Well with brother in arms coming out and me all exited about it i thought i might as wel post a meaniless thread
anyway i was wondering if brothers in arms could bring back the WW2 shooters anyone else think so.

*Also to the person who keeps sending me strange meesages please note that i am 13 and STOP SENDING THEM

Bring back? There still making them, you mean GOOD ww2 shooters?

YE SURE

I'll bet on COD5 brothers in arms is too niche (WW2 tactical)

Let the WW2 games end already. Soon the titles will be "WW2 Generic FPS Version II"
Medal Of Honour and Call Of Duty have been going on scince 1999, almost 10 years. What difference has there been in those years? Addition of vehicles and thats about it. Let it go EA.

They could at least have you play as the Russians or something in one of the games. Gads, ANYTHING to stand out.

acer840:
Let the WW2 games end already. Soon the titles will be "WW2 Generic FPS Version II"
Medal Of Honour and Call Of Duty have been going on scince 1999, almost 10 years. What difference has there been in those years? Addition of vehicles and thats about it. Let it go EA.

I say we need to stop making futuristic action games... it's been going on since Halo!

But, right, ahem.
It's a series, big deal. A game is a game, and if it's a good one, does the setting even matter? Sure, it may appeal to some other people more/less, but the gameplay is what counts.

If you yourself would want to make an FPS, what settings would you pick? Of course, it'd have to be in either a historical war, modern day, or in the future.
The first 2 tend towards realistic gameplay (mostly... there are gameplay exceptions, of course, since it's a game in the first place, e.g. the circles above German heads in BiA), whereas the third option, futuristic shooters, has been milked out even more (Halo, Crysis, Timeshift, Haze, etc.).

Besides, if you look into the past, and you're looking for a setting where a first person SHOOTER can be played, there's only 3 real possibilities: WWI, WWII and the first Gulf War. The Gulf War can be considered too recent to even 'allow' irrealism, accordingly to your average developper, and WWI was just people sitting in trenches.

Of course, there are exceptions: games like Painkiller and BioShock are a few examples of that, but hardly realistic.

The WWII gaming fad had ended, but is it a bad thing that a few series continue to live on from that glorious age, when there weren't too many quick cash-ins?
Is the 'futuristic superhuman hero' type FPS not tiring anybody else right now?

The only WW2 game i wanna see more of is Company of Heroes. Relic Ftw!

Saphatorael:
Is the 'futuristic superhuman hero' type FPS not tiring anybody else right now?

I concur. Unless you can do something really cool (see the upcoming FPS They), take an extended break from sci-fi shooters.

My approach to designing a FPS, let alone any other genre of game? Steampunk. If God appeared before me with the promise of answering any question, I'd ask him why there isn't more steampunk games.

WW2 games are just about done and finished. They're scraping the bottom of the cliches and gimmicks barrel. They've added vehicles, obscure perspectives, lesser known campaigns, planes. Herein the only new thing they could do would be introduce a flamethrowing gun and oh god the people at EA just saw me right that and are now releasing "Medal of Honour : Paris Burning".

I think Modern shooters will be the next to go the way of the WW2 games, but they'll probably have a good run for a few more years depending on how far we can stretch the russian terrorist thing.

What I'd like to know is why not make more Western Shooters(as in Wild West, not western developers)? I think that would be awesome. Granted I have been watching Deadwood for two days stright, maybe that's the reason.

Saphatorael:
Besides, if you look into the past, and you're looking for a setting where a first person SHOOTER can be played, there's only 3 real possibilities: WWI, WWII and the first Gulf War. The Gulf War can be considered too recent to even 'allow' irrealism, accordingly to your average developper, and WWI was just people sitting in trenches.

Ok, I admit for FPS there is not much to look at (though you did miss the Vietnam War). But I would perfer a FPS game that would not have the tired old America Vs the Nazis. We know how it ends and who eats the apple pie.

So why can't we have more games around conflicts of today? I would really like to play a Gulf War game, or even a Cold War game that breaks out into a war (World in Conflict did this but in RTS). There are other conflicts of the past you can do or even take out of context for entertainment.

There are loads of arenas not yet properly explored by WW2 games. I think we've more or less had enough of Saving Private Ryan, Version 4.3.

We need to have some Britain in Africa, Russia in Finland, maybe some of the Spanish Civil War, and ye some Japan too. It was a world war, remember, and also was going on for 5 years before America entered.

My idea is that you get the option of being either a Private, a Commando or a General, for either side. As a private, you start off as a lowly foot soldier, scraping through battles until you are promoted and then get a team for yourself, which you have to keep alive through battles. As a Commando, you're dropped behind enemy lines and have to use stealth and other techniques to complete key objectives. As a General, you are an RTS type leader who needs to order units to strategically land in key areas, etc.

Obviously this is never going to happen, as it would require, essentially, 3 games being developed in one.

I would so play that game. A FPS and a RTS multi-player game? That'd be sweet

I think that we really need to stop reinventing the WW2 franchise. With one or two titles for every console, you've pretty much covered it. There aren't going to be any good or bad WW2 titles from here on out; they're all going to be about WW2, they're all going to look smashing, and they're all going to play like [insert FPS/RTS title here]. If you like WW2 shooters or WW2 strategy games, then you're going to like whatever WW2 shooter/strategy they come out with.

No one else is waiting to be impressed by the next Medal of Honor except people who liked Medal of Honor. :P

CoD 5 seems likely to be more popular, and indeed just plain better than Brothers in arms.

That said, I'm looking forward to To End All Wars more than either of them, purely because it's set in WW1. Nice change, you know?