The Next Call of Duty

[rhyno435]

I searched this and there were 2 results that were pretty outdated, so I thought I would start another one.

I have heard rumors from my friend (no idea about the validity) that Treyarch are going to make World at War 2. I personally think that this is a horrible idea; people got bored with World War II years ago.

What do you think of this idea, and what setting do you think the seventh Call of Duty should have?

 

[wellummnick]

anything as long as it's not Future Warfare... >.<

 

[TheLastCylon]

It should take place in the Roman era.

I seriously doubt that will happen.

 

[RollForInitiative]

I have heard rumors from my friend (no idea about the validity) that Treyarch are going to make World at War 2. I personally think that this is a horrible idea; people got bored with World War II years ago.

That seems like a relatively broad and baseless statement considering that, across the three console platforms, World at War had sold a total of ten million units as of the end of last month. Are you telling me those ten million people are bored with World War 2 games and bought it anyways?

 

[HardRockSamurai]

We went from old warfare, to new warfare, to modern warfare. The next logical step; future warfare.

In other words, I want to play Call of Duty 4, in space.

 

[I Stomp on Kittens]

Anytime involving muskets and only being able to stand in a line.

 

[rhyno435]

I have heard rumors from my friend (no idea about the validity) that Treyarch are going to make World at War 2. I personally think that this is a horrible idea; people got bored with World War II years ago.

That seems like a relatively broad and baseless statement considering that, across the three console platforms, World at War had sold a total of ten million units as of the end of last month. Are you telling me those ten million people are bored with World War 2 games and bought it anyways?

That's true, many people did buy it. It was a good game, and probably the best World War II game available. But, I, and anyone I have talked to, have said that they are getting bored of the repitition in World War II. I don't think there is much more they can get out of this war that is fresh. WaW had the Japanese campaign, which had never been done before (as far as I know), so that was fresh. I'm not sure there is anything else new though.

 

[rhyno435]

anything as long as it's not Future Warfare... >.<

That too. I think it would be too much like Halo.

 

[Pyre00]

World War One.

And no, it wouldn't be all boring trench warfare. It's pathetic how misunderstood the Great War is. If they did it well, it could very well open the door for more WWI games. As it is, only the bravest of the brave try to make them now. And by the way, the Japanesse campaign has been done before. ALOT. Ever hear of Medal of Honor Rising Sun?

The Future setting has also been beaten half to death, Fallout 3 being the only creative and original future setting (1950s style). I'm sure that the mediocre developers of the world and the mindless herds that follow them will soon beat the life out of the other half, but whatever.

 

[CallMeDeadly]

It was a good game, and probably the best World War II game available.

Excuse me, the best World War II game ever? Doubt it, there are better World War II Games. Honestly, I didn't hear any hype about the previous Call of Duty's. Yes, I'm talking about the stone age, when a certain amount of players played CoD 1, 2, and 3. Now a days, there are way too many kiddies playing CoD 4. Honestly, it just gets annoying.

And the reason why CoD: WaW has such high sales is due to it being a sequel. I mean a year later they released the game after releasing CoD 4.

And yes, as Pyre00 has stated before, the Pacific campaign has been done before.

We went from old warfare, to new warfare, to modern warfare. The next logical step; future warfare.

No, then the game would turn into a Battlefield 2142; we don't want that to happen!

World War One.

The Future setting has also been beaten half to death, Fallout 3 being the only creative and original future setting (1950s style). I'm sure that the mediocre developers of the world and the mindless herds that follow them will soon beat the life out of the other half, but whatever.

I agree with you. They should make a World War One - that would be very interesting. What I find funny is, ever since Call of Duty 4 came out, people have been saying, "Oh World War II has been way over done." Of course it has, but no one mentioned anything beforehand until AFTER the release.

Yes, Fallout 3 did succeed in actually creating a decent future setting.

Could this be possible for the Call of Duty franchise?

Time will tell, my friends --- time will tell!

 

[Dys]

I, for one, am sick of all this 'modern warfare' and 'modern combat' games. The spam is unbearable. I liked having a bolt action rifle and people having to rely on a measure of patience and cuning to get kills, rather than just picking up a p90 and charging in guns blazing. Team specific guns are also a must, it just gets boring fighting when everyone has access to the exact same guns. Also, perks (martyrdom, last stand, juggernaught etc) should die, they are beyond stupid..

Honestly, I don't care what era it's set in, but the SMG/assault rifle spam is lame, and semi-automatic sniper rifles are just unfair.

 

[RollForInitiative]

It was a good game, and probably the best World War II game available.

You might want to check your quotes. If you're going to quote me, at least quote something I actually said. =)

 

[Sky Captanio]

anything as long as it's not Future Warfare... >.<

If it was made by Infinity Ward it might be good. Not by Treyarch though.

 

[the protaginist]

Here's an idea! A game set during the Cromwellian Conquest of Ireland!

Well, maybe not a GOOD idea, but it'd be nice to play as the Irish rebels, doing a number on that asshole Cromwell.

Or maybe a game set during The Troubles! It'd be a little WW2'ey, but without all the brown.


To hell with it, I just want a game set in Ireland.

 

[xChevelle24]

I would be totally fine with World War 2, I just had a problem with the way Treyarch tried to copy and paste COD4 into World War 2. You just can't do that.

I like World War II and the whole war, it just needs to be done with some sort of realism in mind. Nothing is more exciting than actually being able to pin an entire team down with 1 machine gun, and then having your face blown off by a sniper :].

But also, the modern warfare idea is good too, you just have to use your imagination. It doesn't all have to be about the current war. Hell, it's video games, do whatever the fuck you want!

Future warfare is where I tend to turn the other way. Everything turns into lasers and shit, and I'm just not in to that.

So, for call of duty 7, since Treyfail is making it, I would just suggest they stick to what they know best, which is World War II. Hopefully they do better this time around.

 

[XJ-0461]

The next Call of Duty is Modern Warfare 2. We'll think about the one after that when it comes out.

 

[Kermi]

What I find funny is, ever since Call of Duty 4 came out, people have been saying, "Oh World War II has been way over done." Of course it has, but no one mentioned anything beforehand until AFTER the release.

I've been seeing people complain about the overuse of the WW2 setting for years, I think the fact that CoD4 was set in modern times was part of what made it so popular.

Frankly I wouldn't mind seeing a COD type game set in Vietnam, but I think that whole thing might be too sensitive an issue for an American developer, at least for now. I mean there was Battlefield Vietnam, but as far as I can tell it was the least popular of the Battlefield games.

 

[Kermi]

Korea, seriously we need to stop ignoring this way already.

Ah but Korea was a police action.