OXM UK writes: "War. What is it bad for? It's a question games have rarely asked, let alone answered, and that goes double for answering it as well as Call of Duty: World at War does.
From the violent opening to the poignant ending, this is Treyarch's middle finger to those who said that they could never make a war game as sophisticated, slick, or stunning as Infinity Ward's Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare.
Maybe Call of Duty 3's harsh reception has turned out to be a good thing. Treyarch has pushed itself further than ever before and come up with a Call of Duty game that comfortably matches, and sometimes even dares to excel, Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare.
Those worried that World War II has been done to death, fear not. Treyarch's willingness to push the boundaries has uncovered a side to the war few developers even knew existed, and we'll be damned if it doesn't make for one hell of a game to boot."
A very devoted fan of Call of Duty: World at War racks up incredible in-game stats while playing regularly for the past 15 years.
Of course you will hit a ridiculous stat after 15 of anything.
My main character for Everquest had over 500 days played in the first 6 years of the game. I was young then and had a lot of time on my hands. I don’t think I could duplicate that again until I retire and not sure I could match it if I tried.
Gamespot : Call of Duty: Vanguard launches with 20 multiplayer maps, three of which are actually remakes from 2008's Call of Duty: World at War. Let's take a look at how the maps have changed with this side-by-side comparison.
Andrew says: "The intrinsic values of COD are the following: memorable campaigns, meticulous multiplayer marathons, and lobbies populated by screaming 12-year-old kids that think puberty is the evolved form of Jigglypuff."