[QUOTE=FFStudios;19497391]That'd make me insta-buy it.[/QUOTE]
Make some yourself. Google it.
[editline]12:01PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=hypno;19502566]Hey, this might be the first COD game I buy from Treyarch.[/QUOTE]
I thought it WAS the first COD game made by Treyarch. Rate me boxes if im wrong, and un-observant (i've played all of them, just thought it was Infinity Ward)
[editline]12:02PM[/editline]
Well fuck me, they made World at War!
[QUOTE=NeoShinsei;19503121]Make some yourself. Google it.
[editline]12:01PM[/editline]
I thought it WAS the first COD game made by Treyarch. Rate me boxes if im wrong, and un-observant (i've played all of them, just thought it was Infinity Ward)
[editline]12:02PM[/editline]
Well fuck me, they made World at War![/QUOTE]
Call of duty 3 & 5 were made by Treyarch.
[QUOTE=Moby-;19503083]Where?![/QUOTE]
[img]http://www.flipflopflyin.com/g/riojesus2.jpg[/img]
There he is!
[QUOTE=-TRASE-;19500446]Another WW2 game? NO THANKS[/QUOTE]
Go back to school and read some history books.
[quote]"Development is on course - and Treyarch have been told the game must be ready to hit shelves before the gifting season."[/quote]
Why does Activision insist on having a new Call of Duty every year?
This isn't the right thing to tell your development team: "the game must be ready to hit shelves before the gifting season".
The developers, Treyarch here, should be able to spend enough time refining it and not rushing it so that it's ready for Christmas.
The ending will be awesome, watching the troops pull out after having their squads tiortured, knowing that you won't actually win the game while playing it.
[QUOTE=TAU!;19497198]I just hope they know what they're doing. Practically all Vietnam War games that have been made up to this date have been shit.[/QUOTE]
Oh come now, Battlefield Vietnam was pretty good I thought.
I hope this doesn't suck like pretty much every other 'Nam game
Also
Thread music
[media] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBfjU3_XOaA [/media]
Shame that most 'Nam games have been total shit. Hopefully this won't be as bad.
Loving how everyone blames IW for MW2's faults. Activision is responsible for almost all of the technical faults with MW2. They're more or less backseat developing.
Anyway, since Treyarch developed this, I'll just wait until MW3. WaW sucked hard.
Vietnam + Future = EPIC
[QUOTE=G-foxisus;19498253]Hopefully they won't use the same engine since CoD4.[/QUOTE]
Hopefully Valve won't use the same engine since Source.
At least they are out of WWII (not that it was bad) and into Vietnam.
Infinity Ward and Treyarch both get 2 years to work on each CoD game. Infinity Ward is at fault for MW2, if they didn't think they had enough time to make the game, or didn't want to release a bad game. They could've left Activision, but no they stayed and made that game.
And I can't wait for Vietnam that is going to be fun! As I have lost respect of IW and gained some for Treyarch.
[QUOTE=mrbloog;19514658]Infinity Ward and Treyarch both get 2 years to work on each CoD game. Infinity Ward is at fault for MW2, if they didn't think they had enough time to make the game, or didn't want to release a bad game. They could've left Activision, but no they stayed and made that game.
And I can't wait for Vietnam that is going to be fun! As I have lost respect of IW and gained some for Treyarch.[/QUOTE]
The stupidity of this post made me cringe.
They can't "just leave," they have a contract. Not to mention Activision more or less owns IW anyway.
I love how everyone was complaining about Treyarch during WaW's release/praising IW, now everyone's against it like some decent band that's gone mainstream.
It's called a bandwagon.
[QUOTE=tankkiller;19497074]FUCK YES, finally, a Vietnam war game.[/QUOTE]
Appropriate Avatar.
So, we've literally covered EVERY WAR in history. We've got too many WW2 games, the odd Vietnam game, a [B]cancelled[/B] WW1 game, some loosely related to Pearl Harbor, quite a few modern-conflict games, and some future-war games.
But does anybody give a fuck about Korea? I never hear about that war, let alone in games discussions. I mean, Raging Tiger was a shitty game from '04, but nothing anybody has even heard about has been produced.
It'd be interesting to see Infinity Ward/Activision take a stab at "the war nobody knew about (except Walt Kowalski//Gran Torino).
[QUOTE=zydos;19545942]So, we've literally covered EVERY WAR in history. We've got too many WW2 games, the odd Vietnam game, a [B]cancelled[/B] WW1 game, some loosely related to Pearl Harbor, quite a few modern-conflict games, and some future-war games.
But does anybody give a fuck about Korea? I never hear about that war, let alone in games discussions. I mean, Raging Tiger was a shitty game from '04, but nothing anybody has even heard about has been produced.
It'd be interesting to see Infinity Ward/Activision take a stab at "the war nobody knew about (except Walt Kowalski//Gran Torino).[/QUOTE]
I want to see something new. Like, there is the recent Sri Lanka Conflict, China independence, Falkland wars and the serbia conflict.
[QUOTE=Robert!;19545985]I want to see something new. Like, there is the recent Sri Lanka Conflict, China independence, Falkland wars and the serbia conflict.[/QUOTE]
Exactly exactly exactly! Something new and [I]risque[/I]. Something nobody's played a version of 10000 times.
[QUOTE=MBGrimm;19501557]They aren't giving the smaller developers a fucking chance by releasing games once a year, for gods sake Activision slow down.[/QUOTE]
Money. Most people like it. In the free market, you're gonna have to keep up, or get out.
[QUOTE=TurbisV2;19498998]I'm not spending more money on CoD games.[/QUOTE]
This.
I personally Believe everone expects way to much ouuta a game IW did a beautiful job on MW2 and WaW was pretty damm good to and this Vietnam game should be great sense its a new idea but dont blame the company for making a new game for u to go buy and it not having excatly ever fucking thing u want in it apericate it and make the best of it all it does is give u headachs
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.