Call of Duty 5

[Kurtle Squad]

CoD3 didn't have multiplayer on the Wii as far as I know...

And 2 & 4 weren't even on there.

Since you haven't noticed I was pointing out people stupidly think Infinity Ward are that much worse that Treyach.

 

 

I hope vehicles make a return.

[Zechs Merquise]

Great news, but why got back to WW2? I really like modern warfare games far far more than WW2 ones. Happy and disappointed.

[Aalborg]

Since you haven't noticed I was pointing out people stupidly think Infinity Ward are that much worse that Treyach.

 

you don't mean the other way around?

[The fish]

Great news, but why got back to WW2? I really like modern warfare games far far more than WW2 ones. Happy and disappointed.

 

*deskhead*

 

Ok, put simply, Call of Duty, CoD2 and CoD4 are made by Infinity Ward. They started the series, and make the good Call of Duty's.

 

Treyarch made CoD3 and are making CoD5. The games are ok, but are no where near the quality of IW's games. The only similarity between the two company's games is the name.

 

Oh, and I heard that IW are having exclusive development rights after CoD5, which is awesome news.

 

I hope vehicles make a return.

 

Along with the lack of balancing and playability that Treyarch's CoD's give us in multiplayer? Awesome!

[flameboy]

*deskhead*

 

Ok, put simply, Call of Duty, CoD2 and CoD4 are made by Infinity Ward. They started the series, and make the good Call of Duty's.

 

Treyarch made CoD3 and are making CoD5. The games are ok, but are no where near the quality of IW's games. The only similarity between the two company's games is the name.

 

Oh, and I heard that IW are having exclusive development rights after CoD5, which is awesome news.

 

 

 

Along with the lack of balancing and playability that Treyarch's CoD's give us in multiplayer? Awesome!

 

Not true..I heard they were spliting the franchise in to leaving Treyarch to do the WWII stuff and IW to pursue the Modern Warfare side of things.

[The fish]

Not true..I heard they were spliting the franchise in to leaving Treyarch to do the WWII stuff and IW to pursue the Modern Warfare side of things.

 

This is one of those times I wish I'd keep a history...

 

I would find it, but I have an exam in 3 and a bit hours.

[Kurtle Squad]

you don't mean the other way around?

Yeh:)

 

 

Along with the lack of balancing and playability that Treyarch's CoD's give us in multiplayer? Awesome!

Lack of balancing?!

It wasn't that bad....plus, if you were good enough (and your team weren't morons) you can still do well.

You'll always get idiots on your team.

 

For the record, COD4 can't even count.

 

 

:wtf:Lack of playability!?

Lost me there.

 

 

If you've got one or two other team players on your team on any of the CODs, then you should do well, and I have to say, COD3 is the best out of 2, 3 & 4 when you haven't got a teammate.

Also, COD2 multiplayer was rubbish, and COD4's team Deathmatches aren't nearly as good as 3's.

[Ren of Heavens]

"The game has picked up a new subtitle -- Call of Duty: World at War. As the subtitle suggests (and as was rumored late last year), the series is going back to the World War II setting, specifically revolving around the Pacific theater. Also as previously rumored, development duties have been hot-potatoed back over to Treyarch, makers of Call of Duty 3.

 

World at War will be the first Call of Duty to feature co-op play through the campaign, and multiplayer will focus on squad-based elements and vehicular combat. Formats revealed were as expected: PC, PlayStation 3, Xbox 360, and Wii. A different team within Treyarch is exclusively tasked to the Wii version, which is apparently running on the CoD4 engine. The Wii Zapper will also reportedly be incorporated.

 

If you think another tour of duty in WWII seems far past the point of redundancy, you may be relieved to know that Treyarch at least seems to be trying to put a new spin on the familiar setting. According to a separate article in Official Xbox Magazine (via Joystiq), the developer claims that they want to "explore the darkest corners of WWII," and make the game more of a survival horror experience."

 

http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3168156

 

Seems pretty promising. No PS2 port to worry about and the CoD4 engine is great.

[The fish]

Also, COD2 multiplayer was rubbish, and COD4's team Deathmatches aren't nearly as good as 3's.

 

I seriously beg to differ. Call of Duty mulitplayer isn't about vehicles, it's about infantry combat. If vehicles is what you want, buy BF1942. Call of Duty 2's can't be faulted (at least on the PC), and 4's only (and I mean only) issue is the martyrdom grenades are entirely unlike the normal ones.

[gaggle64]

World at War? I'd buy it if it had Laurence Olivier narrating everything.

[The fish]

:wtf:Lack of playability!?

Lost me there.

 

After playing a shooter on a proper Call of Duty's engine (one made by IW), playing any other is just frustrating. It's mainly psychological - I go in expecting every thing to link together logically and perfectly (like CoD, 2, and 4) and when it doesn't, it just feels cheap and lazy, and, therefore, unplayable.

 

CoD3 isn't bad, it's just not a Call of Duty game.

 

Seriously, though, get BF1942, you'll enjoy it.

[Hellfire]

CoD4 has the most ridiculous bugs I've ever seen. Sort of.

[The fish]

CoD4 has the most ridiculous bugs I've ever seen. Sort of.

 

In multiplayer, the only one I've found is the martyrdom grenades. Sure you're not just being shot through a wall?

[Columnar]

The Latest issue of gamesTM (Issue 71) has a big feature about CoD: World at War and Treyarch Studio Head Mark Lamia and Senior Producer at Activision Noah Heller, went into some detail about the Wii version (get ready for huge long segment of magazine pg. 76):

 

'What we've seen (gamesTM) of the title is superb, and after bearing witness to the Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and PC versions of the game, our mind turns to the Wii. Call of Duty 3 was one of the first shooters to appear on the console and appealed to many because of that fact.

 

"Man, we can definitely talk a lot about the Wii version. I mean, where do we start?" asks Lamia excitedly. "Well, first and foremost" offers Heller, "The Wii version is being developed here at Treyarch. It's a separate team from the next-gen team but it's on site. If you're going to compare the next-gen version and the Wii version side-by-side then you're going to find that it's a much closer comparison than, I think, any other Wii game currently on the market".

 

"Yeah, the challenge with this one was 'how do we make a cutting edge next-gen game work on the Wii?" adds Lamia. "The answer is: a lot of frickin' smart engineers who've shipped Wii titles in the past. Getting the Call of Duty 4 engine on the Wii was our first challenge - which we've managed to do and it looks great - but there are also content and design challenges to consider"...

 

"Beyond that" continues Heller, "We're really accepting the fact that the person buying on the Wii is doing so for a different kind of experience. I mean, we're going to be supporting the Zapper and, I don't know how familiar you are with the Zapper personally, but you lose about five or six buttons on that controller, so it's very challenging to make a Call of Duty game that functions well".

"This is our second Wii title though" Lamia reminds us. "And there aren't many studios out there who have made two. We had a launch title, which is tough because you don't have as much time with the hardware, yet Call of Duty 3 was, for a while, the best shooter on the format. We're really using that experience. We'll be doing some unique stuff with co-op gameplay, too, but we're not ready to talk on that yet. I honestly think you'll see we're taking the Wii very seriously".

 

Make of that what you will:heh: