Call of Duty: World at War

[Benji]

Please don't fuck it up is all i'm going to say

[Wallace]

I can't see this being better than Modern Warfare. Its just going to be so... Naff.

I want more red dot sights n shit, no?

[myoozikk]

i'm not hopeful but i'll reserve judgement till it comes out or demo's.

[KieronGillen]

In passing, one of the things Treyarch made clear when demoing the thing to me was this was the first game they had two full years to actually develop. They've turned around all their previous CoD's in a year. They're clearly aware at how they're perceived.

KG

[Uzi]

All COD's? Didn't they just do 3?

Ah wait, they did that Big Red One too didn't they?

[mushashi]

In passing, one of the things Treyarch made clear when demoing the thing to me was this was the first game they had two full years to actually develop. They've turned around all their previous CoD's in a year. They're clearly aware at how they're perceived.

KG

So did they infer it'll be on par with an Infinity Ward sequel? (as IW have pretty much been on a 2 year cycle for their games since inception).

[KieronGillen]

Well, that's what they want to do, clearly. They're clearly excited to be able to have a chance to Show What They Can Do.

I wish 'em luck. Doing the sequel to the biggest game of last year isn't an easy one.

KG

[Timmo]

They have the engine, they have the time. They even have the multiplayer format laid out for them. This is Limbo of the Lost territory we're talking, here.

It's all about the maps.

I'd love it to be even better than CoD4.

[Sir DangerM]

I don't see how it can be better than CoD4. WW2 weaponary is so limited that i don't see how they can keep the same amount of depth in multiplayer as CoD4.

[Meers]

Hey, I'd love it to be better as well.

Fair enough then, I'll reserve further judgement until a demo emerges. Go Treyarch, prove you're worthy!

AND DON'T FORGET TO INCLUDE A SOUTHPAW OPTION. AND DON'T FLIP THE TRIGGERS AROUND WHILST DOING SO! A lot of developers seem to think 'Southpaw' also means 'flip the trigger functions around as well as the thumbsticks'.

[Sirloin]

Why would you string up a POW instead of shooting them?

Plus aren't you supposed to capture POWs and lock them up rather than killing them? Geneva convention and all that.

I don't think the Russians were signatories of the Geneva Convention. So you could still shoot them in the back of the head in the woods like they did to the Polish.

[ManInJapan]

Couldn't they just be considered an unlawful combatant?

Didn't stop Bush, did it?

[Fusty Gusset]

I've just gone through COD2 in single player for the first time since the 360's release and I'm just about to leap into COD3 again, which I really disliked...but it still has 'something' - I just really love the WW2 scenario's.

COD4's FPS nirvana yes, but I'm looking forward to another blast from the past.

I hope Treyarch have listened to the critics.

[Nathan Wind]

The problem with vehicles is that the game maps will have to become a lot bigger and wider to incorporate the tanks, both losing the tightness and claustraphobia that 4's multiplayer thrives on, as well as giving lots of open, long-range avenues for those fuck-wit snipers among us. Hmm.

It worked for UO, which is still the multiplayer pinnacle of the series by some margin, IMO - CoD2's multiplayer felt like a real step backwards after UO. Great big maps for vehicle play, but with plenty of settlements and cover in the terrain to keep infantry useful (and deadly against vehicles) as well. Although it ultimately depends what sort of player numbers can be supported for the consoles.

[LittleJoe]

It's possibly to provide the claustrophobia of tight urban enviroments and have wide open fields and roads for vechile combat as the Battlefield series has proven. But as long as Xbox Live has the 16 player cap I can't really see the point.

I don't think the WW2 scenario takes any of the depth away from the game, the depth comes from the range and contrast of weapons, rather than the depth. COD4 is deep because it offers a range of classes rather than because it has several variations on SMGs, there's not that much difference beteewn WW2 and the modern day in terms of the range of weaponary.

Yea you'll miss the red dot sight, Helicopters and claymores, but theres no reason that a WW2 setting has to be any less 'deep'.

[Rayn]

A german gamingsite managed to leak a few images today, almost two weeks before the embargo is to be lifted.

Pics can be found here: http://ga-forum.com/showthread.php?t=313307

PS: I tried to embed the pics, but this forum doesn't allow the lack of file extension in the image URLs.

[Commander Jameson]

Yea you'll miss the red dot sight, Helicopters and claymores, but theres no reason that a WW2 setting has to be any less 'deep'.

You could call in artillery support and napalm bombing runs instead, which would be pretty cool.

Edit. Oops. This isn't 'Nam.

[Meers]

I've saved them locally just in case that thread gets deleted. Shall I post them in this thread?

[Rayn]

I've saved them locally just in case that thread gets deleted. Shall I post them in this thread?

Yes plz...I wanted to do the same, but I'm kinda stuck at work so I don't have the time atm

[Meers]

Okay then.

[Meers]

Doesn't look too shabby. I like that flamethrower one.

[Floshenbarnical]

As Zero Punctuation once pointed out, the combined efforts of MOH and COD have kept WWII alive for longer than the war actually was. I swear, every single avenue of WWII has been explored time and time and time including the Japanese/Pacific setting. COD4 was a step forwards in that it was modern warfare and taking a step back to generic WWII is in my opinion a huge mistake. What would be interesting is if someone did an alternate future where you played as the AXIS forces and actually won the war and ruled the world.

[mushashi]

COD4 was a step forwards in that it was modern warfare and taking a step back to generic WWII is in my opinion a huge mistake. What would be interesting is if someone did an alternate future where you played as the AXIS forces and actually won the war and ruled the world.

Games where you get to play as the 'bad guys' don't really work from a commercial point of view, unfortunately. A WWII game where you could play as the Nazis or Imperial Japanese and change the outcome of the war would be a nice change, but unsellable, probably be fairly controversial too.

[Rudi von Starnberg]

I swear, every single avenue of WWII has been explored time and time and time including the Japanese/Pacific setting.

It really hasn't. There's an awful lot of interesting stuff from WW2 that hasn't made it into games. We just seem to get the same theatres/battles over and over again, though.

[mash]

Uninspiring.

[Floshenbarnical]

I thought the plot in COD4 was intriguing and interesting and while obviously the good guys win it left me in doubt a couple of times like when I died of radiation poisoning and tore down some general rules of videogame storytelling.

WWII just leaves me thinking that I've SEEN IT ALREADY

[Timmo]

I want to play as an ultra-powerful mecha-hitler, punching cockneys into space.

[mushashi]

The only FPS war game which sounded rather intriguing was David Jaffe's cancelled Heartland:

Heartland was the story of China invading America. It was a first-person-shooter where you played a soldier debating whether to stay and fight for America or go AWOL to meet up with your family. We were trying to put in a lot of gameplay that would evoke emotion. You had sequences where you'd go into homes and your commanding officer would tell you to shoot innocent Chinese-Americans. It was very dark and was meant to cause players to consider what it's like to live in America and be an American today.

[K]

Mmm, just reading that outline has made me consider what it means to be an American and to live in America today.

[Mr Do 71]

Microsoft has announced that Call of Duty: World at War will be revealed with a new trailer only on Xbox LIVE Marketplace on June 21-22.

No further info has been provided, although we assume the trailer will be available in HD and we're hoping it will look as good if not better than Call of Duty 4.

There's currently no word on when the reveal trailer will be released elsewhere, but you can look forward to VideoGamer.com's first-look preview shortly after the trailer premieres.