The Open Beta for PC ends Oktober 2nd, 2017. Who wants to take a peek at the brandnew Call of Duty, or at least the multiplayer part, has to hurry up now. For all who still don't had a look at it and prefer to read a few lines about it instead of being part of the battle oneself, here are my first impressions.
Since Oktober 29, 2017 everyone is free to participate in the Open Beta for Call of Duty:WWII via Steam. There was an earer longing for the new Game of the series but only a few hours later the first negative reviews appeared on Steam.
There are many reasons for the negative reviews. I for myself can understand the negative criticism partly, espacially because most of the negative criticism is based on the fact that what Call of Duty:WWII is can't satisfy the users expectations. One reason for this is the marketing hype about the new Call of Duty and it's goal to revive the good old times of Call of Duty 2. Disappointingly this isn't what happend. This isn't much to my surprise but seems to upset most of the open beta testers, because the new game continues to be what Call of Duty used to become - this isn't changed by returning to the WWII scenario.
As well as all the last Call of Duty games the new one is recognizably a console port to the PC. That alone doesn't make it a bad game, but it has a negative touch.
All those who another bad port to the PC can be assured that this one is a well done port. Visually and technically Call of Duty:WWII might not be a master piece, but for a game in beta state it's a stable and solid work. After over 10 hours of gameplay I personally didn't experience a single crash, freeze or graphical error and most of the problems I read about in the internet can be solved by updating hardware drivers like those for the graphics card.
Call of Duty: WWII's system requirements are moderate: a third generation Intel Core i3, 8 GB RAM, a nVidia GeForce GTX 660 or AMD Radeon HD 7850 with 2 GB of VRAM each and 25 GB HDD are enough for playing the new game. Recommended are an Intel Core i5 2400 or AMD Ryzen 5 1600X, 12 GB RAM and a nVidia GeForce GTX 970 or AMD Radeon R9 390 / RX 580 with 6 or 8 GB of VRAM each.
My own PC is old, powered by an AMD FX-8150, 16 GB RAM. Only my graphics card is a bit more up-to-date as I upgraded a few month ago, since then it an ASUS Strix Radeon RX 470 with 4 GB of VRAM which is delivering the graphics power. This totals to a system in between the minimum and the recommended configuration, at least it is way enough to have a decent gaming experience with Call of Duty: WWII and to participate in a few fast battles.
The gaming experience
And with fast battles we directly name what it's all about. All game modes are fast to ultra fast experiences, there is little time to realy enjoy the scene, no time to rest - but this isn't something to expect of a Call of Duty multiplayer session and after being thrown directly into the battle after a short briefing about the objectives.
But everyone who has played a shooter in the last few years will most likely feel at home right away. Overall, the whole Call of Duty:WWII experience isn't able to really surprise anyone. The war mode, which I tested most of the time, was able to make fun with the typical clear and secure scenarios. Destroy an ammo dump, rebuild a bridge, conquer the command post - all the usual stuff. War. War never changes. And maybe that's the reason that Call of Duty:WWII doesn't change it either. In a way this is what is the fun part about this new game. But in the end Call of Duty:WWII could be a bit more tactical, this way Call of Duty will stay the right tool for the now and then hobby comupter sceen soldier, who needs to fill a few empty hours from time to time.
Summarized the positive aspects are: Call of Duty: WWII offers an easy entry, fast and action loaded battles and for a beta version a quite stable and solid state.
Although we can't say anything about the singleplayer part yet, we already have a first impression of what Call of Duty: WWII has to offer. At least for now this is not the promised back to the roots and Call of Duty 2 like game. The port of from the console to the PC might be technically good, but means that the experience isn't what a PC gamer will expect - it's more a Big Mac Menu instead of a good steak.
Nonetheless the battles are fun, although the multiplayer part will have it's difficulties to keep up the motivation to play it. For a long term motivation the battles are too fast and action loaded with too less tactical demands. A coordinated affort of a team is not necessary to win a battle. Additionally the historic accuracy lacks in a few points like Battlefield One did, too. Both can't deny that they are in some why trying to transfer a modern warefare and modern gameplay to a historic scenario - in some ways simply trying too hard.
On the one hand side: Yes, WWI is fun, having a look at the beta is worth the try as it offers a fast an action loaded gaming experience. On the other hand: We can't say anything about the singleplayer or the Co-Op mode, additionally there are the few negative aspects mentioned before. You can have fun with the new Call of Duty, but don't expect a new Call of Duty 2. I am nonetheless looking forward to the release and whether the developers can improve on at least some of the negative aspects.
- Call of Duty: WW2 PC Beta: Erste Eindrücke zur Technik mit Grafikkarten-Benchmarks / pcgameshardware.de (DE)
- Call of Duty WW2 - Video-Fazit: Warum wird die PC-Beta so negativ bewertet? / gamestar.de (DE)