Call of Duty: World At War

April 11, 2009

Posted by: Charger57 : Category: Action, Shooter

The fifth installment to the Call of Duty series, Treyarch and Activision made a sweet shooter. The company goes back to the World War 2 setting and uses all of the Modern Warfare features. For instance being able to mod your weapons with scopes, silencers, and larger magazines. This time around we get a neat present from Hollywood, Kiefer Sutherland stars as Sgt. Roebuck. Soon as I heard the voice I recognized it, I knew it was Kiefer. He does a really great job protraying a Seargant in the army.

The game was well put together, but lacked the funness that Modern Warfare had. There's a quite a few things I didn't like. First, I really didn't like how Treyarch sped up the game. Seems unrealistic how quick you could move across the map, almost made me dizzy at times, eventually I got used to it. I have all the Call of Duties and none of them were as fast paced as this one. They really need to slow it down! On to the maps, boring! They just didn't do it for me, I was looking for multi levels and more places to hide. Just didn't like how they set them up. And for some reason I couldn't pick a gun that I liked.

This being the fifth series and all, I expected a lot more from the game. Just seems like Treyarch and Activision threw the game together very fast to make money off of it. I'm not saying it's bad game or anything, just thought they could of created a better game. Believe it or not Modern Warefare 2 is already on its way in November. I've been playing it a bit here and there, but I'm always going back to Modern Warfare. Have to give it a 6 out of 10, I know Team Xbox and IGN have given it perfect scores, I still stand on my rating.

NEW GAMES

Timestamp 2002-01-16T19:31:23Z is more then 900 seconds before current time 2010-09-04 05:22:34Z.

Used GAMES