What do you guys think? Was I too harsh on WWII? Too much credit to World at War? I like them both, just wish World War II could be less cringe overall and worked harder on the story. Other than that, I think it does have some underrated aspects that I heavily appreciate.
Personally, I did not like WWII. To me, WWII was false advertisement by Activision. For me, I grew up on classic CoD. I was in middle school when CoD 1 first came out. I loved CoD 1, CoD: UO, CoD: FH, CoD 2, CoD 2: TBRO, CoD 3. So when the developers went out on interview after interview talking about how CoD: WWII was a return to its roots, I was super excited. Years of exo-suit, wall running, futuristic space CoD just wasn't my vibe. The idea that they were "going back" to their roots, all I could think of was playing across the globe and representing different nations, seeing the bleakness, the cruelty, the darkness of the war through the eyes of different people, I was excited. Instead what they gave was an inaccurate, one sided portrayal of an overplayed theater of the war. And to me that was the biggest insult, they could've literally made WWII a remastered/remake of The Big Red One and that would've been a better game, because it covered the war all the way from North Africa to the end of the war. The characters were stereotypical and bland, especially when compared to the squad that you fight with in The Big Red One. The story was just a combination of different WW2 medias, like you said. The game felt more like a fast paced CoD version of Medal of Honor Allied Assault or Medal of Honor Frontline than like a classic CoD.
WW2 was fine. It was just a attempt to bring cod to the "boots on the ground" after people were tired of all the futuristic games. I still have yet to play it, and I would prefer this game over the new ones
World at War is certainly better, but people still glaze it too much. It's just the heavy metal badass of Call of Duty, not really the high art people often try to make it out to be.
WW2 is how media in general romanticize portrays the Second World War WAW is how it actually went down Edit: what I was trying to say was that WAW shows the brutality of war and yeah I do know WAW doesn’t depict the event 1 to 1
I think a more accurate way of putting it would be that WW2 is based on American cinema of that conflict (Band of Brothers, Saving Private Ryan, etc.), whereas World at War is based Downfall, a piece of German cinema about the collapse of the Third Reich (a time period that elicits discomfort at best, utter disgrace at worst, if you are German), as well With the Old Breed, a firsthand account of the Pacific Theatre written by veteran Eugene Sledge, specifically to dispel romantic notions about the war.
No because at least movies didn't make World War II look cringe like the game. Nobody was writing love letters on the transport ships heading to the beaches of Normandy, in real life it be too wet to write anything even their rifles were covered in protective plastic. I laughed out loud when I first saw that in the game like nobody was showing pictures of their girlfriends to each other, in real life they'd be too busy on the mission and scared realizing this might be their final minutes of their lives. I laughed the game was shoe horning cliche WW2 tropes.
The problem is you get a better understanding of the brutality and hopelessness of the war in 15 minutes worth of cutscenes in world at war than you do with hours of content in ww2.
I really think if WWII focused more efforts on their writing & characters to flesh out this world better it would've went down as one of the best COD campaigns and be different enough from WAW. It felt like it could've been a really great campaign that had a blend of classic (COD1-3) and a sprinkle of WAW with some elements of war horror. I enjoyed my time playing through the game again for this video when I ignored the cringe parts and instead just admired the levels and their design.
@@theWheezy I agree. Especially with the overall sentiment that the cast felt too plastic and like movie actors. I just want another beautifully gritty ww2 game lol
@@pleasanttoast3229 true, that was very good. When I first played the game I was definitely moved by some scenes. I wish more of the game was a bit more real feeling like that
Couldn't agree more. Played it when i was 10, hearing Reznov praises you is like hearing a proud dad (regardless of fucked up things you do in the game)
@@ryszakowy The Nazis actually did use Soviet captured weapons. Also Viet Cong did actually use German WWII weapons as well. There were former Waffen SS in the French Foreign Legion. There's a lot of things like this that happen.
@@ryszakowy The Nazis actually did use captured Soviet weapons. Also later on, Viet Cong used German weapons from WW2. There were former Waffen SS among the French Foreign Legion. Stuff happens.
@@ryszakowy The Nazis actually used captured Soviet Weapons. Viet Cong also used WWII German weapons as well. There were actually Waffen SS in the French Foreign Legion.
@@ryszakowy Hey, not sure if you knew this but the 352nd regiment for Germany on d-day was mostly made up of soldiers that were transferred from the Eastern front and a lot of them had Russian weapons on them.
Especially on Veteran WAW makes you feel like a soldier. The last mission as Roebuck as you defend your position in the castle had me actually stressing and feeling sweet relief when the bombers arrived. Then after dealing with Heart of the Reich for hours thanks to infinite grenades and spawns I spared no one and barely even died in the Reichstag. I felt a taste of what the Soviet’s felt, pure anger and frustration. Lastly the ending of seeing the Manhattan project and being told how many people died, then seeing the message of how it was made to honor the veterans of the past
Difficulty does make it more meaningful when you have to struggle just to beat a mission, leaves a bigger impact in the memorability section. Those grenades though are crazy 😭
@@snowman6645 The difference is you can stay behind teammates in the Shuri Castle last point. In Heart of the Reich, it feels like you are the only fucking one charging. No wonder the enemy AI keeps pinning the player down lol
I saved Polonsky. He was just a kid (albeit one that looks like a 30 year old) All that Roebuck wanted was for everyone to be able to go home, and him dying is bittersweet
WaW did not hold back. By tackling the two most brutal 'take no prisoners' theaters of the war, even showing graphic pictures and footage from the war itself it really set the mood as we dived into the war and all it's gory brutality. Honestly the campaign for me was more memorable than the multiplayer, the ending really packs a punch telling us the cost of this war.
As a zombies player, you know more than most that the old games have a thick, gritty atmosphere that hasn't been matched. WAW is amazing, and for what it lacks in fidelity is made up with that atmosphere. You believe you are the player that you are, and I feel it was harder to feel like I was "Red" in WW2. Even though in WAW you fought on multiple fronts, I still felt like I was the player character. It was horrifying and realistic for its time, and even though it doesn't look the greatest I believe it still holds up. As for the story of WW2, I thought it was great but I believe that if it wasn't for your LT Turner's sacrifice it would have been way worse. I did enjoy WW2, but I'm a sucker for old Treyarch.
@@PeartoKasane I think WAW final zombie map Der Rise sets up how Treyarch want to do zombie content. I feel like they should treat the zombie infection as something mysterious, not an overcomplicated plot scattered around multiple entries that is threaded by the thinnest canon connection between them. I completely drop out of the lore when the infection is something related to magic.
As a Russian, I appreciated the fact that WAW actually portrayed the Eastern front and the mentality of the Red Army Soldier. Soviet Soldiers upon entering the capital of an enemy that declared them subhuman had one thing on their mind: revenge. I believe that WAW encapsulates this theme of revenge very well.
The same thing our involvement in the Pacific theatre too, The Asiatic Pacific War was worse than even the Eastern Front as American soldiers and marines became hardened veterans fighting the Japanese during the island hopping campaign and the Japanese used banzai and infiltration tactics on American GIs who were islands such as Guadalcanal, Tarawa, Bougainville, Saipan, Peleliu and especially Iwo Jima and Okinawa
WW2 never was a bad campaign, it just never felt as authentic as WaW. The story wasn't bad, but it held back on the brutality and focused too heavily on characters and not enough on the world.
@@enriqueperezarce5485 just imagine which would make a better movie, waw is cheesy and cliché aka b movie war films while WW2 is like saving private ryan, waw is nostalgic I just replayed them all but the hard-core zombies and actually something to do made the zombies better
Ww2's campaign wasnt bad, but it felt extremly generic and safe, as if it was just phoning in a cheap rip off of saving private ryan and band of brothers. World at war is not only more unique in its take(although it has its influeces as well), but is also better executed and memorible.
it wasn't bad IT WAS TERRIBLE and just because vanguard came out and everyone saw what a complete failure of a game looks like doesn't make ww2 any beter
@@ryszakowy I still have no clue how people say that WW2 campaign is good. Its horribly innacurate, has only one front, lame ass safe writing (im looking at you "what, they let you serve in the army now?" line). At least they show an empty concentration camp, thats worth something i guess. In comparison to Vanguard it is much more servicable, but playing it feels like watching a 5/10 ww2 movie, average brainrot entertainment with minimal philosophical or historic value
@@Intrusive_Thought176 its accurate to the point where Americans and Germans are fighting in western Europe, everything beyond that, the weapons, uniforms, events are portrayed nothing like what was used or happening at the time. The only thing thats nicely done are the tanks, but the situations theyre in or how they perform is also bogus. Take the spy mission for example, the time the mission takes place makes no sense, there was heavy fighting in Paris already and 2/3rds of it was already liberated, the lights are all on at night, during heavy allied bombing runs (not an innacuracy necesarily, just very stupid) and it was the 4th infantry division liberating Paris, not the 1st. Moreover the guy in charge of the Paris occupation at the time wasnt some crazed villain guy as portrayed in the campaign, Dietrich von Choltitz, refused a direct order from Hitler to burn down Paris just cuz he thought its stupid (which it was) and has even the nickname of "Saviour of Paris". That is the events ONLY in ONE mission. As i said in my original statement, it is not very accurate. To close out tho i do realise i sound a bit like a "no fun" sorry sob, but i really dont mind sacrificing certain elements of historical accuracy to portray a cohesive story of a man in a war, i just wish it was even a little authentic, WAW wasnt accurate to the t either, but it was mostly in line with the events, dates and weapons use portrayed and wasnt written like something that sounds like it was for a 12yo, it really had something to say, while WW2 is just childish in almost every aspect Edit for typos
Same. I've played WAW more then any other Call of duty game. Like I think I played it five times. That's how good the campaign really is. But I really don't like horror.
For WW2 the best mission was the silent walk through the concentration/POW camp and as photos were taken it flashed real images of the camps. To take the player out of this action hero role and ground them in the reality non-combatants faced during World War 2 was done very well. I would like to see a World at War again in the new CoD engine, but frankly I don't think Activision and especially Xbox have the balls to depict the real war anymore.
This scène was Bad executed i don't know IS because they didn't want to show it but the camp was completly empty nothing no furniture like clothes of the prisonniers no dead corpse nothing
@@kg7162nah there were some guys tied up and mangled in that scene that had been left there, but for the storyline they said they marched all the people out of the camps
I don't necessarily think WW2 is bad, but it's obvious that it plays much "safer" than WAW,this becomes quite clear when we compare the atmosphere and scripted scenes of both games.Although it still remains cinematic,waw seems more natural when compared to ww2,and I believe that beyond the direct and natural dialogues ,the lack of cutscenes and predefined animations in waw also helps to immerse you in the game.
This is the point I would agree with most. Except they did crawl a little bit out of their comfort to not play it as safe, at least with showcasing things they had previously removed in their games like n*zi flags and intense gore (even though it's mostly in cinematics). It did have some intense moments like the flamethrower section I showed where prisoners were being burned alive. There are a lot of times where they dropped the ball though, could've done more with the concentration camps. Cutscenes did feel really cinematic and I always love crisp cutscenes like that, but they need to have their moments occasionally within game, especially the most important moments to the player like character deaths.
@@theWheezyFair enough,I just feel that WW2 could try to go further with some ideas, like the Camps and the situation of civilians during the conflict.I have to say, at least in this game you can see that the developers still tried to do something, unfortunately I can't say the same about Vanguard where the team seems to have given up halfway through the project.
True because the European theatre and Asiatic Pacific theatre were very different for American GIs, Both wars were simultaneous in fact many units that fought in Europe were then supposed to be transferred to the Pacific War for the final blow against Japan which was Operation Downfall which if it happened would've been larger than even D Day and cost 1 million dead if the Atomic Bombs weren't used in time
Correction: "Red" Hartsock is the main character of only one Brothers in Arms entry, which is Earned in Blood. In Road to Hill 30 and Hell's Highway, he's a major character, but not the main character. That's instead Matt Baker.
I consider him a main character, he’s a big piece of the entire story and I think any fan would agree after playing earned in blood. Hard to see him different. But yes major character is more proper, when I say “main” I don’t mean one highlighted character we play as.
Yeah because originally Matt Baker is the main character, Earned in blood was a "meanwhile" and show you what else was going on off screen while the events of the first game was happening still making Red a major character.
One thing that really stands out for me about WaW's campaign is that, besides the Makin, Peleliu and Stalingrad levels, almost all the other missions has the Axis on the back foot. It really hits home the vibe of the regular soldier just hoping that he survives the last few days of a war he feels is drawing to a close. A bright point about WW2's campaign though. That mission with the female resistance member was really nostalgic. I think it's the closest we ever got to an eighth-gen taste of the earlier cloak-and-dagger Medal of Honor games.
The biggest problem of CoD WW2 of that CoD2 showed the horrors of war far better than WW2 ever could. That game had so many technical limitations even compared to WaW and yet still holds up today.
And Ronald Red Daniels and Zussman would've fought alongside C Miller, Polosky and Sgt Roebuck because many units that fought in Europe including possibly the 1st Infantry Division were supposed to be transferred to the Pacific theatre after VE Day for the invasion of Japan codenamed Operation Downfall and Operation Coronet scheduled for late 1945 and 1946 but was canceled thanks to the Atomic Bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki
We need a massive WW2 game that show us everything Multiple campaigns through the eyes of all sides, without being scared of propaganda or crimes from them too Be a history lessons with a game attached to it Make the difficulty really hard, but death isn't the end of the mission, like in BF1 intro, show a name and a date, would make all of that really impactiful Making a game that show the true horror while playing the whole length of the war on different perspectives is truly the way to honor veterans
But only how nowadays political correctness does not anymore allow historic accuracy to show what war indeed is, claim "fearing would hurt people's feelings"
@@m0vnt41n5 hey hey hey, to be fair, capitalism does support wars as they are the most lucrative business were they could sell products (cough, weapons). And I'm not saying communist had done the same in the past, but, communist nowadays are nothing more than an idea, not a country or a major party anymore.
When you force a story, you kill the immersion, and immersion is what it’s all about. People didn’t need to know Sgt. Paul Jackson’s back story to connect to him, just fighting and sharing his hardships was sufficient.
World at war feels like a book. The unbridled feelings of man and that which hurts WW2 feels like a Hollywood movie you watch once enjoy it, but dont come away remembering things of the gameplay. Ww2 had so much potential but was gutted. Additionally, ww2 had a voiced protagonist, which isn't inherent lying a problem, but in waw, you have only yourself and the score to settle and process what happens
I'm going to spitball and say that WaW 's development team chose to portray WW2 as a surreal sociological horror story instead of a realistic military fiction story comes from a place of understanding how trauma warps memory. As the player character you feel stuck in a nightmare of war not a war game. Cutscenes are just maps with grisly irl WW2 footage mirroring how a soldier might remember their time in the service during the conflict.
I have an appreciation for the portrayal of heroism in WWII, but I do like WaW's atmosphere more overall. A story with a dark tone is more interesting to tell. A heroic story's good too, for how uplifting it can be.
Love Big Red One, probably my favorite childhood game from the COD era. Need to find a (good) way to replay it, emulation on PC for it isn't so good. Those Band of Brother actors were getting quite a few roles in the gaming world, love when games take inspiration, but yeah here it is too forced.
@@theWheezy i am going to see if my old xbox disc is compatible with the 360 still, its been a minute since ive touched it admittedly lol the actual character arch's of each person on that team is actually quite amazing. You see the shy and "incompetent" Kelly raise to the rank of sgt, leading his own squad. Brooklyn goes from a comedic wisguy to a bitter soul who you can tell has lost brothers along the way. There was so much of that lacking from WW2 it's like they have completely forgot how to write actual characters going through one of the worst wars ever. side note: the voice acting was actually quite great. Id never forget Kelly seeing a boat blow up next to him, screaming at smitty to paddle harder while smitty is deep in prayer outloud with explosions hitting right near the boat, that was pretty intense for back in the day honestly.
@@ReaverSenpai You should! Big Red One is crazy underrated. Those characters are all pretty well written. Lots of nostalgia too, game really has a classic vibe to it. Let me know how it goes!
Im not a fan of COD much at all, but World at War is one of my favorite shooters ever made. It held no punches back. I really appreciate the pros you talked about with WWII, because the scenery does look beautiful at some points!
One thing that I feel helps immerse me better into WaW’s campaign is the cutscenes (especially early on). While not showing the characters as much, the scenes briefly explaining the history, with clips of actual videos from the time set as great reminders of what was going on in the world at the time.
Ww2 was a return to the old pre modern warfare call of duty games. These were largely hollywood, Stephen Spielberg inspired games. Waw was probably my favorite ww2 game period because it broke that mold. And while i appreciated the nostalgia trip ww2 gave me with its writing. Games like waw are fewer and further between and I'd like to see more of that.
WaW's campaign is a timeless classic and a good showcase of the horrors of war. WWII's campaign is an unexpected but welcome surprise that decently portrays the romanticizing of war. Both are way better than anything after it.
World at war is the greatest and most immersive cod I have ever played. I played it when it came out at 8 years old and I was mortified. World War II is often glorified but the horrors and shear brutality of it all was successfully captured in this game. My great grandfather landed at Omaha on D-day and just putting those two together made me so proud of him all those years later (RIP). I know he would be upset about a game being made about the most horrific and terrifying day of his life, but it helped me to understand his unbelievable feat. The multi-view approach from different factions, no matter how inaccurate, made it feel so gritty and real. And after I finished it all as a small child, already uncomfortable, I was greeted by a random cutscene. I was like “oh boy a bonus mission” only to be absolutely terrified when I realized it was a SCREAMING ZOMBIE RUNNING AT ME. Thanks for coming to my ted talk this game is amazing
I'm sure there was plenty of Band of Brother enjoyers sitting through this game and thinking the same thing lol. It did have some cool moments though that we haven't seen enough of in WWII games.
WaW was the COD I put the most hours in and was by far my favourite. That being said, I genuinely enjoyed WW2's campaign and felt that they tried to bring things back to the days of WaW (of course, nothing will ever come close), I just wish they did more with it. It was still nice to notice little nods they put in to the old days
@@ryszakowy atleast ww2 was some what grounded, yes it was more heroic and romanticism than portraying brutality of war, but man, vanguard was nothing like either one of those, it was an alt history story trying to be grounded in something that it wasnt. It had no identity, atleast WW2 had something for it.
Really good video, this was my first UA-cam video I got to watch after I finished basic training so it’s cool to notice all the small details that I wouldn’t have noticed before.
To me the main difference between WW2 and WAW was the former seemed to showcase itself like a movie with the cinematic cutscenes are there to provide the main cast of characters and get a sense of who everyone’s personalities is like, and the in game cutscenes help give more screen time to flesh out the characters, even some of the quick time events all seemed to give a sort of epic badass main character being capable of anything and being a hero, all this feels like it was trying to portray it like it was on the big screen. Whereas the latter WAW approached it more of a documentary there’s no movie like cutscenes in any of the missions and are instead replaced by using real footage and photographs of the war all while Reznov/Roebuck are briefing you on what your current objective is at the moment, and there’s only if not a few scripted encounters but unlike WW2 where your character would go into a sort of scripted animation to pause the gameplay and resume its movie like type theme WAW never takes control away from the player and pauses the game to go into any movie like cutscene the scripted encounters in WAW happens when you are still in full control of the game which kind makes you feel like you aren’t the main character/Hero your just like everyone else here in the war trying to survive. And at the beginning and end of each mission there’s no in game cutscene that happens to give a (movie like traditional conclusion) but rather a simple fade to black again going with that more documentary esque like sequence. That’s why WAW feels more authentic to me because one was trying to present itself like it was a set on a stage and tell a traditional story of heroism, sacrifice and brotherhood which is not bad or wrong at all to give credit but watered the war down so that hero’s could be the focus. However The other presented itself like it was a camera man in the war personally to capture the sheer raw brutality, ruthlessness, and unfathomable destruction of war there we see both sides don’t really care about heroics but rather they just want end the war as soon as possible and they’ll achieve it by any means necessary even if that requires crossing some serious moral lines to get there. And the main characters aren’t the main focus at all there not the traditional main characters like Harry Potter, Aragorn, Luke Skywalker there not like these hero’s where the plot is dependent on them, no the focus is about the war and how it affects everything and everyone around it nobody emerges and transforms into some sort of hero but becomes more and more weary, tired and broken from the fighting and just push forward because that’s all they can do.
World at War will always be my favorite cod and the most realistic/immersive one for me. I liked cod ww2 for the story building and the environments you played thru the game. But it will never live up to WAW. COD 2 is also a very good ww2 game, and I wish they would remaster it along with cod was.
I don’t think COD WW2 campaign wasn’t bad, but it doesn’t hold a candle to World at War. It’s just not as dark and gritty when you compare both games. The other thing I didn’t like about WW2 is that you only play as the Americans for the entire campaign.
WW 2 is what i call Hollywood's depiction of World War 2. Action sequences, the obligatory 'Co protagonist best friend' character for example. WAW is more a kin to how the mess actually went with less exaggeration action scenes. WaW shows how hate and revenge would drive people to do something they might had never done in times of peace. Then,there is Vanguard. We don't talk about Vanguard.
All good but Red wasn't the main character in all games, (5:49) In first Game (Road to Hill 30) Baker was the main character whole Red was one of his squad mates In the second game (Earned In Blood) we follow Red! In the third gam, Hells Highways (we again play as Baker, but red is also around us most of the times)
One thing that separates waw with other cods were the cutscenes. The way they blend irl clips of ww2 to those cutscenes were amazing. It also made my love history and learn more about ww2 itself.
Ones a Hollywood Style game with no heart or soul. and ones one that didn't need much of a story and made more of an impact it truly is more like horror of a war than that game can ever depict.
I think a blend of WaW and CoD2 could make for one of the best war games. WaW level gritty with CoD2's unapologetic battles would be a spectacle. (There are mods for CoD2 to attempt that but modding that game is awful to do)
Throught WAW as the marines they did give us alot of context throughout the cutscenes on how the marines felt during the War. You get the sense of the muddiness and long hours of fighting which is greatly portrayed
Honestly WW2 might have one of the best campaigns in a CoD game besides United Offensive and WaW. It had a warm, familiar vibe, feels like a video game adaptation of productions like Band of Brothers and Saving Private Ryan, or a spiritual continuation of Medal of Honor and Brothers in Arms. I actually find myself come back and play it every once in a while, in the meantime I stay very clear from the multiplayer part of the game as it is completely the opposite of everything I said. I think people were too harsh on it when it came out, even when it comes to the campaign. It actually did some good work that unfortunately not a lot of people appreciate. In a way, it was the last CoD game and last FPS game we got in general where actually men were portrayed as men, instead of soft genderfluid what-have-yous.
It's nice these days how often people bring up Brothers In Arms. At the time the games seemed to be super niche and you barely ever met anyone else who played them, or if you did it was the many many kids who quit forever the moment they realised Matt Baker isn't a bullet sponge and can't rambo through missions alone.
I haven't actually played either of them but WaW seemed like you feel as just a soldier. Where as World War II seemed like we are the main character and a hero, almost in a movie.
5:12 well imma be honest, incoming is the best way to say somethings coming especially in a ww3 game, i dont think that one is a refrence, but the other ones prolly are
The main difference between Europe and the Pacific Theater that I think is really well portrayed in WaW is the fact that most fights were usually against bunker systems and guerrilla fighters instead of massive open battles. Yes there were invasions but most of the theater was basically hopping from island to island and clearing the IJA. In Europe there were a lot of large scale battles just because of how much open land there was. It would’ve been hard to execute an operation like Market Garden and Barbarossa because of how small Japan is comparatively. And that’s what I really liked about WaW compared to WWII.
I wanted to touch on the hero vs nightmare talking point. This is sort of touching on the idea as a whole and not just the video (which was great btw). I think there is something heroic and selfless if you decided to join any armed forces and went to fight. The idea of going to war is terrifying and you will likely come back home in a body bag. The war itself is the nightmare and something no one should ever have to go through. The reality of war is death, loud sounds, filth, crimes, etc and should never be hidden from view. There are also exceptions to the hero idea too. A Nazi soldier is not a hero but a criminal while an American soldier is more on the side of hero. That's just how I see it though.
World at war was actually a world war. You fought in the Pacific and the Eastern front, which aren't commonly shown in games. In WW2 its just america vs germany in france and western germany despite calling it ww2
@Coltydabrewski maybe something more specific. If I'm just getting a western front game, then don't call it ww2. I'm expecting more than 1 front from a ww2 game
@@Coltydabrewski game that uses signature garand *ping obsessively and only has european theater with america vs germany doesn't deserve to call itself WORLD war 2 european assault is taken by medal of honor but any other set of words associated with americans in europe would fit much better united offensive - also had more than one lousy campaign finest hour - sounds great big red one - literally about big red one roads to victory - still implies more than one lousy america fuck yeah campaign ANYTHING by your WRONG logic if i make a game that happens in 1942 and is about farming i get to call it WORLD WAR 2, what are you 12?
Two phenomenal games imho Waw: shows warcrimes from both sides and doesn't shy away from using graphic footage from ww2 Ww2: is more heroic version as in "America rahh" type of story
The way I saw it, COD WAW is just Come and See, Enemy at the gates, Stalingrad and Windtalkers if it was a game and 10 times darker , while COD WW2 is Saving Private Ryan with hints of Band Of Brothers, this is why WAW will always be goated it showed what war is really like, it doesn’t show the typical let’s go on a heroic adventure into the unknown story rather it gives off an every man for himself situation since at any time your brothers in arms could be taken away from you
the games showed how certain countries treated each other during the war, Germany was more lenient towards america than russia, japan was just aggressive overall during the pacific theater.
Me as a kid i had world at war final fronts on PS2, only hearing rumors of zombies in the main game waw and dying to get it, but bo1 was my first zombie experience wnd waw was my second, hearing from second hand sources of beating the game to get zombies so i olayed for 9hrs all day saturday to get it and was so happy to play
Someone should mod WW2 and make the gore more likely to happen. I'm sure they retained the old "death" script in the default.ff file since it is the same graphic engine, they should have some code preventing it to happen most of the time.
World at War is unbeatable. But I did still enjoy the campaign in WW2. The cutscenes were really good and I liked the sense of comradery between the characters. It felt more like a video game adaptation of Band of Brothers
I’d say ww2 in the tank mission was kinda good sure I didn’t like how all the Sherman’s had a 76mm gun but it captured how the Sherman tank fared against their German counter parts it’s not easy to be on the end of a long 75 or 88mm canon that can rip you to shreds in one shot but you could use your mobility and terrain against these German tanks
What i like about waw is that you never feel like a hero but more of a regular soldier being called for duty, you're always on the verge of surviving, on the soviet side you got reznov and chernov both of them act as a moral compass weather you're viewed as a soldier that everyone should inspire to be like or a blood thirsty soldier that's just as unforgiving as the nazis
Throw in call of duty 3 and big red 1. BIG RED 1 is my personal favorite of all the call of duty games. Also it gets over shadowed the most like opposing fronts.
A good comparison would be ww2 being band of brothers while waw is the pacific. One chooses to display just how heroic the greatest generation were and the brotherhood they had got them through the day while the other shows how truly horrifying war can be
Both campaigns were amazing despite being Polar Opposites. One depicting the Horrors of War and the other showcasing the Heroism and Bravery of those who fought in War.
What do you guys think? Was I too harsh on WWII? Too much credit to World at War? I like them both, just wish World War II could be less cringe overall and worked harder on the story. Other than that, I think it does have some underrated aspects that I heavily appreciate.
Personally, I did not like WWII. To me, WWII was false advertisement by Activision. For me, I grew up on classic CoD. I was in middle school when CoD 1 first came out. I loved CoD 1, CoD: UO, CoD: FH, CoD 2, CoD 2: TBRO, CoD 3. So when the developers went out on interview after interview talking about how CoD: WWII was a return to its roots, I was super excited. Years of exo-suit, wall running, futuristic space CoD just wasn't my vibe. The idea that they were "going back" to their roots, all I could think of was playing across the globe and representing different nations, seeing the bleakness, the cruelty, the darkness of the war through the eyes of different people, I was excited. Instead what they gave was an inaccurate, one sided portrayal of an overplayed theater of the war. And to me that was the biggest insult, they could've literally made WWII a remastered/remake of The Big Red One and that would've been a better game, because it covered the war all the way from North Africa to the end of the war. The characters were stereotypical and bland, especially when compared to the squad that you fight with in The Big Red One. The story was just a combination of different WW2 medias, like you said. The game felt more like a fast paced CoD version of Medal of Honor Allied Assault or Medal of Honor Frontline than like a classic CoD.
WW2 was fine. It was just a attempt to bring cod to the "boots on the ground" after people were tired of all the futuristic games. I still have yet to play it, and I would prefer this game over the new ones
World at War is certainly better, but people still glaze it too much. It's just the heavy metal badass of Call of Duty, not really the high art people often try to make it out to be.
Vs vanguard
if anything you were too good to ww2
WW2 is how media in general romanticize portrays the Second World War
WAW is how it actually went down
Edit: what I was trying to say was that WAW shows the brutality of war and yeah I do know WAW doesn’t depict the event 1 to 1
Pretty much lol
I think a more accurate way of putting it would be that WW2 is based on American cinema of that conflict (Band of Brothers, Saving Private Ryan, etc.), whereas World at War is based Downfall, a piece of German cinema about the collapse of the Third Reich (a time period that elicits discomfort at best, utter disgrace at worst, if you are German), as well With the Old Breed, a firsthand account of the Pacific Theatre written by veteran Eugene Sledge, specifically to dispel romantic notions about the war.
@@360Nomad put in that list also come and see for the soviet side
No because at least movies didn't make World War II look cringe like the game. Nobody was writing love letters on the transport ships heading to the beaches of Normandy, in real life it be too wet to write anything even their rifles were covered in protective plastic. I laughed out loud when I first saw that in the game like nobody was showing pictures of their girlfriends to each other, in real life they'd be too busy on the mission and scared realizing this might be their final minutes of their lives. I laughed the game was shoe horning cliche WW2 tropes.
@@360Nomad there's also one level in WAW called Downfall
The problem is you get a better understanding of the brutality and hopelessness of the war in 15 minutes worth of cutscenes in world at war than you do with hours of content in ww2.
As another Dylan and huge ww2 nerd I 100% agree
I really think if WWII focused more efforts on their writing & characters to flesh out this world better it would've went down as one of the best COD campaigns and be different enough from WAW. It felt like it could've been a really great campaign that had a blend of classic (COD1-3) and a sprinkle of WAW with some elements of war horror. I enjoyed my time playing through the game again for this video when I ignored the cringe parts and instead just admired the levels and their design.
@@theWheezy I agree. Especially with the overall sentiment that the cast felt too plastic and like movie actors. I just want another beautifully gritty ww2 game lol
Yeah, but WW2 did the concentration camps at the end very well, showcasing the horrors of the camps very well.
@@pleasanttoast3229 true, that was very good. When I first played the game I was definitely moved by some scenes. I wish more of the game was a bit more real feeling like that
World At War felt so immersive that I felt scared of disappointing Reznov
That is impossible with how much he gasses you up.
@@DeadSpaceWing Reznov even Glazes you while talking about you dieing in BO1
@@allanorme2093 I mean to be fair- With the amount of shit Petrenko lived through it's justified
Me too
Couldn't agree more. Played it when i was 10, hearing Reznov praises you is like hearing a proud dad (regardless of fucked up things you do in the game)
One thing for sure: both of these two games combined did a better job at portraying WWII than Vanguard ever could.
russian ppsh on the beaches of normandy pretty much killed all pretense of ww2 portrayal
@@ryszakowy The Nazis actually did use Soviet captured weapons. Also Viet Cong did actually use German WWII weapons as well. There were former Waffen SS in the French Foreign Legion. There's a lot of things like this that happen.
@@ryszakowy The Nazis actually did use captured Soviet weapons. Also later on, Viet Cong used German weapons from WW2. There were former Waffen SS among the French Foreign Legion. Stuff happens.
@@ryszakowy The Nazis actually used captured Soviet Weapons. Viet Cong also used WWII German weapons as well. There were actually Waffen SS in the French Foreign Legion.
@@ryszakowy Hey, not sure if you knew this but the 352nd regiment for Germany on d-day was mostly made up of soldiers that were transferred from the Eastern front and a lot of them had Russian weapons on them.
Especially on Veteran WAW makes you feel like a soldier. The last mission as Roebuck as you defend your position in the castle had me actually stressing and feeling sweet relief when the bombers arrived. Then after dealing with Heart of the Reich for hours thanks to infinite grenades and spawns I spared no one and barely even died in the Reichstag. I felt a taste of what the Soviet’s felt, pure anger and frustration. Lastly the ending of seeing the Manhattan project and being told how many people died, then seeing the message of how it was made to honor the veterans of the past
Difficulty does make it more meaningful when you have to struggle just to beat a mission, leaves a bigger impact in the memorability section. Those grenades though are crazy 😭
Defending the position was actually surprisingly easy on veteran but the final eastern mission is what really got me
@@snowman6645 The difference is you can stay behind teammates in the Shuri Castle last point. In Heart of the Reich, it feels like you are the only fucking one charging. No wonder the enemy AI keeps pinning the player down lol
War isn't fair, but a video game should be.
I saved Polonsky. He was just a kid (albeit one that looks like a 30 year old)
All that Roebuck wanted was for everyone to be able to go home, and him dying is bittersweet
WAW: All Quiet on the Western Front
WW2: Saving Private Ryan
That's the best way to describe these 2 games
I think Private Ryan is a lot more realistic than WW2 is.
Saving Ryan's Privates
COD WW2 is less like saving private ryan and more like those 40s and 50s Hollywood WW2 propaganda movies
Vanguard: The Avengers (but like a shitty knockoff version)
@@GLC48our "Defenders" movie😁
WaW did not hold back. By tackling the two most brutal 'take no prisoners' theaters of the war, even showing graphic pictures and footage from the war itself it really set the mood as we dived into the war and all it's gory brutality. Honestly the campaign for me was more memorable than the multiplayer, the ending really packs a punch telling us the cost of this war.
the pre-mission cutscenes really did help set the tone. loved them.
As a zombies player, you know more than most that the old games have a thick, gritty atmosphere that hasn't been matched. WAW is amazing, and for what it lacks in fidelity is made up with that atmosphere. You believe you are the player that you are, and I feel it was harder to feel like I was "Red" in WW2. Even though in WAW you fought on multiple fronts, I still felt like I was the player character. It was horrifying and realistic for its time, and even though it doesn't look the greatest I believe it still holds up. As for the story of WW2, I thought it was great but I believe that if it wasn't for your LT Turner's sacrifice it would have been way worse. I did enjoy WW2, but I'm a sucker for old Treyarch.
Makes me mess when Zombies was more simplistic, no complicated magic shtick and multiple timelines.
ok
@@PeartoKasane I think WAW final zombie map Der Rise sets up how Treyarch want to do zombie content. I feel like they should treat the zombie infection as something mysterious, not an overcomplicated plot scattered around multiple entries that is threaded by the thinnest canon connection between them. I completely drop out of the lore when the infection is something related to magic.
@@PeartoKasane preach
@@cloudynguyen6527 for me, zombies lore died in moon
As a Russian, I appreciated the fact that WAW actually portrayed the Eastern front and the mentality of the Red Army Soldier. Soviet Soldiers upon entering the capital of an enemy that declared them subhuman had one thing on their mind: revenge. I believe that WAW encapsulates this theme of revenge very well.
I loved the Russian side of WAW more than any cod game out there. Never saw or heard anything like it
@@Only_Carmine it’s not depicted much in other video games.
The same thing our involvement in the Pacific theatre too, The Asiatic Pacific War was worse than even the Eastern Front as American soldiers and marines became hardened veterans fighting the Japanese during the island hopping campaign and the Japanese used banzai and infiltration tactics on American GIs who were islands such as Guadalcanal, Tarawa, Bougainville, Saipan, Peleliu and especially Iwo Jima and Okinawa
@@Voucher765 I wouldn’t say the pacific front was worse than the eastern front, but I get your point.
@@Voucher765I think that nothing compares to the eastern front my friend, even the Pacific war
WW2 never was a bad campaign, it just never felt as authentic as WaW. The story wasn't bad, but it held back on the brutality and focused too heavily on characters and not enough on the world.
It's a better storyline and better zombies
@@Laquintainnroom217Nope it’s not a better storyline, I do believe some aspects are up to par or better then world at war but overall no
@@enriqueperezarce5485 just imagine which would make a better movie, waw is cheesy and cliché aka b movie war films while WW2 is like saving private ryan, waw is nostalgic I just replayed them all but the hard-core zombies and actually something to do made the zombies better
@@Laquintainnroom217 No, WW2 is comedy film and WaW is documentary film.
@@august4215blinded by nostalgia
Ww2's campaign wasnt bad, but it felt extremly generic and safe, as if it was just phoning in a cheap rip off of saving private ryan and band of brothers. World at war is not only more unique in its take(although it has its influeces as well), but is also better executed and memorible.
it wasn't bad
IT WAS TERRIBLE
and just because vanguard came out and everyone saw what a complete failure of a game looks like
doesn't make ww2 any beter
@@ryszakowy I still have no clue how people say that WW2 campaign is good. Its horribly innacurate, has only one front, lame ass safe writing (im looking at you "what, they let you serve in the army now?" line). At least they show an empty concentration camp, thats worth something i guess. In comparison to Vanguard it is much more servicable, but playing it feels like watching a 5/10 ww2 movie, average brainrot entertainment with minimal philosophical or historic value
@@FlyshBungo2its not that inaccurate
@@Intrusive_Thought176 its accurate to the point where Americans and Germans are fighting in western Europe, everything beyond that, the weapons, uniforms, events are portrayed nothing like what was used or happening at the time. The only thing thats nicely done are the tanks, but the situations theyre in or how they perform is also bogus. Take the spy mission for example, the time the mission takes place makes no sense, there was heavy fighting in Paris already and 2/3rds of it was already liberated, the lights are all on at night, during heavy allied bombing runs (not an innacuracy necesarily, just very stupid) and it was the 4th infantry division liberating Paris, not the 1st. Moreover the guy in charge of the Paris occupation at the time wasnt some crazed villain guy as portrayed in the campaign, Dietrich von Choltitz, refused a direct order from Hitler to burn down Paris just cuz he thought its stupid (which it was) and has even the nickname of "Saviour of Paris". That is the events ONLY in ONE mission. As i said in my original statement, it is not very accurate. To close out tho i do realise i sound a bit like a "no fun" sorry sob, but i really dont mind sacrificing certain elements of historical accuracy to portray a cohesive story of a man in a war, i just wish it was even a little authentic, WAW wasnt accurate to the t either, but it was mostly in line with the events, dates and weapons use portrayed and wasnt written like something that sounds like it was for a 12yo, it really had something to say, while WW2 is just childish in almost every aspect
Edit for typos
@@FlyshBungo2 so you're whole comment proved me right
Thanks
Waw was incredible. I played cod4 but Waw is the game that got me hooked.
Same. I've played WAW more then any other Call of duty game. Like I think I played it five times. That's how good the campaign really is. But I really don't like horror.
It’s still crazy in the opening cutscene in world at war, you see real execution footage from the Japanese
The start of the Russian campaign in world at war is the closest video game adaptation we have for the eastern front in Europe.
For WW2 the best mission was the silent walk through the concentration/POW camp and as photos were taken it flashed real images of the camps. To take the player out of this action hero role and ground them in the reality non-combatants faced during World War 2 was done very well.
I would like to see a World at War again in the new CoD engine, but frankly I don't think Activision and especially Xbox have the balls to depict the real war anymore.
We need treyarch for it
@@Korben-c5x The current Treyarch have no balls.
This scène was Bad executed i don't know IS because they didn't want to show it but the camp was completly empty nothing no furniture like clothes of the prisonniers no dead corpse nothing
271k 🤫
@@kg7162nah there were some guys tied up and mangled in that scene that had been left there, but for the storyline they said they marched all the people out of the camps
I don't necessarily think WW2 is bad, but it's obvious that it plays much "safer" than WAW,this becomes quite clear when we compare the atmosphere and scripted scenes of both games.Although it still remains cinematic,waw seems more natural when compared to ww2,and I believe that beyond the direct and natural dialogues ,the lack of cutscenes and predefined animations in waw also helps to immerse you in the game.
This is the point I would agree with most. Except they did crawl a little bit out of their comfort to not play it as safe, at least with showcasing things they had previously removed in their games like n*zi flags and intense gore (even though it's mostly in cinematics). It did have some intense moments like the flamethrower section I showed where prisoners were being burned alive. There are a lot of times where they dropped the ball though, could've done more with the concentration camps. Cutscenes did feel really cinematic and I always love crisp cutscenes like that, but they need to have their moments occasionally within game, especially the most important moments to the player like character deaths.
@@theWheezyFair enough,I just feel that WW2 could try to go further with some ideas, like the Camps and the situation of civilians during the conflict.I have to say, at least in this game you can see that the developers still tried to do something, unfortunately I can't say the same about Vanguard where the team seems to have given up halfway through the project.
No it was terrible.
True because the European theatre and Asiatic Pacific theatre were very different for American GIs, Both wars were simultaneous in fact many units that fought in Europe were then supposed to be transferred to the Pacific War for the final blow against Japan which was Operation Downfall which if it happened would've been larger than even D Day and cost 1 million dead if the Atomic Bombs weren't used in time
@@Voucher765 Iceberg was already larger than D-Day at that point
1:53 "Maybe it's more catered to the time it was released," is such a sad phrase in this context.
Correction: "Red" Hartsock is the main character of only one Brothers in Arms entry, which is Earned in Blood. In Road to Hill 30 and Hell's Highway, he's a major character, but not the main character. That's instead Matt Baker.
I consider him a main character, he’s a big piece of the entire story and I think any fan would agree after playing earned in blood. Hard to see him different. But yes major character is more proper, when I say “main” I don’t mean one highlighted character we play as.
Yeah because originally Matt Baker is the main character, Earned in blood was a "meanwhile" and show you what else was going on off screen while the events of the first game was happening still making Red a major character.
One thing that really stands out for me about WaW's campaign is that, besides the Makin, Peleliu and Stalingrad levels, almost all the other missions has the Axis on the back foot. It really hits home the vibe of the regular soldier just hoping that he survives the last few days of a war he feels is drawing to a close.
A bright point about WW2's campaign though. That mission with the female resistance member was really nostalgic. I think it's the closest we ever got to an eighth-gen taste of the earlier cloak-and-dagger Medal of Honor games.
The biggest problem of CoD WW2 of that CoD2 showed the horrors of war far better than WW2 ever could. That game had so many technical limitations even compared to WaW and yet still holds up today.
And Ronald Red Daniels and Zussman would've fought alongside C Miller, Polosky and Sgt Roebuck because many units that fought in Europe including possibly the 1st Infantry Division were supposed to be transferred to the Pacific theatre after VE Day for the invasion of Japan codenamed Operation Downfall and Operation Coronet scheduled for late 1945 and 1946 but was canceled thanks to the Atomic Bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki
0:39 to the ring to the pen to the king🗣🔥🗣🔥🗣💯💯
I understood that reference
We need a massive WW2 game that show us everything
Multiple campaigns through the eyes of all sides, without being scared of propaganda or crimes from them too
Be a history lessons with a game attached to it
Make the difficulty really hard, but death isn't the end of the mission, like in BF1 intro, show a name and a date, would make all of that really impactiful
Making a game that show the true horror while playing the whole length of the war on different perspectives is truly the way to honor veterans
But only how nowadays political correctness does not anymore allow historic accuracy to show what war indeed is, claim "fearing would hurt people's feelings"
You wanted to create a good piece of media but, what if, the politics and capitalism says no?
@@El.fish.the.chocolate Just politics. And leftists such as yourself.
@@m0vnt41n5 hey hey hey, to be fair, capitalism does support wars as they are the most lucrative business were they could sell products (cough, weapons).
And I'm not saying communist had done the same in the past, but, communist nowadays are nothing more than an idea, not a country or a major party anymore.
When you force a story, you kill the immersion, and immersion is what it’s all about. People didn’t need to know Sgt. Paul Jackson’s back story to connect to him, just fighting and sharing his hardships was sufficient.
Say what you will about WWII, Vanguard makes it look like Citizen Kane.
I was thinking that.
no it doesn't it's still bad and just because there's a worse game - it doesn't make ww2 better, it's still terrible
@@ryszakowy yes exactly, that's what I'm saying, by *comparison* it's basically high art. On it's own it's mediocre, that's how bad vanguard is.
@@ryszakowynah ww2 still better than vanguard
@@Intrusive_Thought176no shit, my own meat is more fun to beat than vanguard
World at war feels like a book. The unbridled feelings of man and that which hurts
WW2 feels like a Hollywood movie you watch once enjoy it, but dont come away remembering things of the gameplay.
Ww2 had so much potential but was gutted.
Additionally, ww2 had a voiced protagonist, which isn't inherent lying a problem, but in waw, you have only yourself and the score to settle and process what happens
You know dimitri also speaks right ? in Black Ops 1 ?
@@Man77772Not in waw tho
And BO is a completely different case as it needed a voiced protagonist for narrative
If WaW had civilians like Black Ops did, it would have sold the theme even more but then it probably would have cause legit PTSD.
and then ww2 FORCES a scene with german civilians
just to tick the box of great american hero
I'm going to spitball and say that WaW 's development team chose to portray WW2 as a surreal sociological horror story instead of a realistic military fiction story comes from a place of understanding how trauma warps memory. As the player character you feel stuck in a nightmare of war not a war game. Cutscenes are just maps with grisly irl WW2 footage mirroring how a soldier might remember their time in the service during the conflict.
World at War was huge in making me see at least some of what these soldiers went through.
I have an appreciation for the portrayal of heroism in WWII, but I do like WaW's atmosphere more overall. A story with a dark tone is more interesting to tell. A heroic story's good too, for how uplifting it can be.
COD: Big Red One had actual actors from band of brothers and still didn't throw out pointless references lmfao
Love Big Red One, probably my favorite childhood game from the COD era. Need to find a (good) way to replay it, emulation on PC for it isn't so good. Those Band of Brother actors were getting quite a few roles in the gaming world, love when games take inspiration, but yeah here it is too forced.
@@theWheezy i am going to see if my old xbox disc is compatible with the 360 still, its been a minute since ive touched it admittedly lol the actual character arch's of each person on that team is actually quite amazing. You see the shy and "incompetent" Kelly raise to the rank of sgt, leading his own squad. Brooklyn goes from a comedic wisguy to a bitter soul who you can tell has lost brothers along the way. There was so much of that lacking from WW2 it's like they have completely forgot how to write actual characters going through one of the worst wars ever. side note: the voice acting was actually quite great. Id never forget Kelly seeing a boat blow up next to him, screaming at smitty to paddle harder while smitty is deep in prayer outloud with explosions hitting right near the boat, that was pretty intense for back in the day honestly.
@@ReaverSenpai You should! Big Red One is crazy underrated. Those characters are all pretty well written. Lots of nostalgia too, game really has a classic vibe to it. Let me know how it goes!
@@theWheezy
It’s on steam actually, just wait for a good sale to buy it. I got it at under 10 dollars from what I can remember. Comes with cod 2 also
I wish COD 2: the Big Red One was more in different platfrom than being ps2 exclusive. That game is what i started COD.
Im not a fan of COD much at all, but World at War is one of my favorite shooters ever made. It held no punches back. I really appreciate the pros you talked about with WWII, because the scenery does look beautiful at some points!
🙏🏻
I’m so glad I found your channel
One thing that I feel helps immerse me better into WaW’s campaign is the cutscenes (especially early on). While not showing the characters as much, the scenes briefly explaining the history, with clips of actual videos from the time set as great reminders of what was going on in the world at the time.
Ww2 was a return to the old pre modern warfare call of duty games. These were largely hollywood, Stephen Spielberg inspired games. Waw was probably my favorite ww2 game period because it broke that mold. And while i appreciated the nostalgia trip ww2 gave me with its writing. Games like waw are fewer and further between and I'd like to see more of that.
WaW's campaign is a timeless classic and a good showcase of the horrors of war. WWII's campaign is an unexpected but welcome surprise that decently portrays the romanticizing of war. Both are way better than anything after it.
If they added a dude getting burnt alive crying for his mom then that'd definitely send a shiver down my spine
Fury?
Red Orchestra 2. Both Soviet and Russian factions have some of the most gruesome voice lines for a character dying.
World at war is the greatest and most immersive cod I have ever played. I played it when it came out at 8 years old and I was mortified. World War II is often glorified but the horrors and shear brutality of it all was successfully captured in this game. My great grandfather landed at Omaha on D-day and just putting those two together made me so proud of him all those years later (RIP). I know he would be upset about a game being made about the most horrific and terrifying day of his life, but it helped me to understand his unbelievable feat. The multi-view approach from different factions, no matter how inaccurate, made it feel so gritty and real. And after I finished it all as a small child, already uncomfortable, I was greeted by a random cutscene. I was like “oh boy a bonus mission” only to be absolutely terrified when I realized it was a SCREAMING ZOMBIE RUNNING AT ME. Thanks for coming to my ted talk this game is amazing
It's funny you mentioned Band of Brothers because I said to my friends that CoD WW2 felt like a bad Band of Brothers episode
IMO, there's no bad Band of Brothers episode.
I'm sure there was plenty of Band of Brother enjoyers sitting through this game and thinking the same thing lol. It did have some cool moments though that we haven't seen enough of in WWII games.
Babe wake up, Wheezy uploaded
To Lengineer's babe, he indeed uploaded
She will watch it in morning
WaW was the COD I put the most hours in and was by far my favourite. That being said, I genuinely enjoyed WW2's campaign and felt that they tried to bring things back to the days of WaW (of course, nothing will ever come close), I just wish they did more with it. It was still nice to notice little nods they put in to the old days
back in 2017, we all hated on WW2 saying how bad it was compared to WAW, then we got vanguard... shoulda just remade waw.
just because vanguard is even worse
doesn't make ww2 any better
it's still the same crap it was
@@ryszakowy atleast ww2 was some what grounded, yes it was more heroic and romanticism than portraying brutality of war, but man, vanguard was nothing like either one of those, it was an alt history story trying to be grounded in something that it wasnt. It had no identity, atleast WW2 had something for it.
Yeah Vanguard made WW2 look like a masterpiece.
You say mention that in ww2 that the devs add a few quotes from band of brothers but in waw they use the whole of the intro from enemy at the gates
there is no WW2 game like COD WAW that game feel so surreal playing it yet very grounded in reality
Bro how are you everywhere
@DogeickBateman I got too much time on my hand I am jobless thanks to the current world economy
Well like in defence of some of the voice lines any soldier would yell incoming with inbound artillery
Really good video, this was my first UA-cam video I got to watch after I finished basic training so it’s cool to notice all the small details that I wouldn’t have noticed before.
To me the main difference between WW2 and WAW was the former seemed to showcase itself like a movie with the cinematic cutscenes are there to provide the main cast of characters and get a sense of who everyone’s personalities is like, and the in game cutscenes help give more screen time to flesh out the characters, even some of the quick time events all seemed to give a sort of epic badass main character being capable of anything and being a hero, all this feels like it was trying to portray it like it was on the big screen. Whereas the latter WAW approached it more of a documentary there’s no movie like cutscenes in any of the missions and are instead replaced by using real footage and photographs of the war all while Reznov/Roebuck are briefing you on what your current objective is at the moment, and there’s only if not a few scripted encounters but unlike WW2 where your character would go into a sort of scripted animation to pause the gameplay and resume its movie like type theme WAW never takes control away from the player and pauses the game to go into any movie like cutscene the scripted encounters in WAW happens when you are still in full control of the game which kind makes you feel like you aren’t the main character/Hero your just like everyone else here in the war trying to survive. And at the beginning and end of each mission there’s no in game cutscene that happens to give a (movie like traditional conclusion) but rather a simple fade to black again going with that more documentary esque like sequence.
That’s why WAW feels more authentic to me because one was trying to present itself like it was a set on a stage and tell a traditional story of heroism, sacrifice and brotherhood which is not bad or wrong at all to give credit but watered the war down so that hero’s could be the focus. However The other presented itself like it was a camera man in the war personally to capture the sheer raw brutality, ruthlessness, and unfathomable destruction of war there we see both sides don’t really care about heroics but rather they just want end the war as soon as possible and they’ll achieve it by any means necessary even if that requires crossing some serious moral lines to get there. And the main characters aren’t the main focus at all there not the traditional main characters like Harry Potter, Aragorn, Luke Skywalker there not like these hero’s where the plot is dependent on them, no the focus is about the war and how it affects everything and everyone around it nobody emerges and transforms into some sort of hero but becomes more and more weary, tired and broken from the fighting and just push forward because that’s all they can do.
World at War will always be my favorite cod and the most realistic/immersive one for me. I liked cod ww2 for the story building and the environments you played thru the game. But it will never live up to WAW. COD 2 is also a very good ww2 game, and I wish they would remaster it along with cod was.
I don’t think COD WW2 campaign wasn’t bad, but it doesn’t hold a candle to World at War. It’s just not as dark and gritty when you compare both games. The other thing I didn’t like about WW2 is that you only play as the Americans for the entire campaign.
Agreed.
a miniscule part of it as sexy french spy (the sexy part is up to debate)
WW 2 is what i call Hollywood's depiction of World War 2. Action sequences, the obligatory 'Co protagonist best friend' character for example.
WAW is more a kin to how the mess actually went with less exaggeration action scenes. WaW shows how hate and revenge would drive people to do something they might had never done in times of peace.
Then,there is Vanguard. We don't talk about Vanguard.
This is why World at War is my favorite CoD. Brutality and dark atmosphere is what i miss in CoD.
Both are underrated
World at War campaign remastered in may 2025 for the 80th anniversary of Victory in Europe
At least both are better than Vanguard
Well that sniper scene at the fountain is ripped straight out of enemy at the gate.
You're convincing me of trying out WWII. I've avoided it due to the train scene and the lackluster MP, but I might give it a shot sometime.
All good but Red wasn't the main character in all games, (5:49)
In first Game (Road to Hill 30) Baker was the main character whole Red was one of his squad mates
In the second game (Earned In Blood) we follow Red!
In the third gam, Hells Highways (we again play as Baker, but red is also around us most of the times)
One thing that separates waw with other cods were the cutscenes. The way they blend irl clips of ww2 to those cutscenes were amazing. It also made my love history and learn more about ww2 itself.
Ones a Hollywood Style game with no heart or soul. and ones one that didn't need much of a story and made more of an impact it truly is more like horror of a war than that game can ever depict.
COD2 is better than both. No heroic bombast, no forced edginess, just the straight man of WWII Call of Duty games.
Based take.
I think a blend of WaW and CoD2 could make for one of the best war games. WaW level gritty with CoD2's unapologetic battles would be a spectacle. (There are mods for CoD2 to attempt that but modding that game is awful to do)
Cod 2 is very boring and slow compared to WAW, in my opinion WAW is tye best call of duty
@@Eric-vg9fj As I said, it's the straight man of Call of Duty. Naturally the less mature COD fans will be filtered out 🧐
@@Eric-vg9fj you realise that cod 2 has exactly the same pacing as waw without scripted moments right?
Throught WAW as the marines they did give us alot of context throughout the cutscenes on how the marines felt during the War. You get the sense of the muddiness and long hours of fighting which is greatly portrayed
ww1 call of duty game would be crazy
Honestly WW2 might have one of the best campaigns in a CoD game besides United Offensive and WaW. It had a warm, familiar vibe, feels like a video game adaptation of productions like Band of Brothers and Saving Private Ryan, or a spiritual continuation of Medal of Honor and Brothers in Arms. I actually find myself come back and play it every once in a while, in the meantime I stay very clear from the multiplayer part of the game as it is completely the opposite of everything I said. I think people were too harsh on it when it came out, even when it comes to the campaign. It actually did some good work that unfortunately not a lot of people appreciate. In a way, it was the last CoD game and last FPS game we got in general where actually men were portrayed as men, instead of soft genderfluid what-have-yous.
World at war and bf1 are my favorite single player depictions of the world wars they are so good I consider them historically authentic
It's nice these days how often people bring up Brothers In Arms. At the time the games seemed to be super niche and you barely ever met anyone else who played them, or if you did it was the many many kids who quit forever the moment they realised Matt Baker isn't a bullet sponge and can't rambo through missions alone.
I haven't actually played either of them but WaW seemed like you feel as just a soldier. Where as World War II seemed like we are the main character and a hero, almost in a movie.
5:12 well imma be honest, incoming is the best way to say somethings coming especially in a ww3 game, i dont think that one is a refrence, but the other ones prolly are
The main difference between Europe and the Pacific Theater that I think is really well portrayed in WaW is the fact that most fights were usually against bunker systems and guerrilla fighters instead of massive open battles. Yes there were invasions but most of the theater was basically hopping from island to island and clearing the IJA. In Europe there were a lot of large scale battles just because of how much open land there was. It would’ve been hard to execute an operation like Market Garden and Barbarossa because of how small Japan is comparatively. And that’s what I really liked about WaW compared to WWII.
Nazi flags being there helps. Seeing the iron cross seems like I’m in WW1
World at War was truly unsettling for a CoD game, there were times where I would look behind me because I would think someone was there.
I wanted to touch on the hero vs nightmare talking point. This is sort of touching on the idea as a whole and not just the video (which was great btw). I think there is something heroic and selfless if you decided to join any armed forces and went to fight. The idea of going to war is terrifying and you will likely come back home in a body bag. The war itself is the nightmare and something no one should ever have to go through. The reality of war is death, loud sounds, filth, crimes, etc and should never be hidden from view. There are also exceptions to the hero idea too. A Nazi soldier is not a hero but a criminal while an American soldier is more on the side of hero. That's just how I see it though.
To this day those two have been the greatest campaigns to me. Like MW2 and BO2 were amazing but WAW and WW2 can’t be beat.
World at war was actually a world war. You fought in the Pacific and the Eastern front, which aren't commonly shown in games. In WW2 its just america vs germany in france and western germany despite calling it ww2
What would you called ? Germany vs America ? Lmao it’s an event that took place during world war 2 so yes it’s called world war 2 , what are you 12?
@Coltydabrewski maybe something more specific. If I'm just getting a western front game, then don't call it ww2. I'm expecting more than 1 front from a ww2 game
@@Coltydabrewski game that uses signature garand *ping obsessively and only has european theater with america vs germany doesn't deserve to call itself WORLD war 2
european assault is taken by medal of honor but any other set of words associated with americans in europe would fit much better
united offensive - also had more than one lousy campaign
finest hour - sounds great
big red one - literally about big red one
roads to victory - still implies more than one lousy america fuck yeah campaign
ANYTHING
by your WRONG logic if i make a game that happens in 1942 and is about farming i get to call it WORLD WAR 2, what are you 12?
Two phenomenal games imho
Waw: shows warcrimes from both sides and doesn't shy away from using graphic footage from ww2
Ww2: is more heroic version as in "America rahh" type of story
well your opinion is wrong
13:24 i still think it was a welcomed changed to give a Older CoD Players that Feeling Less “Super Soldier”
World at war and bf1 are my favorite single player depictions of the world wars they are so good I confused them historically authentic
Love these kind of videos
The way I saw it, COD WAW is just Come and See, Enemy at the gates, Stalingrad and Windtalkers if it was a game and 10 times darker , while COD WW2 is Saving Private Ryan with hints of Band Of Brothers, this is why WAW will always be goated it showed what war is really like, it doesn’t show the typical let’s go on a heroic adventure into the unknown story rather it gives off an every man for himself situation since at any time your brothers in arms could be taken away from you
the games showed how certain countries treated each other during the war, Germany was more lenient towards america than russia, japan was just aggressive overall during the pacific theater.
WaW is better in my opinion but i will choose WWII over Vanguard without hesitation.
why not choose waw or cod 2 over ww2 as well
5:12 Before I even saw the clip from BoB, I thought that *was* Lipton.
Me as a kid i had world at war final fronts on PS2, only hearing rumors of zombies in the main game waw and dying to get it, but bo1 was my first zombie experience wnd waw was my second, hearing from second hand sources of beating the game to get zombies so i olayed for 9hrs all day saturday to get it and was so happy to play
Someone should mod WW2 and make the gore more likely to happen. I'm sure they retained the old "death" script in the default.ff file since it is the same graphic engine, they should have some code preventing it to happen most of the time.
World at War is unbeatable. But I did still enjoy the campaign in WW2. The cutscenes were really good and I liked the sense of comradery between the characters. It felt more like a video game adaptation of Band of Brothers
I’d say ww2 in the tank mission was kinda good sure I didn’t like how all the Sherman’s had a 76mm gun but it captured how the Sherman tank fared against their German counter parts it’s not easy to be on the end of a long 75 or 88mm canon that can rip you to shreds in one shot but you could use your mobility and terrain against these German tanks
World at war such a cool title and such a brutal game
At least these had horror aspects, and were credible by their stories unlike a certain COD game released in 2021
What i like about waw is that you never feel like a hero but more of a regular soldier being called for duty, you're always on the verge of surviving, on the soviet side you got reznov and chernov both of them act as a moral compass weather you're viewed as a soldier that everyone should inspire to be like or a blood thirsty soldier that's just as unforgiving as the nazis
Throw in call of duty 3 and big red 1. BIG RED 1 is my personal favorite of all the call of duty games. Also it gets over shadowed the most like opposing fronts.
And then you have Vanguard which spit on the history of the conflict and the memory of all sides
To get a realistic grasp, you need to show horror and heroism, terror and boredom, friendship and hostility.
world at war was one of th best campaigns i played
people can say what they want about WW2, but turners death tore a piece out of me.
WW2 = Kid Friendly WW2 Game.
WAW = A Horror COD Game.
A good comparison would be ww2 being band of brothers while waw is the pacific. One chooses to display just how heroic the greatest generation were and the brotherhood they had got them through the day while the other shows how truly horrifying war can be
World at war takes you to the two most brutal theatres in world war two in a very authentic and realistic way.
Waw is a horror game first and a fps second
Yea but the only reason I like wow more is how much of a BANGER the black cats theme is
WW2 did its job which was to return to call of dutys roots and it emulates that classic war movie vibe that the original games had pretty good
Both campaigns were amazing despite being Polar Opposites. One depicting the Horrors of War and the other showcasing the Heroism and Bravery of those who fought in War.
WW2 was Band of Brothers. WAW was The Pacific.