Rumour: Call of Duty May Be Flying to the Moon

Why Activision, you already have Destiny don't you? I hope Titanfall 2 will position itself directly against CoD and show them who's the boss... would be cool to see them go up against their former employee. For the record: I don't want CoD out of the way, I just want a complete reset. This year's iteration is jam packed full of shooter goodness, it's almost ridiculous how much content they squeezed in, yet CoD hasn't been CoD for such a long time now. It's wants to be something it's clearly not, something Titanfall mastered to perfection, and a "space CoD" would really be preposterous. This setting combined with IW not being a shadow of their former selves could really hurt sales and critical reception, which might make Activision rethink their strategy.

It could still be anything though, I remember reports back in 2010 that they were working on a CoD with "space marines", which eventually lead to Advanced Warfare. I still think their best move would be to remaster MW2 with all DLC and introduce a season 2 for Blops 3, which could even be bundled. That way you keep the current players happy and have a game which will bring back all the people they've lost along the way.

Why does this sound insane? The series has become more futuristic with every installment it seems. It is the logical next step, and the vocal minority may complain, but the sales of Call of Duty have grown exponentially and the general public seems to like futuristic settings better than historical settings. Either way, I won't be trying it lol.

Either way, I'm not buying it.

I personally don't care what the setting or time period will be. I do think that for a game routed in more arcade, fast paced, twitch shooting, the historical setting is not the best. That's better suited to Battlefield.
As fr as the Campaign is concerned, Space could be good. It was certainly OK in Ghosts - very Moonraker! However as far as the MP is concerned, Low or no gravity may end up with the same issues that affected Advanced Warfare - No flow to the maps. I do think that 'boots on the ground' warfare would seem cumbersome following BO3 - being caught climbing a ladder or mantling objects - especially if you can't shoot or defend yourself. I do think the double jump mechanics can get annoying in Combat but for navigation, getting to 2nd level buildings, its a lot quicker and more fun.

Isn't COD:BO3 already considered a sci-fi game? If so, I kinda like @Tasuki's tagline better. lol

Ugh. If that's the case what was a 95% pass becomes a 100% pass. As it is I was passing if it was anything past modern (you know, no exo, actual guns, normal killstreaks) with a hope for a return to either ww2 or even just a simple mw collection would have a good chance to get my money. Looks like treyarch is the only one left who will get my money I guess, and even that is largely dependant on the quality of zombies.

I really don't know what the fascination with a CoD set in the past is for. I know the CoD franchise started in WW2 but that's because all military based games were set during this era. If the franchise went back now, it would seem like a massive step back.
Its not just the boots on the ground, but what that means for the game play. It would be a lot slower - getting around the Map, getting into 2nd floor areas, mantling etc.
I also think its more restrictive from a creative point of view - having to stick with 'historical' accuracy doesn't leave room for creativity. I doubt the Story is written by IW but having to make everything look accurate to the time period means that everything - weapons, armour etc means that the developers are restricted to recreating existing designs.
The reason Exo-suits didn't work was more down to how they affected the map flow. CoD doesn't have 'much' verticality but the few places that you can get into for that height advantage - 2nd/3rd floors of buildings - are limited and only allow a small window to shoot from - exo-suits ruined that by giving you a whole roof-top and many other 'high' areas which made it very hard to check everywhere. The walls meant that you couldn't see enemies but could be jumped over. which affected the 'flow' and certain amount of 'predictability' of the maps - something all other CoD games have inc BO3.
I couldn't care less if I am shooting an AK47 'type' weapon with bullets or a AK47 type 'laser' as long as they both feel 'right' within the CoD universe and kill in similar times etc - I haven't fired one in reality.
I would prefer a more 'gritty' look regardless of the era. If that's set 500 years in the future, I would prefer Star Wars to Star Trek (too shiny/new). I would like certain 'killstreaks' back but if its a sci-fi setting I know some may not work but others certainly would if re-imagined.
I think the 'feel' is more important than the era. As long as it plays like a CoD, weapons, perks, scorestreaks (hopefully Specialists comes back) etc are balanced and it retains the map flow, then I will be happy. BO3 is certainly the best CoD this generation (so far) and IW will have a tough job following that regardless.

@kyleforrester87 IW gave us the MW trilogy and Ghosts storyline. These are coherent! Ghosts may have got a lot of criticism for its MP (although that was MW4 in all but name) but its story was good. Somewhat 'predictable' in its premise but still coherent and followed a natural progression to its conclusion - although the twist at the end was unexpected. Treyarch are the ones that jump around a lot in their stories.

@kyleforrester87 MW1 had a fantastic story and the pacing was superb. Black Ops series are more experimental. BO1 was probably the least experimental but certainly jumped around a lot, BO2 had more 'branching' elements and those weird RTS type missions, BO3 had the virtual reality/flashback jumping around. IW (and Sledgehammer too) had more straight-forward 'linear' progression campaigns. MW3's was a bit weak but it did finish the trilogy off. Ghosts and AW - despite criticism of the MP (Ghosts though was essentially MW4 and AW messed too much with the flow and therefore feel of CoD), both had good traditionally styled linear story campaigns. Each new mission/chapter followed on where the last left off in essence. I believe Ghosts had one 'flashback' mission to establish the relationship of the 'enemy' but it's timing was 'right' for the story.
If you like the more traditional style linear campaign with predictable progression (ie not jumping around) then I would certainly recommend picking up any of IW's or even Sledgehammers Advanced Warfare. I don't think any have the impact that CoD4 have but its very difficult to repeat that - you can't kill off a lead character, drop a nuke, have a stealth based mission or shoot from an AC130 again and have the same impact or be compared. Ghosts at least was unique in that it had underwater and Space combat (very 'Moonraker'). Because CoD4 did these 'first', it had a lot more 'impact' - Its kind of like you remembering your first Mario Kart as being the best even if newer version have more content, pick-ups, better tracks etc because it was the 'first'.

if anyone finished the last level of Extinction mode (exodus) in COD Ghosts it ends on a cliffhanger (in space)