World in Conflict

Most players probably know that when assessing the game, one usually takes into account, among others such features that can almost be clearly defined as good or bad. This is the case, for example, with the story (the more complex and surprising the better) or physics and graphics (complex and accurate models are usually worth a higher rating). The problem with writing a note to a title that has the features listed above simply disappears. Worse, when the game contains elements that you can't attach a plus or minus labels, and their rating is disputable. That is why the World in Conflict rating is subjective to the limit.

The intro that opens the game briefly reveals its content. The main motive here is the fight of the United States with the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. I don't need to add who is the aggressor in the title conflict. We meet our hero, Lieutenant Parker, in 1989, during the Red Army attack on Seattle. The first mission is to delay the progression of Russians, so that other troops can evacuate the city's residents. Before the next task, we meet other commanders in this war - these characters accompany Parker throughout the rest of the game and are of great importance, not only for the story path, but also for the way the game is conducted.

The story told in the game is one of those things that are difficult to classify as pros or cons. It is full of pathos and despair of the Americans, who, in the name of the highest values, such as individual freedom, are ready to fight any enemy, even if they had to heroically attack tanks with stones. If someone does not mind cut-scenes, in which issues such as "Let's show them what the price of invasion of our country is!", He can safely read on. Otherwise, you can practically write off WiC at a loss or go to the description of the multiplayer game mode, in which the exalted style is practically gone.

Despite the fact that the character of the story is what it is, you cannot refuse masterfully made interludes. They are made really ingeniously: placing a map of the battlefield with sticks and stones or drawing it on a blackboard in a busy school. Stupid. They can evoke emotions. Most cut-scenes are characterized by considerable dynamism, just like the clashes with the Russians themselves.

Interestingly, although in the movies we still see the character of Parker and his companions - Webb, Sawyer and Bannon, we are not given to see his face or hear his voice. The same is also true during the game - in the ether often there are fierce discussions between soldiers, but our alter ego does not take part in them at all.

Some of the cutscenes are of a comic character. These are nothing but a nice addition to the story. They present the talks of soldiers with their families, as well as the behavior of US politicians. As I mentioned, the videos have an exalted character, but if it can be digested, the game rating goes up high.

World in Conflict was created by Massive Entertainment, responsible for the Ground Control series. WiC presents a similar approach to fun. It excludes the need to set up a base and collect raw materials - we focus only on calling for and commanding meals.

The player has a certain number of points for which he can buy units. The purchased forces are delivered to the battlefield usually by means of parachute drops. However, if - let's say - one of the player's tanks is destroyed, the points that he spent on him will soon appear again in his pool. We are losing the army, we wait a moment, we call them again and we return to war. Over and over again.

There is also such a thing as tactical help points, awarded for fighting an enemy. We can call for various types of support for them, such as air reconnaissance, airstrikes, artillery fire, napalm dump, bridge repairs or air-to-air rocket attacks. The icing on the cake is the option of launching a tactical nuclear missile that sweeps everything out of the earth for good.

The number of points used to buy troops is always too small, which is why we are constantly using a small number of units. The player with ten armored vehicles can say that he has accumulated extremely good strength. This solution means that we usually focus on only one strategically important place - a selected building or bridge. The emphasis is on tactics and the best use of your few troops.

This does not mean, however, that WiC is difficult. To tell the truth, this is one of the easiest titles I've ever played, mainly thanks to the not very advanced artificial intelligence of the opponents. If someone starts their adventure with erteesami, they can confidently play this game.

Although the tasks set for the player are repetitive ("capture and keep point" or "destroy the unit / building" is really not enough), the situation is saved by the dynamism of the game. There is no second in which nothing would happen. We must constantly fight the Russians, move our units, call for reinforcements and tactical aids. The accumulation of actions, the rapidly changing situation and sensational special effects make the game suck like a high-class vacuum cleaner. I have to admit that some missions consumed me so much that I forgot about such things as completing the save game. Not to mention the total ignoring of people who entered my room.

The greatest disadvantage is the mediocre AI of the Russians, who not only do not use the special abilities of their units, but also push the gun under the barrel. Tactical attacks, such as artillery shelling, are a matter of scripts - you only need to play a given mission once to know where the missiles will fall and from which side the enemy will come. However, the first pass of the game provides a lot of nice impressions - as long as someone likes to exterminate communists happily and without problems in dozens of ways.

World in Conflict offers a campaign consisting of fourteen missions. This number sounds quite impressive, but it's just a pretense. Completing them will take experienced players about 2-3 days. For my taste, this is definitely not enough. It is a pity that the developers have not decided to put in the game the possibility of being "the bad one". All that remains is to fight under the starry banner. Sickles and hammers on a red background are available only in the multiplayer mode.

There is also a lack of naval battles. You can only count on computer-controlled ships that can fire at your territory on our orders. In this respect, WiC is very similar to Command & Conquer: Generals - Zero Hour, in which we not only met surface units since the holidays, but it was impossible to control them fully. The abandonment of fighting on the seas and oceans is probably due to the fact that the maps available in the game are small in size and have been prepared for ground units - they are full everywhere and you do not have to look for the enemy for long.

If someone does not like easy fight or simply ended a single player campaign in the world, you can try your hand in multiplayer. However, I have mixed feelings for him. On the one hand, we meet the same maps as in the campaign, but on the other, we are dealing with a quite original approach to the multiplayer. The game can be played by up to sixteen people. The player is forced to choose one of four roles before starting the fight. He can command either infantry or tanks or helicopters or support forces (artillery, anti-aircraft vehicles, repair vehicles). The problem is that you can't fight the enemy alone, so you need to work closely with allied commanders. Players must support and complement each other, which comes extremely difficult.

The necessity of cooperation is rarely so great in games, which is why public servers prevail chaos and confusion. In addition, multiplayer fights are much more difficult. You lose more often, you have to wait a lot for meals to be sent, and the effect is a loss of dynamism. However, if someone is a clan member (or plans to be one), they can try their hand at World in Conflict. When the next moves in the game are clever and properly coordinated, the fun takes on color.

Battles can be fought in three modes. The first is to occupy points (here: perimeters) located on the map. In the second one we deal with one long perimeter constituting the front line. The task of both teams is to occupy the entire line, which causes it to move and push the enemy to the defensive. The last of the ways to play is called "attack". One team covers the entire map point by point, while the other is to counteract this. In the next round, the teams switch roles. There is not a lot of freshness in these modes, but they are enough to have fun.

One of the strengths of World in Conflict is graphics. Not only does it not require a technologically advanced computer (the developers have drawn conclusions from beta-tests!), But also - or rather above all - it looks fantastic. After turning on the details, you can see how tanks and infantry leave deep furrows in the snow, and their arrows make the ground black and forests burn. There are even bombs in the game for clearing wooded areas. Imagine the trees falling in all directions ...

To be honest, you can't fully convey the quality of graphics with words. Detailed units, dense and realistic smoke, plumes of fire shooting up into the heavens and a blinding flash of nuclear explosion - all this creates an amazing, eye-catching atmosphere and intensifies the impression of dynamism. You can also add screen waving to the long list of graphical fountains when zooming in on an explosion or a burning napalm. Bringing the camera closer to a radioactive contaminated zone will result in slight interference in the image display, and the loudspeakers will make a cracking sound reminiscent of a Geiger counter.

The way in which camera control was developed deserves praise. Although you have to get used to it (completing the tutorial is enough), it allows you to watch the war from virtually every angle, even from the perspective of a single soldier. An additional option to completely disable the interface and all windows and markings allows you to make beautiful screenshots and videos of the game.

Fighting for Yankee democracy, limiting the economy and focusing on tactics, cooperation in multiplayer and low difficulty - these are the qualities I mentioned at the beginning. It is difficult to assess them unequivocally, and they have an extremely important impact on the player's perception of the product. World in Conflict is a pretty good title. Do not expect revelations, but it can provide a lot of nice moments. If someone hesitates to buy this game, I recommend reading the demo.

Maciej "Sandro" Jałowiec

PROS:

MINUSES: