Ever since the first screenshots and gameplay videos, there has been
plenty of hype surrounding World in Conflict and its graphics. But
unlike many expected, Massive Entertainment developed a game that
delivers on every front. From the graphics to gameplay, there isn't
much that could have been done better.
The basic catch behind World in Conflict is the complete lack of the
traditional resource gathering that has been around ever since Dune 2.
Each player has a specified amount of reinforcement points for buying
units and you'll rarely find yourself controlling more than several
units at time. If a unit is destroyed, the points replenish and you are
back in business in matter of seconds. This might sound too forgiving
at first but after playing the multiplayer for a while, you'll notice
how crucial every moment is. If an area is left unprotected, it won't
take long before it's already under enemy's control and gaining it back
is easier said than done. Some old time PC gamers may loathe
streamlining but no one can deny that it doesn't work here. The idea
isn't unique as we've seen it in Massive's previous Ground Control
games but World in Conflict has the best version of the system.
Massive aims World in Conflict to be the Counter-Strike of strategy
games, and anyone can jump in and control the small amount of units
without anything else important to worry about. There isn't much
strategy involved, but tactics, feint, maneuvering, reconnaissance,
defense and all-out aggression - and more important than any of them,
teamwork. No matter how good a single person is, he can't win games
without the help of his teammates. As a result, the game is easily
accessible but hard to master.
The singleplayer campaign starts with a cutscene of Russia invading
Seattle in 1989. With US forces fighting against Soviet Union in
Europe, there aren't many to stand in their way. Cold War turned hot is
a nice change from the usual World War 2, scifi and fantasy settings
seen in so many strategy titles and unlike in them, you aren't a
supreme commander behind everything but just a simple First Lieutenant
doing his best to survive under Colonel Sawyer's stout command. As just
one of the many pawns of war, you might be given a support mission
while the computer controlled players do the dirty work. Your goal is
never fully exterminating the enemy but holding them back until you
receive the next order. If you have men to spare, you can try your luck
with the secondary objectives such as escorting civilians to safety
from a nearby shelter or destroying the enemy artillery to help your
cause. Although often the primary objective like controlling a bridge
or destroying a certain target will keep you fully occupied.
Quarrel between the officers in middle of a battle and humanlike
mistakes really add to the experience. Only thing eating the survival
immersion is the lack of user avatar on the battlefield. While the
other officers actually feel like they exist, your own group can be
completely destroyed and you as the group leader still survive. There
are plenty of characters in the campaign and some of them go through
many stages of character development during the plot, and you'll find
yourself becoming fond of characters you hated before, once more of
their history and motives are revealed through well executed flashbacks
and somewhat clichéd cutscenes. Though not the whole campaign takes
place on American soil. You'll get the chance to fight on the side of a
stereotypical French officer and NATO forces in France and Lapland.
Even with the few flaws, overall production quality really shines
through with Alec Baldwin's top notch narration during loading screens
and even after the next mission has loaded, you tend listen to
everything he has to say. Even if some of the voices aren't as good as
Baldwin's, they deliver whole way through the game. As a nice touch,
you can hear your units speaking in their native language when you zoom
in close to them. Doesn't sound like much with United States or Soviet
Union but it does make a difference with the multinational NATO.
As great as the singleplayer campaign is, it only works as a tutorial
for the fantastic multiplayer. It's easy to imagine Battlefield 2 as
WiC's biggest influence with striking resemblance everywhere. It's hard
to blame Massive though, as Massgate is one of the best multiplayer
services I've used in years. Everything from the slick UI to rankings
and clan support work really well. WiC also offers a crystal clear VOIP
but headset is not a necessity as another thing familiar from
Battlefield, there are easy to use commands for interacting with other
players. Anyone can easily jump in or out in middle of the round
without any hard feelings. It can be frustrating at times to find
yourself on the less coordinated side as the real fun and enjoyment
comes from teamwork.
Teams consist of maximum eight players and every player chooses one of
the four cIasses: air, armor, support and infantry. Each cIass has
their weakness and you have to spend your reinforcement points wisely
with your team to gain the perfect balance. And unlike usually in
strategy games, you can only control several units at time. Infantry is
vulnerable to all kinds of fire in the open but can cause massive
damage to any opponent. Station few anti-tank squads in nearby
buildings and you already have considerable threat against enemy tank
forces. Hiding in forests helps too but hide for too long and there
isn't much left of your men after a napalm strike has scorched the
ground. Air uses helicopters to deal with enemy tanks, but is extremely
vulnerable to support's anti-air vehicles. Support also has repair and
transport vehicles plus artillery to create mayhem. Anyone can buy
units outside their specialty, but it's rarely worth it for the
significant extra fee. There are times to use the option though: one
infantry squad alone can be enough to protect your precious artillery
from scouts.
Capture objectives, kill opponents and help teammates, and you'll gain
tactical aid points, which are used to call in paratroopers, radar
scans and most importantly, bombs. Everything from the airstrikes to
tactical nuclear weapons is absolutely stunning to look at. Explosions
are definitely the high point of the graphics as they have never looked
this good and you will always come back for more of the goodness.
Tactical nuke is a real cherry on the top from amazing effects to the
calm afterwards. You can zoom in to see even the smallest details on
your troops and then zoom out for the impressive draw distance. There
is such an amount of detail that sometimes you'll forget that you are
playing a RTS. Everything from the trees to Christmas decorations is
fully destructible and after few carpet bombs and a nuke, you won't
recognize the battlefield anymore. It's important to use the
environment to your advantage as all units have realistic line of sight
and even bomb craters play a small role.
There isn't much music in the game but the little there is sets the
mood perfectly and will keep you entertained while you browse Massgate
and wait for the map to load. Bombs and weapons sound superb with the
nuke taking the trophy again. Flying over the nuclear area after the
explosion will chill down your spine. Unfortunately everything feels
slighty unsatisfying after the pure awesomeness of the nuclear bomb.
Rather than reinventing the wheel, Massive Entertainment combines two
old formulas and makes them better than ever before. The memorable
singleplayer campaign takes about 10 hours to finish and anyone with
time on their hands can spend countless hours playing the multiplayer.
It's easy to recommend World in Conflict to anyone - especially with
the low price tag. There aren't many games that can change your opinion
of a certain genre but this is definitely one of the few.
