Call of Duty: WWII Confirmed
- Thread starter Lizzy Finnegan
- Start date
Recommended Videos
No one cares about the Korean war outside of Americans? You'd better tell Kim Jong-Un; he seems to feel strongly about it. It's good to realize that Americans aren't the only people in the world, but going from that to "Americans and Europeans are the only people in the world" isn't really an improvement.MC1980 said:
Ho declared independence in 1945. Saigon fell in 1975. Even if you're somehow posting from Mars, that's the longest nine years I've ever heard of.ObsidianJones said:
If they are going to do WWII, they NEED to not just do the Western Europe shit AGAIN. Seriously, we have North Africa, the Pacific Islands, and other things all over the damn world.
Real talk, have the Italians EVER been in any of these WWII games? I can't remember a single one where the Italian army was even really acknowledged let alone involved in the fighting. The Italians basically only exist to be liberated by the Yanks (And sometimes Brits, never Canadians or Aussies though because they don't exist according to WWII media). Imagine if they did a tutorial level set during the Italian invasion of Ethiopia.
Real talk, have the Italians EVER been in any of these WWII games? I can't remember a single one where the Italian army was even really acknowledged let alone involved in the fighting. The Italians basically only exist to be liberated by the Yanks (And sometimes Brits, never Canadians or Aussies though because they don't exist according to WWII media). Imagine if they did a tutorial level set during the Italian invasion of Ethiopia.
You're combining the First Indochina War with the Second Incochina War (a.k.a. the Vietnam War). They're generally regarded as two separate conflicts.Recusant said:
"These WWII games" as in Call of Duty? Then, IIRC, no. In WWII games in general? Yeah, the Italians have been in a few ones, such as Medal of Honour: Breakthrough/Airborne, Battlefield 1942: The Road to Rome, and Sniper Elite 4.demoman_chaos said:
Also, let's be fair, Australia and Canada were hardly heavy players in WWII, and I say that as an Australian. Canada has featured though, in Call of Duty 3 and in a single mission in Battlefield 1942 (the Caen one). Australia, to my knowledge, hasn't. Partly because Australia wasn't really a major player outside it a base of operations in the Pacific, partly because you can't really separate Australia from either British operations (Tobruk, El Alemain, Singapore), or American ones in the Pacific. Maybe Kokoda, but I think that's it.
A bit egotistical, but if a new game comes I feel most designers will focus on American's involvement, as I believe they will see that as the main customer demographic. Their main campaign is what I was referring to.Recusant said:
It isn't. I played it this year.meowchef said:
It does score some diversity brownie points though - you play a US marine who later joins the OSS (so, nothing out of the ordinary there), but you're helped by a British agent, a Nisei spy, team up with the Chindits on some missions, and help an Indian fighter pilot on one mission.
Well, sure. But that's my point: the United States has existed for less than 250 years; even if you include the pre-independence colonial days, you only have so many wars to work with. Activision, of course, is probably not going to bother using wars that had no American involvement, but there's great potential in them nonetheless.ObsidianJones said:
Tell that to the Vietnamese. Like pretty much all wars, it was a grand clusterfuck of the highest order, with several sides fighting multiple enemies for often vague and confusing reasons. There may have been little Western involvement for a while, but that doesn't make it any less of a war- it wasn't until Saigon fell that the country was united, after all.Hawki said:
You mean Darkest of Days 2?Souplex said:
Honestly, that might be interesting. Though probably even dumber then the first game was.
"You need to be careful not the change history, so don't shoot certain people. Also, here's a futuristic assault rifle. Show those confederates a thing or two".
Also, can we please not visit Stalingrad and D-Day in this one? Yeah, they're cinematic, but CoD has done Stalingrad in 3 separate games at this point and D-Day in 2. WW2 took place, you know, all over the world. How about some of the lesser known theaters?
That's an adventurous leap you're performing there, nothing quite like leaving your comfort zone to explore new and exciting settings, right? Stunning ground breaking material. Inspirational. Daring. Can't wait to unravel the mystery behind this conflict.
I guess I'm in the minortiy but WWII could actual bring me back to the franchise. I love media that portrays that war.
They could have at least tried on the title though. They copied Battlefield 1 and somehow it's still worse.
They could have at least tried on the title though. They copied Battlefield 1 and somehow it's still worse.
Apparently, it won't have a zombies mode - because Treyarch might release a 8 maps megamappack of remastered zombiemaps for Black Ops 3.
Not sure if those are actually related or if either is true but if both are, I wouldn't be surprised about the relation.
Not sure if those are actually related or if either is true but if both are, I wouldn't be surprised about the relation.
...If it's only an American campaign, I won't buy it.
The best parts of CoD I and II were the British and Soviet bits.
Charging into Stalingrad, armed only with a clip of bullets, was memorable as fuck. And the Crusader crew portions were neat too.
But, hey, it's activision. I fully expect them to shit the bed here.
The best parts of CoD I and II were the British and Soviet bits.
Charging into Stalingrad, armed only with a clip of bullets, was memorable as fuck. And the Crusader crew portions were neat too.
But, hey, it's activision. I fully expect them to shit the bed here.
I have a friend who is a good decade younger than I and he was actually excited for this.
I tried to explain that they'd done WWII with CoD 1 - 3 and he had no idea since he was a kid when those came out.
Suddenly, this announcement made sense.
I tried to explain that they'd done WWII with CoD 1 - 3 and he had no idea since he was a kid when those came out.
Suddenly, this announcement made sense.
Can't someone make an online shooter but in a setting similar to Wolfenstein? Or I dunno - alternate history? Steampunk? Go Cold War between the Soviets and Mujaheddin? Alternate history Cold War where a Star Wars missile defense system has allowed the USA and USSR to openly fight without worry of getting nuked? There are so many scenarios one can go down without rehashing the same thing yet again.
C'mon, have an Australian mini campaign at least. First military to defeat all Axis forces, first to best the blitzkrieg . Plus you could do what B1 couldn't ... have an entire level were it's you running through actual trenches and tunnels with a bolt action and bayonet.
Or maybe a mini campaign of Z Special Unit in SE Asia focussing on Operations Jaywick and Rimau. Wildly successful, but a tragic end.
Or maybe a mini campaign of Z Special Unit in SE Asia focussing on Operations Jaywick and Rimau. Wildly successful, but a tragic end.
I think non-Americans are fine playing American-focused war games- the early Medal of Honour games and Wolfestein games were you tend to only see and play as Americans were both successful. Vietnam would have been a good choice IMO, everyone around the world has some familiarity and sense of what the conflict was like.MC1980 said:
My personal choice though would have been a Korean War game because it's a genuinely fascinating conflict- and people outside of America do give a fuck about it. The Koreans themselves most obviously, but it was also a huge coalition of other nations which for the only time in history fought combat operations under a UN flag. Unlike WW2, we're also still living with the direct consequences of that war by the fact that North Korea still exists and constantly threatens nuclear war with everyone. A COD game set in Korea would have been very timely given what's going on in the world now. I think Activision are being conservative and going for WW2 option after the flunk of their last time- if they were more ambitious they'd have tried Vietnam or Korea.