AICN Games: A Layman's Humble Impressions Of The CALL OF DUTY: WORLD AT WAR Beta!!

Merrick here...
..with a few thoughts on the much-discussed CALL OF DUTY: WORLD AT WAR Beta that launched over the weekend. Before we go any further, it's important to understand the perspective with which I'm approaching this game. Regular readers may recall that I'm a huge video game fan, but I also consider myself something of a casual gamer. I frequently immerse myself in games for hours on end, but I don't give a rat's ass what my XBOX Live Gamerscore is. I don't pay any particualr attention to stuff like frame rates, but I do notice when they're lacking. For me, "cool" gaming is about shamelessly wallowing in whatever visceral action, carnage, Bayhem, and in-your-face ridiculousness a game might offer. For me, gaming is about whether or not an often uncoordinated dork like myself can actually master a control scheme. It's about how big a rush I get when I sit down to slaughter hapless Wookies, or impale Nazi bastards. This said, I do regularly (and quickly) note whether or not a title looks good on my badass HDTV (I love my TV enough to marry it, which would make for an admittedly awkward threesome). And, CoD: WAW looks pretty nice, by the way, With that in mind, consider the below as nothing more than an off-the-cuff, somewhat random, "everyman" perspective of the CALL OF DUTY: WORLD AT WAR Beta, with no pretense beyond that. If you're looking for a highly technical or learned review, this won't be it - some place like IGN is probably your best bet. Above all, think of this as an invitation to Geeky discussion in the Talkbacks below. So, here we go...

NOTE: THE BELOW REFERS ONLY TO THE CURRENTLY-IN-PROGRESS XBOX LIVE ONLINE MULTIPLAYER BETA. I haven't seen or played the entire, "finished" game yet.

I was extremely apprehensive about the new CALL OF DUTY game. I never played the first installment, adored the second one (despite its frustrating online lag), found the third game's personality...lacking, and was hopelessly addicted to the fourth one. However, CoD: WORLD AT WAR had developed negative word of mouth in the months leading to its reveal: game fans immediately dismissed it because it was developed by Tetryarch (who brought us the underwhelming CoD 3), and it was being wrapped around the same engine used in Cod 4: MODERN WARFARE ("It's the same game, set in World War II" they decried). And, to a degree, they're right. WORLD AT WAR feels a lot like MODERN WARFARE...set in World War II. But it's hard not to ask: isn't that inherently bitchin'? Menu designs, the "perks" system, class creation, etc. will all seem instantly familiar to CoD players (which also diminishes pesky learning curves considerably). But, if you loved MODERN WARFARE like me, all of this is a "good" thing. This isn't to imply COD: WAW is basically a mod of CoD 4 - WAW has personality and characteristics which help it to feel relatively distinct. But CoD 4's influence...is inescapable. Sound design is often eerie and sometimes chilling - notably the incessant barking of distant attack dogs, the metallic banshee-like scream of incoming artillery fire, and the unnerving mechanical "hum" of prowling tanks. WAW's graphics often recall CoD 4 in style and execution, but the game does manage to pull of a few unique tricks. Its sense of scale sometimes gives one pause (take a look at the sprawling environs of the "Roundhouse" level), and The Powers That Be have thrown quite a bit of aesthetic atmosphere into the mix (little nuances on moonlight nights, sunlight playing through motes of dust or smoke, etc.) One darkly hilarious addition this time around: CoD 4's dreaded helicopter dispatches have been replaced here with packs of attack dogs, which players can unleash after (I think) 7 straight kills. These dogs chase down other players on the map and savagely maul them to death - escalating the kill points of whomever unleashed them. It is possible for opposing players to defeat these dogs by either shooting them or stabbing them, although the animals move very quickly and have a way of being on your throat in no time. During one match last night, a few players reported seeing other players blown in half...their legless torsos attempting to drag themselves to safety. I haven't personally witnessed this, but it sounds like it's all kinds of fucked up and I can't wait to see it myself (provided it's not an urban legend). Occasional lag, and present-but-infrequent server disconnects are part of any CALL OF DUTY experience. Fans will be delighted to learn this element has been retained, and there's at least a chance you'll be blown offline during what'll likely be your best match. Gamers hoping for a massive reworking of game play here, or for oodles of fresh ideas, may find themselves frustrated or disappointed. Players joining the franchise for the first time with this game - or folks who simply can't get enough CoD - should find WORLD AT WAR an extremely solid, and visually dazzling, chapter in the franchise. At this juncture, nothing about CALL OF DUTY: WORLD AT WAR suggests it is Atomic Stink Bomb many feared it would be. It's a pleasant surprise, grand in well-realized scale and liberal in chaos and mean spirited carnage. Tetryarch has earned a fair amount of redemption here, and the Beta has convinced me to grab the full game upon its November 11 release - which was far from certain before going online with it yesterday. I can't wait to unlock my flamethrower...