CoD:Vietnam Release Date November 2010 [Archive]

Mike Nomad

01-08-2010, 05:56 AM

Call Of Duty: Vietnam Release Date - November

http://www.raidersmerciless.com/images/treylogo.png

Thursday 7-Jan-2010 3:35 PM Rumour confirmed by senior UK trade source; Game takes cue from Apocalypse Now

CVG can confirm that Activision has pencilled in a November release for the seventh Call Of Duty - which will be set in the late 1960s, during the Vietnam War.

Following this week's rumours (http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=230802), a senior UK trade source today told us that the Treyarch-developed title is scheduled to arrive a full 12 months after last year's Modern Warfare 2.

thanks to Preacher for the heads up

They added that the game would be set during the Vietnam conflict - and takes particular influence from classic movies Apocalypse Now and Platoon.

"It's going to be November again - just as with World At War and Modern Warfare 2," they told CVG.

"Activision believes that it can own Christmas 2010, just as it has in the last two years.

"Development is on course - and Treyarch have been told the game must be ready to hit shelves before the gifting season."

Activision declined to comment when contacted by CVG.

SOURCE (http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=230972)

thanks to Preacher for the heads up

DPGmaximus

01-08-2010, 06:39 AM

I wonder if there is any twitter updates on whether or not they can confirm there will indeed be dedicated server support. None the less, I have more faith in Treyarch than IW. The concept sounds cool. Vietnam would be fun to play CoD on.

Mike Nomad

01-08-2010, 06:53 AM

I wonder if there is any twitter updates on whether or not they can confirm they will indeed be dedicated server support. None the less, I have more faith in Treyarch than IW. The concept sounds cool. Vietnam would be fun to play CoD on.

Yep..... We must however wait and watch..... If Treyarch goes the IW route, then I'm completely done with Activision. Activision calls all the shots since they OWN both IW and Treyarch..

Pendragon

01-08-2010, 08:26 AM

Would be nice if they gave a mention to the guys that made the mod first...

Misnomer

01-08-2010, 10:33 AM

While I am all for supporting the modders in originality Pendragon, I don't think it is quite up to snuff on this one. While the "idea" of the mods may have been around. We know that IW and Treyarch both begin their next title as their most recent is releasing. Therefore COD: Vietnam started in development as COD:W@W was hitting the shelves. I don't think Zeroy's mod or the other one were really in development that early.

Also, considering that these mods are mostly reskins and there aren't a bunch of new features, I see it as unlikely that Treyarch is actually stealing that many ideas from them. Hopefully they will just see them as a motivation to create a great product that surpasses the mods and is more than just a reskin itself.

LoneGunman

01-08-2010, 11:27 AM

When does the 'do not buy this' campaign start then Mike? :P

Be interesting to see if they bother with a PC version this time.

bullrees

01-08-2010, 11:14 PM

Pendragon

01-09-2010, 06:30 AM

Thing is I'm not after any great new thing! I would like some new maps, weapons and a nice single player. Most importantly is not to bugger up what they already have...

The issue I had with WaW when it first cam out was it didn't do things that previous CoD's did. It was like they reinvented the wheel. Well this time I don't want them to reinvent the wheel. They fixed the wheel and now it runs just fine. It still lacks the sharpness of CoD:4, WaW some how feels sloppy. Sorry I don't have a better way of describing it, just a gut feeling. CoD:4 feels tight and CoD:5 dosn't.

So re-skin job would do just fine! Please don't break anything in your attempt to make it "super fantastic" Just give us CoD:Vietnam just like World at War but with a 70's theme.

Mike Nomad

01-09-2010, 07:46 AM

Thing is I'm not after any great new thing! I would like some new maps, weapons and a nice single player. Most importantly is not to bugger up what they already have...I'd hazard a guess that most players are. After all, they've seen what neat features WaW now has to offer. Any enhancements to the graphics, dynamics and physics the engine produces are welcome. Since the patches, WaW has become the lovely Swan once regarded as the ugly duckling.
The issue I had with WaW when it first cam out was it didn't do things that previous CoD's did. It was like they reinvented the wheel. Well this time I don't want them to reinvent the wheel. They fixed the wheel and now it runs just fine. It still lacks the sharpness of CoD:4, WaW some how feels sloppy. Sorry I don't have a better way of describing it, just a gut feeling. CoD:4 feels tight and CoD:5 dosn't.What version of WaW were/are you playing?? My experience is quite the opposite... MW was fine but WaW embarrasses MW in the graphic quality and flow. Go back and look carefully at MW - the graphic vividness and color are missing. It is as if they purposely conserved resources there to allow for other gimmickry.
So re-skin job would do just fine! Please don't break anything in your attempt to make it "super fantastic" Just give us CoD:Vietnam just like World at War but with a 70's theme.70's?? um I believe we'd be better off with the mid to late 60's theme. As for a skin job... sorry I dare say I'd tell the Treyarch Devs so exacting a desire. I do not want a re-packaged WaW - I am willing to pay for a newer, more exciting and entertaining step up in the family of Call of Duty offerings as long as they include dedicated servers as we have them now and the editor tools as we have them now. Custom Maps and Mods are a vital component of CoD. Just look at the unrest with MW2 and the numerous complaints about how boring its already become.Any deviations from the Dedicated server type and format we currently have and enjoy will finish the Call of Duty franchise.

Mr.Ray

01-10-2010, 07:27 AM

I'm gonna go out on a limb here...but cod WAW was not the success that MW2 was in the sales department.

It seriously sucked to start with. But now with the recent suck of MW2...maybe it wasn't so bad?

I really doubt that anyone related to COD games is motivated to keep their job by innovation or originality, but more by sales numbers by the duel developers. They both will use sales as the measure of their individual success

A new crap game by the people that made cod:waw that sucked so bad to start off and has only recently not sucked so bad that it is good. (In the MW2 light)

Cod is in fact doomed.

I read this, left, came back, left and then came back again to respond. Please allow me to refute some of what you state.
1> No, CodWaW was not the success $$$wise that MW2 was. That is a given but not for the bald statement that you made it to be. Activision, IMHO, pushed way harder with IW to hit the console market at the total expense of giving the PC community the hind tit to suck on. When Treyarch released WaW at least a lot more effort went into the game than into marketing to one platform or the other.

2> WaW serious sucked to start with? It had some serious issues for sure and that sucked yes, but the game didn't suck. I'm not going to go into all of the good things that came with the release. With the "Given" ability of the community (given meaning we had the TOOLS) WaW turned around quickly into a great game. MW2, as you state sucks and will forever more remain that way.

3> I can't believe the width of that paintbrush that you use to paint everyone with. I'm positive that those devs that actually do the work to make the game would string you from a high tree for saying that they aren't motivated to bring innovation and originality to their work. Their bosses may not give a damn for anything except the profit/loss margins but give the devs some credit for an honest day's work.

4> My crystal ball is old, cracked and/or at least not as sensitive as yours since you can see CoD-Vietnam being nothing more than a crap game already. Where have you been for the past year or so? Once Treyarch did two things for the community, (1 getting their finger out of their butt and 2 giving us the TOOLS) WaW took off for the stars. By far the best in the series for everything across the board. The new custom maps, those made by those who love their work are simply put, better than what the studios have ever produced. Some fantastic mods have appeared. Over all, the game is now the best since the community is involved. You say that WaW still sucks but not as bad now since MW2 sucks more. Great comparison and an equally great endorsement if I have ever heard one......

5> "CoD is in fact doomed" Perhaps, we don't know this for sure. Perhaps the studios will leave it but maybe not. For IW it is most likely over since all that they are apparently concerned with is the console market. Treyarch though was once an independent. Perhaps they will go that way again. I hold out that of the two "competing" studios Treyarch has a leg up on brains and talent.
No matter, CoD is not doomed. New releases may be soon over but the spirit will live on for some time yet with those in the community who continue to give doing what they do. Not all of us are nearly as jaded as you are about the future.

Nat_Greene

01-10-2010, 09:28 AM

I'm wondering... even if they do a fine job with the game, that is, it has everything we want. How much interest can a Vietnam War game generate? How much have they generated in the past? It's not exactly a popular war in US history nor is it one that the average gamer of today knows a lot about.

I'm a reasonably educated 40 year old whose read a good deal about the Vietnam War (among others) and still I have a hard time generating much interest in playing games related to it (BF Vietnam, or the COD 4 mod).

Some ideas that might make a Vietnam era game interesting to me:
A two pronged focus-
- 1st on the development of Special Forces; SEALS and Green Berets and in that regard use a wealth of single player stealth missions (frogmen swimming up rivers, parachuting in, prolonged jungle recon)
- 2nd on the development of the use of the helicopter in combat. It would be cool to be able to fly them in insertion/extraction and other combat support missions.

My 2 cents.

woowoo

01-11-2010, 07:52 AM

zeroy

01-11-2010, 09:12 AM

I'm wondering the same. While their is interest in a mod such as zeroy and team created I'm not sure there's enough interest to sell a whole title.

I think the opposite, i believe there is room for great storylines and great MP - providing Treyarch use all the assets at their disposal:

- Water level, with Patrol Boats driving and so on
- Helicopters: A must have for a Vietnam Game - i dont see MP getting those other than for Killstreak rewards though
- Weapon arsenal, as seen on the RGN Vietnam Mod this is easily done as the weapons are all more less there from past CODs
- Vehicles, There were a lot of vehicles used in Vietnam which we havent put in the Rgn Vietnam mod but this is something Treyarch might well be developing for SP and MP
- Tunnels: another must have geo feature which i would think can make for great SP levels and be good in MP maps.

The past Vietnam SP games have not been exactly wonderful (although Vietcong was awesome) and even less in MP, lets hope Treyarch get something worthwhile on our plates!

rudedog

01-11-2010, 09:14 AM

TBH it does not matter what setting, era or type of war it depicts.

If they pull a IW and lock down the console, forgo the dedicated servers and make this a console port with paid DLC, then we have to come to term and move on.

Then IW can blame Treyarch for ruining the franchise and come out smelling like roses.

One more thing, I'm more then happy with what the community is doing with CoDWW and CoDMW. Mods like Zeroy's and the Black Monkeys will keep the game(s) fresh while not having to rely on IW for anything. The added bonus, we won't be financing any new products from IW.

TRTL

01-11-2010, 09:29 PM

When does the 'do not buy this' campaign start then Mike? :P
You got to admit, that's funny shit right there.

CODWAW was a horrible title for the COD franchise. Most people were ranked up in the first week because of the power servers, there goes the ranking system. Instead of fixing the bugs, they would write reviews that would explain to us that it takes several months for a patch to come out. I guess that's ok if you have never played any other pc game before. The sounds were horrible. Sounded like you were running across the map in high heels.

Here is some server figures before anyone jumps me for not having facts.

According to game-monitor.com. These are how many servers are online for all the COD games.

COD = 229
CODUO = 943
COD 2 = 3,731
COD4 = 11,828
CODWAW = 941

As you can see, besides the first COD that came out 10 years ago, this is the least popular. Other than MW2, this by far was the worst COD ever made. This is not my opinion, but this is a FACT.

England4eva

01-12-2010, 03:05 AM

Hi,

Will be interesting to see how factually accurate a Vietnam based game would be, this is of course if Vietnam is the era they`re pushing for.

Games are terribly allied based, especially based around any conflict that involves American military. As Vietnam is a war that the USA would rather forget than parade it`ll be a touchy subject to make a game around. Just remember how much controversy the airport scene made world wide in MW2. Now ask if the American public is ready to play such a game?

With a sizable entertainment market in the US and the producers being US based can Treyarch deliver a game that keeps the American public happy but also provides situation accurate (although fantasy) combat and storyline that will please the rest of the world who have less emotional contact with this war.

Vietnam is still raw and not all that long ago for enough people to remember. My biggest concern would be firstly of course if Treyarch will go the IW route and secondly how "American-ised" the game will be.

Games such as "Six Days in Fallujah" felt the wrath of public opinion. A fictional airport scene in MW2 caused in world do-gooders to speak, is Vietnam all a bit too recent to tread in and could Treyarch/AV do a game around the era justice without bending to the weight of American opinion?

That said, more important issues are at hand, I think we could of originally backed Treyarch to do the PC version justice (dedicated servers, mod tools etc) until the PC community showed IW and the rest that the PC community IS willing to bend and accept match-making, no mod tools and all the rest they chucked at us. After the initial uproar, many of the nay-sayers went and bought the game. The boycott MW2 steam group image of the majority of the people playing the game they wanted to "boycott" goes to show how much backbone a large portion of the PC community have.

For now i`ll support Treyarch until I see fit not to. How about the community give them a break from the outset and try to embrace them, discuss with them and show our support. From a public and personal level i`ve seen how Treyarch has supported even a small community, something which you`d be hard pushed to see happen for even a larger community.

In the majority of times the PC community is its own worst enemy. Treyarch with CoD:WW was bashed before it was even released, people dooming it to failure. Don`t forget public boards and opinion are felt by these companies and a large public mood will be known about by them, reflect on how this might make the individuals who create the games feel and how much dedication they may show to a consumer base as hard to please as the PC one. Who would push for options/features for a community made up of ungrateful bast**ds when the easy to please console comminity praise in droves the work that Treyarch/IW do.

We might be small compared to other markets but we`re vocal, please for the sake of PC gaming and the next "cod" in the series, support Treyarch until we see reason not to. Where is the harm in doing that? I fear the headshakers have already started to surface looking for any tidbit of information that they can cast down their disapproval at.

Until we see reason not to, try a different approach for once and get behind Treyarch maybe?

Mike Nomad

01-12-2010, 05:25 AM

When does the 'do not buy this' campaign start then Mike? :P

Be interesting to see if they bother with a PC version this time.

I'm sorry, you lost me. What are you trying to say?

Up to this point, Treyarch hasn't given any indication of snubbing the PC market. In fact, from the very beginning, Treyarch has indeed bent over backwards to work out the kinks, trubs and problems with us. I'd rather be, as I am, supporting Treyarch. ;)

Mike Nomad

01-12-2010, 06:01 AM

Hi, ......<snip>

In the majority of times the PC community is its own worst enemy. Treyarch with CoD:WW was bashed before it was even released, people dooming it to failure. Don`t forget public boards and opinion are felt by these companies and a large public mood will be known about by them, reflect on how this might make the individuals who create the games feel and how much dedication they may show to a consumer base as hard to please as the PC one. Who would push for options/features for a community made up of ungrateful bast**ds when the easy to please console comminity praise in droves the work that Treyarch/IW do.

We might be small compared to other markets but we`re vocal, please for the sake of PC gaming and the next "cod" in the series, support Treyarch until we see reason not to. Where is the harm in doing that? I fear the headshakers have already started to surface looking for any tidbit of information that they can cast down their disapproval at.

Until we see reason not to, try a different approach for once and get behind Treyarch maybe?

Agreed...... I too, see many putting the cart before the horse. Treyarch has earned our support. WaW is now a joy to play. We have great MoDs, Full Mods and of course, superb, ultra high quality custom maps.

Yes, Treyarch earned and deserves our support.

zeroy

01-12-2010, 06:17 AM

CODWAW = 941

Not that it makes much differences but its a known fact that neither game-monitor or gametracker are accurate for CODWAW, never has been. There are about 2200 servers atm for CODWAW and only about 10% of these are full at any given time. It is for sure not great at all.

woowoo

01-12-2010, 07:59 AM

Not that it makes much differences but its a known fact that neither game-monitor or gametracker are accurate for CODWAW, never has been. There are about 2200 servers atm for CODWAW and only about 10% of these are full at any given time. It is for sure not great at all.

I was going to say the same. With CoD2 and CoD4 game monitor automatically captured the servers. With CoD:WW you know have to register them. I haven't bothered to register any of our CoD:WW servers.

ButchCassidy

01-12-2010, 08:08 AM

I have to agree..CODWaW is a much much better game due to some very good patching by Treyarch.

I must admit that I was very disappointed with all the original flaws in CODWaW but I take my hat off to Treyarch because they stuck with it and put up with all the whineing and moaning and eventually they got what all us PC players were asking for and accordingingly kept patching until they got it just about right.
I think that in its self deserves a good measure of respect and as long as Activision don't force them to go down the IWnet route I think they will deliver a good solid game.

And TRTL whenever I run up my in game browser for the game it always brings up 2200 plus servers.
Also just as final note the Original Call of duty is not 10 years but 7.
It was released on October 29, 2003 in the USA and November 7, 2003 in Europe.

TRTL

01-12-2010, 08:41 AM

Also just as final note the Original Call of duty is not 10 years but 7.
It was released on October 29, 2003 in the USA and November 7, 2003 in Europe.
Thanks Butch! (thumbs up)

69thPaladin

01-12-2010, 06:52 PM

If Treyarch had made MW2, there would be very, very few complaints about the game. Just bitching about minor things. They made a complete game. They gave us what we wanted to have in MW2.

TRTL

01-13-2010, 03:41 PM

Agreed...... I too, see many putting the cart before the horse. Treyarch has earned our support. WaW is now a joy to play. We have great MoDs, Full Mods and of course, superb, ultra high quality custom maps.

Yes, Treyarch earned and deserves our support.

For a re-skinned COD4? Are you serious? If that is how high you are going to be setting the bar for Treyarch to make games, you should be happy for a while.

England4eva

01-13-2010, 04:58 PM

For a re-skinned COD4?

The simple fact you say this shows how little you know about CoD:WW

To say that you may aswell say COD4 was a reskinned COD2, and COD2 was a reskinned MOHAA. They`re hardly reinventing the wheel each time.

TRTL

01-13-2010, 05:08 PM

The simple fact you say this shows how little you know about CoD:WW

To say that you may aswell say COD4 was a reskinned COD2, and COD2 was a reskinned MOHAA. They`re hardly reinventing the wheel each time.

Well please correct me if I am wrong, I am sure you will.

But wasn't COD4 a new graphics engine and Treyarch used that for CODWAW?

69thPaladin

01-13-2010, 10:05 PM

Yes they used the same engine as with COD4, only they improved it. Graphics are greatly improved over COD4. They modified and improved the engine. And the sounds are much more realistic, despite all the flak they get about people not liking it. Sounds are quieter and it is the first game where sounds can be heard directionally up and down, not just horizontally.

In my opinion, it's a much more fun game than COD4 with all it's tiny little maps that feel crowded when you have 10 people playing.

Treyarch's support post-release puts IW to shame, which is perhaps the most important difference between COD4 and CODWaW.

rudedog

01-14-2010, 07:26 AM

Well please correct me if I am wrong, I am sure you will.

But wasn't COD4 a new graphics engine and Treyarch used that for CODWAW?

Treyarch did a lot of work in regards to upgrading the engine that IW used for COD4, not to mention the controversial sound engine updates.

They added a ton of physics as well.

Disclaimer: personal opinion on the following as we don't know all the facts
It seemed that IW gave Treyarch an older version and did not update them on some of the changes they made in regarding, patching. Thus Treyarch had to reinvent the wheel so to say, without any help from the IW devs.

We do know that there are some inter development in fighting by the comments Jason West said directly to me in regards to " I don't play World at War, never have and never will" with a cocky smirk on his face. But that could have been because he was miss-speaking about dedicated servers to me at the Xbox live event for MW2
/Disclaimer

England4eva

01-14-2010, 08:03 AM

I`m one of the people who for public play actually likes what they did to the sound, directional sound is brilliant. For example, play a map such as Broadcast on COD4 and you don`t know if they`re above you or below.

Play Asylum on CoD:WW and you`ll see the difference. In reality you shouldn`t beable to hear sounds as loud through a wall as you would if the wall wasn`t there. What they did with the sound was pretty spectacular and something which was well overlooked.

For competitive play the sound is awful though and a built in on/off option for non-modded servers might of been an idea.

rudedog

01-14-2010, 08:36 AM

bacon

01-14-2010, 04:41 PM

For a re-skinned COD4? Are you serious? If that is how high you are going to be setting the bar for Treyarch to make games, you should be happy for a while.

I never got and will never get the Treyarch hate and pre MW2 all things IW infatuation. WAW was and is a great game.

TRTL

01-14-2010, 06:58 PM

I honestly loved WAW. We had a top ranked server and played it all the time. We even had a innerclan zombie tournament. That was a blast. That remark I made was a inside joke to someone.

FightingScallion

01-14-2010, 09:34 PM

Will be interesting to see how factually accurate a Vietnam based game would be, this is of course if Vietnam is the era they`re pushing for.

Games are terribly allied based, especially based around any conflict that involves American military. As Vietnam is a war that the USA would rather forget than parade it`ll be a touchy subject to make a game around. Just remember how much controversy the airport scene made world wide in MW2. Now ask if the American public is ready to play such a game?

I would like to respond to this. This game is a huge opportunity to correct this sentiment. The US military has very little to be ashamed of when it comes to Vietnam. You want accurate? The accurate statements work out much differently that you seem to imply.

Just so you know:

1) Vietnam was lost diplomatically, not militarily. By Johnson, not Nixon.

2) The South Vietnamese didn't want to be ruled by the North. The people of South Vietnam still dislike and distrust the North Vietnamese. Tet supported this further.

3) Tet may have been one of the most spectacular military victories in American history. The fact that it is remembered as a failure is a disgusting failure of educators and media. Viet Cong recruiting dropped to nearly 0 after Tet.

4) After Tet, the American political classes began to force the military to focus on the irregular threat in Vietnam. That threat had evaporated, however. The US fought against a regular force using methods for fighting an irregular force. Thus, to quote Timothy Lomparis, "The US won the war it should have lost [irregular] and lost the war it should have won [regular]; North Vietnam lost the war it should have won, and won the war it should have lost."

5) Significant problems arose in the air campaign because of political influence in targeting. Rolling Thunder failed because of inadequate use of force, not because of anything dishonorable in USAF behavior.

6) The whole thing wouldn't have happened if it weren't for the Chinese taking over operations at Dien Bien Phu. They basically ran the war. Political pressure to keep us from involving the already-involved Chinese hurt military operations. Military personnel were ignored in their reports of this.

7) Who knows what would have happened if we'd tried out Operation Vulture (Nixon in favor of, Johnson against) to save the French at Dien.

I'm going to repeat...the military has very little to be ashamed of in Vietnam. Some of the things people may point to are one-off circumstances. Others fall in the category of sausage-making; you don't want to see how it's done, just enjoy the results. It was a visible war, which was the problem.

Please, for the love of all that is good and holy, learn something before you hope for "accurate" so that we can imply the frailty or lack of resolve of America. A frail nation without resolve does not create AC-47s or AC-130s. A frail nation does not create Daisy Cutters. A nation without resolve does not conduct the Linebacker operations, especially knowing the devastation they will leave on an enemy nation.

Misnomer

01-14-2010, 09:42 PM

I think they are fine. There are a few very angry people out there about Vietnam still, but I see the argument going like this....

Question: How can you make a game about a war and leave out things like Agent Orange and Mai Lai? This is clearly apologist and glorifying the military.

Answer: We make it the same way we made games that never showed Dresden or Tokyo in WW2. That never showed the Holocaust in any detail. That never showed any of the atrocities committed by either side against civilians, because it is military game. Fear not it is still Call of Duty and there will be moral questions about the conduct of war in the campaign.

If you want to see someone do something horrible to civilians, you might want to talk to IW.

England4eva

01-15-2010, 02:42 AM

I would like to respond to this. This game is a huge opportunity to correct this sentiment. The US military has very little to be ashamed of when it comes to Vietnam. You want accurate? The accurate statements work out much differently that you seem to imply.

The very fact you`ve jumped up and made such a large reply about this proves my point entirely.

I`m assuming you`re a citizen of the United States and obviously my post has hit a nerve. As I said in a round about way a game around such a subject will but a touchy subject to a select portion of the American (USA) population, you fall into this portion.

I`m not going to even start quoting how factually inaccurate games, movies, books and many others have been about so many other nations (many of them originating from the USA) and how history is rewritten in all media from the absolute truth.

All I asked was it was the game be factually accurate and not hollywood-ised. Come down off your high horse before you lambast me with your lesson in history. There are plenty of replies before you who could of taken that opportunity, but they don`t fall into a portion that took offence to my post, but then again they`re also unlikely to take offence to a game set in Vietnam, you on the other hand, will.

zeroy

01-15-2010, 05:10 AM

All I asked was it was the game be factually accurate and not hollywood-ised. Come down off your high horse before you lambast me with your lesson in history. There are plenty of replies before you who could of taken that opportunity, but they don`t fall into a portion that took offence to my post, but then again they`re also unlikely to take offence to a game set in Vietnam, you on the other hand, will.

Well this wont be any different from any other COD. There is Allies and there is Axis. Clearly we know who goes on each side. Never mind what happened politically, this is a Shooter, its not like there hasn't been any Vietnam FPS before that.

Mike Nomad

01-15-2010, 07:49 AM

........ <snip> I`m assuming you`re a citizen of the United States and obviously my post has hit a nerve. ..... <snip>

Please, for the sake of not only keeping on topic but keeping within the scope of mutual respect, Lose the biased nationalistic connotations. NOW, before it goes too far.

After all, we are only talking about a game that's yet to be released. ;)

GaSplat

01-15-2010, 11:22 AM

Apocalypse Now and Platoon were fantasy films with strong anti-war messages. Interesting art, debatable politics, and farcical accuracy. And these are the inspiration.

Better be prepared to try and enjoy the game as a game. Forget about accuracy.

TBH, an accurate FPS would kind of suck. What you want is an enjoyable gaming experience that feels kinda accurate. But true simulators are not much fun. They are more like work. Think about it.

England4eva

01-15-2010, 11:38 AM

Misnomer

01-15-2010, 11:55 AM

If you really want to get Americans upset, make a FPS Civil War game. Vietnam is a drop in the pan comparatively. Though I am with you that the history would be quite interesting (the combat less so since it was still largely musket based warfare).

I agree with GaSplat in some ways, though I would hope that they use the mostly accurate We Were Soldiers Once, And Young for the opening mission. Call of Duty has always ripped off good war movies and that would be a good one. Now if they could work in scene from Forest Gump too.... :D

rudedog

01-15-2010, 07:18 PM

Shit hits the fan.

Bad Company 2 will not have a developer console. Please start your flaming in this thread
http://www.fpsadmin.com/forum/showthread.php?t=19409

Here we go again!!!!

GaSplat

01-15-2010, 09:20 PM

After all this they`ll probably turn round and suprise us with an American Civil War game, now there are some weapons i`d like to play with in a game :D

LOL - and the guys with muskets will accuse the guys with Sharp's Repeaters of Spray and Pray. :D

OldDog

01-16-2010, 09:23 AM

Agreed GaSplat, i`m glad you can put it better than what I can.

After all this they`ll probably turn round and suprise us with an American Civil War game, now there are some weapons i`d like to play with in a game :D
Hmmm, I'd rather see a 100 Years War game ... Crecy, Poitiers, Agincourt, Rouen. The ascenency of the archer, the end of the knights in armor, the beginning of matchlocks and cannon. Then, we'd have arguments about spawn campers and reload times for longbows vs crossbows. Or, a Peninsular War game: Talavera, Badajoz, Almeida, Corunna, Salamanca, Toulouse, sieges, breaches, with a great guerrilla component ... could have maps of each of the fortresses, culminating in a great map of Waterloo. Then, we could have arguments on the relative merits of the 12-pounder vs the galloper 6-pounder, and, whether using Baker rifles is fair when opposing muskets. Come to think of it, virtually all those battles were French defeats in one way or another ... in keeping with Mike's warnings, perhaps we ought to balance with some other countries.