User Reviews (11 - 21 of 71)

Show these reviews first:

Highest Rated
Lowest Rated Newest
Oldest Most Helpful
Least Helpful

Good but not as good as the original

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 5 / 6
Date: May 08, 2005
Author: Amazon User

I'm a little surprised to see some of the unqualified praise COD: United Offensive has received. I loved the original and enjoyed this expansion pack very much, but its not without its drawbacks. The AI is much worse than the original; for a game that boasts about never having to fight alone you sure do have some worthless squad mates. I cant tell you the number of times I burst into a room or area to have the rest of the squad bypass the enemies right in front of them to breeze onto the next room, or even stand around twiddling their thumbs with a Nazi in the room! The reason they probably are not reacting is that they are not being shot at; inevitably whenever you are in a group, the enemy AI will target and attack you, forgetting about your squadmates. This isnt a big deal, as it makes the game that much more challenging, but can still be annoying. Far worse, and to me shoddy game design, are the instant death artillery strikes. On a couple levels (The bridge at Ste. Foy being the worst) you will simply die if you veer away from where you are supposed to go. Take a wrong step or not move fast enough and *boom*, instant death from artillery or air strike. This became infuriating on the aforementioned Ste Foy level, where its not exactly clear what you are supposed to do. I mean, all you have to do is cross a bridge, right? Hardly, and you will be punished with instant death many times if you dont follow the exact (and unclear) steps the game designers wanted. There were several times I was so infuriated that I had to walk away and count to ten. Its pretty much a below the belt way of ramping up the difficulty. Look, I appreciate difficulty as much as the next guy, and will walk away from games that are too easy as well, but this game passed over the line from difficulty to sheer frustration on more than one occasion. One other point worth mentioning that was a change from the original is the never ending Nazi spawn point. In the original COD you could usually mop up the enemies and advance towards your objectives. In UO the enemy will spawn forever until you have advanced far enough to trigger the ending event. Not a big deal, but again, its a cheap way of ramping up the difficulty. You'll fight off or kill wave after wave of enemy until you figure out that you need to walk forward to trigger some even that stops the wave of Nazis from overwhelming you.

All that being said, this was still worthwhile and a whole lot of fun (I did give it 3 stars afterall), it was (perhaps inevitably) a let down from the original, and employs some questionable game design to ramp up the difficulty in order to mask an occasionally sub-par AI. I'd still recommend it, just temper your expectations.

The best WW2 similator out there now!

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 4 / 4
Date: September 22, 2004
Author: Amazon User

I agree with everybody about the multiplayer in the game. It is simply awesome! First of all the original C of D multiplayer was simply awesome and in this game it's even better here's why:

Now you can drive tanks or be the machine gunner on top just like BF1942 but driving and shooting is a lot more fun! The tanks have more fire power than BF1942 and you can shot quicker it seems?

There is now deployable machine guns in this game. I have found they are great if you can find a good place with a view to set up and mowe down anyone going by but just running around on the maps and looking for people to shot can be inefective to say the least because if you do spot someone they have the advantage because they can just aim and shot you but you have to right-click to set up the gun then load in most cases and then left-click to fire so by the time you do all this your dead from a Thompson gun carring soldier.

You can also shoot anti-tank weapons like a American Bazooka or the German's copy of the weapon. Which leaves tanks very vulnarable for destruction. You can also fire canons at tanks, buildings and soldiers which is fun. In all reality this is BF1942 all over again but 10X better. You can drive Jeeps to. The only thing you can't drive in the game is Airplanes but this is a ground combat game and besides BF1942 can have thier planes because even if you got one off the ground you couldn't hit anything due to going to fast or stay in the air very long without crashing into something because the controls were to hard!

As mentioned by a previous reviewer, flame throwers were added and if you want to find one you will most likely have to kill the guy who is carring one. I did on the Berlin map. So make note of that.

All and all, this game is awesome. Single player is in my persective is a lot harder unlike what another reviewer said. He must be some ex-millitary guy or something because I found it very challenging especially the first battle in the game. I am currently on the second mission and have no ammo in the middle of a fire fight and that's not good! Yes, single player is th e same thing as the original but why change something that's already great? Just add some new weapons and different maps and battles and go with it. I think people expect to much out of games especially expansion packs. If the orginal game was a success then the expansion must be ten times better..............wrong! You guys need to live in reality. There is nothing wrong with this game at all except it being short but it's a expansion pack! Not a entire game! Come on guys get real!

Anyway, enough venting I just get tired of people wanting the moon and stars to boot out of games. Oviously they never seen the pregression of game through the years and how far they have come since the day of pong?

One last line in responce to Joel's review. Joel, I had the same problem with my single player in fact I couldn't even get the game installed on my PC because of a missing game file so I returned the game to EB and got a new one and it works like a charm now! I don't know if that's what you will have to do but make sure you install the (1.4) patch for the game or it won't run at all which is the latest patch version out right now.

Here I come Star Wars Battlefront! I heard this game was great!

See you on the UO battlefield! Latter....

Single player okay, multiplayer greatly improved

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 4 / 4
Date: March 04, 2005
Author: Amazon User

There are really two games in this expansion, and the single player game is about 3 stars, while the multiplayer is a 5 star addition.

The single player missions are overall not quite as good as those in the original CoD. Often they show a lack of imagination in level design, or are too difficult or too easy, as others have reported. But the real problem is that most of the levels show a lack of integration in how the events are "triggered." In CoD it was clear that events occurred according to triggers, but the triggers were well integrated into the overall level, scene, or scenario so that they seemed natural. In the expansion the triggers are much more obvious (ooh, who wants to bet that the moment I climb this ladder all h*** is going to break loose?"). Additionally, the same events occur over and over again in certain scenes where you are neither dying nor advancing the plot. When you've watched the same guy take 20 or 30 shots and keep getting up, you don't feel much urgency to protect him anymore. In fact, you wonder why in the heck he isn't doing more to protect YOU. This happened less frequently, but more importantly, less obviously in the original CoD.

Also, the way you are tracked in certain maps is irritating. In one notable example, you are literally walking a path between two minefields between one trigger point and the next. Maps are designed to channel you to one, and only one, assault point -- no flanking moves (unless ordered), no leap frog assaults, etc. The level designers set up "cool" scenes, and darn it, you are going to play them just they way the designers want you to play them.

But where the game shines is with the multiplayer maps and new weapons. Without the programmed bots, and without the need to do exactly what the games designers envisioned, the creeping, rushing, creeping nature of infantry assaults really come alive. Plus, with the addition of man portable machine guns, lanes of control and true fire bases become possible where you want them, rather than where the designers inserted a machine gun nest.

The looks are great on most of the maps, but where the real improvements have been made are in flowthrough -- the fights can come together over natural landmarks, or swirl and fragment into individual dogfights -- all depending on the skills are tastes of the players. You can't ask for too much more than that.

Best Expansion Pack Ever!

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 4 / 4
Date: March 04, 2005
Author: Amazon User

I bought this game mainly becuase I loved the original Call of Duty. In my books it is one of the best FPS ever, and certainly the best WW2 game. I did not expect to get so many new features for $30. They could have called it Call of Duty 2 and I wouldn't have a problem with that. There are many new weapons including Semi- Auto rifles and Mg's. What I've spent the most time on and what the games biggest improvement is is the multiplayer. With new maps, gameplay modes, and a new rank system the multiplayer is disgustingly fun. To make this short- if you liked CoD get this.

Call of the Expansion pack

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 10 / 19
Date: September 05, 2004
Author: Amazon User

Call of Duty was a fast paced, realistic, World War II shooter which was successful because of it's unique look and feel: the shell shock, the bullets whizzing by and the ability to fight as differnt people on differnet fronts. No game has ever done that. Also, the squad based action made you feel compasion for the men fighting alongside you, fighting together, it was so different to medal of honor. So if you want another dose of the action buy the expansion pack with 10 more single player levels and new and improved multiplayer maps and scenarios. Buy this game and remember; in war no one fights alone...

Not even worth downloading the demo.

1 Rating: 1, Useful: 10 / 19
Date: October 15, 2004
Author: Amazon User

I really enjoyed Call of Duty. Unfortunately the same thing that makes the Medal of Honor (yet another WWII game) add-ons so awful and a complete waste of data makes this add-on to Call of duty so bad. You literally follow a path that can not alter in any way, or the game kills you. A mortar shell magically lands on your head if you don't follow a very linear set of orders in a set time allotment. There is no ability to find alternate solutions in a battlefield scenario (unlike the original game), your orders are just barked one after the other in rapid succession, and they sound very much like one of the developers just pulled them randomly from a hat full of ideas written by the neighbors kid (they have nothing to do with strategy in a battle). Essentially this one add-on has made me completely lose any interest I had in 'grey matter' the company that did the add-on (a long time ago they used to make great games when they were xatrix, that is definitely not the case anymore, they must not have any of the original developers), and I certainly am wary of anything from infinity ward if they have such low standards for their products while claiming they are 'commited to excellence'. Not even close guys, not even close.

YAY! LET'S KILL NAZIS! . . . AGAIN!

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 7 / 12
Date: November 20, 2005
Author: Amazon User

First of all, I want to say that I was not that impressed by the original Call of Duty. Sure, the gameplay and interface was solid, the Russian campaign was a nice escape from the norm, but overall, Call of Duty just didn't do anything revolutionary in the FPS genre. Just about everything in COD was done before by games like Medal of Honor and Battlefield 1942. Admittedly, COD did some of those things better.

As for this new expansion pack, it really is not that good. For one, the original COD could be beaten in about 10 hours. Not a very long game, by any current standards. And it's safe to say that expansion packs often (if not always) offer less gameplay time. So how did they remedy this? Easy. They cranked up the difficulty by having scripted bombs kill you if you stand in the wrong place for too long, or the wrong place at the wrong time. And worst of all, I literally saw Nazis SPAWN in front of me due some invisible spawn point. I kill one wave of Nazis and then "Poof!" Hitler magically warped some Nazi stormtroopers onto the battlefield, or something. Shortly after this feeble attempt to defend the chateau, I died.

I also want to point out that the COD games are trying to emphasis the fact that "You are part of a Team", like when you follow SGT Moody around. But the AI for my teammates is INSANE! My fellow soldiers walk right by Nazis and don't even realize what they've done! As a result, "I", me, personally, have to kill these Nazis that they've conveniently overlooked. Very very rarely has a fellow soldier taken out a Nazi troop for me when I'm reloading.

I tried to be patient with this game, but in the end I just couldn't deal with it. Maybe I could put up with the game, if it had some redeeming replay value (I didn't buy it for multiplayer, only singleplayer). But this game has little or none. You won't find secret areas, you won't find secret maps, you won't find secret weapons, and, let's face it, any of those elements would be a little out of place in a trying-to-be-historical WWII game anyway. This isn't Doom or Half-Life.

It's much worse.

If you like linear games, then you'll love this.
If you like more freedom, you'll probably hate it.

Great expansion so far, and that's just the multiplayer ver!

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 5 / 7
Date: September 19, 2004
Author: Amazon User

I just got this this weekend, and launched right into multiplayer games, since this is the real strength of this game. So far, it's awesome! The addition of tanks, jeeps, tank destroyers makes battles more dynamic. This is fast approaching the quality of combat simulation we used in the army! The best thing is that there are enough tanks for everybody...no one is waiting around for one to spawn like in BF1942. Same for anti-tank rocket systems as well, which balances the use of tanks. The infantry can defeat tanks with well-placed rocket shots from behind bushes which demonstrates the need for tank-infantry combined arms tactics (just like real life!).
Additionally, the expansion pack fixes every deficiency the previous version had - allowing for cook-off of grenades, allowing you to sprint short distances (to cover/concealed positions).
The multiplayer game is supposed to have flamethrowers as well, but I haven't seen them yet.
The best part is this all still runs on my 800mhz 4 year-old Dell. BF Vietnam reduces my PC to a crawl.

An average expansion to a great game.

3 Rating: 3, Useful: 4 / 5
Date: September 29, 2004
Author: Amazon User

I'm something of a CoD addict, putting in literally hundreds of hours of multiplayer games on my favorite Headquarters server. I've had the expansion for a few days now, and am about halfway through the SP material. I've also played about 6 hours of the new MP maps/game types.

The SP component is pretty much more of the same, although the British campaign does start out with an interesting mission where you are a gunner inside a B-17 bomber. However, in my view the game suffers from some of the same limitations of Call of Duty's single-player: the scripted, railroading nature of the missions, and the tendency for it to devolve into advance-kill a guy-quicksave. Ninety percent of the time there are "tracks" (be it a low barbed wire fence, or a wall, or mines) that limit your advancing to a narrow, predetermined pathway through the mission. Bad guys almost always appear at exactly the same place (after a few reloads, you can almost close your eyes as you advance). The game has very limited replayability.

I'm a big fan of multiplayer CoD, and I was eagerly anticipating the new maps, weapons, and game modes. Thus far, though, I've been a bit underwhelmed. The new modes are interesting but nothing that I haven't seen before in other games. Since the game generally supports fewer than 30 players (15 on a side, assuming a full server and no spectators), you really don't have enough to successfully guard/attack 6 bases (at least not without good coordination and tactics, which you don't generally see outside of a clan). What has really turned me off are the vehicles; while I generally enjoy combined arms games like the BF series, in this case the tanks feel... well, a bit overdone. The balancing (infantry vs. tank) isn't too bad, but there are literally dozens of tanks seeded across some of the maps, and because of the relatively small number of players, you lose some of the gritty intensity of soldier vs. soldier combat you saw in the original game. The new maps are also often VERY dark, and while you can crank up the brightness setting, that makes the colors appear very washed out. Playing the twilight maps gives me a headache after a round or two.

ONE OF THE BEST WORLD WAR 2 GAMES OF ALL

5 Rating: 5, Useful: 3 / 3
Date: December 16, 2004
Author: Amazon User

i have all of the medal of honors and most call of duties and this is the best one yet with good graphics and a historical sigificance it is the best world war 2 game in the market today
I showed my uncles who where in vietnam and korea veterans this game and it almost brought them to tears they said it was the most realistis thing the ever saw. 5***** great game for all history lovers.

Review Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next 

Actions