I've been on a shooter mood lately, just wanna point guns to things on my screen and watch them blow up, plan to replay alot of shooters and play some that I never played before. After replaying Medal of Honor Allied Assault and Call of Duty 1, I got hungry to play other WWII shooters and oh boy... the disappointment.
I just avoided all WWII shooters for consoles, saw some footage from them and , honestly, they just look like inferior versions of Allied Assault or Call of Duty 1 made by the B team, with terrible controls and stiff as fuck shooting made for controllers. Just played the PC versions of the few available and avoided most of the garbage.
Call of Duty II - Regenerating health, respawning enemies that only stop once you step up on the magic triggers that stop the respawning machine, pinpoint accurate enemies that can hit you from the other side of the map with MP40s and weapons so accurate that you can snipe dudes with submachineguns, all the sins are here, however, I still enjoyed it, it is the last Call of Duty game that I still enjoyed. Despite all the dumbdown, this game has a lengthy campaign, there are many levels where they let you loose a little, letting you fight the way you want with just some basic guidance, for the most time you won't watch some bossy dude ass yelling what you need to do all the time, this sort of decline was still to come.
You are placed on a series of shooting setpieces but the game still expects you to be minimally competent with them, the stage of decline where the game plays itself and you the player is more or less a camaraman on the awesome Michael Bay movie would only really come with Call of Duty Modern Warfare. Throwing smoke grenades and running like crazy mowing down blind nazis with the high capacity soviet machinegun is just base fun, not incline on any way but still fun.
Medal of Honor Airborne - This one is so sad to see, the concept is really nice, you start the level on the sky and need to guide your parachute to a landing zone, you can land anywhere on the map so the levels aren't completely linear as they use to be on those sorts of games, there is just a catch, the maps are small and unremarkable as fuck. I had some fun parashutting right next the main objective and starting mowing down nazis one after the other with a trench gun but the fun doesn't last long. The game is short as fuck with very few levels and the levels that are available, most are generic villages, generic radar station, generic industrial zone, so uninspired that hurts and the game finishes so quick you don't notice. To think, somewhere, some fucker, paid 60 dollars for this excrement is hilarious. The shooting kinda sucks too, enemies don't react to being shot and the weapons, especially the submachineguns are underpowered as fuck.
EA wasn't really trying with this title. Actually, EA is a mystery for me, if they did popamole, that is actually expected from greedy asshole companies but they even half ass popamole when they are fucking competing with franchises with better brand recognition. I think they are a corporation run by Doctor Evil wannabes with shitty plans to conquer the world that didn't gone down yet because some tards buy a FIFA game every year. If you are popamole, be at least competent at it, popamole and incompetent is just an achievement. How to ruin franchises? EA wrote the manual for that.
Call of Duty World at War - The dumbdown transformation is complete on this one and I won't even waste my time with the rest of Call of Duty games if they are similar to this game. You maybe like those sorts of linear scripted shooters but man, anyone that buys a Call of Duty after Call of Duty 2 is a fucking moron, sorry, Activision is inserting their corporate shaft on your ass and you are just a little bitch taking it all the way. Call of Duty 2 had 26 missions, World at War has 13 missions, Activision is selling you half or a quarter of the games they used to make.
Their shit are creatively bankrupt too, making questionable if even the little time wasted with this garbage is worthy it, there are some unbelievable sheep that sometimes comment that it doesn't matter if a game isn't lengthy if it is good, from where did you take that from? How about short AND bad? If you are dealing with a company like Activision, that is a very realistic thing to expect.
Most of the missions on World at War are bog standard stuff that were done better on Call of Duty 2, the fact the game focus so much on the exploited to exhaustion cliches of the soviet front and the boring as fuck Pacific front doesn't help either. They add some small stuff like flamethrowers, you being able to call artillery strikes and the japs on the Pacific War campaign sometimes yell Banzai before charging you for a quicktime event, instant death on failure... that is it. Activision is literally half assing Call of Duty 2 with some skins changed for more than a decade and 20 millions tards buy this shit every year. The human race deserves what it gets. Only a nuclear war can solve this.
