Jangowuzhere
Banned
Shocking in what way?
I don't know about future stuff, but the vast majority of the Call of Duty audience enjoys the modern setting.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Call Of Duty WW2 reveal 26 april, website up [UPDATE: Leaked screenshots]
- Thread starter Reckless Onion
- Start date
I don't know about future stuff, but the vast majority of the Call of Duty audience enjoys the modern setting.
Razgriz-Specter
Member
I just hope Treyarch's next game is the legitimate Black Ops 3 campaign.
The Lone Courier
Member
Yes please.
Razgriz-Specter
Member
Honestly could be another game starring David Mason & Karma or start with David Mason's kid and flashback to David for a plot connection like BO2 did with his father.
And obviously throw in a Reznov hint or 2.
Always fascinating to see WW2 pictures in color.
Still looks less brown than most WW2 games.
SolidSnakex
Member
When it's time for the next Treyarch game, i'd really like a site to try to get an honest sit down with them about what the fuck happened with BO3's campaign. BO and BO2 were so damn good in that area. And then comes BO3. It's a campaign so bad that it made me appreciate the campaign in Ghosts. At least it felt like a CoD campaign even though it was heavily flaws in some areas.
Deckard Chapel
Banned
Razgriz-Specter
Member
Yeah, BO3 has the worst campaign by a substantial margin. Absolute shit.
Deckard Chapel
Banned
Please no.
An original storyline akin to "Saving Private Ryan" and "Band Of Brothers" please, Sledgehammer Games.
Hidden One
Member
I have no doubt the campaign will be amazing. MP....Not so much. It'll be plagued with supply drops besides I realized that after playing CoD 4 Remastered the slower paced CoDs don't do it for me anymore. I'll proudly stick with Black Ops 3 till Treyarchs next serving.
Both of those games are pretty bad though if memory serves me right.
Especially PA. What a letdown after the brilliant Allied Assault.
Lord of Castamere
Member
Black ops 3 looked so bad I never even bothered renting. The only campaign to date, beside Cod1, that I haven't beat. Such a shame.
Forerunner
Member
PA was decent. RS was the one that sucked ass.
Personally, I'd love to see new pacific theater fps. There was Rising Storm, which was a great game but it was multiplayer only.
AlexFlame116
Member
I'm still waiting for Call of Duty Ghost's story to be resolved.
Ah, you're probably right. All the WW2 games from that era kind of run together, lol.
I remember both games being disappointing, but I probably thought PA was more so because I liked AA so much. I don't really remember anything about RS other than I didn't like it, ha.
Hidden One
Member
lol Ghosts ending was completely ass.
AlexFlame116
Member
Exactly. That's why I'm so upset about it. If you're going to make a cliffhanger then freaking either follow up on it or release a conclusion on DLC.
But nope. All we know is that the main hero is gonna have a hard time.
M.W.
Member
I am the opposite. I have no doubt the SP will suck, like most COD games. The MP could be good, could be awful. The reveal in 3 days won't answer anything.
If I can deal with HL2:E2 having an unresolved cliffhanger, we can clearly live the rest of our lives without ever needing to know what happened to RORKE and LOGAN
Let alone the fact that one more Ghosts campaign from Infinity Ward is one less Infinite Warfare sequel. I think the namesake and the fact that they placed IW in chronology with the MW series shows that they knew Ghosts was a dud and needed another crack at a "signature" brand for the studio
Hidden One
Member
Why do you think the SP will suck? Advance Warfares campaign was really good. Sledgehammer seems to know how to make exciting campaigns.
SolidSnakex
Member
It's so bad that I wouldn't even recommend it for the sake of curiosity. It really feels like a CoD campaign designed for people that don't like CoD campaigns. The rollercoaster nature of the series is completely stripped out in favor of making it very co-op friendly. So in place of your set pieces you instead have moments where you've got to complete the same objective (hold a point or plant some type of bomb) in multiple areas in order to get to the next sequence. I played it in single player, so that may actually be enjoyable in co-op, but it sure as hell isn't when you're playing it like a standard CoD campaign.
Deckard Chapel
Banned
Pacific Assault was decent - I remember you had to have a beast of a PC to run it at ultra settings. Rising Sun was garbage - it was like a lower-grade version of Pacific Assault [even though Rising Sun released first lol].
Maybe it was the total lack of aesthetic evolution, but I remember being pretty done with the modern setting when the trailers for MW3 were rolling out. Then again, I was still enjoying Battlefield 3 and 4 years later, so maybe it was more of a Call of Duty specific problem.
Yeah, honestly I think the best way to do co-op campaigns in the future is to just "tack it on" to a single-player designed campaign, like was done in World at War. Make players share the main character's perspective during those cinematic in-game cutscenes if need be. Restrict it to two players if need be. Don't water down the encounter and objective design.
Fox Mulder
Member
I haven't given a shit about cod in years, but I'm down for a current gen retake of Normandy and other awesome ww2 set pieces.
And scorpio.
And scorpio.
Deckard Chapel
Banned
Agreed.
The WWII Call Of Duty games hold a special place in my gaming history - but Medal Of Honor: Allied Assault is the best of the best.
The atmosphere alone coupled with the soundtrack - that almost doubles as atmosphere itself - just sells the game. I remember seeing documentaries about how they recorded the actual WWII weapon sounds, so everything was authentic even down to the shell casing sounds.
The level choices were also sublime - it was either overcast most of the time, or raining and it just really had such an overbearing Saving Private Ryan/Band of Brothers vibe that I couldn't help but fall in love with it.
Here's hoping Sledgehammer Games can recapture at least some of that magic and atmosphere in Call of Duty: WWII.
I feel like they have overplayed their cards at this point. I am tired of the ridiculousness of their future war settings we have had to endure (wall running has to go) and I've played soooooooo many WWII games that I'll never go back to those. This even mentions d-day and Normandy in the description.
No disrespect to the real people who fought these horrible conflicts of course, It is not a subject to be taken lightly, but these are games we are talking about right, shouldn't they be fun more over than anything else? I really don'r care if it would have taken an extra 3 seconds to load that gun in real life because the clip expands when un humid environments and btw you are scaring us all with that kind of talk.
All kidding aside how about something just for fun or if we have to go accurate do another war that has either been rarely done or maybe different battles. I refuse to storm the beach of Normandy in one more freaking game. I feel like I've been desensitized to how awful it was simply because of the fact that if WWII is the setting you can pretty much guarantee the will be a D-day level.
So do I have an answer? Nope not at all I'm just saying the formula needs to be shaken up a bit. We need some innovators and fresh ideas to revitalize this genre or IMHO I think they should take a lot longer than just a year off from these games. They have enough money, take a bit of a risk here and there or how about a completely off the wall story idea. Take your cues from Guerilla Games and what they did with Horizon Zero Dawn, sure they borrowed some elements of assassins creed and tomb raider but in whole that game is a breath of fresh air in an environment that is stagnating. How bout this..... take a few years off and develop something new, Take a chance, you've been milking us dry with FPS based during war time since I can remember. Or if you have to (just absolutely have to) make another boots on the ground FPS use something other than WW1 or WWII. Tell a tale about a fictional story based on an event that happened like Cuban Missile Crisis The redacted missions, or the story they never told you. You see sometimes the story is more important then what kind of skins you can attach to your characters and guns. Even a tastefully done (as much as possible) Vietnam War that shows you the real futility of war and how your side doesn't always win because that's real life. Again this is only if you won't risk doing something completely different and take your time making it. Go nuts make something we would never see coming there are plenty of new ideas out there to be had so just stop turning on the call of duty video game clone machine that has one dial with 2 settings on it., WWII or Future Wars. You guys need a new machine because this is getting really old. Oh look youre idea generator is blinking. Yep I thought so its caught in a feedback loop. Try turning it off and on again. You should be golden after that....
Rant Over ( i swear this was going to be around 3 sentences long when I started)
Deckard Chapel
Banned
I feel like they have overplayed their cards at this point. I am tired of the ridiculousness of their future war settings we have had to endure (wall running has to go) and I've played soooooooo many WWII games that I'll never go back to those. This even mentions d-day and Normandy in the description.
No disrespect to the real people who fought these horrible conflicts of course, It is not a subject to be taken lightly, but these are games we are talking about right, shouldn't they be fun more over than anything else? I really don'r care if it would have taken an extra 3 seconds to load that gun in real life because the clip expands when un humid environments and btw you are scaring us all with that kind of talk.
All kidding aside how about something just for fun or if we have to go accurate do another war that has either been rarely done or maybe different battles. I refuse to storm the beach of Normandy in one more freaking game. I feel like I've been desensitized to how awful it was simply because of the fact that if WWII is the setting you can pretty much guarantee the will be a D-day level.
So do I have an answer? Nope not at all I'm just saying the formula needs to be shaken up a bit. We need some innovators and fresh ideas to revitalize this genre or IMHO I think they should take a lot longer than just a year off from these games. They have enough money, take a bit of a risk here and there or how about a completely off the wall story idea. Take your cues from Guerilla Games and what they did with Horizon Zero Dawn, sure they borrowed some elements of assassins creed and tomb raider but in whole that game is a breath of fresh air in an environment that is stagnating. How bout this..... take a few years off and develop something new, Take a chance, you've been milking us dry with FPS based during war time since I can remember. Or if you have to (just absolutely have to) make another boots on the ground FPS use something other than WW1 or WWII. Tell a tale about a fictional story based on an event that happened like Cuban Missile Crisis The redacted missions, or the story they never told you. You see sometimes the story is more important then what kind of skins you can attach to your characters and guns. Even a tastefully done (as much as possible) Vietnam War that shows you the real futility of war and how your side doesn't always win because that's real life. Again this is only if you won't risk doing something completely different and take your time making it. Go nuts make something we would never see coming there are plenty of new ideas out there to be had so just stop turning on the call of duty video game clone machine that has one dial with 2 settings on it., WWII or Future Wars. You guys need a new machine because this is getting really old. Oh look youre idea generator is blinking. Yep I thought so its caught in a feedback loop. Try turning it off and on again. You should be golden after that....
Rant Over ( i swear this was going to be around 3 sentences long when I started)
WWII is the ultimate setting for any kind of war/action/adventure/FPS game.
First of all, it actually happened and second, it's just an absolutely atmospheric, blissful and rewarding experience to participate in, partly because it not only radically changed our history, but thanks to the interactive medium of video games - we get to partake in a little bit of the lore and storied history of it; to feel as though we were really there, fighting to help make a difference - even if it's just in the virtual sense.
Just my 2 cents.
Razgriz-Specter
Member
Did you miss the post where I said Treyarch?
Because Treyarch did a separate original campaign from W@W, BO1 and BO2 and it was the worst PoS in the series.
Last_colossi
Member
WWII is the ultimate setting for any kind of war/action/adventure/FPS game.
First of all, it actually happened and second, it's just an absolutely atmospheric, blissful experience to partake in, partly because it radically changed our history and also thanks to the interactive medium of video games, we get to partake in a little bit of it; to feel as though we were really there to help make a difference - even if it's just in the virtual sense.
Just my 2 cents.
Deckard Chapel
Banned
Last_colossi
Member
lol, I'm all in for games about real historic events but I'll have to wait and see how this turns out, I'm interested to see if they go the super realistic & true story route or the Michael Bay route.
GeNoMe
Member
Rolling on WWII
Anyway, I for one am thrilled to see what the developers have in store for us. It's gonna feel like coming home playing another COD in this setting.
Deckard Chapel
Banned
Btw, when I mentioned "blissful", I was referring to the fact that taking part in something as historic as WWII in the capacity of the Allies that fought for nothing but good; is in itself rewarding and leaves you with a pleasant, happy feeling.
Stiler
Member
Medal of Honor: AA was great, one of the best fps games imo.
The thing that made it fun to play was one of the reasons why Goldeneye was so much fun, good gunplay.
The way enemies reacted to getting hit in different areas, it didn't take a half a mag to down someone and they didn't just fall like paper or other things like you see in even modern games.
The only recent fps game that attempted good reactions to combat was Mafia III.
Enemies reacted to where you hit them and didn't always die when they were down either, it made great use of physics with animation blending as well.
Something that I would hope Call of Duty would learn from (but probably won't, probably just the same usual cod style animatoins).
The thing that made it fun to play was one of the reasons why Goldeneye was so much fun, good gunplay.
The way enemies reacted to getting hit in different areas, it didn't take a half a mag to down someone and they didn't just fall like paper or other things like you see in even modern games.
The only recent fps game that attempted good reactions to combat was Mafia III.
Enemies reacted to where you hit them and didn't always die when they were down either, it made great use of physics with animation blending as well.
Something that I would hope Call of Duty would learn from (but probably won't, probably just the same usual cod style animatoins).
Last_colossi
Member
😉 I thought so, but it was just a perfect opportunity to take it out of context. 😂
Deckard Chapel
Banned
Medal of Honor: AA was great, one of the best fps games imo.
The thing that made it fun to play was one of the reasons why Goldeneye was so much fun, good gunplay.
The way enemies reacted to getting hit in different areas, it didn't take a half a mag to down someone and they didn't just fall like paper or other things like you see in even modern games.
The only recent fps game that attempted good reactions to combat was Mafia III.
Enemies reacted to where you hit them and didn't always die when they were down either, it made great use of physics with animation blending as well.
Something that I would hope Call of Duty would learn from (but probably won't, probably just the same usual cod style animatoins).
With an "M" rating, I hope that Sledgehammer Games makes good use of it to display the visceral, brutal nature of true combat.
War isn't fun - video games give us all a sense of having fun while playing war games - but actual war is anything but.
The more violence and gore shown to the viewer during a war film or game should actually deter them from remotely seeking to ever commit a violent act.
That was Steven Spielberg's message in Saving Private Ryan. The opening scene is around 28 minutes in length; there is no soundtrack to accompany the on-screen action - just visceral violence and gore, accompanied by the actual sounds of the weapons of the era, the waves crashing on the shore, the shouts and orders issued from the many brave soldiers to their comrades - as well as their screams in agony to depict the actual horrors of war. Hacksaw Ridge, directed by Mel Gibson does a very similar thing for it's third act, in showing you with unbelievable amounts of blood and gore, the true horrors of war.
In a real war, there are no do-overs, there are no health packs that will regrow a limb and there certainly is no coming back from death to grab a rifle and fight again.
I just hope that Sledgehammer Games will utilize their 2 1/2 years of World War II research to harness everything I just mentioned into Call of Duty: WWII.
Medal of Honor: AA was great, one of the best fps games imo.
The thing that made it fun to play was one of the reasons why Goldeneye was so much fun, good gunplay.
The way enemies reacted to getting hit in different areas, it didn't take a half a mag to down someone and they didn't just fall like paper or other things like you see in even modern games.
The only recent fps game that attempted good reactions to combat was Mafia III.
Enemies reacted to where you hit them and didn't always die when they were down either, it made great use of physics with animation blending as well.
Something that I would hope Call of Duty would learn from (but probably won't, probably just the same usual cod style animatoins).
Mafia 3 is the only game I've ever played other than maybe Arma that properly simulated what it actually feels like to fire a rifle. I used the rifle so much in that game simply for that reason.
MilkyJoe
Member
I've played CoD 1 and 2 through numerous times, recently rebought them for xbox. The modern ones, I've not even completed. CoD will always be WW2 for me.
I love the one in the first CoD, where you only given an ammo clip to hold like Enemy At The Gates.
You should play United Offensive if you love CoD1 and 2, you'll like it very much.
down 2 orth
Member
Predictable, safe, and boring.
The execution could be stellar though.
down 2 orth
Member
Maybe if you are a Call of Duty fan. But I would place my bets on underwhelming fast-paced World War action for casual teenagers.
Isn't this exactly the target audience? What were you expecting - the franchise turning into Red Orchestra?