Rumor: Call of Duty 5 to be set during World War II
by Griffin McElroy 
{ Dec 8th 2007 at 2:00PM }
Treyarch, the development team behind Spider-Man 3 and Call of Duty 3, recently put up a job listing for a Call of Duty level designer, presumably for the fifth game in the series (which Treyarch is reportedly working on). However, a bit of text in the listing may reveal the direction which Treyarch is taking Call of Duty 5 -- and from the looks of things, that direction is backwards.
The listing says that applicants would be well-served by being "a fan of World War II shooters," causing some to believe that the game will take place during the WWII era. We've seen less logical rumors come through the mill, but we still can't help but scoff at this gossip. Who would want to play a game based on WWII? What's a war game without AC-130 gunships and guided anti-tank missiles? We'll tell you - it's boring. We'll take futuristic weaponry over rich cultural heritage any day of the week.
[Via Voodoo Extreme]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
brad @ Jan 24th 2008 12:49AM
can they plz make a game with aus in it coz i have never played a game with aus soliders in it
Nick Spacek @ Jan 26th 2008 11:37AM
Have there been any COD style medieval games? I think that would be cool (someone mentioned it above too).
Gotta say, I didn't play any other COD but I sure did like 4. If you guys are so concerned you should email them too or something! :)
Oreo @ Jan 26th 2008 10:33PM
I liked CoD3, well at least the online play.
Geo @ Jan 28th 2008 2:55AM
COD 1 for Xbox was appauling, poor gameplay, too sticky, enemies took years to die and it seemed as though you were about 4 feet tall and couldn't jump.
COD 2 wasn't much better on the Xbox, on the 360 it was only slightly better.
COD 3 - now I just don't understand the who har about this, this is the title that revolutionised WWII games and is still in my eyes the best WWII shooter I have played. The gameplay is 2nd to none compared to more recent Medal of honour airbourne and brothers in arms. The online play is probably the best and most entertaining I have played.
COD4 - One of the best single player games I have played, awsome gameplay and realism, good story, good missions, but it seems as though you pay for that with these types of games getting shorter and shorter. The online play however is poor, when compared to COD3. COD3 is just more fun, simple as that.
However, it is the COD3 online play that saves that title, but it is still absolutely awsome. COD4 is boring online and is so repetative, you just end up camping somewhere and sniping, there's no foolhardy action that makes online play fun.
So, if COD5 has the single player and graphics of COD4 and the online gameplay of COD3, we are in for a treat.
weedman420 @ Feb 4th 2008 9:18PM
you know what ur a smart person cod4 online is brutal horible i put in 30 hours and then got really bored however i put in over 100 hours into cod3 and i can still play that game
and i much prefer the ww2 or even 1 for this sake settting
how ever they should make it baout fighting the japanese there has been very few games about but the ones that where made where amazing yes it wuld be a bit harder cuz u have to live up to the other big games about it but stick to waht ur games are supose to be about world war games not this stupid american game that americans are only so fond about because they get to blow i guys head off who is wearing a turban
Penno @ Feb 1st 2008 12:27PM
how can they consider making ww2 bullshitt again after releasing modern warfare. cod4 is the most perfect game i have ever played, its technically brilliant, if youve played cod3 then tried cod4,you will understand what i mean. PS, i wondered why cod3 sucked ass, i never realised it was made by someone else. if they make the next game instead of IW iwill not b buyin it as id rather chop of my penis and eat it. WHY TAKE A STEP FORWARD WITH MODERN WARFARE THEN 2 STEPS BACK WITH TREYARCH AND COD5 ? WANKERS!
raychandler @ Feb 2nd 2008 9:03PM
This is alarming. Cod is taking backwards. cod4 is so awesome that the next installment would pale in comparison. Treyarch sucks big time. I am very disappointed.
Kyle @ Feb 3rd 2008 3:20PM
i really prefer the WWII setting to be honest.
Although i'm absolutely sick and tired of the same campaigns OVER AND OVER! ok after the craze of the saving private ryan scene...everyone wanted to storm the beaches eh...but enough is enough
would it really be so insulting to have the choice to play a German campaign???
Hanabi @ Feb 6th 2008 7:37PM
CoD1 - Great.
CoD2 - Great.
CoD3 - Great.
CoD4 - Bleh, boring.
WW2
Jason Nicorvo @ Feb 8th 2008 3:19PM
yeah there are no wwi shooters. But how 'bout french and indian war cod....oregon meets cod...what a great idea! no tanks here just hatchets and medicine pouches!
karatebody @ Feb 13th 2008 11:37PM
What about a Predator fps game, you could fight aliens, space marines,(or as space marines) even other predators in civil wars on a limitless number of planets. What better way to expand on that storyline since the movie thing isn't cutting it. Somebody needs to hire ME.
curtis klapp @ Feb 14th 2008 6:58PM
Complaints about a WWII shooter sound childish. COD 5 set in the pacific would be great. It can have all the action COD4 has and more...flamethrowers! Don't worry they also used all kinds of heavy calliber weapons too. IF you want laser and neutron guns then you've always got Halo for that.
tsaweeos @ Feb 17th 2008 9:22PM
Another game based on ww2? I'm fine with that. I loved playing CoD2. It was the first call of duty game I played and it was ORGASMIC! Overcoming insurmountable odds in a realistic environment. I felt like I was actually there... But I hated CoD3. Seriously, what was that all about?
ps. Who is this Treyarch character and why does everyone hate him?
tsaweeos @ Feb 17th 2008 9:25PM
I'd also like to add that CoD4's campaign was dissapointing. It was realistic yeah, but the event's didnt actually happen. This was why I loved playing through CoD2 because it was pretty much the real thing. thats why I said "I felt like I was actualls there."
But I think we can all agree that the multiplayer is amazing.
Hefelshmef @ Feb 18th 2008 11:47AM
I cannot see what was wrong with COD3. Try & name one bad thing about the multiplayer mode?? and dont just say "it sucks" - "not as good as cod2" theyre not reasons. List some reasons e.g. "always laggy" (just an example - wasnt really always laggy". COD3 was the first ever game i played on XBOX 360 and it was soooo fun!!! There were some amazing maps, vehicles and weapons etc. The game modes were good, and you could revive people by being a medic (such a genius idea). just hearing a nazi saying "medic" whilst dieing made me so happy. As for COD4, well OK at first then gets boring after your first prestige, kill cam is the WORST IDEA EVER in modern history and there are no decent size maps (Big Maps) Overgrown is the biggest yet it is still quite small. I think COD5 should be set in the Cold War where the Allies actually declared war on the Soviets and the battles take place in places like...
- Berlin
- Moscow
- Ukraine
- S.Korea/N.Korea Border
- Yugoslavia
etc. There should be NO KILLCAM, NO HELI'S, NO FLIPPIN AIRSTRIKES, NO UAV'S, and some decent sized maps that are like 1-2 km2, like in a forest in Russia somewhere or the Berlin wall. In all CODS, people just run around like headless chickens just tryin to get kills, but the new one should be more team based hence TEAM deathmatch. You should be able to have little groups of 4 who should stick together and infiltrate the destination. ALSO increase the capacity of a game to like 28-32 poeple. Then it would be more of a war. ALSO get rid of ranks and unlockable guns, it ruins games like COD, HALO etc. People dont care about each other, they only care about themselves and their rank. GET RID OF PERKS, they do my head in, if you breathe longer with 1 gun, who sais you cant breathe longer with anohter gun etc. ITS CRAZY. If you get shot in the chest area with a sniper you should die!! and not live to take another shot in the FOOT THAT KILLS YOU!!!! Instead of a "first to 50 kills wins" mode, it should be like Star Wars: Battlefield where you have like 150 men and the first team to run out loses. Look at the time would ya, gotta dash, hope you like my comment. thankyou for reading.
littlefucker @ Feb 18th 2008 6:04PM
Call Of duty 5.
I think that the romours about that the CoD devolopers are taking the cod series back 2 the 2.WW era is wrong.
I think they will create a real future warfare game.
Call Of Duty 5- The Future 2050 or something
BritishBeef @ Feb 21st 2008 5:35AM
Cant see how people can complain about cod4. Yeh the missions were and the game didnt last long. But the graphics, realism and game play is brilliant. As for online play, there are not many faults and dont forget the game hasnt really been out for that long and still being updated to fix the problems. If online is getting boring for u then its coz u need to get out more and not play 24/7.
Only problem is by the time the game errors are fixed cod5 will be out and from what u guys think, guessin its gonna be shit. So will just have to wait and see. U never know the developers might realise they suck and suprise u all with a great game.
GAMER FRAK ALL GAME OWNEDDD!!!! @ Feb 27th 2008 2:15PM
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO DAM MRE WW1 OR WW2 GAME O WE WILL MAKE A WW3 GAME WITH YOU!!! WE DONT WANT IT DONT U GET IT? WE WANT MODERN LIKE COD4!!!!!
PLEASE MAKE IT MODERN!!
IT WILL B A RUBBISH SELLER AND WASTE OF EFFORT AND MONEY..
UL MAKE A LOSS!
Ambitious @ Mar 1st 2008 7:49AM
All I can say is that the only WWII game that I've ever taken a liking to is Red Orchestra. And that game doesn't even involve Americans. For once, it's good to play on both sides of guys who aren't considered "Americanized". Commies and Nazis. And that is the most realistic WWII game out there where if you get hit enough, then you drop your gun. You can set up your machine gun or rifle on things to steady it. The MG42 has a working bipod and you have to change the barrel over time to prevent overheating. There are actual bullet and projectile ballistics in that game. You have to manually do the whole bolt action thing with rifles. I could go on and on. But the fact is, that if CoD 5 is going to end up like the unrealistic and horrible WWII abominations of games, then it's truly a pity.
hightimes101 @ Mar 7th 2008 9:27AM
im sorry but WWII FPS are the best they acctually involve skill instead of being able to spray and pray all of the time. COD2 hardcore match was the best you could get cuz u acctually had to aim and be good at the game not sit there with a RPD and spraying all over the screen with a 100 rounds. if you want sci fi go to unreal tournement, and if you wanna bomb the crap out of people go to BF2 get in a plane and stay in that all day. But COD2 is the best FPS out there because it envolves skill
Mayank @ Dec 8th 2007 2:05PM
Probably won't matter. Treyarch will just mess up the flow of the CoD series just like they did with CoD 3. Even Infinity Ward recognizes that if you've heard the CoD 4 credits song. After the debacle that was CoD 3, I doubt many people will be interested in another Treyarch game.
frrs @ Dec 8th 2007 3:04PM
It's just sad that Activision wants to milk this franchise.
ToonPac @ Dec 8th 2007 3:13PM
Nooooooooooooooo! Not TreyArch again!!!
gonk @ Dec 8th 2007 3:27PM
here's activision:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/12/05
Mayank @ Dec 8th 2007 4:17PM
But wait...if Activision ran every other CoD into the ground...that means... NOOOO!!! Save Starcraft 2!!!
Lone Starr @ Dec 8th 2007 5:45PM
We're going deep and we're going hard.
dbrooks14 @ Jan 23rd 2008 12:45PM
The thing about COD4 and Infintey Ward is that they screwed it up royaly the game is awesome about 40% of the time when it works. Its been out since november, and the still haven't fixed the hit detection on the sniper rifles. I'm so glad they are switching developers IW suxs. Its an awesome series, no matter the period it covers, over the years some developers have done great, some struck out big time.
weedman420 @ Feb 4th 2008 9:10PM
first of all i dont if u noticed but read dbrooks14 message he knows what hes talkign about yeh call of duty 4 is fun but trust me after about 48 hours of game play it can get a bit boring plus call of duty was a sick game they had actual realistic sniper rifles that when u aimed at some ones head it wuld actualy give u headshots unlike cod4 where u shoot the guy in the head and dont get hed shot but u can shoot him in stomach and get them
i also think that there world war games are amazing u stuck up spoiled little prudes got to get over the fact its based on history k if u truly apreciated games u wuld know that yeh ww1 and 2 games are actualy frigin amazing
third thing is aswell that u people are just really anoying in ur modern war games with ur stupid helicopters coming in and crap like that come on i asked for a shooting game not a f**king tank war if i wanted to buy that i wuld
Sublime599 @ Feb 15th 2008 12:33PM
Dude, your retarded, messing up the flow of the CoD's was exactly what the series needed...It took the CoD name and launched it from "Good" to "Excelent"...skipping "Great" all together. Not to mention the game is arguably the best multi-player games of the year...(yes, MANY people traded Halo for CoD...just so much better). Anywho, just thought someone should say something.
Seroth @ Dec 8th 2007 2:08PM
If it's gonna be another game set in WWII, they should add zombies and giant robots into the mix. Make it an "alternate" WWII. Otherwise, I'm not interested.
But yeah, it's Treyarch, so whatever.
Jerk Face @ Dec 8th 2007 2:33PM
I'll buy it if there's giant enemy crabs.
Negativecool @ Dec 8th 2007 2:48PM
Ugh...Wolfenstein?
ill trooper @ Dec 8th 2007 4:14PM
Maybe you should look into 'Resistance: Fall of Man' if that appeals to you.
E.D. @ Dec 8th 2007 2:08PM
Yeah it's Treyarch so it'll be horrible anyway. It would be a good thing that this be a WWII game cause then they can't muck up the awesomemess that is Vietnam. God, I hope Infinity Ward makes a Vietnam CoD next.
ThornedVenom @ Dec 8th 2007 8:30PM
ZOMG, trees are too hard to model compared to rubble! Crap, where are the nazis?!! Oh shit, we're shooting tiny Chinese guys, the game is racist?!!
You catch my drift: just stick to the plan, and no shit will happen even if innovation and originality has to suffer. It's all good for marketing.
Sofun @ Dec 10th 2007 1:40PM
COD Vietnam all the way. Battlefield Vietnam was fun and the Eve of Destruction mod for Battlefield was awesome. WWII has been done to death. Lets get some Nam action! Besides the MP problems for COD4 (which hopefully will get fixed soon) Infinity Ward made a kick ass game. They could make a hell of a Nam game.
Vegeta (aka Ska Oreo) @ Dec 8th 2007 2:09PM
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ARRRGH!!! Just when I was liking the Call of Duty franchise too.
I mean I don't have a problem with WWII games, but still . CoD4 was just perfect.
ComicShaman @ Dec 8th 2007 2:15PM
Treyarch. These are the guys who had a really good foundation for a game in Spider-Man 2 (it had flaws, but there was a lot it did right) and then proceeded to get worse and worse with Ultimate Spider-Man and Spider-Man 3. Can't say I'm very optimistic about them.
Vegeta (aka Ska Oreo) @ Dec 8th 2007 4:22PM
IDK bout that. I heard Ultimate Spiderman was pretty good.
colin @ Dec 9th 2007 1:41AM
yeah, i liked ultimate spiderman
gonk @ Dec 8th 2007 2:17PM
why are they allowed to make another cod? cod3 is reviled among fans of the series and infinity ward made cod4 so awesome.
is it that infinity ward wants 2 years to make another cod, but activision needs a yearly update, so they're having another studio put out one in a year? pretty fucking lame
Obie @ Dec 8th 2007 3:03PM
Agreed. Is this what the Vivendi/Activision merger brings? Everytime Infinity ward makes a great COD game, Treyarch comes along and shits all over the franchize? Does this makes sense to anyone??
rv @ Dec 8th 2007 4:08PM
Its pretty clear activision wants a cod out every year. Thats ok with me as long as cod6 come out in 2 years by infinity ward set in modern(or future) times. Ill just pretend like cod5 never happened.
gonk @ Dec 8th 2007 4:26PM
i guess that's my plan too, rv
:(
Kwipper @ Dec 8th 2007 2:19PM
No No NO NO NO!!
Look! WE ARE SICK TO DEATH OF WORLD WAR GAMES!
I say we all should downvote this game automatically if it is released as a WWI or WWII game! Game reviewers should do it as well.
"Yes, the graphics are pretty and the control is good, but none of that matters because it's another fucking world war game. People are sick to death of these games, therefore this game gets a 1 out of 5"
Brucie B @ Dec 8th 2007 2:27PM
Not really buddy, Love War games!!!
Hate Treyarch War games!
KHCloud @ Dec 8th 2007 2:37PM
We've had a World War One game?
Negativecool @ Dec 8th 2007 2:53PM
You sound like a game reviewer that HAS to play all of the WWII games. Jesus, shut your hole and don't buy the damn game then.
My issue isn't with the time setting, I don't mind WWII games at all. It's just another common facet of the FPS genre--like Scifi shooters, etc.
No, my issue is with Treyarch. Successful companies can make gold out of shit. These guys did just the opposite with CoD3 and turned absolutely pure 100% gold bullion into diarrhea turds.
Not happy.
LaughingTarget @ Dec 8th 2007 3:16PM
Not game developers' fault that we didn't bother fighting wars that are interesting to make into shooters.
WW1 - Stand in a trench until some douche tells you to charge the machine guns and get blown away.
Korea - Freeze to death as you try and hold off a massive wave of Chinese troops with no ammo left.
Vietnam - Get ambushed in the jungle and have dirty hippies back home picket your funeral.
Grenada - By the time you land on the ground, the war is over and you go home.
Panama - Listen to loud music as you sit around some dictator's house.
Desert Storm Part 1 - Bored shitless in a hot desert while the airforce beats the crap out of Saddam.
Somalia - Only one possible level, and if you lose one soldier, you fail.
Desert Storm Part 2 - Crush a barely functional military then spend years getting nowhere as new enemies spawn all over the place all the while Vietnam hippies come out of the woodwork to insult you and picket your funeral.
WW2 was the only interesting historic war that works in a shooter. Otherwise, they'll just have to make shit up, and we don't want another derivitive sci-fi shooter either. There are just as many Doom clones as there are WW2 shooters. Maybe the FPS is just dying.
Mike-453 @ Dec 8th 2007 3:29PM
The FPS isn't dying, if the gameplay is fun and good quality, then so what if it's the same? What should be advancing in FPS is story-telling. (like bioshock, but with the great gameplay bit also)