User:SPARTAN 119/SPARTAN 119 Reviews: Call of Duty: World at War

=SPARTAN 119 Reviews: Call of Duty: World at War= Here it is: my second game review. I won't have as much to say about this one because, quite frankly, nothing in it sucks.

Single Player: 9.9/10
Call of Duty World at War returns to classic Call of Duty setting of the Second World War. COD:WAW proves that you can still do a World War II first person shooter game and make it good, in spite of recent abominations such as Hour of Victory. But COD:WAW is more than good, it is excellent, outstanding, a worthy sucessor to Call of Duty 4 in every way. The campaign mission follow the wartime experiences of Private Miller of the U.S. Marine Corps and Pvt. Petrenko of the Red Army during the Pacific and European theaters of WWII, respectively. Both Miller and Petrenko's missions feature a wide variety of authentic-looking World War II locations, such as war-torn Stalingrad, the Pacific Islands of Peleliu and Okinawa, and the final climactic battle for the Reichstag in Berlin. The weapons, are indeed, among the most striking new features of the game. In addition to old favorites like the Thompson submachine gun and the M9A1 Bazooka, COD:WAW introduces the the American M2 Flamethrower, the Russian PTRS-41 anti-tank rifle (though by WWII it was worthless against tanks, as it is in the game, it still fucks up infantry), and a wide array of Japanese weapons, many with bayonets, to the Call of Duty Series. The only two issues I could find were the fact the the British, Canadian, and Polish troops that made appearance in Call of Duty 3 were nowhere to be found. I mean, I know there are disc space limitations, but, they did fit more missions that COD:WAW in Gears of War 2, so they could surely include those extra missions. Also, the setting of the levels seems to skip forward two or three years very abruptly, but now, I'm just nit picking.