I thought the graphics were a nice, if subtle improvement over Modern Warfare and the single player campaign was at least as good. I didn't find the story as powerful as MW though, but the combat was well paced. I thought some of the guns were hard to use because it was difficult keeping them loaded for the duration of the mission, so the choice of arms was somewhat dictated by the availability of ammo. As the WWII counterpart to MW, I think this game is on par. MW probably wins in some of the clever ways they staged the action but I think this game has better large scale shoot outs. I was again disappointed by the length of the single player campaign. I felt that it was not adequate for the two story lines they tried to squeeze into it. Still, nothing in this game detracts it from upholding the CoD standard. If you like CoD, this is a safe and good buy, so don't be deterred by some of the people expecting this to be MW2 for some odd reason.
Other Helpful Reviews for Call of Duty: World at War
It would be hard to immediately identify something as a World War II game with the absence of Nazis. In fact, the absence of Nazis is what potentially could have led Treyarch's latest iteration of the Call of Duty franch... Read Full Review
The Call of Duty franchise has once again returned to it's World War II roots. This release pays respect to the Pacific Theatre of Operations and delves once again back into the major conflicts of the Eastern Front. T... Read Full Review