After last year’s blockbuster, Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, we have the next entry into the now renowned series. But unlike COD4, World at War doesn’t seem to be a major instalment but instead has a distinct add on pack feel. This is clearly shown by the lack of digit in the title, so the question is what is World at War?
The storyline takes us back to the time of World War II, from the widely loved Modern era. But don’t fear this isn’t going back to the days of old COD where it’s all about denting Nazis’ helmets. This time is all about a far scarier enemy, the Japanese.

Yes, it has left Europe, at least for the most part, to take on the Pacific Theatre. For most of the game you are in-charge of an American, Private Miller of the U.S Marine Corps, but you do move to the German front playing as the Russians as they moved into Berlin.

The action is very much in the style of COD4, with the story jumping between the two fronts as it progresses. Now this isn’t the only gameplay function that has been lifted from the previous title, of course it is well know that World at War runs on the same engine as COD4, but also the HUD has come over too, with pretty much no changes at all.

The core combat is the same too, with each weapon type being responsive and also having the feel that you would think each weapon would, including the range differential between Rifles and Machine Guns. But at the same time as WAW retains modern Warfare’s brilliance, the level design is heavily linear and laboured at times. This isn’t to say that COD4 was not linear nor indeed laboured at times, but it was hidden behind the action, WAW though has set-piece action coming out of its ears for most of the game it feels very by-the-numbers kind of game.

There are also some irritating holes in the gameplay that should have been corked up at Q&A level. Take one point were while running for cover I hit an invisible wall that looked like an open cave, needless to say this ended up with me being killed. Another problem is the checkpoints which at points are too far away from each other to allow you to progress in the game, especially in Veteran Mode. The problem with checkpoints continues in that when you do hit one, they seem to be in odd places, because more than once I had respawned into a checkpoint which was swarming with enemy soldiers and before you know it I was ripped to pieces, or another instance is that I respawned after being killed but a grenade only to find that I was killed but the same grenade again, which really damages the excellent experience.

The biggest problem in the mission structure is another problem. As your jumping to and from the American and Russian campaigns there seems to be very little holding to two stories together. This leads you to start to think “Why am I here? What has this got to do with the last battle I fought?” COD4 on the other hand had Small connections between the SAS campaign and the Marine Corps one.

The visuals are just as good as COD4 if not slightly better, the environment of COD:WAW has much the same line as 4 but the setting has moved from suburban atmosphere of modern day to World War II typical beachheads. The beachheads from the American campaign are not a match for the amazing scenery of the Russian campaign. World at War rekindles a small amount of the wonder and thrilling sense of death around every corner that’s to be had in one foul swoop with the Russian campaign, if all the levels were set-up like the Russian’s then we would have had the ultimate FPS. The Russian campaign has dark and moody visuals as you fight the Germans on the streets. Whereas the American campaign feels too nice and pretty with lush jungle surrounding you, not at all showing the type of thing that you would have seen in a war film.

The character models look excellent, with their uniforms and faces tarred with mud as artillery fire throws mud all around your ears, but that really only goes for the main characters. The enemy are slightly varied but you will see each model at least ten times in the course of a level, which isn’t too bad as if you do see them it’s normally about a second later that you stick a bullet in them.

This all said COD: World at War is a very good game, not as solid as COD4 but still a worthwhile purchase. But this comes with a big but, the reason for it being so solid is the pure fact that it is running on the COD4 engine and pretty much takes everything that made COD4 excellent and presents it to you in a new little package.

The saving grace of this game is the online multiplayer, which again is pretty much the same as COD4 except for the change in time zone and the change in weaponry, for an in-depth look at that you can see our impressions here.

At the beginning of this review I posed the question what is Call of Duty: World at War? Well, I have to side on the feeling that it is an expansion pack for COD4. It takes everything good about COD4 and places it in a new setting with nothing more really done to it. If you loved the last game then you will like this one and it is also a good starting point for newcomers, but series veterans might want something more.

Overall Rating: 7/10