![]() ![]() Especially disappointing is how the character Parker, whom was being played the entire game, has no post story. There isn't any aftermath footage or epilogue. There is simply a dialogue that informs that the player has succeeded, one short story tie-up, and then the credits roll. The ending on the American side is a little disappointing, not because of how it ends, but how it is handled. ![]() There are 15 American/NATO missions while there are only 6 Russian missions, but of them all, there are only about 5 great American missions, and 4 great Russian missions, making the expansion pack better overall in design, even if it is shorter. I will say more about this further into the review. This isn't because the initial levels are tutorials, but just because emotionally they feel stronger, and the gameplay is superior. Overall, while the story is interesting overall, dealing with nukes, and some plot twists, it only really starts to get exciting in the latter half of the game. These are different than COH, which only play off the strategy of the map at hand in-game, with the operation overviews being separate in the animated cinematics. They are similar to Call of Duty 4 in storytelling style, but a more slow and morbid version. They include story of the map you will soon be visiting, but not each objective you will have to do on it. The American cinematic operation overview maps are narrated by an "unknown voice" and describe the thoughts of the current attack plans and reasoning. His interaction with his associates also brings up more politically charged topics: execution, guerilla tactics, patriotism which feel more in terms with the game's story than some of the early shallow dialogue occurring between the American counterparts. He is sort of that stereotypical hero that one sees from movies such as from "Letters from Iwo Jima" that knows the enemy and respects them. Rather than go into the names, I will simply say the Colonel feels more human than the American chatterbox equivalent, and stronger emotionally. In terms of characters there are better-quality soviet versions. Regardless, if one is playing World in Conflict for the first time, the inclusion of the Soviet missions certainly helps explain some of the story arcs as well as scenes occurring simultaneously in the storyline. This is a little disappointing, since as an expansion it forces a complete replay through the game to find all the new content, rather than having that option as well as a mission/campaign select for just those special missions. Now, World In Conflict Gold came with a Soviet Campaign as well as the American one, but soviet missions are spliced in between the American's. While other characters come into play, those 3 are the ones of major storyline importance. In the American Campaign, the player takes control of a commander named Parker, and is joined with the help of AI Co-commanders, such as Bannon, with both of you being directed by Colonel Sawyer. During both, the allied nations are dealing with the threat of the Soviet Union, had it not fallen at the end of the cold war. Story: The story takes place during the cold war, 1989 including additional historical pieces. World in Conflict is a game which reminds me a lot of Command and Conquer with bits and pieces of other RTSs thrown in for a somewhat appealing and occasionally satisfying experience. Instead, this review will focus on the single player aspect of both the original campaign and the interlaced Soviet expansion pack missions. ![]() I had not had the chance for playing much multiplayer for this game, so I won't reflect on it much. World in Conflict Gold was one of those games, and after playing through the single player on the normal difficulty I have constructed this review. During Direct to Drive's 5 year old sale, where they were selling games for 5 dollars, I jumped on two games at discount prices. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |