Call of War

About

Call of War is a single player and multiplayer casual strategy game. It was developed by Bytro Labs GmbH and was released on October 21, 2017. It received mostly positive reviews from players.

From the Frontlines, raise an army and overpower other players!

Genres & Tags

Play Modes

Skip User Reviews

74%

Audience ScoreBased on 10,023 reviews

gameplay106 positive mentions

monetization87 negative mentions

The game offers engaging strategy and immersive atmosphere, appealing to fans of the genre who appreciate a methodical approach to gameplay.
Players enjoy the historical setting and the depth of gameplay, with many praising its replayability and balanced mechanics.
The graphics and overall aesthetic are often highlighted as stunning, contributing to the game's immersive quality.

The game suffers from numerous bugs, glitches, and a lack of tech support, leading to a frustrating experience for many players.
The monetization model is heavily criticized as a pay-to-win scheme, with many feeling that it detracts from the overall enjoyment and balance of the game.
Players find the grinding aspect excessively time-consuming and tedious, often requiring significant daily commitment to progress.

gameplay
265 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
40%
52%
8%
The gameplay is characterized by a mix of strategic depth and slow-paced mechanics, allowing for thoughtful planning and alliances, though many players find it excessively slow and bogged down by pay-to-win elements. While the mechanics are generally easy to learn and offer a rewarding experience, the presence of bugs, lack of tech support, and the influence of microtransactions detract from the overall enjoyment. Despite these issues, the game is praised for its engaging strategy and immersive atmosphere, appealing to fans of the genre who appreciate a more methodical approach to gameplay.
- “The gameplay is fun, and I like the intrigue when it comes to factions.”
- “I enjoyed the historical setting and slow-paced gameplay that allowed for thoughtful planning and alliances.”
- “The gameplay is excellent.”
- “They have removed 2 game essential resources that were part of the core gameplay.”
- “For all of the interesting scenarios, the glitches in the game mechanics and the total lack of tech support force me to say that I wouldn't recommend this game to my worst enemy.”
- “The pay-to-win basis of the game is expensive, especially when you consider the very low graphics and basic mechanics of the combats, and the cost of resources and build time speed-ups.”
graphics
182 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
32%
55%
13%
The graphics of the game receive mixed reviews, with some players praising the stunning visuals and recent updates that enhance the overall aesthetic, while others criticize the outdated and laggy graphics that detract from gameplay. Many users express a desire for improved detail and performance, particularly on mobile devices, indicating that while the graphics can be appealing, they often fall short of expectations and can hinder the gaming experience. Overall, the game's visual quality is seen as a significant area for improvement, especially in comparison to other titles in the genre.
- “The graphics are stunning, and the gameplay mechanics are both challenging and rewarding.”
- “Superior graphics, engaging mechanics, and immersive atmosphere, yet, the narrative could be richer compared to similar titles.”
- “I love the graphics and the varied maps.”
- “Comparing to other titles, Call of War: World War 2 excels in strategic depth, but falls short with less captivating graphics.”
- “The pay-to-win basis of the game is expensive, especially when you consider the very low graphics and basic mechanics of the combats.”
- “The graphics are almost rustic looking and give a real sort of feeling the game should have.”
monetization
124 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
6%
24%
70%
The monetization model of the game has received significant criticism, with many players labeling it as a "pay-to-win" scheme due to the reliance on premium currency and microtransactions that can create imbalances in gameplay. While some players appreciate the option to earn in-game currency through watching ads, the overall sentiment suggests that the monetization practices detract from the game's enjoyment, with frequent complaints about the high costs and the necessity of spending money to remain competitive. Despite some players finding ways to play without spending, the pervasive nature of microtransactions has led to a perception of the game as a cash grab.
- “There's two levels of monetization to this game: there's premium and there's gold.”
- “There are no ads at all so far, and I've been playing for over a month.”
- “Very well made strategy game, no ads, has speed ups but nothing capable of annihilating non-paying users.”
- “This game is just a lazily made cash grab.”
- “Game is an absolute pay to win cash grab.”
- “You need to do in-game purchases to be competitive, pesky greed of money...”
stability
82 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
4%
99%
The stability of "Call of War" is widely criticized, with players reporting numerous bugs, glitches, and crashes that severely impact gameplay. Many users express frustration over laggy performance, unresponsive controls, and a lack of effective support from developers, leading to an overall experience described as chaotic and frustrating. While some players note occasional fun moments, the overwhelming consensus is that the game's stability issues make it difficult to recommend.
- “Absolutely no issues; fun, interactive, and runs great even on some of my lower-end devices.”
- “The game runs smoothly without any crashes or glitches, providing a seamless experience.”
- “I've played for hours without any performance drops, which is impressive for a game of this scale.”
- “For all of the interesting scenarios, the glitches in the game mechanics and the total lack of tech support force me to say that I wouldn't recommend this game to my worst enemy.”
- “The game crashes and glitches constantly; this is a result of the ads they put on after you have invested time.”
- “Bytro are incredibly lazy developers; the game is incredibly buggy and laggy, and they do nothing to fix it.”
story
34 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
18%
73%
9%
The game's story aspect is largely criticized for its lack of a cohesive narrative, with many players noting that it resembles classic strategy titles more in mechanics than in storytelling. While some appreciate the realistic battle scenarios and the potential for player-driven narratives, there is a strong desire for a more structured campaign or mission mode to enhance the storytelling experience. Overall, the game excels in gameplay but leaves players wanting more in terms of a defined story.
- “Story and atmosphere remain its strong points.”
- “I was reluctant to play it given some of the reviews I read, but I was surprised at how wrong some of the reviews were when it comes to the campaign (story).”
- “Honestly, this game looked bad but it's really good to play, with so many plot twists.”
- “☑ no story”
- “20 minutes of slow moving, go nowhere, do nothing, see no graphics, follow no storyline was enough for me.”
- “Long story: this game is for those who are patient.”
optimization
33 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
33%
49%
18%
The optimization of the game has received mixed reviews, with many players reporting significant performance issues, including lag, crashes, and slow loading times, particularly on mobile devices. While some users appreciate the game's potential and note improvements over time, the overall consensus is that it requires further optimization to enhance gameplay experience and reduce battery consumption. Players often recommend using the browser version for a smoother experience.
- “Optimized; no lag, high frame-rate.”
- “There is a fun game here, you can play for free, spend weeks carefully planning your economy, curating your army into specific divisions optimized for what you want.”
- “Would recommend 9/10 | edit: as the dev has made the optimization better, I increase it to 10.”
- “Optimization is lackluster and unfortunately it's pay to win.”
- “It's terribly optimized.”
- “The game is at least not optimized enough to cover some mobile apps because we cannot even play other maps itself and yet it kept crashing even if we have the proper space for it.”
music
22 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
14%
72%
14%
The reviews indicate a strong dissatisfaction with the lack of music and sound effects in the game, with many players expressing that the absence of audio contributes to a dull and uneventful experience. While some players appreciate the gameplay, they consistently call for the addition of a soundtrack and sound effects to enhance immersion and engagement. Overall, the consensus is that the game would significantly benefit from improved audio elements.
- “I love this game and everything about it, the gameplay, soundtrack, controls, but I do wish that it had a little bit better graphics and the provinces looked like they were at war. Overall, this game is awesome.”
- “Update - needs sound and gameplay such as soft war music in the loading background and a playlist of soft war music to change things up now and again.”
- “It’s a good game with good music.”
- “I dislike that it has no sounds, music, tactics, something that a war strategy game needs.”
- “The slothlike pace makes everything grind to a halt until you just stop out of boredom, especially since the devs didn't even bother putting in background music.”
- “This game is good and playable for those who love command and conquer, but it needs more graphics and sounds; actually, this is a completely silent game.”
humor
20 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
The humor in the game is a mixed bag, with some players finding the community interactions and in-game events amusing, while others criticize the game's pay-to-win mechanics as laughably frustrating. Many users highlight the comedic aspects of global chat and the absurdity of certain game dynamics, such as the exaggerated power of paying players, which can lead to humorous situations. Overall, while some enjoy the humor derived from the game's quirks and community, others feel that the monetization strategies overshadow any potential fun.
- “I loved the newspaper; writing articles in that paper was hilarious.”
- “Yes, most of that time is spent in global chat just talking, but the game has a really funny, positive, and helpful community.”
- “And the prices... hilarious!!!”
grinding
13 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
15%
31%
54%
Players generally find the grinding aspect of the game to be excessively time-consuming and tedious, often requiring significant daily commitment or even a "second life" to keep up. While some appreciate the grinding mechanics, many criticize them as dull and a cash grab, with a strong sentiment that the game could benefit from more efficient ways to earn in-game currency. Overall, the grinding experience is seen as a major drawback, detracting from the enjoyment of the game.
- “You'll need a second life for grinding.”
- “No grinding or buying needed; from the beginning, you can do whatever, except for the whole level thing. But if you play for like a week, you unlock all of the fun game modes.”
- “Strongest negative: time consuming and generally grindy game”
- “Good, but it can get tedious to log in every day.”
- “Pub games are dull and tedious as anyone who's throwing their dosh at the game like a 'girls night out' has a major advantage, being able to dump out x more amounts of units and build structures before you can do half of that.”
replayability
4 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
50%
25%
25%
The game boasts excellent replayability due to its balanced mechanics and exclusive multiplayer format, allowing players to explore various starting locations and allies in each scenario. Users highlight its depth and challenge, contributing to an engaging experience that encourages repeated play.
- “Great replay value, with balanced game mechanics.”
- “A challenging, fun game with much depth and replayability.”
- “This is an exclusive multiplayer game, and that makes its replay value infinite, as you can choose different starting locations and different allies in all scenarios.”
atmosphere
3 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
67%
33%
The atmosphere of "Call of War: World War 2" is highly praised for its immersive quality and superior graphics, effectively evoking the feel of classic strategy games. While the mechanics and overall ambiance are engaging, the narrative aspect is noted as lacking depth compared to other titles in the genre.
- “Reminiscent of classic strategy titles, Call of War: World War 2 excels in mechanics and atmosphere.”
- “Superior graphics, engaging mechanics, and immersive atmosphere.”
- “Story and atmosphere remain its strong points.”
emotional
2 mentions Positive Neutral Negative
100%
Players express a deep emotional connection to the game, highlighting that it is the first they have ever completed, which evokes strong feelings. However, recent graphical changes have caused frustration, impacting the overall experience.
- “This is the first game I have ever completed, and it's making me emotional.”