I'd say it is not a good game at all. i bought my son it for his birthday and he hates it. its one of the worst Call of Duty games. ( id say call of duty 1 is better)
call of duty 5
Call of Duty 5 was never used for a title but was only slang for the Call of Duty game after the Call of Duty 4 Modern Warfare. The name of the game is Call of Duty Worlds at War and it could be considered a game based on WWII weapons except for the DLCs and Zombie Mode that was part of 4 Maps
Call of Duty 5
Call of Duty: World at War (COD 5) Call of Duty: Black Ops (COD 7)
In my opinion call of duty 4 is way better since everything is auto. and on #5 barely anything is.
CoD: WaW is an abbreviation for a game called Call of Duty: World at War (or Call of Duty 5). It is a popular game from the game series Call of Duty for Xbox360, PS3, Wii and PC.
Call of Duty 5 was never released under that name, for the PS2 the game's name is Call of Duty World at War Final Fronts and it is a different game from the Call of Duty World at War for PS3 and Xbox 360
It is awesome, one of myof favorite games, but call of duty 4 and 5 are the greatest
Well there both good in there own way so by them .
No of course not. Call of Duty World at War and Call of Duty World at War Final Fronts were never Call of Duty 5and instead the Firth game in the Call of Duty series. How can a new game be called Call of Duty 5 when people have been calling those games COD5. It would be bad marketing of a new product with reduced sales while people tried to decide if it was a new game
look here http://www.xbox360achievements.org/game/call-of-duty-world-at-war/achievements/
Not if your game is Call of Duty World at War Final Fronts for the PS2