COD is NOT going back to WWII and the next game is NOT a COD5. - Page 2

Goblin · 06-23-2008, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrSchmo

First you have contradicting information. The title says COD is NOT going back to WW2. Then you say:

Treyarch said they're not GOING BACK to WWII, they're STAYING there, since they started working on COD5 before they knew 4 was going to be future.

Makes sense to me.

MrSchmo · 06-23-2008, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xkingADROCKx

Apologies, it is kind of a misleading title, what the interview is basically saying is that, although world at war is set in WWII, that doesn't necessarily mean the COD after that will be a WWII game. The creators of the game must've realised they can make so much money off Call of Duty that they are no longer gonna just stick to the 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, etc and instead are gonna do whatever they want with it, and in a way, treat it as a franchise, instead of a series. We pretty much knew that already but at least it's official now.

Well that contradics the below response. I understood what it ment and the OP confermed it was a little misleading, I just dont want to get other people more confused.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goblin

Treyarch said they're not GOING BACK to WWII, they're STAYING there, since they started working on COD5 before they knew 4 was going to be future.

If anything Trey will keep the World at War title and IW will keep the numbering.
Eitherway we will all be calling it COD5 until IW makes there version.

xkingADROCKx · 06-23-2008, 06:31 PM

God it's confusing.
MySpaceTV Videos: AVGN chronologically confused by The Angry Video Game Nerd

Goblin · 06-23-2008, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrSchmo

If anything Trey will keep the World at War title and IW will keep the numbering.

What does this have to do with what i said?

And anyways, WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH NUMBERS? Convenience isn't trendy anymore?

MrSchmo · 06-23-2008, 06:38 PM

Nothing, thats why it was in a seperate paragraph...

Orchid · 06-23-2008, 06:54 PM

It means its not a series anymore, its more like the rainbow six games.

Mr Joey · 06-23-2008, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orchid

It means its not a series anymore, its more like the rainbow six games.

It never was a 'series'. In historical terms, CoD2 events (Invasion of Normandy) took place roughly the same time as CoD3 events (The falaise gap) which both happened around June-August '44 so it was never really a 'timeline' series.

Those two following articles are fucking terrible, really don't have a clue what their on about.

Guatemalan · 06-23-2008, 08:12 PM

All this bitching about COD5...

Let the fucking game come out, play it, then bitch if you want to.

fuck....

shorty920 · 06-23-2008, 08:22 PM

It isn't really bitching right now. Just clearing things up.

So let me get this straight. COD5 isn't the COD game beinng released this year, and no more COD games will be in WW2? I'm a bit confsued.

xkingADROCKx · 06-23-2008, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shorty920

So let me get this straight. COD5 isn't the COD game beinng released this year, and no more COD games will be in WW2? I'm a bit confsued.

From what I understand (and i'm kind of confused here too, so somebody please correct me if i'm wrong), the COD game coming out this year (world at war) will not be labeled as COD5, neither will any of it's successors. Also, the COD games will no longer stick to a specific timezone, ie, the next one takes place in WWII, but that doesn't necessarily mean the COD game after that will take place in WWII.