Post: Call of Duty World at War 2: Vietnam
Options
03-07-2010, 11:02 PM
#1
andrewman18
< ^ > < ^ >
Any repeat maps or guns would you like to see?
Lets get 2500 and the first person that posts after we get 2500 views gets 50k vbux!!
DSx won the 50k
03-13-2010, 09:17 PM
#65
schaffinosx
To and fro the island.
Originally posted by BrodyF11
I believe Treyarch is making the next CoD game and then Sledgehammer is going to make the one after that.
It would seem we are both correct.
Originally posted by another user
Sledgehammer Games Not Developing 2011 Call of Duty
Activision confirms two different titles.
by Jim Reilly
March 3, 2010 - Activision confirmed to IGN this morning the new Call of Duty title slated for release in 2011 is not the same title that will be developed by the newly formed studio Sledgehammer Games.
Confusion arose yesterday afternoon during the announcement which seemed to imply there were two separate titles in development: a new title by Sledgehammer Games and another title by an unknown developer for 2011. That has now been confirmed.
While little details are known about Sledgehammer Games' Call of Duty project, according to the announcement it will "extend the franchise into the action-adventure genre." Activision also confirmed yesterday that Treyarch is developing the next Call of Duty title set for release later this year.
Update: Activision has issued a correction to their previous comments and apologizes for the confusion. The story has been updated to reflect that.
You must login or register to view this content..
03-13-2010, 10:13 PM
#67
Night Wolf
Rescue Me
Hmmmm. Try again. Fail. How you gonna talk about WWII when this is gonna take place in vietnam???
03-13-2010, 10:55 PM
#68
schaffinosx
To and fro the island.
Originally posted by andrewman18
Too many little battles in wars..
That is one of the only reasons in which so many World War II games can be produced and praised, because there are simply so many fields that can be covered. However, it is not impossible to make a good game that covers many battles, even if some of them are short and uninteresting. There are various ways that developers can skip those while keeping a chronologically correct campaign.
03-13-2010, 10:58 PM
#69
andrewman18
< ^ > < ^ >
Originally posted by crapper74
Hmmmm. Try again. Fail. How you gonna talk about WWII when this is gonna take place in vietnam???
NICE SIG and its all in the 1900;s
Originally posted by SchaffinOSX
That is one of the only reasons in which so many World War II games can be produced and praised, because there are simply so many fields that can be covered. However, it is not impossible to make a good game that covers many battles, even if some of them are short and uninteresting. There are various ways that developers can skip those while keeping a chronologically correct campaign.
And yeah they should make a ww1 ww2 and now war game
03-13-2010, 11:06 PM
#70
schaffinosx
To and fro the island.
Originally posted by andrewman18
NICE SIG and its all in the 1900;s
And yeah they should make a ww1 ww2 and now war game
And yeah they should make a ww1 ww2 and now war game
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that. Do you mean a game in which covers all of those events? If so I'm not sure that that would be very efficient. What I meant in my last post is that smaller battles can be skipped without messing a game that is striving to be chronologically correct.
Example: Private John has been going through a major World War II battle. The battle ends, and, based on actual events, a smaller, less important battle is about to occur. However, the developers do not want to take players through that battle, so your soldier gets called somewhere else in which that battle takes place and you can simply resume where the next battle begins.
However I think making a war game in which are rather far from another would be difficult to pull off, as it would almost be like creating more than one game in a single game. If a developer clear a couple of years for a title like that, however, I could see it being quite a bit of fun. The major issue would merely be transitioning from one time period to the other, especially from World War II to the present. World War II was not very long after the first, so that would be a smoother transition.
03-13-2010, 11:21 PM
#71
andrewman18
< ^ > < ^ >
Originally posted by SchaffinOSX
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by that. Do you mean a game in which covers all of those events? If so I'm not sure that that would be very efficient. What I meant in my last post is that smaller battles can be skipped without messing a game that is striving to be chronologically correct.
Example: Private John has been going through a major World War II battle. The battle ends, and, based on actual events, a smaller, less important battle is about to occur. However, the developers do not want to take players through that battle, so your soldier gets called somewhere else in which that battle takes place and you can simply resume where the next battle begins.
However I think making a war game in which are rather far from another would be difficult to pull off, as it would almost be like creating more than one game in a single game. If a developer clear a couple of years for a title like that, however, I could see it being quite a bit of fun. The major issue would merely be transitioning from one time period to the other, especially from World War II to the present. World War II was not very long after the first, so that would be a smoother transition.
Example: Private John has been going through a major World War II battle. The battle ends, and, based on actual events, a smaller, less important battle is about to occur. However, the developers do not want to take players through that battle, so your soldier gets called somewhere else in which that battle takes place and you can simply resume where the next battle begins.
However I think making a war game in which are rather far from another would be difficult to pull off, as it would almost be like creating more than one game in a single game. If a developer clear a couple of years for a title like that, however, I could see it being quite a bit of fun. The major issue would merely be transitioning from one time period to the other, especially from World War II to the present. World War II was not very long after the first, so that would be a smoother transition.
Yeah all 3 big wars in one game
03-14-2010, 07:34 PM
#73
andrewman18
< ^ > < ^ >
Originally posted by jaymee123
it better be alot better than W@W cos W@W sucked
Yeah i know i got to 10th prestige and then sold it.
Copyright © 2026, NextGenUpdate.
All Rights Reserved.
