Call of Duty: World at War - The giant, CoD W@W Zombies !

[Evlyti]

http://kotaku.com/389162/call-of-dut...ready-playable

Its being released on PC/PS2/PS3/360/Wii/DS

I hope this is the last CoD game in the franchise that they work on, Infinity Ward really should be the only company developing Call of Duty

[SS316SRV]

Originally Posted by deccyj

As long as they remove racist clan names on the online tags e.g 'KKK'...then I'm not too bothered.

The racist language that I hear from people with microphones pisses me off

Turn your mic off.

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by SS316SRV

Turn your mic off.

that doesn't keep you from being exposed to innapropriate clan tags.

[SS316SRV]

Originally Posted by davin_g

i am extremely happy they are going back to ww2...

WWII games are tough because they are really not that relevant to younger generations. The weaponry is dated (even though the M14 is still used by the US military). All of those other modern warfare games are based more on strategy and less on run and gun. You talked about how great the WWII story lines are but how bad the multiplayer is on COD4. Straighten that out. Did you like the COD4's story? If you don't like all the special perks and kits in the multiplayer, go play hardcore where three frags (even though the modern infantry man carries that many if not more) and juggernaut (I hate it), do not matter. The game is not life real life. If the game was it would be the worst game ever. The first time you die it deletes your account and stops working in you machine because there is no coming back when you die.

[SS316SRV]

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

that doesn't keep you from being exposed to innapropriate clan tags.

I agree. Aren't there clan tag filters on the PS3?

[Proteus]

Originally Posted by SS316SRV

I agree. Aren't there clan tag filters on the PS3?

No. But, there is a Terms of Use that prohibits such things with the threat of terminating access to the PSN.

The real problem here is enforcement. No one seems to be policing this stuff at all. Wouldn't take long either... just hit 'search: *insert lame name here*' on the server and ban all of them.

Trust me. One round of perma bans from PSN would put an end to all the stupidity really fast. In fact, instantly.

I say they should do it.

They should put in a few mic 'marshals' too that just play undercover and if someone violates the ToS in that bad of a way (the 12yr old example concerning the n'word comes to mind) then perma ban!

It would take less than a day to put an end to all of this nonsense. Seriously.

Just requires some time and enforcement.

[dereksworl]

Originally Posted by Proteus

No. But, there is a Terms of Use that prohibits such things with the threat of terminating access to the PSN.

The real problem here is enforcement. No one seems to be policing this stuff at all. Wouldn't take long either... just hit 'search: *insert lame name here*' on the server and ban all of them.

Trust me. One round of perma bans from PSN would put an end to all the stupidity really fast. In fact, instantly.

I say they should do it.

They should put in a few mic 'marshals' too that just play undercover and if someone violates the ToS in that bad of a way (the 12yr old example concerning the n'word comes to mind) then perma ban!

It would take less than a day to put an end to all of this nonsense. Seriously.

Just requires some time and enforcement.

i agree with you on the name bans. the racist ones should be banned, but mic marshals, eh..............do wanna push it. thats gonna take money. we wanna keep PSN free.

[Shin-Ra]

http://www.us.playstation.com/Support/PS3#

PLAYSTATION®Network File a Complaint Form (link at the bottom)

You can complain about a PSN member using foul/racist language there. It doesn't need repeating here.

[davin_g]

it isn't about ultra-realism or anything like that...i play cod4 and my clan very very rarely loses a match...ever. i just hate being penalized for killing someone and then having marterdom blow me up. or having to deal with people having juggernaut and you get the drop on them and they still turn and kill you..or take a whole clip in the chest only to blast you with one shot from a shotgun. the thing i hate the most is a mp5 that you can snipe with or put steady aim on with stopping power and mow people down with out ever bringing it up to your eye.

i have plenty of other modern games i play...i love modern warefare...i just love the WW2 theatre better. the weapons are amazing...the feel the way they fire...the skills it took to aim them...and the stories are soo much richer than a terrorist hunt. fact is there is what three real franchises that cover ww2....cod, bai, and moh. you have probably a dozen or more covering modern warefare....let me have my ww2 and get off my franchise. if they want a dumbed down shooter let them play halo or battlefield...it would be like taking socom and turning it into a fps futuristic sci-fi laser fest set in outer space....they don't want that....i don't want cod modern. Cod had a huge following before..and would have still had a great following without this last game.....did it sell alot more games....sure.....did it sell out....sure it did. it made a niche game that took great skill and balanced weaponry and made it so a 10 year old gamer, a first time gamer, and a seasoned vet are all level because it dumbed down the gameplay mechanics. just give me back the franchise i loved...i would definately play a modern warefare game from infinity ward....just name it something else and make sure Activision is still giving us COD.

[Canada]

WWII has been done to death. Either keep it in the modern era, of if not they could make a really historic Call of Duty. Around the era Bravehart took place in. Need to develop new sword mechanics though it would bring a whole new game play element also, and very different strategy element to the table.

[warhawk21114]

I for one am interested in COD 5 as it contains something rare for a WW II game, THE Pacific War. We get Europe done to death, give it a chance. We get some new scenery this time!

[TheFutureIsBlu]

Originally Posted by stockstar1138

im just not excited about this going back to the WWII theme.

Out of all the awesome games coming out in the next 18 months, I think Im going to have to pass on COD 5.

+1, I'm not excited for them to be going back to WWII

[hardcore_canadian]

Originally Posted by Canada

WWII has been done to death. Either keep it in the modern era, of if not they could make a really historic Call of Duty. Around the era Bravehart took place in. Need to develop new sword mechanics though it would bring a whole new game play element also, and very different strategy element to the table.

....What? Elaborate Please... Now I'm Intrigued

[SS316SRV]

Originally Posted by Canada

WWII has been done to death. Either keep it in the modern era, of if not they could make a really historic Call of Duty. Around the era Bravehart took place in. Need to develop new sword mechanics though it would bring a whole new game play element also, and very different strategy element to the table.

I have in another COD5 thread said that they should call it COD5: Dark Warfare. With bow and arrows with Acogs for sniping. They could use a broad sword for the melee. The slingshot would be used for close to medium range fighting, but you have to put a red dot on it to make it more accurate.

[Shin-Ra]

Stay on topic now please.

[bilbravo]

Offtopic: How about COD: Civil War? With the ability to change history? I've never seen a CW FPS, maybe it would be lame with the muzzleloaders... but didn't they have repeating rifles first during the CW?

Ontopic: I don't mind the WW2 stuff so much, and as others have said the Pacific front will be a change of pace. I do hope the game expands on COD4's gameplay, which I thought was MUCH better than COD3... but maybe that's simply because it was modern warfare and not ww2?

[stockstar1138]

Originally Posted by bilbravo

Offtopic: How about COD: Civil War? With the ability to change history? I've never seen a CW FPS, maybe it would be lame with the muzzleloaders... but didn't they have repeating rifles first during the CW?

Ontopic: I don't mind the WW2 stuff so much, and as others have said the Pacific front will be a change of pace. I do hope the game expands on COD4's gameplay, which I thought was MUCH better than COD3... but maybe that's simply because it was modern warfare and not ww2?

History Channel made a civil war game.

[bilbravo]

Was the History channel game FPS? If so, I'm all over it.

[kingofgrills]

I think what's most troubling about COD 5 is the fact that Treyarch is developing the game and not Infinity Ward. Having Treyarch develop the game means the new one will be closer on par with COD3 than COD4, and that's a big step backward for the series.

Activision needs to learn that quality instead of quantity would be better for them in the long run. They already ran the Tony Hawk series into the ground by demanding an annual release since the first game in '99. This past year SKATE was released (by EA ironically), and it proceeded to sell twice as many copies as the last Hawk game. The Tony Hawk franchise is taking a year off while Neversoft focuses on running Guitar Hero into the ground. Activision should take a page from their own book and give COD a year off so Infinity Ward can remain the sole developer. To tide things over for the extra year, they can release an additional map pack or two as well as a bonus mission. COD4 still has heavy online traffic and sales that don't need to be derailed by an upcoming inferior game.

[Bageara]

Premiere trailer for COD5 World at War

http://www.psu.com/Premiere-trailer-...0004037-p0.php