View Full Version: Call of Duty 5: World at War

The Sports Summit > Cards & Video Games > Call of Duty 5: World at War


Title: Call of Duty 5: World at War


BrownsFan9 - October 17, 2008 02:58 PM (GMT)
Any of you COD players here getting the new Call of Duty: World at War that is coming out next month? I was checking out some of the multiplayer beta they released and it looks really good. I'm a pretty avid COD 4 player online, and this one is set in World War 2 with all the guns and everything. Should be a lot of fun.

After I get out of class in about an hour I'm actually going to Gamestop to pre-order it, which they then give you a key to be able to play the beta online. I'm actually pretty excited about it because it looks awesome.

Heres a clip of the beta multiplayer gameplay

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKjsWP1kA5U&feature=related

BrownsFan9 - October 30, 2008 12:59 PM (GMT)
I am actually kind of disappointed in the beta. It really wasn't what I thought it would be like, however I still think I'm going to get it when it comes out (seeing as I had to reserve it to get the beta). I love the WWII weapons and everything but I'm not that comfortable, nor very good, with the older rifles. I'm used to all the sub-machine guns and assault machine guns in COD 4.

The thing that drives me crazy on it is this one map called Roundhouse, which is basically an abandoned train station. And, in this map there is a glitch that kids always seem to do, where you can basically sit under the map and look up and kill people as they walk by, without them having a clue as to where they are. Also to make this map worse they have a tank at each team's spawn point, and it is really annoying having to deal with them. You can have one person inside the tank and one on the top gunner spot. It isnt very hard to kill the person in the gunner spot unless they go underneath to shield themself, however it is hard to blow up the tank which takes at least 3-4 RPGs to kill it! That drives me insane on that map. 2 RPGs to a tank should destroy it!

With all that being said, I think they will fix that glitch before it comes out, and it will probly have a solid single player mode and multiplayer.

True Grit - December 27, 2008 05:22 AM (GMT)
zombie mode is great.

BrownsFan9 - December 27, 2008 02:52 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (True Grit @ Dec 26 2008, 11:22 PM)
zombie mode is great.

True that. I love that mode.

Raider - February 4, 2009 02:42 PM (GMT)
I REALLY liked Modern Warfare, but I have never really been able to get into the older WWI and WWII-based games. I need to have assault rifles, sniper rifles, RPGs, etc. It seems the games set back in the old days try to overdo the authenticity of the older weapons.

True Grit - February 4, 2009 08:43 PM (GMT)
Well, this game was by far the best WWII game. This year a Modern Warfare II is supposed to come out.


Im still waiting on a Vietnman war game though. Or civil war. Revolutionary War could be cool too.

TexasTech - February 4, 2009 11:14 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (True Grit @ Feb 4 2009, 03:43 PM)
Well, this game was by far the best WWII game. This year a Modern Warfare II is supposed to come out.


Im still waiting on a Vietnman war game though. Or civil war. Revolutionary War could be cool too.

I think developers are scared to make a game based on the Vietnam war since we lost. A Civil/Revolutionary War game would be boring if they made it realistic. Imagine shooting once and then waiting 30 seconds or so for the musket reload. Awesome.

COD 5 almost was a Vietnam game, though. Half of it was guerrilla warfare in the South Pacific, and the other half was trench warfare. The Russian campaign was the highlight of COD 5. I also found the game to be unnecessarily brutal. I realize it's a war, and war isn't pretty, but there were so many times where they made you watch some helpless person get executed. I didn't see the point. There was one part of the Russian campaign where they give you a choice whether or not to execute a bunch of guys huddled in a tunnel who have surrended. I didn't do it, so one of my comrades throws a molotov cocktail at them and torches their asses. WTF?

I like some of the WWII guns. The Springfield is cool, as is the ever-entertaining Garand. A few of the German guns were fun. The Japanese weapons sucked ass. That bolt-action Arisaka was terrible. Ugh. Good game, but it could have been better.

True Grit - February 4, 2009 11:39 PM (GMT)
I didnt think the brutality was that bad. I have played games that were much more gory.

TheGuru - February 5, 2009 03:19 PM (GMT)
I was asleep at the wheel on this one. The other day I was walking around Best Buy and came across this and couldnt remember if it was the same as "Modern Warfare" the last one I had.

Overall, what do you guys think that got it? Worth getting or no?

BrownsFan9 - February 5, 2009 06:39 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (TheGuru @ Feb 5 2009, 09:19 AM)
I was asleep at the wheel on this one. The other day I was walking around Best Buy and came across this and couldnt remember if it was the same as "Modern Warfare" the last one I had.

Overall, what do you guys think that got it? Worth getting or no?

Overall I think its a pretty good game and its worth getting. However, if your not really into the whole WWII scene it might be better to get Modern Warfare.

I really like the guns and everything in World at War, but it does take some getting used to, with the rifles and machine guns. My favorite rifle would have to be the M1A1 Carbine and the MP40 is my favorite sub-machine gun.




* Hosted for free by InvisionFree