Brilliant, but not revolutionary

User Rating: 8.5 | Call of Duty: World at War PS3
Lots of speculation has arose with the latest edition to the Call Of Duty series, 1. Treyarch are back in development (who done the mediocre Call Of Duty 3) and 2. It's back to World War II.

While i don't mind World War II games, i can see why people initially are dissapointed. If it's not broken don't fix it, and with Infity Ward who developed the outstanding COD4, i can agree. But this game completely surpassed my expections of it, and bought me back to the days of COD2, with the vast superior and responsive engine from COD4.

In this game you follow 2 campaigns, one is from the Americans point of view as they battled the Japenese, and the other is the Russians and their invasion of Germany. Keither Sutherland and Gary Oldman voice the commanders of each battalion, and they they do a fantastic job! One problem with Keither Sutherland is, that i kept thinking he was jack bauer! That slightly took the effect away, with Gary Oldman pulling a far more descrete accent.

The engine as i mentioned is from COD4, and it's limits really are tested in this game. Controls are extremely fast and responsive, and it really feels are you are thrown in the midst of battle. You're frantically running for cover, strafing to supress fire, and you're springing away from a grenade about to detonate 2ft away from you. This is seriously Call Of Duty at it's best!

Graphically aswell, the game is stunning! With the environments and player models looking vastly superior than the COD4 counterpart, i can say with confidence that this game definately looks better. One very stunning aspect of the visuals is the shadows, they are unbelievable!

Sound aswell comes outstanding as standard with Call Of Duty games, and here is no exeption. You always feel you are in danger with explosions and gunfire constantly bombarding overhead, and it really adds to a very memorable experience. Voice acting as i mentioned is spot on, and the comrades and enemy shouts are very realistic.

The campaign isn't incredibly long. As far as i remember there are around 15 stages, altogether it took me 6-7 to complete roughly. You will die in the campaign, loads!! The good thing about this though is the difficulty isn't too hard. Yea you will die loads, but it makes you feel as though it's your fault and not the game. So instead of throwing the controller, you'll restart the checkpoint, make sure you constantly in cover before moving, throwing back grenades, and not rushing out into the open. It feels incredibly rewarding when you've finished a stage.

The multiplayer is definately as good as COD4. I don't want to go into it too much because i'll be typing forever, but most of the modes are back again, and you can still add perks customize weapons which i was glad to see. A nice addition in the online are the use of tanks. They withstand around 3 rocket missles, and 1 player drives and fires rockets, whilst the other is on top and manning the turret. The good thing is they don't feel overpowered. You'll get a lot of kills inside a tank, but you'll also feel constantly vunerable as you are openly exposed to bazooka blasts and sticky grenades which will finish you off in seconds.

Overall, this is an absolutely amazing game, i very highly recommend it. It's worth jumping back into a WW II cod game for the last time (hopefully), and having a real blast in the campaign and multiplayer. This game is as good as Call Of Duty 4, but the fact that it uses the same engine, modes, and even recycles a few set pieces in the campaign, it doesn't make Call Of Duty World Of War revolutionary. But what's not broken, don't fix.