Gaming Forums => Nintendo Gaming => Topic started by: BeautifulShy on June 23, 2008, 06:31:45 PM
Title: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on June 23, 2008, 06:31:45 PM
I didn't see a topic about this so I am making one. If this is in the wrong place please move it mods. I don't really have that much experience with this genre. I only played Medal of Honor: Frontline on the cube.More info in a few minutes. Here is a interview Http://videogamer.com/xbox360/Cod_world_at_war/preview-1034.html And here is a link to some previews and impressions http://gonintendo.com/?p=47263
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 23, 2008, 06:50:15 PM
They are settings us up for disappointment.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on June 23, 2008, 07:13:03 PM
How can the settings be disappointing you don't know about them.j/k
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: ShyGuy on June 23, 2008, 07:57:36 PM
The developers say this matches the PS3/360 version feature wise, so I'm excited.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Adrock on June 23, 2008, 07:58:18 PM
Supposedly the team working on the Wii version of CoD is "a special team at Treyarch focused specifically on the Wii" who "live, eat and breathe Wii." (Read the rest of the interview Here (http://computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=191511)) Sure. I would like to believe that, but I won't until I have reason to. There are rumors all over the internets about how 3rd parties are finally getting their sh*t together and going all out on the Wii because they realized that it's a completely untapped market and a viable console for hardcore games and so on and so forth etcetera etcetera. That's a bunch of bull to me because well, what the hell are they waitng for? The second coming? Or TGS? E3? Or should I say that trade show that no one gives a crap about anymore? I remember when May was creeping up and gamers the world over would get crotch tingles just thinking about E3. Seriously, just announcing something, maybe not everything but something, would raise stocks because the Wii is such a powerhouse. So I'll remain skeptical until the Wii gets the kind of respect that the PS2 commanded. Anything less is simply not worth the excitement because it's probably going to be a letdown.
Cynical, I know.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on June 23, 2008, 08:31:42 PM
What do you think about the difference of eras between Call of Duty 4 and Call of duty: World at war? Does it matter that you are back in World war 2 vs. Modern Times?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Adrock on June 23, 2008, 09:32:45 PM
No modern weapons, vehicles etc.... that's about it. Or they could cheat like in Metal Gear Solid 3 and have enemies on personal hover crafts and whatnot. Cold War, World War II... same thing.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: blackfootsteps on June 23, 2008, 09:39:34 PM
Infinity Ward > Treyarch
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 23, 2008, 10:10:16 PM
If Gunnery Sgt. R. Lee Ermey is my radio contact in the game, my opinion of its prospects would improve. Give me that ol' A-Team, Mail Call vibe.
Otherwise the ps3/360 games could STINK, and the Wii version would match that same level of FUNK -- and we don't know how well the controls are implemented.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Dirk Temporo on June 23, 2008, 10:53:00 PM
What do you think about the difference of eras between Call of Duty 4 and Call of duty: World at war? Does it matter that you are back in World war 2 vs. Modern Times?
Yes. I'm f**king sick of all these rehashed WW2 games. Nothing could ever make me buy another one.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 23, 2008, 11:00:00 PM
BUT THIS GAME HAS JUNGLE TREES WITH BIG LEAFY LEAVES
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on June 23, 2008, 11:10:20 PM
What do you think about the difference of eras between Call of Duty 4 and Call of duty: World at war? Does it matter that you are back in World war 2 vs. Modern Times?
Yes. I'm f**king sick of all these rehashed WW2 games. Nothing could ever make me buy another one.
What would make you buy one?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Dasmos on June 23, 2008, 11:37:03 PM
What do you think about the difference of eras between Call of Duty 4 and Call of duty: World at war? Does it matter that you are back in World war 2 vs. Modern Times?
Yes. I'm f**king sick of all these rehashed WW2 games. Nothing could ever make me buy another one.
What would make you buy one?
Nothing.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Spak-Spang on June 23, 2008, 11:54:58 PM
I am really upset. All they had to do was make a Wii version of Modern Warfare...or even a game with different levels and story, but in modern times.
Now, that it is in World War 2 again, I just don't care about this game. They lost a purchase with that choice...and that is disappointing, because we have had WAY too many World War 2 games. Why not focus again on modern times...or at least perhaps move up to Vietnam War or something other than WW2.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: ShyGuy on June 24, 2008, 12:17:48 AM
I can't wait for screenshots.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: blackfootsteps on June 24, 2008, 12:19:38 AM
Why not focus again on modern times...or at least perhaps move up to Vietnam War or something other than WW2.
What about an Iraq war sim, complete with prisoner torture minigames? Wii waggle would be incredibly realistic.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: AV on June 24, 2008, 12:55:13 AM
Modern War is such an amazing game its on the top of the list for local multiplayer with my friends. I am so sick of the World War 2. Sort of getting sick of SCI FI shooters too, so modern is so fresh.
This is a step back, if it was infinite ward I would give a damn but as of now they have to prove to me I should care.
Not into Vietnam, or Civil War crap either.
Revolutionary or War of 1812, or Spanish American War now that would be something special. 8)
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Adrock on June 24, 2008, 01:08:41 AM
I'm sick of seeing WWII games, but regardless of setting, I'll be content with the Wii getting a decent version of a multiplatform game that isn't a port of a PS2 game. The bright side is that the Wii is getting this game. Even the DS got a version of Modern Warfare. Maybe not the greatest, but better than nothing.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: animecyberrat on June 24, 2008, 01:19:07 AM
a game set in the American Revolution would be cool. Haven't they already done that though? If not how come?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: AV on June 24, 2008, 01:22:09 AM
a game set in the American Revolution would be cool. Haven't they already done that though? If not how come?
It takes several minutes to reload a musket thats why. Gamers are not patient. I guess you could fight as Americans and the gorilla warfare we used to win that war
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Smoke39 on June 24, 2008, 01:23:27 AM
Someone should make a wild west FPS that's better than just mediocre.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: animecyberrat on June 24, 2008, 01:24:16 AM
well nobody said it had to be realistic with the guns physics. There was this gun in COD2 or 3, forget which one, that took *forever* to reload, it wasn't a good gun to have but it was one you got , well I got stuck with a lot anyways.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Kairon on June 24, 2008, 01:24:41 AM
I happen to enjoy the black-and-white moral clarity from the last great war. CoD:WaW, and History channel reruns, here I come!
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: IceCold on June 24, 2008, 03:25:20 AM
Quote
Revolutionary or War of 1812
That would be incredible! I'd love to play as Laura Secord..
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on June 24, 2008, 04:09:37 AM
a game set in the American Revolution would be cool. Haven't they already done that though? If not how come?
I think there was a game back on the SNES called Liberty or Death.In it you could play as either side.I don't think there has been a more recent one.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NWR_insanolord on June 24, 2008, 06:08:38 AM
Vega's got the exact reason there's no Revolutionary War game, you only have one weapon and it only holds one round and takes forever to reload.
There's only one real war that works as a game without issues about the level of technology or the morality/public perception of the war: World War II. That's why there are so many games set there. A fictional modern-day or near-future war is fresh, but the way the industry works it won't be for long.
I hope when Sci-Fi and Modern get played out they go back to the concept of a lone secret agent that single-handedly takes down big plots to rule the world.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: animecyberrat on June 24, 2008, 11:36:07 AM
We had more "weapons" n the revolution than just the musket, they weren't all "guns" but we had them. They could focus not on a fast paced action 2st person shooter, but maybe a action game that has you using blunt weapons a lot and melee combat more than using the gun. It could be done, very well in fact, if a competent developer handled it. I think the problem lies more in, America isn't so popular right now so nobody thinks a game about our beginnings would sell to non-Americans. It likely won't happen ever but I think it could and would be cool.
Out side of WWII, the futuristic setting is the only other option it seams. How about something like Heretic, a Fantasy FPS that uses Magic instead of weapons?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Spak-Spang on June 24, 2008, 12:30:25 PM
True...there World War 2 is the only "moral" war that can be exploited.
But a fictional war would be a great concept. Set it in modern times, or whatever era you want...and just write a what if war with the technology and weapons of that time period. If need be don't even do it with real countries to but still with whatever era of weapons you decided.
I am just completely bored with WW2 stuff...and a good Western would be good, but then you go to what? The Mexican American War? Another problem is War strategy was horrible back then....it was mostly lining people up for big battles, which also isn't very fun or cool.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: animecyberrat on June 24, 2008, 12:35:37 PM
I got the answer, time travel. Britain sends a bunch of their modern troops, and technology back in time to stop the US from winning their independence, so the Americans only have enough power in their time machine to send either a single soldier back or a single platoon. What causes this to come about could be anybody's guess but it could work.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NWR_insanolord on June 24, 2008, 12:39:38 PM
I got the answer, time travel. Britain sends a bunch of their modern troops, and technology back in time to stop the US from winning their independence, so the Americans only have enough power in their time machine to send either a single soldier back or a single platoon. What causes this to come about could be anybody's guess but it could work.
You just described the greatest action movie ever conceived. One man has to go back in time and beat the entire British army singlehandedly with only whatever's left in his clip and dual wielding muskets in order to stop them from erasing America from history. If that doesn't get your blood pumping you've been dead for at least a year.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Spak-Spang on June 24, 2008, 12:55:34 PM
Actually that would kind of work.
But the story is how America really won its independence...and it starts off in the future where the English have taken over a majority of Europe and America and have a strangle hold of the Ocean's and all trade. Historians look back to the British defeating America's attempt to gain independence and the key event that lead to this current domination.
So they send a single man back into time to win the American Revolution. Since he is armed with the latest Body Armor and modern day weaponry it is conceivable that a lone soldier would be like a terminator in that time period...and he has the history records of what happened to how...to help the Americans. Armed with that information he rallies the Americans and leads them to victory.
The twist is that he will eventually get killed half way through the story and George Washington saves him, and before he dies is told how to use the weaponry...the rest of the story is George Washington with future tech destroying the British for American independence.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: ShyGuy on June 24, 2008, 12:56:45 PM
Another reason WWII is popular is the nature of the combat. Fast paced, massive land battles that have opportunities for players to go mano a mano.
I will get this game because I have a weakspot for FPS games like an Otaku for a JRPG.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NWR_insanolord on June 24, 2008, 01:03:37 PM
But the story is how America really won its independence...and it starts off in the future where the English have taken over a majority of Europe and America and have a strangle hold of the Ocean's and all trade. Historians look back to the British defeating America's attempt to gain independence and the key event that lead to this current domination.
So they send a single man back into time to win the American Revolution. Since he is armed with the latest Body Armor and modern day weaponry it is conceivable that a lone soldier would be like a terminator in that time period...and he has the history records of what happened to how...to help the Americans. Armed with that information he rallies the Americans and leads them to victory.
The twist is that he will eventually get killed half way through the story and George Washington saves him, and before he dies is told how to use the weaponry...the rest of the story is George Washington with future tech destroying the British for American independence.
Now I'm sad because this will never happen.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Kairon on June 24, 2008, 03:56:21 PM
But the story is how America really won its independence...and it starts off in the future where the English have taken over a majority of Europe and America and have a strangle hold of the Ocean's and all trade. Historians look back to the British defeating America's attempt to gain independence and the key event that lead to this current domination.
So they send a single man back into time to win the American Revolution. Since he is armed with the latest Body Armor and modern day weaponry it is conceivable that a lone soldier would be like a terminator in that time period...and he has the history records of what happened to how...to help the Americans. Armed with that information he rallies the Americans and leads them to victory.
The twist is that he will eventually get killed half way through the story and George Washington saves him, and before he dies is told how to use the weaponry...the rest of the story is George Washington with future tech destroying the British for American independence.
This is so awesome, and you guys are so cool.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 24, 2008, 04:02:17 PM
Time Splitters sounds like the suck in retrospect.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on June 24, 2008, 05:57:49 PM
Spak is brilliant! Here is another interview. Http://joystiq.com/2008/06/24/joystiq-interviews-mark-lamia-of-treyarch-and-call-of-duty-the-f/
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Spak-Spang on June 24, 2008, 06:16:39 PM
I am not brilliant...I elaborated on another person's idea. People are just muses to me...and inspire me to run with their concept.
I don't think it is truly my original idea, but a collaboration with all the boards.
This place is very cool for people to think of ideas.
But yeah this game would be so easy to create. Go through history and play what if on Key Battles in the Revolutionary War, What if the British won this...or what not and then write develop a level around that scenero.
Like for instance a fun level would be what if the British came both by Land and Sea. The American Army is ready for one battle...but you as a one man army must defeat the other army...and it is you and your automatic sniper gun taking them out...if you are over run you will surely die...you must not let that happen.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Shift Key on June 24, 2008, 06:48:28 PM
a game set in the American Revolution would be cool. Haven't they already done that though? If not how come?
The actual re-enactments get you way drunker than you could get while playing a game?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: animecyberrat on June 24, 2008, 06:49:38 PM
What would be cool about it, besides the getting out of WWII, which I don't mind I kinda have a thing got that era anyways, but it would be cool to **** with history.
Shift Key- I never been to one of those.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Shift Key on June 24, 2008, 06:52:54 PM
What would be cool about it, besides the getting out of WWII, which I don't mind I kinda have a thing got that era anyways, but it would be cool to **** with history.
Here are some Xbox 360 screenshots. Http://joystiq.com/photos/call-of-duty-world-at-war/875224/
Fixed.
Fine you look for them as I clearly don't know the difference.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: ShyGuy on June 26, 2008, 09:18:23 AM
HD is overrated confirmed.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on June 26, 2008, 09:48:22 AM
Are those really Xbox360 shots? If so sorry Brandogg.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BranDonk Kong on June 26, 2008, 11:52:21 AM
Yes, they are. Nothing wrong with posting screens, just don't want anyone to think that those are Wii shots. If you hit "hi res" it blows them up to 1024x576, which is the resolution that COD4 uses on 360 and PS3. Anything bigger than 720x480 = not a Wii screenshot.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: ShyGuy on June 26, 2008, 01:15:10 PM
or a Wii Bullshot
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on June 27, 2008, 02:54:03 AM
There are some of the same screenshots over at Gamepro.com they say they are Wii screenshots.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on June 27, 2008, 03:46:49 AM
Completely innaccurate and misleading.
The false media is added anyway so that there's content to browse through, yielding web traffic.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on June 27, 2008, 04:37:15 AM
The false media is added anyway so that there's content to browse through, yielding web traffic.
Ok, thank you Pro.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on June 30, 2008, 04:01:38 PM
I found a trailer. Http://youtube.com/watch?v=4Q7DqnN9Ri8
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on July 10, 2008, 04:35:16 PM
Some more screens (http://Http://ga-forum.com/showthread.php?t=326443)
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on July 10, 2008, 08:29:46 PM
That was completely unnecessary.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on July 10, 2008, 08:33:13 PM
Yea you are right.I'll change it.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on July 10, 2008, 08:53:30 PM
I still don't see Wii screens.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on July 11, 2008, 12:48:23 AM
Fine I'll stop posting in here till we get info on the wii version!
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on July 11, 2008, 05:04:13 AM
Here are some details on the Wii version of the game. http://gonintendo.com/?p=49242
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Kenology on July 11, 2008, 09:31:13 AM
Hmmm... CoD4 engine at 60 fps... Let's hope they nail the controls a la MOHH2. I'm sick of WWII shooters, but if this is good, I'll give it a try.
And holy hell, please go for an M-rating. FPS is the one genre where an M-rating is necessary... leave sanitized war to the Medal of Honor series.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on July 15, 2008, 10:56:16 PM
This seems to be shaping up well.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on July 15, 2008, 11:00:07 PM
In your opinion Pro how does it look?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: ShyGuy on July 16, 2008, 12:42:19 AM
I think it looks suprisingly good. Honestly if I just caught the trailer without context and somebody said it was a 360 or PS3 game, I would have believed them. The fire looks really good.
Any links to screenshots?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on July 16, 2008, 01:00:26 AM
And holy hell, please go for an M-rating. FPS is the one genre where an M-rating is necessary... leave sanitized war to the Medal of Honor series.
I can't even imagine how a ratings group could give a war game anything less than M. Can just as well leave the blood in when you've got a game about shooting people.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Spinnzilla on July 16, 2008, 11:51:04 AM
http://www.cinemablend.com/games/Nintendo-At-E3-Call-Of-Duty-World-At-War-DS-And-Wii-Screens-11305.html? only a hand full of screen shots, two of the wii version and two of the fantastic looking DS version
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on August 03, 2008, 02:04:16 PM
Http://computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=191511 Here is a interview.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on August 26, 2008, 04:36:10 PM
If it has been, I can't see it. Is that because I shut off the cursing filters?
I see the "gonincompoop" in ShyGuy's post, and I can see curse words, so I think there's another filter. Test: gonintendo.com
Well, I can type it, so it's either a conspiracy that ShyGuy's in on or it's in the posting preferences instead of the reading preferences.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on August 27, 2008, 02:40:19 PM
Why won't Activision show us that the Wii version is good instead of just telling the press "it's going to be good"?
Do they expect the Wii version to sell anyway and therefore they don't need to hype it?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on August 27, 2008, 08:08:51 PM
Yeah I annoyed by that.This game is the only one that I can think of that does that.Sure Wii has the largest fanbase but that doesn't mean that you can just send it out there to die.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on September 04, 2008, 04:25:14 PM
The release date is set at November 11th for all versions.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Kairon on September 04, 2008, 10:59:23 PM
That's what they say...but... well, I'll believe it when I see Wii video.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on September 05, 2008, 12:16:15 AM
lol is it more believable than Brothers in Arms?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on September 05, 2008, 02:57:15 PM
Europe will get this November 14th.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on October 01, 2008, 11:40:32 PM
Congratulations, its disappoints on the same levels as Brothers in Arms.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 11, 2008, 09:35:20 PM
So are there any reliable impressions yet?
Are the controls silky and responsive like Metroid Prime 3 or not?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on November 11, 2008, 10:09:10 PM
From what I have gathered from around the Net. The Frame rate is 30.It slows down when there are explosions. The controls are good but not of the calibur of Prime 3 and MOHH.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on November 11, 2008, 10:19:50 PM
Did anybody pick up the game today?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 11, 2008, 10:20:38 PM
what the hell, it's supposed to be out already?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on November 11, 2008, 10:31:07 PM
Yep same day as Tales. Today was a good day for Wii releases.That Star Wars Clone Lightsabers battle came out today also.I just found out today about the star wars game.
I don't know should I make a thread showing weekly releases?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Mario on November 11, 2008, 11:02:58 PM
Geez. Nobody buys games anymore. WTF is going on?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 11, 2008, 11:14:42 PM
I blame music games. Just like I blamed skateboarding games last generation.
What do they have in common, then and now?
Activision
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Stogi on November 11, 2008, 11:30:15 PM
I can't afford many games. I've haven't bought a game day one since Brawl.
I might have to start stripping in the evenings.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BranDonk Kong on November 12, 2008, 12:03:22 AM
I've played a little bit of the game, and I'm pretty impressed. The graphics aren't too much better than COD3 (though the heads/faces on character models are *excellent* from what I've seen so far), the control has been tightened up quite a bit. It definitely seems more like a Wii game than a PS2 port with added waggle.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on November 12, 2008, 12:09:43 AM
I am glad you picked this up Brandogg. Have you tried the co-op and online?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: ShyGuy on November 16, 2008, 05:48:31 PM
Now that I'm back, I need to get this game. Impressions to come.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: MaleficentOgre on November 16, 2008, 07:19:43 PM
Treyarch is awesome. That is all.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BranDonk Kong on November 16, 2008, 09:29:48 PM
Haven't had a chance to play it again yet...will do soon however, and post my FC and whatnot.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Stogi on November 16, 2008, 09:53:50 PM
Is anyone buying it for any other system?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Dasmos on November 16, 2008, 10:12:23 PM
I'll probably pick it up for 360 in the coming weeks.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Spinnzilla on November 16, 2008, 11:10:21 PM
My younger brother will be picking it up for the 360.
When the beta was out, I played it a little bit. Way more engaging than I ever found Modern Warfare.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on November 16, 2008, 11:35:44 PM
I'm getting it for the far FAR superior Wonder Swan Color
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Stogi on November 17, 2008, 02:34:01 AM
Ya, I think I may cop the PS3. Well, if I think it's worthy of purchase of course. I got to play it first.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: ShyGuy on November 19, 2008, 04:18:52 AM
So I picked this up tonight. Great production values. Controls are very good. Not great, but very good. I guess the online play is friend codes only?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Mario on November 19, 2008, 04:20:44 AM
Not great, what stops that from happening? Are they fast enough?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BranDonk Kong on November 19, 2008, 11:38:08 AM
There are only 3 options for the "bounding box"...that's why.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: ShyGuy on November 19, 2008, 12:06:24 PM
What Brandogg said, you can adjust the pointer speed, bounding box, etc. It still controls very well. You just don't have as many options as MOHH2.
The levels are pretty frantic. I also finally got the non-friend codes online random matches to work.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: ShyGuy on November 19, 2008, 11:08:36 PM
I'm really liking this so far, despite the WWII retread. The advancement in multiplayer is a good incentive and I'm loving the flamethrower. Loving it.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: ShyGuy on November 25, 2008, 01:19:56 PM
Why aren't you haters playing this game? I don't think you guys are really hardcore. It has the best online gaming for the Wii, good visuals, and plenty of violence. Put down your copy of Cooking Mama and try the best Wii game of Q4 08!
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 25, 2008, 01:37:27 PM
I've yet to read detailed impressions/comparison of the aiming. Also, ballistics and projectile collision detection. Someone care to do so?
Can I look around and move at will without much concentration like in MP3? Or is there some noticeable drag in the pointer, like the disgusting Red Steel?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: BeautifulShy on November 25, 2008, 01:40:47 PM
Shyguy if I had the money I would get this.This will have to wait till the new year.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: ShyGuy on November 25, 2008, 02:03:15 PM
Aiming is very good, if MOHH2's FPS controls were a 9.5, COD:WAW's controls would be an 8.5. Although there is not as much to tweak, I found it very comfortable with the sensitivity turned up on all settings and the bounding box made as small as possible. Very little drag in this game. I think the controls in MP3 may be slightly better, but that may be due more to the enemies and pacing of the Metroid game. My favorite control mapping scheme is Delta, which puts Aim on the A button, crouch on the C button, sprint/use on the Z trigger, and the two grenade types to plus and minus. More on grenades later.
One thing to know about the gun control of this game is that when you are walking, your reticule spreads out and your accuracy is worse. To really be accurate, you have to stop and look down your iron sights or scope.
One annoying thing about grenades is the enemy makes constant use of them. You will get a grenade warning message when one has landed near you, which means time to split! However, sometimes you have less than a second to react and that can lead to unexpected deaths. One way to combat the grenade spamming is when you are close enough to a grenade, you have the option to pick it up and throw it back. This takes quick reaction time though.
The only annoying campaign level so far has been a tank level. The tank moves slowly and sometimes it's hard to tell which direction is forward. Expect to be blown up a lot before you reach the next checkpoint.
Multiplayer is pretty good even on random opponents, but I wish more than 8 players per match were available. The bonuses are fun, I especially like the dogs.
Did that cover everything?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 25, 2008, 02:53:12 PM
Have you run into situations where you're shooting at an enemy point-blank, yet there's no apparent reaction on their part? (the trademark of last-gen 007 games)
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: ShyGuy on November 25, 2008, 03:14:13 PM
No, nothing like that, not even in online.
I've only seen a couple AI glitches. One where a comrade and an enemy were on opposite sides of the wall shooting at each other and missing, another where a comrade got stuck running against a small cliff. In fact sometimes the AI is so good they will accomplish your objectives for you.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 25, 2008, 03:33:38 PM
OK I'm sold.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NWR_insanolord on November 25, 2008, 03:42:05 PM
If it's limited to 8 players and grenades are still annoying and it uses friend codes what makes the online play better than MOH: Heroes 2?
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: ShyGuy on November 25, 2008, 03:58:39 PM
Although it uses friend codes it has random online play which puts you on a server. You can specify what skill level to play against somewhat.
I has a nice feature that allows you to customize your loadout and skill bonuses, and you level up as you play the game. Purists may not like this, but I thought the MMO trappings worked well. The bonuses like artillery, scout planes and attack dogs are cool.
Although you can't have as many players as MOHH2, I think the maps are much better. I like the feel of the weapons better too. Also, the netcode seems a little less laggy.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 26, 2008, 07:45:30 PM
I purchased said game software title today. I'm holding you responsible!
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: ShyGuy on November 26, 2008, 08:23:17 PM
The buck stops here. Enjoy the delicious particle effects of a German forest fire.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: DAaaMan64 on November 27, 2008, 01:22:31 AM
Shyguy if I had the money I would get this.This will have to wait till the new year.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 27, 2008, 02:32:24 AM
I have to say, I'm impressed. The game manages to show objects and people that matter without the framerate taking me Back to the Future, without hampering the controls. Good job there.
I've been able to tweak the controls to a setting that's likable. The poor vertical turning speed irritates me to no end (developers, get a fucking clue, with a cherry on top, please). I can't draw neat circles in the air with the pointer (they're more like elipses), evidence that the developer fucked up somewhere. Otherwise, the controls are generally suitable and responsive for the game's designs.
This is a good in-house framework for future Activision titles, and was obviously not shared with the James Bond dev team. This seems to be a solid product that floating-gun fans would be satisfied with.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: DAaaMan64 on November 27, 2008, 01:19:30 PM
Why aren't you haters playing this game? I don't think you guys are really hardcore. It has the best online gaming for the Wii, good visuals, and plenty of violence. Put down your copy of Cooking Mama and try the best Wii game of Q4 08!
Don't tell me this. I've been buying all the other games you losers should be buying!
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: bustin98 on December 01, 2008, 01:22:20 AM
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: ShyGuy on December 10, 2008, 01:10:34 AM
Kenology has a higher score than me. :(
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: ShyGuy on December 10, 2008, 02:30:10 AM
So I beat the single player game tonight, satisfying and good production values throughout. The little animations of reloading, dodging fire and bleeding out in the dirt are those nice little touches that separate an A grade game from a B grade game.
The biggest annoyance is really the nature of this subgenre of shooters. They want to keep the tension high and always make it seem like you are in large scale battle, so the action recycles itself until you progress to certain point on the map. The enemies keep respawing and the sergeant keeps yelling "take out that artillery gun!" until you run forward enough to trigger your comrades to take new covering positions and the enemies stopping popping up to re-man the AA gun. This is fine as long as you keep running through the game at a fast clip, but it shows its seams if you take it too slow.
One thing I am excited about for the future is the potential for more COD4 engine based games on the Wii. Maybe I should rent Quantum of Solace...
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Kenology on December 10, 2008, 07:08:12 PM
I just put in MOHH2 just to check it out after playing so much CoD:WaW.
First thing I noticed is the fluidity - the 60fps goes a long way for MOHH2. Overall, CoD:WaW has a lot more going on as far as effects are concerned. Another advantage of MOHH2 is the sound design. CoD:WaW is a bit too muted for my taste. I notice I have to turn my receiver up higher than normal to get a decent volume. Also, the sound FX for guns aren't nearly as crisp, clear, and authentic as those in MOHH2. Just squeeze of a M1 Girand in MOHH2 and do the same in CoD:WaW and you'll see exactly what I mean.
With that said, CoD:WaW >>>> MOHH2
It should be selling so much better than it is... :( Hopefully it'll have legs and reach at least 500k worldwide by Xmas.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on January 09, 2009, 04:59:36 PM
>> Call of Duty: World at War (http://sixsidedvideo.com/media/wii/codwaw.html) Official trailer
I'm so behind on this game.
Yet I continue to buy Wii gun shells.
Title: Re: Call of Duty: World at War
Post by: Spinnzilla on January 09, 2009, 07:12:05 PM
