BLOG POST

Review: Call of Duty World War Two

By Danny Radical

Call of Duty World War Two Review: What A Piece of Shit

temp-post-image

Back in November 2017, Activision released Call of Duty, World War Two. This piece of shit was presented to the world as a game with beautiful graphics, exciting single player gameplay, and...that's about it. Just about the same roll out as Pac Man had in 1982.

Yes, I know the game has sold millions of copies. McDonalds sells millions of hamburgers, but no one's saying "Holy Shit, this is the best hamburger ever!" And while this forum of gaming isn't the usual Sports On The Go 1 fare, there's more and more buzz on video games as sports- like cheerleading, they aren't- so it seems just as acceptable to discuss a bad team or a shitty GM like Garth Snow as it is to discuss a shitty team...which falls upon the team of programmers that made an inadequate game.

I'm sure you're wondering what's wrong with the game, considering I'm not being nice to it. I'd prefer to save that for later. I'd like to start with the positives.

The game has multiple modes. There's campaign, which is the best part of the game despite the horrible in game animations and predictable sounding voice acting. There's multiplayer, which has vast redundant game modes, and then there's zombies, a Call of Duty staple whose time has more than come for the pasture.

The best is the single player mode. You start the game off storming Normandy ala Saving Private Ryan. Saving Private Ryan did a better job depicting such, but it's a pretty cool board to experience. In fact, playing that board via a rental from Redbox was my impetus to purchase the game for myself. You can even look around your character and see what's happening in the ancillary environment, which adds to the experience.

Some people think even the best mode is garbage. NSFW.

Zombies is a new take (for me) because generally I'm not a fan of zombies and haven't been into playing that mode since Black Ops II presented Kino Der Totten, and that's only because my friends played it with me which made it fun. The new Zombies board plays out like a bad movie, which is wholly unnecessary.

My first time playing zombies on CoDWWII, I nearly got to level 30. I NEVER got to level 30 on Kino. I really can't say more than that, as the whole zombies in a little city thing may have been a cool way to expand and progress the concept of zombie gameplay, but overall it's poorly done. Why not integrate the zombies to act like bots do in practice games on various battlefields, instead of having one specific board for zombies? Combining the games so that zombie fans can learn the regular game maps and feel comfortable, and non-zombie fans can try something new would be an improvement to trying to package the same game in various ways.

Whereas zombies is redundant, boring, and unnecessary, by far the biggest clusterfuck as a game mode is multiplayer. Before anyone tries to get salty, my KDR is about 1.0, I have won more games than I have lost, and I have multiple levels of prestige. I have put my time on this turd, for the first time since Nuketown. And after collecting days worth of hours of gameplay, I can tell you that the game is visually pleasing, but largely garbage.

temp-post-image

What makes it garbage? From the first time you insert the disc, the game is a time waster. An hour of downloading extras from the initial contact from the boot disc just to get it up and running, and then daily updates to keep fixing mistakes that Activision made in trying to make a game on a deadline, instead of making a game. Who needs 19 daily updates a month on a good product? If you can believe this, there was a time where a game needed ZERO updates because they made sure it was debugged before it was sold. That was pre internet, on line content, where developers had to be smarter.

Back to time wasting. The loading of any game mode in CoDWII takes minutes. Minutes. My Commodore 64 had a better load speed. A Commodore 64 smokes a PS4 Pro- that's Bizzaro Earth shit. You sit in a lobby depending on the multiplayer game mode you choose, just to lose all freedom of choice. Here's an example: I enter a lobby to play a game of War at Operation Breakout. 20 seconds into the lobby filling with players, the board changes to Operation Neptune. Why? Nobody knows. 6 players leave because it's a bait and switch. The game resets it's team finding clock to add time to your wait. You don't get the game you want, which is odd because you paid for the game you want.

temp-post-image

It's going to be a long time.

So your bait and switch game starts, and you HATE it. It's not fun because it's not what you want. On top of that, your teammates are garbage. So you decide to quit what you didn't ask for, because you didn't ask for it. WRONG. If you quit, you get penalized for quitting by being given a loss and a denigration of the things you earned as you were playing. And if you stay? Likely getting a loss and frustrated with awful teammates. So you now get the choice of fighting for hope against hope for a win, or take the loss and save your actual lifespan from being wasted away on a shitty game. My preference is the latter. Gives me more time to read.

The next thing on the garbage pile is a situation that I have NEVER dealt with before in a video game. I've been playing systems since the Atari 2600 through the Sega Genesis through the Atari Jaguar through the Dreamcast and all levels of Playstations and Xboxes- I'm leaving out the complete list because it's 4 times that size- and this is the FIRST game I ever had that actually had game specific controller malfunctions. Call of Duty WWII has shut my controller off with a full battery during a game well over a dozen times. Why the balls would a game shut off a controller as you play it?

Who programmed that? And I have to assume that it's on Activision, as there are no other PS4 games I've ever played that have done such. Not shitty Battlefront, not goofy Lego Dimensions, not free Neverwinter; no other game has turned off its controls. Ever. Except CoD WWII.

temp-post-image

Free. And more engaging.

Because the programmers tried to rush out a product and ended up selling people half cooked food.

Now, you may be saying "So your complaints are that after dropping $65 on a video game, you don't get to play the games you want and your controller craps out and removes you from a game? What's the issue?" Which is like going to a restaurant and ordering food, only to be brought whatever the chef feels like making, and you have to go cook it yourself. Why the taint would you go back there?

Now if these two on a scale of one to ten perfect 10 screw ups were the only issue with the game, I'd say that the game is a 4 out of 10 based on the strength of the solo mode. But this game hovers around zero out of ten, and I'll keep explaining why.

Next up is the game play. There are plentiful game modes to explore, such as Domination where you have to acquire and protect a point to gain score. Or Hardpoint, where you have to acquire and protect a point to gain score. Or there's Team Deathmatch, where your team races the opponents to get to a specified number of kills to win. Or there's Kill Confirmed, where your team races the opponents to get a specified number of kills to win. Then there's Capture the Flag, where you have to kill opponents and bring back a trophy to a base. Then there's Gridiron, where you have to kill opponents and bring back a trophy to a base. To mix it up, there's Search and Destroy, where you kill opponents and put a trophy in a base. There's a mode called Free for All, which is what the name implies. Finally, there is War, a 6 on 6 battle that actually requires a little strategy to play as you conquer objectives that goes a little beyond "shoot the other guy."

In short, there are five game modes to play. And in each mode, you have no control over the arena you play in and little control on the team your play on. And no control as to how to balance teams for a good fight. There are occasional seasonal modes, like Prop Hunt, which is the worst game mode imaginable. You run around and shoot boxes and cars that are props within the game. What a lazy effort.

In further explaining why this game is a zero, we move to the next element- ambiance. The game has in game group leaders who shout out directions and instructions to you. These shouts range from a whisper in the game to a wake-up-the-house-at-midnight audio blast, and all with no apparent reason to the changes in the volume. On top of that, they often tell you after the fact what's going on. "The Enemy is building a bridge!" will be stated after the enemy built their bridge. Well, that would have been useful a moment ago, when you know, they were building a bridge. Also, is that the voice of Jay Mohr? What happened to him.

Next up, the presentation of Germans is entirely racist. Were Germans racist in the 1940's? Clearly. There was a Holocaust. But the interesting thing to me was that if they're setting the game in that era, where the Allies are calling Germans "Krauts," I'm betting my bank account that if they added the Japanese to World War Two (yes, the Japanese were the bad guys, too) there would not be one guy yelling "Look out for the Slopeheads!" or "Gooks away!" Because Germans accept their history as human rights violators, but the Japanese have a real difficult issue coming to terms with raping most of Korea and China. And I'm not even going into Japan's actual self justification with attacking Pearl Harbor as terrorists, or their frequent reminders about being the only nation who undeservingly had weapons of mass destruction used on them. I'm just really sure that a nation that makes Playstations would not allow themselves to be portrayed in a negative light.

So after awful audio, throw darts at a board game choice, and limited game modes, there's the actual gameplay.

When you play multiplayer, there are usually 5 divisions you can play as- infantry, mountain, airborne, expeditionary, and armored. Each class has it's perks. but their consistency is questionable.

For instance, expeditionary allows players to load incendiary shells into their shotgun to shoot someone with fire. When you score a hit, the opponent goes up in flames. At least, in theory. I have shot many people with flaming rounds- closing in on a thousand. I watch the person absorb a shotgun blast- a painful event- and then burst into flames- a decidedly worse event. And then those people shoot and kill me. The guy punctured by a shotgun blast and in flames will have the wherewithal to sight up and kill me. And then run around- still on fire- and participate in the game. And not die.

Repeating: I shoot a player with a shotgun blast. Hole into their body. The blast lights them on fire. They then kill me, go about making a sandwich, and go about their day.

Only against me.

I'm not sure how that happens. I know that I have seen people shoot my character with fire shotguns hundreds of times. My issue? Whenever I get shot by a guy with a flaming round, it's instant death. 100% of the time. Flaming immolation. Now I know there are some soldier classes who cope better with being on fire. The odds that half of my fire victims have that one class are 1 in 30. 3%, not 50%. But there's more.

If someone throws a hand grenade at my character and it lands anywhere on the board my guy is in, I will die. No exceptions. However, I have thrown hand grenades into guys faces and watched them shrug it off. The game has a little graphic for such- it looks like a beard. Guess that stands for unkillable? I have stuck grenades to opponents faces and watched the grenade blow up the turret that the opponent is using, yet leaves the opponent unharmed. So the grenade didn't blow a head off, it just blew up the gun. Makes sense. But the guy throwing back? He hit Canada, but that's close enough to kill me! Hey Activision, when you empower grenades, equal blow up for all. I'm tired of getting stuck notifications without a kill. Smarten up.

Also, say you had a choice- be shot in the head 4 times, or be stabbed in the leg. Most folks would pick the stabbing. Yet in Call of Futility, one is a guaranteed kill, and one is a 40/60. Want to guess the guaranteed kill? The knife.

All of this is gripe is clearly aimed at a poorly written video game. But this next part transcends gripe. The weapon damage system of the game defies logic. Here's what I'm talking about. I have a gun that does 5 out of ten damage. I shoot my opponent 4 times in the head before they realize that I'm standing there. They spin, jump up, and shoot at me twice with a pistol. As they jump I put extra rounds into their legs. Final scorecard: I shoot them 6 times across their whole body, I get shot twice and die. The game then tells me what killed me-often the same exact gun. So as I triple the amount of rounds into my opponent, land multiple head and chest shots, yet I somehow still lose.

The game is completely disconnected to its damage system and its weapon offerings. There's no rationale to it. It's like the court system. A gun with a 4 level in damage does equal amounts to a gun with an 8 damage, with no reason why. The most overpowered weapons are sniper rifles. A sniper rifle in CoDWWII acts like a pistol but across the entire screen. The sniper can "quick scope" any opponent and instant kill them because its a sniper rifle. Clearly the writers of American Sniper screwed up, because if that movie was made in Call of Duty mode, it would run about 45 seconds.
The OP of the sniper rifle is utter nonsense. A sniper rifle is a long range weapon, but it isn't a long range immediate death kill pistol if it hits your leg. Conversely, 5 shots from a B.A.R. directly into your upper torso and head would kill anyone. Laying down on the ground doesn't give an extra buffer for absorbing such shots. In fact, it means bullets would be hitting your head, spine, lungs, neck. Usually things that kill people.

The worst of all issues however is the built in acceptance of the game system for lag. Hands down. This game has a killcam that defies reality. Often I will be playing and get hit by "curve bullets," shots that when replayed are on a different planet than the screen I am presently playing on. And the greatest example of lag that I've ever seen in a game was a tank progressing 10+% of its trip in a flash because the game wasn't processing time properly. I've seen that happen multiple times- the opponent jumps from 90% done to game over in half a second.

What's more, because the game lags, you can walk into a room and see no one, only to be killed shortly after by the "invisible" opponents in your room who were already there, but weren't on your screen when you walked in.
It's a shitty way to produce a game. Embarrassing. Activision made Barnstorming. A classic game without daily updates. Somehow with extra technology, they got worse as a company.

temp-post-image

ALL BETTER THAN COD WWII!

Yes, your game made a lot of money. Which is the worst thing ever. It reinforces doing a shitty job. Because that removes a check on your company to serve up fully developed games to people paying a ton of money for the game, the add ons, and the in game purchases for more bonuses.

In game cash purchases - for any game- should be made illegal, as they're borderline criminal. The government already said such regarding the horrible Star Wars Battlefront 2. And not the good Battlefront 2.

I burned out on this game in 2 months. Let me share with you some games that have had a longer shelf life. Grand Theft Auto 5- played for years. Borderlands 1 and 2- played for years. Smash TV- played since 1990. Pac Man- played since 1982.

ALL TIME GREAT

Activision, you don't have a generational game. You don't have a must get for a system. Jesus, Activision, this isn't even on the level of Pitfall, of which I had a denim patch for my high score. You don't even give out denim patches anymore. Shame.

Recommendation- if you want to play a Call of Duty game on a newest generation console, go get Modern Warfare remastered. Similar graphics, 33% of the price, better in game play, and mission modes NOT available in the newer game. Better yet, just replay Modern Warfare 2, which is a better game. Or Modern Warfare 3, which is a better game. Or Black Ops, which is a better game. And you don't even need a PS4 or Xbox 1 for those.

Last point- the add on's. After dropping $15, I found that the new war mode- Operation Intercept- is complete garbage. And it's not even the worst part of the expansion, of which I wish I could get removed and my money back. There's a game mode called Prop Hunt. Prop hunt may be the worst game ever made. Atari 2600 ET laughs at how bad it is. You're running around shooting whistling crates of nothing. Seriously, WTF. They made new guns for the expansion pack. The new guns available are still guns. And now players are purchasing computer aided gun guidance systems or controller based stabilization devices to cheat the game and kill you with one shot regardless of the gun. Way to govern your mess.

temp-post-image

Yes, this is a game mode. Shoot a bicycle.

Did I mention that this game outside of single player campaign mode is absolute garbage?

So here's my review: Take your $65 and go to a place with day old sushi. Eat the warmer stuff. Get crazy stomach pains, maybe even food poisoning. Shit yourself to the point that you dehydrate. Go to 7-11 for electrolytes and shit all over their floor. Come home, drink the liquids, shit your own pants, and pass out in an undignified fashion. Why? Because it would be a more useful experience and money better spent than the $65 over Call of Duty WWII.

Final words?

temp-post-image