The Consensus on COD:WaW

E

edifyingkarma

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Mar 8, 2008
Messages
1,464
As excited and trigger happy I have been about this 4th Q title release season, one question goes unanswered. I would like to know the general consensus of COD:WaW before I go buy a copy of it for PC. I loved COD4, 3 sucked, if that helps.

Is the 5th installment of the COD series a winner or a flaming piece of whale shit?

(vote yes or no, and give an explanation)

Thanks
 
I'm kinda iffy at the moment.

Haven't tried single-player.

MP has quite a few maps, but honestly like five of them look the same. A lot of them are "town" environments, with lots of broken up buildings and windows to snipe from. This makes the action a bit less predictable than MP in the other games, which is good....

Starting out in MP seems kinda slow, due to the weapons and perks you have at your disposal... but I think things will pick up once everyone figures out what is going on. I certainly don't regret buying it at this point.
 
based on the multiplayer i say yes it's good. IMO if you like COD4 MP you'll like COD:WaW MP.
 
i pick up my copy tomorrow night..... i sprung for the collectors edition because i wanted the mg42 lol man i have spent alot of money on video games in the past three weeks :( oh well
 
reviews are looking good for this game. thinking it will be my thanksgiving day game of choice
 
i was a bit iffy when i saw people bashing it, but i knew theres more to it, and their just probably dumb/retarded cause infinity ward didn't make the game and thoughts of the old cod3 came into play.

they were wrong, if anyone says anything bad about this game, i wanna hear why. One of the things i was hearing was guns sounding wimpy, but with my sound system turned all the way up, i couldn't notice. I haven't played multi that much, but im liking it, i have been playing cod since uo, which i have been playing ever since, and im loving cod5. the game looks amazing and is worth getting. I havent played cod4 that much, and i dont know if its better, but this game is a buy for sure.
 
Dumb AI lets say I'm leading the way and we encounter an enemy encampment, I take cover behind something but as soon as my AI teammates they push me out of the way forcing me to take another defensive position.

If the enemy is focused on targeting my AI allies they forget about me.

AI seems to only target me and not my teammates when we are taking cover.

All the usual complaints nothing new, but kinda annoying its still around in 2008.

Everything feels like been there done that.

I'm not gonna bother with multiplayer, Left 4 Dead is coming out next week so bleh.
 
Casper312 said:
i was a bit iffy when i saw people bashing it, but i knew theres more to it, and their just probably dumb/retarded cause infinity ward didn't make the game and thoughts of the old cod3 came into play.

they were wrong, if anyone says anything bad about this game, i wanna hear why. One of the things i was hearing was guns sounding wimpy, but with my sound system turned all the way up, i couldn't notice. I haven't played multi that much, but im liking it, i have been playing cod since uo, which i have been playing ever since, and im loving cod5. the game looks amazing and is worth getting. I havent played cod4 that much, and i dont know if its better, but this game is a buy for sure.
Click to expand...

Everybody's complaint about the game is that it is just CoD4 in disguise. The gameplay is exactly the same, and unlike the comparison between Oblivion and Fallout 3, CoD5 doesn't have a marvelous storyline to back it up in the face of this sort of criticism.

It feels sort of like BF2142 did compared to BF2. They are really the same game, but BF2142 was sold as a separate package even though it was little more than a mod of the original.
 
CoD 5 multiplayer feels just like CoD4, but with a better 7-kill streak ability.

Small improvements, but no major departures, if you liked the last one, you'll like this one. It's a safe buy. After all, by now most of us have prestiged at least 3 or 4 times already and will want the new maps offered by the "sequel".
 
I vote no, horrible, definite pass.

CoD1 and CoD2 were the best WWII games ever (imo), and to insult those by using the same engine as CoD4 for the new game is kind of insulting. I hated the gameplay in CoD4, adding softcore and hardcore is a GREAT way to divide your community up, most of us would like a spot right in between both of them and I believe the original games offered that.

If you liked CoD4 then why spend another $50 on the same game with different weapons?

But I guess as always these types of games appeal to the masses and the diehards will just have to deal with it as always.

I miss rifles only on carentan...
 
I for one think it's awesome

the new modes in the game are kick-ass. capture the flag, war, etc.

the tanks kind of suck, but other than that nothing feels better than shooting 7 people in the face and then releasing a pack of angry dogs on them.
 
I've played every CoD since before the original got a patch. I've been doing so casually, and competitively, with some insanely high-level players. I love CoD. I love bolt-action rifles. I like the cinematism of the on-rails singleplayer campaign. I LOVE bashing people in the teeth with my rifle butt.

I'm not buying WaW. It was fun to begin with, but it quickly became apparent that it suffers from many of the things that flawed CoD4, the only problem being that Treyarch can't create a game that is great despite those flaws, as IW did with CoD4. I don't play CoD4 any more for the same reasons, there are far too many silly niggles. I thought they'd fix them, but apparently not.

Most importantly, as Killa_32373273273 said: it needs no distinct modes, and a damage model the same as CoD2. Simpletoncore: one hundred thousand million billion jillion squillion hits to down someone. Hardcore: one or two. CoD2 had it spot on, and there was no need to change it.
 
I'll buy this game when I have the money for it,

it is alot like cod4, but im going to enjoy the 4 player coop and zombie mode. But before WaW im goignt o get L4D and play the hell out of that lol.
 
I played it with friends over the weekend, I really enjoyed it. I'm definitely a fan of ww2 weaponry, I like the trade offs between powerful rifles and fire rate. I do like the better friend system and cd-key account (though a true account log in is still desired).

I was on the fence, thought I'd play some CoD4 yesterday to get a feel if I'd be happy just playing CoD4 MP again, but then I realized I wanted to play more CTF and War modes, so I said screw it and bought my copy.

Sure the game isn't for everyone, but you need to remember a lot complainers around here are protesting it purely on the studio change.
 
Played it the whole evening yesterday. Coop with 2 of my friends. It's AWESOME. Granted, we got through 2/3 of the missions in about 4 hours, but single-player is actually longer since it has a few missions that aren't in coop (like the PBY Catalina and sniper levels). Multiplayer kicks ass like always.
 
Played for 3 hours last night and love it. The maps are larger and the sound seems better then COD4. I got the game with low expectations as many of my friends did but we all like it.
 
Anyone who says this game is not good is basing it off of misinformation. The game if released by itself under any other name would be a solid 9.0. It runs very well, the game play works great, the graphics are good, etc. There is no reason to not like this game except for personal preference. Of course you can compare this game to the other COD's all day long and pick it apart, but every time they release a new COD this happens. The people who loved the old COD's gripe about the new ones. It never fails.

Right now COD:World at War is the best FPS, especially multiplayer, that you can buy.
 
Wally said:
Most importantly, as Killa_32373273273 said: it needs no distinct modes, and a damage model the same as CoD2. Simpletoncore: one hundred thousand million billion jillion squillion hits to down someone. Hardcore: one or two. CoD2 had it spot on, and there was no need to change it.
Click to expand...

Are you just trying to be a jackass? :p
 
Killa_2327 said:
Are you just trying to be a jackass? :p
Click to expand...

Couldn't remember your display name thing.

Anyone who says this game is not good is basing it off of misinformation. The game if released by itself under any other name would be a solid 9.0. It runs very well, the game play works great, the graphics are good, etc. There is no reason to not like this game except for personal preference. Of course you can compare this game to the other COD's all day long and pick it apart, but every time they release a new COD this happens. The people who loved the old COD's gripe about the new ones. It never fails.
Click to expand...

WRAONG. That's a fat wrong right there. People need to stop saying "UGH GAME NOT BAD JUST BECAUSE TREYARCH" and accept that there are aspects that are bad in their own right, and were bad when Infinity Ward implemented/didn't correct them in CoD4, as i actually have mentioned multiple times.

I personally loved CoD4 when it came out, despite being a hardcore CoD/UO/CoD2 fanatic. It was only with time that I came to realise what stupid things they'd done to the series, and I'm disappointed to see they've not considered them with CoD:WaW.
 
edifyingkarma said:
As excited and trigger happy I have been about this 4th Q title release season, one question goes unanswered. I would like to know the general consensus of COD:WaW before I go buy a copy of it for PC. I loved COD4, 3 sucked, if that helps.

Is the 5th installment of the COD series a winner or a flaming piece of whale shit?

(vote yes or no, and give an explanation)

Thanks
Click to expand...

metacritic.com
 
I have to say that head shots sound great...hehe In comparison to COD4 I don't think I am sold yet. Single player has a great storyline so far, in that you get sucked in just like COD4. The artillery fire sounds creepy as hell and dogs tearing you to shreds is startling, but at the same time, annoying. Sometimes enemies are harder to distinguish, especially online. I think anyone who likes COD4 and a WWII theme, will enjoy the game.

For me, I don't enjoy it as much as COD4 (mostly because I really dig the modern weapons), but it will grow on me and I certainly don't regret getting in the slightest. Comparisons to COD4 aside, it is a good game on it's own.
 
Sniper|3d-R| said:
I can't wait to try the 4 person co-op killing nazi zombies! :)
Click to expand...

This alone made it worth my while tonight. I haven't had that much fun in a long time. 3 of my boys on TeamSpeak with me, coordination + strategy = a huge pile of dead zombies.
 
Wally said:
I personally loved CoD4 when it came out, despite being a hardcore CoD/UO/CoD2 fanatic. It was only with time that I came to realise what stupid things they'd done to the series, and I'm disappointed to see they've not considered them with CoD:WaW.
Click to expand...

I'm glad you came around.

I also loved CoD4 when it came out til I realized how horrible it really was. CoD1/2 we're perfect and didn't need anything done to them except maybe new maps and graphical upgrades, but they completely changed the core gameplay which ruined CoD4 for me and which is why CoD5 sucks.

Oh and also because CoD5 is completely ridiculous. Unleash the dogs? Are you fucking serious?
 
Finished a bit more, and this is not as good as COD2 or even 4 but still decent fun.
 
Its horrible.

Sound: 4/10
Graphics: 5/10
Gameplay: 3/10
Replay: 0/10

I am having to force myself to play through it to feel like it was worth it.
 
I think it's a worthy addition to the series, and that the people saying it's utterly horrible are just trying too hard.
 
Killa_2327 said:
I'm glad you came around.

I also loved CoD4 when it came out til I realized how horrible it really was. CoD1/2 we're perfect and didn't need anything done to them except maybe new maps and graphical upgrades, but they completely changed the core gameplay which ruined CoD4 for me and which is why CoD5 sucks.

Oh and also because CoD5 is completely ridiculous. Unleash the dogs? Are you fucking serious?
Click to expand...

The dogs would be ok if there was a limited number of them, so there was actually any point in defending yourself from them. In CoD4 you could shoot the chopper down and be done with it, but every time someone sets dogs on us I slash or shoot my way through seven or so of the little bastards before I realise that it's futile, and just let them kill me and sit and spectate until their timer expires. Respawning dogs is idiotic.
 
Wally said:
The dogs would be ok if there was a limited number of them, so there was actually any point in defending yourself from them. In CoD4 you could shoot the chopper down and be done with it, but every time someone sets dogs on us I slash or shoot my way through seven or so of the little bastards before I realise that it's futile, and just let them kill me and sit and spectate until their timer expires. Respawning dogs is idiotic.
Click to expand...

you sure about this? i could swear i've played on teams where we eliminated all the dogs before the 60 seconds was up.
 
i havent played the beta but in my opinion from videos the mp seems like it plays exactly like cod4 but with ww2
 
Lame, me and my buddies finished the coop campaign yesterday and it turns out you have to play the solo campaign to unlock the zombie mode. Good thing it's one hell of a good game so I won't mind.
 
IF you own CoD4, imagine the same thing, but with WW2 guns and WW2 scenery. Then think to yourself, why go back into the past when I already got a solid game for today.

I played it on the X360 this weekend, for a solid 3 hours, the AI for the campaign were as dumb as could be, I knifed 6 Japanese dudes back to back w/o dying, and to be honest that aspect of the game is pretty cool, but the whole mechanics when it came to the guns seemed off, especially what I have been used to with CoD1 and 2.

It seems like people are going out to buy this game to spite the people who hate on it, because I honestly cant see a reason why you would buy this game, especially if you own call of duty 4. World War 2 has been done to death, and I had more fun playing call of duty 2 in that aspect.

All this game is, is a 3rd party remake for a money grab, nothing more. IT should be an addon to CoD4 and it should be 30 dollars, max. There are plenty of other games out there worth the 50 and 60 dollars, just not this one.
 
Simpson5774 said:
It seems like people are going out to buy this game to spite the people who hate on it, because I honestly cant see a reason why you would buy this game, especially if you own call of duty 4.
Click to expand...

well i know that's why i bought it...just to piss you off. it couldn't possibly be because we have difference of opinion.
 
I just walked into my local BestBuy and saw 3 different prices for the " regular version" and the Collectors Edition.
Regular = $69.99 crossed out and no price [WTF]?
Regular = $49.99
CE = $79.99
CE = $49.99
At the checkout the girl honored the $49.99 CE Box as she called for someone to check the prices on COD.
Neat commerative metal canteen, tin box and mg42 right off the bat in MP.
Installed, patched and about to try it.
I like WWII games so I'll probably like it.
 
Wally said:
The dogs would be ok if there was a limited number of them, so there was actually any point in defending yourself from them. In CoD4 you could shoot the chopper down and be done with it, but every time someone sets dogs on us I slash or shoot my way through seven or so of the little bastards before I realise that it's futile, and just let them kill me and sit and spectate until their timer expires. Respawning dogs is idiotic.
Click to expand...

Umm, you get XP for each dog you kill. Light em up.

Jeff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top