Call of Duty: WWII

 PlayStation 4
User Score
5.1

Mixed or average reviews- based on 2065 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 718 out of 2065
  2. Mixed: 482 out of 2065
  3. Negative: 865 out of 2065
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. TheQuietGamer
    Nov 24, 2018
    7
    Call of Duty goes back to its World War 2 roots. A return to form that will be welcomed by anyone tired of wall running and jet packs. This back-to-basics approach is comfortable as an old shoe, but the new additions are hit-or-miss and the lack of risks taken won't do anything to win back those who found the series to have gotten stale some time ago.

    The campaign: Sledgehammer Games    Call of Duty goes back to its World War 2 roots. A return to form that will be welcomed by anyone tired of wall running and jet packs. This back-to-basics approach is comfortable as an old shoe, but the new additions are hit-or-miss and the lack of risks taken won't do anything to win back those who found the series to have gotten stale some time ago.

    The campaign:
    Sledgehammer Games shows once again that they're almost as good at telling stories as the team at Treyarch. With the exception of the protagonist (whose voice actor has some trouble maintaining his southern accent), I actually cared about the characters. I wasn't a big fan of the gameplay changes though. The removal of recharging health for a limited bar that you need to keep an eye on is at odds with the chaotic nature of the action where bullets come at you from every direction. The new squad system where your AI teammates can resupply you with ammo and first aid kits is interesting, but not fleshed out enough to have any real impact. While I was invested in the story actually playing through it wasn't something I enjoyed all that much.

    Zombies:
    I think WWII actually has one of the best iterations of the fan favorite cooperative mode. The new tone and setting are really creepy giving it a distinct vibe. All of the abilities, power-ups, and single use skills will be easier for newcomers to wrap their heads around than they were in Black Ops 3. While this change may not sit well with some, I love the addition of regularly updated goals for the sense of direction they give. Of course playing with randoms isn't ideal. Especially if you or they don't have a mic. This is still a mode that is at its strongest with friends.

    Multiplayer:
    The biggest portion of the package and the thing that's kept this franchise alive. It's where you'll feel the effects of the return to boots-on-the-ground style gameplay the most. With the removal of all the movement systems introduced over the years as the series pushed further and further into the future this really does feel like playing old school CoD. The new War mode can be quite a bit of fun with each map offering different objectives for teams to complete in order to win the match. It adds some nice variety, but can be a little unbalanced at times with certain objectives giving one side a clear advantage over the other. The Hub is kind of an odd addition. Giving you a place to interact with other players. It has its amusements, but for the most part I never used it.

    The loot box system is understandably controversial as it has led to the inclusion of microtransactions. They are totally frivolous though as all they offer are cosmetic options. They're given out at random and you can earn them by completing "contracts" that require you to complete certain challenges. You can even get specific things you want with the easy to amass in-game currency by going to the Hub. So you'll never feel pressured to spend any money on them. Personally, I kind of like them as they mean I don't have to hit some crazy goal just to get a stupid charm or skin for my guns.

    Newcomers and longtime fans alike are going to face a bit of a learning curve when it comes to navigating WWII's confusing mess of menus. I don't know why Sledgehammer decided to ditch the sleak, easy to figure out layout of previous CoD titles, but it wasn't a smart move. Its the kind of thing that helped put Medal of Honor: Warfighter in a very early grave and has kept me from ever sticking with a Battlefield game for too long. I also encountered a startling amount of disconnects from matches. The stability is quite questionable given the meaty update sizes.

    Technical:
    Patch sizes are something Sledgehammer really needs to work on. I've been able to get every update put out for all of both Treyarch's and Infinity Ward's entries in the series over the years without ever having to worry about whether or not I had enough space for them. Here though I had to clear out a nice chunk of memory to make room. This was in issue for Advanced Warfare as well and I abandoned that game because of it.

    Conclusion:
    If you've wanted to see the series return to a more grounded style of play that's free of laser beams and robots then this is the CoD for you. Sledgehammer has tried to add some defining changes to the mix with varying degrees of success. Overall though this is another solid addition to the franchise and a sign that perhaps we haven't seen everything this conflict has to offer.

    7.9/10    … Expand
  2. RubenPrinsloo
    Aug 8, 2018
    6
    I can really say that it is a great game. It is also not the best Call of Duty I have played. I like the characters and where it takes place.

    My only problem is as follows: My game is lagging like really a lot. Every time I play, it starts to lag. Then when I want to continue someone killed me or my game does not want to continue. So, every time this happens, I must restart the whole    I can really say that it is a great game. It is also not the best Call of Duty I have played. I like the characters and where it takes place.

    My only problem is as follows:
    My game is lagging like really a lot. Every time I play, it starts to lag. Then when I want to continue someone killed me or my game does not want to continue. So, every time this happens, I must restart the whole game and start from the beginning. Then I also want to ask to bring in more powerful weapons. For example, it takes 4 shots to kill someone, and by that time someone already killed me. My game also takes very long to connect online or in multiplayer.

    The Pros of the game:
    I really like the maps in the game. It has really nice hideouts for sniping. I also like to follow the story of how the game takes place. The best for me is the great graphics. It really looks realistic.

    I would recommend this game to people who likes war games.    … Expand
  3. mikect92
    Aug 15, 2018
    6
    Call of Duty WWII can be split into 3 game modes each of which is radically different to each other.

    The campaign is the best in the Call of Duty franchise since Black Ops. It has stunning visuals, great characters and has a compelling story. It has replay-ability and manages to stay interesting. The only real negative of the campaign is that it is too action packed, which is a common    Call of Duty WWII can be split into 3 game modes each of which is radically different to each other.

    The campaign is the best in the Call of Duty franchise since Black Ops. It has stunning visuals, great characters and has a compelling story. It has replay-ability and manages to stay interesting. The only real negative of the campaign is that it is too action packed, which is a common problem with COD games. Huge explosions, great falls and unrealistic odds make the game unrealistic and goofy.

    The online multiplayer (which for most is the highlight of the game) is the polar opposite of the campaign. The visuals take a hit and are noticeably worse than the story. The maps are boring and not very re playable and it is a forgettable and boring experience. The maps are small and linear, the invisible walls are unforgivable and 2 of the very limited maps are obvious copies of Modern Warfare maps. Unlike the campaign which was over the top, the multiplayer is so under whelming. On top of this, the multiplayer suffers from pay to win mechanics and poor servers. Most guns are locked behind loot boxes which you can either pay real money for or grind like hell, only to end up with customised weapon grips. A FPS has customised weapon grips which are barely visible! As for servers, i played the game about 7-8 months after release and i keep being kicked from games and being locked out of matches. After 8 months, this should have been fixed.

    The final game mode is Zombies. Zombies is fun and interesting. There is a story and multiple different objectives and the map is huge. It is difficult however and is best played with friends in co-op.

    Over all, this game is a mixed bag, excelling in some game modes but horrifically failing in others. The campaign is great, as is Zombies, however the Online seriously holds the game back from greatness.    … Expand
  4. Garfield2010
    Sep 6, 2019
    7
    I got this game at a well discounted price. It is a typical Call of Duty game. I have only played the single player campaign thus far. The pace is very fast. As per usual you are a super human killing 50+ enemies per mission and you are a specialist bombardier, recon, sniper, driver etc. The game jumps from the one scene to the next - non stop action. The pacing seems a bit off withI got this game at a well discounted price. It is a typical Call of Duty game. I have only played the single player campaign thus far. The pace is very fast. As per usual you are a super human killing 50+ enemies per mission and you are a specialist bombardier, recon, sniper, driver etc. The game jumps from the one scene to the next - non stop action. The pacing seems a bit off with too much happening all the time. Every mission has an element where you need to rescue someone, clear certain areas, hold certain areas for a time period, some allies dying violently and a little bit of quick time melee. Very very linear.

    Good entertainment for a teenager I would say. Its basically a gaming version of Saving Private Ryan 15 years later    … Expand
  5. Datojet
    Jul 1, 2020
    7
    Just finished this game after I got it through my PS+ subscription.
    I don`t know why COD WW2 took so much heat from the audience, but I had a great time while playing it.
    The graphics are decent, the plot is very simple yet manages to keep one entertained, the campaign length is enough for 5-6 eves of intensive gameplay. What else do ya`ll want from a shooter? You run and you shoot, as    Just finished this game after I got it through my PS+ subscription.
    I don`t know why COD WW2 took so much heat from the audience, but I had a great time while playing it.
    The graphics are decent, the plot is very simple yet manages to keep one entertained, the campaign length is enough for 5-6 eves of intensive gameplay. What else do ya`ll want from a shooter? You run and you shoot, as simple as that. Yes, the dialogues in this game are dull and full of washed out cliches, but it`s not a first FPS to abuse that and definitely not the last. COD WW2 also has a number of gameplay shortcomings that get quite annoying after several hours of playing, like indistructible tables or other seemingly fragile objects that absorb RPG shots and leave enemies untouched, or crazy damage the nazis do on high level of difficulty resulting in frequent one-shots. Also, the friendly NPC`s are often annoying as they constantly run in front of you making it more difficult to aim at the enemies.
    But generally, I liked the dynamics of the game, I loved the missions where you operate a tank or a plane, the shooting itself feels pretty good, and the whole COD WW2 just feels like a solid game to spend a few eves with.    … Expand
  6. metooo
    Nov 4, 2017
    6
    I wanted to mention something a little different from other reviews. Played cod since mw1. My biggest gripe is that maps have been getting more and more streamlined, to the point where cod feels like glorified laser tag. I got the deluxe edition hoping it would be a throwback to the good old days where you'd snipe from a destroyed building, lurk through tall grass, or hide in the carcassI wanted to mention something a little different from other reviews. Played cod since mw1. My biggest gripe is that maps have been getting more and more streamlined, to the point where cod feels like glorified laser tag. I got the deluxe edition hoping it would be a throwback to the good old days where you'd snipe from a destroyed building, lurk through tall grass, or hide in the carcass of a downed helicopter, but instead they got rid of all that realistic hc Tdm stuff to appease the trigger fingers of people who complain about camping. The result is that it feels more streamlined than ever, in a very backward way. No you can't climb that tower it's decoration. No you can't hide in that grass, it's decoration too. BF1 really ruined COD for me, that was truly next gen and I got this hoping Cod was really gonna go back to the roots and then innovate from there. Loved advanced warfare btw, sledgehammer makes good games, but the slow boots on the ground doesn't work IMHO if you're using a map style still suited for fast play in the vein of advanced or infinite warfare. Slow play should have a tense stealth element to it which is what made the old games so fun for me,… Expand
  7. wapakalypse
    Nov 4, 2017
    5
    I give it a five. It looks amazing and I like the HQ concept. Its fun to play. Its boots on the ground COD. There are a lot of desperate people pulling drop shots and jumping around like fairies to avoid being shot but that is just the reality of COD right now.

    The servers are unable to handle these cool new ideas. It is constantly crashing, infinite loading screen and error codes all    I give it a five. It looks amazing and I like the HQ concept. Its fun to play. Its boots on the ground COD. There are a lot of desperate people pulling drop shots and jumping around like fairies to avoid being shot but that is just the reality of COD right now.

    The servers are unable to handle these cool new ideas. It is constantly crashing, infinite loading screen and error codes all day. The error codes present a link to www.callofduty.com/wwii/status where you can check updates on the server status however this page is clearly not updated because no one on my friends list can access any online function of this game yet the website indicates that all systems are green...

    The worst part, is that they have censored WWII and made it politically correct.

    Next Gen video games are ruining the gaming experience because video game developers seem to be simply riding the hype of next gen gaming while putting minimal effort into the actual performance of the games. Micro transactions have turned gaming into a profit first industry, have removed the artistic integrity of games, and have completely disregarded the consumer.

    My advice is to buy this game used on Kijiji and prevent these developers from making m.ore money than they deserve    … Expand
  8. kingz261
    Nov 3, 2017
    5
    Okay so first off. This is the best Call of Duty campaign in roughly ten years. I personally think all of the campaigns since the first two have aged like **** but MW1, MW2, Blops, WAW, were all pretty fun campaigns when they came out. Call of Duty 1 and 2 have the best campaigns as they were made with primarily a PC focus and the campaigns were the main draw point to those two. Those twoOkay so first off. This is the best Call of Duty campaign in roughly ten years. I personally think all of the campaigns since the first two have aged like **** but MW1, MW2, Blops, WAW, were all pretty fun campaigns when they came out. Call of Duty 1 and 2 have the best campaigns as they were made with primarily a PC focus and the campaigns were the main draw point to those two. Those two are classics and this game definitely tries to recapture what made those so good. Its a pretty good campaign but very short (5 or 6 hours on hardened). The switch back to healthpacks instead of the regenerating bulls*** is a amazing choice here. So the campaign is great, whats wrong? Well the zombies is meh, not bad nor good. And the multiplayer.... Its still the same garbage tripe that the series has been pushing out the past few years. Advanced Warfare had one of the better multiplayer components in recent years and it still wasnt very good. This multiplayer is just bad, they took a lot of inspiration from the originals for the campaign but didnt do anything for the multiplayer. I do not understand how people still enjoy this after all these years and improvements from other series. Its the same garbage circular map design where its basically a matter of who sees who first with a focus on grinding so you can unlock the cheap a** weapons so you can mow down the lower level players who use pea shooters. Its the same unbalanced garbage that really requires very little skill and lots of bulls***. Its a shame because the campaign is one of the best in the series.

    Campaign = 7.8/10 (still very short which sucks and some bad on-rails sequences and QTEs)
    Multiplayer = 3/10 (very little good to be said about this)
    Zombies = 5/10 (nothing new really, just a horror atmosphere and its just boring.)
    Graphics = 9.2 (pretty damn good)
    Sound = 9.5 (COD always has fantastic sound design)

    Id say buy this used and beat the campaign then return it or get it on sale. The multiplayer is what really kills this game since its the main focus and its abysmal. But even though most of my review is negative, the campaign still deserves a lot of praise as a call of duty campaign since the past 5 have had absolute garbage campaigns.    … Expand
  9. Lyvins
    Nov 3, 2017
    6
    the game itself is ok but not worth the price tag.
    To be fair this might look like WW2 but doesn't feel like it.
    I would honestly say save your money and buy battlefront 2. Atleast you got no season pass to buy and they changed the lootbox system so it's pretty much buy base and enjoy game now. This game is not a 8 or higher, nor is is a 5 or lower. but anyone giving it more are just    the game itself is ok but not worth the price tag.
    To be fair this might look like WW2 but doesn't feel like it.
    I would honestly say save your money and buy battlefront 2.
    Atleast you got no season pass to buy and they changed the lootbox system so it's pretty much buy base and enjoy game now.

    This game is not a 8 or higher, nor is is a 5 or lower. but anyone giving it more are just overreacting.    … Expand
  10. Vebshtar
    Nov 3, 2017
    6
    Call of Duty has been a complete failure for years now. Does WWII redeem the franchise? No, it doesn't. But it's a start.
    Graphics: 7/10. I've seen better.
    Gameplay: 8/10. Simple boots on the ground. I like it. Campaign: 7/10. I haven't finished it, but it's decent so far. Multiplayer: 7/10. I'm out of practice, but it's still fun. Historical Accuracy: 2/10. You'll see. Call of    Call of Duty has been a complete failure for years now. Does WWII redeem the franchise? No, it doesn't. But it's a start.
    Graphics: 7/10. I've seen better.
    Gameplay: 8/10. Simple boots on the ground. I like it.
    Campaign: 7/10. I haven't finished it, but it's decent so far.
    Multiplayer: 7/10. I'm out of practice, but it's still fun.
    Historical Accuracy: 2/10. You'll see.

    Call of Duty is like an Adam Sandler movie. I know I'm not getting the best, and parts of it may suck, but it's still fun.    … Expand
  11. albodoin
    Nov 5, 2017
    5
    First time I'm buying a COD game since MW3, I decided to move on from this franchise because it preferred by far Battlefield (still do). For once in a cod game I can say that the campaign is spot on. Okay it might be built around war cliches but it's just enough to be enjoyable without being to corny. The zombie mode is amazing as always but this time it's less cryptic with the addition ofFirst time I'm buying a COD game since MW3, I decided to move on from this franchise because it preferred by far Battlefield (still do). For once in a cod game I can say that the campaign is spot on. Okay it might be built around war cliches but it's just enough to be enjoyable without being to corny. The zombie mode is amazing as always but this time it's less cryptic with the addition of clear objectives. But the main drawback (which is a huge one) is the multiplayer...thank god they added the War mode and the headquarter as a lobby to join friend! Finally Activition is trying to improve, but that is pretty much it. The rest is still the same as always, corridor maps, run and gun, corner camping, people that plays for their kill ratio instead of the objectives. It's basically a Modern Warfare or Black Ops with a WW2 skin!; nothing new. Maybe I'm getting old but I'm tired of reflex shooters and would like something more immersive because right now I really don't feel like I'm fighting against hordes of nazis but more like farming kill for xp to unlock the next **** weapon skin for my pistol.… Expand
  12. P_D1LLY
    Nov 4, 2017
    5
    The campaign and zombie mode seems fine, but I am here for the Multiplayer...for your reference, my favorite games in the series were Modern Warfare 1 & 2 and Black Ops II, in no particular order.

    This is one of the bigger disappointments in my gaming life, my friends and I were going to get the gang back together, after one day of this mess we will probably all be returning the game.    The campaign and zombie mode seems fine, but I am here for the Multiplayer...for your reference, my favorite games in the series were Modern Warfare 1 & 2 and Black Ops II, in no particular order.

    This is one of the bigger disappointments in my gaming life, my friends and I were going to get the gang back together, after one day of this mess we will probably all be returning the game. This game might look like boots on the ground WW2, however it doesn't feel like it at all. You're zooming around the map like it's nothing, it's a twitch shooter, I can't remember a COD game that felt so, for a lack of a better word, wrong. Advanced and Infinite warfare weren't my cup of tea, to say the least, but the way they controlled was in line with the setting and equipment.
    My biggest complaint might actually be the maps. Not only are they tiny, they are weirdly streamlined, don't feel like authentic environments, just corridors with a coat of paint (ugly coat of paint too, the graphics in mp are very underwhelming). The interface in my opinion is a mess, the hub world completely unnecessary. Bottom line, I have no intention of going back to the game. Which is kind of sad, we were all really looking forward to this. Even World at War was a superior WW2 shooter. I won't give this game a 0, because it obviously just doesn't deserve that, but I do believe a 5 is a fair score, I am shocked by the positive reception by some gaming sites (apart from the single player). I'd say stay away from this one...    … Expand
  13. mrseannathan
    Nov 3, 2017
    5
    I will keep an open mind seeing as it hasn't even been 24 hours since launch.

    1. I expected a much better visual experience when playing online. Graphics feel like they were pulled from a COD 4 -5 years ago. 2. This social hub or whatever it is.. yes, i know it's obvious but damn, way to copy Destiny. I want my COD to be simple with the menus and everything the way it has been. 3.    I will keep an open mind seeing as it hasn't even been 24 hours since launch.

    1. I expected a much better visual experience when playing online. Graphics feel like they were pulled from a COD 4 -5 years ago.
    2. This social hub or whatever it is.. yes, i know it's obvious but damn, way to copy Destiny. I want my COD to be simple with the menus and everything the way it has been.
    3. LOADING TIMES.. HOEEEE LEEEEEEEEE (Holy!)... Even when leaving a match, i'm waiting ages until I can leave.

    I give this a 5/10 only because I am a long fan of Call of Duty and I will always love the series. Despite the poor execution, it still offers that appeal in a WW2 game... Especially now that they have added 'WAR', a mode perfected by Battlefield and one I have always wish to see in COD. There are some things that need to get fixed and I'm sure they will over the next couple days but in my eyes, it's failed on launch unlike the past releases.

    I'm a huge sucker for WW2 games but I have to say.. I miss the jumping, fast-paced gameplay COD evolved into.. and at this current moment, I can say I enjoyed IW way more that WWII.    … Expand
  14. PrimalBanana
    Nov 3, 2017
    7
    Another year and another Call of Duty game. This time they've ditched the jetpacks and what not and gone back to their roots. CoD WW2 unsurprisingly takes place during WW2. Trailers shown before release had me actually looking forward to the campaign. In fairness its not terrible but its not exactly engrossing or exciting. We get to play through a story that we've played a thousand timesAnother year and another Call of Duty game. This time they've ditched the jetpacks and what not and gone back to their roots. CoD WW2 unsurprisingly takes place during WW2. Trailers shown before release had me actually looking forward to the campaign. In fairness its not terrible but its not exactly engrossing or exciting. We get to play through a story that we've played a thousand times before. Im struggling to really connect with the chatacters too. Mainly because squad mates are bloody useless in a fire fight leaving it up to me to do everything. The AI is as dim as ever and the dialogue is just a clichè fest. Like i said its not terrible but its certainly not worthy of anything over a 6 or 7 out of 10. The MP is as you'd expect. Solid and tight and raining loot crates. Activision go to extreme legths to try to convince you to part with your cash, its kind of embarassing to be honest. There's even a daily mission to watch 3 people open loot crates in the social space. Gunplay is good, sounds are good and the level design is overall pretty decent. Graphically Call of Duty continues to show its age and as i've said in the past its desperate for a new engine. Certainly a better Call of Duty than we've had in the last few years but its nothing special so dont expect too much except your normal Call of Duty experience.… Expand
  15. Firewing2
    Nov 3, 2017
    5
    Honestly, I was extremely disappointed with this game. I played through the campaign in a short afternoon, and was surprised at how truncated it felt. A lot of cutscenes and not a lot of game play... trying too hard to shove the story of "brotherhood" down your throat. The squad system feels tacked on, and the campaign brought nothing new to the franchise.

    I'm a huge fan of the CoD    Honestly, I was extremely disappointed with this game. I played through the campaign in a short afternoon, and was surprised at how truncated it felt. A lot of cutscenes and not a lot of game play... trying too hard to shove the story of "brotherhood" down your throat. The squad system feels tacked on, and the campaign brought nothing new to the franchise.

    I'm a huge fan of the CoD series as a whole, and was very excited by the promise of a return to the WW2 roots, but this game is just disappointing.    … Expand
  16. brat1111
    Jan 7, 2018
    5
    The shooting, that I liked so much in Black Ops 3, just feels off and clunky in this game. The graphics are good in some campaign levels but not that great overall. I am very disappointed. Don't bother buying this game, that's my advice, man.
  17. mrrader72
    Nov 12, 2017
    5
    When I person can run around the map with just a shovel while everyone else has machine guns, and have the high score your WWII shooter has problems. This game is buggier than road kill. Snipers quick scoping in close quarters without taking time to aim, because the aim assist for snipers is ridiculous. it has the potential to be so much fun too. That's what makes playing it so frustrating.
  18. 000Sarmad
    Nov 12, 2017
    6
    I’ve been waiting for this game for so long. After playing I would say it is a disappointment of the year. Being a fan of fps, I thought COD WII would replace battlefield 1 but I was wrong. Let’s back to the game-play and of course multiplayer, which is the most popular feature of this series.
    Firstly, campaign is just mediocre. I would say that the game play is good but story is    I’ve been waiting for this game for so long. After playing I would say it is a disappointment of the year. Being a fan of fps, I thought COD WII would replace battlefield 1 but I was wrong. Let’s back to the game-play and of course multiplayer, which is the most popular feature of this series.
    Firstly, campaign is just mediocre. I would say that the game play is good but story is disappointing thought. Graphic is good but not as good as I was expecting. In campaign, I was expecting Russian, Japanese, Italian and many other countries that were the victim of WWII but the campaign only focus on few events between US and Germany. How could COD not include Russian and Japanese in campaign? I love COD World at War campaign and if I compare to this latest edition I would say it is below par.
    Secondly, multiplayer is repetitive and I got bored after few matches. War mode is a good addition but it is not enough to make things right. There are few maps and all of them were small, poorly designed and heaven for SMGs, being a fan of bolt action rifles and M1 Garand it is frustrating.
    In the end, I would like to say that it is just like an old COD games with WWII theme. No innovation nothing new in it, War mode is a copy of Battlefield 1 operation mode, Headquarter mode is a replica of Destiny 2 clan, campaign is a more or less same as Saving Private Ryan Hollywood movie. Just 5 hour campaign, it would easily extend to 10 hours by adding more content by including Russia, Japan, Italy and other main players in WWII.
    I would honestly give COD WII 5 out of 10, but being a little bias and as a fan of this series; my final verdict is 6 out of 10.    … Expand
  19. dannija96
    Nov 3, 2017
    5
    A game with promise and disappointment. More work should be done to figure out the core of what this franchise is, with the story being fun but way too short. Sure multiplayer is the focus, but more effort can be placed to put more action set pieces for story players. Multiplayer has not had much innovations in the last iterations of the franchise, it needs to figure out new and innovativeA game with promise and disappointment. More work should be done to figure out the core of what this franchise is, with the story being fun but way too short. Sure multiplayer is the focus, but more effort can be placed to put more action set pieces for story players. Multiplayer has not had much innovations in the last iterations of the franchise, it needs to figure out new and innovative ways for players to enjoy the game.… Expand
  20. IONOSGAMES
    Nov 4, 2017
    6
    Un juego de disparos, shooter sin mas. No profundiza en la historia, no innova, es un juego para pasar el rato, divertido sin mas. Es recomendable a los que les gusta el shooter a bajo precio, ya que su duracion pienso que no esta acorde a su precio. Lo malo es el parche de salida que es OBLIGATORIO. No se puede jugar sin ese parche, por lo que suspendo este juego
  21. deLama
    Nov 17, 2017
    6
    6/6 6/66/6 6/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/66/6 6/66/6 6/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/66/6 6/66/6… Expand
  22. hoohoo
    Nov 5, 2017
    6
    Well.. it's not a bad game. But I'm still really disappointed. I expected so much more, but it is just a tunnel run with some quite weak story around it. Shoot the same predictable enemies, who just run into your bullets. Meh.
  23. RJ_Crooks
    Dec 28, 2017
    5
    There is nothing special about WWII that separates it from previous iterations of the COD franchise. The story is sub-par and the online play is full of quick scoping snipers, and spawn camping boost lobbies. Of course you have the pay to play loot system for those that are into wasting their money. All in all not a bad game, but one that will quickly be forgotten.
  24. cem12
    Nov 10, 2017
    5
    Gráficamente el juego está bien, lo único que puedo decir bueno de el. El modo Zombies esta entretenido, y es totalmente diferente a los vistos hasta hoy. La historia de la segunda guerra mundial para nada se parece a lo que representa en este juego. Se han burlado de la gente. Metiendo mujeres en la segunda guerra mundial, uniformes inventados, armas fuera de su tiempo y pantallas lasGráficamente el juego está bien, lo único que puedo decir bueno de el. El modo Zombies esta entretenido, y es totalmente diferente a los vistos hasta hoy. La historia de la segunda guerra mundial para nada se parece a lo que representa en este juego. Se han burlado de la gente. Metiendo mujeres en la segunda guerra mundial, uniformes inventados, armas fuera de su tiempo y pantallas las cuales jamás hubo batalla alguna. Es un juego lleno de micro transacciones, fomentando la compra de productos ya que te muestra descaradamente lo que le toca al resto de jugadores. Los emblemas nazis "volaron", jamás podrás elegir uniforme aleman. Siendo americano juegas con armas alemanas, no te da opción a elegir. Sigo enamorado el Cod: World at War, un juego que sí cumplía con la historia, escenarios y soldados. pensaba que Activision por fin lo iba a volver a hacer, pero me equivoque. Han creado un juego de "guerra antigua" por llamarlo de alguna manera, para que los "niños rata" sean felices. Creando micro transacciones, matar por matar ya que no matas Nazis, sino alemanes que no han hecho nada; poniendo mujeres que apenas las hubo en los ejércitos alemanes ni americanos, creando las cajas de de premios "traga perras" Lo único que celebro, es que por fin se abandonen los malditos juegos futuristas.… Expand
  25. RuslanDZE
    Nov 14, 2017
    5
    CAMPAIGN ONLY REVIEW.
    YES, I am one of these players that playing COD games for a campaign.
    From campaign I usually expect great, creative and epic action scenes and stereotyped vilians. From the announcement that was obvious, they wanna double down on the realism and drama. Game is trying to make sense of comradory and make you care about characters but problem is that there is    CAMPAIGN ONLY REVIEW.
    YES, I am one of these players that playing COD games for a campaign.
    From campaign I usually expect great, creative and epic action scenes and stereotyped vilians.
    From the announcement that was obvious, they wanna double down on the realism and drama.
    Game is trying to make sense of comradory and make you care about characters but problem is that there is nothing special about them to start care. Sometimes you think that game will give you something interesting but after a while you are dissapointed. There is no vilian and story is not cohesive. It feels more like episodes from B1. If I would replace characters in each mission I would not miss anything. QTE is very dissatisfied, even tho you can make them cool (Heavy Rain). There is some new things in the gameplay like you can ask for particular things from your team members. There is some action scenes too, probably the best one is train chase. But these scenes are not impressive because we saw it before. Other games are caught up with crazy action. Lets say few years ago in modern warfare times I would say yes only COD developers can make action as crazy as here.
    I loved France Liberation section.
    THE WORST THING in the game is story. At the announcement event of this game Activision was saying about how personal and important this game to them because they care about history of WW2. Well, that was a joke probably. Whole game is representing how you should not make story about WW2. There is some playing with history but in general is so bad. And I am not expecting everything smart from a Call Of Duty game. But why would deveopers lie about how they care about history..... oh yeah it is marketing.

    Overall, I partly enjoyed this game. Call Of Duty did returned to the throne of FPS games. It is maybe even step back compare to IW in terms of campaign.    … Expand
  26. Phil_Panteleit
    Nov 13, 2017
    6
    I have waited for 10 days to give this game a proper review. It's not a 0 out of 10 like some idiots say it is. However it is not close to bing a 10 either. The campaign is great but WAY TO SHORT. 5 hours and its done. Multiplayer is well great too. This is COD i don't think this part needs to be even talked about because you either love it or you don't. Zombies is fun but once again ifI have waited for 10 days to give this game a proper review. It's not a 0 out of 10 like some idiots say it is. However it is not close to bing a 10 either. The campaign is great but WAY TO SHORT. 5 hours and its done. Multiplayer is well great too. This is COD i don't think this part needs to be even talked about because you either love it or you don't. Zombies is fun but once again if your a zombie fan you will love it.

    However, this is the part where I say do not waste your money. The reason is because the game is broken. Headquarters is broke. When you get into a game with your friends you are guaranteed for one or more of you to be kicked or lose connection to host after every game. There is a glitch in one of the trophies for doing daily challenges. Sledgehammer has had ample of time to fix the bugs and still have not. They had a Beta and never thought to put the HQs in it and wow now its broke.

    Sledgehammer needs to go. This game is a solid 6 out of 10 and a good pick up for no more than $40    … Expand
  27. Chronos1
    Nov 14, 2017
    5
    The single player campaign is rather mediocre but then again this is call of duty so not really a big let down there.. the MP is rather bland because there is no real changes there that makes it more interesting to play.. zombie mode is same old same old.. basically another bland COD game.
  28. Termin8ter
    Nov 7, 2017
    7
    Another year, another Call of Duty game. First off, the engine still needs to be rebuilt completely or shot on the spot, ok? Still using the Quake engine from 99? Really? The art team did a good job though. The gameplay still feels the same as it did ten years ago in Call of Duty 4, despite the massive change in setting. The campaign is quite good, quite lengthy as well. Better thanAnother year, another Call of Duty game. First off, the engine still needs to be rebuilt completely or shot on the spot, ok? Still using the Quake engine from 99? Really? The art team did a good job though. The gameplay still feels the same as it did ten years ago in Call of Duty 4, despite the massive change in setting. The campaign is quite good, quite lengthy as well. Better than Infinite Borefare and BO3's overly complicated plot. It's just a slimmed down, grounded war experience, and that I like. The multiplayer is mostly a very samey Call of Duty multiplayer experience that we have gotten since Modern Warfare, aside from the great new War mode, which is a fantastic addition. But it unfortunately doesn't quite save the multiplayer mode. Zombies. Sledgehammer's last crack at Zombies in AW only proved that only Treyarch could nail it correctly, so I was hoping they could save face here. I like how the mode feels like it's own beast and not a clone of BO3 zombies. The tone is very serious and mature, and that ascends the overly humorous tone of IW's zombies, which is great too. The gunplay itself is quite good, and I liked how the team opted for a proper campaign with horde sections, rather than repeating Treyarch's zombies mode. To be honest, the zombies is probably the best part of World War II. This game is definitely better than Destiny 2, and takes some strong strides in the right direction, but It doesn't earn a purchase at full price. I wouldn't get it for more than 15$.… Expand
  29. Calitoris
    Nov 11, 2017
    7
    People hating the game just because it comes out every year. It's a polished game, runs smooth, but it's just the same good game new skin. It's obviously not a bad game, just a repeating well oiled machine. Single player is short but it's not what everyone plays COD for.
  30. SeptemberFly
    Nov 7, 2017
    7
    Call of Duty World War 2 is, well... It's a Call of Duty game. I haven't played a call of duty game since black ops 2, so it's been a good bit since I've played one of these games so this review is coming from someone with an outside perspective. Playing this game after a long break from the series, it still feels very much the same as when I stopped playing the series. The changes inCall of Duty World War 2 is, well... It's a Call of Duty game. I haven't played a call of duty game since black ops 2, so it's been a good bit since I've played one of these games so this review is coming from someone with an outside perspective. Playing this game after a long break from the series, it still feels very much the same as when I stopped playing the series. The changes in multiplayer feel very minor, as the experience felt about the same to me as it has always been. The only changes to multiplayer that I really noticed is that there's a hub area in multiplayer that you're in before going into a match and that transitioning to new matches feels a lot more seamless than it used to. However, the changes that were made are probably feel a lot more important to a hardcore call of duty fan than it was to me. The zombies mode in the game is very fun to play with friends. I didn't play too much of it, but the time I had with it was fun and I was surprised that they actually made a campaign out of it. The strongest part of Call of Duty WW2 to me was the main campaign. It feels like the Call of Duty campaigns fly under the radar, which I've always felt is unfortunate. Strange as it may sound, I think that the Call of Duty campaigns can be compared to the Marvel films. They feel like pretty standard cookie cutter stories that always play it pretty safe, but the experience is usually a good time and has characters you can feel attached to. Call of Duty WW2 uses this format as well, and it's probably one of the best campaigns in the entire series. It gives off a Saving Private Ryan kind of vibe, and includes many characters that you actually become attached to and care about what happens to them. The main protagonist Robert "Red" Daniels is one of the more interesting characters, who has a good backstory and his chemistry with the rest of the cast helps make the story remain engaging. Overall, Call of Duty WW2 feels like the same Call of Duty that we've always known it to be. The multiplayer feels the same as it did when I played it many years ago, as does almost every other area. If you are a Call of Duty fan who plays the game every year, you won't need my recommendation because Call of Duty fans will buy the game no matter what. As for other outsiders to the series like myself, I'd recommend either renting the game or waiting for the price to drop just to play the campaign or zombie mode, but I wouldn't pay full price for it.… Expand
  31. lufuxe
    Nov 8, 2017
    7
    Graphics: from the last parts there is a step forward, but if you peer into the textures, everything is bad ..
    Physics: bad, so is the physics of weapons .. they simply do not have ..
    Plot: I liked it
    That's why 7 points
  32. kyper007
    Nov 25, 2017
    7
    Играл в call of duty еще с ее начала.Купил магазине так как игра была по скринам на коробке очень похожа на Медаль за отвагу и не прогадал. Новая кола это возвращение к этим самым истокам,довольно удачное.
  33. SchroederRock
    Nov 5, 2017
    6
    WWII suits Call of Duty better, to a degree, than all the future stuff. However, where CoD WWII stumbled the most is in its scale. The campaign has its moments and ends up being a good reason to pick up Call of Duty to begin with but its multiplayer pairing is not so fortunate. Much of WWII's multiplayer feels heavily rehashed from previous games, adding little new to spice up the formula.WWII suits Call of Duty better, to a degree, than all the future stuff. However, where CoD WWII stumbled the most is in its scale. The campaign has its moments and ends up being a good reason to pick up Call of Duty to begin with but its multiplayer pairing is not so fortunate. Much of WWII's multiplayer feels heavily rehashed from previous games, adding little new to spice up the formula. Maps are typically dense and lead to more encounters between players but that doesn't translate to more fun. Often times, players can be cornered into spawn kill/deaths, especially if an opposing team knows where to stop pressing to keep the predictable computing from spawn-swapping. It really bugs me that no Activision title with the CoD moniker has fixed this problem after years of abuse. Nazi Zombies always has its fun moments, bringing a more visceral experience to the shooter. It's clear to me that this game mode is the only aspect that delivers time after time. It shows complexity, strategic thinking, and white-knuckle experiences because of how unpredictable the game mode can be. Good on Sledgehammer for keeping this part of the game fun and interesting. However, outside of an OK campaign, there isn't much to love here. Call of Duty continues to be nothing more than a re-skinned version of itself, year after year. This is a huge irritation as Call of Duty is begging to break out of its shell. Perhaps the future will yield a larger sandbox feel to CoD, especially as console and PCs continue to advance and offer more horsepower to smoothly handle the heavy computing that can come with AAA games.

    As for WWII - if you like the setting, this is not the game to play. Battlefield 1 offers a much deeper and open experience that encourages a little role play here and there. Only CoD fanboys that wait on the scraps that fall from Activision's table will ever find a lot to love here. WWII continues the tradition of CoD failing to impress. It is clearer to me year after year that the original Infinity Ward crew were the lifeblood of Call of Duty and once Activision broke up that team, some of which went on to make Titanfall years later, that the pulse of CoD fell dramatically. With the exception of Black Ops, Call of Duty hasn't been interesting since the Modern Warfare series. I'm still waiting for the franchise to be resurrected and WWII does nothing to make that happen. Buy at your own risk.    … Expand
  34. martyisruling
    Nov 11, 2017
    7
    The Game as a whole is good, but not Great. It looks and plays amazing. The Campaign is great, but it's short. That's pretty much the theme with this COD. The new War mode is pretty solid. The problem is there are few maps all around in multiplayer in general. Unless you want to pay $50 for the season pass. So, before you buy this game you have to ask yourself, is $60 too much to pay forThe Game as a whole is good, but not Great. It looks and plays amazing. The Campaign is great, but it's short. That's pretty much the theme with this COD. The new War mode is pretty solid. The problem is there are few maps all around in multiplayer in general. Unless you want to pay $50 for the season pass. So, before you buy this game you have to ask yourself, is $60 too much to pay for half a game? Is the full game worth $100? Next year there will be another COD, and players will migrate over. Buyer beware.… Expand
  35. xenomorph287
    Nov 5, 2017
    6
    Im conflicted about this game. I love the singleplayer, every mission was fun and the characters were memorable, and probably my 3rd favorite story in COD. Multiplayer on the other hand, is pretty bad. I enjoy the war mode a lot, but every other game mode is bland. In short, wait until a sale, and just play the campaign.
  36. xenofiend95
    Nov 9, 2017
    5
    I was interested to here COD would be going back to WW2 for the first time in nearly a decade, being that World at War was one of my favorite games in the series along with COD 2. This game happens to be anything but interesting, not terrible, not bad, it is just incredibly mediocre. Campaign is uninteresting, multiplayer maps are uninspired and not fun to play or look at, then you haveI was interested to here COD would be going back to WW2 for the first time in nearly a decade, being that World at War was one of my favorite games in the series along with COD 2. This game happens to be anything but interesting, not terrible, not bad, it is just incredibly mediocre. Campaign is uninteresting, multiplayer maps are uninspired and not fun to play or look at, then you have the obligatory zombies mode. The game is a huge disappointment, but not bad.… Expand
  37. haydos89
    Nov 13, 2017
    5
    I can't go as far to say that COD WW2 is a bad game. The campaign is fantastic with a great story, likable characters and a real sense of realism when it comes to the hellish circumstances that came battling in World War 2. Unfortunately that only lasts around 6 hours or so and then you're left with the multiplayer modes...which is basically has just been re-skinned to suit the WW2I can't go as far to say that COD WW2 is a bad game. The campaign is fantastic with a great story, likable characters and a real sense of realism when it comes to the hellish circumstances that came battling in World War 2. Unfortunately that only lasts around 6 hours or so and then you're left with the multiplayer modes...which is basically has just been re-skinned to suit the WW2 setting. The pace, scorestreaks etc are all the same as before and to be honest it is getting quite old and never makes you feel like you're in a true battle or makes you feel like you've accomplished anything when you win a match.

    It is a shame because i was looking forward to heading back to the classic COD we all came to love, but unfortunately it's a big miss for me. Personally i am happy to trade it in for battlefront 2 and also head back to battlefield 1.    … Expand
  38. Sexbot-5000
    Nov 12, 2017
    5
    There really isn’t a need for a long review. It’s call of duty. It’s WW2, it’s mostly unchanged, and they added a couple tropes from other games. War mode from Battlefield’s rush, COD version of social from destiny, and the loot boxes from Overwatch without cartoon style to give them the freedom to create actual costumes. If you think you’ll like this game you probably will. If you thinkThere really isn’t a need for a long review. It’s call of duty. It’s WW2, it’s mostly unchanged, and they added a couple tropes from other games. War mode from Battlefield’s rush, COD version of social from destiny, and the loot boxes from Overwatch without cartoon style to give them the freedom to create actual costumes. If you think you’ll like this game you probably will. If you think you won’t like this you probably won’t. It’s that easy. There’s a long list of more unique and creative shooters out there. At the end of the day if you like the game you’ve been playing for a decade you have no reason to think you won’t like this one. It’s a five. Equal parts exciting and boring.… Expand
  39. vitek__ok
    Nov 9, 2017
    7
    "+":
    - Well-made campaign;
    - Good visuals(except sprite fire), great prerendered cutscenes in singleplayer;
    "-":
    - Bad running and weapons animations straight from 2007, especially noticeabe in multiplayer;
    - Boring shooting;
    - Bad sound-design in russian version (some elements too loud, some are too quiet);
  40. LittleL
    Nov 25, 2017
    5
    I want to really like this game, call of duty was a favorite of mine growing up and when i heard we'd be going back to boots on the ground gameplay i was excited. While this is not the worst game in the series (cough infinite warfare cough) it is in my opinion the worst boots on the ground experience we've been given so far.

    Campaign - While i know most play call of duty for the    I want to really like this game, call of duty was a favorite of mine growing up and when i heard we'd be going back to boots on the ground gameplay i was excited. While this is not the worst game in the series (cough infinite warfare cough) it is in my opinion the worst boots on the ground experience we've been given so far.

    Campaign -
    While i know most play call of duty for the multiplayer, i still love playing the campaigns as well. The one were given here in WW2 has to be one of the worst in the franchise. Characters who i cant remember with the exception of Daniels because everyone was screaming his name every 2 seconds, clipping that can be spotted easily with one example being in the opening scene and vehicle physics that are plain awful. The first level was so much fun but it all just fell apart after that. If your buying just for the campaign, pass on this one.

    Multiplayer -
    Here is where the game should really shine but it just doesn't. We all know what a disaster the launch was so i'm just going to skip over that. The game comes standard with 9 maps and to be honest i only kinda like 2 or 3 of them. Theres no map that comes up in the rotation that i get excited to play on. The spawns are AWFUL and i seem to always be put right infront of someone who ends up shooting me in the back. The guns need some serious work as everyone is just running around with the STG, Bar, PPSH and kar. The new mode war is pretty fun until you realize there are only 3 maps to play on with it and the new headquarters is ripped straight from destiny and feels pointless. I dont play zombies so i cant personally speak on that but from what im hearing its not to great either.

    I hope one day i'll be able to love a call of duty game again but this most definitely is not the one.

    My final rating of Call Of Duty: WW2 is a 5/10    … Expand
  41. Ubermonkey88
    Nov 6, 2017
    7
    I've seen a lot of varying reviews of COD WW2 but a lot seem to be bashing by fanboys of another franchise or completely biased praise by COD fanboys, so hopefully I can give a bit more of a balanced view.

    I've played most CODs (some for a long time, some VERY briefly) since the very original on PC all those years, and although the return to WW2 does suggest a lack of new ideas etc,    I've seen a lot of varying reviews of COD WW2 but a lot seem to be bashing by fanboys of another franchise or completely biased praise by COD fanboys, so hopefully I can give a bit more of a balanced view.

    I've played most CODs (some for a long time, some VERY briefly) since the very original on PC all those years, and although the return to WW2 does suggest a lack of new ideas etc, it's one of the better recent releases, especially following last year's abysmal Infinite Warfare. The return to WW2 obviously means no jetpacks, double-jumps or futuristic tech that distracted from the actual gunplay, which for now, is a welcome change. There are plenty of issues too, which I will mention below, along with the positives -

    Pros

    - The single player campaign is fun, which is something that can't be said for the past few iterations of COD. It does visit settings and places that have been done in every other WW2 game but it does it with a level of polish that isn't seen in many others. Objectives are varied, so although it is the familiar campaign, it does help mix things up a bit. The introduction of squad mates who provide you with supplies/health packs/support is a nice addition that keeps you on your toes.

    - The multiplayer benefits greatly from the lack of futuristic nonsense (drones, robots, nanobots etc) and is a much more focused experience for it. Because of the WW2 setting, the developers are more restricted in types of weaponry available and the game benefits from it, meaning it''s a bit more balanced and not quite as chaotic as before. It also introduced Headquarters, which is a social hub, not unlike The Tower in Destiny/Destiny 2. It's initially overwhelming but once you get used to it, it's good to be able to run about in and check with vendors while waiting for a game to start.

    - Graphically the campaign looks great. Textures are nice, it's very polished and it all runs very smoothly.

    Cons

    - Graphically, the multiplayer doesn't look great (which is nothing new in COD) especially now that the devs have had a few years with the PS4 (and XBone) kits, which is disappointing. It looks like it could easily be from the last generation of consoles, but I suppose graphics aren't everything.

    - Considering that it's gone back to WW2, it's no surprise there isn't an awful lot of innovation, and nothing that hasn't been seen in other WW2/COD/BF games.

    - The biggest issue at the moment is the servers - at times the online is unplayable due to errors, extremely slow matchmaking (which has been confirmed to be an issue with the servers as opposed to my connection) and completely empty Headquarters hubs. It's completely possible that if you do manage to connect to the online services that you could be sitting in a lobby waiting for a game for 15 minutes - it's that slow. It is assumed that this issue will be fixed with a patch or update very very soon, but it's still shocking that for a game as big and popular as COD that this is such a problem.

    Other points

    - Zombies - it has zombies mode as usual. I don't care, and never have cared for Zombies but if it's something you like, it's there and is pretty much the same as previous Zombies modes in previous games, so if you liked them then yay! If not, it likely won't change your mind.

    Overall, COD WW2 is an enjoyable enough game with a few issues holding it back, none more so than the servers which will hopefully be fixed soon. Definitely worth playing through and having a go on multiplayer - if you loved older CODs (such as 2, 3, Modern Warfare and World at War), then you'll feel right at home. If you don't like COD though, I don't think this will change your mind.    … Expand
  42. thaesino
    Nov 6, 2017
    7
    (Disclaimer: I will not comment on microstransactions, nor take that into account when reviewing this game, as it is our fault, the gamers, that these publishers have gotten away with such things. Placing a bad rating on the Developers' hard work due to the greed of the Publishers and the ignorance of the Players, would not do justice to any of the many AAA titles riddled with(Disclaimer: I will not comment on microstransactions, nor take that into account when reviewing this game, as it is our fault, the gamers, that these publishers have gotten away with such things. Placing a bad rating on the Developers' hard work due to the greed of the Publishers and the ignorance of the Players, would not do justice to any of the many AAA titles riddled with microtransactions or DLC. If you want them out, STOP PAYING FOR THEM. YOU ARE THE ONES PAYING FOR THEM TO BE THERE.)

    Let me make this short and break it down into three sections: Call of Duty: WW2, the game; Call of Duty: WW2, the Comparisons; and, Call of Duty: WW2, the Community.

    --- The Game: This is a game which can be easily scored anywhere between 5 and 8, depending on your mood, on your common sense, on your intelligence, or on your need to defend your purchase of this game, or to attack it in order to defend your purchase of another game (i.e. BF1, Destiny 2). The Campaign is good, albeit short. The MP is exactly like the Beta, plus the usual millions of microtransaction options which just keep getting cleverer and cleverer.

    --- The Comparisons: This game is not BF1. It has great visuals and good voice acting/writing. However, because it is not BF1, it also moves faster, which is great. BECAUSE it moves faster, it does not need to look as good. No one buys a game like this in order to stare at puddles in the mud, that's what games like Horizon: Zero Dawn are for. People compare for various reasons, not the least of which is, they simply don't know what they want anymore... and it is not our fault. Publishers and Critics and even YouTubers swing us left and right (bet they have fun doing it) for the sake of a sale, or for the sake of a sponsorship. In the end, so many people ended up buying Infinite Warfare BECAUSE of MW:RE... so it didn't matter. Activision won. Yay! And so did DICE/EA, because they also bought BF1. And so did Blizzard (Activision's merge), because they also bought Overwatch. And there go more than $180.

    The Community: I'll lay it flat. Go anywhere. Whether here on Meta, or YouTube, or the Activision community, or just on the mics on PS4 and you'll reach the same conclusion I have reached: Call of Duty has been hijacked by children, and this is here to stay. Children, because, well, that is what children do, are not the best at playing well, although if you don't take the game too seriously, you'll be fine, since they are pretty good at just having plain fun in ridiculous ways, without worrying about dying or having their teammates killed, etc etc, and heck... since when did we get so serious about games?

    Enjoy this game if you bought/buy it. That's all I can say. I couldn't enjoy it, but notice my score. My personal experience doesn't change what I see to be a solid COD experience, like in the past with MW and MW2.    … Expand
  43. lheg95
    Nov 11, 2017
    5
    I play like 8 or 10 hours and this game is so boring. The first mission of the campaign, the D-Day, the moment all WWII lover wait for is disappointing. The campaign is short and mediocre. There are some "wanna be BF1" points like the Train Mission or the multiplayer mode that is the same as conquest but in a shorter map.
    The graphics are great, they really upgrade all the visual effects    I play like 8 or 10 hours and this game is so boring. The first mission of the campaign, the D-Day, the moment all WWII lover wait for is disappointing. The campaign is short and mediocre. There are some "wanna be BF1" points like the Train Mission or the multiplayer mode that is the same as conquest but in a shorter map.
    The graphics are great, they really upgrade all the visual effects (finally!), but, to be a game that sells more than 10 millions copies each year, the upgrade is less that I expect.
    The sound is great, I really doesn't have any complaint.

    For zombies, I like the scary sounds and ambient that create for this mode, but the map is not great and it's not bad and the survive mode is ok, nothing special.    … Expand
  44. ZeoN
    Nov 27, 2017
    5
    Call Of Duty clasico que quizas atraiga a seguidores antiguos de la franquicia.Mapas bien construidos en su mayoria a excepcion de algunos.Campaña profunda y modo zombis aceptable.
    Como siempre,las politicas abusivas de Activision de sus 4 DLCs e introducir los CPs antes de reparar el propio juego no se podian hacer esperar.Este juego tecnicamente merece un 8,pero las politicas y mala    Call Of Duty clasico que quizas atraiga a seguidores antiguos de la franquicia.Mapas bien construidos en su mayoria a excepcion de algunos.Campaña profunda y modo zombis aceptable.
    Como siempre,las politicas abusivas de Activision de sus 4 DLCs e introducir los CPs antes de reparar el propio juego no se podian hacer esperar.Este juego tecnicamente merece un 8,pero las politicas y mala gestion de el hacen que su puntuacion se reduzca.

    Juego recomendable si eres fan de la franquicia de CoD    … Expand
  45. se7enX90X
    Nov 6, 2017
    5
    -Some of the worst multiplayer maps in the call of duty franchise. Majority of your deaths will come from being shot from behind due to awful map design.

    -When this game was first announced Sledgehammer lied to the world by saying they were making an authentic WWII game that was going to be true to the war and as accurate and realistic as possible....That was a big fat lie.    -Some of the worst multiplayer maps in the call of duty franchise. Majority of your deaths will come from being shot from behind due to awful map design.

    -When this game was first announced Sledgehammer lied to the world by saying they were making an authentic WWII game that was going to be true to the war and as accurate and realistic as possible....That was a big fat lie.

    -Censorship in a game that's supposed to be for adults is inappropriate. Sledgehammer has no right to tell others what's too sensitive to view and what's not. Hiding swastikas in a game about WWII is just immature and illogical on Sledgehammer and Activision's part.

    -The outdated connection service they use is really showing just how outdated it is. A mass amount of people that bought the game cannot connect to the servers. The fact that Activision makes literally billions of dollars a year from their gambling crates but still use the cheapest possible multiplayer service is disgusting...

    When its all said and done this game could've been amazing. Sledgehammer could've created a masterpiece and proved to everybody that they really don't just make these games on a yearly basis as a cash grab. They dropped the ball and WWII is the result. I've been playing cod for over 10 years and after the amount of disappointment I received from WWII, I'm officially done with the franchise. Won't be contributing to a company like Activision who is 100% anti consumer.    … Expand
  46. aaronaccidently
    Nov 7, 2017
    6
    How this game garners 8 and 9/10 scores is insane, and unless COD gets special handicap treatment for being such a heavyweight in game titles, it is not an accurate grade for the quality of this game.

    I was excited for COD WWII because I read it had team members from the original Deadspace, and the last COD WWII game, World at War was pretty good. I played through the first level,    How this game garners 8 and 9/10 scores is insane, and unless COD gets special handicap treatment for being such a heavyweight in game titles, it is not an accurate grade for the quality of this game.

    I was excited for COD WWII because I read it had team members from the original Deadspace, and the last COD WWII game, World at War was pretty good.

    I played through the first level, the D-day landing and it was okay, but no better than Allied Assault on PC a decade ago. As a historical shooter goes, Battlefield 1 is superior in every way. The Zombie mode is okay, but it's the same old same old deal. If you were expecting anything new or different...

    This is the best COD game I've played since the first Modern Warfare, but it still seems like a rushed/cheap wannabe triple a game. Considering it's nearly 2018, this game feels like it's a couple years old. I had no interest in multiplayer, so I didn't try it. Immediately swapped it in for Wolfenstien 2, which I hope is better.    … Expand
  47. sir_walter
    Dec 18, 2017
    7
    As someone who enjoyed COD: WaW (The other WWII game in the COD series), I thought this was a enjoyable update to the era. I loved the zombies changes and gameplay. I think the maps aren't has fun as I would like but they're not terrible. So far the campaign is alright as well. The loading times between screens is horrible though.
  48. luckydutch
    Nov 4, 2017
    7
    I don't really get all the hate for this. It's not groundbreakingly innovative but the campaign is interesting and the multiplayer is just classic CoD multiplayer. The microtransactions are FAR less toxic and invasive than the RNG P2W rubbish in the upcoming Battlefront 2. Based on my current experience, I reckon I will unlock every gun within 30-40 hours of online play which is prettyI don't really get all the hate for this. It's not groundbreakingly innovative but the campaign is interesting and the multiplayer is just classic CoD multiplayer. The microtransactions are FAR less toxic and invasive than the RNG P2W rubbish in the upcoming Battlefront 2. Based on my current experience, I reckon I will unlock every gun within 30-40 hours of online play which is pretty reasonable.

    If you like CoD, you'll like this. If you don't like CoD, why are you buying it in the first place?    … Expand
  49. JeremyDoesGames
    Nov 5, 2017
    7
    1. Don't get ANY of the negative reviews

    2. Why is a 7 considered mixed? To me it means really good; 5 is mixed for me and under that is negative Anyway, onto the review. "Call of Duty: WWII" is the best "Call of Duty" game since "Black Ops 2" a mere 5 years ago. The gameplay feels fresh, the campaign has an excellent story (and it's the games' biggest strongpoint), and the    1. Don't get ANY of the negative reviews

    2. Why is a 7 considered mixed? To me it means really good; 5 is mixed for me and under that is negative

    Anyway, onto the review.

    "Call of Duty: WWII" is the best "Call of Duty" game since "Black Ops 2" a mere 5 years ago. The gameplay feels fresh, the campaign has an excellent story (and it's the games' biggest strongpoint), and the characters are really great. The multiplayer is nothing new, but it is fun. It's not a GREAT game, but I really enjoyed play "Call of Duty: WWII" (especially for the campaign), and I'm excited to play it some more. A pretty solid entry to this series that hasn't had a good game in years.    … Expand
  50. wigclyne
    Nov 22, 2017
    7
    It is great to have boots on the ground again and WW2 is better than Infinite Warfare but the game as whole is a let down. Online connections at launch has been terrible but this has improved but you do not share the barracks anymore . There seems to be few maps but the addition of War mode is a welcome one.

    Story mode is average and a little short but there is a decent amount of    It is great to have boots on the ground again and WW2 is better than Infinite Warfare but the game as whole is a let down. Online connections at launch has been terrible but this has improved but you do not share the barracks anymore . There seems to be few maps but the addition of War mode is a welcome one.

    Story mode is average and a little short but there is a decent amount of scenarios and does have a few great moments.

    Online, microtransactions and it seems a little light on content have let this down. More of WW2 should have been added, it was a world war after all.    … Expand
  51. gdmatt
    Dec 22, 2017
    7
    The best CoD since Black Ops 2, however given the quality of recent titles, that's not much to brag about. A solid entry that adds nothing of any value to a tried and tired series.
  52. sgy0003
    Nov 5, 2017
    7
    Set in WWII, you think they would put more effort into the game since it's an actual part of the history and not some sci-fi future shooter ****

    Well, although the campaign is much better than the last three entries (BO3, AW, and IW). There are mix of tank section, aviation battle, espionage, and stealth. However, tank and aviation battle especially sucks, because even though they are    Set in WWII, you think they would put more effort into the game since it's an actual part of the history and not some sci-fi future shooter ****

    Well, although the campaign is much better than the last three entries (BO3, AW, and IW). There are mix of tank section, aviation battle, espionage, and stealth. However, tank and aviation battle especially sucks, because even though they are fun it only lasts about 15-20 min as part of a mission, and NOT as a whole mission. Espionage while entertaining, it's easy enough for anyone with basic stealth instincts can plow through. And Stealth.....oh my god, it sucks. There is so much stealth in this game. You'd think that would be nice taking a break from full frontal combat, but these stealth sections are annoyingly paced. I was expecting a brother-in-arms type of bonding with my npc comrades, but that never happened.

    Multiplayer is also a lot better, but still kinda the same. We finally don't have jet-packs and futuristic abilities, so the gameplay is much more grounded (literally). It's still only fun when you are the one kicking asses, but you'll still be plagued with cheap shots, 6-year olds who apparently did your mother, and **** who are better than you. Oh and lootboxes, while unnecessary, shows the greedy corperate **** side of Activision in a full force.

    If you are looking to get COD, WWII is the game I'd recommend(sorta). The game looks great, campaign has its moments, and multiplayer as always needs some serious balancing.    … Expand
  53. psylife
    Nov 15, 2017
    7
    A well-paced piece of Zionist propaganda. Despite being cheesy, cliche, and misleading in its depiction of the events, it still manages to delight thanks to solid and varied game-play mechanics and an expertly designed single player campaign.
  54. Reciter5613
    Nov 9, 2017
    6
    It was alright. I mean the campaign is really what I was into then anything else.

    It really felt like a war most of the time and the story felt like Band of Brothers. Of course the stealth elements were frustrating and the objectives are hard to understand right away. The multiplayer is still the same. Mostly run & gun with you getting killed almost instantly so it seems why bother.    It was alright. I mean the campaign is really what I was into then anything else.

    It really felt like a war most of the time and the story felt like Band of Brothers. Of course the stealth elements were frustrating and the objectives are hard to understand right away.

    The multiplayer is still the same. Mostly run & gun with you getting killed almost instantly so it seems why bother. The new WAR mode was a nice idea however.

    Zombie mode was boring as ever making me wanna die just to end it.

    Overall, this installment was nice for a short time but it one of the reasons I prefer renting games then buying.    … Expand
  55. The_XIII
    Nov 6, 2017
    6
    The game is far from perfect, and honestly not that enjoyable in the long rung. But you know what's hilarious? Reading these severly autistic kids crying about black women in videogames.
  56. Paragon89
    Mar 5, 2018
    7
    Bit of a tough one to review.

    I haven't played COD since BOP2- so cant really judge on the evolution on the next-gen platforms. But based on what I've heard its been a pretty crap Era. Start with the Good. + Visuals Looks grest especially in the campaign. Havent played any of the next-gen era titles but it seems really good. I was happy with that. + Zombies is still good,    Bit of a tough one to review.

    I haven't played COD since BOP2- so cant really judge on the evolution on the next-gen platforms. But based on what I've heard its been a pretty crap Era.

    Start with the Good.
    + Visuals Looks grest especially in the campaign. Havent played any of the next-gen era titles but it seems really good. I was happy with that.

    + Zombies is still good, different but at least its not same old and they actually evolved it. But hasn't become some bloated expanded mess and have managed to keep it feeling fairly simple and ground the classic maps. They have objectives now but are entirely optional. and is better than BOP2 Zombies anyway.

    + More customisation - plenty of customisation if your into that like your character, weapon skins etc

    + War and Headquarters, adds new multiplayer depth. added value and things to do. Tries to bring a story to the multiplayer.

    + Solid Multiplayer experience, not really a plus, but if your used to what they do year in year out, and are happy with that then you know your going to get a solid pick up and play multiplayer experience to fill in your hours when your bored.

    + While I haven't played AW/BOP3/IW so I don't know if they have these features. I really like the addition of Divisions and the new way of doing Perks to create unique combinations.

    Negatives
    - My biggest gripe with COD has always been the respawn system in multiplayer progressively getting worse with each instalment coupled with the average size of maps getting smaller means I often find I have enemies closer to me than allies and usually behind me. There's no logical direction to run in when you spawn. Which with WWII is still broken it seems.

    - Loot crates, that was a obvious one to get on the list. While it doesn't really bother me for COD as its a game where you grab any gun and kill people. I don't really see the need to pay for anything for the core experience. its all mainly cosmetic. and any guns don't really hamper you.

    -value for money , there is less maps at launch and have paid the same price, fair enough there's WAR mode but doesn't really justify it as I imagine its not something the core player base will get involved with. Same with map packs, less for your money.

    Now the personal things that stand out for me

    While COD gains superficial changes each year often depending on who's developing. Some Key features are missing or changed that I miss.

    for example I loved the Support and Specialist Play styles of MF3 it was a great way to help Assist/Support and lone wolves playstyles build a different set of killstreaks/perks and bring changes to the game. While this game kinda has it with divisions and the new Perk system Its something I miss.

    Killstreaks - I know its WW2 so its rooted and limited in technology etc, but Attack Dogs is missing!? I know we have paratroopers but come on! give us more streaks! - there seems to be a general lack of streaks(different streaks as well) to be fair I cant really think of any beyond the dogs that is missing, maybe drop a AI controlled tank on the battlefield that enemy team has to blow up....

    - Rooted is bad in a way - off the back of the last point, while its nice to be simple and go back to the roots, I cant help but feel they have stripped a lot meat from its bones. and while there is a solid core experience it lacks the added value to help with longevity. I feel ive grown tired on this COD instalment a lo faster than I have the others.

    Overall I've given it a 7. Its Classic COD and I love it for that and can pass many hours playing it. its solid and you cant go wrong. however it hasn't evolved as a franchise and doesn't have the added value to make it worth the price. Id give it a 9 if they would fix the respawn system.

    Whats Next? Call of Duty: Chronicle's - a time travelling adventure that features Easters eggs and cameos from all games. and Resets the whole timeline. and the Multiplayer maps is just remastered versions of the top 20 maps of all time.    … Expand
  57. claytastic
    Feb 4, 2018
    5
    Call of Duty continues to prove itself to be the most boring franchise out there with WWII. I didn't have high expectations, and actually wasn't planning on buying it. But some of my friends told me I would enjoy it, so I got it when it was on sale. They were pretty wrong.

    Don't get me wrong, it has some of the best graphics and sound design out there, and nails the look and feel of    Call of Duty continues to prove itself to be the most boring franchise out there with WWII. I didn't have high expectations, and actually wasn't planning on buying it. But some of my friends told me I would enjoy it, so I got it when it was on sale. They were pretty wrong.

    Don't get me wrong, it has some of the best graphics and sound design out there, and nails the look and feel of World War 2. It also plays pretty well, and can be enjoyed for an unextended amount of time, but in terms of the rest of it, there's nothing here.

    Let's start off with the campaign. It's bad. I mean, what did you expect? The characters are boring and lifeless, and no amount of Hollywood actors is going to make me change my mind about that. Call of Duty just doesn't have good campaigns anymore. They pretty much stopped trying after the first Black Ops because I guess they realised that no one played the campaigns anymore. This one really proves that point, though, because in the multiplayer, they censored the Swastikas, and there are black and female soldiers running about, even on the side of the Nazis. Not that I'm opposed to diversity, but in a game selling itself on historical accuracy, that really puts a dent in the illusion. However, in the campaign, there are Swastikas everywhere, and no females in sight (minus one who plays a fairly minor role). Why do you think this is? Because no one plays the campaign. They could make it the most violent game ever, and no one would care. Besides that problem, the campaign never really has any twists or turns. It's just standard and pretty boring most of the time. I'm not gonna sit here and pretend to care about ANOTHER soldier who has family at home who we can all predict is gonna die.

    The multiplayer isn't much of a step up, either. At first, I was kinda upset that they were continuing to make futuristic games with Infinite Warfare, but World War 2 has made me realise something. Going futuristic was the best thing that happened to Call of Duty. Both Advanced Warfare and Black Ops 3 are two of my favourites because the futuristic setting allowed for more variety. The double jumps and wall running in Advanced Warfare was the biggest change the series had made since the switch to a modern setting in CoD 4. Plus, this gave them the opportunity to have more weapon and ability variety. It needed refining, but it was a nice change of pace. Black Ops 3 was the perfect follow up because it did all of the refining that needed to be done in Advanced Warfare, and became what I would say is my favourite Call of Duty (even though the campaign didn't measure up to that of previous franchise entries). The only reason I hated Infinite Warfare was because it was just Black Ops 3 with worse maps and one of the series' worst campaigns. To say World War 2 has improved on this or evolved the series in any way is a joke because all they did was return to a style that everyone thought they wanted, but then realised they didn't. I always kind of knew that just going back to modern or historical settings wouldn't automatically fix Call of Duty, but I was hoping that it would provide some slight ounce of innovation. And it kinda did. The new War mode, which is the newest thing CoD has done since the jump kits in Advanced Warfare, is actually pretty neat. You're dropped into a linear map in which you and your team either have to complete an objective or drive the other team back from doing that. And while it's infinitely more fun to play the attacking team than it is to play defending, I still enjoyed my time with it. Other than that, though, there's nothing new or fresh about World War 2's multiplayer. If you've played a modern or historical CoD's multiplayer, you've played this one.

    Lastly, there's the zombies, which has absolutely nothing new or interesting about it. It's just boring, honestly. So much so that I have absolutely nothing to say about it besides the fact that Ving Rhames is in it, so that's cool.

    Overall, CoD WW2 is the furthest thing from a fresh gaming experience as you can possibly get. It's fun in short bursts and has some creative ideas, but none of them are ever executed to their full potential. 5/10.    … Expand
  58. JMARSseph
    Nov 13, 2017
    5
    Campaign....beautiful graphics, great sound, not very good dialogue and story and a horrible ending....
    Zombies..... great map, but of course only one... decent customization although the unlockables weren't exactly mind blowing
    Multiplayer...typical Call of Duty, extreme downgrade in presentation next to campaign and the new lobby is a poor, poor attempt to be a community playground    Campaign....beautiful graphics, great sound, not very good dialogue and story and a horrible ending....
    Zombies..... great map, but of course only one... decent customization although the unlockables weren't exactly mind blowing
    Multiplayer...typical Call of Duty, extreme downgrade in presentation next to campaign and the new lobby is a poor, poor attempt to be a community playground
    The campaign is quick and forgettable, the zombies are a dangling carrot to spend more for more and the multiplayer , as usual, was plagued with issues..... already traded this title at the local Vintage Stock...and would not recommend.....high hopes for a return to ww2 were only that, high hopes...    … Expand
  59. HappyPhilXD
    Mar 1, 2018
    5
    Just bought it for PS4 because a friend wanted to play with me.

    Visuals: Graphics are mediocre, it tries to stay at 60fps, the effects are from 2009. Controls: It's ok to play with controller, the auto aim is pretty heavy so you can hit something. It's not as smooth as Halo or Destiny when it comes to aiming. Gameplay: There are good amount of weapons but for the most times all    Just bought it for PS4 because a friend wanted to play with me.

    Visuals:
    Graphics are mediocre, it tries to stay at 60fps, the effects are from 2009.

    Controls:
    It's ok to play with controller, the auto aim is pretty heavy so you can hit something. It's not as smooth as Halo or Destiny when it comes to aiming.

    Gameplay:
    There are good amount of weapons but for the most times all players use the same guns because some of them are over effective. Talking to you fire shotgun.
    The maps are not the best part. I enjoy only 2 of the 9 maps because for the most parts there was no thought behind them.
    It wouldn't be an CoD without Cheaters. I thought there couldn't be that many Cheaters on PS4 than on PC but I was wrong. There is at least one blatant 360° spinning aimboting idiot in 1 of 3 games and some other "strange" players.

    Gamemodes:
    There are enough maps and modes to keep me occupied for a little while, most of them standard fps fast food.
    The zombie mode is good. They changed some thing and I have to say it's refreshing.
    Campaign is standard. Pew pew action with nice settings.

    All in all a normal mediocre CoD with the attempt to cash in on the World War hype Battlefield 1 started. Does nothing particular wrong but neither right. Should be ok for fans but I would suggest waiting for a sale.    … Expand
  60. johnnypxc
    Jan 17, 2018
    7
    Id rate it a 7.8/10 if there were decimals allowed here. Id say it is pretty solid in terms of returning to the classic boots on the ground combat. Its ages better than the last couple cods. The only things I really disliked about it were that id rate the zombies a 6/10 because it has changed too much from the golden day waw-bops 2 era and is far too fast paced, "if it aint broke dont fixId rate it a 7.8/10 if there were decimals allowed here. Id say it is pretty solid in terms of returning to the classic boots on the ground combat. Its ages better than the last couple cods. The only things I really disliked about it were that id rate the zombies a 6/10 because it has changed too much from the golden day waw-bops 2 era and is far too fast paced, "if it aint broke dont fix it", and of course the loot boxes which are hilariously bad, (you always get pistol grips that you cant even see on your gun).… Expand
  61. SrPepe
    Jan 2, 2018
    5
    Una campaña... cuestionable y aburrida. Si quieres pasar de dar escenarios increibles como la destrucción de la torre Eiffel o la estatua de la libertad a pelear en campos y casas viejas debes saber muy bien como manejarlo y no lo han sabido hacer. Una campaña que se me hizo aburrida.

    Probe el multijugador muy poco, pero lo mismo de siempre.
  62. red_ninja_9
    Dec 21, 2017
    6
    This game is ok 6/10 at most. I don't know why they went too far back in history, all we asked was modern day warfare. MW2 was the best COD period. I don't really care for old outdated weapons and world as it was back then. Another problem is, not enough maps, 9 multiplayer maps is not enough. Desperately need more maps or the game will be quite routine for most people, like myself.This game is ok 6/10 at most. I don't know why they went too far back in history, all we asked was modern day warfare. MW2 was the best COD period. I don't really care for old outdated weapons and world as it was back then. Another problem is, not enough maps, 9 multiplayer maps is not enough. Desperately need more maps or the game will be quite routine for most people, like myself. Another gripe is, the maps are too small. Typical 3 lanes maps with no variety and...again too small. I cant wait until MW2 remastered. Getting bored with this game already.… Expand
  63. Lowzone
    Feb 20, 2018
    6
    Trop court.... manque de materiel pour le mode de jeu solo. Le mode zombie n’est pas aussi addictif qu’il aurait pu l’etre.... je m’ennuie de world at war....

    Bon points: sound design impressionnant Gameplay efficace et combat bien balancé VO excellent Visuellement magnifique Mauvais points : Manque de contenu Balancement des armes me semble inadéquat Variété inexistante ... 1    Trop court.... manque de materiel pour le mode de jeu solo. Le mode zombie n’est pas aussi addictif qu’il aurait pu l’etre.... je m’ennuie de world at war....

    Bon points:
    sound design impressionnant
    Gameplay efficace et combat bien balancé
    VO excellent
    Visuellement magnifique

    Mauvais points :
    Manque de contenu
    Balancement des armes me semble inadéquat
    Variété inexistante ... 1 mission de char, 1 mission d’aviation.... donnez m’en plus!
    Zombie ennuyant
    Multiplayer = reskin des derniers titres de la série aucune innovation.

    Overall: 5.5/10    … Expand
  64. Berrlett
    May 9, 2018
    7
    Good thing I bought it heavily discounted, going through the campaign its surely no match for BF1 but still enjoyable, the D day landing on French beach was created with saving private Ryan in vision, brutal and unforgiving what follows afterwards is average. Have yet to try the on-line features but if you're here for advice thinking to buy it mine will be yes, at a big discount (somethingGood thing I bought it heavily discounted, going through the campaign its surely no match for BF1 but still enjoyable, the D day landing on French beach was created with saving private Ryan in vision, brutal and unforgiving what follows afterwards is average. Have yet to try the on-line features but if you're here for advice thinking to buy it mine will be yes, at a big discount (something like 50% off)… Expand
  65. dexter3
    Nov 6, 2017
    6
    I've been playing this game since COD 3. Here's what I think:

    Campaign: I have found it to be decently fun. Not an amazing experience, not horrible either. There are some people complaining about realism. If you're looking for realism, you shouldn't be playing COD. It's the same type of COD campaign that we've seen in most of the games. Multiplayer: The new war mode is the most fun I    I've been playing this game since COD 3. Here's what I think:

    Campaign: I have found it to be decently fun. Not an amazing experience, not horrible either. There are some people complaining about realism. If you're looking for realism, you shouldn't be playing COD. It's the same type of COD campaign that we've seen in most of the games.

    Multiplayer: The new war mode is the most fun I have had in COD for a long time. It's freaking awesome!! Your KD doesn't matter so it really encourages the team to play the objective. It very much takes after Battlefield One (a lot of the game does), but that doesn't bother me because I enjoy this game mode very much. If taking the positive elements from other games bothers you, you might have a problem with this. The downside is there are only 3 war maps and 9 regular MP maps... way too few. I have not experienced any server problems, my matchmaking times have been basically instant (I'm not denying the problem, I'm saying the people who come here are generally the ones who want to complain so you're going to read about more problems than good things). The rest of the MP is not very different, so if you've played any other COD game you know what to expect. Except gun camos are like COD4 which is fantastic. Gun balance is good and sniping is really fun so good job on that.

    Zombies: Only one real map so far which is pretty disappointing. The map itself is pretty good though. I like the changes to zombies. Blitz machines replace perks, armor replaces Juggernog and gets more expensive each time you buy it, which is a welcome and challenging change. The zombie types are varied (there are 5 main types, plus a boss you can fight), and are done cleverly. The zombies are quite different than old BO and BO2 zombies. The music is phenomenal at the beginning and really adds to the horror of the game, but I found it getting annoying after a while and turned it off. They have added a real progression system which is great. You can unlock and equip perks (mods) and start with new starting guns, unlock attachments, etc.

    -----

    Other points:

    - The UI is horrible. It is the worst UI I have seen in a COD game. It is extremely counterintuitive and I find myself constantly searching too long for what I want. Maybe I'm too used to the old menus, but this one is just poorly laid out.
    - Microtransactions are a disease in gaming and every game with them deserves a lower score. Please DO NOT BUY THEM.
    - SPLITSCREENERS BEWARE: The splitscreen is completely broken. The things that pop on screen (objective lost, pick up gun, etc.) are HUGE and completely block your view. It's like no one even tested this. It's so so bad. It has great potential but they need to make everything way smaller. I have a 65' TV and it is very difficult to play splitscreen. I really hope they fix this.
    - Graphics are in the middle. Obviously there are better looking games but it does the job for me.
    - The content is high quality for COD standards, but there's not much of it. Not a whole bunch of guns and not very many maps. Campaign is short.
    - SJW stuff is a sad sad part of the world now, and breaks some of the immersion.    … Expand
  66. Beyblades
    Nov 9, 2017
    5
    Before buying WW2, i was excited for Call of Duty to go back to BOTG. Although i was disappointed with how unoriginal and uninspiring the game is as a whole.

    Zombies: Without a doubt, zombies is my favorite part of the whole game. I have been a big fan of WAW,B01, and B02 zombies and still play it today with my friends. WW2 zombies to me feels VERY similar in ways to these games but    Before buying WW2, i was excited for Call of Duty to go back to BOTG. Although i was disappointed with how unoriginal and uninspiring the game is as a whole.

    Zombies: Without a doubt, zombies is my favorite part of the whole game. I have been a big fan of WAW,B01, and B02 zombies and still play it today with my friends. WW2 zombies to me feels VERY similar in ways to these games but doesn't add too much. With the two zombie maps that come with game, you get bored with them fairly quick (but that's not to say they are horrible maps). Although if you're looking to get WW2 strictly for zombies, i would recommend waiting for Zombie DLC maps to come out first.

    Multiplayer: For me, the WW2 multiplayer was a huge let down. The game itself feels very slow paced, for the reasons that:
    - If you are firing from a fair distance with an smg, it can take up to 7 shots to kill someone.
    -It takes a 5 kill streak just to get a UAV.
    -Maps are way to big (most maps of the maps i hate)
    For some people i can understand if you would enjoy a slower paced game. But for me I hate it. On the positive side, the sounds and visuals in the game a very satisfying.

    Campaign: After completing the campaign i was in shock to how boring of a story it was. The campaign could of been written by a kid in elementary school. How the story progressed was very predictable, and there were only missions that involved Americans and Nazi's... With that, the missions itself were just boring. There wasn't a single mission that i would love to go back and replay.

    Overall WW2 in terms of call of duty standards was a disappointment. It was nowhere worth the amount of money the game costs and the campaign felt like a complete waste of time. I would recommend trying to borrow the game first and possibly waiting for future dlc and patches to come out.    … Expand
  67. Jb22reviews
    Nov 14, 2017
    6
    Cod ww2 fun but not new
    Single player: the single player player campaign brings new features like med kits rather than health regeneration which sounds like a decent idea but turns out being very annoying having to rummage around for packs or search for a healer becomes repetitive and pointless while also featuring historical inaccuracies like black female nazis and some overblown action    Cod ww2 fun but not new
    Single player: the single player player campaign brings new features like med kits rather than health regeneration which sounds like a decent idea but turns out being very annoying having to rummage around for packs or search for a healer becomes repetitive and pointless while also featuring historical inaccuracies like black female nazis and some overblown action scenes aside from that the campaign is quite enjoyable and one of the better in recent years however with a lack of character development and quite a short length the fun gameplay and setting become less exciting
    Multiplayer: the multiplayer experience is just like any other cod with It's usual modes with the addition of war mode an attack and defence based objective game which is a breath of fresh air amongst other modes like Tdm and ffa which are fun but Arcady and can get stale with only 9 mp maps with few good ones and with a new headquarters space where you can open supply drops get contracts and meet with other players feels like a tower ripoff which doesn't help the fact that there is no one in headquarters anyway because of a glitch the mp is fun but leaves much to be desired
    Overall cod ww2 is the same fun arcade shooter but I wish we saw more innovation    … Expand
  68. HCL
    Nov 15, 2017
    6
    I must admit i was pretty bored with the futuristic style of the last couple Call of duty's.
    Now they have returned to their roots but with the same fast shooting style. Now its boots on the ground and i liked it allot. But with the messy servers its like they went back to their roots with the servers also, and that's a shame. Games disconnecting or you get kicked out the lobby for now    I must admit i was pretty bored with the futuristic style of the last couple Call of duty's.
    Now they have returned to their roots but with the same fast shooting style. Now its boots on the ground and i liked it allot. But with the messy servers its like they went back to their roots with the servers also, and that's a shame. Games disconnecting or you get kicked out the lobby for now reason. Sledgehammer games what is wrong with the headquarters you promised that the gamers are all in one headquarters but now most gamers are holy solo in there.

    Its like that this COD WW2 wasnt ready to be released. But i must admit when the game does what i must do, its almost the best Cod i played in years.

    The singleplayer experience is like the serie Band of brothers. Its pretty awesome but its still a hollywood like story.

    Conclusion:
    The singleplayer is a Hollywood like story so i gave this a 7 for it.
    with the multiplayer its pretty great but with the messy servers its almost unplayable. so i gave this a 6.

    If you want to buy it wait a couple of months for the patches and fixes, and then you have the best multiplayer experience in almost 9 years.    … Expand
  69. DMein
    Nov 16, 2017
    7
    I think this is the best call of duty game in the past few years. Still doesn't compete with the Modern Warefares or the Black Opps games. However, call of duty has finally created a throw back to the times of no jet packs or running on walls that the gaming community has been asking for for a long time. I really enjoy both the game play of both multiplayer and nazi zombie game modes, butI think this is the best call of duty game in the past few years. Still doesn't compete with the Modern Warefares or the Black Opps games. However, call of duty has finally created a throw back to the times of no jet packs or running on walls that the gaming community has been asking for for a long time. I really enjoy both the game play of both multiplayer and nazi zombie game modes, but both of these game modes lack map size and/or number of maps available to play on. I know that more maps in both game modes will come out, but this will just be another payment addition on the already kind of expensive price tag. I give this game a 10/10 on game play but a 5/10 on game play availability.… Expand
  70. Hardy1987
    Nov 16, 2017
    7
    I really enjoy this game but the bugs let it down, the games been out for 2 weeks and I've seen very little in progress... So much potential and when fixed will be the best CoD I've played since MW3 BUT needs fixing.
  71. Shalakur
    Nov 22, 2017
    7
    So Call of Duty World War 2, the game i have been waiting for since World at War was released in 2008, was not a disappointment. The game features a detailed story that utilizes the old style health bar system, reminds me of the old medal of honor days. I would give this game at least a 9 if the story was the only feature, but its not. Sledgehammer took zombies in somewhat differentSo Call of Duty World War 2, the game i have been waiting for since World at War was released in 2008, was not a disappointment. The game features a detailed story that utilizes the old style health bar system, reminds me of the old medal of honor days. I would give this game at least a 9 if the story was the only feature, but its not. Sledgehammer took zombies in somewhat different direction that promotes horror and gore rather than the goofy style of Infinite Warfare, it's a rather detailed and immersive zombies experience. Now the important topic, multiplayer. Multiplayer is your standard boots on the ground game play, it has an new create-a-class system called divisions. The division style is much like Battlefield but it allows more customization, by that I mean you can run the machine gunner division with a shotgun and it would still work fine. I really enjoyed the multiplayer but as of Thanksgiving 2017 my game is broken, not the disc I mean the game itself. Many people such as myself have experienced the game-breaking bugs known as error code 1, 3, and 5. The bug downloads a quick playlist update then automatically fails returning you to the start screen, then when you try to join multiplayer (or any other online function) it re-downloads and errors again sending you into an infinite loop. Many of us paid $60-120 on this game just to not play it. That is not the only multiplayer bug, there have been many reports of black-screening, server kicks, and overall complications revolving around the servers. Would be a great game if myself and many others could play it.… Expand
  72. Easycw44
    Nov 25, 2017
    5
    After taking a break from this series after MW2, thought they might be able to replicate the brilliance of World at War. Unfortunately to date they have not, maps are small, guns are repetitive, and at times almost useless in the smallest of the small maps (Sniper Rifles). This games doesn't reward skill, if you enjoy twitch shooters, then this is the best on the market. 5 feels fairAfter taking a break from this series after MW2, thought they might be able to replicate the brilliance of World at War. Unfortunately to date they have not, maps are small, guns are repetitive, and at times almost useless in the smallest of the small maps (Sniper Rifles). This games doesn't reward skill, if you enjoy twitch shooters, then this is the best on the market. 5 feels fair because it is still better than most FPS out there, but doesn't hold a candle to Battlefield 1. Could go on about things I dislike, even if the new map packs take it to the next level, you're still going to have to wait, and pay (which is fine). I'm finished with the COD series, Easy come, Easy go… Expand
  73. Maciag33
    Dec 10, 2017
    7
    Call of Duty is a franchise that I grew up on, my favorite game in the series is Call of Duty: World at War so I was obviously very excited for the franchise to go back into World War II. I love American military history and its one of the reason why I connected with video games, it’s a chance for our youth to not only see history but an attempt to play through it. It makes it a learningCall of Duty is a franchise that I grew up on, my favorite game in the series is Call of Duty: World at War so I was obviously very excited for the franchise to go back into World War II. I love American military history and its one of the reason why I connected with video games, it’s a chance for our youth to not only see history but an attempt to play through it. It makes it a learning experience. Now saying this, I’m disappointed that COD didn’t make an accurate depiction of World War II. Depictions such as gender, race, marketing of the Nazi party, accurate depiction of weapons, clothing, etc. is something I would complain about, then again it is just a game and not a history book. It’s just something that I found disappointing.… Expand
  74. kiank
    Dec 19, 2017
    7
    I have played over 24 hours of this Cod and I believe that it is a step in the right direction for call of duty. For me, it is the first decent Cod since Black Ops III. I love the idea of a Headquarters and think it is the best addition in this Cod, especially with the firing range and one v. one mode. I also love the pace of the multiplayer and have always loved the different modes.I have played over 24 hours of this Cod and I believe that it is a step in the right direction for call of duty. For me, it is the first decent Cod since Black Ops III. I love the idea of a Headquarters and think it is the best addition in this Cod, especially with the firing range and one v. one mode. I also love the pace of the multiplayer and have always loved the different modes. The new War mode was fun for a while, but I would like to see more operations added to it. I like the gun options and feel the progression system/loot boxes are rewarding. I have not had time to touch the campaign but have heard good things from friends. On the other hand, I dislike most of the maps and the map variety is pretty bad overall. The worst part about this Cod has been all the bugs. I've had trouble connecting with friends, staying in lobbies, and I've seen different bugs in the headquarters. This has been the buggiest Cod I've ever played. Overall, I'd give it a 7.2.… Expand
  75. Ninjeye
    Dec 28, 2017
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The game is great, it is finally good to have a COD that does not run on walls, jump and hover or have any of the futuristic warfare in combat. I am a little sad as I am stationed in Japan and play on American servers on base and deal with a persistent lag, though I have noticed that it is worse than Black ops III. The sniper maps are amazing and remind me of Ghost even though this one is set during World War II. Being an actual Military member, I would have liked to see more emphasis on stealth, tactics and strategy as opposed to run and gun but I do understand that this is more of an arcade first person shooter than simulation. You are guaranteed to like it, which is why I actually give this game a 7.7, just under an 8 however, I believe my score will change once they hand over the first DLC and patches that fix the issues that I see happening on the game. For one thing, I have noticed how easy it is to team kill as your gun will lock on to a friend with ease and have difficulty locking onto the enemy. I have seen only a hand full of hackers and some will even tell you they are doing it which is my biggest issue as I do not believe in cheating. Anyways this is my first review but hopefully not the last. I am Ninjeye… Expand
  76. Enddless
    Jan 3, 2018
    6
    Мультиплеер хорош, особенно война, убийство подтверждено и зомби. Сюжет говно и вся кампания это коридор сботами.
  77. MustafaTqu95
    Feb 9, 2018
    7
    طور اللعب الفردي أو القصة كان جيد كـ قصة وايضا طريقة لعب ولكن كان وللأسف قصير وكنت أتمنى لو يكون بهيئة العب التعاوني بدل أصدقاء داخل اللعبى بذكاء اصطناعي , وبالنسبة لطور الزومبي ف هو تقريبا الحسنة الوحيدة في اللعبة رغم قلة الخرائظ ولكن وبشكل عام كان جيد وأستمتعت به نوعا ما وبالنسبة لطور اللعب الجماعي ورغم عدم وجود القفز ولكن لازال الموت بسرعة بحيث لا يمكن أتخاذ أي ردة فعل عند الأطلاق عليكطور اللعب الفردي أو القصة كان جيد كـ قصة وايضا طريقة لعب ولكن كان وللأسف قصير وكنت أتمنى لو يكون بهيئة العب التعاوني بدل أصدقاء داخل اللعبى بذكاء اصطناعي , وبالنسبة لطور الزومبي ف هو تقريبا الحسنة الوحيدة في اللعبة رغم قلة الخرائظ ولكن وبشكل عام كان جيد وأستمتعت به نوعا ما وبالنسبة لطور اللعب الجماعي ورغم عدم وجود القفز ولكن لازال الموت بسرعة بحيث لا يمكن أتخاذ أي ردة فعل عند الأطلاق عليك .… Expand
  78. dr_zorua
    Mar 6, 2018
    7
    A great game with a great campaign and good quick time events and great stealth that you will love! The multiplayer is fun but the community is too salty, like play the mountain faction in a comp map that doesn't have good sniping spots you will get yelled at by like a five year old or a twenty year old yelling at you. Still a great game!
  79. SlightedHand
    Mar 23, 2018
    6
    Call Of Duty: WW2 is an above average game (just). For the price range, it isn't really, but there is still a lot of good old fashioned Call Of Duty in there. Is it fun? Yeah, sometimes. Is it replayable? Multiplayer yes, Campaign no, Zombies can be.
    Gameplay-
    This game is not revolutionary or innovative in a single aspect, nothing is inspired and because of that there isn't all that    Call Of Duty: WW2 is an above average game (just). For the price range, it isn't really, but there is still a lot of good old fashioned Call Of Duty in there. Is it fun? Yeah, sometimes. Is it replayable? Multiplayer yes, Campaign no, Zombies can be.
    Gameplay-
    This game is not revolutionary or innovative in a single aspect, nothing is inspired and because of that there isn't all that much interest in what you're doing. However there's a reason for this, and that is that Call Of Duty essentially has set the model for FPS games. It can't revolutionise because then it stops being true to its series. You could argue that this means the series should just stop, an argument I sit on the fence with. Anyway, the campaign is mediocre. The voice acting is good but aside from that its just occasional cinematic moments and repetitive points (and whoever created that piece of garbage tank section in the Aachen mission is going to hell, that is truly terrible). It's a Call Of Duty campaign. Not bad, definitely not great. The multiplayer I actually properly enjoyed. TDM, S&D etc are the same thing as in every other game. However war, this is just good, thank whatever god you pray to they made this. This mode is repetitive but it's actually fun, a brilliant bridge between campaign and multiplayer. It takes you along these mission based maps each with their own tense checkpoints. This kept this game from being a 4 and bumped it up to a 6. This is exactly what you'd hope for in a Call Of Duty game. The zombies is pretty good. They pivoted completely from Infinite Warfare and went for a dark, nightmarish approach, there are literal moments of almost pure darkness in the easter egg. The problem primarily with the zombies is that really there is only one base game zombies map which gets boring after completing the Easter egg for your fifth time. The mini map you get for completing the EE is just bad. It has a quick pace but it honestly feels like a tutorial map, because it is also the tutorial map, it's pretty lazy for the developer to release it as the only other map. Also David Tenants character doesn't really fit in this area of the game, he has quips and is meant to be a bit of comic relief. However their approach of a horror zombies makes his character just seem wrong.
    Aesthetic-
    Visually this game has a fine aesthetic. Its hyper realistic but its very brown and grey as their primary hues. In the zombies its really cool though, the zombies are covered in torn flesh and twisted metal, it really fits their tone of a near horror approach to zombies. The soundtrack and audio is pretty good. Its got no pumping riffs and power chords like Black Ops 1, instead it's quite classical and very similar to Battlefield 1's soundtrack. Good, but nothing inspiring.
    Replayability-
    If a single person says that the campaign is replayable, they are full of it. It is not even remotely interesting enough to be worth playing more than once, it's barely worth playing just that once. Multiplayer, it generally is except for War which just yes. War is the smartest, most replayable thing a COD game has implemented in years. The zombies is until you've played it for more than 20 solid goes. Then it gets stale, which is frustrating as it is designed as a mode to be done lots of times.

    In conclusion, COD:WW2 is fairly uninspired with almost nothing thats particularly new or interesting. I give it a 6 as there is enough to do and is worth the price tag, however if you dislike previous Call Of Duty's then you'll dislike this one. Except for War. Mhm that is actually good. It's fine, not bad, but certainly not revolutionary either.    … Expand
  80. GrantD243
    Oct 21, 2018
    7
    The campaign was a joke, but the multiplayer of WWII was a solid throwback to earlier Call of Dutys, and I never got tired of it. The orders and supply drops may be seen as a cash grab by some people, but they kept me coming back to the game over and over. One of the better Call of Duty games in a while.
  81. Naedeslus
    Apr 13, 2019
    5
    It's okay. It starts off great, the campaign goes to the most famous battle in all of WW2, D-Day and the first mission is great. If only the rest was as interesting. The problem is, is that I've seen it before. It doesn't really do anything new. Sure the first mission is great but after that, it just felt like MW2 with a WW2 skin over it.

    It also for a WW2 isn't that historically    It's okay. It starts off great, the campaign goes to the most famous battle in all of WW2, D-Day and the first mission is great. If only the rest was as interesting. The problem is, is that I've seen it before. It doesn't really do anything new. Sure the first mission is great but after that, it just felt like MW2 with a WW2 skin over it.

    It also for a WW2 isn't that historically accurate. If you're sensitive to some games being too PC, stay the hell away because they don't even have the enemies wear the Nazi uniforms. This game could've been Activision's chance to give us a gritty but over the top experience and it just fell flat.

    The combat is more of the same as COD has been for the past 10+ years. If you love it, you'll love it but it feels too arcadey. The AI is braindead most of the time and it just doesn't have a sort of impact I'd prefer.

    Not a horrible FPS and you could do worse but if you like historically accurate WW2 games, this isn't for you. If you wanted COD to maybe feel a bit less arcadey and have better AI, this won't do it. The only ones I can really recommend this to are die-hard fans of the series.

    COD really needs to find a way to reinvent itself because it's very stale and this proves just how stale it has become.    … Expand
  82. BonkTrap
    Oct 16, 2018
    5
    I was on the hype train for a boots on the ground call of duty game, but it turned out to be meh at best, litteraly feels like a bad treyarch game, gameplay does not feel as solid, the campain is just a **** action movie and the zombies is just a poor man version of the treyarch zombies gamemode. I get that the zombies mode is trying to be scary, but the jumpscares just get old real fast,I was on the hype train for a boots on the ground call of duty game, but it turned out to be meh at best, litteraly feels like a bad treyarch game, gameplay does not feel as solid, the campain is just a **** action movie and the zombies is just a poor man version of the treyarch zombies gamemode. I get that the zombies mode is trying to be scary, but the jumpscares just get old real fast, they should just look up to verrukt, this is how you make a scary zombie map… Expand
  83. Cooper_Reviews
    Nov 29, 2018
    6
    Visuals: 8/10
    Audio and sound design: 9/10
    Game-play: 5/10 Story: 5/10 Replay-ability: 5/10 Overall Score: 6.2/10 Call of Duty: WWI, is a true example of style over substance. The game is beautiful and the presentation is top notch but the substance of this game negates much replay-ability, the generic maps, a boring and lazily written story with a few good moments, and overall    Visuals: 8/10
    Audio and sound design: 9/10
    Game-play: 5/10
    Story: 5/10
    Replay-ability: 5/10

    Overall Score: 6.2/10

    Call of Duty: WWI, is a true example of style over substance. The game is beautiful and the presentation is top notch but the substance of this game negates much replay-ability, the generic maps, a boring and lazily written story with a few good moments, and overall just a mediocre package. Not a horrible game by any means but certainly not a good one.    … Expand
  84. R3HAP3R
    Feb 4, 2019
    7
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  85. flaviojcm
    Jun 12, 2020
    5
    dialogues and scenarios well created but repetitive game with low suitability for battles in war
  86. teddymikki
    Jul 9, 2020
    5
    Got it from PS Plus. Never ever finished it. Gameplay is boring as hell and feels like a remastered Call of Duty 2 from the early 2000. Which is not a bad thing, if the game was published at least 10 years ago. The stealth missions are a disgrace. Nothing like from CoD4. Plot is chaotic as well. And I am so tired that Americans won everything and not only in WW2. Pathetic.
  87. storygamer
    Jan 17, 2023
    7
    Call Of Duty: WWII is one of the last innovative and good COD games, after the franchise became a repetitive evergreen. While the multiplayer is strong as usual, the single player campaign is a bit short, but well written. But the most impressive aspect is the atmosphere. You dive deep into emotional WWII moments and experience rotatory slow and fast scenes. A good historical FPS!
  88. KrowKrof
    May 13, 2023
    6
    ........................................................................mid
  89. trinovatic
    Nov 27, 2022
    7
    El COD más infravalorado en mi opinión, esta bueno, la campaña me gustó y la ambientación que hay en el modo zombies también.
  90. uoKAOS
    Oct 20, 2022
    7
    This one is truly awesome to play! Graphics are well made! Snipers and throwing knives are very enjoyable and pleasant to play with! Great one for once!
  91. SauceBox6
    Nov 26, 2022
    6
    10 - Masterpiece
    9 - Amazing
    8 - Great
    7 - Good
    6 - Okay
    5 - Mediocre
    4 - Bad
    3 - Awful
    2 - Painful
    1 - Unbearable
  92. Epicmonster5600
    Dec 6, 2022
    5
    It is quite literally the most forgettable cod game I've ever played but the "lootbox" system was different I suppose
  93. goodgriff33
    Dec 24, 2022
    7
    Answer: 75 characters is between 10 words and 19 words with spaces included in the character count. If spaces are not included in the character count, then 75 characters is between 12 words and 25 words.
  94. bramchvh
    Feb 10, 2023
    7
    This is a strange game. It is a Call of Duty that tries a lot differently which is respectable but a lot of it falls flat. The campaign is beautiful and is pretty fun with a couple of changes but nothing big but the zombies is something completely different. It is still the round based system but tries to scare you a lot more than the other zombies games. Unfortunately it isnt scary atThis is a strange game. It is a Call of Duty that tries a lot differently which is respectable but a lot of it falls flat. The campaign is beautiful and is pretty fun with a couple of changes but nothing big but the zombies is something completely different. It is still the round based system but tries to scare you a lot more than the other zombies games. Unfortunately it isnt scary at all. The multiplayer is really nothing to comment on.… Expand
  95. Gaz
    Nov 12, 2020
    7
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I'm going to be as fair and balanced as I possibly can with this game. It's completely average in just about every way. Honestly, this is the video game equivalent of a failing student getting a C- minus and the teachers all say how good he is. The bar was set so low that it looks good by comparison.

    The campaign was something I found enjoyable, but suffers from archaic design choices. It felt like I was playing Call of Duty 2 or 3, and while I enjoyed some of the nostalgia and simplicity of it all, I was constantly reminding myself that this was a 2017 release that cost millions of dollars to make and promised a return to form while pushing boundaries, and the game failed to deliver in that regard. Worse still, where the game goes over-the-top with it are the most immersion-breaking parts of the story. There's seriously a scene where you sneak into a Nazi camp with suppressed SMG's ( the stealth sequences are terrible, by the way) and later in that same level, you chase a train and flip your vehicle sideways in front of it and end up grinding against the train before it eventually derails and you fly out of your jeep. A lot of the game doesn't feel like WWII and instead feels like a weird pseudo-WWII. Honestly, the only way I got through it and found myself having fun was by acting like it was Inglorious Basterds The Game. Seriously guys, take this campaign with a grain of salt and try to treat it like a war movie and just enjoy the ride because if you're looking for a realistic or immersive experience, you won't find it here. It's a good campaign, but only if you appreciate it with the right mindset. If you're like me and you loved World at War, this game's campaign won't be dethroning it.

    Multiplayer made me keep reminding myself that, once again, this was a multi-million dollar franchise because the multiplayer is about as basic as it gets. You get all the modes that come in traditional CoD fare with a few additions like the War mode which really just boils down to, "Defenders camp and attackers shove their bodies into objectives and ruin their K/D." But the maps are basic, bland, and uninspired and the weapon selection is mostly acceptable at best. Again, this multiplayer is easily 10x better than Infinite Warfare's, but that's barely saying anything. I truly felt like I was playing a lesser shooter made by a smaller developer instead of a powerhouse franchise. It's pitiful, actually.

    The zombies, however, is something I enjoy for the most part. It's familiar enough to draw me in, yet different enough to feel unique. The map is huge, the zombies have different movement patterns than the other CoD games, there's different zombie types, and catalogued objectives that guide you on a path. I feel like this game gives you the tools to last longer and it feels like the devs want you to survive and see it through if you can figure out what you're doing. There's a story there, and it peaks your interest.

    But one of the areas this game stumbles in is the accuracy department. Suppressed weapons, manually reloading M1 Garands, red dot sights, incendiary bullets, and NO FREAKING SWASTIKAS in multiplayer really hold this game back. Because Nazi zombies with a bunch of iron crosses draped on everything doesn't look anywhere near as sinister as it should. In fact, just to mock the absurdity of this game's political correctness, my multiplayer soldier is a black woman who's calling card is Normandy beach with a gay pride flag raised on it. Seriously. These are things Sledgehammer put in their game about WWII, folks. And speaking of things put in the game, the microtransactions and the season pass are back and just as prevalent as ever, and given the fact that Activision recently patented methods to shove them down our throats even more, it seems that they're going to be content to alienate their fans and bleed whoever's left dry until the cash cow can't be milked any further.

    At the end of the day, Call of Duty WWII is strictly average in every way. It's by no means a terrible game, but it never comes close to greatness, either. This will be a game relegated to the dead center of every CoD ranking list, and that's where it belongs. If you need to wash the taste of Infinite Warfare out of your mouth and want that CoD experience you can't get elsewhere, this game is for you. As for me, this is a game I'd buy on sale for about 20 bucks because that's all I feel it's worth. But if you're looking for historical shooters, Battlefield 1 is a much better game and there are plenty of other first-person shooters on the market that outclass this one. Like I said, it's a C- grade from a failing student. It's good compared to its last few outings alone, and that's not saying much.    … Expand
  96. PictoPirate
    Jul 27, 2020
    7
    Call of Duty: WWII is exactly what you'd expect from a Call of Duty game. Big production values, bombastic set-pieces and all the shooty shooting you can stomach.

    The combat is as good as ever, the weapons feel meaty and satisfying and there is a decent amount of variety in weapons to keep things interesting. The graphics are good, as you'd expect from a CoD game. The story is decent    Call of Duty: WWII is exactly what you'd expect from a Call of Duty game. Big production values, bombastic set-pieces and all the shooty shooting you can stomach.

    The combat is as good as ever, the weapons feel meaty and satisfying and there is a decent amount of variety in weapons to keep things interesting. The graphics are good, as you'd expect from a CoD game.

    The story is decent and brilliantly acted, if a little one dimensional and lacking in any really interesting twists and turns. So, yeah... it's a call of Duty game where you get to shoot Nazis. Nothing groundbreaking but a fun romp while it lasts.

    *I don't care about multiplayer so I can't tell you if that is any good or not.    … Expand
  97. Markos-
    Nov 27, 2020
    6
    I was never a big fan of CODs but this one caught my attention because of the WW2 setting. Well, it was also given for free in PS Plus so that might have something to do, too.
    I played a third of the campaign. At first, I thought it was awesome, the graphics are great in cinematics, there seemed to be a gripping story and I thought I would really feel immersed.
    However, after 2-3    I was never a big fan of CODs but this one caught my attention because of the WW2 setting. Well, it was also given for free in PS Plus so that might have something to do, too.
    I played a third of the campaign. At first, I thought it was awesome, the graphics are great in cinematics, there seemed to be a gripping story and I thought I would really feel immersed.
    However, after 2-3 missions, i started to clearly see 'I've been here before' all over the place. The action is always pushed to the limit with explosions etc, and it's always the same old 'clear the enemies - move to next checkpoint' that we know so well from ALL these games. I just lost immersion and stopped caring completely on the action, I realized the characters were also very empty and I didn't even know who was who (not that it mattered anyway). Great envelope (graphics, presentation, music), but a very empty core (feeling, engagement, uniqueness).
    The multiplayer , I lasted 30 minutes. It's just too fast and chaotic, and you need to train a lot to get competitive. I don't see the point on playing unless its with friends.    … Expand
  98. iKen
    Sep 1, 2020
    7
    Played on PS4 Pro.
    Gameplay: GOOD
    Graphic: GREAT
    Story: GOOD
    Music/Sound : GOOD
    Dialogue/Voice Acting: GREAT
  99. p1menta
    Jul 5, 2018
    7
    same old same old, not bad, but it's still not really fine. the story is cliche and boring and stupid, and the brazillian portuguese voices are terrible, i wish i could at least play this **** in english. i dont ever play the multiplayers
  100. FreedomFighters
    Jun 14, 2020
    5
    Here’s a game I never expected that I’d be writing a review of. I’ve played a few of the “Call of Duty” games before, but I’d say I have a weird history with this franchise. My friends and I have spent numerous hours playing several “Call of Duty” games (notably the “Black Ops” sub-series) in local multiplayer (mostly through fighting bots and taking on Zombies), and I’ve had some funHere’s a game I never expected that I’d be writing a review of. I’ve played a few of the “Call of Duty” games before, but I’d say I have a weird history with this franchise. My friends and I have spent numerous hours playing several “Call of Duty” games (notably the “Black Ops” sub-series) in local multiplayer (mostly through fighting bots and taking on Zombies), and I’ve had some fun playing those games, since I enjoy some local cooperative multiplayer with friends, but “Call of Duty” is in a weird boat where I feel it's simultaneously the most underrated and overrated game franchise out now. Underrated in that the games are relatively fun in short bursts, and perhaps not as bad as the internet might lead you to believe, but overrated in that they aren’t nearly as good as their blockbuster sales might lead you to believe. “Call of Duty” is not one of the greatest franchises in gaming, it’s simply one of the most persistent, as it continues to receive yearly installments that sell like hotcakes in spite of their general averageness. And while 2017’s “Call of Duty: WWII” was a hyped entry when it was announced for returning to the boots-on-ground gameplay style after so many futuristic entries, this entry honestly epitomizes the “averageness” that has rendered the series unexciting.
    “Call of Duty: WWII,” presentation-wise, does things pretty solidly: of course, the game is graphically impressive, just as any number of Activision games are, and gameplay-wise, it's at the very least functional. It’s fast-paced, the controls are fluid, and the gunplay is competent stuff. Beyond the campaign, this is another “Call of Duty” game that I’ve played with friends (as I mentioned, mostly against bots because that’s what we like), and it is occasionally pretty fun. This is a very minor thing, but I never got to mention this when I reviewed “Battlefield 1,” which I’m using just for the sake of comparison, but one thing I found so fun in that game was being able to use a shovel as a weapon, just because it was so jarring yet gratifying. “Call of Duty: WWII” does also allow you to use a shovel, which…I’m sorry, I know it’s really minor, but I just get a kick out of it.
    The reason I had to mention something that minor, though, is because I'm really reaching to find something positive to say about this game. I had some big issues with it, but the biggest, most glaring one is this: if you've played one “Call of Duty” game, you’ve played them all, and this entry hits that nail on the head. There’s nothing exciting about the gameplay here, it’s competently made but severely lacking in anything that captivating. Beyond the lack of standout gameplay elements (well, outside of vehicle sections that stand out for the WORST reasons), the campaign is unbelievably short and painfully unfulfilling. Much of the story is a mishmash of clichés with forgettable characters, and the game is so cinematic that it feels like most of the game’s length is spent watching. I know I mentioned in my review of “Battlefield 1” that it too had a campaign that felt short and occasionally had too much watching, but “Call of Duty: WWII” takes those flaws and turns them up to eleven. And the difference here is that “Battlefield 1” actually had a good game to go along with it, but with “Call of Duty: WWII,” I mean, I just beat the remaster of “Modern Warfare 2” about a month ago and I feel like I’m playing that exact same game here. By the way, I know I’m hanging around the “Battlefield 1” comparison a lot in this review, and I don’t want this to feel like a compare-and-contrast piece because a game should be judged on its own, but frankly, I feel the comparison is worth bringing up because I refuse to believe that “Call of Duty: WWII” would exist had the fanbase not caused such a stink about “Infinite Warfare” a year prior, and then EA not hit it so big with the announcement and trailer for “Battlefield 1” not long after. This game feels like it was conceptualized and created only to ride on the coattails of “Battlefield 1,” and frankly, to me, it often just feels like a rip-off of it.
    I really have to hand it to the “Call of Duty” series, because it is just extremely good at diluting and watering down the entire FPS genre for the biggest audience possible, most specifically casual gamers who don’t play enough video games to understand why the franchise is not nearly on the level of creativity as the many games it finds itself so eager to copy off of And that is precisely the case with “Call of Duty: WWII,” which has its moments of fun, but continues to carry a “been there, done that” vibe. It’s the same game you’ve played for years, and it remains a very safe, stale, lowest common denominator shooter that I can’t help but feel simply indifferent towards.
    Final rating: 5 out of 10 “Hmm…”    … Expand
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

82
#82 Best PS4 Game of 2017
9
#9 Most Discussed PS4 Game of 2017
9
#9 Most Shared PS4 Game of 2017

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
79

Generally favorable reviews - based on 83 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 62 out of 83
  2. Mixed: 21 out of 83
  3. Negative: 0 out of 83
  1. CD-Action
    Jan 10, 2018
    70
    I really wanted CoD’s return to World War II to be something more than a solid game – but it’s not. I couldn’t shake the feeling that I’ve already seen all this, that the developers (or perhaps the publisher) chose to create something as safe as possible. There’s just one campaign mission that surprised me with its scale, the rest is just a disappointing “best of Call of Duty”. The multiplayer is as good as usual, but it was infused with unnecessary systems resembling mobile titles, e.g spending in-game currency on pointless tasks of the “kill 100 enemies” variety. Missions that make you watch other players open their loot boxes are the pinnacle of absurdity. [13/2017, p.64]
  2. The Digital Fix
    Dec 22, 2017
    70
    A solid return to its roots, Call of Duty WWII reminds us what made us all fall in love Call of Duty in the first place. It ticks all the boxes which is both a blessing and a curse. Good fun and worth your time but offers nothing exceptional.
    Read full review
  3. Playstation Official Magazine UK
    Dec 15, 2017
    90
    Revitalised and exemplary FPS gaming. Multiplayer trims back to the essentials, campaign shows sensitivity and Zombies...well it's a new excuse to play CoD Zombies. [Christmas 2017, p.77]
See all critic reviews »