CoD5's Treyarch: overconfident wannabe's?

[Vampirolatino1]

Wow, that mode sounds pretty fun! Can you do that in coop as well?

YES!!! I think is 4 players limit? Go see the video is very informative. [yes]

I hope for the best about this game. [thumbup] zombie Nazi's FTW!!!!

[Raptor156]

YES!!! I think is 4 players limit? Go see the video is very informative. [yes]

I hope for the best about this game. [thumbup] zombie Nazi's FTW!!!!

Link?

[epking]

No. I'm talking about the game's developers possibly being overconfident wannabe's.

I think COD World at War will be awesome, but maybe not as good as Gears2 and maybe resistance. Even still, it's should be a 5star shooter with coop, awesome multiplayer and a fun campaign with lots of cool bonus features (nazi zombie mode anyone?)

I think it's become the cool thing to slag off Treyarch because their sequels aren't quite as good as IW's. I think that probably has a lot to do with Treyarch's combative attitude your picking up on. I know IW have publically hinted that they weren't that thrilled with COD3, and then guess what? everyone jumps on the bandwagon[rolleyes]

I thought COD3 was an extremely good shooter. All indications COD World at War does actually deliver. It may not be as good as COD4, but that's a high bar to reach, especially since they had the advantage of being first to market, and Treyarchs offerings have sequel status and lack the huge suprise and buzz factor. All that said, I think Treyarch kind of get a bum rap to tell you the truth. They've made some pretty good games, and they have to overcome the cash in sequel accusation. If anything, they've done better than most companies who take over a such a high profile franchise for a sequel. Consider this, COD3 was more of the same with few innovations (i think that's what turned people off a bit, even still, imo, it was a very fun, well made shooter) now, consider this COD sequel. It seems like they've gone out of their way to innovate and add new features. 4 person co op for starters, add to that vehicles in multiplayer, cool perks, higher leveling, zombie survival mode, flame throwers, dogs of war... anyways, it seems like they've put in a lot of effort to make it a unique experience. Also, it's impressive they've used Hollywood talent, and seem to be turning out a quality story with a dark tone. Anyways, I'm a believer. I think they will deliver a great FPS experience worthy of the COD name. Further, I thought COD3 was great, but I think this one will be significantly better by comparison. I doubt it will have the impact and buzz factor of COD4 or Gears2, but that is basically asking the impossible.


btw, I have an extra copy of COD3 (free when i bought COD4) so if anyone wants it, send me a PM with your addy. (North America only please)

[Vampirolatino1]

Link?

sure, here!: http://www.gametrailers.com/gametrailerstv.php

[twonha]

I think it's become the cool thing to slag off Treyarch because their sequels aren't quite as good as IW's. I think that probably has a lot to do with Treyarch's combative attitude your picking up on. I know IW have publically hinted that they weren't that thrilled with COD3, and then guess what? everyone jumps on the bandwagon[rolleyes]

I don't think I've ever seen anyone slag off Treyarch. Sure, their games have never gotten much attention, but a lot of people just ignored them because of lower review ratings. I sure do know that I haven't slagged them off - except for now, when Treyarch (or just this Noah fellow, I don't know) has crossed my boundary of how much of an ******* a developer is allowed to be in public.

Also, if you'll make an exception, I'll gladly take CoD3 off your hands.

[Lucius86]

I will eat my hat if its better than any one of the big 3 this xmas (FallOut 3, Gears 2, Resistance 2).

Going back to WW2 is NOT what I wanted.

[sionyboy]

It'll sell a shitload with the Call of Duty name attached, CoD4 was a massive success, more than most people anticipated I would think. Still, I think they've held off calling this CoD5 so that when Infinity Ward resume next Christmas people will see it as the 'proper' sequel to CoD4.

Still, at the end of the day Treyarch are proud/confident of their work and no-one can begrudge them that. Unless of course people want developers to start giving interviews like; "Well we had a tough act to follow after CoD4, and to be honest I don't think we really did it justice. We had high hopes for our project but sadly we fell a bit short. Still, Call of Duty and all that....buy our game!"

That would be pretty awesome actually.

[.OneLove.]

Treyarch's COD's don't hold a candle to infinitys COD's, i've found them to be utter dog shite.

I've loved COD (and expansion) since the first and the original still remains one of my all time fave games as do no 2 and of 4 the rest is simply garbage.

[epking]

after reading some multiplayer previews over at IGN, it appears this game is shaping up really nicely. the author even said World at War multiplayer is a "deeper richer experience than COD4." That's quite a statement.

In summary, World at War builds on the top-notch multiplayer delivered in last year's Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. This is a deeper, richer multiplayer experience

One thing i forgot about in my previous post about new features is the squad mechanic in multiplayer. This is an absolutely huge improvement, imo. Squad gameplay and spawning off the squad leader add a huge amount to the teamwork and strategy in multiplayer. Remember BF2 was the first to really implement this? The squad mechanic is what set BF2 above all team based shooters imo.

Playing through the maps and modes made it clear that Treyarch has some good ideas at work here. The large-scale of many of the vehicle maps is a nice change of pace from the tight nature of many Modern Warfare maps, but at the same time if you want brutal infantry combat it's here as well, too. The perk and level systems will encourage long-term play, as you can unlock plenty of fun new toys. The weapons feel oh-so-right, and it's awesome to watch the flamethrower in action. And this was just about head-to-head multiplayer; keep in mind that there's co-op gameplay as well. Put it all together, and it's safe to say that the multiplayer suite may surprise people who aren't expecting much out of World at War.

this game is coming in slightly under the radar. If I were Activision, I would have held this game untill after the Xmas rush, because it could get lost in the Gears2 hype. If they released in late January when all of the Gears2 hype dies down, and people are looking for something different in multiplayer, COD could really hit the market harder imo. January is also the time 100s of thousands of new X360 and PS3 owners are looking for new games for thier system.

[Raptor156]

I honestly think I might buy CoD5 primarily for the Nazi Zombie mode... I love wave after wave survival type gameplay... It adds so much replayability. Hell, I STILL play Crimsonland on PC in survival mode trying to beat my best time.