Side-Quest: Aren't We Done With WWII?

Article by Travis Meacham.

Call of Duty: World at War is fast approaching and developer Treyarch faces the unenviable task of releasing a game to follow-up Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. Will the return to a World War II setting sour the next Call of Duty?
11 answers Last reply
More about side quest aren wwii
  1. I agree with the author in the regard of WWII being played out (even though I love history and especially war history). I am excited for Call of Duty 5 in one way and that is because I have some friends who are going to get this and they didnt get Call of Duty 4 because it wasnt WWII (I know...they are insane), but I am glad to be able to play with them again.

    I have Call of Duty 5 PC reserved/paid in full at gamestop already, but I own CoD 4 on PC, 360, and PS3...I seriously doubt that CoD 5 will be worthy enough to follow in those footsteps, but I could be wrong and it could be great. I guess we will just have to wait and see. Until then my WWII fix will be filled by Brothers in Arms: Hells Highway.

    One thing to note is that in all fairness to treyarch: they only had a 1 year dev cycle to work with CoD 3 and also no experience in the franchise. I think now with the experience/feedback that they have had along with a full 2 year development cycle that this game will not turn out the same as CoD 3 (atleast one would hope.)


  2. I know some people who prefer WWII games because they are really interested in the history of the war. My dad is one of them. He got into gaming because RTCW was a WWII game, and every game he's played since then has been a WWII game, except for COD 4, but he didn't put a lot of time into that.

    The pacific setting should freshen things up a little too. I don't remember playing any shooter based in the pacific (I never really like the MOH series so skipped most of the games).
  3. First off with any game it really all comes down to how well it is designed and implemented. You could have the same re-hashed setting and plot from a thousand games before but if the game is done right people will want to play it. You can also have a brand new plot and setting and make an utterly crappy game.
    Sure there are lots of themes that have been done and re-done a thousand times and need to just be left alone for awhile. WWII however is not one of those themes. Because of it's scope, scale and historical importance it will be a long time before we exhaust the possibilities of WWII themed games. That doesn't mean that every WWII game will be good or even worth playing. But there will be plenty of room for another good WWII game for quite a while and by the time everything has been done it will be time to revisit earlier version.
    Think about this, WWII video games have been around for what, 20 years? WWII movies on the other hand were being made since pretty much before the war even ended. And yet there is still another very good looking WWII movie coming out right now (Spike Lee's Miracle at St Anna).
    What gives this topic such appeal and staying power is the fact that it's real and people care about it regardless of if it's a game or not. There are lot's of fiction based themes which have been beaten to death. Just go watch last week's Second Take video. I loved the Star Wars movies, but they're fiction so I really have a hard time caring about a Star Wars themed game unless it's just flat out a great game. I could really care less about who Vader's secret apprentice is because not only is he not real, but also because it doesn't even have anything directly to do with the actual Star Wars movies. It's a storyline created purely for the purpose of the game.
    With WWII games there's always a direct correlation to actual events. Even if the specifics are made in part or whole they still have that appeal of being related to something real. A game like Wolfenstein still has that appeal even if in itself it is fiction. You can go even further and look at alternate reality games which have at some point an intersection with history and they still have that appeal because the "what if?" really could have been (well sometimes).
    I think there's plenty left in the WWII bag of tricks for game developers. I hope that it's neither given up on as being "too played out" nor do developers take the easy route and just pump out clones because they know there is an interest in the topic either way.
  4. I think that its all dependent on how well the game is made, the story, and level design. When the first Call of Duty came out WWII was already a well used (some might say over used) setting, but it was still a great game.
  5. I agree with the WWII era being overkilled, however looking at some screens & videos of World at War I must admit that its peaked my interest. I don't believe that this will be a bigger hit than Modern Warfare (or its other successful WWII predecessor COD2), however being the COD Fan that I am, i will probably still buy it.

    If however I have one major concern, it may rest with the game being made by Treyarch rather than Infinity Ward. I feel that Infinity Ward would be the better group to go with if they're risking another WWII game, but hey I guess we just have to wait & see how it is.

    I look forward to pwning many a noob none the less :D :D
  6. People like Travis especially here seem to have forgotten the days when the entire world was involved in a struggle for survival against each other. There was no sitting around talking about development cycles, it was kill or be killed.

    A good game is a simulation of things that actually did happen rather than something imagined, such as call of duty 4.

    Sure I doubt they'll never create a perfect world war 2 simulation but i'm happy for them to get closer each time.
  7. So....I just played CoD World at War's multiplayer/co-op, and it's fantastic (can't write about it yet because of a press embargo).

    The MP is exactly like CoD4 but with more weapons, custom class slots, etc.. And the co-op is sick; 4-player online is just superb. So yeah, I guess I'm not done with WWII....
  8. Maybe we should just do simulations of the Vietnam War instead. The players could reenact the massacre in My Lai and rape and slaughter hundreds of unarmed Vietnamese woman and children.

    Or we could just stick with the WWII simulations.

    What a silly article. Why do most of these side-quest columns come across as some guy griping from his soapbox?
  9. Ah, Pmid. My biggest fan. Glad to see you're still around. Missed you for the Age of Conan review and Warhammer First Impressions. :)

    So... Vietnam is off limits because horrific things happened but WWII isn't? WWII was all sunshine and rainbows then? And who says these shooters have to be based on real-world scenarios? CoD4 wasn't.

    They are some guy griping from his soapbox. It's an editorial column with my picture on it: i.e. me griping from my soapbox.
  10. The WWII shooter has been done countless times, and I'm sure there are other areas to expand the genre to. Sometimes, though, I just wanna kick some Nazi A$$.
  11. I am in the 360 beta currently and it is as Rob says...quite impressive. Cant wait to get it on PC as I feel the WWII weapons dont translate to console nearly as well as the more modern ones since they are much less forgiving of inaccuracies.


Ask a new question

Read More

Call of Duty Games Video Games