Would you play Call of Duty Future Warfare?

[SilkySkyKitten]

I have, and it's called Crysis 2.

I kid, I kid. In all seriousness, I probably will not, as while I have enjoyed the series up to this point it is starting to get rather stale. A CoD: Future Warfare seems more like an example of the series jumping the shark than a good direction for CoD. Plus, I doubt I'll be buying any new CoDs on launch night like I did with Black Ops, considering the whole Infinity Ward bullcrap earlier last year.

 

[Ordinaryundone]

Personally, I don't think WW2 is overdone, I think the Western Front of the European Theater of WW2 is overdone. I'm sick of it, like most gamers probably are. I want to see games set entirely on the Eastern Front, the bloodiest part of the bloodiest war ever, which has been relatively neglected because it didn't have squeaky-clean G.I.s draped in Old Glory. I also want to see games set in the Pacific, with their own sort of feel to them, distinct from any WW2 game with Nazis in it... I'd hope for a focus on the tense, primal sort of warfare that took place in theater Fighting in a jungle should not feel like fighting in France with more palm trees.

Going away from WW2 entirely, why not Korea? That was NOT a small or one-sided war. It would be easy to set a game in that conflict!

Hasn't there been an Eastern Front character in every WWII Call of Duty? Hell, even Black Ops had you playing as a Russian shooting up Nazis at one point. As for The Pacific, I agree. World at War already went there, and Black Ops' Vietnam sections were pretty good too, but it is a somewhat underutilized setting. The only downside is that what we saw in WaW is pretty much it. There wasn't much variety in the ground fighting in the Pacific theater, nearly every battle went the same way in the same environment. WaW showed us a pretty good amount of variety, given the circumstances, but I can't help feel another Pacific setting would just be retreading old ground.

As for Korea...it was a pretty one-sided war, honestly. NK got its butt kicked right out of SK, and then despite putting up a stronger resistance they were still unable to keep America from rolling nearly all the way to the Chinese border. Then the war pretty much stopped thanks to posturing from the Chinese, but it was definitely not a "close" fight. We took a lot of casulties, but that was mostly because MacArthur got greedy and decided he'd take the entire country, rather than just holding the border like his orders said.

Honestly, I like the direction the series has started down with Black Ops. A highly sci-fi/speculative fiction story against a realistic back drop. I wouldn't mind seeing them keep doing the same thing with the Cold War era, maybe even bump it forward a little to deal the Russian war in Afghanistan and the final years of the Cold War. You could play as an American agent sent into Communist countries to destabilize the regions and lead rebellions, culminating in the leading the Mujahideen against the Russians. It'd probably catch some flak from focusing on our rather...shady involvement in that war, but I think it'd be a cool story if done correctly.

 

[Aphex Demon]

Battlefield 2142 was awesome, so yeah, this would be awesome.

 

[Feste the Jester]

I already do. It's called Halo.

 

[ryai458]

Isn't crysis 2 coming out soon? Which is basically halos and CODs baby, so yeah crysis 2 is COD of the future.

 

[ChaoticKraus]

Generally i'm not very fond of futuristic settings, but that is secondary to game quality. If it was good i might buy it.

 

[icyneesan]

Future Warfare? You mean like:

Oh god, everything they said on Screwattack is coming true D:

 

[superdude22]

If infinity ward is at the helm definitely if they're not probably not. I didn't find black ops as good as MW2 but that's just my opinion

 

[Corporal Yakob]

To hell with the future I want Call of Duty: Napoleonic Warfare!

 

[Addicted2]

I'll play Ghost Recon Future Soldier before I try that.

 

[nebtheslayer95]

Yes. If it removes noobtubes ill play just about any cod. If it doesnt, im sure that infinity ward will find a way to make the future better in other ways

 

[CaptainKoala]

I would play almost anything as long as it was fun.

 

[emeraldrafael]

same game over and over i just cant see how so many can like playing the same game over and over with some new guns and little graphic upgrades

Really? Cause the Halo games got like that after they just added the dual weapon feature in Halo 2, and even then it was a poor sequel in comparison to Halo: CE. And that pretty much describes most any shooter game EVER since the first few CoDs and Halo: CE.

OT: I would. CoD is always a solid shooter and anyone that tells you that they wouldnt play is bullshitting you. If their friends were playing, they would play, and they wouldnt change their mind or stop playing until they found a new fix all their friends (or at least most) had it. Besides, the games and stories when in Infinity Ward's hands are something to be reveled and loved. Its only when they arent.

Besides, what would you play in its place that offers the same mindless fun and can be said is SIGNIFICANTLY better, to the point where if I (or really anyone) played it they would be blown away, renounce them ever playing CoD or just saying they didnt know this existed, and put it on the pantheon of gaming?

 

[Giovanto]

Well, just with that said it'd essentially be a sci-fi FPS with the Call of Duty formula. Sure it could be good but with Halo finally milked to its last dry, powdered milk drop I can imagine a lot of people will say "been there, done that, bought the t-shirt". Could it be good? Yes. But it'd likely be extremely generic...I second the previous notion of doing some lesser-used wars in an FPS. WWI is a good one. One thing I can say in favor of the TreyArch game was that they chose Vietnam, which is underused. WWII has been used too much for sure. It'd be nice to see some more original stuffing coming out instead of just re-releasing stuff that's been done before. The video game industry is turning into the music industry.

 

[Ashcrexl]

oh man, i hope to god the rumors are true. CoD is my 2nd favorite FPS franchise and a totally different setting would be amazing. Hopefully, the developer in charge of this particular installment will have a more original vision of the future than either burnt out wasteland or shiny metropolis.

 

[emeraldrafael]

I want to see games set entirely on the Eastern Front, the bloodiest part of the bloodiest war ever, which has been relatively neglected because it didn't have squeaky-clean G.I.s draped in Old Glory.

Because no one in America wants to play as a Russian, the Russians werent exactly the most humane people when it came to war (not putting it out as saying Americans were better), and because thats alot more snow fighitng, dead of winter, concentration camp liberations. Plus its not something taught (at least in America), because the next chapter (both in history and books) is about the Rise of Communism and its fight against the Western world of democracy on some level [whether it be American or British or whatever country that has a semi democratic state of government]). So for a faithful retelling of the Eastern Theatre, it would probably make more people sick to see. Then again, maybe I'm just showing a lacking knowledge of the Eastern Theatre past a half semester at college cause I got bored and wanted something to fill up a time slow that all of my friends were in class during and I had nothing to do.

I also want to see games set in the Pacific, with their own sort of feel to them, distinct from any WW2 game with Nazis in it... I'd hope for a focus on the tense, primal sort of warfare that took place in theater Fighting in a jungle should not feel like fighting in France with more palm trees.

I think they had a good portion of those, with a few including:
War In The Pacific
Pacific General
Pacific Storm
Gary Grigsby's Pacific War
Fighting Steel

Though I'll grant you, they dont get the respect/representation they deserve. I'd more so like to see a game that goes from Jungle/land fighitng, to holding beach fronts, to dogfighting, to fighting on the navel ships that is a faithful and well done game (like CoD4:MW1 was). That would be awesome, though thats mainly the US vs. Japan, but still, following the Carrier vessel Enterprise or fighting in the Philippines. Or even a game following the Tanks of Patton in Africa, or the "African Theatre" in general.

Going away from WW2 entirely, why not Korea? That was NOT a small or one-sided war. It would be easy to set a game in that conflict!

Mostly cause this ended in a Standstill and still isnt resolved today, and is a generally overlooked war in and of itself. Yes, its ramifications and ties to other countries/conflicts are major, but no one wants to fight a war game where you eventually change nothing except put up a fence between the countries where everyone already knew there was a boundary. Korea, for all of its worth, was more ideology (as in Democracy and the Western World vs Communism and the Eastern U.S.S.R. control countries).

I would like to see the Dog fights of WW2 or WW1 even really, done to the level CoD4:MW1 was done. Or the wars of the frontier of places like the American East, the African Congo, places where the Native people fought against the Empirical British Crown and take the side of the natives, because there's alot of battles Natives won that quite frankly just embarrassed the British/any country trying to take over.

Or the Monarchical wars between France/England/Spain during the colonization periods that details the conflict between the nations.

 

[Professor Cubbage]

No because the future of warfare is just finding cheaper ways to kill people (UAV sniper drones, bulets that explode in midair etc) and COD already has enough cheap ways to kill people as it is.

 

[Marowit]

99.999% sure I wouldn't bother picking it up.

Warning!@ The following views are personal opinions of MewTwo and MW
After MW2 Activision is going to have to work really hard to get me interested in one of their FPS. If Blizzards next MMO is really a MMOFPS that might get me to pick up one of their FPSers, but MW2 was just so incredibly bland, and the Multiplayer felt like I was wrestling with my two cats inside a cardboard box.

If they made the campaign longer than a handful of hours, if they made the campaign more than just a cool string of locales with a slap-dash story line, if they made the multiplayer maps larger than my cars glovebox, if they did those 3 things I would consider picking it up. Not to mention I absolutely hate how automatic weapons are the norm in FPS now (yes, I understand they reflect reality, but there's no risk v. reward that old bolt action guns had in WWII shooters. Yes I understand there were automatic weapons in those games too, but they were inaccurate and did shite damage compared to 1 shot from a bolt action *stares off into the distance and remembers the KAR .98*)

$60 is just too much for me to throw away on MW:moar moderner; nao with knew skinz!

 

[RA92]

It doesn't have to be in the distant future or anything. I'll be happy 'nuff if you give me this...

Spoiler

... with guns.

Really. Big. Guns.