[UPDATE] Call of Duty 5 official title and setting revealed
- Posted June 9th, 2008 at 07:40 EDT by Mike Harradence
- 60 Comments
According to reports from Videogaming247, Call of Duty 5 will be officially titled Call of Duty: World at War and will indeed take place in the previously rumoured Pacific theatre of World War II.
News comes following the latest issue of UK publication, GamesTM, which was distributed to subscribers of the magazine earlier this morning.
Although substantial details have yet to hit the web, Activision confirmed earlier today that the game would be unveiled later this month, so expect more information to surface around that time.
“The reveal’s scheduled for mid-to-late June,” a source told Videogaming247.
Stay tuned for more information as soon as it becomes available.
UPDATE:
New details have surfaced from owners of GamesTM. See below for a full roundup.
-The game is touted as being as "gritty" as anything out there, with enemies far smarter than before, capable of using a selection of new tactics to get to you.
-Call of Duty: World at War will be released on PS3, PC, Xbox 360 and Wii.
-Co-op will be included for the first time in the series, and the multiplayer component will feature vehicles and various squad-based elements.
-A description of the opening scene in the first level is as follows: "‘The opening scene of the first level we are shown is a Japanese commander stubbing a cigarette out in the eye of a prisoner before slitting his throat - the blood splatters and dribbles down the side of the tent you are being held in. He turns towards you to deal out the same treatment but help arrives just in time. Cue a daring level-long escape.’”
Email
Comments
-
dj_sup3r1or
- 2:01am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 1
Damn they are back to the same crap, I hate WW2 games! better make a future warfare or something
-
-
ryesher
- 2:05am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 3
Hmm could be a good game, I am not too fussed about the setting its whether it plays like COD4 and had all the elements that makes COD4 a great game.
In saying that Brother In Arms is the better of the WW2 games imo due to it being more realistic. Well the PC versions were good anyway.
-
-
-
-
-
Dr_tee18
- 2:19am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 8
yo. why they do this, they should take after Tom Clancy and Ubisoft keep it present, wait until a next decade to get to the past or do like Insomniac and make it a SciFi war but I did heard its aint Infinity Ward developing it so a guess the new team suggested the past don't make another Grandpa game stick to Modern Warfare a sequel that takes place some years after the present story. fans would love it.
-
-
-
CrapFactory
- 2:33am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 11
"World war 2. How boring!" Carl
That is the gayest comment ever. Wow.
-
MephistoSoze
- 2:37am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 12
Hum, I'll probably buy this one. [Looks around.] That's right, I never bought COD4. I love WW2 weapons (I'm 19, by the way, not a "grandpa"). I personally think that the weapons of the period required more skill than the 10000000000 rounds per minute (exaggerated, of course) weaponry of today. I believe in shots that require skill, instead of pumping the other guy full of lead and hope he topples over. (Also the reason why I prefer sniper rifles.)
WWII weapons had the best mix of fire rate and skill requirement. It's faster than, say, Civil War period weapons, while still requiring more aiming ability than modern weapons.
I'm all for modern weaponry, really. But that stuff best left for real life. Modern Weapons are boring weapons. If Call of Duty went that way, they'll eventually have "Call of Duty 9: Keep Hiding -- with such great features as: weapons you never have to fire yourself, simply set them on the ground and hide somewhere safe, they will do the rest; homing missile rocket-launchers that lock on to 40 enemy troops at the same time, and goes around curves and corners as it 'seeks' its targets, while you hide somewhere safe; and tanks you never control, just deploy them and hide and wait somewhere safe as your killing spree count goes higher and higher."
Doesn't sound like fun to me. I don't mean to sound bitter. I really just don't think modern weapons belong in video games. Sci-Fi weapons are forgivable, because they're unique... especially if the minds at Insomniac came up with them. I love WW2 Games, just because I love WW2 weapons.
-
-
Emo-Mercenary
- 3:05am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 14
Co-op sounds great but.. Really. Do developers and Publishers actually stop and listen to us gamers? We don't want another WWII shooter.. Give us somthing new!
-
-
Paranoimia
- 3:41am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 16
If the game proves to be any good, I'll probably get it. After all, a good game is a good game.
But they really need to think about knocking the WW2 settings on the head now. Okay, CoD hasn't done the Pacific 'theatre' yet, but Medal of Honor has - and it did it pretty well. It doesn't really matter if you're shooting Nazi's or Japanese, the weapons are the same.
What was refreshing about CoD4 was that you used current weapons. The old weapons have been done to death, and practically every other game uses near-future or sci-fi weapons. CoD4 was so good because it was realistic and current - a fact that seems to have escaped Activision and Treyarch.
-
-
-
tadpole3159
- 3:44am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 19
cod is going back to its roots. i'm a cod fanboy and i couldnt be happier. bring on e3 lets see a trailer! wooo!!
-
Xdeth
- 4:21am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 20
I will laugh when this game flops and rightly so. I mean, they are realesing it on the Wii.... that should send up red flags to anyone. We don't want WWII. We are sick of it. Leave the dead horse alone. I don't care how gritty or gory they claim it will be. The majority of CoD fans agree I think.
-
bigbossakajack
- 4:26am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 21
vehicles for MP??!!! that sucks... vehicles are always stronger than soldiers on foot. and I like being on foot more than driving around...
-
DreamsofAnarchy
- 4:35am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 22
It's about time. I love the WW 2 setting and I hope it is better than COD 3. Not to say that I was let down with it but it kind of felt like a rush job. With MGO comming out soon I hope this game doesnt get lost in the shuffle somehow.
-
-
-
jkR87
- 4:43am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 25
Still loving the COD series and the WW2 based games, but if this is like the other COD games that Treyarch developed i will probably not even consider buying it....
The vehicles in Multiplayer games is awful, let the BF population keep that and keep it away from us plz...
An upgraded COD2 is what we need =)
-
-
Untildeath89
- 5:36am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 27
I hate WW2, because of the fact that everyone likes to go back in time when new ideas aren't needed. Little space for creativity when you tell story from ww2.
-
-
-
-
Dr_tee18
- 6:12am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 31
WW2 was last gen do'nt you people notice. non of developers are taking it up. what are the most played games now, is'nt it more modern and scfi games because they could do more things than last gen and after seeing COD3 flop when it released on the current gen consoles, maybe thats why they went to modern warfare. and in interviews Infinity Ward keep saying it was something they wanted. to do for along time. there are countless WW2 games that came out does'nt the present deserve a chance for once. i call them grandpa games I'm sure people don't wanna see another game that your grandpa already told you stories about i dont want to relive my grandpa's youth in a video game the only thing they could do is to let you choose whatever side you wanted to fight on and use new tech and put more things goin on ,on the screen to give you the real experience. but i would'nt buy it (1) i played to much WW2 games on the last gen consoles and Pc (2) if it aint Infinity Ward no go for me but maybe fans would like it. PSN ID: Drtee18.
-
GreyFox747
- 6:31am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 32
Hurray! Can't wait to get my hands back on a Kar98, I hope they use the sight for it that was in the original CoD. I was extremely rarely thwarted. aaaaah those were the days. Ghost Rifle Squad fo' life!
-
-
-
XenoSilvano
- 6:52am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 35
ahhh fück world war 2 again come the fück on! I thought they where gonna pull a WW3 on us but no, arrh the heck with it!
-
clemx2
- 6:54am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 36
what a bunch of pricks, these people have no business knowledge watsoever, the game wont sell because ww2 games are CRAP and therefore it will be another waste of time and money which could have been put into a much better title like expanding on what cod4 was. they are not getting a penny from me even if this game gets rave reveiws. I hate ww2 its so lame and old.
-
kidkotic2001
- 6:57am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 37
Man I will not get this one I dont want to go back to the past I am tires of wwII games
-
-
-
InfernoReaper
- 7:10am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 40
@richkaos: CoD5 isn't the same studio that made CoD4.
---
@ Alakratt: Infinity Ward is not making this CoD. It went back to Treyarch.
---
Changing the setting in a WWII game is still a WWII game, and there's a reason I haven't bought a Call of Duty game before CoD4.
-
-
-
-
-
DemonOfRazgriz07
- 7:52am EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 45
omg another WWII setting. enough with these! haven't they covered like every aspect of WWiI yet? i wont even be renting this one...
-
-
-
-
RagingStorm
- 12:29pm EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 49
WW2 you say?.....Yeahhhh......I think Im gonna have to go ahead and say no to this.....yeahhh, NO!
-
MotorStormman222
- 1:19pm EDT - June 9th, 2008
- 50
Sweet! Can't wait 4 this. I like WW2 games better than the modern age ones...
This will permanently ban this user and delete all associated comments. This action is irreversible, are you SURE you want to do this?!
Related Content