WW2 but the graphics aren't (Call of Duty: World at War (PS3))

Member Name: joggino

Product:	Call of Duty: World at War (PS3)
Date:	31/08/09 (16 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: graphics, special effects, guns

Disadvantages: its set in WW2

This Game is like the older call of duty games, it is set in WW2 and the aim of the game is all leading upto the pushing back of the germans, and eventually killing General Amsell, the graphics and audio plus special effects are good, here is a break down:
EFFECTS:
the special effects are really good espeically when you get tabuned or some one gets blasted by a tank when you go either slow motion to the floor which is really cool, also the breathing when you are regenerating health.
GUNS:
the choice of guns is very cool, it shows how some guns have developed e.g. the MP40 to the MP5 not much has changed i also find that the PTRS on the game is nearly modern, but compare these to Modern warefare the only better thing these guns have is the graphics.
NAZI ZOMBIES:
the nazi zombies is cool and has got better and better, and when each map pack gets released, the maps keep getting bigger.
MAPS;
yet again when each map pack gets released the maps keeping getting better quality and bigger.

i would buy this game if you like WW2 but i personall prefered modern warefare , mostly due to the no scoping but thats just my view.

Summary: graphics aren't bad just the time frame is