Vietnam war, Korean war... anything. Just anything else.
The Vietnam War lasted 9. Fricking. Years.
Please drop world war 2
Well maybe they want a war in which the americans are the good guys?
...If it's only an American campaign, I won't buy it.
The best parts of CoD I and II were the British and Soviet bits.
Charging into Stalingrad, armed only with a clip of bullets, was memorable as fuck. And the Crusader crew portions were neat too.
But, hey, it's activision. I fully expect them to shit the bed here.
I have a friend who is a good decade younger than I and he was actually excited for this.
I tried to explain that they'd done WWII with CoD 1 - 3 and he had no idea since he was a kid when those came out.
Suddenly, this announcement made sense.
Can't someone make an online shooter but in a setting similar to Wolfenstein? Or I dunno - alternate history? Steampunk? Go Cold War between the Soviets and Mujaheddin? Alternate history Cold War where a Star Wars missile defense system has allowed the USA and USSR to openly fight without worry of getting nuked? There are so many scenarios one can go down without rehashing the same thing yet again.
C'mon, have an Australian mini campaign at least. First military to defeat all Axis forces, first to best the blitzkrieg . Plus you could do what B1 couldn't ... have an entire level were it's you running through actual trenches and tunnels with a bolt action and bayonet.
Or maybe a mini campaign of Z Special Unit in SE Asia focussing on Operations Jaywick and Rimau. Wildly successful, but a tragic end.
No-one gives a fuck about the Vietnam/Korean wars outside of 'Mumaricans. They've toyed with the idea of a 'Nam focused game at a time before, and that was the conclusion they came to after market research. Can't say I'm not glad, I'd rather have some variety with Brits and Russians, than another round of yanks wanking about.
I think non-Americans are fine playing American-focused war games- the early Medal of Honour games and Wolfestein games were you tend to only see and play as Americans were both successful. Vietnam would have been a good choice IMO, everyone around the world has some familiarity and sense of what the conflict was like.
My personal choice though would have been a Korean War game because it's a genuinely fascinating conflict- and people outside of America do give a fuck about it. The Koreans themselves most obviously, but it was also a huge coalition of other nations which for the only time in history fought combat operations under a UN flag. Unlike WW2, we're also still living with the direct consequences of that war by the fact that North Korea still exists and constantly threatens nuclear war with everyone. A COD game set in Korea would have been very timely given what's going on in the world now. I think Activision are being conservative and going for WW2 option after the flunk of their last time- if they were more ambitious they'd have tried Vietnam or Korea.
I had read many negative reviews about Call of Duty World War 2 is that the gameplay itself is like CoD of old one. No strategy, no thinking and it gets boring after a while. But, generally the Call of Duty World War 2, game took place in a more modern stage of fictional war. I know some of my friends Call of Duty World War 2 kaufen and they are probably playing right now. As they said that this PC game itself is an amazing war type game.