Tuesday, February 17, 2009

"World at War" or "World of Mediocrity"


I don’t think there has yet to be a current video game to come up on Pixel to Polys, so what better way to break the ice than a to maliciously attack a second rate publisher.

World at War while I may like the game in some respects really make me wonder how long Treyarch can keep peddling these world war two games with essentially the same weaponry and story line. (Sorry guys, not like we don’t know the end ending to this grand piece of artwork) Don’t get me wrong, I loved the addition of the flame thrower and being able to burn a whole new brand of enemy with the Japanese. However this game while it tried to build on a lot of the great additions, thanks to Infinity Ward, they really came up lacking in my book.

Taking a cue from Infinity Ward and adding multiplayer benefits for multiple kills at least made it a little more interesting. I can’t stand those F’ing dogs, they are ferocious! I can’t understand if their decision to stay in the mid 20th century was due more to a desire to hear Kiefer Sutherland voice over “God Damn-it!” one more time, or just a lack of imagination for their creating their own storyline and game modes. They may have implemented a Nazi Zombie mode for those who complete the main story line, but honestly, online players started that mode back in Halo 2 online and it’s a full blown game choice now in Halo 3.

I wish I could say I expected more, but I really didn’t. The story was mediocre; hearing Jack Bauer at least kept me interested enough to wait around to see if he would torture anyone for information vital to winning the war. No such luck. The graphics were well put together; it offered really stunning visuals and cinematics that were really a step up. The source of this new engine? Call of Duty 4, go figure.

About the only thing I admire Treyarch for doing with this game is trying to possibly make the last of a World War 2 Activision game with some of the benefits from the 21st century version. But if they were trying to show that they can still dance with the best and not bring something new to the table and still play in the 1950’s they failed, plain and simple. I only hope that they move on to the new modern warfare model if they can do nothing but copy technologies and enlist A-list actors to voice/promote their product.

-Pat

2 comments:

  1. I like that you went pithy here Pat.

    I have to say that I like the multiplayer... but I think that is mostly because of the groundwork laid down by COD: 4... the single player is terrible... haven't been able to trudge through it, so I haven't even got to try the zombie mode yet.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I can remember when COD4 was announced, everyone was all giddy and I was thinking that it stupid that they left the WWII genre...now I'm 100% certain that it was a good idea...I don't think the world needs anymore WWII FPS's

    ReplyDelete