Call of Duty 5 will be called Call of Duty: World at War

I might get COD 2 and 3 if all the achievements are obtained offline has they're really cheap now. I say all achieveemnts offline because I'm sick of getting 360 games where it's impossible to get all the achieveemnts because no one plays them online anymore.

3 has loads of online achievements, about 5 which will take damn ages - the call of duty 3 servers are all filled with cheaters now. Id get it purely for campaign if I were you. I'm currently playing through call of duty 2 on veteran and its great fun - almost finished :)
 
YAY!!!

I love WW2 games:D

Its about time there is one with upto date(what ever this gen is now called) graphics and physics out.

I hope they use Australia in this, im sick of us getting neglectic in games:(
They could have such a good Pacific battles if they use the ANZACs, The could do Kokoda, Burma, Singapore or use the Z comando unit:cool:

And i personally cant wait for the WW1 game out sometime for the PS3:cool:
 
Ok maybe overreacting, change the word to average. Which considering the number of quality of FPS we are seeing is still bad.

Yeah totally agree with you there mate, an Average FPS in this world is not going to be bought by me but rather rented. Too many of them on the market.
 
WW2 never gets old, as long as they can offer improved gameplay and presentation. No other war since WW2 gives the same massive scope for producing a varied single palyer campaign.
I look forward to a decent Pacific Theatre game (MOH:Pacific Assault was poor in my opinion), but I hope they have some British\Commonwealth elements to the campaign, maybe set in Burma.
 
theres not enough eastern front stuff and the pacific theatre has been neglected


I personally like the Brothers in Arms games and am looking forward to the new one...would like it if they could trasnfer the game mechanics to an eastern front game it would be great...street fighting in stalingrad whilst ordering a couple of squads...could work in the pacific as well..you could have a flamethrower in your assault squad for attacking bunkers


I'm never sure a ww1 game would work....there wasnt really a lot of variety in the fighting!
 
I'm never sure a ww1 game would work....there wasnt really a lot of variety in the fighting!

Blow whistle, climb up trench, run towards enemy lines clutching your swagger stick in one hand and your Webley service revolver in the other one.
Get blown to pieces by heavy machine gun fire and artillery, respawn back at your trench, repeat for 4 years (With the intermission of a brief Xmas sub-game, Fifa 1914 - The Road to Berlin)
 
Last edited:
Blow whistle, climb up trench, run towards enemy lines clutching your swagger stick in one hand and your Webley service revolver in the other one.
Get blown to pieces by heavy machine gun fire and artillery, respawn back at your trench, repeat for 4 years (With the intermission of a brief Xmas sub-game, Fifa 1914 - The Road to Berlin)


Thats where you're wrong.

WW1 wasnt always trench warfare like you discribed, it only became like that when it became a stale mate and neither side could break through.
There was plently of different ways of fighting in WW1.
 
Thats where you're wrong.

WW1 wasnt always trench warfare like you discribed, it only became like that when it became a stale mate and neither side could break through.
There was plently of different ways of fighting in WW1.

Erm, steady on, it was an attempt at humour (It obviously failed).
For the record, I am a bit of a military history fan and have a reasonable knowledge of the various theatres and campaigns of WW1.
I was characterising the western front in Europe, which after some mobile battles in the first monts of the war in 1914, pretty much bogged down to static, trench based warfare, apart from the odd territory gain, here and there.
 
Back
Top Bottom