"Call of Duty will go back to its roots"-- Activision new resolution

If they mean the old stuff like WW2, then hell yes! Otherwise, meh.

Hopefully they don't go back to BS game design like re-spawning enemies like in CoD 2, or "hold here until an arbitrary time has lapsed" sequences.

they must have notice the rising demand in people wanting to play a more "grounded" game in advance warfare and blackops 3. The declining sales for IW was just the result of that demand...and because they tried to **** ppl over with locking COD4 out of the standard ver of the game

I replayed it recently and one thing that really made it inferior to the original 2 (besides the health regen....which 2 also had...not 1 though) was that you'd never get killed right away from getting shot. The screen would turn red or whatever and you always had a chance to get behind cover and regenerate. Took away a lot of tension and intensity away from the firefights.

Anyway, love the WW2 setting, but would much rather have a new tactical/realistic WW2 shooter like a new Hidden & Dangerous game, although I know that's not gonna happen.

Hope its ww2 or modern warfare with a few killstreaks

I want COD Vietnam or else I pass.

What console will you get it on? Must be a tough choice being a manti-core!

when will ppl get tired of this

Pretty much this lol

Have you guys played Day of Infamy by chance ?

It's made on the source engine, but it's one of the best WW2 FPS (out) at the moment.

I've been playing a lot of it lately, I really like how I've found a great WW2 FPS like this again, one that reminds me of great games like Day of Defeat, Insurgency and Red Orchestra :)

Even if they just ditched all the futuristic crap and made a decent MP again, I would buy it.

I would like a CoD2 Remaster

Anything set in the past is good with me.

I'd buy a new United Offensive.

The hell does that even mean at this point?

Gameplay-wise CoD never steered far away from its "roots" to begin with.

If they're talking about the setting, i couldn't care less which one it's gonna be this time.

It's not the important part.

Activision : *sees what battlefield did*

"uh yeah, we have this idea to go back to our roots... "

Only in our video game hobby do original ideas die of loneliness...

I'm still waiting for a developer to go beyond or shit, even incorporate a next gen idea like the nemesis system in shadow of mordor. Nope... It's more, " how many units did they push? Alot? K, let's just do that for next year." hacks.

Maybe explore Vietnam or just go back to WWII.

I hope by going back to their roots, they mean no health regen and a play style more like CoD 1 and 2.

They won't though because the series really started to sell with MW.

I don't even mind the movement and settings in the newer COD games. I hate the f*cking laser guns, there ricochet off walls, op bullshit. I could tolerate and sometimes really like the movement enhancements. It's the guns, and all the other little secondaries to kill you or slow you down that I can't stand. Crawling grenades, bio mines that stun you, cluster grenades, noob tube attachments, noob tube secondary launcher, so much dumb little shit to get a cheap kill.

Go back to pick a gun with attachments, a secondary, grenade, C4, or claymores, and some perks.

Have decent KILLSTREAKS not this dumb ass score streak stuff and have perks that can counter them but not all of them. Make people shoot shit down if they don't want to die/hide.

Preferably boots on ground limited sprint, and maybe a slide or dolphin dive. As for setting do modern, gulf war time, make up some Cold War era stuff, vietnam, Korean War, World War doesn't matter to me. I'd kinda prefer for Sledgehammer to do a modern or as far back as Vietnam.

Then let Treyarch do a World at War 2 and have a remaster World at War come with it in 2018 and I'd probably never have to get another COD again ??

Yeah... It'll be back alright. Just like how EA said they were bringing back the last Need For Speed game 'to its roots'. Gee, and look how that turned out in the end... they managed to one-up, ****-up the series once again.

But this is about Call of Duty, right? Is it possible that we will see another WW2 title again (Together with an OST similar what CoD 3 had)?

Damn, I completely forgot about Day of Infamy. Thanks for the reminder, time to go have a look :)

Supply drops killed the series so who cares.

Should they make another Ghost, no thanks

just bring back WW2 and maybe an ISIS plot era, no more Killzone meets Halo.

Eh, to say its a new resolution is kinda funny. Its not like COD takes 6 months to make. It must have been planned in house for a while now. Every FPS has gone so futuristic that going backwards would probably be beneficial. Obviously EA and DICE pulled the trigger first with BF1. There is no major WW style shooter coming out this year on consoles. Destiny 2, Ghost Recon, and Battlefront 2 are all modern/futuristic style. The question is what era are they going to tackle? Or is this another new entry bundled with a classic remaster?

EDIT: I think what is worse here is that is now 2 duds in a row from IW (Ghosts and Infinite). Ghosts felt like a step back from MW and yet Infinite was too much compared to BLOPS 3? Who knows what COD consumers even want anymore.

I like the space thing, honestly it should go full aliens.

Interesting. I still prefer the modern/post-modern settings of the current Call of Duty games, World at War was my least favourite CoD game since Modern Warfare, but I'm willing to give this one a shot.

I hope they go back to WW2. The reason COD4 was so revolutionary was they were the first to (in any meaningful way) really push away from the oversaturated WW2 FPS market that had been done to death, and they basically took the rest of the gaming market's FPS genre along for the ride. But now nobody makes those kinds of games anymore, last I played was World At War years back. The time is right to return to that genre with a fresh take that modern gaming machines can offer.

Anyhow, I find it funny they're talking about returning to their roots when the two leads at Infinity Ward that left the company to form Respawn who now make the incredible Titanfall, I mean, just seems absurd to return to their roots when those who built the franchise aren't even around.

It's going to take a lot more than a setting change to fix this skinner box trash.

Modern is "OK", but their narrative just sucks. It's like Michael Bay effect in video games. Future is just getting overdone at this point. Don't think anyone wants Titanfall of Duty.

It would be nice to see them finally start anew with a brand new engine, something much more "open" and robust, but they are just to cheap and conservative to do that.

Getting back to roots probably just means a WW2 era game, done on latest evolution of the same old engine for cost savings and familiarity.

This is the big problem.

Even EA at least makes a new engine for their yearly sports games every gen. So when they move from one gen to the next they scrap everything and start from scratch. Call of Duty just keeps on patching that old engine and making games with the same basic formula.

Really the live action cutscenes was the only way the last NFS game "went back to it's roots" at all. Other than that, it was basically Rivals with a new coat of paint (and the unfortunate aspect of "always night-time" racing as well as the idiotic always online requirement)

Hopefully 3rd time is a charm with this studio, I have a feeling if they disappoint again we will hear about them closing next year. At least so long as they stay open there is a chance we get a new Burnout game. With Criterion apparantly working on shooters going forward, Ghost games might be the only viable option unless EA just scraps doing racing games.

You always had an opportunity in old games as well, it was just that you had to look for a "health pack" to heal hourself. I'd say if you are playing Veteran on World at War you could die pretty fast - about as fast as old school games. Of course the healing meant there were some sections that were a bit easier. Even on Veteran, in World at War there were really only a few insanely tough sections - and that was mainly due to grenade spam more than anything.

I would like to see it take a page out of something like Operation Flashpoint, where you took different damage depending on where you were shot (and a headshot might instant kill you). If you got shot in the leg you could heal the wound (and might even be slowed down... i.e with a limp). Even the newer versions of that game totally got "taking damage" right. A shame other devs didn't copy that.

its funny that people want WW2 setting back when they were incredibly stale in early 00s and has almost no creavity in it.

sci fi FPS has always been best kind of em. and still are.

I got fed up with WW2 games like I got fed up with modern and futuristic shooters. But now I actually would love to see them do another WW2 shooter been too long

the futurstic sci fi shooters has always been varied and very different to each other.

you have Doom, Quake, Deus Ex, System shock, Half life etc. they are all sci fi futerstic while they are very different to each other. cant say same about WW2 shooters. COD and MOH were Exact same game.

I'm pretty sure they've used that Buzzword at least twice after Black Ops 2.

Same can be said for WW2 games

Red Orchestra and Day of Defeat for example are totally different games and gameplay experiences.

Well at least the game engine hasn't changed for about 15 years so that will be one thing that will never change.

@ghosts4ever: Sci Fi done right is good, sadly CoD hasn't done sci fi right. Blops3 was ungodly horrible in the campaign, easily the worst of the series. AW had some potential but it turned into a Micheal Bay movie pretty quickly. Plus it had horrible gameplay online with even worse map designs.

Everybody I know is excited for a return to an older setting, feet on the ground Cod, I'm not because I know the outdated engine and horrible netcode will ruin any chance it has before it even comes out. Also what was more favorably wanted, CoD:IW or COD4 remaster? Yes the remaster, people are sick to death of the future bs in these games.

@Metallic_Blade: what? That need for speed game was really good. I had fun playing that.

they are MP games. not counting them.

COD has never moved from its roots in over 13 years, thats the problem, its just stayed there and piled DLC and unlocks ontop of it :P

Finally COD is on a decline ... Can't wait for the day each installation garners 2-3 mil sold copies tops.

Of course your not..that would defeat your own logic.

They really should give the Korean War a shot. Lots of cool immediate post-WWII tech to play with.

That or make it about the sink-Japanese war, just to rustle some hardcore jimmies

The WW2 setting was overdone back then and they needed to take a break from it, there is no doubt about that, but the break has lasted too long. Currently it is now the futuristic setting that is overdone and definitely needs a break. It has now been almost a decade since Call of Duty has been in a WW2 setting and that was on last gen hardware, so finally returning to this setting a decade later on new generation hardware is now a breath of fresh air after having nothing but futuristic games in recent years.

I think the ideal solution would be to stop doing the same setting every single year until people become sick of it before finally changing up the setting. Instead, they should alternate between settings every year to prevent any one setting from becoming overdone and so fans of each setting won't have to wait a decade before they get another game in their preferred setting. The Call of Duty games have three different developers that alternate each year, so why not task each of the 3 developers with a different setting to work on? One developer can work on futuristic Call of Duty games, one can work on modern setting Call of Duty games, and one can work on Call of Duty games with historical settings; so that we never get the same setting two years in a row and none of the fans will feel deprived since they will get a game in their preferred setting every 3 years.

@W1NGMAN-: lol COD is always on a decline until the next Treyarch COD comes out ?.

You didn't always though, as sometimes you'd go from full health to being dead in an instant. Something that didn't happen in WaW. (talking about being shot...not grenades and btw.. I played the old ones on the hardest difficulty recently and didn't see any health packs at all)

And yea, the grenade spam on veteran in WaW was just....

As far as what got so 'stale' ...it was the linear, heavily scripted, over the top hollywood style....not the setting.

Like I said before, I'd love a SP focused WW2/WW1/Vietnam, ect.... more realistic & tactical shooter which actually required a little bit of thought & planning, instead of basically just mindlessly running thru a glorified shooting gallery. Not that I expect this from a mainstream/AAA franchise like CoD, of course.

More in the line with the campaigns of OFP: Cold War Crisis and Hidden & Dangerous series. Great long campaigns with excellent mission design and variety. Something you just don't see anymore in military shooters.

Battlefield 2 actually did this first on PC; it just wasn't put in the spotlight because it wasn't on consoles proper.

Call of Duty needs to go back to its roots. Then it needs Roundup applied.