Fun Stuff > CLIKC

Call of Duty: World at War

(1/9) > >>

Ozymandias:
So, Call of Duty is going back to WW2, after having so much ridiculous success leaving it. This is really frustrating me. I mean, I know they're going to implement most of what CoD4 good, just in a WW2 setting, but it feels so wasted.

Yeah, they're going to actually focus on the Pacific this time. Which is cool, I guess. But I feel like if there's any good unmined material in WW2, it isn't a change of location, but a change of view. Make a real Russian storyline. Make a Japanese storyline. Hell, even try to make a good, solid Nazi storyline. Make the player get into the point of view of the people who will historically be regarded as evil and cruel. At least give it an honest try. You don't have to rationalize and say the Holocaust was a good thing when putting the game from a German soldier's eyes. Hell, you can emphasize the horrors of WW2 even better from that angle, IMO. God, just try harder to push the medium beyond killing the generic bad guys, which is what the Nazis have been for decades. It's as easy to kill a Nazi in CoD as it is to kill a rabid dog in Oblivion. Hell, I feel worse killing the dog because of the little yelp it makes. I just want someone in the industry to have the balls to challenge that mindset, because video games would be the best way.

Spluff:
I'll just wait until Infinity Ward makes another one. The Treyarch ones aren't particularly good, no matter where they are set.

Dimmukane:
I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt.  They're not to blame so much as Activision for wanting a sequel every year and dumping that on Treyarch.  I still can't get over that they finished CoD3 in 8 months. 

Besides, Infinity Ward may decide to do other things.  Their next game isn't going to be Call of Duty, in any case.

Storm Rider:
To be fair to Treyarch, Activision forced them to make Call of Duty 3 in literally 8 months, which is a ridiculously short time frame for a game. For it to turn out even passable is an achievement, although a dubious one. Supposedly this one has been in the works almost parallel with Modern Warfare, which means I think it could have a shot at being pretty good.

Either way, I frankly don't care too much. I'm kind of shootered out for the moment, and I doubt with this game set back in WW2 that it will manage to do anything new and exciting. If it's built on the Call of Duty 4 tech, it'll most likely look and play great, but I got tired of CoD4 after a couple of weeks because I'm not much of an online shooter guy anyway.

Dimmukane:
This, along with Gears of War 2 and Far Cry 2, are on my 'get it later' list.  I'm reasonably interested in this game, but there's enough games coming out this holiday combined with work and school to keep me busy.  Gears of War 2 and this are just mediocre enough for me to not mind waiting.  Far Cry 2 looks gorgeous, but I'm a little skeptical about how it plays.  I'll wait until I get to play it somewhere else, then see if I like it.  Besides, Spore, Too Human and Fallout 3 are going to have a ton of replay value.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page