Call of duty 5: World at war (wii)

Anyone tried this out? its pritty cool, i've always been deterred from playing FPS's on consoles purely because i detest analog sticks for aim. So with the wii its an interesting addition to my collection.

If anyone does: 498390118749 = friend code (: add me my friends list is lacking since the wii doesn't have any method of communication between players and theres no ingame chat. Its impossible to find friends in-game like you would playing the xbox. >.>

From what i've seen from the commercials, the graphics look pretty "meh"

I'll rent it sometime, though.

its brilliant on the pc i love it

I have it for the PC.  I found it dissapointing after playing COD4.  It's the same engine, and I dont see much difference in the graphics.  The Russian storyline is pretty good, the US story not so much.   Overall it's a good game as far as FPS's go, but when I compare it to COD4 it doesn't come close in my opinion.

i rate it over cod4, cod4 the story was better, but nobody plays singleplayer, its got to be about the multiplayer IMO, and for the multiplayer i dont think cod4 comes close, yes its new weapons, but call of duty has always been a world war game, people who joined at cod4 are bound to find it different, but those who have been playing cod since it began like the fact that it was a war game, so its a return to our roots for us, the gameplay online is everything you ever wanted in a game, the little things you notice like having your limbs amputated when you get hit, reviving dead team mates, not beign able to look at the map whilst running so theres never an "im always better than you" state, you are always vulnerable, and most importantly, the maps have been opened up so much, you can no longer put 1 player on one spot, and one another and deny access to the bombs to 15 players on the opposite because you just camp and spray, especially the spraying walls on cod4, now the maps have been opened up with 4 or 5 sometimes as many as 10 different paths to your objective, it makes multiplayer so much more fun and the graphics are definitly better

ZarlakQUAM wrote:

i rate it over cod4, cod4 the story was better, but nobody plays singleplayer, its got to be about the multiplayer IMO, and for the multiplayer i dont think cod4 comes close, yes its new weapons, but call of duty has always been a world war game, people who joined at cod4 are bound to find it different, but those who have been playing cod since it began like the fact that it was a war game, so its a return to our roots for us

I know lots of people who would completely dissagree with that argument. WWII has been over-done to hell now and granted CODWAW managed to tap into something slightly new in the end it was still WWII, heck they even had to add zombies to it to make it interesting, if thats not screaming lack of content I don't know what is.

cod4 had a zombie mod first plus 100 other mods, its nothing to do with lack of content, its just giving players other options, hence why people create hundreds of mods for hundreds of games

ZarlakQUAM wrote:

cod4 had a zombie mod first plus 100 other mods, its nothing to do with lack of content, its just giving players other options, hence why people create hundreds of mods for hundreds of games

Not the developers though, the developers make a consious decision to leave all the 'mod' stuff out. I wouldnt serve you a 4 course meal of nice food and then decide for pudding you were getting a clown squirty-cream pie for desert, it just doesnt fit with the overall package.

Well when it comes to wii the graphics where never great anway its not a console for graphics more about gameplay. As for the cod4/cod5 debate i only started playing cod4 just before the release of cod5 and it was on xbox but i think im one of the few that having played both prefers this one.

The only downside is the wii version has reduced content..not all of the maps etc which kinda sucks :/

odj wrote:

ZarlakQUAM wrote:

cod4 had a zombie mod first plus 100 other mods, its nothing to do with lack of content, its just giving players other options, hence why people create hundreds of mods for hundreds of games

Not the developers though, the developers make a consious decision to leave all the 'mod' stuff out. I wouldnt serve you a 4 course meal of nice food and then decide for pudding you were getting a clown squirty-cream pie for desert, it just doesnt fit with the overall package.

I would put it in the same vein as "Ragtime Warfare". Both games are great imho.

Danger_Frog1471 wrote

The only downside is the wii version has reduced content..not all of the maps etc which kinda sucks :/

thats what bothers me about wii games the most. I rented Star wars unleashed expecting the same level design and find out that everything is reduced and simplified. I mean you go to the same place 3 times and just end in a different room. That and even the costumes and light saber colors were reduced.

As for cod I love cod4 and its great, the upgrades to cod5s multiplayer are just awesome ( i didn't even realize the map went away when you ran, of course i almost always play hc) but dogs, second chance, expanded custom classes with prestige mode (idk if thats on the computer too cause cod4 doesnt even have regular prestige where as ps3 does), even having to practice with a sniper rifle without its scope before you get it, improved levels, VEHICLES are back! all are big pluses for me.

I mean cod2's expansion being my favorite multiplayer heading back to that is always going to get my vote.

although I still play cod4...

odj wrote:

ZarlakQUAM wrote:

i rate it over cod4, cod4 the story was better, but nobody plays singleplayer, its got to be about the multiplayer IMO, and for the multiplayer i dont think cod4 comes close, yes its new weapons, but call of duty has always been a world war game, people who joined at cod4 are bound to find it different, but those who have been playing cod since it began like the fact that it was a war game, so its a return to our roots for us

I know lots of people who would completely dissagree with that argument. WWII has been over-done to hell now and granted CODWAW managed to tap into something slightly new in the end it was still WWII, heck they even had to add zombies to it to make it interesting, if thats not screaming lack of content I don't know what is.

I tottally agree.  It's not just COD that's wearing out WWII, it's most war games in general.  They need to find a new war to use or actually think for once (like COD4) and make up their own war.

shearman wrote:

odj wrote:

ZarlakQUAM wrote:

i rate it over cod4, cod4 the story was better, but nobody plays singleplayer, its got to be about the multiplayer IMO, and for the multiplayer i dont think cod4 comes close, yes its new weapons, but call of duty has always been a world war game, people who joined at cod4 are bound to find it different, but those who have been playing cod since it began like the fact that it was a war game, so its a return to our roots for us

I know lots of people who would completely dissagree with that argument. WWII has been over-done to hell now and granted CODWAW managed to tap into something slightly new in the end it was still WWII, heck they even had to add zombies to it to make it interesting, if thats not screaming lack of content I don't know what is.

I tottally agree.  It's not just COD that's wearing out WWII, it's most war games in general.  They need to find a new war to use or actually think for once (like COD4) and make up their own war.

BUT I think the reason why they use WWII is because when they try to do wars like vietnam , they normally do poorly, while WWII always does well. Although I dont think theres a WWI game but thats probably because it would mainly be trench warfare.