Call of Duty: WWII brings us the second great war for the first time in nine years. Is it a gameplay improvement worth playing or a graphical overhaul?
Since Ye Old Call of Duty
The first three CoD titles took place in World War 2, while the 5th game, CoD: World at War, was the first to tackle World War 2 in Japan. Eight other games in the series were released between World at War and WWII. A history of those eight games: Danger Close; Vietnam; World War 3; Target Finders; Aliens; Sledgehammer's first game; Bow and Arrows; Star Wars. That's a lot I know, and it means those World War 2 enthusiasts have been waiting that long for the series to come back to its roots, as it advertised. Of course, the gameplay is the main root of CoD, but the war it so prominently held onto must be attached in some secondary way. The setting is part of the foundation for the original mechanics. The setting is also what made those games unique compared to Halo and Wolfenstein. They were gritty. There were no jetpacks or laser sights. But, even as the series has stepped through multiple settings in time and theaters of war across the solar system, CoD's super fast and short time to action gameplay has been fully intact in every single game since. Now that we have seen the signature gameplay work in every other setting, how well does it work back in WWII? Does it make a CoD game without gadgets, or something distinctly WWII? Bringing yesterdays war back to Call of Duty is a mixed bag: The game includes a story that explores family and connections made during the war and shiny new game mechanics, but there are many moments where the gameplay is at odds with the feel of World War 2.
Slightly Changing the Core
Being the 14th main game of a series in a saturated market is not easy. While examining the game within the confines of Call of Duty itself is important, so is looking at what shines against the rest of the FPS wave. Keeping that in mind, CoD: WWII starts with a bang. After three distinct cutscenes and a long boat ride, it is Normandy time. WHOO D-DAY, one of the most important battles in history. And then after three minutes and a quick time event, the line of defense is broken and we roll down into the bunkers. That's a pretty fast way for such a day to blow past you in a game. (D-Day and the first mission level design will be discussed later), but for now, we're in the middle of the trenches where the game smacks us with a new game mechanic. New, in this case, means it was old and has been replaced with health regeneration since. Yes, healing now requires health packs. Just like many FPS's from the old era, you have to manually use these things. When health was regenerated automatically, you were allowed to make infinite mistakes. Now, with health packs, you are limited in bad decisions, which forces you to pay closer attention to where enemies are on a bigger scale. No more can you simply and infinitely peek around cover and get shot just to find out where the enemy is. Approaching a battle asks you to notice the landscape. Where are the most enemies? Is there a machine gun? All kinds of questions matter now. Knowing where people are and choosing your cover and when to shoot is more critical to success.
So, how do we get health packs? A member of your squad has them and throws them at you when they're ready. The teammates-throw-items-at-you system is one of the games best mechanics. There is a heavy amount of time spent on the characters in your squad, part of which comes from actually needing them. Different characters have different abilities that require you to look at them and press a button for them to throw ammo, health, or other items at you. On the surface, it doesn't seem like that much of a complication to the formula, but I've found myself seeking their help more often than expected. It can be a lot of work to find a specific teammate while the enemy is firing at you from all angles. If they're getting shot at, it might be a little hard for them to toss you that grenade or health. In total there are five other guys in your specific squad. That is five total items, and they're not always alongside you at the same time. What if it is just you and someone who does not have health packs? You have to play super carefully and hope there are health packs on the ground. Stay low. Alternatively, what if the grenades guy is not around? You better not waste them. The rotating availability of certain items combined with having to manually find your teammates to access them is a variation that stresses the gameplay just enough to make the average battle feel new.
Where does WWII Shine?
Often the key to a linear game is to create a fun gameplay loop and then allow for interesting scenarios to stress the loop. CoD has always used scripted moments to do this. Scripted moments are here, but not as full force as earlier entries that never used an abundance of cutscenes. In addition to the core changes, there is stealth now. Smaller changes include the occasional serene, peaceful moment at camp, and Heroic Moments, instances that ask the player to do something besides shooting. There's also some driving. It's not bad. These things are all intertwined more or less because most of the time the game is bombarding you with something to do. For example, I can't bash the enemies for their lack of depth during the average shooting gallery without relishing their part in scripted moments, so let's look at how all of these mechanics enhance the game as a whole.
Let's start with the scripted scenes. I distinctly remember how great it was when Soap McTavish jumped out of a window in the Favelas and tackled a guy onto a car. That was Modern Warfare 2 and it was in real time as I was running with them. Earlier CoD titles were sparse with cutscenes if they had any at all. It's not that there was a lack of any cinematic direction, but the developers used every excuse to put the player in first person view. CoD 4 famously had the player get shot in the face, and it would keep you in first-person just to watch two friendly characters talk. The immersion can be satisfying because these moments are immediate, usually contain something interesting, and let the player back into the action fast. A lot of these scripted moments are capable of being cutscenes. In most other games, they would be, but waiting for a cutscene gives you time to remember that it is a game. Since there are plenty of cutscenes in this game, what is left for the more scripted parts? Driving is part of these moments, and driving happens a couple of times throughout the game. In past CoD games, you would shoot from a turret or passenger seat while being driven. Those were entirely scripted because the vehicle had a path and all the player could do was shoot. Here you actually get to drive, but it's on a linear track with obstacles, not very different. It's not like an actual driving game, but most driving games don't let you hop on the turret during the ride. Actual scripted scenes still happen, but often with quick time events. The QTE's don't appear with any sort of flash or purpose. Every time they showed up, they caught me off guard. The scenes were already interesting, and then they showed up in the least visible way with thin lines and sometimes between sounds. They partially felt like they were robbing any scene of its momentum because the scenes were interesting close-ups on the gore and destruction of battle. A crumbling church, slow-motion sidearm kills, that's all in first-person. If you don't mind the QTE's as much, these moments are pretty interesting.
A couple of times, the mission will start before the combat. It's you and a bunch of soldiers resting. Take a look around and enjoy the silence. It's an anomaly.
Stealth is not a mechanic widely used in Call of Duty. It happens in them, but they're usually crafted in a linear way. The beginning of MW2 had you scale a mountain and take out enemies with a silencer in the middle of a blizzard. Then there's "All Ghillied Up." Who can forget that mission? But CoD: WW2 has mild sandbox areas in which you can sneak past enemies. The outstanding mechanics of popular stealth games are here, such as staying out of enemy sight by sneaking. They have notice meters, and you can use your knife. One of these sequences is played as a French female spy. Europe was known for having women serve in combat and technical work, but it was also known for having many instances of civilian resistance. They were informal and comprised of anyone around. Part of her mission is to infiltrate a building as a civilian by answering questions that officers might ask. This situation does not involve guns. There also seems to be multiple paths and side missions to handle. Maybe there are hidden rooms or false paths. Most of the mission takes place inside a building that is fully intact and has never seen war, which is another odd thing for the series. Eventually, she does get to the stealth that involves taking out the enemy, but it is impressive how long the first half could take. The average stealth gameplay is not as in-depth as a game based around it, but it is a passable changeup that is easy to learn.
Heroic Moments offer small objectives to be aware of. Watch the enemy because if they surrender, you can capture them. You could also shoot them. If a teammate is down, you may be able to save them. The addition of these moments creates a very small layer of things to look out for. They don't matter very much overall, but it's a small touch for realism, being unable to predict everyone else.
The narrative follows a surprisingly consistent path through France. Other CoD games of the era had multiple campaigns spanning different factions that had you jump between countries in an instant. Even later CoD games could have large chunks of time in between missions. WWII on the other hand starts and ends in the same region as the characters get close to Nazi Germany. The mission select screen even keeps a map of your progress, which is a nice touch. Staying inside the game without returning to a menu would have been nice too, but at least the menu reflects your progress.
A Deeper Look
Does this so far sound like a giant break in the monotony? It felt like it, but does it make going back to the usual gameplay loop less fun? First, the gameplay loop often takes the shape of charging the enemy, fending off the enemy, or sniping them. In these moments, the enemies are nothing to fear. They shoot you from pretty static positions of cover or approach you. They don't feel like major challenges alone. A.I. in games, I believe, have been more or less stagnant for a long time, so this is not solely a Call of Duty problem. There are great exceptions of course. Left 4 Dead, Alien: Isolation, and Halo Reach come to mind. The A.I. in those games is challenging because they can operate like the player or because they can do things the player cannot. We can all stand and shoot. It's not fun to anticipate anything they might do because they don't often do much. They also barely offer any variation. There are moments, such as the following main example, in which a specific scenario can enhance their threat, but the average shooting gallery, even on the highest difficulty, is not the most interesting.
EXAMPLE: At one point, you are tasked with suppressing an MG and then telling a soldier when it is safe to advance to the next cover. If you mess up that process, then it becomes your job to do whatever he was doing. This was top notch. There was an MG to worry about. The battle was uphill. There was a guy to keep alive, and a bunch of enemies. That is a lot of things to balance on top of making sure you have enough health. Having a purpose, which is keeping that guy alive, makes it more interesting than shooting for the sake of killing the enemy. At this moment, the enemies were something to be concerned about, and they were just a small piece of the whole problem.
This example is a good instance of injecting the loop with something interesting, instead of surrounding it. I kept finding moments that I thought were capable of being this interesting, usually involving the small variation that exists within the enemies. One variation is the flamethrower enemy. Flamethrower enemies are usually alone or with other average soldiers. They seem like a wasted opportunity because they are usually as easy as any other enemy, and don't offer a challenge even though they have a different weapon. What if a squad of flamethrowers is keeping your guys out of somewhere, so it is up to you to find a vantage point? There could be a side door or a window perfect for a grenade. Another possibility could include snipers. What if, instead of sniping the snipers, there was a sniper's nest with multiple approaches? You could have the option to use a sniper, or you could take a shotgun, but you would have to be careful because they have traps and such. If we can't have super smart A.I., why not put us into more unique situations? These possibilities could be a good alternative. I know all the other things I praised for adding variety do exactly what I am requesting here, but they break up the loop outside of the usual battle on the front. They add, instead of reform. Then we return to the battle on the front for more running, holding the objective button, and shooting. These moments aren't the worst and their simple structure is necessary to pace the game, but there is evidence of wasted potential as they dominate many levels.
What about Call of Duty 2? I'm glad you were wondering. There was no sprinting in Call of Duty 2. Even without it, they threw you into tight alleys and burnt buildings that asked you to explore a little to accomplish a bunch of objectives. This first mission has you up and down the map multiple times to fix things or shoot things and then eventually blow up tanks. At the same time, it's snowing and all of these enemies blend into the snow making it hard to see. This was variety. This was a good way of having a couple of things to worry about at the same time. Should you just play this game instead? No, you could just play both, but the example stands that multiple objectives have proven successful already.
Personally
What else have other CoD games gotten right that Sledgehammer can take from? Remember in Black Ops when they gave you the shotgun that was loaded with incendiary ammo on a night level and you ran around shooting daytime at people. That was great. Remember when "All Ghillied Up" made an entire mission out of sniping. That was great because it was a whole mission dedicated to a style of combat. In CoD: WWII, you take a building as a vantage point with a sniper, but it is not about sniping. It is about wave-defense with a strong weapon. There is no patience involved. The game gives you a shotgun when it is time to repel enemies from a tight spot, but again it is not about close-quarters combat, it is about running back and forth with a shotgun so no one gets close. It is frantic and that is fine, but it feels so familiar. It feels like it is not living up to the power of first-person that is usually on display in CoD.
The First Mission (Irrelevant to the Game, Completely My Own Wants)
For anyone who might not know, D-Day, the mission in which the beaches of Normandy were stormed in an effort to break the Axis' hold on France was significant enough to have had rehearsals up and down western Europe. The first part of Saving Private Ryan covers the battle in gruesome detail, in which Tom Hanks is almost unrecognizable as the fun actor he was known as. D-Day in media is always the centerpiece. This mission here is one of the most important days in the history of warfare, but it's the intro mission for this game. Why waste the moment on the intro? Unfortunately, for anyone that wanted to spend 10 minutes or an entire mission on the beach, dodging between cover or multiple areas, the area lasts about 3 or 4 minutes of no shooting, just dodging. It also ends with a quick time event that could have been a well-scripted scene, but it's a QTE. Then you're in the trenches. There's even an Achievement/Trophy for getting to the trenches in 2 minutes. So, potentially what could have been half of a mission of content in which soldiers are brutally killed around you, is reduced to the learning to walk portion. There is always a danger in teaching the player the controls during a mission that could be fun with more advanced gameplay down the line. At the same time, it could be boring starting the game with a training course. CoD 4 starts with a course that gets you familiar with the mechanics and feel of the game, but it doesn't exactly stamp down a promise of things to come. The intro stage dilemma is a hard one, but let's accept that this is a good opening and consider how it could have been better. Heroic moments should have been all over this. Dragging wounded teammates to cover would have been accurate. A lot of small scripted moments would have made this more interesting. What if you got shot and then dragged and healed with a health pack before even having to do to do it manually? How about if dodging near certain places took the camera just for a second to show us something? The first impression should be a good one, and this one could have been denser. It could have put these mechanics together to drive home the theme of having to fight harder than the enemy. I am a little too invested in the portrayal of this event, which could be my reason for being hard on it. I once walked the coast of Scotland where the old bunkers used in a practice run for D-Day were floating back into the sea. So, in a D-Day mission, I am looking for something that was worth an entire practice run.
World War II
World War II had many battles, many fronts, and nearly everyone was affected. I think variety is important in representing such a time. The gameplay offers a variety to some degree. Don't worry, we're not diving back into that, but I overall praise the number of things that alter the gameplay as a good formula for WWII and a triumph for trying things other Call of Duty games have not. Keeping the tension up with variety is important. Having the spy mission is perfect in showing us the different methods in which war was conducted. That mission required us to learn new rules. The parts of the game I have been asking to be more interesting do not offer the tension so crucial to the constant fear that a war like that spreads. The simple moments of walking and shooting feel as if I flew right through them as opposed to when the game gave me a few things to balance. While the game added new mechanics that add layers to the CoD experience, the campaign switched between great design and light moments that did little for the feel of the time. I hope the next game from Sledgehammer turns everything up to the same level for what could be a very different Call of Duty Campaign. As far as this game goes, it's World War II. Try it out before the next fad rolls back around.
P.S.
There is a lot I left out for the sake of surprise. The refugees? What a Heroic Moment looks like? You'll find out like I did. This took forever to trim down to a readable size. I also didn't talk about the multiplayer because people generally praise the campaign for this specific title. Black Ops 4 launched with no single player and seems to amaze audiences that are new to it and the regulars. What if a Call of Duty was only a single player campaign? With no balance to be had, it could be so much better than when the games try both. Then multiple Call of Duty games would be supported and they wouldn't be old news in just a year. Just a thought. Anyway, I did enjoy this game and I hope you may too. Here are some other pictures.
 |
| When will Call of Duty break back into using a subtitle |
Since Ye Old Call of Duty
The first three CoD titles took place in World War 2, while the 5th game, CoD: World at War, was the first to tackle World War 2 in Japan. Eight other games in the series were released between World at War and WWII. A history of those eight games: Danger Close; Vietnam; World War 3; Target Finders; Aliens; Sledgehammer's first game; Bow and Arrows; Star Wars. That's a lot I know, and it means those World War 2 enthusiasts have been waiting that long for the series to come back to its roots, as it advertised. Of course, the gameplay is the main root of CoD, but the war it so prominently held onto must be attached in some secondary way. The setting is part of the foundation for the original mechanics. The setting is also what made those games unique compared to Halo and Wolfenstein. They were gritty. There were no jetpacks or laser sights. But, even as the series has stepped through multiple settings in time and theaters of war across the solar system, CoD's super fast and short time to action gameplay has been fully intact in every single game since. Now that we have seen the signature gameplay work in every other setting, how well does it work back in WWII? Does it make a CoD game without gadgets, or something distinctly WWII? Bringing yesterdays war back to Call of Duty is a mixed bag: The game includes a story that explores family and connections made during the war and shiny new game mechanics, but there are many moments where the gameplay is at odds with the feel of World War 2.
Slightly Changing the Core
Being the 14th main game of a series in a saturated market is not easy. While examining the game within the confines of Call of Duty itself is important, so is looking at what shines against the rest of the FPS wave. Keeping that in mind, CoD: WWII starts with a bang. After three distinct cutscenes and a long boat ride, it is Normandy time. WHOO D-DAY, one of the most important battles in history. And then after three minutes and a quick time event, the line of defense is broken and we roll down into the bunkers. That's a pretty fast way for such a day to blow past you in a game. (D-Day and the first mission level design will be discussed later), but for now, we're in the middle of the trenches where the game smacks us with a new game mechanic. New, in this case, means it was old and has been replaced with health regeneration since. Yes, healing now requires health packs. Just like many FPS's from the old era, you have to manually use these things. When health was regenerated automatically, you were allowed to make infinite mistakes. Now, with health packs, you are limited in bad decisions, which forces you to pay closer attention to where enemies are on a bigger scale. No more can you simply and infinitely peek around cover and get shot just to find out where the enemy is. Approaching a battle asks you to notice the landscape. Where are the most enemies? Is there a machine gun? All kinds of questions matter now. Knowing where people are and choosing your cover and when to shoot is more critical to success.
 |
| Check out the bottom right of the picture for team items |
So, how do we get health packs? A member of your squad has them and throws them at you when they're ready. The teammates-throw-items-at-you system is one of the games best mechanics. There is a heavy amount of time spent on the characters in your squad, part of which comes from actually needing them. Different characters have different abilities that require you to look at them and press a button for them to throw ammo, health, or other items at you. On the surface, it doesn't seem like that much of a complication to the formula, but I've found myself seeking their help more often than expected. It can be a lot of work to find a specific teammate while the enemy is firing at you from all angles. If they're getting shot at, it might be a little hard for them to toss you that grenade or health. In total there are five other guys in your specific squad. That is five total items, and they're not always alongside you at the same time. What if it is just you and someone who does not have health packs? You have to play super carefully and hope there are health packs on the ground. Stay low. Alternatively, what if the grenades guy is not around? You better not waste them. The rotating availability of certain items combined with having to manually find your teammates to access them is a variation that stresses the gameplay just enough to make the average battle feel new.
Often the key to a linear game is to create a fun gameplay loop and then allow for interesting scenarios to stress the loop. CoD has always used scripted moments to do this. Scripted moments are here, but not as full force as earlier entries that never used an abundance of cutscenes. In addition to the core changes, there is stealth now. Smaller changes include the occasional serene, peaceful moment at camp, and Heroic Moments, instances that ask the player to do something besides shooting. There's also some driving. It's not bad. These things are all intertwined more or less because most of the time the game is bombarding you with something to do. For example, I can't bash the enemies for their lack of depth during the average shooting gallery without relishing their part in scripted moments, so let's look at how all of these mechanics enhance the game as a whole.
 |
| Who needs Forza |
Let's start with the scripted scenes. I distinctly remember how great it was when Soap McTavish jumped out of a window in the Favelas and tackled a guy onto a car. That was Modern Warfare 2 and it was in real time as I was running with them. Earlier CoD titles were sparse with cutscenes if they had any at all. It's not that there was a lack of any cinematic direction, but the developers used every excuse to put the player in first person view. CoD 4 famously had the player get shot in the face, and it would keep you in first-person just to watch two friendly characters talk. The immersion can be satisfying because these moments are immediate, usually contain something interesting, and let the player back into the action fast. A lot of these scripted moments are capable of being cutscenes. In most other games, they would be, but waiting for a cutscene gives you time to remember that it is a game. Since there are plenty of cutscenes in this game, what is left for the more scripted parts? Driving is part of these moments, and driving happens a couple of times throughout the game. In past CoD games, you would shoot from a turret or passenger seat while being driven. Those were entirely scripted because the vehicle had a path and all the player could do was shoot. Here you actually get to drive, but it's on a linear track with obstacles, not very different. It's not like an actual driving game, but most driving games don't let you hop on the turret during the ride. Actual scripted scenes still happen, but often with quick time events. The QTE's don't appear with any sort of flash or purpose. Every time they showed up, they caught me off guard. The scenes were already interesting, and then they showed up in the least visible way with thin lines and sometimes between sounds. They partially felt like they were robbing any scene of its momentum because the scenes were interesting close-ups on the gore and destruction of battle. A crumbling church, slow-motion sidearm kills, that's all in first-person. If you don't mind the QTE's as much, these moments are pretty interesting.
 |
| There's no good French cuisine |
A couple of times, the mission will start before the combat. It's you and a bunch of soldiers resting. Take a look around and enjoy the silence. It's an anomaly.
 |
| Be sneaky |
 |
| Don't you hate this guy? I hate this guy. |
Heroic Moments offer small objectives to be aware of. Watch the enemy because if they surrender, you can capture them. You could also shoot them. If a teammate is down, you may be able to save them. The addition of these moments creates a very small layer of things to look out for. They don't matter very much overall, but it's a small touch for realism, being unable to predict everyone else.
A Deeper Look
Does this so far sound like a giant break in the monotony? It felt like it, but does it make going back to the usual gameplay loop less fun? First, the gameplay loop often takes the shape of charging the enemy, fending off the enemy, or sniping them. In these moments, the enemies are nothing to fear. They shoot you from pretty static positions of cover or approach you. They don't feel like major challenges alone. A.I. in games, I believe, have been more or less stagnant for a long time, so this is not solely a Call of Duty problem. There are great exceptions of course. Left 4 Dead, Alien: Isolation, and Halo Reach come to mind. The A.I. in those games is challenging because they can operate like the player or because they can do things the player cannot. We can all stand and shoot. It's not fun to anticipate anything they might do because they don't often do much. They also barely offer any variation. There are moments, such as the following main example, in which a specific scenario can enhance their threat, but the average shooting gallery, even on the highest difficulty, is not the most interesting.
EXAMPLE: At one point, you are tasked with suppressing an MG and then telling a soldier when it is safe to advance to the next cover. If you mess up that process, then it becomes your job to do whatever he was doing. This was top notch. There was an MG to worry about. The battle was uphill. There was a guy to keep alive, and a bunch of enemies. That is a lot of things to balance on top of making sure you have enough health. Having a purpose, which is keeping that guy alive, makes it more interesting than shooting for the sake of killing the enemy. At this moment, the enemies were something to be concerned about, and they were just a small piece of the whole problem.
 |
| It's Call of Duty 2 |
 |
| There can be so many objectives |
Personally
What else have other CoD games gotten right that Sledgehammer can take from? Remember in Black Ops when they gave you the shotgun that was loaded with incendiary ammo on a night level and you ran around shooting daytime at people. That was great. Remember when "All Ghillied Up" made an entire mission out of sniping. That was great because it was a whole mission dedicated to a style of combat. In CoD: WWII, you take a building as a vantage point with a sniper, but it is not about sniping. It is about wave-defense with a strong weapon. There is no patience involved. The game gives you a shotgun when it is time to repel enemies from a tight spot, but again it is not about close-quarters combat, it is about running back and forth with a shotgun so no one gets close. It is frantic and that is fine, but it feels so familiar. It feels like it is not living up to the power of first-person that is usually on display in CoD.
The First Mission (Irrelevant to the Game, Completely My Own Wants)
 |
| Let's wrap it up and get out of here |
World War II
World War II had many battles, many fronts, and nearly everyone was affected. I think variety is important in representing such a time. The gameplay offers a variety to some degree. Don't worry, we're not diving back into that, but I overall praise the number of things that alter the gameplay as a good formula for WWII and a triumph for trying things other Call of Duty games have not. Keeping the tension up with variety is important. Having the spy mission is perfect in showing us the different methods in which war was conducted. That mission required us to learn new rules. The parts of the game I have been asking to be more interesting do not offer the tension so crucial to the constant fear that a war like that spreads. The simple moments of walking and shooting feel as if I flew right through them as opposed to when the game gave me a few things to balance. While the game added new mechanics that add layers to the CoD experience, the campaign switched between great design and light moments that did little for the feel of the time. I hope the next game from Sledgehammer turns everything up to the same level for what could be a very different Call of Duty Campaign. As far as this game goes, it's World War II. Try it out before the next fad rolls back around.
- Ben R.
Player of games
P.S.
There is a lot I left out for the sake of surprise. The refugees? What a Heroic Moment looks like? You'll find out like I did. This took forever to trim down to a readable size. I also didn't talk about the multiplayer because people generally praise the campaign for this specific title. Black Ops 4 launched with no single player and seems to amaze audiences that are new to it and the regulars. What if a Call of Duty was only a single player campaign? With no balance to be had, it could be so much better than when the games try both. Then multiple Call of Duty games would be supported and they wouldn't be old news in just a year. Just a thought. Anyway, I did enjoy this game and I hope you may too. Here are some other pictures.
 |
| An actual stone from the decaying bunkers on the North Sea. I had to crop out my friend |
Fin.
Comments
Post a Comment