Is setting COD5 in WW2 a good idea?

[wicked insanity]

An article from April '08 of OPM

YES

So, WW2 is out of fashion is it? Even though most of the WW2 shooters people moan about are confined to PC and are rubbish. Meanwhile, PS3 and its predecessor, has enjoyed Nazism and in remarkable quality may I add. You can’t write out history because of a few duff games. Its like denouncing a 12 Scottish malt because your best friend had too many WKDs!!

Name another war than would be more fun then. The Great War? Too Brown. ‘Nam? Too leafy. The gulf? Too much like now. Korea? Everybody thinks that was ‘Nam…

No WW2 has it all: death’s head insignias, Spitfires, Stukas, ‘taches, shouting, grenades with decent handles, tanks, windmills, desert/forest/snow and nice coats.

It lasted six years, saw technology leap from propellers to rockets to the atomic bomb and has toured more countries than Alice Cooper. It’s not dead yet.

NO

What happened? One second COD was entering a new era full of nuclear terror and customisable AK’s, the next and we’re back to stick grenades and rifles made out of teak!

I’m guessing here the issue is trust. Activision probably wasn’t entirely convinced the new shift work pull off and set to work on another 1940s epic before everyone realised the new setting was the best thing that had happened since the fall of Nazism. Now we have to wait till 2009 for an Infintyward sequel. Meanwhile, we’ll be given increasingly obscure WW2 campaigns- the Belgian evacuation anyone?- clogging up a genre that already crammed like a Dunkirk lifeboat!!

The even numbered in the series might be the best, but the hopscotch is only going to confuse casual gamers. The one-a-year approach has already broke series like Tony Hawk and Splinter Cell to the point of no innovation. It may boost the bottom line but, the impact on games as a whole is ruining them. Even though we want more of Price, we don’t want it watered down like fly’s piss.

[snaptrap]

i agree.. i like modern warfare way better!!

[stabville]

I personally think that the WWII setting is played out. I wont buy another one no matter how pretty it looks on PS3.

[pacific808]

Most people liked the modern warfare COD better not only because of the customizing of the weapons and stuff but because most of the FPS players today want more action.

If a player were to envision himself on a battlefield most people would think of themselves sitting behind cover wearing a kevlar vest while holding a modern assault rifle, not sitting in a bomb crater holding a M1 grand. With all of today's media on the war in Iraq it was smart for them to create a game where the gamer could feel as if they have some sort of action that could be tied to modern events.

[starwarflcn]

I actually think this is a step back for the francise, what about going to another historic war (Greece, Vietnam). Maybe even in the middle east (You fight for Isreal). There are far too many games set in WWII.

[SG24]

personally i thought the change was refreshing, but perhaps they could do another war.

[Grot]

I wouldn't mind since I wouldn't play it, unless it is being made by Infinity Ward. Then I'll be hella disappointed.

[wicked insanity]

GROT, COD5 is to be made by Activision not IW

[zork90]

They should make up a real good story and the setting should be WWIII in the year 2017 or something. Im sure they can come up with a nice storyline that reflects on todays nations and politics.

[slats]

i feel like i have played way too many WWII games.. i liked the change and no more Treyarch.