Mysterious box-art for Call of Duty: World At War II crops up online.
The presentation of women in video games like Call of Duty: WWII, Battlefield 1, and Skull and Bones caused quite the upheaval among the gaming community in a ridiculous controversy. The controversy lies in the idea that women have been presented in a manner that violates historical accuracy which also conflicts with the diversity of sexes during well-documented periods when the world was predominantly run by white men. Should a game be historically accurate and lack diversity? Where's the happy medium?
I agree on skull and bones, i mean there was a damn cracken in the trailer, but bf1 is different, everything besides commonality of automatic weapons (gameplay comes first agter all) is going for strong accuracy, maybe mot to the point of sim but at least in terms of visual presentation.
And does it affect gameplay if there are non-white men characters walking around?
Of course it doesn't! If one thing can be inaccurate why not something else?
It's the weirdest thing ever!
Am I to assume you think entertainment media isnt a tool for education?
You'd be severely misinformed if you thought that. Kids who play these games will receive a form of impression of those periods that is horribly inaccurate. And unfortunately ignorant.
I don't think anyone cares about whether or not gaming is portraying women fighting in wars. That's perfectly fine. But when it's portraying a historical event the danger is teaching the wrong history.
And don't give the crap about games being fiction since some games are based on historical events, ie nonfiction
@EatCrow
Ah, so replacing swastikas is okay for educational purposes? Or having African American soldiers running around in equal numbers to white dudes? Or like with BF1 everyone having weapons that were barely used in WW1? Or like in BF1 the amount of armoured vehicles?
You can't complain about one thing not being accurate and then brushing off the rest!
Besides, these games aren't meant for kids anyways! They have a mature/18+ rating as far as I know!
You realize not just white men participated in WW2 and other game settings right?
@FIT
You realise that not all the weapons and vehicles from BF1 weren't actually used in the amounts they are being used in the game, right? Yes, they existed but not as much as BF1 makes it out to be.
You also realise that there were a few women actually fighting during both WW1 and WW2, right? Yes, they existed, not in huge numbers, but to deny they weren't there is BS.
And to allow one inaccuracy and not the other is silly!
Are swastikas really not going to be in this game? Perfect example of social justice bullshit and trying to change history. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it. We're moving in a dangerous direction as a society.
Oh well at least I'm sure Wolfenstein will do Nazi's better.
@skull that is a dumb argument. Not wanting to put swastikas in a game isnt changing history. dont be foolish. try getting your history from books, not video games. no one is forgetting what a swastika is because it wasnt in a video game.
This historical accuracy is just a fake argument because you cant be honest with yourself about the real issue you have with it.
@Haurus
Alright, so with the new COD: WW2 you don't like it either that there are no swatikas then? Or that the weapons might not be accurately represented? Or as in Battlefield 1 where the ratio of African Americans to white people is not an accurate representation of how it was in WW1? Or how everyone in BF1 has weapons that weren't available in large numbers or were even only prototypes? Or how there are way more armoured vehicles in the game than there were in reality?
All those things break the immersion too, right? 'cos it's not accurate after all...
Or are those things okay? Am sure most of the people so against women in games like these have no issues with those inaccuracies. Tell me, why is that? Why is this such a huge problem?
There's a deeper reason for why this is different and I really, really do not understand why. No one so far has been able to give me an actual reason for it....
Aenea I hope you know that you and people like you are the reason why Americans said Enough! and the reason why Trump is currently President. Classic Feminist shun the word feminism over what you women have turned it to. Just remember that the reason why your president isn't a woman is because of women like you.
@certifiedgamer
Listen, I'm not advocating to include women in games at all costs, like I said I don't mind if there's no female character and would not complain about it nor demand it from developers.
All I'm saying is that I find it ridiculous that everything goes and inaccuracy is no problem at all, but once a dev decides to include women to a game you lot suddenly start crying about inaccuracy!
You can't allow it for one thing and complain about it for the next. Either allow it all or demand historical accurate games, don't change your stance on accuracy whenever it suits you and your old fashioned ideas.
Since I'm actually the one that is okay with everything and not complaining and you guys who are so dead set against women in games it's you who are the problem, not me. I'm not demanding anything, am ok with everything a developer decides to do, it's YOU and your anti-SJW/feminism kind who are campaigning against it and I doubt you even know why you're doing it.
I've asked it several times already, but none of you is answering me, why on earth is it okay with non-gender inaccuracies, but it's not with gender ones? Please explain it to me, I see no rational reason behind it other than just to complain so you can complain, it's idiotic and is precisely what the anti-SJW crowd is blaming SJWs for...
Look in the darn mirror before grabbing a pitchfork!
PS. I'm not American, Trump is not my president, thank heavens....
Can't wait to listen to screaming females on the landing craft on Dday. /s
but..muh white men, Game developers make it easier and easier to avoid their games these days and I have more money to spend on more constructive things so I really should thank them.
I will watch with amusement when the next generation of boys grows up to beat up women who dare get in their faces since the SJWs have raised them in a fantasy where women are warriors on par with men.
Mannn if anything people who participated in D-Day should be the most offended, imagine if they released cartoons right after the war with women soldiers depecited in D-Day imagine the uproar.
But I guess it's OK to disrespect all those men who died with this BS, because well most of them are dead now.
On the other hand feminists and SJW's are alive and plenty, gotta watch out for them...
Spineless devs is what it is.
I'm so tired of minds like yours. If you're going to be offended then be offended by the fact that kids with nothing better to do play through one of the worst episodes in human history for fun. This selective sensetivity doesn't cover your fear of change or your complete ignorance.
If its so bad why do SJW's feel the need to change it up? You raise a good point, but the disappointment should be directed at the author of this propaganda and the devleopers, not me.
Or why be offended at all, there is like a handful of people alive than can even recall those events. As with most tragic events in human history my philosophy is remember it, learn from it, don't repeat it and get the f@#k over it
lol you actually just called this propaganda? Where do you guys get this list of words you must force in, but dont know what they mean?
So, because people make games with women in it you hope that kids will grow up and attack women, or anyone for that matter... whats wrong with you?
What is going on in the world where this type of comment that encourages violence gets any agrees?
Great job hiding your sexism. Why do women scare you so much? Why do you clowns always show pride in your ignorance? Its like you still have a sad need to act like a fool for attention. "SJWs" lol
If it's intended to be a historical game, then yes historical accuracy matters. If the game is intended to be fantasy, then the developers are free to do whatever.
This is another example of liberal developers introducing PC into their games as a result of personal bias. Vote with your wallet. I'm sure there are more historically accurate games to play if that's what you care about.
Here s the thing though. Dev should be free to do whatever they want within certain limits of course but if they want clowns landing on Omaha beach so be it. Or even, you know, zombies..
But imagine if they did it on a conflict that didnt involve "white men" Imagine if they had clowns flying the planes over Pearl Harbor before the attack, the ensuing SJW outrage over "racism" would be monstrous.
I always advocate for freedom of creativity but we all know this is a one way street in favor of SJWs.
Exhibit A: https://www.pcgamesn.com/ba...
Exhibit B: http://n4g.com/news/1924625...
Exhibit C: http://n4g.com/news/1972656...
I have to recommend The Warmth of Other Suns, your understanding of American racial relations and history is a joke. The fact that white conservatives can't wrap their minds around white supremacy is not for lack of ability but for an abundance of willful ignorance.
The campaign will be historically accurate, so you'll get all the Nazi imagery your heart can bare.
It's only in the multiplayer that the lines are blurred, Nazi symbolism is replaced, and races and genders are mixed in.
Why the hell would you want to play as a Nazi anyway? Oh wait...
RememberThe357, I suggest you remove Kratos from your profile image as it is an image of toxic white male straight masculinity.
I suggest you pull your head out of your ass. Kratos is a former Greek god, not a racist.
@beep: You don't know shit about me boy. You know for a fact you wouldn't say any of the shit you just said to my face, that's how Nazis get punched. I'm German too smart guy and I had family die in that war, still remember my grandpa's eyes when he thought of his brothers. So you can blow that Nazi loving bullshit right out your loose ass with a 12 gage slug. And if you think for one second anyone has any fear twords white supremacists, you haven't been in a city recently. Should we ever cross paths, I'll show you the power you think you have.
developers are free to do whatever, PERIOD.
No ifs and buts. All these other moral busy bodies can go get screwed and or make their own games
ITS A GAME TO HAVE FUN STOP IT DRAMA QUEEN!!! NO ONE THANKS BAYONETTA AND 3 GAMES OF FFXIII TO HAVE FEMALE HEROES WHY? BECAUSE IT JUST A GAME A GOOD THING TO AVOID REAL LIFE BULLSHITS. Just stop pulling these shit to gaming industry.
I was gonna buy COD WW2 but the no swastikas and female paratroopers are just too much for me :)
Take your political correctness and shove it...
I mean what's next transvestite generals?
I serious think that people who get upset about women have mental problems. Or secretly closeted gay guys or some cheap like that. How is putting a female model in a game politically correct. Girls play games to and COD is a game. It doesn't make you more of a man either to get upset at girls... It's really weak actually.
oohh, homophobia, do you feel tough now by accusing those whom you disagree with as being homosexuals?
Hahaha your dumbass comment doesn't even warrant an intellectual reply...
Classic White Knight right here...
Smh
Maybe youre the one that's a closeted gay, lol. I'm man enough to voice my opinion about something that involves women.
But you go out of your way to defend anything that remotely offends women because well you're either a closeted gay like you put it, or maybe your trying so hard to be accepted by women but you ain't getting any :(
For the record I see Tomb Raider as being one of the best video game franchises ever, I have nothing against women protagonists.
It seems the point of my argument went way over your head apparently
@mafiahajeri
You were right about not having an intelligent response.
No, you are just weak. I mean your opinion is based on a non historic game. It is insulting to conflate COD to the levels of real life. I play COD daily and I can tell you it's not real. That you wait for girls to suddenly have an opinion on its legitimacy indicates you are twisted in some group thought. Not falling for it. And stop being triggered by women.
Wait a minute. Your telling me they took out the swastikas?!? That I didn't know, that's fucking bs. Let's take out the very reason world war II happened in the first place. I'm so sick of let's cover up history because I don't like it attitude. It's everywhere, germany has no nazi's in their games ever, because you know forgetting about will make things ok. Same with the US let's get rid of history because of my feelings. SMH
WWII didn't happens because of the swastika. Either way COD isn't a war documentary. It's an arcade shooter. In class, teachers don't refer to videogames to teach us about war. Even Wolfenstein which has Nazis isn't accurate. History is history and a game is a game. Devs don't owe history a damn thing..
just a heads up meka.
World war 2 didn't happen because of a sacred symbol in buddhism and hinduism.
it was because Hitler decided that Jewish people were the scum of the earth and with his brilliant public speaking, convinced an entire country that they were not only better than everyone else, but that anyone who was jewish was disease.
No crap that world war II wasn't started because of the swastika, but with hitler it represented his regime. So to cut it out is just plain dumb. So something is painful oh well, shit happens, no need to act like it didn't happen.
And forcing diversity into games is a weak argument too. Why? Because it doesn't help promote it. What does, is a great game with a minority protagonist that is written for him or her. A game that showcases why there is a place for all types of games. But creating a trend just to feel socially secure doesn't work. It is better to highlight differences and the characteristics that make them so great! Mafia 2 is a good example. If CoD includes female resistance fighters, or a regiment of African Americans soldiers who valiant ly fought in WW2, that is great. The U DLC is great too! But forcing anything will just work to separate people more! And there's tons of evidence for this.
A youtube remark I read this morning went something like this, "Putting a character into a game because of their race, which is diversity engineering, is as racist as excluding them because of their race."
What is the setting? Make it race appropriate. or sex appropriate. I do not want a mixed race, multi-cultural hermaphrodite for a character if it doesn't fit the story. Stop ramrodding things because by some twisted tale of fate involving a stolen ship and a wormhole you can shoehorn a character into a situation. Its like the new Robin Hood film with Jamie Foxx as Little John. Utterly ridiculous.
I'm it sounds like there is no allowable room for anyone but white guys and that stupid. What if someone makes a black character? Like it racist because their not white. A form of logical fallacy is to make rules on other people behavior that have to fit I to your narrative. Why can'tsomeone be black or a woman without us first needing to pass some Race bait test?
They can be whatever color they are and it doesn't matter as long as it isn't forced. For example, say I am making a historical game about Vikings and the raid on Lindesfarne. On board the viking ship is...a black Viking. Then we get this unbelievable tale about how he traveled from Africa all the way to Norway and came to live in Avaldsnes. Ridiculous really. I think Idris Elba is a phenomenal actor but casting him as Heimdallr, The Whitest of Gods in Thor? Really? How about we make a movie about African gods and cast Brad Pitt as Shango? People would be up in arms over "cultural appropriation." It goes both ways...except it doesn't.
Accuracy in historical games should be accurate to respect those portrayed accurately. If you don't portray it accurately then it's no longer accurate and not being accurate will cause people to complain it's not accurate so best to keep it accurate to avoid it not being accurate. Because accuracy matters when it's a game based on accuracy.
These are games, not documentations. Let them be enjoyed by everyone.
COD isn't marketed as a male game only but rather a game that anyone can play. The point is that you want to reach as many consumers as possible. Anything else is just for people to argue about.
Then I wan Laura Croft to be a blond haired boy in a wheelchair. I can't enjoy the game otherwise. I am not handicapped or blonde but that's what I identify with and its the only way I can enjoy the game.
Morgan.
that was straight up Retarded.
there were females in WW2, not exactly how they are portrayed in the game, but they were there.
you are now wanting to make laura croft a physically handicapped trasngender....
where the hell did your logic go
I think the importance of historical accuracy is relative to the type of game and whether it's actually trying to be a period piece. It's completely moot in medieval fantasies for example, where I welcome more presence of the fairer sex. In CoD and/or BF maybe the campaign would be better off sticking to historical accuracy if that is indeed what they're going for, but in online matches I doubt most players are too concerned with cross-referencing their kill streak with actual history books.
I would imagine someone that isn't smart would believe it's a weak arguement.
Let the free market decide if it succeeds or fails, no use complaining if you are going to buy it anyway.
The problem with presenting historical accuracy is history is often inaccurate. If you are educated and look at current events you know the truth is rarely reported. The same happened years ago.
When I was in school no one talked about the Harlem Hellfighters. In fact, I was always told blacks didn't fight in WWI. I'm sure that many found out by learning through Battlefield I. You know this by the many complaints about a black lead character for the game. Remember the historical accuracy argument just a few months ago about that.
People should do a little research before hollering sjw. I would bet many of those that are quick to think PC don't know there were prolific Russian snipers in WWII. And a woman sniper in WWI would have more likely been covered up rather than covered in the press. They probably don't know that women serve in Israel and have for years. I saw a reporter comment that the ninja warrior contestant they call Wonder Woman would beat Gal Gadot's a$$. Apparently he didn't realize Gadot is Israeli and they all serve and are trained in Krav Maga. She was trained to kill with her hands to save her life. Not for a movie.
Buwhahahahahahaha you're really trying to sell the fact Gadot can kill with her bare hands? LMFAO
You're delusional. So by your logic all Israeli citizens are master assassins, huh?
You did not mention anything we don't know yes their were Russian Snipers that were women. We're talking about paratroopers on the American side, they didn't exist.
You're knitpicking occasions where women fought, WTF does Israel have to do with WW2 the "country" didn't even exist back then.
If it's Russia or France or any other country where women actually fought then thats OK, as long as it historically correct but don't force women down people's throats every time you get a chance just to cater to SJWs and feminists.
Bunch of White Knights...
Many are claiming their were no women in combat. I gave examples of where there were. Gadot's Maga ability would be based on her efforts to perfect the art. But her combat training means she is far more likely to be combat ready than someone participating in fake movie fights. Gadot was taught to kill people with her martial arts just like every other Israeli soldier. Being a woman doesn't mean her training was ineffective. But like it has been mentioned there weren't tanks everywhere either. Doubt there were many combat blimps. But there will be creative liberties taken in creating anything. Everyone didn't run around with parachutes that work twenty feet from the ground but I would never complain about that. I don't have anything against parachute manufacturers. The people complaining about the liberties taken with women's role in earlier combat do often have issues with women though. The idea of shield maidens set off similar arguments. The true issue is the male ego and poorly documented history.
dcbronco is very misinformed on many subjects but loves to spice it up with a pretentious unearned smugness and condescension to whoever he responds while providing no citations to back his claims... EVER.
Here is one of many diatribes involving dcbronco saying a lot of absurd things without backing them up.
dcbronco - "Somebody needs to do something about "Christians". Always sticking their noses in other peoples business. Like everyone believes in their beliefs. Here's an idiotic example of their special brand of stupid. In some US states a woman can't have a vibrator. She is not allowed to pleasure herself. That makes it more likely she doesn't have to settle for Scooter and god says she belongs to him. Besides to religious conservatives a woman doesn't have rights anyway. Except the ones a man gives her. Oh, and in some states (they may have moved into modern times recently) a woman can't refuse her husband sex. No I have a headache. And he's allowed to rape her if need be. Cause the magic book says so."
The hypocrisy of dcbronco in many comments is astounding, often railing about others lack of knowledge and that they need to research before speaking up while doing little to none themself. It's truly worthy of a gold medal in mental gymnastics.
Uninformed?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/...
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/...
Those IDF, women are mostly eye candy for propaganda purposes. They look great posing on Instagram but do little else. Women aren't going to be beating anyone up, thats a fact.
And again those are very small, just because one or two people fought doesn't mean tons of women on the battlefield. And you lost me at krav maga; I studied martial arts for years, and I can tell you that style is full of shit. It's about flailing like a jackass, no technique, just smack things, that's not martial arts, that kid fighting.
https://m.youtube.com/watch...
You're right. That does just look like a lot of slapping.
Those were some hard slaps though. Lol.
And the last little b threw a bottle and ran.
There was no women fighters in WW1 and WW2, women were used as nurses and other type jobs, within the military.
This footage says otherwise.
https://m.youtube.com/watch...
This one too. And there are others. Women are another minority whose contributions were swept under the rug. No matter the numbers, they participated. There was also women in WWI.
https://m.youtube.com/watch...
The fact that even video footage gets down votes shows how sad and feeble the male ego is. Mommy she keeps taking my kills. In real life and online.
Ah yes, there were also no African American fighters either in either wars....
See, I can spout nonsense as well!
Of course there were particularly in World War Two there was a great many Russian female soldiers they were particularly well known as snipers there were also female pilots.
This article, predictably, completely misses the point of why some have issues with the way these games are designed. Devs aren't creating "diversity" to pay respects, they're shoehorning it in so they don't offend these brats like the author of this article. All the games mentioned are horrible examples to use while standing on your white knight soap box. Gamers want these games to be as accurate as allowed. Sure they'll overlook some small things like automatic weapons when there shouldn't of been any, but others go WAY past minor inaccuracies. Featuring black female paratroopers in WWII would be an example of cramming diversity into a spot where it absolutely doesn't belong. Thats an ocean of difference compared to a weapon that has a magazine it shouldn't. People like this author want history erased because it doesn't fit their narrative, gamers are pushing back because we want accurate depictions of the period we are playing in(assuming we are playing an "authentic" recreation of a period/event.) I mean how many times have we heard Sledgehammer use the words "authentic" or "realistic" in reference to their new CoD, yet we will have censored Nazi imagery and will have females jumping out of planes.
Can't promote accuracy in inaccurate games though. You brush of other stuff so easily without strong arguments. The automatic weapons argument is solid though. You say you want accurate depictions of the period you play in, war ia based on weapons. The type of weapons used has direct effects on battle circumstances and results. It's like playing an accurate medieval war game with automatic crossbows ala Van Helsing.
The real losers in all of this are the monkeys! They are severely underrepresented in WWII games.
Is it wrong? They beat us men up without repercussions in every other game...
cough Uncharted cough
Considering there's no "Fight against women" in games... or anything for that matter. This article is freaking dumb.
IF a game is going for historical accuracy it should contain ONLY what is accurate to what it is trying to depict.
Your "defense" of women "everywhere" is hypocritical when you turn tail and bash an entire other group of people. Way to go and make your own point moot.
What are you talking about haven't you read the comments? Do you not see all the people here fighting against women in games?
Lol no one cares about women in games. It's about shoehorning it in. Christ there have been women in games since the damn nintendo, with samus. Don't remember anyone saying, "this is BS we play as a female, never playing metroid again." No one cares, we care about shoehorning it in. Plus if women want represented, how come the majority of NPC's you kill in games are all men?
I don't need female characters in every game to enjoy the game. If I can choose a female character, cool, but not necessary.
What i do find idiotic is that quite a few males here are okay with many historical inaccuracies in games but when it's about adding women to a game they suddenly are 'worried' about historical accuracy. It's hilarious and silly and wonder why it is even a problem.
Can anyone be honest about it and tell me what the real reason is?
"Social justice" is a weak argument in the misguided fight for women in video games. Let developers make the games they want. Not the games that are politically and socially correct. If they want to put women in games, fine. I don't give a crap. But don't do it to make some manbun sporting, skinny jeans wearing, starbucks sipping hipster or black tanktop without a bra on feminist happy.
Case in point, Horizon Zero Dawn with Aloy at the center was great. Now if the story was told with a guy instead of a girl, would the story have been worse? No. Why? Because whether it is a man or a woman is not important. You can't claim that you want people to not be biased about gender when you're trying to force them to represent a particular gender more.
The only thing about this is that no one outside of the company kmows what the developers want (unless they've mentioned it). The developers may very well be the people you just described who just happen to want different characters in a game whether based upon ethnicity, gender, nationality, sex, religiion, orientation and so far. People who assume developers are shoehorning in a diverse cast of characters for the sake of it are more than likely prejudice, particularly if their first and only thought was that a diverse cast was created for the sole purpose of making 'hipsters' happy
Its a video game, not a documentary piece. With that said, if it were historically accurate im sure there would be those who would complain that it negatively portrays the primary cast of characters as misogynistic, prejudice, racist douchebags...even if it is historically accurate. They'd want historical accuracy within the confines of rose colored glasses.
Authenticity requires Accuracy. If that is what you are going for then you have to stay true to the source, no matter how unappetising it may be to modern society.
Fantasy allows for lenience. Diversity is then advisable.
Welcome to 2017, where the truth and the history is weak argument because of political reason.
Sigh I miss the days when PC Culture wasn't a thing and we would all just enjoy playing video games.
Not this shit again......
I'm sick of hearing how everybody is oppressed for this reason, that reason, or the other reason.
Stfu and play the games.
I think it's time devs got back to using some actual real creative to push out these games instead of trying to use historical events as a crutch. Nothing wrong with using a certain era or a chain of real world events for inspiration, but its up to the team to take those elements and form them into something less potentially offensive and more imaginative and creative.
I'm tired of them regurgitated the same BS and pretending like its a tribute to anyone or anything else other than their wallets. These games shouldn't even be utilized as historical soapboxes in the first place, and I consider it just another form of patriotic exploitation if anything at all, it's definitely nothing to question historical authenticity over, a game that only showcases the side of war that is from the perspective of the winning side "Your Side", hardly a fair representation of war.
One of the better games handling these kind of affairs was Spec Ops: The Line, in terms of narrative and what the game was trying to drive home with its message.
My point is, that mostly none of these games should be considered historical swansongs and if someone is puzzled by the inclusion of women or minorities in the form of diversity in these games then they are only fooling themselves and put these damn games on too high of a pedestal in the first place.
All these damn war games about this war and that as long as they can make the player feel empowered and like some type of war hero right? Doesn't matter if they're women...white, black, or hispanic, but there aren't nearly as many games focused around the American Indian Wars, is there?
Hmn. I wonder why that is?
Regardless I'm tired of the whole idea that videogames and politics need to go hand and hand, find something far more entertainment centric to focus on and stick with that instead.
It was a different world back then, female nazi soldiers are a step too far for me, this is like saying that right wing nazis had no problems with women in the army, back then americans were ashamed to send their women and mothers to war,, count me out for this one, devs should learn respect real history more, not everything needs to be a big political statement, i will not buy this game because this is one of the most disgusting things i have ever seen, i was interested but i can't stand this bullshit
Look at all the offended little men, guaranteed they are mostly white lonely males who are deluded and think the world is after them.
Depends. If a game is trying to be historically accurate, then yeah it should be. If a game is just set in a time period though there's a lot of wiggle room for taking poetic license.
Carston Anderson writes: "The campaign aims to capture the grit and humanity of the first World at War while introducing the graphics and gameplay quality of 2016, and according to the Kickstarter page it'll be available for release sometime by 2018. When asked why Kickstarter when they could have very easily funded it themselves, Treyarch replied by stating that 'we wanted to give devoted fans a chance to be involved in the process, more so than any other Call of Duty game we've made before.' "
I would. I'd take this over the new CoD Master Chief Edition anyday.
I am sick and tired of futuristic CoDs. Give me a MW1,2,3 remake with better, dynamic mp maps, and I may just buy it for the first time since BO2.
Agreed!
No more jet packs or special abilities... give me a gun, and keep my damn boots on the ground ffs.
I mean if it was real it would be a new low for Activision, funny enough I wouldn't put it past them xD
Whats even more funny is that it would be probably be funded, lol.
IGN - We know that the end of the year will mark a new Call of Duty release, and we know that it will be forged by Treyarch. This title will mark the first time the mainstay Call of Duty developer has had three years to work on a release, instead of the old staple of two years per game. Given the fracturing of Infinity Ward after Modern Warfare 2, Treyarch has become the go-to developer for franchise entries that try something different and also throw in a tonne of content.
Another $120 out of your wallet (with "mandatory" dlc), changes to MP that make it interesting for about a month, still no moderation of cheaters or glitchers nor any real attempt to fix all the bugs it will ship with, and a poorly done campaign resembling a Jerry Bruckheimer film again.
I can't wait for official news about this game to come out, I have my hopes high after being disappointed with AW multiplayer.
I would much rather see another world at war. Still the only single player COD campaign I have finished. Plus I liked the grittier gameplay.
I love how people click the Call of Duty articles just to write the usual "waste of money" "same old thing" comments. Shut up. We got it. You think the game is a waste of money. You think these games are all the same. You know what's also the same? Taking the time to click every single Call of Duty article to write how each game is a waste of money and is the same.
On another note, I've been enjoying Call of Duty a little more lately than I have in the past ... but I still can't play these games for more than 2 months. I'm also one of the few people that genuinely enjoy Infinity Ward's and Treyarch's Call of Duty stories.
I never said it was the same old thing, only that the way they produce and maintain the series hasn't changed. THAT is getting old. You even admitted you couldn't play them for more than a few months and most people don't like the stories... as you bash others for talking about it. Lol.
$120 a year, every year gets old and Activision is running COD into the ground like they did with Tony Hawk and Guitar Hero.
I still play it for 2 months and don't complain about it. I've NEVER spent $120 on a Call of Duty game. I think that's more of a personal choice. Activision isn't holding a gun to anyone's head demanding for DLC purchases. If you're one of those people that have spent that kind of money then I apologize. For everyone else, I'm sure it's their choice to spend that money and IF they do spend it it's because they WANT to spend it because the enjoy the game enough to buy its DLC. You see it as a waste of money. Others see it as more fun. Another thing, Activision running Call of Duty into the ground is making them millions. Do you honestly think they care? But unlike A LOT of other people, I think some Call of Duties are worth praising and not condemning just because it's Call of Duty.
Lots of bad things make people rich - like robbery, pimping, or selling drugs. Just because mommy and daddy continue to buy this game for their 10 year olds to play every year(which counts for at least half their sales) doesn't make it good business.
I'm not saying you can't like it, just don't talk about their financial situation like it's a good thing to do. Rockstar makes good games, makes good money, and doesn't have to take advantge of people to do it. Activision just sucks.
Your comparison of making video games to illegal actions has NOTHING to do with the subject we're discussing. Creating a video game that millions of people play because they genuinely like it is a good thing in my eyes. Just because you don't like what Activision, Infinity Ward, Treyarch and Sledgehammer are doing with Call of Duty it doesn't mean it's a bad game. So what half of the units pushed out are for 10 year old, the other half is for teens and adults. Breaking News! A LOT of people enjoy Call of Duty and absolutely love their yearly releases. If a company like Activision sees the amount of money they're making off a specific franchise, of course they're going to milk it. They'd be stupid not to. Bottom line, it's about the money and the consumer and trust me, there are more people out there that like Call of Duty than those that don't. Whether you play it for a month or a year, you're still tossing money on the counter. I dislike Activision as a publisher ... don't get me wrong. But releasing Call of Duties every year and making bank off each release is a plan that works and will continue to work. It's like a said in the previous post, it's your personal choice to spend more than $60 on a single Call of Duty release. It's your choice to purchase Call of Duty period. Just like it's your choice to jump in an article and speak ill about anything that has to do with Call of Duty EVERY SINGLE YEAR.
Treyarch COD is the only ones I now buy. With a 3 year development cycle I hope they come with something good.
Give me a gritty WWII game with a coop campaign and ill be happy... Also how cool would it be if you could use a PS Vita during couch coop/mp! One persons screen dedicated to the vita, the other gets the tv!
No it probably wont happen, couch co op is a dying breed and sony's support for the vita has been dismal over the years... But to imply that a feature wont come to ps4 just b/c its awesome is a tad silly.
COD has a long standing partnership with Microsoft and Xbox.
Microsoft would not let COD have a feature that is exclusive to its rival.
That's why it won't happen.
It's gonna be Black Ops III, I just feel it in my bones. Call of Duty's always been one to complete its trilogies and no matter how tired they've gotten after just two games, they've got to milk the label for all its worth until it's done. I'd vouch for a WW II game just for the change of pace, but by now, what era hasn't been done to death already? A Civil War game? Actually...yeah, not happening.
So many of us begging for a WW2 setting, but i guarantee you that the second they announce it everyone will start bitching about it.
In Treyarch i trust!
after MW4 WAW was my favourite.. bouncy betty was the Shii. i really hope this is real
I still have nightmares about the nades in that japanese jungle level.
Would be great but the box art looks so fake.
Its on the internet so it must be real
I'd like to see a COD game for WWI. Trench warfare in first person view.