Call of Duty: WWII Review

For the past few years Call of Duty has focused on being a futuristic game, with jet packs and exo-suits, but this year they did something...
By Reynolds, Nov 16, 2017 | | |
  1. Reynolds

    For the past few years Call of Duty has focused on being a futuristic game, with jet packs and exo-suits, but this year they did something different, they went back to their roots and listened to the people that actually buy the game. By doing so, this game breathes some much-needed fresh air into a series that many thought was dying. They still have a lot to prove, and a lot to make up for, but may this is the start.


    The campaign sets itself off with a blast, throwing you right onto the beaches of Normandy, fighting for your life. You storm the beaches and in true old-school Call of Duty fashion, you're the hero that gets your team off the red sand and into the Nazi lines. You're introduced to some of the new features here, most notably the new healing system. As we all know, healing in the past was done by ducking your head, finding cover, and waiting for the blood-soaked screen to turn clear again so you could go for round two. This isn't the case any longer, now you have to make use of medkits, if you have any, to fill your health bar back up. You're not alone on this quest for medkits, your squad mates will generate them and give them to you. This is somewhat of a strange addition to the campaign, but something different. Unfortunately, this is where the fun of the campaign ended for me. Its full of inconsequential missions, where even remembering details about them becomes a blur in less than 24 hours before I began to write this.



    The gameplay can be unwieldy at times. Between the connection errors caused by the plague of server issues, to some terrible features (talked about below), they definitely have some major fixes to implement in before the game will be at its most enjoyable. Spawns are another talking point, being as they are absolutely terrible. If you enter a game that’s in progress, god bless you. You’ll most likely be stuck in a war zone as soon as you spawn, either getting lead rained down on you or having a lovely grenade plopped into your lap, chances are you're going to die... a lot. The hit-boxes are a walking, talking, living, breathing meme. You can be fully around a concrete corner in a kill cam, and yet a messily 9mm round out of a MP40 will drop you like a sack of potatoes.

    HQ (Social Space):

    One of the new features that was hyped up was the addition of the HQ. It was sold as a place where teammates could do things together instead of just in a menu, and thus far it has been a disaster. It’s has increased loading times throughout the game, and has been linked with some of the connectivity problems. While this feature had good intentions written all over it, it has been nothing but a nightmare. Maybe some changes and fixes will help this feature to a different fate, but until then, it's one of the worst features in the game.


    The maps are on the smaller side, but pack a whole lot of fun into them. They have kill-zones, funnels, and sniper hides, all things that a real war zone would have. Some maps do have some major flaws that lead to easy spawn traps. For example, the "USS Texas" map has a sniper tower, the bridge, overlooking the spawn points on both sides of the map. With spawning in its current condition, it makes for a hard breakout.


    Arguably one of the things I was most upset about with this game was their lack of weapon choices. They are missing WWII classics like the British Sten, or the Japanese Arisaka. If you're a big Search and Destroy player, you may be surprised to learn that silencers aren't available to any weapon type other than the SMG class, and that’s only if you're using the Airborne Division. Then there is the major issue of gun balancing. They have already released an update to start correcting this, but still, the overpowering of the BAR is more than evident.


    It's safe to say that my favorite feature of any Call of Duty are the Zombies modes. While they've gotten far from their roots of just sit and defend, they’ve always been pretty decent and fun to play with a group of friends. This year's zombies are no exception of that. They did make some changes this year, getting away from the in-game perks and instead went with class loadouts where you pick your perks and in-game passive boosters to increase your effectiveness while playing. This leads to some hard choices before you're even slaughtering some undead Nazi experiments. They also debuted Jolts, which is the new in-game currency replacing the old money/cash system. I don’t see the big deal with that, as you still get Jolts the same way you’ve obtained money in past games, by killing some zombies. The Easter egg, though much easier than last years, still managed to be interesting and keep my attention. Zombies still has the issue of losing your attention after an hour and a half game of just killing zombies and finishing the Easter egg, but that’s something that is out of their control.

    Overall the game looks absolutely stunning and has the music to go along with it. The game kind of gives you the feeling that a return to greatness isn't as far out of reach as many would've thought. Will it ever topple some of the previous Call of Duty's legendary work, no. Will it show the series has some life in it after all? Yes. Maybe the bleeding has stopped, and the death of this franchise was largely over-exaggerated, or maybe it’s a short reminder of what Call of Duty was, and the inevitable is still to come.

    If I was asked to rank this game 1-10, I would rate it as a 7.3/10. The reason for this is due to the nostalgia factor, the zombies, the graphics, and that lovely menu music it has to offer it's players.

    Share This Article

    BrownMagician, Luna, Barnacle and 5 others like this.


To make a comment simply sign up and become a member!
  1. Barnacle
    The concept is great, it's a shame that they didn't iron out the bugs before release. If we're paying upwards of £50 to play it, I believe the game should be well optimised to reflect that.
    1. Reynolds
      Agreed, but they’re pressured to release it, with or without bugs. Most games released these days are unfinished, but it’s just a sign of the times.
  2. Vegeta
    Better than the last few jetpack space fake gun crap games that have been going around, BO1 for life and I will slap anyone who tests me in a 1v1.
  3. Skepta
    Amount of times you have moaned about CoD to me and then "If I was asked to rank this game 1-10, I would rate it as a 7.3/10" :wink:

    Great review though.
      Reynolds likes this.
    1. Reynolds
      I moaned about multiplayer tbf. I actually enjoy this zombies more than the ones of recent past. The game isn’t good, but it’s by no means on the IW level.
      Skepta likes this.
    2. Skepta
      Zombies didn't cut it compared to BO zombies. The multiplayer is good compared to IW and AW and even BO3 in my opinion. Nowhere near the game it used to be.
    3. Reynolds
      It’s a shame, but then again if it was the game it used to be, we’d all be complaining about buying a copy paste game from them, rather than a **** game.
  4. Slim Shady
    Oh my a article that is not copy and pasted LOL :tongue:
      Atlas, 3xTiNcT, Apollo and 1 other person like this.
    1. Reynolds
      It’s a shame really
      Slim Shady likes this.
  5. Keeley Hazell
    I wanted to buy this game and be excited for it but the microtransactions made that impossible.. Call of Duty as well as gaming will never be the same with this constant cycle of capitalistic greed.
      Apollo likes this.
    1. Keeley Hazell
      I also think Sledgehammer should never make Call of Duty.. they are the worst developers out of the 3 lol
      Apollo likes this.
  6. Frosty
    The game is ok, but there are so many problems that I wouldn't rate it above a 6/10.
    1. Reynolds
      There are a few things I enjoy, which is why I gave it the rating I did. Plus the menu music was superbly done.
  7. Atlas
    Nicely said. Do you feel the game really has returned to its roots insofar as gameplay is concerned? Just judging from watching some streams, it seems like the maps are set up closer to maps from AW and BO3 rather than maps from WaW. In particular, do you feel like any maps are structured as to have any tactical play like WaW maps such as Courtyard and Cliffside (e.g. you can hide in foliage, there are lots of routes to take as opposed to only 3 lanes)?
    1. View previous replies...
    2. Atlas
      Ah that's a shame. Do you feel like it is at a speed level faster than say BO1? I remember even then feeling like things were getting a bit too quick.
      Reynolds likes this.
    3. Reynolds
      Personally, I’d say yes. The game has just about no strategy to it (depending on how you play and if you’re alone). You run in, gun 1-3 people down, die, respawn, repeat. Even S&D is stupid fast, which is a shame, as it used to be the only reason I’d buy the game.
      Atlas likes this.
    4. Atlas
      That's so sad. Especially with it being on sale for Black Friday, I really want to enjoy it. However, if it is that fast, I feel like I won't enjoy it. If I'm going to play something fast, it will be Titanfall 2. I used to play S&D for hours on World at War. It was great because maps like Outskirts provided numerous places to hide and new opportunities for Bouncing Betty placement each match. I was really hoping to relive some of that thrill, but I guess CoD WWII won't be doing it for me.
      Reynolds likes this.
  8. LookBroZombies_XBL
    Reynolds What system did you play it on? I watched Angry Joe's review and I agree with what you say here even though I haven't played the game. I think the COD series is dead and has been since Black Ops 2, but that's just me. COD's campaign is always a boring linear story which I think is a trend that should die since there aren't many real options except to follow the story they set out and reach the checkpoints. No matter how many times COD makes a game it's going to be essentially the same stuff just reskinned, which we have seen numerous times with them. Better graphics and different guns doesn't make me want to get this game since I always play multiplayer and I've been hooked on BF4, which opens up so many possibilities in terms of mp, and BF1 was a disappointment for me. Great review either way, I'm glad people are still writing articles here!
      Reynolds likes this.
    1. Reynolds
      Thanks for the feedback! As for the console it was on Xbox one... looking back at it, should have included that in the review. Oops. They were a great FPS at one time, it’s a shame it’s going to be nearly impossible for them to reclaim that status. BF1 was a disappointment in my eyes as well, but for battlefield that was a first, for CoD this is there first mediocre game after a long series of terrible ones. Maybe they’ll take the hint and go back to their roots again next year, and maybe have better execution while doing so.
  9. Wiki
    I think this review is very one-sided and that side is based on a very negative review. The subject Head Quarters "It's one of the worst features in the game." is far from the truth. HQ would, of course, be much better with it filled with other online players which we will have very soon. But to call it the worst future in the game is just not true. With the guns subject, the bar needed to be nerfed and it was which I'm sure we will be seeing much more weapon balances in the future. About the Silencers. You were complaining about weapons not being completely authentic to WW2 even though silencers were rarely used in WW2, so would it of been better to just take silencers out altogether? Maps subject I agree with you. At the end of the day, the game has only been released around a week and has already had major updates put in place to fix a lot of the issues. This game will end up taking several awards next year. I feel this game has so much potential and when all the fixes get put in place I see this cod being my favorite cod made. I can understand how people are upset with the server issues and how long it's taking them get it all fixed but I don't think they were expecting to have this many people as their last cods were ****. All I can say is a huge improvement from the last cod! #BootsOnGround
      Reynolds likes this.
    1. Reynolds
      Thanks for the feedback. The review isn’t completely negative, it’s just how I personally think of the game. As I said multiple times, the game could be better and will be, when it’s updated and fixed. It has tons of potential, just a lot of it has yet to be reached. As for silencers, yes they were hardly used, but they still existed, and were used. To further counter your argument, how used are suppressors in the current day battlefield? They are mostly used by special operatives and snipers, and not your “everyday” solider. Should they be taken out of every Call of Duty because of that? I don’t think so, but then again I do see your point.
      Wiki, Frosty and LookBroZombies_XBL like this.