00:00
00:00
View Profile BlackMorningStudios
Just me and a some pencils, and a large amount of ADH... Oh! Awesome, I found a nickel... what was I doing again?

Age 32, Male

Joined on 2/22/09

Level:
14
Exp Points:
2,120 / 2,180
Exp Rank:
28,420
Vote Power:
5.64 votes
Rank:
Scout
Global Rank:
38,963
Blams:
78
Saves:
158
B/P Bonus:
4%
Whistle:
Normal
Medals:
325

Game Reviewed; Call of Duty "World at War"

Posted by BlackMorningStudios - March 13th, 2009


(CONTENT CONTAINS SWEARING)
As we all know that how, "Call of Duty 4, 3, 2, 1," were probably some of the coolest world war 2 type games, (besides the espionage type shooters like, castle Wolfheimstein and Medal of Honor.) Well when Activision made another addition to the series, (Call of Duty, World at War.) it wasn't all that bad.
What was impressive, was how Activision was able to do a fantastic on a solo project, like this game.

But, what irritated me the most about the game was how it played out. like the game took an unexpected jump from the early part of the war( 1941-1942,) to (1945). Leaving out the endless existence of possibilities for hard ass levels that would make you want to tear fucking eye balls out, (besides that and the veteran level, were the enemy throws grenades at a ungodly rate.) The game may have been a little short for my liking, but it made up, with Nazi zombies.

Enjoyment Rating 8/10
Intensity Rating 9/10
Playability Rating 9/10
Overall Score 9/10

Post comments Or Opinions about the game.

Game Reviewed; Call of Duty "World at War"


Comments

Comments ain't a thing here.