Call of Duty 5 World At War was the big new
release last year and I had seen all the message board debate about it
for some time before that. I had played the beta version of the
multiplayer ahead of release and something about it had prevented me
getting excited. I let the release go by and, aside from noticing fewer
people on CoD4 (and a lot of them being really good now), I didn't think
much about it until someone lent me their copy for a few weeks. As with
CoD4 the game operates on two levels – the game itself and the
multiplayer.
I played the game first, without trying it on co-op
or anything and I must say that visually it is very impressive and
tense. However, as a player, I found it almost too big – and I recognise
that this is personal taste speaking here, because some will love that.
The comparative simplicity of the CoD4 battles made them more engaging,
with CoD5, it all just felt too frantic and random – more realistic of
war I suppose but less fun to play. I much preferred the level structure
where the focus is smaller, rather than you as part of an army. That
said I did still enjoy the levels but I did find that there were only
one or two that I would return to. The zombie mode is a nice idea that
adds to the game but I didn't get into it and probably didn't give it a
chance to grow on me.
I wanted to get into the online games
"proper". It took me a minute to get used to the differences. The guns
of course are different and feel a lot more basic and even as I levelled
up, they didn't seem to "feel" right. On CoD4 the weapons feel meaty
and they have a tangible presence – it is hard to describe but the
contrast is clear. In CoD5 they are less so and I didn't come to like
them as much, and not just because of the WW2 setting. At the start I
thought the maps were great as they generally are bigger and more
complex, however this quickly flipped round as I got used to them. Some
are almost too big and, in team games, I never really got that sense of
intensity that I do on CoD4. I was surprised as well to find that,
playing it many months after release, how full of annoying quirks the
game was. Players would float into the sky, easily disappear under the
map and other such examples. I know some glitches will always exist but
these ones seemed common and really easy to access. The spawning was
also an issue – the smaller maps in particular seemed to constantly put
you directly in front of other players, or too close together as a team.
The use of tanks adds variety to the game and I suppose their pros/cons
balance out. The perks are OK but the "air strike" function was a lot
less effective than in CoD4 while conversely the dogs are just too
effective and are only fun when they are yours (thanks to them I got a
23-streak, a 24-1 game and a 15-0 game, all on my first day of playing –
that shouldn't be right!).
In a nutshell though, I always seemed
to be playing the game thinking that I could be using this time to play
CoD4. And this is the problem – CoD5 is not good enough, different
enough, slick enough or engaging enough to even stand as an equal of
Modern Warfare, and that applies across the board. It is a matter of
taste to a point but I found the game more frustrating due to technical
reasons, less intense as an on-line experience, less flowing and less
fun – and it is not down to me "losing", because I don't mind that so
much.
So, like many others, I have returned to CoD4 and will
remain there until Modern Warfare 2 comes out, which I hope can
replicate the strengths and success of that game – because for my time,
CoD4 just doesn't cut it, no matter how visually impressive and grand it
all is.