Call of Duty: World at War

"he Call of Duty games have moved beyond the stuff established in the PS2 era, both in terms of setting and in how they're presented. A lack of online multiplayer or co-op and an overpowering sense that you've done all this before -- multiple times, in fact -- dilutes any of the impact that Final Fronts could have had. There are moments where it's fun, sure, but does it come close to the advancements to the series in recent years? Hardly, and thus it's really not worth your time."

"The Call of Duty games have moved beyond the stuff established in the PS2 era, both in terms of setting and in how they're presented. A lack of online multiplayer or co-op and an overpowering sense that you've done all this before -- multiple times, in fact -- dilutes any of the impact that Final Fronts could have had. There are moments where it's fun, sure, but does it come close to the advancements to the series in recent years? Hardly, and thus it's really not worth your time."

" World at War is a far better game than Call of Duty 3, and with a similar set up to multiplayer as Modern Warfare plus the new four player co-op, it’s certainly a well-rounded package – but will it survive the double-pronged attack of Resistance 2 and Gears of War 2? "