Customer Reviews:
Showing reviews 246-250 of 250
 Fun...Not Call of Duty 4 Fun November 12, 2008
T. Hale (Fort Walton Beach, Florida)
4 out of 12 found this review helpful
I, like many of you, loved COD4. It was almost perfect as far as first person shooters go(it was a bit short). But if you are looking to satisfy your thirst for that game, don't buy this one. COD5 is actually just a better version of COD3 with the addition of a pretty cool co-op multiplayer that quantifies how much better I am than my older brother through a point system based on kills and deaths. The only drawback with the co-op is the silly way in which they format the split-screen. I won't bore you with details...it sucks. Aside from that, I have to give this game four stars because it is what it is; the same WWII shooter that I have played oh so many times before. But really, what else could it be?
 This game is one of the best, Better than Call of Duty 4 November 12, 2008
Larry David (Los Angeles, CA)
3 out of 15 found this review helpful
The graphics are so real and the battles are so intense, you feel like you are there. They kept the controls the same, which is a relief. Just bought this game, and already putting it as my top 3 game ever next to Call of Duty 4 and GTA IV.
 Multiplayer ...larger maps/graphics not quite as good as COD4 November 12, 2008
A. Catalano (Mclean, Va)
5 out of 15 found this review helpful
COD WAR plays very similar to COD4 in game play. Larger maps in Multiplayer, more going on in the environments. Graphics are not quite as crisp and bright as COD4. And the weapons are all WW2 era except for some player bomb in the multiplayer that looks like the Jericho Missile from IRON MAN? Did Tony Stark time travel back to 1942! Still a must play for COD4 gamers. Just dont see it overtaking COD4 in Sales.
DONT GET THE MORE EXPENSIVE COD WAR EDITION. You get a better machine gun that you only use with Heavy Gunner, cant take the gun with you into Create mode. No Additional Maps.
CasualNoob FPS players will fight Online game harder then COD MW. Aparrently, there were no Laser Sights in 1943.
Finally they didn't ruin it! November 12, 2008
TheCommish16 (US)
4 out of 12 found this review helpful
When sequels come out to awesome games often times the publisher tries to alter the game to make it seem like people are buying something "new" versus an expansion pack. This sometimes results in uncomfortable gameplay and people putting the old game in after few hours of playing the new version. This could have been the case for Call of Duty 5 World At War. However the publishers KNEW that the controls, game play, systems that were in COD4 were a huge hit...so they left the game mostly the same, just changing the era (world war II vs modern). The maps are a bit larger (more like Battlefield series) with incredible detail. The WWII maps provide plenty more places to move around in, and the drivable tanks are a ton of fun to drive. The "create a class" is similar, most of the perks from COD4 are in this game with the addition of new ones, and the ranking system is similar. The weapons are WWII era, so they aren't as advanced, but as you rank up you once again unlock better weapons. The multiplayer setup is similar with the ability to choose what type of game you enjoy most and matches you up and gets you in a game just as quickly as COD4. The single player is excellent though I haven't spent enough time on it to get a real feel, but it seems like it's well done.
Overall I would sum the game up by saying it's a very COD4 like game with some improvements and set in WWII maps. Enjoy!
I love it. November 11, 2008
G. Chadwell (Warner Robins, GA United States)
3 out of 13 found this review helpful
I will keep this short. I love the multiplayer, it is still dead on awesome, and unleashing the hounds? Fantastic. Is it CoD4? No, but it isn't trying to be, the Pacific theater warfare is awesome and really shows the tenacity and sheer will of the Japanese fighters, I love it. This game is worth it in every way.
Showing reviews 246-250 of 250
|
