Call of Duty: World at War: Final Fronts Call of Duty: World at War: Final Fronts pc

I understand that it’s a flamethrower and that’s awesome, but these things have to be handled with care, you know? Graphics in Call of Duty: World At War: Final Fronts (2 out of 5) Here, however, all of that magic is killed after you get the flamethrower in the very first mission. World at War at least made you wait a few missions before letting you burn guys to a crisp and the anticipation was sweet. In fact, the only thing separating it from past PlayStation 2 Call of Duty titles is the addition of the flamethrower, but even that is somewhat ruined. Call of Duty: World At War: Final Fronts contains none of that innovation and excitement, delivering an experience that “by-the-book” is too nice of a term for. The sniper level in which you hide amongst dead bodies and time your shots with passing planes? Sure, it may have been a mix of Enemy at the Gates and the sniper level from Call of Duty 4, but it was still great, as was the ensuing chase after you’re discovered.

I mean “game” is right there in “gameplay.” Sadly it’s where Call of Duty: World at War: Final Fronts disappoints the most.Ĭall of Duty: World at War made the tired World War II setting work through innovation. Gameplay is, I think, the most crucial aspect of a game. Call of Duty: World at War: Final Fronts, as you can tell from the title, is not just a PlayStation 2 port of World at War, but rather a companion piece.Ĭan UK-based developer Rebellion do what Treyarch did and breathe some life back into World War II? Gameplay in Call of Duty: World At War: Final Fronts (1 out of 5) I was understandably wary, but Treyarch managed to make World War II somewhat fun again.

I didn’t know what to think when the Call of Duty franchise went back to World War II after the phenomenal Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare.

Prepare Call of Duty: World At War: Final Fronts

Call of Duty: World at War: Final Fronts Call of Duty: World at War: Final Fronts pc