237°
EXPIRED
(PC) Call of Duty: World at War preorder £21.99 @ Powerplay
(PC) Call of Duty: World at War  preorder £21.99 @ Powerplay

(PC) Call of Duty: World at War preorder £21.99 @ Powerplay

Buy forBuy forBuy for£21.99
GETGet dealVisit site and get deal
Cheapest I've seen this is elsewhere is £29.98 at Amazon

23 Comments

Great price. I'll be getting it for 360 though

Good price but only preorder this if you don't mind getting the game a week or 2 after release. Powerplay never deliver on release day.
If you must play this game on release day buy (1st class) with gameplay (11% Quidco).
I suggest you wait a few more weeks before preordering.

Banned

In before the haters arrive (COD4 fanboys).

I can't believe people actually write reviews about this game even though it hasn't been released nor has a demo surfaced (as far as I know). Quite sad :).

whens it coming out?

82 days

PS thanks for the advice Musicrab if they do take 2 weeks no wonder its cheaper, how much if first class gameplay delivery

Great price - so I have to wait a few days to save £8 (quidco not included) - not a problem for me.
Still a few months to go - will order it from Powerplay and keep an eye on the price elsewhere.

Also, remeber with these people that if they want to charge more on the release day, they'll just cancl your order - happened to me several times, which is why i dont use these people for pre-orders

sosrandom;2864523

82 daysPS thanks for the advice Musicrab if they do take 2 weeks no … 82 daysPS thanks for the advice Musicrab if they do take 2 weeks no wonder its cheaper, how much if first class gameplay delivery


]Gameplay.co.uk charge 0.99p for 1st class delivery. 2nd class is normally good enough but not worth the risk if you MUST have it on delivery day.

not the same dev team who done cod2 or cod4 though

Can't believe the price of COD4 (PC) is more expensive than this one.

I'll pass.

I cannot believe that Treyarch are being allowed the chance to put the COD franchise back to mediocrity again after the shambles that was COD3.

After the sheer brilliance of COD4 we are back again to WW2? I mean its been done a million times already.

I wont be buying it, thats for sure, unless it drops to a tenner or something.

Ev0lution;2865563

I'll pass.I cannot believe that Treyarch are being allowed the chance to … I'll pass.I cannot believe that Treyarch are being allowed the chance to put the COD franchise back to mediocrity again after the shambles that was COD3. After the sheer brilliance of COD4 we are back again to WW2? I mean its been done a million times already.I wont be buying it, thats for sure, unless it drops to a tenner or something.



Its so infinity can bring out COD6 next year set in space cod5 can either be great or not, it won't matter as cod6 is already confirmed for next year. I personally think cod5 will be great.

Banned

I would hold back until a review comes out as Infinity Ward aint doing it so I would guess this aint gonna be that good at all, 21.99 is good providing it aint a bloody waste of time

cod4 was good cause of it being moderen but for cod5 why put it back in too ww2?;-)

i just dont get it i know other people are making it and i know they made cod3 badly but on a money prospective i would say theirs more money in modern times than in the ww2 style :whistling:

but i guess you cant go wrong with it being 21.99:thumbsup:

good luck to infinityward for number 6

Banned

TBH Cod4 is good but there are some very annoying things about it especially in multiplay such as the airstrikes and helicopters which can ruin the game.

CoD should be really based on ww2 anyway so thats a good thing with CoD5, also worth mentioning cod 3 was not out for the pc

I heard cod 5 was the vietnam war but cod2 and cod4 are the best.

Original Poster

In Treyarch's defence they had only 8 months to make COD 3. I work in games development and I can tell you what they achieved in that time is nothing short of a miracle. Most AAA titles take at least 3 years with a dev team twice the size of the COD 3 team. (Too Human took somewhere between 5-10 years depending on who you believe)

Also the reason they are revisiting WW2 is that they haven't done the South Pacific until now. They wanted to before but basically PCs weren't powerful enough to handle the graphically intensive jungles. Crysis proved that it is now possible to do so.

I'm personally going to give them the benefit of the doubt for now.

i wish people would stop saying "oh no not WW2 again!" if they did just modern wars for the next 2 CODs people would moan again..."oh no not again"

I only just started playing COD3 and so far im liking it, even though im not used to first person shooters on a controller. Voted hot

i love playing COD4 and thoroughly enjoyed COD3 online aswell.

IW/Treyarch who gives a chit, as long as the game is fun to play online. me and my mates are all buying it for 360 on release day.

joconnor;2867515

Also the reason they are revisiting WW2 is that they haven't done the … Also the reason they are revisiting WW2 is that they haven't done the South Pacific until now. They wanted to before but basically PCs weren't powerful enough to handle the graphically intensive jungles. Crysis proved that it is now possible to do so.



I must have just dreamed playing Medal Of Honor Pacific Assault 4 years ago....:roll:

Original Poster

Strawdog;2868844

I must have just dreamed playing Medal Of Honor Pacific Assault 4 years … I must have just dreamed playing Medal Of Honor Pacific Assault 4 years ago....:roll:



Medal of Honor isn't Call Of Duty :whistling:

joconnor;2867515

In Treyarch's defence they had only 8 months to make COD 3. I work in … In Treyarch's defence they had only 8 months to make COD 3. I work in games development and I can tell you what they achieved in that time is nothing short of a miracle. Most AAA titles take at least 3 years with a dev team twice the size of the COD 3 team. (Too Human took somewhere between 5-10 years depending on who you believe)Also the reason they are revisiting WW2 is that they haven't done the South Pacific until now. They wanted to before but basically PCs weren't powerful enough to handle the graphically intensive jungles. Crysis proved that it is now possible to do so.I'm personally going to give them the benefit of the doubt for now.



Not really a miracle as such. They managed to get a poor game to market faster than the average devco because of the demands of the almighty dollar. No other reason.

In the process they effectively ruined their own reputation and but a black mark on the COD series that wont ever go away.

There is no point rushing a game to market when it is a mess. Its ultimately self defeating.

Banned

There is nothing wrong with COD3 MP (XBL).. it's actually very good and can be very hard if you're playing against regulars.

I never did understand why people slated it so much but it's probably down to delusion, you know the whole COD4 is great (mediocre at best imo)... no game will ever be better... GTA IV is great 10/10... same BS.

I won't be buying COD6 if it's based in "".
Post a comment
Avatar
@
    Text