to COD4's multi player???? I dont think it will.. i remember trying to play cod3 online and that was complete trash..

[Apocwhen]

Good points, but there are some things that did affect the quality of COD3. They were Treyarch only had 8 months to develop that game and within that time it also had to be developed for 4 consoles (PS2, Wii, PS3 and Xbox 360).

With WaW they've had alot more time to develop the game and with the added COOP and Zombie modes added I'm sure it will make for a good multiplayer game.

It may still be COD4 underneath but the fact is alot of people really like COD4 but have gotten bored with the maps and modes now. COD WaW will be their next choice just for the new maps and for some the vehicle play.

[creeture]

Treyarch would be nothing without Infinity Ward.

[kornbeaner]

It goes both ways. If you look at CoD: United Offensive and CoD 3 while those games were "Weak" in comparison to IW releases they made great improvements over the base game that found themselves in IW releases.

Also CoD3 was made in 8 months. I challenge you to find a Dev that has made a game in 8 months that played as well as CoD3.

You won't find one.

[Scenarist]

Im loving the CoD 5 information , and im glad they are bringing back the tanks. Ive played every version of COD and this is looking like it will be better than cod 4 IMO. Even if its JUST on par with cod 4 then i will be satisfied since it is different than 4. You can only play a game so much before you get burned out on it especially if you already are at the top rank and have no more room to grow.

For all the people that dont like cod5 then great go back to cod4 but atleast give it a chance ... and i hope you arent narrow minded enough to expect the same game with just more perks , I for one am hoping its a different experience than cod4 because i played that game already.

[The Dark Side]

COD: World at War will have trophies and rumble this time around and COD 4 did not. So it will definitly be a better game on the PS3. And co-op will be big for the franchise, hopefully IW do it for the next COD. Plus, NAZI zombies FTW.

[Teh Cell]

How does that make the PS3 version better, dork?

Oh...do you mean it will be better than the PS3 version of COD4?

[anubis12]

if they get better maps...the beta maps are mehh. only like the castle

[ZombieNinjaPanda]

I believe anything will be better than Cod4's online.

For the first month or so, it was an amazing online experience, but after a while, I began to notice every single fault about it.

Oh, and the weapons aren't entirely balanced in Cod4. What pissed me off is that I found people using SubMachine guns sniping all the way across the map. And killing.

The m16 is probably the strongest assault rifle, kills in about 2 bursts. It takes 6 rounds to kill someone with it. Yet with the m4, the same exact gun, automated, takes much more than that?

[TVC15]

the balance is fine

far better than halo at least

and m16 is not overpowered if you think it is why don't you use it?
SMGs cannot snipe across the map unless you mean across the room :|

you probably just have bad reflexes cause CoD4 is a twitch shooter

[OOG]

I wont say WAW is better then cod4...............but cod4 isnt better as well.

Only reason people like cod4 is because its modern....as do I....but cod waw has everything that cod 4 has to offer and more.....better online functions, co op, those special cards for single player that alter the game, better stats systems, better team functions online, GORE etc

So I cant say either is better because its preference but on value and bang for your buck WAW offers everything cod4 offered and more....

And yes this is from someone who had the beta day 1 for both

[Wilku]

chees is better than gherkins
coca cola is better than sprite
male is better than female
fire is better than wind
music is better than movies
and the primary is ... to have a brain is better than dont to have a brain

god damn this is so incredible stupid to compare everything....

ps: dont forget, to leave a comment is better than dont leaving a comment.

HAHAHA

[danofpaco]

I'm in the beta and I wouldn't say that it's better that COD4. It's good, no doubt, I like it - but COD4 still feels and plays better. I feel like the animations aren't as convincing in WaW - I don't know, it just feels less polished, more like a video game. My suspension of disbelief was higher in COD4.

I will still buy it, and the co-op will be rad no doubt. But I'm pretty sure after a month or two my buddies and I will be back playing COD4. And Gears2.

[TheD_R_E]

Nothing about this game is better than Cod4. The fact that treyarch took the lazy route by just basing the game off the COD4 IW engine is what really irks me. All the doubters of how good IW is compared to Treyarch will be humbled when IW builds a new engine for their COD game(if it's still a COD) in 09.

[ChrisGTR1]

forget about cod4 and waw! its all about COD5!!! future warfare!!

[ivor84]

So, I've played the beta of COD:WAW roughly 8 hours total, I also played COD4 since release. IMO WAW is nothing more then a reskin of cod4 with dogs added in. The unlocks are mostly the same, red dot and silencers on a Thompson? lol. I'll be saving my money on this title and trying Fallout3, Left 4 Dead, or Farcry instead.

[kornbeaner]

Nice try TROLL. But the weapons on CoD:WaW do not have Red dots or silencers on them. Those are modern modification that do not fit the WWII timeframe.

Again nice try but at least come up with something more Feasible. Also how did you get an early copy of the game? It's not out for another 2 weeks.

DAMN TROLLS.

[ivor84]

Hey mario go back to playing the Wii, the beta came out last night, and yes there are red dots and silencers along with most of the cod4 unlocks.

[kornbeaner]

Again stop your lying, There are no red dot sight in CoD:WaW, not even in the Beta.

There are (and this is just for the Thompson) Aperture sights, Suppressors and Round Drum for the Thompson. There is no Red Dots in the game. Anywhere. Not in the PC or 360 beta. I know cause I have played both. So quit your lying.

[ivor84]

---do not have Red dots or silencers---

--There are (and this is just for the Thompson) Aperture sights, Suppressors--

Jfc flip flop more?

[kornbeaner]

What Flip-flop are you talking about, You named Red dot and Silencers.
These are not in the game.

Granted Aperture sights and Suppressors serve basically the same purpose, but they are not the same. A car is a car but a Chevy isn't a Ford.

[divideby0]

to many shooters...dont care about this version
Socom, R2, GOW2.....shooter overload

[tigerstyle]

not as sweet as COD4. Although CALL OF DUTY games are WAYYYYYY easier than SOCOM Franchise...

[iggypop123]

coop will be the reason this argument isnt crazy. IW blew it with no coop

[theEnemy]

Treyarch blew it for picking the WW2 card again.

[xcelticxcrossx]

i dont think the beta is doing just to the actual game play u have to think that the beta is not goin to be as good but i think the game it self will be much better than cod 4

[bumnut]

its more of the same, i don't think ill pick this one up.

[PotNoodle]

Even with socom never working properly, i think its a much better game than CoD4 and CoD5. You can disagree with me obviously because its my opinion.

CoD4 has a nerfed hitbox system that makes shooting people to easy, hitting people is so easy, when i first played cod4 the first thing i thought was "Aiming is a thing of the past, eh?" especially after playing css.