Just like the other WWII FPS game on the PSP, Call of Duty has been getting some spectacularly mixed reviews. Who to believe? Are the controls really that great? Are they really that terrible? Message boards across the internet have been producing quite a variety of responses. For once, the critics reviews may not actually inform anyone on the "correct" purchasing decision for this game.

* UGO (87/100) loves the incredibly generous auto-aim: "Call of Duty: Roads to Victory is one of the few must-own titles for the handheld. If you've ever gotten a kick out of picking up a gun and killing evil people in a video game, look no further."

* IGN (66/100) hated the controls and the gameplay: "The sluggish and somewhat delayed controls wouldn't be so bad if the gameplay accounted for it, but it doesn't."

* Gamespot (62/100) thinks the game feels more like a free mod than an actual game: "The poor AI, combined with frequent respawning of soldiers, makes it feel as if you're playing some sort of WWII-themed shooting gallery at times."

What do you guys think. I have heard it is not as good as many people say...

Via PSPFanboy

i heard u cant aim with anoalog stick but i dont care i use the face buttons to aim. i heard with auto aim 2 shots kills enemies. NO ONLINE that kind of ruined the game. but i dont play online so much. i want online. but i guess im not missing much. i will rent before i buy. dam my comment is as mixed as the reviews of this game

Well i have to go with gamespot. alot of germans spawn in 1 minute on my screen. Bute the AI is'nt so bad the duck when you shoot but near miss, and wait when you show your face then they pop out again and start firing. Also the balance between the missions arent even.

i like the medal of honor heroes game better then call of duty

just my opinion

I agree with Saints210. I didn't like this game as much as medal of honor. The controls are too sluggish in this game... you move too slow too. I prefer socom even more of course.