COD4 features with COD3 feel, I like it. My only complaint is the spawning, and the CTF matches seem to go so fast.

 Neillydun wrote:

I have to agree with an earlier poster, it is basically a reskinned version of CoD4, with all the faults of CoD4 as well. It looks like absolutely no development was made on the networking side of the game. It still has:

No Host Migration
Lousy Hit Detection
Poor Matchmaking (even when using the Local option)

Ideally, you should have stuck with the P2P model you had in CoD3, and developed it further, and do away with the single host problem altogether.

what a bummer.  so many people hated cod3, but failed to realize how good it was at certain things, one of them being the networking code.  cod3 host migration worked nearly perfectly, i can't believe they didn't bring that to WAW.

---

In our life there is "if"
In our beliefs there is "lie"
In our business there is "sin"
In our bodies there is "die"

 Rokossovsky wrote:

 Aegis of Sparta wrote:

My review of Call of Duty: World at War.

Call of Duty 4, with improved sounds and graphics, and WW2 weapons... oh... and vehicles... that's about it.

You think the graphics and sound improved???

i agree with your sarcasm.  however, i will hold off on totally backing your opinion until i see all the maps.

---

 grand fuhry wrote:

"oh i spat on the competitive integrity of the game..."

 I TV Casualty I wrote:

Actual valid concerns about weapon strength (read: not just complaining for the sake of complaining)

Non-scoped bolt-actions: too weak/fickle. Sometimes kill in one-hit, but unfortunately in most cases do not. Stopping Power helps somewhat, but you shouldn't be forced to pick a certain perk just to get a weapon to work correctly.

Dogs: too many of them spawn. First time I called them I got six kills off of them. WTF? Choppers in CoD4 choppers rarely got that many kills, unless you were playing with newbies. The biggest problem is that they're distracting as well (which I suppose is part of the charm, but still). The swarm of dogs makes enemies easy pray as they flail around trying to kill them. Kinda not cool, as it gives them yet another advantage that choppers did not have.

Telescopic site: Really? Really, Treyarch? You took the worst attachment in CoD4 and brought it back? Originality is knocking. You may want to answer the door.

thoughtful review.  sounds honest and hits on many of the points that i saw - some of the weaps are underpowered but perhaps that is the point - were ww2 weaps less accurate/powerful than modern weaps?  did the dev try to stay true to form or are they jamming gamers up?

the dogs - i was apprehensive at first but i get it - and the opportunity to get more points via dog kills is fantastic.  its just something to get used to - just like the chopper was in cod4 - and i am sure as we all get better at the game, the dogs will become just that - a nuisance.

your joke at the end there is well recieved.  scopes are either great or ***.  it depends on the player.  i have seen some of these gamers own me downright continuous with that frakin scope.  but i agree with you that the scope feels like a carry over.

in the end, i am not sure if it is possible to give this game a true review until they raise the cap or provide a map or two more.  the latter probably wont happen, but i am sure we will see the cap raised as we move toward the release date.  up to now, it seems to me like cod4 set in ww2.  just like everyone else is saying.  i read somewhere that there are about the same number of maps in the final release as there was in cod4 per dlc.  we'll  see - maybe someone will confirm that number.

one feature i was impressed with was the leaderboard for the lobby you are plying in.  at a glance i get to have a feel for the number of players that will own me :)  nice touch.

---

 grand fuhry wrote:

"oh i spat on the competitive integrity of the game..."

 MegaDeath wrote:

 Neillydun wrote:

I have to agree with an earlier poster, it is basically a reskinned version of CoD4, with all the faults of CoD4 as well. It looks like absolutely no development was made on the networking side of the game. It still has:

No Host Migration
Lousy Hit Detection
Poor Matchmaking (even when using the Local option)

Ideally, you should have stuck with the P2P model you had in CoD3, and developed it further, and do away with the single host problem altogether.

what a bummer.  so many people hated cod3, but failed to realize how good it was at certain things, one of them being the networking code.  cod3 host migration worked nearly perfectly, i can't believe they didn't bring that to WAW.

That part of the game was fantastic, and the maps, and the guns and classes. The only thing that let it down for me was the glitches.

As for the beta basically neillydun hit the nail on the head, although I love COD 4, WAW just seams like cod 4.5 in a WWII dress.

Don't get me wrong I'm still going to buy it and probably play it a lot I just expected a little bit more.

---

LFC - YNWA

Fernando Torres Liverpool's Number 9

GT = Julliet Whisky

I don't like the spawns, bolts are worthless,the sound is kind of screwy, and re-spawning dogs is a bit much.  You get to 7 kills, you should be able to send out about 7 dogs, once they are dead, that's it.   Dogs on a timer??  they are out way to long. When someone gets dogs in FFA, it's over.

Those are my only gripes, other than that, I love it.

---

If you don't chew Big Red, F*** you.

So far loving the beta Treyarch did a good job with this game only thing that sometimes gets to me is when you shoot them loads and have them turn around and kill you in 2 shots but that's probably just lag maps really well thought out different style of play is required the tank map is probably my favourite they have done a good job balancing the tanks out because the perks offered make them easy to take out if you get close enough can't wait for them to raise the level cap to get more perks.

---

 TN1 TEHCHAMPION wrote:

this thread is ALMOST as funny as women's rights...almost...

9/10.

-1 for silly spawns and useless bolts unless scoped.

-Funky

---

A Kinky Milkman
Halo: Reach Trailer

Pros;
Nice Maps
Good Variety of Attachments
Dogs
Sniping is fun.
CTF!
War is fun.
Tanks actually work

Cons;
Guns are far too accurate.
Thompson.. Nuff sed.
Bolts.. Hugely unbalanced.
Molotovs are useless.

If they could fix these, it could be really good.

---

HALT! HAMMERZEIT!

 Broodyhat wrote:

Pros;
Nice Maps
Good Variety of Attachments
Dogs
Sniping is fun.
CTF!
War is fun.
Tanks actually work

Cons;
Guns are far too inaccurate.
Thompson.. Nuff sed.
Bolts.. Hugely unbalanced.
Molotovs are useless.

If they could fix these, it could be really good.

Fixed. 

---

Misguided Miscreant Turned Evil Genius

I played for a couple of hours last night and here's my initial thoughts: I think the maps are very, very good. I like how there are 3 levels to them. Like in Makin, you have the water(low), town(med), and a couple of perches(high). In Roundhouse, same thing - you have ground level, 2nd stories, and third level perches. Spawning does need to be tweaked. Spawn deaths are a common subject while in lobbies. Weapon mix is great, however, as previously stated, there are those that may be considered overpowered or newbish - thompson, gewr come to mind. To me, they equate to the MP5 and G3 Player skin looks to me aren't as much of an issue as their blending into the background. For me, it's harder to see/spot someone than in CoD4. I think that the dogs are just a bit overpowered, one hit one kill from a dog isn't 'real'. OHOK should be from a bullet, not a bite. Throwback, I think, shouldn't be a perk, regardless of what it does to the fuse. It's harder to hear the enemy approaching, i.e. footsteps are quieter than in CoD4. This may be a good think, though. The 'last words' you hear when you get killed are funny but may wear out after a while. I wish I understood Russian, German and Japanese. I feel that SP is where WaW will separate itself from CoD4.

 U2boy wrote:

 UFOGoldorak wrote:

By far the worst spawn system in any game i've ever played to date.

Agreed

 

The spawns need a fixin'.

---

yes...my avatar is Ron Jeremy holding a chicken
Jenny Warts stole my bike

 Jenny Warts wrote:

I don't like the spawns, bolts are worthless,the sound is kind of screwy, and re-spawning dogs is a bit much.  You get to 7 kills, you should be able to send out about 7 dogs, once they are dead, that's it.   Dogs on a timer??  they are out way to long. When someone gets dogs in FFA, it's over.

Those are my only gripes, other than that, I love it.

Yeah....the dogs tend to last a tad bit too long....but maybe I am being selfish. Twice I was unable to call them in because I was waiting for someone else's bitchs to go back to the kennel.

---

yes...my avatar is Ron Jeremy holding a chicken
Jenny Warts stole my bike

I can already tell I'll be playing this game for a long time. The only problems are:

Molotov Cocktails need to be fixed
Spawns
Bolt actions

 Blacksnyder wrote:

 Broodyhat wrote:

Pros;
Nice Maps
Good Variety of Attachments
Dogs
Sniping is fun.
CTF!
War is fun.
Tanks actually work

Cons;
Guns are far too inaccurate.
Thompson.. Nuff sed.
Bolts.. Hugely unbalanced.
Molotovs are useless.

If they could fix these, it could be really good.

Fixed. 

No.. I meant that

The Gewehr has NO recoil, Neither does the SVT-40. They are too easy to use.

---

HALT! HAMMERZEIT!

 Broodyhat wrote:

 Blacksnyder wrote:

 Broodyhat wrote:

Pros;
Nice Maps
Good Variety of Attachments
Dogs
Sniping is fun.
CTF!
War is fun.
Tanks actually work

Cons;
Guns are far too inaccurate.
Thompson.. Nuff sed.
Bolts.. Hugely unbalanced.
Molotovs are useless.

If they could fix these, it could be really good.

Fixed. 

No.. I meant that

The Gewehr has NO recoil, Neither does the SVT-40. They are too easy to use.

They arent supposed to have recoil. They are single shot rifles that allow you repeated fire. They are the WW2 equivalent of a G3.

---

In Australia from 10th Nov - 8th Jan :-D

alright i need help!!! i signed up on callofduty.com, but i dont know how to migrate or whatever you call it!!!!!!!!! i need help really soon!!!!!!!!!!!

---

ruro

4.5 out of 5.

Did you see what I did there?

---

Status: Incognito

So far I see pros and cons.  I will cover the cons first.  As this is a Beta, these issues may be resolved by the final release.

Cons:

1.  Movement.  COD 4 perfected first person movement.  It was the right speed, smooth, and intuitive.  I realize that this one still utilizes the same game engine, but I am not impressed with this one over COD 4's realism. 

2.   Sound.  Neither first person movement or other troop movement is comparable to COD 4.  It almost sounds like the "thump thump" from COD 2. 

3.  Gun animation.  The weapon perspective seems a little smaller than COD 4, maybe not, but its harder to pick up on the gun details.  Also, the reloading animation is not the best, and firing the weapon in terms of sound, animation, accuracy, etc., just doesn't give you the punch you have come to experience in COD 4. So far, there isn't a gun that comes close to COD 4's MP5 or either shotgun.   I hope that there is also some siting equivalent to the red dot sight (peep site maybe?) for zooming in.  I have not played long enough to find out if this is the case.

4.  Graphics.  Maps appear a bit more cluttered--as if putting more details in is a positive thing over capturing realism.  Of the beta maps released, there is nothing comparable to the COD 4's "Crash" or even "Broadcast".

Before I go on, I know that there are people who will say, "Well, this ISN'T COD 4!" but, it is the same engine, operates the basic same way, and uses the same systems (perks, etc.) that COD 4 does.  If anything, one would expect some improvement over COD 4, but so far I don't see that.

Pros:

1.  Graphics.  The game is pretty and the change of scenary will be nice.  They also give one the WWII "feel"

2.  Perks.  It appears that there is going to be a large variety of perks, guns, etc. 

3.  Gaming community.  I am sure that the Xbox community will receive this title well, so you should be spending many hours with your buddies playing this one.

I am not yet sure if this title will live up to the standard set by COD 4. I would love to believe that it will, but I can't truthfully say that from the Beta.   Either way, though, it should be an entertaining and worthy addition to the COD collection.

(Spelling and grammer not checked)

---

Sonny, I was playing Pong before you were born.

Slarti

I agree with some of you guys that its cod4 with a WWII skin on it but i think that it is its own game.  Sure they have the perks and all but I love the maps, yes some of the guns seem overpowered and need to be fixed same with the spawns.  Last night i got killed FIVE times by the same artillery strike.  I like the dogs some games i can get 10+ kills with them and some games i get 1...i guess its just how people deal with it and how they counter it.  Otherwise i like it.  Its a beta and there are BOUND to be problems with the game.  Thats why they make betas so they can get feedback, tweak, fix, and change certain things. I give it a 8 out of 10 for some of the falts but i think they will be fixed and it will be a fantastic game.  One question i heard they will be updating the beta and rasing the level cap.  Is this true? Thanks in advance.

RebelGh0st

---

CODWAW Beta Tester
[~ZS~] Zombie Squad Member
Nacht Der Untoten aka Nazi Zombies

 A Funky Milkman wrote:

9/10.

-1 for silly spawns and useless bolts unless scoped.

-Funky

Wait the bolts magically do more damage when you put a scope on them?

---

Cowbell... Must have more...

Well I am sorry to say that this game is an utter disappointment to me. There hasnt been one thing so far in this beta that has wowed me or even made me think "hey that was cool." As has been previously stated, it is COD4 reskinned. The game engine is in place as are all menu's and mechanics from the previous installment and I dont really feel like that added anything that really makes the online any better. My cons far out weigh the pro's in this game and the campaign better be nothing short of spectacular for this game to truly make it imo.
Cons-
All guns available to both sides- Now some may say this makes it balanced, but that is utter hogwash. It worked fine in COD2&3 and really gives the weaker weapons no place once you unlock the guns later on. They should have done a hybrid sort of weapon level up based on weapon class for each different nation i.e. You start game w/ Springfield for US, Arisaka for Japs, Kar98k for Germans, and Mosin Nagant for Ruskies and every level you go up unlocks a weapon in that level for whatever team your playing on.

No in-game host migration- Treyarch dropped the ball on this one w/ 2 years of developement they had to be aware to some degree that COD4 online host dropping issues flawed the online experience and should have took it upon themselves to save it.

Maps- The maps didnt impress me and still felt like they were the closed in COD4 maps. I was expecting something alittle more wide open w/ a bigger feel.

Bolt action rifles- JD has touched on this and basically says because they are low level unlocks they suck. I find it amazing that they can adjust the power so much just because it does or doesnt have a scope, like that has anything to do w/ the bullet its actually firing. Treyarch has failed w/ its weapons stats all together. The one that made me laugh the most was that the m1 carbine has the same effective range as an m1 garand. I mean come on treyarch did you do any sort of research on the guns in this game?

Pros-
Plays like call of duty 4. Thats about it ladies and gentleman, thank you for your time today and have a wonderful time playing COD4.5

I pretty much agree with you, Joker.  I think that I would welcome three more maps for 1500 MS points over COD WAW, but hopefully they will take all the feedback and do the necessary tweaking.  This is my first time with Beta testing, so I am not sure how much these games tend to change from the Beta.  As I mentioned in my post, COD 4 set such a high standard, that in order for Treyarch to distinguish itself it either had to be as good, excitably different or better.  So far, the Beta doesn't support either. 

---

Sonny, I was playing Pong before you were born.

Slarti

They need to fix spawns, nerf the SMG's (especially the Thompson), make the Akrisaka have a thicker bullet (it needs to be DEAD-ON to hit them), and make the molotov cocktails stronger and with splash damage.

I'd give it a 8-8.5/10.

P.S.- I know that these may be only in other maps, but I thought that you could shoot holes that you can walk through in straw buildings, set trees, grass, and the buildings in Makin on fire, climb trees, and aren't some perks missing (Banzai, perks for possibly swimming faster/climbing trees)?

---

Fire, Fear, Fury.

Formally:
Shank 4 Giggles
BnB | Kar98k

i won;t be willing to spend 20$ on new maps that i have allready payed for in my pre-order just for my beta, but thats just me.

---

"The Internet is a scary place...." -Dr. Phil

This is only a small amount of the game and I cant wait. People I know kept saying this game will suck. That I should get Gears of War instead. Well I already know what I'm playing until Christmas. This game is a mixture of CoD2, CoD3, and CoD4, how can it go wrong. This is one awesome Beta.

---

1000/1000 Call of Duty 2

 Flak Falcon wrote:

 A Funky Milkman wrote:

9/10.

-1 for silly spawns and useless bolts unless scoped.

-Funky

Wait the bolts magically do more damage when you put a scope on them?

When you scope when you have the scope on the bolt, yes.

-Funky

---

A Kinky Milkman
Halo: Reach Trailer

 ExiledJoker wrote:

Cons-
All guns available to both sides- Now some may say this makes it balanced, but that is utter hogwash. It worked fine in COD2&3 and really gives the weaker weapons no place once you unlock the guns later on.

Did it? Maybe in CoD2, but in 3, the only thing you need to say to refute that statement is "MP44 vs. BAR."

I agree with pretty much everything else you said though.

...

Oh, other things I wanted to touch on:

Pistols: WAY too inaccurate/weak. To be honest, this is the one thing that I wished that Trey copied and pasted directly from CoD4, which had awesome pistols (USP was my favorite). In CoD4, I would switch to my pistol when I ran out of ammo in the middle of a firefight. In W@W, I'd much rather just take my chances reloading my main weapon. They're THAT bad.

Momentum "buff" in War mode: my favorite addition, believe it or not. It's subtle, but everything down to the different "war cries" for each army really gets you pumped and gunning for the next flag. That's one thing that Treyarch has actually managed to do better than IW: giving the armies GOOD character.

---

 I TV Casualty I wrote:

People that quote themselves in their sig usually end up being arrogant, pompous jerks.

 A Funky Milkman wrote:

 Flak Falcon wrote:

 A Funky Milkman wrote:

9/10.

-1 for silly spawns and useless bolts unless scoped.

-Funky

Wait the bolts magically do more damage when you put a scope on them?

When you scope when you have the scope on the bolt, yes.

-Funky

That makes no sense...

---

Cowbell... Must have more...

 Flak Falcon wrote:

 A Funky Milkman wrote:

 Flak Falcon wrote:

 A Funky Milkman wrote:

9/10.

-1 for silly spawns and useless bolts unless scoped.

-Funky

Wait the bolts magically do more damage when you put a scope on them?

When you scope when you have the scope on the bolt, yes.

-Funky

That makes no sense...

It does. He just used the first instance of "scope" as a verb instead of a noun 

---

 I TV Casualty I wrote:

People that quote themselves in their sig usually end up being arrogant, pompous jerks.