Blast away hundreds of zombie fanboys in a fun recreation of World At War's most kickass mode.
Apparently, the game designers thought he said "Apple iPhone," when he meant to say "Atari 2600," which would have been several levels of awesome.
So, we get Call of Duty: World At War: Zombies, which contains one colon too many. For $10, you get, and brace yourself, 1 MAP OF ZOMBIE AWESOMENESS!!! Which is still just one map. Of zombie awesomeness.
You defend yourself against hordes of [insert name of console opposite the one you own] fanboys, trying to break into your bunker and destroy your [insert name of console you own]. Killing them earns points, and you use points to buy guns and open completely-indestructible-to-shotgun-blasts doors.
There is an online mode, and the graphics engine is good enough to throw dozens of zombies at you and three other players while keeping a framerate that doesn't dip into slideshow-territory. The problem with playing with multiple people, though, is that everyone has seperate point meters. With online multiplayer nature being what it is, this means that, instead of fighting together like the developers intended, it turns into a race to kill as many zombies as you can before the others do. It completely changes the feel of the game, and sort of turns this into a competitive shooter. So that label that says "co-op", that's just a typo.
COD: WAW: Zombies is one of the few multiplayer iPhone games that doesn't really need voice chat (or have it). It would probably all boil down to "You buy that door." "No, you buy it." Followed by some racial slurs and refrences to the other player's sexuality.
Another annoyance is the controls. Granted, I've seen iPhone FPS's with far worse controls (many games made with the Unity engine come to mind), but we've been spoiled by Modern Combat's silkier-than-a-JRPG-teenager's-hair controls. Instead, COD: WAW: Z's takes a console controller approach. Move with a virtual joystick, continuously turn by moving your finger onscreen. It works, but it's only slightly less gritty than a copy of Kane and Lynch 2 buried under a sandbox.
In addition to the $10 I paid for the main game, I coughed up an extra $10 for the two DLC maps. The first one, "Verruckt" is actually a really good deal. You get an entire, completely different map, new guns, traps, an element of race (to get to the Electricity switch), and 4 different kinds of cola that give you perks like faster reloading and more health, just like in real life.
"Shi No Numa," however, takes place in a swampland, and is absolutely titanic. It may be the fact that I own a 2nd gen iPod touch, but I was having a hard time getting a good framerate in singleplayer, let alone online with 3 other people. It's playable, but not desirable. Still, the map also brings new features as well, like the new guns and 'hellhounds,' which are essentially zombie dogs that spawn every 4-6 rounds. If you're playing solo, make sure you have a good gun, otherwise you're guaranteed to die.
Sonically, the sound for the entire package is a mixed bag. The guns all use the same sound effects from the console version and sound satisfingly meaty, but the ambiet sound effects are muffly and compressed. Also, there's no 3D positional sound, another feature Gameloft's spoiled us with. This means that all the zombie groans and yells won't help you find their source. I'd actually recommend just using the built-in speaker instead of headphones.
Speaking of sound, one of the cool things about "Shi No Numa" is the fact that you and your buddies have voices. However, there aren't nearly as many voice clips as in the console versions, and for some odd reason, buying "Shi No Numa" doesn't put voices in the other 2 maps. Seeing how new DLC guns are applied to all maps, this is a bit head-scratchy. I can understand how Activision couldn't apply voice acting to specific parts of the other maps, but basic lines like "I'm gonna need a clip soon" seem like a no-brainer. In terms of voices, iLeft 4 Dead, this is not.
So, yeah. It's pretty good. You should get it.
That was a satisfying conclusion, and that is not what she said.
By the way, I totally expect an Atari 2600 port. Either that, or one on the Intellivision. Do it!