World in Conflict

[RedRalph]

Anyone played it? Worth getting?

 

[Mulholland]

I bought it a few years back. It's not a bad game, it kept me interested for a while, but I found it somewhat lacking. Single player campaign is above average, but short. Multiplayer wasn't great as it requires excellent teamwork which is hard to find unless you're in a clan. If this is the case you'll probably be relegated to the same class Armour, infantry , air or support. and it can get boring.

I'd say if it's in the bargain bin it's worth a try. But if at full price I'd say there are other games you could be playing.

 

[Thorvald of Lym]

My computer couldn't run it at full capacity and I never actually finished the campaign. My friend borrowed it and told me he completed the singleplayer in a couple of hours. It's an alright RTT, but the tactics can become repetitive.

On the other hand, it's written in Python.

 

[Leonel]

I have it primarily for the purpose of waging a brutal war through downtown Seattle. It's pretty cool fighting south of the Seattle Center and say "Hey! I know that place!"

 

[aronnax]

I had it. It was a pain trying to secure the frikking city away from the Ruskies.

Its fun but not really worth the money as there are single-player and multiplayer experiences.

Get it from the bargain been if you are itching to try something new.

 

[RedRalph]

I got it for €17. its good fun, but like most non-strategy games, there isnt much rreplayability. I paid the right amoutn for it.

 

[GoodGame]

I got it for €17. its good fun, but like most non-strategy games, there isnt much rreplayability. I paid the right amoutn for it.

If you want to get the full strategic value of it you have to get into the large online matches. A very good game then, but lack of units and maps tends to limit the long term replayabilty. Was good fun for about 3 months.

 

[bob rulz]

I agree with the consensus. It was a very interesting game and I had a lot of fun with the campaign. Once. It had almost no replayability. Multiplayer was an interesting idea but it had a steep learning curve and finding good teamwork was difficult. I didn't try very hard to get into multiplayer.

I think it's worth it for the single-player if you can find it cheap, as the campaign is one of the better ones I've played, just don't expect to be getting a lot of long-term value out of it.

 

[Joecoolyo]

I have to agree with most people here too. The campaign was too short (but fun in the process). Though I have to disagree about replayability. Sure, it can get kind of boring after a couple months, but it's the first game I go to when I have the urge to blow crap up. And in that area it succeeds greatly .