When you consider that they all seem to follow a formula -- one modeled aesthetically after "Saving Private Ryan" -- it's not surprising that some people have grown tired of World War II first-person shooters. But Call of Duty: World at War is not your father's WWII FPS (assuming your father worked on the first three Call of Duty games, most of the Medal Of Honor series and all of the Brothers In Arms games). Rather, because it's modeled more on last year's Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, World at War plays more like an action movie than a historical drama. But while this never gets silly or over-the-top like one of Bruce Willis' better action flicks, it has some issues that prevent it from being as exciting as those films as well.

Unlike most WWII FPS games, World at War has you taking on the Japanese as well as the Germans.

The basic setup, as with all games in this series, is that you play as different soldiers in the second World War: in this case, a Russian fighting the Germans, and an American fighting the Japanese. The latter battles set World at War apart from other games in this genre, as most World War II first-person shooters have shied away from the Pacific theater. This makes sense, since Japan is now our friend -- provider of great cartoons, sushi and giant monster movies -- while Nazis still rank alongside vampires, zombies and Celine Dion as classic videogame bad guys.

And because you're fighting the Japanese, World at War has some different settings than the usual bombed-out European cities of most WWII FPS games (though there are some good examples of those, too). You'll visit a number of jungle-filled islands, which not only look different, but also have many great places for your enemies to hide within and sneak attack from (which they do, a lot).

Much of the American/Japanese campaign takes places in the jungle.

The action movie vibe comes with the way some missions go down or are set up cinematically. Of course you're rescued at the last moment; of course things explode when you just look at them funny; and so on. World at War does also have all the touchstones you'd expect from a regulation WWII FPS, including the usual turret battles, having to fight a tank, and a particular exhilarating good time on an airplane.

What makes it more Segal than Schwarzenegger, though, is the controls. And no, we don't mean the inherently inaccurate controls that plague all shooters on the Nintendo Wii.. After all, if you're reading this review, then it's safe to assume you've played a shooter on the Wii before, maybe even a first-person one, and have become accustomed to the system's sensitivity (or as accustomed as anyone can be).

Among the historically accurate weapons you'll have at your disposal is this flamethrower.

No, the problem is that the other controls don't always work as advertised. Let's take the aim assist, which is supposed to lock onto an enemy when you're facing their general direction and hit the Z button to pull up your iron sights. While this works okay when there's only one enemy in your line of sight, or only enemies in your line of sight, it's not as accurate when one of your buddies is nearby. Very, very early in the game, for example, your pal Pvt. Ryan is jumped by a Japanese soldier, who grabs Ryan's gun. So you naturally try to save your pal. But if you use the aim assist, you might accidentally shoot Ryan instead. Every time (which wouldn't be a problem -- that dick Ryan is always making people save him -- except that "Friendly Fire Will Not Be Tolerated," unlike in the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 versions, where they kind of look the other way).

The control scheme is even more awkward when you use the Wii Zapper. Reloading, for example, involves twisting the Wii Zapper counterclockwise while you hold the Z button, though if you turn it clockwise while holding Z you'll cycle your weapons. This means you could unintentionally switch to your pistol after you've intentionally reloaded your machine gun.

Fond of being sneaky bastards, the Japanese will sometimes hide in the tall grass.

There is, however, one control that works well -- or at least, more naturally -- here than in the 360 or PS3 versions: melee. Done by swinging the Wii remote, you can clock guys rather effectively, which comes in very handy, especially against the Japanese, who are fond on running straight at you with their bayonets.

The game also has a couple minor sound quality issues -- nothing that ruins the game or puts you in harm's way, but mistakes nonetheless. Granted, we don't expect perfect 5.1 surround sound on the Wii, but there are times when the quality dips considerably, making your commanding officers -- voiced by Kiefer Sutherland when you're an American G.I. and Gary Oldman when you're a Russian -- sound as if they recorded their vocal tracks while holding an empty tin can next to their mouth for a faux echo effect.

What World at War does do right, to a point, is multiplayer, as it has the same great role-playing game-like leveling system as Modern Warfare. It's not exactly the same, since some things had to be changed for historical reasons. For example, a really good killing streak doesn't bring in attack helicopters; it brings in attack dogs. And no, sticking out your hand and letting them sniff it won't stop them from chomping your leg.

Tanks for the memories?

Of course, even multiplayer isn't without its problems. While the game has a couple different modes, not all the variations are available when you start. In fact, you're limited to Free for All (a.k.a. Deathmatch), Team Deathmatch and Boot Camp (low-level Team Deathmatch) until you get to level 14. Only then can you play the Hardcore versions of Team Deathmatch -- which, not to put too fine a point on it, is kind of a dick move.

This version of World at War also doesn't have the more objective-driven modes available in other editions, such as Capture the Flag and Search & Destroy. However, since the Wii doesn't support voice chat -- the mic that comes with Animal Crossing: City Folk doesn't work with World at War -- we don't think these modes would work anyway.


@@
Even with these minor setbacks and inconsistencies, World at War is still a solid shooter. It may not trump Modern Warfare or Metroid Prime 3: Corruption (and isn't as good as the PS3 and 360 versions), but it does have some exciting moments that will keep trigger-happy gamers enthralled. And while your dad won't appreciate its lack of historical reverence, it's not like there aren't other games he can play for that.

This review is based on a retail copy of the game provided by the publisher.