Call of Duty: WWII

http://www.ign.com/articles/2017/02/09/call-of-duty-2017-will-take-franchise-aback-to-its-rootsa?abthid=589ceb7d1b5c0a8c05000017

Well, we know it's on the way. Surprise. They're saying they're taking the series back to it's roots which will hopefully be a historical or modern war (not future warfare please). Hopefully that means boots on the ground, and no jet packs. It could be fun, but even if they go back to their glory days, I cant see myself playing this with so many superior games out in this day and age.

Still, we'll see.

And Sledgehammer Games is the one developing it. We're getting the guys responsible for Advanced Warfare instead of Treyarch, the development team behind Call of Duty 3 and World at War. I would think they'd be the ones better suited making a CoD game that's going back to it's roots. Haven't seen it yet but I'm already giving up on it.

I'm completely burnt out on the Call of Duty franchise.

I'm playing Overwatch now.

CoD should take a break

Prolly will buy...

Originally posted by Nemesis X
And Sledgehammer Games is the one developing it. We're getting the guys responsible for Advanced Warfare instead of Treyarch, the development team behind Call of Duty 3 and World at War. I would think they'd be the ones better suited making a CoD game that's going back to it's roots. Haven't seen it yet but I'm already giving up on it.

haven't played Advanced Warfare yet, but should I ?

**** no.

This is a step in the right direction. I probably still wont buy it, but I'll go in with a more open mind than recent installments.

Battlefield>>>

Can usually tell the difference between the two with the game communities

CoD seems to get the more whiny teen's & spouting insults.

Originally posted by Trocity
Battlefield>>>

Still.....while I understand the lack of response, if they can nail an awesome WW2 campaign I will be more than happy. There hasn't been a good one for a very long time and Call of Duty 1, United Offensive and Call of Duty 2 were amazing.

I've been playing the beta. HUGE improvement over past games. Complicated, maze like maps (no more typical 3 lane design), boots on the ground, the guns are all unique and usable with a few exceptions, and movement feels solid. I like the new class system too. It's creative and varied compared to the past couple of "pick 10 perks, guns and attatchments" games

I still don't know if I can justify getting this though. Not with A+ games like Battlefield and Siege in my library. Plus, Battlegrounds is coming out too. This game is a good return to form for the franchise but the model is kind of outdated (still fun for a quick fix though). I'll have to see about zombies and (to a lesser extent) the campaign.

Battlegrounds is not a comparable at all.

Battlefield is it's own type of game. Same with Siege. Both games cover a niche. Call of Duty is a different type of MP and the type of experience it provides is not close to either Battlefield, Siege and especially Battlegrounds.

Originally posted by Smasandian
Battlegrounds is not a comparable at all.

Battlefield is it's own type of game. Same with Siege. Both games cover a niche. Call of Duty is a different type of MP and the type of experience it provides is not close to either Battlefield, Siege and especially Battlegrounds.

That said, that post wasn't really as much about comparing them as it was "which experiences would I rather have taking up my time" and "will COD get any kind of attention with so many multiplayer FPSs already in my library".

I haven't decided. On one hand I am having fun with the beta, but I left behind COD a long time ago.