COD4 vs. COD: WaW, am I missing something or is it not as one sided as it's made out? - High-Def Digest Forums
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-29-2008, 03:53 PM
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,887
Default COD4 vs. COD: WaW, am I missing something or is it not as one sided as it's made out?

I beat Call of Duty: World at War last night and inevitably, I had to bring up my experience with Call of Duty 4.

I'll get back to you guys with how I felt about the multiplayer so all my opinions, as of now are on the single player.

The first mission of COD4 dropped my jaw with how intense it was (which is what I want out of an FPS), what with trying to escape a sinking tanker. While COD: WaW didn't start with a huge bang but it got progressively better as time goes on. The last missions as each the Russian guy and the American guy were both pretty intense and had you fighting for every inch. Enemies were well positioned to punish players for making a lone-Rambo-charge into enemy fire, so it was hard but legitimate, for the most part. It played exactly how I expected it to play, pretty much and I can't really ask for much more because it's already pretty fine tuned as a shooter as is.

I know, I know, World War II is overused and stuff, but this is the first WWII game I've ever owned, and only the second game disc on the subject matter that's ever been in my PS3 (The first of which being COD3). But it does do something other than the really big stuff we've seen time and time again. Normandy and the war in France. The battle of Berlin was masterful. It's look, it's feel, the music (especially the music).... Just every bit about it. I'm going to go as far as to say that I enjoyed this level twice as much as any individual level in Call of Duty 4.

However, I do have to touch on my feelings on the levels. The game uses forcefield type stage barriers and that's lame. Some buildings can't be entered even when there's an opening easily big enough for you. The vehicle level is bleh. The level where you're in the aircraft turret is 'okay'. And finally, a few of the levels were only above average.


The only real problem I had with World at War was that sometimes I'd shoot an enemy but the hit would fail to register, and that was kind of annoying, but it didn't stop me from progressing.

With all that said, the game is still an intense FPS experience. It wasn't untill I approached the end of the game that I had those "what the fuck" moments that I had for most of Call of Duty 4, but being less than one great game does not, by any means, necessarily mean it is not great, itself. While Call of Duty is in every way Infinity Ward's baby, Treyarch has, in my opinion, proven itself quite a bit more than adaquate at handling this franchise..... Even if it did take us back to World War II.

But as the thread title states, I guess I gotta run down a comparison of this game to COD4...

COD4 > COD: WaW (SP only)
Overall intensity
Fewer instances of enemies not getting hit by bullets
Slightly better AI

COD: WaW > COD4 (SP only)
More intense final stages (Battle for Berlin and the last level in the Pacific)
Visually was slightly upped
Musical score
Felt longer in length
Slightly better voice acting

I guess it really depends. I guess I like both about equally well.... I think that if you really give the game a shot and put down Infinity Ward's green koolaid, you'll find that Treyarch has developed a fine product.

I'd probably give it a solid 9 out of 10. It's got a few problems but the rest of the game is so well done that they can be overlooked.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-29-2008, 03:59 PM
jakebonz's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,716
Default

I'm sorry, but WaW story was just plain boring. I felt no attachment with any of the characters. With the Soviet parts, I felt like I was playing COD2 again.

Come to think of it, if you combine the Soviet campaigns in COD2 and COD4, you get the Jude Law movie Enemy at the Gates.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-29-2008, 04:05 PM
Pyrochaos's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 7,059
Default

SP Wise COD4>5

MP Wise COD5>4

IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-29-2008, 04:32 PM
weasl's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 10,800
Default

I believe you're thinking of the COD3 to COD4 comparison. WaW does good enough job copying COD4 to be considered a pretty good game.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-29-2008, 04:37 PM
Onslaught X's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 37,577
Default

I felt zero attachment to any of the characters. Some missions felt like they were trying to emulate the experience of COD4 (the Sniper mission?!), the graphics made no improvement.

Score was better in COD4. Also, the setting isn't as fun, and the engine seems more better built for Modern Warfare, not World War II.
__________________
Don't Reach, Young Blood

Part of The Finer Things Club, The Ghostbusters Club, The American Psycho Club, The SDF on 360 Club
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-29-2008, 04:47 PM
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,887
Default

See I guess we can all agree to disagree but I was surprised with how fun the game was.

Perhaps my standards aren't as strict, though. I was looking for a good FPS experience and thats what I got out of the game.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-29-2008, 04:48 PM
Onslaught X's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 37,577
Default

I didn't say it was bad, but it was certainly inferior to COD4 IMO.

The major plus though was Kiefer Sutherland saying, "Outstanding Marines.....OUTFUCKINGSTANDING"
__________________
Don't Reach, Young Blood

Part of The Finer Things Club, The Ghostbusters Club, The American Psycho Club, The SDF on 360 Club
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-29-2008, 05:06 PM
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 14,887
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Onslaught X View Post
I didn't say it was bad, but it was certainly inferior to COD4 IMO.

The major plus though was Kiefer Sutherland saying, "Outstanding Marines.....OUTFUCKINGSTANDING"
Oh you misread me, didn't mean to imply that you said that... I just don't get all the hate. The game does a lot right. Yeah, it's World War II but it does a lot right.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-29-2008, 05:20 PM
Onslaught X's Avatar
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 37,577
Default

COD2 = Best WW2 game!

A game where Bolt Actions actually killed people in one shot! (Ok, so I'm an Infinity Ward fanboy...sue me!)
__________________
Don't Reach, Young Blood

Part of The Finer Things Club, The Ghostbusters Club, The American Psycho Club, The SDF on 360 Club
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-29-2008, 06:15 PM
Dark Lord Greg's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,305
Default

yeah I really don't understand how WaW has been labeled a "bad" game mainly because its WW2. I think its SP is better than COD4 and the MP is just as fun and addicting. I also find it funny that most people who write it off haven't played it just heard it was a bad game or just don't like WW2
Reply With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
'Family Guy Presents: Something Something Something Dark Side' - HDD Review Attebery Blu-ray Software General Discussion 23 12-30-2009 01:57 PM
'Family Guy Presents: Something Something Something Dark Side' coming December 22 Landy Blu-ray Software General Discussion 64 12-28-2009 10:33 AM
Family Guy Presents: Something Something Something Dark Side BD for $11.99 at Target AOD Ultra-HD/Blu-ray Bargains 19 12-26-2009 12:23 PM
WTB - (PS3) CoD4, CoD: WaW, Street Fighter IV Fresh Prince Video Game Exchange 0 05-12-2009 02:09 AM
Givin out 1 COD: WaW PC Beta Code ccohen322 Game Room 1 10-29-2008 12:26 AM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off