Home Game Review Call of Duty PC Game Review
40

Call of Duty PC Game Review

0
40

Call of Duty is a 2003 first-person shooter video game developed by Infinity Ward and published by Activision. The game simulates the infantry and combined arms warfare of World War II. The game is based on the Quake III: Team Arena engine. It was accompanied in September 2004 by an expansion pack, Call of Duty: United Offensive, which was produced by Activision, and developed by Gray Matter Interactive, with contributions from Pi Studios. Call of Duty is similar in theme and gameplay to Medal of Honor, as it is made out of single-player campaigns and missions. However, unlike Medal of Honor, the war is seen not just from the viewpoint of an American soldier but also from the viewpoint of British, Canadian, and Soviet soldiers.

The game was somewhat unusual at the time in that throughout the single-player mode the player is joined by computer-controlled allies who range in quantity from two infantrymen (in some of the British missions) to an entire regiment of tanks (in the Soviet missions). The computer-controlled allies will support the actual player during the missions. They also further the game’s goal of providing an immersive and realistic experience; that is, soldiers in World War II were usually part of a larger group, as opposed to the “lone wolf” seen in video games such as Medal of Honor. However, there are some missions where the player is alone.

The “Hardened” and “Prestige” editions of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, released on November 10, 2009, includes a redemption code to download the game onto Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 hard drives, retitling it as Call of Duty Classic.

#gamereviewsps4, #gamereviewspc, #gamereviewsites, #gamereviewsxboxone, #newgameanimereview, #videogamereviewsforparents, #boardgamereviews, #gamespotreviews


Comment(40)

  1. The level in the snow with the U.S troops…..Am I the only one that feels like that level just wasn't developed/finished? Great game!! Great review……For me the Russian campaign was good but quite boring.

  2. Enemy's on the other hand can take a sniper round to the fucking chest and still get up for more… story of my fucking life.

  3. Developed and only available for the PC. This made THE difference. Now fps games are made for consoles and ported to PC which makes them fucking terrible. (Look at the crap quality of gameplay after modern warfare 1, and even then COD2 and MW1 suffered from console restrictions.) This review spends a lot of time talking about the single player campaign, which was good when it came out but the real gem here was the multiplayer. The best gameplay ever in an FPS made for the best multiplayer experience ever imo. Everything was balanced and nothing was broken like you see today. There was no bitching by the community to change things and infinity ward didn't look like amateurs cough**Dice Battlefield 1**cough. The expansion pack, United Offensive, was well worth the money for what it offered. It brought vehicles to the game. Medal of Honor was nothing compared to this game.

  4. Infinite warfare player: where's the jet packs?
    Veteran CoD player: really? This is WW2
    Infinite warfare player: didn't WW2 have jet packs?
    (Veteran CoD player stabs IWP)

  5. The white mansion is like designed for the BAR, that's how I always did it.

    UO is fucking awesome.

  6. Almost 15 years from release and I still return to it. Teammates are fantastic on Veteran difficulty, as they provide a nice distraction for the germans to shoot. And Veteran really means it, as there is a fixed health bar which makes the game all the more challenging, along with NO HEALTHPACKS and enemies having usually pinpoint accuracy (I was once not even really sticking out from cover and yet I got shot up by a soldier with MP40, three shots, three hits, reload game). It really gives a nice challenge and it teaches you in the art of compulsive saving every minute

  7. Wasn't that ground breaking? Are you fucking kidding me? They added IRON SIGHTS and SPRINTING to shooters. That's like adding something as fundamental as crouching and pulling the trigger. It's adds way more dimension to the play between positioning and shooting, significantly adding to the enjoyment of multiplayer fps games and giving close range weapons an actual purpose and it continues to do so in nearly every shooter worth playing today.

  8. whats wrong with the steam version of United Offensive? I played it and I don't remember any issues.

  9. cod was good back in the good old days now its turn Into shit. i hate to say this but it needs to die off.

  10. What? Unlike United Offensive , the Soviet campaign here are the total borefest and just show, that the devs either run out of time and money or just creativity. After the heavily scripted landing in Stalingrad it's just a nonstop boring shooting gallery in a lazily drawn locations, which looks all the same, be it Stalingrad, Warsaw or Berlin. And you just can't take seriously that pathetic assault of a tiny dollhouse Reihstag, where five Red Army soldiers and two tanks fight with fifteen germans.

  11. The multiplayer is good, but the single player is a rail shooter. Just a glorified Virtua Cop.

  12. I got Call of Duty with United Offensive all together on CD of course! It was my first shooter I had ever gotten! Those were the days!

  13. No disrespect, man, but it is beyond my comprehension how can someone like Call of Duty 1 and say Call of Duty: United Offensive is a "hit and miss" game… If you think it has some difficult sections (I agree the American campaign can get brutal, at times), why can't you just play on a lower difficulty level? Do you always have to play on the highest difficulty? For what? To be frustrated? After all, you kept saying it is important to have fun while playing a video game, which is entirely true. Also, how can you say someone will be bored when they get to the Russian campaign? This is a 6-7 hours game, for crying out loud. Both the American and British campaigns are very good. The Russian one has a lot of scenery, true.

  14. Wait…a mission where Commies are mowed down by valiant NSDAP soldiers protecting their homeland? From the filthy Soviet perspective? SOLD!

  15. I remember when MoH released the same thing year after year after year, then CoD came along and revitalized the FPS genre and showed MoH what it was all about… Then it became the replacement for MoH releasing the same thing year after year after year. I stopped being interested in the CoD games after I played CoD 2. I tried a few of the modern ones here and there, and wow it was really sad to see what happened to the franchise.

  16. Im a 20 years old, basically a zoomer, but I still prefer CoD1 over CoD2 because of so many memorable moments in missions. Every mission there was brilliant, CoD2 was kinda repetitive in that term

  17. This,COD2 and MOHA: Pacific Assault are my go-to WW2 experience games. You have the European theater,African,and Pacific in one package.What a steal.Also,the United Offensive expansion was great.

  18. For of thos who says video games teachs you nothing i learned most of the History about WW2 from this awesome games even better than History lessons in High School and i masterd all of my english from video games i'm an Algerian by the way

  19. The best Call of Duty's are ;

    – Call of Duty 1
    – Call of Duty 2
    – Call of Duty 3
    – Call of Duty 4 : Modern Warfare 1
    – Call of Duty : World at War ( which for me is a remake/reboot from CoD 1,2&3 some missions looked very similar )

    The rest of this Call of…franchise sucks and offers the same over and over again . The boring cinematics , the same cutscenes used in many of their games , the boring movie/game-game/movie feel insteed to be "a full game" also not to forget the political agenda they throw in these last years . ( for example Battlefield 5 ) , and the same boring multiplayer campaign/maps that gets recycled on every new CoD game + the annoying kiddos giving insults and the cheaters/hackers which make online gaming not fun anymore ( is why i prefer much more solo campaigns the last decades )

    They should come back to the source of what real fps games were . So tired about health regeneration it is all except realistic . Medikits is more accurate imho same goes for ammo boxes/kits . Upgrading your weapons is also unrealistic as it depends on what era the game is set at . Etc…

    Sadly we will never have memorable fps games we will talk about 20-25 years later anymore . The world of video games is since long a competition and the greedy freaking money that ruins everything . Back then it was "Quality over Quantity" today it is otherwise "Quantity over quality" .

Comments are closed.

Close