Did Treyarch's CoD Really Beat Infinity Ward's CoD? writes: "After the spectacular Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare last year, few believed Treyarch could even approach that greatness with Call of Duty: World at War, let alone surpass it. But one of the first reviews out there claims that - against all odds - the latest CoD is actually the best.

The review in question that's getting plenty of attention across the Internet comes from PSW magazine, which says that Treyarch's effort has indeed surpassed Infinity Ward's. Here's a direct quote from the PSW blog:

"Modern Warfare was pretty much the best game on PS3 for the last year, it's online gameplay kept Deano, in particular, playing for months. So to hold the position that it's sequel, World At War is a better game, is surely to stir up some controversy. That's right, Treyarch has toppled Infinity Ward.""

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
chaosatom3627d ago (Edited 3627d ago )

They did borrow the engine from them, so eh.

They did better than I expected, but still it doesn't make sense to do WWII, when no gamers want it to be that way.

The Matrix3626d ago

It really depends on what era and what kind of weaponry you like. Otherwise they are pretty similar.

The Dark Knight3626d ago

ummmmm i like WW II games... believe it or not some peeps actually like it... just cause you dont doesn't mean no one else does

GrieverSoul3626d ago (Edited 3626d ago )

Yeah! Also they had their work cut out for!
They didnt developed the engine, they didnt imagined a deep multiplayer system, they didnt redefined the gameplay! They only added content due to the others stuff being already done.

Thats why they say its better, Treyarch had a lot a time to develop a zombie mode, the cards system and the co-op simply because the HARD work hawhyd been done! They had lots of time!

So, is it better?
It might be! Simply because it has more content! Infinity Ward looks foward! They said recently they expect to develop a Futuristic FPS. They try to evolve their game not making expansion like Treyarch.

Im not defending this or that developer! Im a gamer who feels that Cod WaW is just an expansion (with WW2 settings) and not a new game!

somethingSQUISHY3626d ago

When Treyarch jacked IW's game engine AND exact multiplayer setup? Please.

Ghoul3626d ago

well i love ww2 games, and waw is definatly one the best i played.
I love the new perks coop etc. for me its a complete win win situation.

ChampIDC3626d ago

Treyarch's multiplayer has some pretty glaring balance issues between some of the weapons. They'll never match the polish that IW can bring, but they did make a good effort with this game. I'll pick it up eventually mostly for the campaign and co-op, but it's not enough to topple CoD4 for me.

psnDevistator3563626d ago

I don't know what they were thinking.

Did they just want to annoy most gamers?

Everyone knows how many F_UCKING WWII Games there are.

Thats why I refuse to even barely glance at this new game.

WWII games make me sick now. Played too much, seen too much.

WWII started out great Like a new 18yr old celebrity but then years pass and that celebrity is a dirty whore. LOL

We need orignial war games. Something like zombie ninja migits vs. Zombie Space pirate Ghost.

Sarcasm3626d ago

"WWII started out great Like a new 18yr old celebrity but then years pass and that celebrity is a dirty whore. LOL "

lol that's pretty funny.

But a dirty whore is an experienced whore.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 3626d ago
Jamegohanssj53627d ago (Edited 3627d ago )

I don't like any of the CoD's, but I know for a fact that CoD5 isn't better than CoD4. Mediocre as it, but CoD4 still has the edge.


daffo3626d ago

but cod5 is a decent alternative for those who played a sh!tload of cod4

PimplePopperMD3626d ago

no. treyarch is composed of entry level noobs that steal others' work.

infinity ward is superior in every way.

world at war is for noobs

ChampIDC3626d ago

Stealing? Blame Activision's money hogging if you don't like them using the same engine and mechanics. It's not really Treyarch's fault.

boodybandit3626d ago (Edited 3626d ago )

IW is not superior in every way.
How soon we forget how bad COD2 and COD4 "was" online.
It took several weeks to a couple months for IW to get the kinks out of COD2 for the 360 and COD4 still (IMO) has lobby issues.

I definitely prefer 4 to 5 but that is mainly because of the weapons and levels but WAW (COD5) runs like butter online and there isn't one lobby issue. I must played in a hundred matches already and several levels of co op. It runs flawlessly.

PotNoodle3626d ago

It is better, much more detailed - feels like a proper war, even in the multiplayer side.

DirtyLary3626d ago

Hardcore fells hardcore with these old school semis and bolt actions. COD4 with it's tiny rat maze maps was a spray n pray grenade spamfest. This game brings new life and fixes those glaring issues with online play.

Show all comments (36)
The story is too old to be commented.