Call of Duty 5 - World At War (beta)

About a week ago the Call of Duty 5 beta went live. As a software developer I find it very difficult to actually call this a beta release. There were promotions from just about every gaming website and magazine that exists. Millions of gamers got a hold of their own personal beta code. Some got more than just one (personally, I got about seven). Those who got extra just shared them with their friends. There were so many codes given out that anyone who actually wanted one could easily have gotten one. Another reason it isn't a beta is the fact that the game comes out in 3 weeks. I doubt any bugs found in the beta will be fixed in the release version. In reality, this is much more of a release candidate than a beta.

The beta is limited to just the multiplayer aspect of the game and within that it's limited to just 3 maps and it has an experience cap on it. A lot of gamers I talk to think this game was doomed from the start, as it was developed by Treyarch and not Infinity Ward (the developers of Call of Duty 4). The game does use the Call of Duty 4 game engine, so the feel of gameplay is very familiar to CoD4 players. There are some subtle differences, mostly added in to stick to the era of the game (WWII instead of modern times). The problems I found come in how the developers chose to implement these changes.

One of my big complaints is the inherant weakness and accuracy of the weapons. I know the developers were aiming for a more realistic game, but reality generally isn't all that fun. It gets very aggravating to shoot someone with a sniper rifle multiple times and not have a single shot register. Another complaint I have is the graphic detail. In CoD4 the characters were very detailed and you could tell very distinct differences between soldiers on the same team. In the beta, the way the graphics are rendered (darkness level, coloring, etc) make it difficult to tell friend from foe. Players are forced to wait for the name indicator to show up on screen which usually delays them enough to get shot. My other big complain is the level design. The word that comes to mind is cluttered. In CoD4, levels had clear lines of sight and made a larger level seem controllable based on what you could see. In the beta, there is so much junk on the levels that your line of sight generally doesn't extend for more than a few feet in any direction.

Overall the game is only 'ok'. If I had to give it a score, it'd be a 5 or 6 out of 10. I really don't see me purchasing this game. My reason for not getting the game isn't any of the above mentioned reasons. No, it's one that developers need to realize is totally unacceptable. For multiplayer games, the developers had voice actors perform the in-game announcements. Kiefer Sutherland performed the voice for the US Marines team announcer. The first time I played the game I was shocked when the announcer shouted out the F-bomb. "Out-f***ing-standing Marines!" I looked through the menu structure and game options. There's no way to filter out the vulgarity. You can mute the entire announcer voice, but then the players lose the valuable strategic information relayed.

We're all in this together

Worthless Review Scores

How many times have you read a game review and seen it given some type of score? Usually these scores are used to convey some actual meaning. When I read the the whole review, I kind of expect the score they gave to be reflected in the review. If I see a low score, I expect the review to be full of complaints about a game. If I see a high score, I expect to read about how great the game is. I really didn't think you could mix that formula up (high score = good review, low score = bad review), but apparently someone did.

Recently I read a review of a new game that came out last month, NFL Head Coach 09, from EA Sports. The game focuses less an the actual football games and more on the management and coaching aspects of the sport. On the site Operation Gaming, a site for sports gaming, the score given for this game is a 9 (out of 10, I assume). To me, that's a great score. If a game gets a 9/10 score, I assume it's a great game and worth looking into. When I saw that, I thought I should read the review and see what exactly makes this game great.

Yeah...that was a mistake.

Apparently, the author of that review must think their scores are like golf scores...the lower the better. Here are a few inspiring quotes from that review:

When it comes to football gamers, the vast majority will look at something like NFL Head Coach 09 (NFLHC) and ask one simple question.
“Why?”

The first thing you’ll notice when you hop into a Coach Now game is that the game looks horribly bland compared to Madden NFL 09.

The audio isn’t anything to write home about, with a white noise crowd sound in the background, and your coordinators rattling in your ear. The actual play calls are great to hear, but if I have to hear, “We’ll win this game one inch at a time … one inch at a time,” ONE MORE TIME, I’ll scream.

When you start to game plan for your first opponent, you can start to get confused again.

Sometimes you’ll also end up with goals that aren’t easily understandable.

The running game was a joke, as the CPU could never mount a consistent attack, let alone against another CPU opponent.

In its current state, NFLHC plays a sublime game of football 90 percent of the time. The other 10 percent can be extremely frustrating...

But the real stumbling block for NFL Head Coach 09 so far seems to be the buggy release.

Thankfully, the process of improving your team is far from easy.

Speaking of seeing what’s going on -- if you’re an online gamer, you’ll be sorely disappointed. You only have the Supersim mode available, with no graphics.

There are some notable bugs (some of which will really get to a large percentage of gamers)

and finally...

When you boil it down, though, NFL Head Coach is the best coaching sim on the console market.

(I think it's the ONLY one on the console market)

I don't know about you guys, but after I read that review, I really didn't feel the urge to rush out and buy NFL Head Coach 09. After reading that review, I really had to wonder why EA Sports, a developer known for it's great sports titles, would put out such a low quality product. Maybe it's in some contract they have with the NFL. I have yet to meet another gamer who actually played this game and liked it. Actually, I have yet to meet another gamer who has even played this game.

My advice to you? Read the full review. Don't just go by the score you see. Again, to Terry Crouch, the author of the review, a '10' means it's good and a '1' means it's bad, not the other way around...