You could find die hard COD fans across world crying in the foetal position in the pouring rain as they questioned the relevance of laser cannons, jetpacks, and drones in one of our favourite franchises. The COD series from that date was then very close to my heart, up until the devil himself possessed the development and producer teams for Infinite Warfare and Black Ops. Digital or not, it was a title that offered the strength to let me break down the walls normally raised by video game stories, and truly help me to connect.
World at War was remarkable for a different reason, too, and was the first game that I played where not only I cared about the actual gameplay, but also the story and the outcome of an event that happened 60 years prior. The game offered fun-filled action of one of the world’s most grisly events as a form of entertainment, but more importantly became a history lesson for myself and anyone else who played the game.
When I purchased “World at War” - and when I say I purchased, I meant my Dad purchased the game for me (because the MA rating stopped me from buying it myself, more collective sigh) - my perspective of war changed dramatically. We had known for most of our lives that World War II changed the course of history, but we weren’t emotionally connected to the story, and can you blame a group of teenagers? As my teacher prepared his PowerPoint presentation on the assault of Berlin, a collective sigh was heard, almost in harmony, among the class of 30 school boys who simply didn’t give a damn.
I was a young lad when Call of Duty’s “World at War” was released back in 2008, and I happened to be studying WW2 at school at the time. And Call of Duty: World War II gets close to scoring all of them. Blood, sweat, and tears: the three things required to produce a historical first person shooter that can both entertain and educates the audience.
0 kommentar(er)
