CoD 5 to be Modern Warfare again

I'm not interested in any more CoD games. CoD 4 was the last for me, and I regretted paying full price for it. I was hoping it would bring something new to the table, but they're just recycling the same thing over and over. Activision/Inifinity Ward has become as bad as EA just adding a different number to the end of the title.

I'll look elsewhere for my gaming needs.

Although I will say, if they can make a decent Bond game using the CoD 4 engine, I might be interested in that if it comes to the PC. All depends on who the developer is, how much budget/time they have. If it's along the lines of SoF 3: Payback, they can forget it. Way to wreck a great franchise...

Great news that its underway.. i just hope they put a longer single player campaign in this time round.Rattlesnake_8

Seriously. Is it that hard to make a 10+ hour shooter?

I also want the game to be less on-a-rail.

[QUOTE="Rattlesnake_8"]Great news that its underway.. i just hope they put a longer single player campaign in this time round.mrbojangles25

Seriously. Is it that hard to make a 10+ hour shooter?

I also want the game to be less on-a-rail.

It's not that hard, it's extremely hard, to make am action packed, fun and exciting game. It may be very linear and you can't interact much but it has a very good feeling and you never get tired of it, MP too.

If I were to get COD5..it would probably be for the single player. I couldn't stand playing COD4's multiplayer...I still prefer COD 1 and 2 over 4 for the overall experience. Multiplayer in 4 was just too easy to die or kill somebody...hence why I don't like modern warfare games...just spray and pray.

If it's as short as the last game, I'll be looking critically at where the industry is really going. As well as being very disappointed.

I certainly prefered CoD 4 to any of the previous ones. Something about WW2 just seems, oh I don't know, old... Done... Tired... Played out... You get the point...

Good call Activision.

omg, im so happy i read that lol

ty TC :D

[QUOTE="mrbojangles25"]

[QUOTE="Rattlesnake_8"]Great news that its underway.. i just hope they put a longer single player campaign in this time round.DanielDust

Seriously. Is it that hard to make a 10+ hour shooter?

I also want the game to be less on-a-rail.

It's not that hard, it's extremely hard, to make am action packed, fun and exciting game. It may be very linear and you can't interact much but it has a very good feeling and you never get tired of it, MP too.

Maybe it's just that I don't have as much time to play games anymore, but I thought the single player campaign of CoD 4 was easily long enough... if 5 is the same way I won't have a problem

I certainly prefered CoD 4 to any of the previous ones. Something about WW2 just seems, oh I don't know, old... Done... Tired... Played out... You get the point...

Good call Activision.

KillOBKilled

wow, u sir are not a true gamer, if u r a true gamer then u have to love ww2 based games considering theres a huge chunk of series out there that are ww2

[QUOTE="KillOBKilled"]

I certainly prefered CoD 4 to any of the previous ones. Something about WW2 just seems, oh I don't know, old... Done... Tired... Played out... You get the point...

Good call Activision.

SGT4EVA

wow, u sir are not a true gamer, if u r a true gamer then u have to love ww2 based games considering theres a huge chunk of series out there that are ww2

How does not loving WW2 games make you any less of a gamer? The fact that there's a 'huge chunk of series out there that are WW2' only proves him right. It's old, done, tired, played out, etc. There's just too many WW2 games already and there isn't too many modern warfare games that were as good as COD4(IMO).

And before you say anything, i love WW2 games too( the good ones), but it's re-done way too many times.

um, yeah, the thingy didn't say modern warfare, it said "new military theatre" that could mean anything. lets wait and find out. i think a vietnam cod would be cool, there arent very many good vietnam shooters out there. battlefield vietnam, vietkong, just not that many. with_teeth26

What about Line Of Sight: Vietnam?

Cool, but I don't have much hope for or interest in CoD5 since it isn't done by its true developers, Inifinity Ward.JP_Russell

I'd actually have more interest in it, for that same reason.

Having played CoD 1 MP for many years, when CoD 2 came along it felt as if it had been designed to make it easier to spawn kill and spam nades. The radar etc., just made it even easier to pinpoint where the enemy was. With CoD 4 it's got even worse, and now people spawn-rape with air strikes and helicopters.

I'm a player who abhors spawn-raping and SKs, to the point I'll turn and run the other way if I've strayed into a spawn area. I just don't find it fun if I'm on the receiving end of it, so I try not to do it to other people.

Some of the CoD 2 map designs were particularly bad (like Moscow) where you could pin down and spawn rape the other team indefinitely. It's not such a problem if you only play S&D (which I personally dislike), but for other gametypes it's an issue. Quite a few of the CoD 4 maps suffer from similar problems, which is aggravated if you spawn 'outside' as you suddenly get blasted with an air strike.

Artillery was one of the things I hated in UO, and played mostly on servers where that was disabled.

So maybe another developer would come up with something better, and at least design maps that make it harder to pin down the opposing team. As for single player, they seriously need to make it at least twice the length and try to do away with the constant flood of respawning enemies.

If I were to get COD5..it would probably be for the single player. I couldn't stand playing COD4's multiplayer...I still prefer COD 1 and 2 over 4 for the overall experience. Multiplayer in 4 was just too easy to die or kill somebody...hence why I don't like modern warfare games...just spray and pray.

kryu88

In the case of cod4, it was nade spam in pray, i get the feeling that less people use guns than grenades.

Who would like to see the Americans win again? That's the problem with WW2 games. It will always end that way. America/Britain will win. Germans lose. The only thing that would be different is on what battle you are going to fight in. Though modern settings will most likely end in the same way(America wins, Terrorists lose), what makes it better is that such setting has rarely been used. Compare the number of games that use the WW2 setting to the number of games that use the modern setting... around 3:1. So if CoD5 stays modern, it will most likely be better. However, it is true that CoD4 SP is too short and CoD4 MP has too much blind naders/tubers which makes this game a little bad. Activision should think about changing it.

Who would like to see the Americans win again? That's the problem with WW2 games. It will always end that way. America/Britain will win. Germans lose. The only thing that would be different is on what battle you are going to fight in. Though modern settings will most likely end in the same way(America wins, Terrorists lose), what makes it better is that such setting has rarely been used. Compare the number of games that use the WW2 setting to the number of games that use the modern setting... around 3:1. So if CoD5 stays modern, it will most likely be better. However, it is true that CoD4 SP is too short and CoD4 MP has too much blind naders/tubers which makes this game a little bad. Activision should think about changing it.

lance435

With all due respect, I know what you're trying to say, but there were many more countries involved in the war than just those you mentioned (as I'm sure you are aware). Therefore, in my view, there is still a great deal of scope for focusing on other battles in other theatres of the war, involving characters from those other countries and their experiences.

World War 2 was such a major conflict with such long-lasting repercussions that it was inevitable it would remain in the imaginations of people for many generations. The values and reasons for that war were also more clearly defined than some of the more modern conflicts we've seen (propaganda aside).

When it comes to modern combat games, I'm not particularly against them as long as they bring something new to the table. And yes, so far it's all simply about America vs Terrorists. There are other conflicts all around the world not involving those 'sides', and it would be refreshing to see other scenarios used instead of the old stereotypes. Give Russia a break, for example. The country has changed, people are different, so why keep using them as bad guys? Let's have something different for a change. I've personally grown tired of always fighting the same enemies in these modern combat games, and I would argue it is just as bad as always fighting Germans in WW2 games.

So I'm glad to see that at least CoD 5 will be in 'another theatre' of war, although I'm not really expecting much to changem when it comes to antagonists and protagonists.

"For Call of Duty, we'll bring the intensity of the recent Call of Duty: Modern Warfare title to yet a new military theater,"For Call of Duty, we'll bring the intensity of the recent Call of Duty: Modern Warfare title to yet a new military theater..."

Which part of "new military theater" indicates that COD5 will be set in a *modern* campaign?

This thread = epic fail, and all you kids get an "F" for reading comprehension.

Stay in school, plz.

"For Call of Duty, we'll bring the intensity of the recent Call of Duty: Modern Warfare title to yet a new military theater,"For Call of Duty, we'll bring the intensity of the recent Call of Duty: Modern Warfare title to yet a new military theater..."

Which part of "new military theater" indicates that COD5 will be set in a *modern* campaign?

This thread = epic fail, and all you kids get an "F" for reading comprehension.

Stay in school, plz.

attirex

Yes, Grandpa. Can i play with your walking stick again?:P