Treyarch using Cold War for Call of Duty 7? Comments by Robert Purchese

i don't care what treyarch does, they should stay away from CoD and leave it to Infinity Ward. We really don't need a low quality installation of CoD every other year

CoD: Rome vs Carthago.
You heard it here first.

'i don't care what anyone does, they should stay away from CoD or move the series on. We really don't need a derviative of CoD1 every year'

Fixed

Wow talk about early marketing, pity that I only care about Mordern Warfare 2. Was there any really major coflict during the cold war? I seem to remmeber it being more a war in the sense that people didn't fight so much because of mutal assured destruction and all that...

Time to read up on the cold war again I guess... seems there was a couple after all (Korean War/Veitnam etc) colour me slightly interested

World War 1, come on, do it!

As long as its not another World War II game...

VicViper@

Hmm, Korea? Vietnam? Afghanistan?

@VicViper

There were quite a few proxy wars fought during the Cold War. The Korean War, Vietnam, and Cuban Missile Crisis are some of the potential conflicts that could be featured. You could also have behind enemy lines/covert ops missions. Who doesn't want to play as a gung-ho CIA agent avoiding evil Cubans and trying to escape back to the good old US after the Bay of Pigs? Seriously though, using the Cold War as a basis does have serious potential if its done right. Although I suppose most video game ideas have potential if executed correctly.

Sounds to me, cynical as it is, like they've got two demographics covered - Treyarch farm out the formulaic shit to the massmarket (ie Christmas time) while Infinity Ward do the better game for the online faithful.

Both are for the mass market, no doubt about that, but IW (so far) do make the better game.

Looks like IW have turned their back on the COD name

And instead have allowed Activision and Treyarch to rinse the IP until gamers realise they have been fooled

Good on IW, I myself intend to only purchase their titles in future. My play in to COD:WAW just reassured me that the franchise is not given any justice in any other developers hands

Korea please... and no more blasted dogs.

Wasn't Call of Duty 4 release a year ago and now they are already talking about CoD 7?

"Wasn't Call of Duty 4 release a year ago and now they are already talking about CoD 7? "

Almost - CoD 4 was 2007, CoD 5 was last year, CoD 6 (which is basically CoD 4 2) has already been announced for this year.


"Looks like IW have turned their back on the COD name "

Not really - they're doing Modern Warfare 2 (CoD 6). Treyarch developing CoD 7 is just the normal cycle.

Sounds good to me, there's plenty of potential variety there

I don't want to play a damn American or British this time. You play as one of these every single CoD game there is. Break it up. Give us a storyline from the other side (the evil side), for a change.

when will treyarch learn, No one cares anymore until they start bringing out games that work.

@Mockerre,Cyclone

Knowledge dropped... guess I forgot they were connected in that way

The thought of being part of proxy wars does sound interesting, the convert stuff has been done before but not in this setting of course. I could see them maybe time jumping between each of the conflicts and the convert stuff, the game would be following the time line of the cold wars and convey how this developed towards its end.

For example being part of the covert mission that insitgated/helped lay the foundation for a conflict then the next minute being apart of that conflict on either side

"I don't want to play a damn American or British this time. You play as one of these every single CoD game there is."

i dont remember any British soldiers in WAW...... Just americans and russians (and germans and japanese in multiplayer)

@Spekingur
I don't want to play a damn American or British this time. You play as one of these every single CoD game there is. Break it up. Give us a storyline from the other side (the evil side), for a change.

You got to play as the soviets too. They were "evil" (for given values of evil ;) ) also some of the better missions IMO.

It would be nice, especially given the nature of the cold war, to play as a (say) US/British/West German soldier (oh God, it would be worth it for the novelty of playing the part of a "good" German) and a Soviet spy maybe working together avert full scale war somehow. Or maybe a better plot. ;)

Apart from the real life conflicts in Vietnam and Korea such a setting could give you special-forces raids, border skirmishes or full scale war between East and West (and those parts of the East who are politically aligned to the West), it doesn't have to be historically accurate after all: I'm pretty sure that in WWII the US didn't have a practically bullet-proof soldier who killed hundreds of German soldiers on his own while his squad mates hunkered down behind a nearby wall shouting "covering fire" every 2 seconds.

I'm also pretty sure that Madeupistan was never nuked (or whatever that middle-eastern country in COD4 was called).

@geeza2020
i dont remember any British soldiers in WAW...... Just americans and russians (and germans and japanese in multiplayer)

He did say "I don't want to play a damn American or British this time. You play as one of these every single CoD game there is." You play as Americans therefore you do play as American or British. The American one, specifically. :)

I really don't understand all the Treyarch hate on here, Yes CoD:3 was rubbish but World At War was as good as Modern Warfare (if not better in places - as befitting a title developed later).
I look forward to both the new CoD titles

I really don't understand all the Treyarch hate on here, Yes CoD:3 was rubbish but World At War was as good as Modern Warfare

It's probably because most people wouldn't agree with you about WaW being as god as MW.

Some Vietnam love, great. Last really good 'Nam game I played was Vietcong. Which was AWESOME!

CoD has been going downhill since the first game anyway :P

@ DUFFKING:

You obviously didn't play Call of Duty 2 then huh?

Vietnam, fuck yes!

I am so sick of people speaking for others when they say that Treyarch don't know what they are doing. World at War is a great game, with plenty of online variety.

CoD 2 was basically a refinement, but the respawning enemy trend basically started in CoD 2, and I still hate the recharging health system for multiplayer.

I have always thought a World War 1 game is something that should have been done along time ago, so much history to take from.

Havent we already had vietnam before.....

Sounds good to me.

"I have always thought a World War 1 game is something that should have been done along time ago, so much history to take from. "

Wouldn't it end up just being a lot of sitting around in god-awful trenches, fighting off rats, and dying from influenza?