Infinity Ward’s Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare is one of the best games of all time. All of the sales have been well warranted. With a compelling 6 hour solo campaign and a well honed multi-player with player progression built in, the game was destined to be a classic. Based on Activision’s franchise model, it was certain that we would see another version of COD from Treyarch on the off-year.
Treyarch’s COD3 left a bit of a bad taste in players mouths as the quality level fell from what players saw in Infinity Ward’s COD2. Treyarch points out, and rightfully so, that they had to complete COD3 on an overly compressed time frame. From what I have read, it sounds like one Activision was sure that COD2 was going to be successful, they kicked COD3 into production for the following year. That gave Treyarch half the time (1 year vs 2) that they would normally have expected to complete a next gen title. Even with a bit of help from Infinity Ward’s tech, matching the prior title’s quality level was still a tall order.
COD: World at War is Treyarch’s first full-production cycle attempt in the series. Activision knew well in advance that they would release another COD before Modern Warfare was released. So how did World at War fare?
From a sales standpoint the title has done exceptionally well. That is for two reasons. First, it is a sequel to the extremely successful COD4 and second that it is a solid effort. From a review standpoint, the title has scored in the mid to low 80s.
Dramatic Effect or Simply Brutality?
Treyarch tried to learn from what Infinity Ward did with COD4. Treyarch attempted to intersperse powerful scenes of war for dramatic effect. The problem is that those scenes just didn’t come off quite right. The power in the shooting squad and nuclear explosion scene from COD4 were just not matched in what effectively amounted to brutality scenes within World at War. None of it was bad, it just wasn’t quite right.
Modern Warfare vs WWII
This one isn’t Treyarch’s fault. I’ve read a lot lately about how tired people are with the WWII theater and killing Nazis. I initially rejected that idea. If a game is fun and innovative, the particular setting isn’t really important. Wrong. After playing COD4, I didn’t want to go back. I found myself longing for the updated weapon technology. I missed the current day weaponry. The incorporated imprecision in the WWII weapons really bothered me. It’s very noticeable in the bonus zombie level. Since the enemies are trying to claw you at close range rather than shoot at you from a distance, the lack of accuracy from the weapons is really noticeable.
The one thing that the WWII setting gives developers is a built in effective story. Striking out into an “alternate reality” like COD4 did requires the developer to construct an effective story. It’s better to use WWII than have a bad modern warfare story.
Bugs and Polish
The area that Treyarch fell off the most is bugs and polish. In no particular order I had the following issues:
- NPCs walking through tanks
- Dying bug that required me to reset
- “Cheap” grenades that seem dropped in (Destructoid thought the same)
- Obvious infinite re-spawning enemies
- Nearly broken final level (Reichstag)
The NPC and dying bugs should have been caught in QA somewhere along the way. The cheap grenades and infinite re-spawning enemies feel like a developer cheat to prevent characters from intelligently taking cover and picking off all the enemies.
The last level (Reichstag) is nearly broken due to a ridiculous inconsistency in design. The storming of the Reichstag up to the front steps is fraught with tons of the cheap grenades and re-spawning enemies issues. I can deal with it to a degree as it shouldn’t be easy to storm the enemy’s base. It just feels like you are restarting repeatedly to hopefully pick exactly the right path to pass through. The steps of the Reichstag is one of the worst designed game segments I’ve ever seen. You need to shoot the enemies hiding behind the pillars so that one of the pillars falls and opens the way. I had to look up what needed to happen after spending a long time trying to figure out how to do it myself. If you look it up on google, you’ll see tons of questions and answers about it. Following dying repeatedly on my way into the Reichstag, you get a section where you walk over and pick up a sniper rifle in the main hall and basically kill everything that moves with no repercussions whatsoever. No one shoots at you at all, there are no counter-snipers, and no one even tries to find you.
Overall
If you haven’t played COD4 yet, shame on you. That title should be picked up well before playing this one. I can’t recommend World at War as a full price pickup. I bought it on a $39.99 Best Buy sale. $30-$40 feels about right for the title.
I just can’t shake the feeling that Activision needs to find a way to fold the entire COD franchise into Infinity Ward so that they same main team is giving oversight to the titles. World at War’s problems are mostly story and polish which I think Infinity Ward’s management would help greatly. The real question is whether Infinity Ward’s management wants to do two titles at once and and risk diluting their impact on the each. Either that or Activision doesn’t want to depend on one studio alone to continue the franchise.
