By Ned Jordan

Throughout the history of the Call of Duty games, developer Infinity Ward has created each major version of the game and then handed things off to Treyarch to handle the expansions and minor sequels. Also throughout the history of the Call of Duty games, the games developed by Infinity Ward have been excellent, and those developed by Treyarch have been good, but not great. Now history has again repeated itself as last year's Infinity Ward's Call of Duty 4 was an excellent game and this year's Treyarch developed Call of duty: World at War is not quite up to par with respect to its predecessor.

The differences between Call of Duty 4 and World at War are not that apparent from the surface – leaving aside the change of setting from modern warfare to World War II. After all, World of War is built using the same underlying game engine that is in place in Call of Duty 4. However, if you play through the campaigns in both games you will notice the difference. Call of Duty 4 does a great job of capturing the series' hallmark of memorable battle sequences and intense combat situations. On the other hand, World at War come up a little short in this department. It's not from a lack of trying – World at War includes an amphibious assault, jungle ambushes, a sniper duel in the ruins of Stalingrad, and other interesting sequences. It's just that World at War can't quite seem to capture that Call of Duty magic. The battles in World at War don't quite stick with you like they do in Call of Duty 4. It's kind of like the difference between reading a book by an above average writer and reading one by a great writer.

World at War's campaign is shorter than the one in Call of Duty 4. This probably due to the fact that only a year separates the games' release dates, and perhaps also to an assumption that you'll spend most of your time with the multiplayer side of the game. You can tell that the developers were aware that the campaign is a little on the short side by the way the game awards its trophies. You get a trophy for completing the first level on any difficulty, but to get any more trophies for completing level you'll nee to play the game on the 'hard' setting. One surefire way to make a game feel longer than it actually is is to increase the difficulty level

In spite of its shortcomings, most shooter fans will have some fun with the campaign. After all, how often in games do you get the chance to smoke snipers out of palm trees with a flamethrower? World at War also delivers something in its campaign that Call of Duty 4 did not: co-op play. Up to four players can play together, either in truly cooperative play or in a competitive mode in which each player competes for the best battle stats. Both modes are enjoyable and co-op play is a welcome feature of the game.

On the multiplayer side of things, World at War is completely on par with Call of Duty 4. You get all of the experience points, rank progression, and perks that are a part of Call of Duty 4. You pretty much get a World War II version of Call of Duty 4's multiplayer game, although there are a few minor additions such as the introduction of attack dogs. World at War also adds a new game type called War. In War the object is to control specific points on the map, much like the play in the Battlefield series. It's safe to say that if you enjoyed Call of Duty 4's multiplayer mode, then you'll have a good time with World at War's

In The End, This Game Hath Been Rated: 85%. Not quite Call of Duty 4, but a fun game nonetheless.