First of all, there was NOTHING wrong with World at War. Treyarch made a great game in world at war, and I have the authority to say that because I’ve been playing CoD games since they were Wolfenstein (Lets get real, RTCW is the same engine, models, look and feel of COD1). The single player was epic of CoD caliber, the multiplayer was balanced, it had dedicated servers, had all the WW2 weapons you could want, the graphics kicked *edited*, and it brought us nazi zombies. The main reason people say it was bad is because of the WW2 aspect and them getting tired of WW2. Lets also not forget, WaW brought the PC users Prestige mode for the first time. Your opinion, not fact. In reality, there was no real flaws in WaW (at least not enough to make people bash it like they do). Now, did it have the fun factor that CoD2 did for a WW2 game? No, but that’s like how GTA San Andreas didn’t have the feel of Vice City. COD2 was all about skill. No perks, everyone had to deal with set classes, and that was okay. *edited* has evolved. It got boring for some. (Although Bolt action rifles will never measure to how kickass they were in CoD2).
Secondly, MW2 is a fantastic game. It really is, and people need to give up comparing it to battlefield BC2. I own both, and they are a totally different style of game. The only thing holding MW2 back from being perfection (in my eyes) was the lack of dedicated servers, and the addition of Tactical Nuke. It turned alot of fun players into people who go for nukes and rage when they fail. Heartbeat sensors should have never been considered for multiplayer either…but what are you gonna do.
Again, don’t talk *edited* about Treyarch.