Don't let the screenshots from Gary Grigsby's World at War fool you. It may cover World War II at a strategic level, but this isn't Axis & Allies. Success in this game requires managing everything from research and supplies to politics and production, with loads of epic battles simply punctuating...

Models many nuances of the war without being too complicated; Rewards long-term planning; Good graphics

Battle animations are lame; Interface could be less cluttered; Fixed resolution

But for those who like something in between - a game with a bit more to it than the average beer & pretzel fare, but still quick to both learn and understand; something that the average person would like to sit down and play, that also offers enough detail to keep the interest of a more hardcore...

Easy to learn; decent map graphics

Gameplay may not be deep enough for hardcore wargamers

well, i'm no IGN, but so far this game has been operating quite well. if you like games such as risk, then this game is definitely for you. i can't comment too much on it at this time as im still learning the moves and operations of the game.

The Call of Duty series is one of the most successful first-person shooter franchises in history. Beginning with the first game back in 2003, the series has gone on to multi-platform success.

The decision by Treyarch to take Call of Duty back to World War II is redeemed by two factors - The Japanese and Russian storyline of the main campaign and the fact that we don't ever want to see the day when people complain "Oh god, not another modern day shooter!

Great singleplayer campaign; Love the Pacific Theatre; Gary Oldman and Keifer Sutherland?

Too familiar; World War II again; Multiplayer maps aren't well balanced

Call of Duty: World at War is one of the best, most polished first-person shooters available for the Wii.

Beautiful visuals and cutscenes; Makes good use of the Wii Zapper.

Control style can be finicky; Quirky multiplayer format will take some getting used to

Call of Duty: World at War is more than a rehash. It provides a refreshing change to the well known maps and weapons from Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, and makes some positive changes. The single-player campaign involves a riveting and emotional story, and the inclusion of co-op is fantastic.

Based on the fabulous Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare engine; Spectacular multiplayer, and the option to search for games locally; Excellent change of scenery to WWII, very solid single-player; Co-op

Single-player a little short, WWII setting won't appeal to all; Weighted very much towards online play (if this can be considered a bad thing)

A new Call of Duty experience is fast becoming a seasonal formality, with additional instalments of Activision's war-bound shooter now arriving on an annual basis. So, right on time, up marches this year's entry, Call of Duty: World at War , the fifth iteration of what's become a winning formula of...

They have really taken COD4'S graphics and engine and made a fantastic game. Possibly the coolest aspect of the game would be blowing things up with the Bazooka and burning things with the flamethrower. Overall the whole package is great, I would definitely recommend getting a copy.

World at War is a strategic World War II war game on the grandest of scales – the entire globe is your battlefield. While war games on this scale can often be quite complex affairs, World at War does a good job of abstracting many of the details that come with managing a global conflict.