Hence, when it comes to portraying the Eastern front of World War II, getting your history lessons from Call of Duty is ill-advised. Moreover, they did not send unarmed soldiers to try to overwhelm armed enemies like cavemen.

Black ops was blast too with severely underrated campaign, it is probably my favorite ever. This one really leaned into the gritty realism side of things, and it works great for WW2 setting. The Red Army, for the most part, is actually well-equipped and there were only a few very rare instances where some of them had no weapons (specifically at the beginning of the surprise invasion of Germany through operation Barbarossa). World at war was great, it really brought me back to call of duty 2 I played as a kid, only this time it was way more brutal. The controversial portrayal is mostly fabricated. The very first mission of the Soviet chapters in the first Call of Duty portrays the Red Army officers as ruthless idiots who let conscripts charge without weapons and then shoot them down for retreating in what appears to be a blatant imitation of the film Enemy at the Gates- a horrifically inaccurate film about the Red Army. For some reason, the first Call of Duty game has a penchant for misrepresenting the Red Army.

Call of duty 2 vs world at war