Topic: Call of Duty WWII --OT--

So now that it has been confirmed by Sledgehammer Games, what is everyone's thoughts on this?

I think it will be nice to.go back to a WWII setting to be honest there wasn't many of them. I know alot of people claim that oh CoD has done WWII to death but honestly I don't see what the mean by that. In all honesty there was 4 CoD games set in WWII were as you had 9 non WWII CoD.

I can see where people who enjoyed the advance movement and more modern scorestreaks are coming from on this one as well, that they don't want to go back to a less advanced war so to speak.

As someone who enjoys reading WWII history and such I am very excited for this game, hopefully the supply drops and such won't ruin it for me too much but we will see.

Share your thoughts below.

Every year I give COD the benefit of the doubt, as much as I want to drop playing it I always find myself going back and just giving it a shot because I've been there from COD1. Most of the time, especially in the past 4 years, I've not been let down but just not wowed by the game and for those years I've just wanted them to take it back to where it began, when it was good, without all the fluff so I am really excited to see them finally do that. I really hope it comes close to what COD1 was.

Good MOH: Frontline style campaign and I'm in.. otherwise NAWWWWWWWWW!!

So according to a twitter post by Sledgehammer Games, CoD WWII has been in development for 2 1/2 years and will be coming out in November. They have been traveling all over Europe checking out battlefields and such. So hyped!!.

One of my favourite COD was World at War I prefer the settings in the past to futuristic warfare. If they also do an edition with a remaster of world at war that will make my year With Battlefield 1 doing so well they need to do a good job on this game. I think COD do better campaigns than Battlefield franchise but prefer Battlefield multi-player.

I can't say I am excited by CoD WW2. I did enjoy World at Wars MP but I felt it was quite a step back from Modern Warfare despite expanding on aspects of CoD4 - like the kill-streaks. I often found myself jumping back to CoD4 in preference.

MP though is not that 'important' to me from a thematic sense. Of course it dictates the weapons but I couldn't care less if it shoots ballistic or laser bullets, couldn't care less if the weapon looks like it was a WW2, Modern or Futuristic version with the same handling and TTK properties. Often the only difference was the look, sound and reload animations but essentially were the same weapons in various eras of games. I guess the biggest difference was that in CoD at least, they had less semi-automatic primaries.

I really don't think the 'era' matters. Up until CoD4 came out - almost all were either very sci-fi or WW2. CoD4 wasn't just 'great' because of its setting - although it did enable more creativity in its story - but because of the customisation - the RPG type aspect. The first game that let us build our class, unlock new weapons, attachments, perks etc.

In terms of sales, Since CoD4, the worst selling CoD is World at War. I can't deny the Campaign was good, showing the sheer brutality of War but I do have issues with making a game that's meant to be a fast paced, 'arcade' fun shooter set in the real world tragedy that was WW2. Making light of the millions that died including millions of civilians. I have already seen comments about how great it will be shoot 'Nazi's' again - not all Germans were Nazi's by the way....

As far as Boots on the Ground goes, I don't think its necessarily a 'good' thing to be going back to. I don't miss the slower pace, the campers with claymores at the top of stairs/ladders, being shot in the back trying to climb ladders or mantel objects as you couldn't defend yourself, unable to tackle head glitchers locking down key areas - something that advanced movement meant you could flank or out manoeuvre these, how much easier it was to quick-scope or even no-scope enemies etc. I had the impression that the community had had enough of these and as far as I can recall, a lot of the issue with Ghosts was that it hadn't evolved much. So much of the CoD youtubers who were vocal about Ghosts, were also full of praise for Titanfall and expected that to be a CoD Killer because it was CoD evolved, the new movement was revolutionary and added another dimension to FPS games - something that CoD hadn't done in years - not since CoD4 - yes we had tweaks and expanded some of the concepts introduced in CoD4 - like more killstreaks, Pick 10, more perks with some perks becoming attachments (like Steady Aim being replaced by Laser sights, Quickdraw perk replaced by a Quickdraw handle etc) but essentially, the game didn't really change too much over that time. Advanced Warefare, Sledgehammers first solo CoD game, screwed up Advanced Movement because it affected the way CoD games flowed and that has affected the CoD community and how they view Movement. BO3 and IW, in general, really play like the old CoD games. Double jump (which gets a lot of negativity) is hardly an issue as the 'second' jump isn't fast and boosts you straight up in the air and unable to stay on target but slow and makes people sitting targets - same with wall running - its so easy to kill those wall-runners because they are exposed - both high risk options but if you can use them at the right time, can be high reward - like enabling you to surprise an enemy camped in a second floor window with their claymore at the door or to get round behind those head glitchers camping and locking down a route. Most of the 'futuristic' tech was brought in to combat campers, to get around those annoying and frustrating deaths - the things that by BO2 were so widely complained about.

It will be interesting to see how Sledgehammer handle this and maybe we will see CoD sell lots again because of its setting but whether it ends up feeling 'dated' or a big step-back or whether it can feel fresh, exciting and fast paced, whether its community stick with it or drop away fast, we will just have to see.

I prefer the Advanced Movement - although hated it in Advanced Warfare - because I get fed up with the slower pace of Boots on the Ground etc. Games like Battlefield get around a lot of these by having vehicles and destruction. I don't think CoD can have too much destruction as that would make killstreaks much more powerful.

So appearently the release date has been leaked November 3, 2017.

@Tasuki Whether accurate or not, CoD almost always releases in the first week of November so its not exactly difficult to predict when its most likely to release. I bet you could work out when CoD 2018 will release too...

@BAMozzy It's from a promotion box and signs that were sent to places like Gamestop for preorders most likly it was probably instructed by Activision to display after the announcement this Wednesday. It also stated that there will be a two player co-op game mode. Not sure if it's a Zombies mode or maybe extinction again or something new altogether.

@Tasuki I would be surprised if we don't get Zombies but that is often 4-player. Extinction was Infinity Wards answer to Zombies before it was decided that Treyarchs Zombies was far too popular and that CoD would now have that every year. Again though these are all 4-player modes.

2 player co-op could be campaign based or they could be bringing back the Special-Ops mode we saw in MW2 and MW3. These were 2 player co-op modes that were 'almost' campaign missions - MW2's were pretty much - but co-op. They became more 'purpose-built' though. For example you could have 1 person on overwatch - sniping enemies, whilst the other was on the ground trying to infiltrate a base. You could be driving a tank whilst another is trying to clear out the enemies that are trying to destroy the tank and set explosives to blow up obstructions or artillery emplacements. Some would be as short as 2-3mins but most would be 5-10mins long. Each had a certain difficulty, certain time limit and depending on how well you did, would grant you 1-3stars. You could blitz through them all in the time it takes to play a decent round of Zombies. If you are both good at the game, got the 3 stars in each, they really offered no replayability though. MW3 added to these with DLC too but I remember a lot of people disappointed they got these instead of new maps. MW3 had a weird DLC structure - especially for Season Pass holders - releasing some content every month and then compiling these into 1 pack for purchase. 1 Pack I think had no MP maps - just Spec-Ops and a few 'Face Off' (small 1v1, 2v2, 3v3 for boosters) maps. Ended up with 12 maps over 4 packs and since then CoD DLC has always had 4 maps and a Co-op map per pack. BLOps was criticised because the last Map pack only had 1 'new' Zombies Map and the other 4 'zombies' maps were remakes of W@W maps given away as a pre-order bonus so two years in a row, they got it wrong.

MW3 was the first game that Sledgehammer were involved in and also the last game with Spec-Ops (only had 2 games with it anyway). Can't say Sledgehammer have a great track record with CoD so far. MW3 can be forgiven as they were only partly responsible and that was a case of too many cooks... Advanced Warfare, as far as MP went, proved they had no idea of what makes the MP great and basically killed off any acceptance of innovation or evolution. Just hope that going back to basics is the way forward for them. Personally I hope this isn't the end of Advanced Movement. It would be good if Sledgehammer stuck with historic CoDs, Infinity Ward the Modern/near future era and let Treyarch handle the future. Both BO2 and BO3 were successful and both futuristic.

BO3 is the biggest selling CoD on PS4 - 2nd biggest selling game after GTAv - only 200K behind at 14.8m compared to 15m for GTAv (that's just PS4 sales). World at War managed 17.58m in total and sold on 6 platforms - XB360, PS3, PC, Wii, DS, PS2 (Wii, DS and PS2 accounted for 4.55m sales) and XB360 accounted for 7.45m and PS3 owners bought 5.4m to put some perspective on just how well BO3 sold. On PS4 alone, Advanced Warfare had 7.7m sales, Infinite Warfare is currently on 7.07m. BF1, the 10th best selling game on PS4, is on 6.78m and the Last of Us, the 2nd biggest selling Exclusive after Uncharted 4, sold 5.41m and Destiny sold 5.67m - Not bad for these CoD games 'considered' flops! 3 CoD games inside the top 10 best selling games on PS4!

@BAMozzy I am thinking that maybe this is some kind of plan by Activision. Do a few gEs with advance movement or something new then go back to their "roots". While its easy to say that poor sales or fan feedback or because Battlefield did it, that's more then likely not the case. People need to remember that each CoD has a 21/2, 3 year development cycle which means when they were working on CoD WWII BO3 had yet to be even made knowledgeable to the general public and IW probably was so far in its infancy that it could have been a totally different game. There's no way that fan feedback or sales could have directed the out come of CoD WWII.

Although Sledgehammer was the odd one. Where as Treyarch and IW both had solid showings with BO2 and Ghost Sledgehammer was the one to introduce advance movement first. So this could be another "experiment. We could very well see a variety of CoD coming from the 3 studios to break up the monotony of "the same old CoD every year. Perhaps it's like people are suspecting. Sledgehammer will do "classic" nitty gritty type of CoD WWIIesque type, Treyarch will do semi modern/ alternate reality and IW will do sci-fi futuristic.

Of course let's not forget Raven Software either.

Raven remastered CoD4 and are most known for helping out to ensure deadlines are met, making/assisting with the odd DLC content etc.

I know CoD have been on a 3yr cycle but its still possible they could change elements relatively late. Its unlikely that Sledgehammer changed direction in response to BF1 but could have after the response to BO3's reveal (around 6months after AW released) although may have already had it in mind after the response to their own game - I doubt it though as Sledgehammers Chondrey and Schofield have stated that they prefer historic settings anyway. I remember people accusing them of 'copying' Titanfall but there is no way they built AW in that time frame.

I also find it funny that people think MW4 would be 'better' than Ghosts - just because if the 'name'. Ghosts was effectively MW4 - at least in MP. Storywise, Ghosts was separate but MW3 came to its conclusion - I thought Ghosts campaign was quite good. Its MP was OK and once they released the DLC Maps to address the issues with the on-disc ones, it was a lot better but essentially it was MW3 evolved. I know the size of Maps was criticised but these weren't a lot bigger (if at all) from some of the maps we had in the MW series - Derail and Wasteland in MW2 were rather large... Its easier to name the 'small' maps than the Large ones...

I have played all since CoD4 and bought all on day 1, owned all the DLC (apart from W@W) and remember all the criticism that each game had. I do find it difficult to think how Sledgehammer can make a Historic CoD without these issues cropping up.

@BAMozzy It's funny how each game gets slammed in the beginning. I remember when people said that Black Ops 2 is a mess that Treyarch has ruined the series and it was the death of CoD, yet now it's regarded as one of the best as is shown by how many were asking for it to become backwards compatible for Xbox One and proven either further by how active it is now.

I will say if Activision does a rotation like people are suspecting one studio handle WWII type CoD, one sci-fi type and so on it might keep people from getting burnt out on one style like what happened with the advance movement and sci-fi settings. Each game can be a palette cleanser so to speak. Not only that but with this year's release of IW and MWR you have fractured the player base now and to do just a series of non advance movement CoD's for the next 3 years will be a terrible business decision, at least imo.

The story in this game is what's going to do it for me so I really hope they pull through. From the reveal earlier today they said they're including real events into the campaign so that seems cool. I can't say I am overly excited for it, COD has let me down pretty much since Moder Warfare 3 so, I'm curious and open to them taking it back I just hope it's executed properly.

I must admit the trailer left me feeling a little flat and disappointed. Visually it looked OK from a graphical sense - its been around 10yrs since the last WW2 era game. I know it said in-game footage but I also felt that a lot of it was more 'cut-scene' than actually game-play. I may be old and remember playing a lot of WW2 games in the past but nothing seemed to jump out as particularly 'unique' or 'noteworthy', nothing that hasn't been seen and done before in a FPS game. It was never going to be easy to do that with a era that was seen over and over again - not just in video-games but movies and TV shows too. I really hoped Sledgehammer would have given us a unique twist - an alternative history.

As for the MP, I reserve judgement. After years of Boots on the Ground, I embraced the advanced movement - first in Titanfall and then in the CoD franchise - it feel revolutionary, took things to the next level, and stopped the feeling that CoD was the 'same game' every year - just with a different 'skin'. I know Sledgehammer ruined the flow with their formula and going back to basics may help them understand what it is about CoD that is important.

I know the Infinite Warfare had a lot of hate - some I think as a backlash to Micro Transactions, and some because of the setting. I have NO issue with 'Space' or the future at all because it leads to innovation and creativity. You can't be creative and change things up to much when stuck with a certain degree of historical accuracy. People moan about 'jet-pacs' but they were the perfect solution to not only to evolve the franchise but also a perfect solution to campers and head glitchers, a perfect answer to being shot whilst climbing ladders or mantling, a perfect answers to those running around with snipers as if they were shot-guns etc. Those noobs who thing that people flying through the air will now be easy to kill, really are still going to struggle with people still jumping round corners and then into a drop-shot to kill them. The Dolphin dive in the old Black Ops games were almost impossible to counter and I won many gun-fights I shouldn't have by drop-shotting or dolphin diving - CQC situations against shotgun users for example because they couldn't hit me whilst dropping/diving. The Advanced Movement though really opened up the ways to get at campers and head-glitchers. No more having to climb a ladder or going up the stairs straight into a claymore that someone has used to protect their camping spot, no more struggling to get out of spawns because of head glitchers - It will be interesting to see how Sledgehammer deals with these issues. Of course it maybe not an issue as its just 1 game after 4yrs. It was much more an issue as it built up over years with the older games.

As they say, time will tell, but it felt quite flat, predictable and generic

So after viewing the trailer I will say I am hyped for this game big time. Now I realize that this trailer was for the campaign which in all honesty I probably won't play. It's the thoughts of multiplayer that has me hyped. No more dealing with people rocket jumping around or running on walls, like total idiots. From what I have seen the player lobby area is going to be a nice feature, and I am curious on this whole 48 player mode. As far as the Nazis "Zombies" goes it's quite interesting that they aren't refering to it as Zombies and are saying it's more along the lines of a horror game, and the fact that the co-founder of Sledgehammer Games is the creator of the Dead Space games.

For me November 3rd can't come soon enough.

@Tasuki I don't think you can call people spazzes anymore, Tasuki.

@kyleforrester87 My bad, I forget that it means something totally different in the UK then in the US. Corrected now.

To me as a primarily campaign player, and a fan of a lot of the 'old' WW2 games, this trailer struck me as being a little bit unoriginal. This seems heavily modelled on Band of Brothers, primarily following U.S units through D-Day and Normandy. I would have liked it to have shown things we haven't seen often before. I think Battlefield 1 did this well in that it wasn't just drab browns and greys of the Western Front but it showed combat in the Middle East and new locales that people weren't aware of.

Of course, this is one trailer and it felt a little bit like it was made by committee. The game might well be awesome, but from a trailer perspective, it didn't make me think wowzer. Still interested to see the gameplay, I do prefer this era of shooter.

I would love to see new eras explored - like a Korean War or Vietnam War setting. Admittedly a Korean War sim right now would probably not be the best timing.

@KratosMD Yeah, I think the setting is still too close to appeal to the mass market. It is a tougher sell, WW2 is a little more clear cut in terms of combatants but Vietnam was a complicated war that still resonates throughout the world.