After allot of rumour and speculation about Call of Duty 5 (now called Call of Duty: World at War) we finally have something solid. It turns out that most of the rumours were true, but its not all bad news.

Firstly as expected, Treyarch will be developing it. Despite this though, it might not be the disaster that CoD 3 was. Activision gives the reason for the poor quality of CoD 3, is that it was only in development for 11 months. This time, they will have had the full 2 years to work on it.

Next, the series is returning to its World War 2 roots. This is very disappointing to some, after Activision announced it would take place in a "new theater". This new theater turns out to be the battle of the pacific, between America and Japan. European frontline action will also be included in the form of the Russians advancing on Berlin.

There is also news that no one will consider bad news. It is using the Call of Duty 4 engine, which will hopefully make the game feel similar to CoD 4, and should help bring the fast, action packed experience everyone expects from a Call of Duty game. And with more destructive environments hopefully adding to the experience, the future is looking better for the game which has already been subject to much criticism.

Also coming straight from CoD 4 is the online multiplayer element. Apart from adding new vehicles and a new leader system (where more perks will be unlocked for staying close to the leader) the multiplayer experience should stay true to that of the hugely popular CoD 4.

Other additions to the game include a 4 player online co-op aggressive Japanese tactics (such as ambushes) and the introduction of a flamethrower!!!! But the important question, is do people really care?

World War 2 shooters seem to have been milked for everything possible, so why do we need another one? Sure, these new features seem interesting, but is it really enough to revive an overused genre? I don't think so. What does everyone else think?

Source: OXM UK