Call of Duty 5 Heading Back to World War II

[Sirisaxman]

It might be good, it might be shit. Since it's not Infinity Ward, it probably won't feel like Call of Duty to me, since I've only played 2 and 4. I'll wait to see if it's any good, otherwise I'll wait til the next IW COD, i.e. Call of Duty 6.

 

[whitemidget]

Treyarch only has one skin on their computers: WW2.

It might be good, it might be shit. Since it's not Infinity Ward, it probably won't feel like Call of Duty to me, since I've only played 2 and 4. I'll wait to see if it's any good, otherwise I'll wait til the next IW COD, i.e. Call of Duty 6.

Don't get it. Don't even think of playing it. Before I was savvy with who was making each game, I picked up COD3 (as a Wii owner, I kind of had no choice because I already had Red Steel). I hope you like NEVER SKIPPING A GODDAMN FMV. EVEN IF YOU DIED YOU MUST WATCH IT AGAIN AND AGAIN.

Back when the first MOH came out, I was excited to see a WW2 shooter. Now I want it to end, because it's definitely time to do something else. What about a different war? What about a Jack Thompson-esque game where you kill the developers of Treyarch, or you destroy all the WW2 games the keep coming out?

 

[BillBarilko]

Jesus... just wait til the damn thing comes out before dumping all over it. Hopefully all this premature pissing and moaning will motivate Treyarch to make a kickass game.

I hope they do away with the airstrikes and helis in MP, which are both more frustrating than fucking noob tubes and martyrdom, IMO.

 

[Pingrash]

Awww fuck.

What he said.

and I'll third it.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

In my experience, the whole "Modern Combat/Warfare" thing has been done to death just as much or more than the WWII genre. "Modern blah whatever" always comes off feeling very bland and uninspired to me. At least the WWII genre is fun. I think people just like to ride waves.

Not that I don't think WWII is overdone, I'm just saying I felt like CoD 4: Modern Warfare did me a disservice by moving from one over-saturated market to another over-saturated market.

 

[Fire Daemon]

I have no idea why you are all against WWII shooters. There is not many of them and it isn't like you have to play them. If Treyarch took CoD5 to the future then you would scream Halo clone and if they took it to Modern times you would scream CoD4 clone. In all honesty where can they take the CoD franchise without you all complaining? At least this time they will have some experience making a WWII shooter and can use that to make a somewhat good game. Hopefully.

All I'm saying is give em a break and don't assume a game set in WWII is going to suck because of the setting.

 

[SomeBritishDude]

COD 4 is the only game I've seen thats done modern day war...maybe I havn't been looking properly.

I just think it feels like a bit of a step backwards more than anything. They at least could of gone sideways, done the cold wars or something...I don't know. WW2 just feels over done. Its strange WW1 never seems to get done.

 

[SomeBritishDude]

Coarse its not going to suck, but its not a good start.

 

[JakubK666]

And FYI, WaW will be a spin-off a la CoD2:Big Red One so could you please stop referring to it as CoD5?

Because by that logic,CoD4 was actually CoD7 and this is the 8th sequel to CoD.

 

[fix-the-spade]

For what it's worth, the gun in the picture looks like it might be a (Japanese) type 99 LMG.

It's a Bren gun, the guy in the screenshot is a British Pra, the red beret should be a clue

I wouldn't call putting bombers in range of Japan a "little achievement".

I mean, you said it yourself: "It also had very few defined battles, being more a continuous slog with very few clear victories."

Who wants to play a video game about "a continuous slog with very few clear victories"? What's next, _Call of Duty 6: Surviving Mustard Gas Attacks In A WWI Trench_?

History focuses on big, pivotal battles, no matter what the nationality involved or how many reporters there are. The island hopping campaign is just a bigger deal than the rest of the war in the Pacific.

The bombers were in range of Japan the whole war, they flew from China or the Russian Mainland. The islands, Iwo Jima in particular, were wanted for emergency landing strips. They weren't even needed for fighter support as both the p-38 and p-51 had enough range to stay with the bombers.
The whole island hopping theatre is just Spielberg history, here's what happened, lets dump so much sugar and spotlights on it it drowns out everything else.
In tactical terms the island hopping campaign is a footnote, the largest battle in the campaign (Okinawa) involved 100'000 defenders, Burma managed 144'000 Japanese killed, nevermind causualties or prisoners.
They didn't even win the war. The atom bomb was rushed into use because the Russians launched an invasion of Hokkaido, the bombs were dropped to end the war quickly and stop Russia gaining a foothold in Japan.


anywase, back to the game.
I think the jungle has more potential than the islands. Fighting with limited amunition against an opponent that can spring up anywhere, with no clear safe points. Sounds like a survival horror fps to me.
Almost resident evil style play, where no space is as safe as it first seems.
The idea certainly has more legs than the yet-another-beach-landing approach we're going to get.

 

[Skrapt]

Of course it's valid, what will be different? There will be the MODERN SUCCESSORS OF THE old guns, very similar landscapes (A LOT OF FORESTS AND DESERTS), and the same American zeal to creating a WW2 game, the only difference is upgraded graphics and instead of vilifying the Germans, this time it will be the TERRORISTS AND RUSSIANS. It's the same war, a different ERA makes it no different when you're stuck with the SIMILAR FUTURE EQUIVALENT OF THE same soldiers/weapons/areas.

You could say the exact thing about CoD4.Or any game in general.

The reason WW2 is "not cool" and "overused" is because people hardly ever take it beyond Europe.WaW might be a reskin but so is CoD4.Considering that Treyarch will try to look at the survival horror genre as well as psychological side of this war(source: http://www.joystiq.com/2008/06/09/call-of-duty-world-at-war-revealed-treyarch-to-develop/) and WaW will utilize a perk system, this game has a chance to become a hit.

I don't think you can seriously suggest that moving your WW2 shooter franchise from the ETO to the PTO is somehow equivalent to the difference between Deus Ex and, say, Serious Sam.

No, because that'd be just plain stupid.However considering that reskinning CoD2 into modern era aka CoD4 sold millions of copies, PTO might be a good idea.People are always looking for a new experience.

It's different because in CoD4, the story actually tried to show several sides to the story, it was a different setting and completely different tactics to win. And when they go back to WWII you know it's back to a game that is basically a piece of propaganda trying to preach that America was the only country in WW2 and that they were saviours of everyone else or something. It's tired and boring, and people want something new, a pacific game is going to make no difference because as already said I bet it completely ignores every other countries efforts in the same area. So unless they can come up with something genuinely new and good and let us play as the Japanese to give us some perspective, I will not be buying it.

 

[LCM]

Of course it's valid, what will be different? There will be the MODERN SUCCESSORS OF THE old guns, very similar landscapes (A LOT OF FORESTS AND DESERTS), and the same American zeal to creating a WW2 game, the only difference is upgraded graphics and instead of vilifying the Germans, this time it will be the TERRORISTS AND RUSSIANS. It's the same war, a different ERA makes it no different when you're stuck with the SIMILAR FUTURE EQUIVALENT OF THE same soldiers/weapons/areas.

You could say the exact thing about CoD4.Or any game in general.

The reason WW2 is "not cool" and "overused" is because people hardly ever take it beyond Europe.WaW might be a reskin but so is CoD4.Considering that Treyarch will try to look at the survival horror genre as well as psychological side of this war(source: http://www.joystiq.com/2008/06/09/call-of-duty-world-at-war-revealed-treyarch-to-develop/) and WaW will utilize a perk system, this game has a chance to become a hit.

I don't think you can seriously suggest that moving your WW2 shooter franchise from the ETO to the PTO is somehow equivalent to the difference between Deus Ex and, say, Serious Sam.

No, because that'd be just plain stupid.However considering that reskinning CoD2 into modern era aka CoD4 sold millions of copies, PTO might be a good idea.People are always looking for a new experience.

It's different because in CoD4, the story actually tried to show several sides to the story, it was a different setting and completely different tactics to win. And when they go back to WWII you know it's back to a game that is basically a piece of propaganda trying to preach that America was the only country in WW2 and that they were saviours of everyone else or something. It's tired and boring, and people want something new, a pacific game is going to make no difference because as already said I bet it completely ignores every other countries efforts in the same area. So unless they can come up with something genuinely new and good and let us play as the Japanese to give us some perspective, I will not be buying it.

Umm COD 1&2 have more than one side Russian,British and American perspectives(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call_of_duty) and a Tank section to brake the monotony which was lacking in COD4 which only actually has Americans in the Middle east completely disregarding most of the coalition yet doesn't bother anybody.

Trayarch's COD 3 has more perspectives than infinity ward's WW2 CODs(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call_of_Duty_3)

Please play the games before you hand out judgment.

Anyways like the sound of a COD in the pacific(WW2 or not Japanese are vastly different then Germans) cause I live in the Philippines and the survival horror is brake from the monotonous(yet still fun) game play kill people coming from this direction and move out that is COD's staple.

 

[Saskwach]

I think the Pacific theater is a horse with some life to flog out. I demand the Kokoda track be in there, though. This isn't even about waving the Aussie flag. That battle has gaming potential.

 

[PurpleRain]

I hope they put friggen Canadian soldiers in there. We did our part too! And join before US!
[/anger and possible flaming]

As with us (Australia). Yet, America seems to be the ONLY heroes of the war.

I was hoping that CoD5 would be set in the distant future. Warhammer 40000 run off the CoD4 engine.

 

[PurpleRain]

Double Post 3: The Revenge of the Double Post

 

[Aliencrash]

Stop making new ones and concentrate on the old ones we need some new maps and more guns would be awesome too for COD4. Hell id like it if they brought out an expansion that carried on the story of COD4 (cause lets face it, its not really finished) keeping the same engine graphics so they can concentrate on a story...so we get this....

 

[the_tramp]

I'm no fan of all of the WWII shooters, but after CoD4 being 'Modern' how could they simply do that again without someone simply saying 'isn't this just CoD4.5?

 

[Russian_Assassin]

So, if this game won't let me stab Hitler, or even just cause him a lilttle scratch, this will be a real "bothered nonsence"!!!!!!! I look forward to it's release, just to see what our "mutual friend" has to say about it...

 

[a big stupid idiot]

Sigh.

I can't help feeling that this will be lackluster. There really going to have to make this amazing if they want anyone to care about it.

 

[Xanadu84]

Personally, I'm still wondering when we're going to get a video game about Vietnam or the Korean War.

Hell, why not Burma? Rambo 4 was awesome, lets go to Burma in an FPS. Or maybe Darfur.

Theres been Vietnam games, just fewer, and less popular. Regardless of what anyone says, Battlefield Vietnam was a lot of fun. The only weak point was that one horrendously unbalanced class with the best anti tank weapon in the game, and the badass machine gun that cut through everything, and had the range to compete with a sniper rifle if you had a good eye. But plowing through the jungle with some friends blaring The Trashmen is one of my favorite shooter experiences of all time.

A Korean War game might be good, as a more historic simulation. However, Darfur...not so much a good idea. I think that would hit a little too close to home, since people are still dying over there.

The problem is that theres not a huge number of available realistic, historic shooter Genres to use. First, you have wars with swords, arrows, etc, and generally that is going to be lumped all into one catagory, and better done through RTS. Then you have muskets and cannons, which may actually make a unique new genre, though shooting one bullet at a time is problematic for gameplay. Then theres WWI era, and Trench Warfare would be a difficult shooter to make. Now, WWII, a very intriguing war, and one where the bad guys are clearly doing evil, and you can feel justified shooting them. its easier to avoid the moral ambivalence, and the scope of the battlefield leads to an interesting shooter. Theres things like Vietnam and Korea, but theres more moral questioning there, its harder to make an adrenaline packed action fest without some hard feelings about wondering the justification. Its harder to be a shoot at the hip type without a little cognitive dissonance in a player wondering about those people he killed. Then theres modern warfare, which is more easily recognized by the public, and theres stuff every day to look at and extrapolate a storyline. So theres highly viable shooter genre number 2. This leaves the only remaining genre to be futuristic, and that is rather likely to turn into a science fiction fest, as it hasn't actually happened yet, so who knows? I think that when it comes down to it, if someone wats to make a historic shooter, theres not a lot of choices. Of course, breaking the mold and finding something unique would likely be rewarded with praise.

Also, I think that playing as a Nazi, or a Japanese torturing an American would be a PR nightmare.