OK, annoying about this review is they dont give flaws about this game; the controls, the graphics, the gameplay, the singleplayer EVERYTHING and I've read it all

Just take this closing comments:

Call of Duty: World at War isn't a perfect FPS on Wii, and when it all boils down, you can find a better controlling game - one with a slicker framerate, too - in EA's Medal of Honor Heroes 2. What you won't find in Heroes though, or in any other Wii FPS to date, is a package that's this cinematic, this intense, this character-driven, unapologetically brutal, or as varied and intense as World at War. Treyarch has had its hands full in trying to deliver a game that could push out from behind COD4's shadow, and while that main battle is unmistakably happening on 360 and PS3 as a main battlefield, the team still took the time to deliver a seriously impressive first-person shooter on Wii. Multiplayer is a bit thin on modes, but what's there works very well, and is a blast to play. Control isn't dead, as smooth, or as twitch-responsive as we'd like it, but it holds its own, against the bulk of Wii FPS offerings to say the least. The single player campaign is extremely impressive, housing some great missions with lots of variety, the most elaborate challenges and locales we've seen on the system thus far, and some seriously impressive tech, be it in the smoke that dissipates from flamethrower blasts, the slow-falling ash in the forests of Europe, or the filtering like that creeps through the jungle canopy in Japan. The game still houses some pretty basic World War II colors and locales, but among the greens and browns lay some impressive chunks of scenery to check out, and battling across, under, and through them is a blast. It could be quite a while until we see wartime shooter with as much attention to detail, cinematic flair, or open battlegrounds as World at War. Or then again, it might be just around the corner with Infinity Ward's official Call of Duty 5.

all in all, I give this review a 7.0 out of 10.

http://wii.ign.com/articles/929/929080p2.html

And yeah, WHERES THE 16 PLAYER ONLINE BOZON!>:|

Also far lower than CoD: WaW PS360.

I'm getting the PC version. They took out too much stuff in the Wii version. I don't understand why either? Most of, if not all of the stuff that they took out could work on the Wii. What is the point of taking out real co-op, vehicles, etc? I would much rather a game that looked bad and had all of these things than one that looks good, but doesn't have these things. Especially when I can get the other versions of the game, and the only reason I would choose the Wii version over them is A Controls(not so much against the PC version), and B I have more friends with Wii's than with PC's. So no PS360 version because of dual analog, and no Wii version because of how gimped it is. So yep PC version for me. I guess I will only miss out on having more friends with the game, but that doesn't really matter too much to me.

@DJ

That was a troll comment if there ever was one, this is discussing the Wii version not the PS360.

On topic: Beating MoH:H2 is going to be tough, those controls were really tight where aiming is concerned, however, if they even do a fraction better than they did with controls on CoD:3 then the game is still going to be decent and worth playing.

I will get 360 version, but first gotta buy Fable II !!!!

 Dont take the reviews seriously... If you own a xbox 360 or a PS3 you might aswell own and play COD 4, in terms of gameplay and multiplayer, COD 5 was a joke compared to COD 4. its just COD 4 with a world war 2 setting the only good feature on the game was the zombie mode as far as I've read from the comments and posts so far, this is more of a spin off game than a  real game.

If COD is concerned, the Wii needs this more the most than HD consoles, as of now even gaming messageboards arent hype for this even in PS360. Sure, it'll be a instant platinum but it will not be as great sales wise as COD 4. Nothing could match that.

I think Activision blew their chances on this one, gamers are sick of WWII shooters already...

Oh come on. Why do Wii/HD cross-plats have to be compared with each other?

Rainbow Six: Vegas came out on PSP and PS3, and yet the PSP one doesn't get knocked because it doesn't look as good as the PS3 version.

Wii shooters should not be compared against the HD versions. Not the same league. Why is this so hard for reviewers to understand? Why are they so desperate for the Wii to compete on a level field with the HD consoles?

Hmm, I really want to get this game, but reading the review, I know I probably shouldn't.

I really don't like deathmatch, I'd rather have objective based gameplay, even without communication possibilites. Also, no vehicles? No friggin zombie mode? Only 8 players?

That said, the review is kind of weird though. Bozon keeps telling us that the control isn't perfect, but still is really good, and the campaign is really intense, yet the gameplay looks to be the weak point of the game scoring only a 7.

He praises the graphics in the review, yet it gets a lower rating on graphics than Medal of Honor. Something just isn't right here.

But yeah, should I get it? I can't wait to play a nice FPS on the Wii again, but the game just feels so gimped!

There are new videos posted on IGN for anybody who is interested.
http://wii.ign.com/dor/objects/14222041/call-of-duty-5/videos/CODWAW-4.html

Not too impressive....