Why Call of Duty World at War?

[ChemicalWarfare]

Why did they make Call of Duty WaW?:shakehead:
Why couldn't there be Call of Duty Korea or Vietnam?:nod:
Like:
WW2
WW2
WW2
Modern Warfare
WW2?
Like first 3 World war 2 games, then a Modern Combat one, again World war II:dead:?
I'm not saying not to play it, just why did they do that?

[GeneralPatton]

Re: Why Call of Duty World at War?

Mmm, Vietnam is technically still very controversial and Korea wasn't anything special that companies would make a game about. It is sad because thousands of people did die at war, but just isn't enough media coverage and/or knowledge and/or interest from the public to be interested in a Korean War game.

Vietnam, EA made BF:Vietnam and I personally refused to play it. I have played a few Vietnam games, all very horrible IMHO.

[iQue]

Re: Why Call of Duty World at War?

BFV was awesome. Too bad it was so buggy/laggy It had a lot of cool features, but it could have been much better made.

I really think that a new Vietnam game would be great. Korea, not too different from WW2 part from the different armies.

[CtrlAltDe1337]

Re: Why Call of Duty World at War?

A Vietnam game would have been awsome, and would fit better with the 'brutality' theme they went with IMO.

[[GCA]Tim270]

Re: Why Call of Duty World at War?

Too bad it was so buggy/laggy .

Explain please.

Anyway, yes I agree a nam' game would really fit into the CQ style of CoD. Also, technically the US never went to war with Vietnam

[iQue]

Re: Why Call of Duty World at War?

Explain please.

I personally didn't have any problems but I know many people had unexplainable crashes and odd performance bugs. Like the game running at 1 FPS even though you had way better hardware than the recommended. BFV was developed by DICE Canada (which is canceled now) and they didn't get to know the engine too well so yea there was gonna be some problems.

It had a lot of neat stuff I wish DICE would have kept for future games... like radio in the vehicles and picking up jeeps with helis etc

[Swatpll]

Re: Why Call of Duty World at War?

My dream is in the new cod 6 is going be a fps like ALL bf with jet ect.. you can drive and the war going be in Afganistan or something like that with modern weapons!:shock::thumbsup:

[=98=]

Re: Why Call of Duty World at War?

My dream is in the new cod 6 is going be a fps like ALL bf with jet ect.. you can drive and the war going be in Afganistan or something like that with modern weapons!:shock::thumbsup:

That would just be Battlefield... not Call of Duty. They like to differentiate themselves.

[Kreepy Kitteh =^o.O^=]

Re: Why Call of Duty World at War?

No they like to sell copies. If they made CoD like bf it would be heaven

[Swatpll]

Re: Why Call of Duty World at War?

No they like to sell copies. If they made CoD like bf it would be heaven

HELL YEA MAN!! they only have to get better graphique then bf and they going own all new game!!:thumbsup:

[(BG)Patton]

Re: Why Call of Duty World at War?

if any game were to take the best of COD (infantry fighting, unlocks, customize weapons) and the best from battlefield (ALL vehicles, big maps, squads, unlockables) than surely it would be a knockout game. i think dice and infinityward should say f**k you EA we are going to make a game that will rule the world for 5 years.

oh, and a vietnam game is badly needed. maybe a Cold War game? US vs russia would be kick *** no?

[=98=]

Re: Why Call of Duty World at War?

No, because some people simply don't want a Battlefield style game. BF2 players sure do, but not others.

I know plenty of people who love infantry based CoD, but greatly dislike BF. Battlefield should adopt the CoD style infantry, not the other way around.

[JoMaMaz]

Re: Why Call of Duty World at War?

No, because some people simply don't want a Battlefield style game. BF2 players sure do, but not others.

I know plenty of people who love infantry based CoD, but greatly dislike BF. Battlefield should adopt the CoD style infantry, not the other way around.

Agreed! From someone who has played all of the games in the BF series and CoD series, I waste my life away playing the CoD series b/c I like the infantry focused combat. I strongly disliked the large maps in BF games which is what most BF players attribute as a good thing for their game. I can handle a couple of maps having tanks in this game, but the game must not lose it's close-combat, intense fighting or it loses its essence imo.

[Kreepy Kitteh =^o.O^=]

Re: Why Call of Duty World at War?

lol! you have got to be kidding me?... If they made a cod4 style game with BF2 settings it would go crazy.. Sure some people may not like it but the majority would. Look at how successful BF2 STILL is.

[=98=]

Re: Why Call of Duty World at War?

What i'm saying is that BF2 should take CoD's gameplay ideas, but CoD shouldn't take BF's ideas. That way you have a combined game in the form of BF3 but for those who prefer proper CoD, you also have CoD7 or whatever.