Why World at War is better: What’s the argument here? If you loved the combat in Call of Duty 4, you’ll shit a brick over World at War (unless you still want to be a baby about the setting). While I would have preferred the newest CoD installment to continue in the modern setting, the battles of the Pacific are a decent substitute. World at War still feels like any of the WWII CoD games before it, with slight tweaks such as a new focus on repelling ambush attacks and traversing through new environments like the lush island jungles.
If you still have an issue, you can retry a couple times, if it still crashes restart game again and again retry, after that, run malware scan virus scan, run the windows SFC program from safe mode. run Pc maintenence and pc diagnostics, (MAINLY NETWORK and ram, and virtual memory), you can also search for an event log for the program to find
Call of Duty: World at War (Nintendo DS) (2008) Call of Duty: World at War (Mobile) (2008) Call of Duty: Zombies (2009) but it's still a great way to play through the franchise. With that in
COD WAW is a super solid game, the engine hasn't aged the best but it's still really fun. I really hope we get a COD WAW remastered in the future, it'd breath new life into World at War and probably get more people into it. Multiplayer is fun; albeit perk balance is very strange (Shades, Gas Mask, Fireproof not making you fireproof, Tossback).
I've made this video for all cod waw players with a non-steam version of game. It works 100% cuz i play it everyday with friends.NOTE: This method works eve
. 221 895 596 475 196 778 881 651

is cod world at war still online