Call of Duty (2003 Video Game)
8/10
Let's be perfectly clear
25 October 2008
I've seen some appalling reviews in this place and I thought I should rectify the shot from some of the reviewers. What is Call of Duty aside from a WWII shooter? Well, just that. It's a world-war 2 shooter with an aspect centered a lot more on the war rather than a large-scale vendetta against Nazis. Medal Of Honor played like this chunky three-legged script-o-rama. You felt rather weak in front of soldiers that could smack you, while all you could do is stand there and shoot them. It was a great shooter, but I don't think MOH: AA ever set any kind of milestone. Nor was it an objective ever to beat MOH. Call of Duty literally SPITS on MOH:AA.

Its gameplay is better, its sound is better, its scenarisation is better, hell the NAME itself is a lot more enticing. Call of Duty will give you something MOH: AA could never have. And that's -SWEAT-. In MOH: AA , it wasn't unlikely to be seen running through enemy lines just blasting away with your thompson smg. Now? If you even pop your head out, you're almost dead: That's if you play the game on Veteran difficulty.

People saying that this game is too easy have just played it on Greenhorn (easiest difficulty). Is this an MOH: AA killer? You bet it is. Gone are the heavy and pointless infiltration scenes: There is one but I'm sure the people at 2015 just wanted to mock MOH's faults by making it extremely short a mission. See, Call of Duty doesn't mess around and try to be more than it really is. It tells you flat out: You're gonna be fighting a war here, boy. Saddle up.

And it never lets go.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed