Top
210°

Call of Duty: World at War. Better than COD4? (Gameplayer Preview)

Gameplayer: "We can already hear the moaning. Another WWII shooter? Man, that makes, like, two this year! TWO! That's just too many. Don't they know what we really need are more sci-fi shooters, more racing games, more… basketball games? With Call of Duty: World at War and Brothers in Arms Hell's Highway both on track for release later this year, it means the percentage of games to be released this year set in WWII is almost a staggering 1%! Please, spare us!

They say sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, but it is handy to make people sound stupid. To all of you, press included, bemoaning this so-called avalanche of WWII shooters – sorry, but we had to call you on it.

Admittedly, to some it will seem like an odd step to take the Call of Duty series back to the Second World War, particularly when Call of Duty 4 knocked it out of the park with its modern-day setting. However, it's not really surprising that the series is taking a trip back in time with Treyarch while Infinity Ward uses its usual two-year production cycle to (presumably) take us somewhere new again. Besides, this time around Treyarch is bringing the war to our doorstep by focusing on the US campaign in the
South Pacific, as well as the Russian push into Berlin.
First-person shooters set against WWII's Pacific theatre have been attempted before – but none have set the world alight. World at War, however, should be different – primarily because it IS going to set the world alight. Literally."

Read Full Story >>
gameplayer.com.au
The story is too old to be commented.
arakouftaian3688d ago

or a good demo whit online !!! but i may not buy this game i mean they r too many good fps games comming like r2, k2...

Winter47th3688d ago (Edited 3688d ago )

I'm willing to overlook the flaws of Treyarch if the MP portion 'since SP's no way gonna top that of 4s' is as kick ass as 3, with SERVER BROWSING FFS.

Server Browsing's gonna be one of the main reasons why I'll pick up 5, i got tired getting thrown in laggy servers with guys i don't know in Zimbabwe or Honolulu, not to mention the worst friend invites system ever, it doesn't even have Filtering Option WTF, shame, a real shame for an MP that had so much more potential.

Majors3688d ago

I hear you all shout we dont need another WWII shooter or why have not they done a modern setting. All i can say is wait and see before you cast doubt on what has the potential to be truly amazing. For a start is uses the COD4 engine which is fantastic in itself and i thought it really raised the bar graphics wise on gaming as we know. I would also imagine that Trearch have also upgraded the engine to fit the setting and new effects they have done, i think this is gonna be one hell of a game. Of course it could be completely utter tosh but im giving it the benefit of the doubt with fingers crossed.

Turbo Teddy3688d ago

Its proberly gonna be a bit hit because of the COD franchise, and I dont think that they gonna allow it to suck because it would damage the hype regarding COD6 - but - I like all the gadgets in COD4, and even though Martyrdom is a pain, don´t see the logic in going back to WWII - We are all way to young to have experienced any of it.

cyclindk3688d ago

I think it will look at least as good as CoD 4, but I really think they were lazy by using the IW CoD 4 engine for a WWII game...while the engine looks good for the modern setting it lacks the "weight" and grittiness necessary for a believable WWII game. I think a more appropriate, albeit overly used engine would be the Unreal Engine (plenty of grit), or one similar in appearance to it.

The fire effects for the flame-throwers are decent enough, but nothing outstanding like someone might expect from the IW team (but considering the utter crap flame effects of Haze they are outstanding)...wish they were working on all CoD games, but we'll see what Treyarch can do...if this one is crap but for the graphics I will cease to have any shred of faith in Treyarch-produced CoD or other games.

cyclindk3688d ago

Almost forgot, the Frostbite engine used by the Dice devs for Battlefield Bad Company would be excellent for a WWII game, not to mention the destructability.

Ju3688d ago

According to the screens and videos release, the CoD4 engine works pretty well in this game. I am somewhat disappointed by Battlefield, though. The controls in CoD4 are so much better. Destructibility is a key to Frostbyte. Sometimes the only chance to survive is to blow things up rather then doing an exact aim an hit maneuver. But, I agree, merging Frostbyte with the CoD4 would give an awesome result. That plus a working cover system! (Peaking out behind cover without getting shot in a second). Its pretty irrelevant for CoD5, though. I was positively surprised by the videos I have seen so far. I might give it a try. I also hope they have improved upon CoD4.

Elven63688d ago

in house studios so to speak always borrow tech from each other, I don't care if they use the COD 4 engine. They did modify it though but in the end that will save them time to work on the game to make it better.

THE_BATTLERAGER3688d ago

This game needs more replay value than COD4 and a slower ranking system that rewards skilled players more. If they have a similar system, prestige need a whole rework, it was just a cheap way of persuading people to play more without any actual reward.

Show all comments (26)
The story is too old to be commented.