Continents erupt in flames and hails of gunfire as war breaks out on an unprecedented scale. This is World War II, where a massive conflict rages on two fronts: Europe and the South Pacific. Answer your nation's call and travel to distant lands where you'll take part in devastating battles that gripped a generation and laid the foundation for the world as we know it today. Do you have the courage, the cunning and the commitment to fulfill your duties and see the war through to its harrowing end?Prepare for global conflict presented in all its terrible grit and immediacy. In Call of Duty: World at War, you assume the role of a U.S. Marine or a Russian soldier in the waning days of the Second World War. Travel to the far reaches of the conflict, from war-plagued Berlin to the dense jungles of the Pacific theater, as you confront enemies who refuse to contemplate surrender or retreat and who fight all the more desperately ~ and more dangerously ~ knowing the end is near. Employ the weapons at your disposal, including a flamethrower and other new infantry and vehicle-based weapons, and fight to complete your mission as battles explode around you with all the terrible chaos of real war.
This reviewer is a member of the Best Buy Tech Insider Network Program. This invitation-only program provides BestBuy.com reviewers with manufacturer-supplied products for the purpose of writing honest, unbiased and usage-based reviews. Outside of receiving products to test and review, Best Buy Tech Insider Network Reviewers are not compensated in any other way.
Look, for everyone bagging on the game before it's even come out, get a grip. Have you ever played any of the old school CoD games? Call of Duty 1 and it's expansion pack United Offensive laid the groundwork for what a CoD game should be. UO had vehicles, huge maps, and new weapons. Between UO and CoD2, UO had the better game engine as far as physics and hit detection. CoD2 was a good game, but it got rid of two things UO had gotten right: sprint and vehicles. CoD3 was alright, it was poorly implemented. CoD4 is probably the best game in the series to date. Best campaign I've played, most diverse multiplayer I've played. CoD5 is just going back to the roots of Call of Duty. How can you complain about being able to n00b it up with a flamethrower, or vehicle camp/spam like none other? It adds a new, challenging dimension to the game and I honestly can't believe why people are knocking on it. Since it's using the CoD4 engine, it's basically a full conversion mod for Modern Warfare. It also covers a theater of WWII CoD hasn't touched yet. Bottom line: New perks + new weapons + 4 player co-op + new gameplay + new storyline + vehicles + game engine that's seen successful action = Game of the year shoo-in and NO reason to be complaining about it.
What's great about it: Built on the best Call of Duty engine for the 360, one of the best selling game franchises ever