I really didn't like World at War. I didn't play too much of it, but my experience seemed to consist almost entirely of:
Spawn
DOGS
Dead
Adding to that, I don't think Treyarch's Call of Duty games are too great. CoD3 and WaW were pretty good, but they always felt a bit clunky and... I guess uninspired compared to Infinity Ward's games. Zombies in WaW was a fun little mode, though.
Uninspired?
Crawling out of a mass grave in Stalingrad, only to meet a sniper with his shooting fingers cut off, instructing you play by play on assassinating the SS officer responsible for the assault is uninspired?
Personally, Infinity Wards games, especially post MW2 have always felt *too* polished. I'm mostly talking about the multiplayer here but at that point they've kinda decided to funnel you down a certain direction. The games have always done this, sure, but it's incredibly obvious to the point of claustrophobia in their titles. If you really have to put up a flashing screen saying TURN BACK SOLIDER OR YOU WILL BE HIT BY ARTILLARY IN 5 SECONDS if a player goes the wrong way then you should fire your map designer.
I guess 'uninspired' wasn't the right word to use. That being said, when I played that mission I couldn't help but think about how much cooler and better executed All Ghillied Up was by comparison.
Treyarch are probably the only studio working on the series who try to actually innovate. Hence why their games are so divisive.
Infinity Ward tend to play it super carefully, their one foray into new mechanics in Infinite Warfare is absolutely hated by the fans (I personally enjoyed it, but it did come with my console, I likely would never have paid for that). The core structure of the IW CoD games has been the same pretty much since CoD 2. The weapons are all incredibly similar, or if fictional, super close to weapons in reality. The story tries to be a dramatic action film, where I'm meant to care about characters with the depth of a shoebox.
Treyarch tend to go a bit more weird and wild with their games. Playing around with alternate history lets them get away with quite a bit. WaW was the start of this whole thing, ever since then they've really tried to push the definition of Call of Duty to its limits to find out what does and doesn't work. Mobility mechanics, weird weapons, character gimmicks, odd game modes, etc. Though due to these constant attempts to innovate none of the features really reach their true potential.
Infinite Warfare's biggest problem was that it's multiplayer was legit a tweaked version of Blops3.
I don't mean "It's similar to" like how all the COD games are similar to one another, I mean "It doesn't have it's own set of gimmicks and borrows mechanics and possibly balancing 1:1 from the previous game"
I suppose it's better then Ghosts in the regard that at least it's ripping off something that's pretty decent instead of wollowing in it's own filth but that's really a low point.
Fire IW, let 3arc churn out a game every 3 years.
Maybe I should replay the game, I think I always enjoyed the soviet missions
Probably the best Call of Duty tbh
Right above the first Modern Warfare and COD2
The only thing I heard people praise WaW for was the zombies mode. Modern Warfare was a breath of fresh air, and to go back to WW2 for the next game, at a time when the market was oversaturated with WW2 shooters, seemed like a bad move.
Good thing it was done better than any other ww2 game
My fav thing from WaW were the dlc maps for mp and zombies, and the extreme gore of blowing people's limbs off.
I liked that it didn't make WWII feel heroic like the other games in the series did. The Marines were angry and bitter and just wanted to go home, the Soviets were bloodthirsty and vengeful. Having Kiefer Sutherland and Gary Oldman barking orders at you helped a lot too.
No, not really, Call of Duty 2 is still a waaaaaay better WW2 CoD than WaW. The soviet campaign had some great moments (but also some not so great) but the American campaign was super forgettable and boring.
Ripping off Enemy at the Gates isn’t exactly what I’d call “inspired.”
I think they're about the same if you level out the gameplay mechanics and all that. For example, not being able to sprint in COD2 bugged the hell out of me.
World at War did some interesting things at the time, and did it all rather well, but honestly I would say that a lot of the problems that plague the franchise today started with that game and Treyarch.
I never played it aside from the demo. I remember hating the controls and putting it down, but I was also a dumb 14 year old at the time. Maybe I should pick it up.
The way I see it World at War was kind of like a weird shared role with Black Ops the last bastion of quality. Modern Warfare was great, Modern Warfare 2 was a mess, and these games marked a transitional period where the whole series was uprooted into yearly sequels as everything gradually fell apart. People criticized World at War at the time for not being modern in a genre oversaturated with WWII, and the game outright called WWII was seen as a petty and weak-handed retaliation against Battlefield 1, but nowadays people can look at WaW with less "FUCK NOT MORE WORLD WAR 2" and more of just looking at the game for what it is.
I think WAW has some of the best atmosphere of any game ever created. The whole thing is covered in this dark, dingy, spooky feeling that instantly puts you on edge, from the title screen to the campaign to zombies. The game should be used as an example of how important atmosphere is, but of course you can't have atmosphere and massive explosions/quippy protags at the same time. I mean, look at the title screen, no menu has ever put me on edge as much as this one, to the point I didn't like staying on it to long when I used to play it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bcsXeuK8kk
I still remember going to school a few days after it came out and someone telling me that you got to kill zombies once you complete the campaign, it was fucking mind blowing, but it makes total sense and fits in with the overall tension of the rest of the game.
My favourite part about World at War was the super dark atmosphere. It was a very styalized game and it was better off because of it.
Not really. The dark, gritty tone and the gore was new for the franchise at the time, and Treyarch hasn’t moved past it at all. Even Infinity Ward and Sledgehammer have tried new and different things with the series. Arguably while Treyarch has been more willing to innovate, arguably their entries since Black Ops II have been holding the franchise back.
Well I mean in terms of gameplay, the thematic setting is different and new sure, that's why it's great. I just mean it didn't really do anything in regards to the "problems that plague the franchise today" that CoD4 hadn't already done.
I will say that even though I played through the missions quite a few times, on repeat plays the missions in Blops2 have always felt a bit bland and weak to me. I can't really explain it.
It was the first COD game I played though, and I love it for that.
tfw that WaW tie-in near the end of blops 1
that shit fucked me up
I loved how Treyarch had this cool storyline going on with WaW and Blops, shame they decided to keep using the name after the second one, because from what I've played Blops 3 had nothing to do with the other two in storyline other than being futuristic
Nova-6 does pop up in BO3, and the villain of BO2 is randomly namedropped, but yeah. BO3's campaign was kinda batshit insane but very thematically different altogether, although Activision did reject an even wilder plot (which they were allegedly trying to recycle for BO4, and Activision flipped out so hard that Treyarch was forced to redo the entire campaign over again or ship with no campaign, the latter of which they chose since less than a year to launch for a whole new campaign was unfeasible).
Call of duty UO is still the best
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8s3-26VU7Vw&ab_channel=Wuphon%27sReach
It may be more due to my young age at the time, but COD2 was something I preferred, especially on the Battle of the Bulge bit. I thought WaW was pretty fun too, but it didn't compete, at least for me.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
