If the next COD was World at War 2 would you be happy?

I agree with the comments regarding dedicated servers and lag compensation. They really need to use the former and get rid of the latter. Sadly, I learned some time ago that to get rid of lag compensation, you'd have to build an entirely new, in-game engine
since that's where it comes from and that is something they don't seem to want to do since they can save money by keeping and constantly improving the current/old engine (which is 10+ years old BTW).

As far as the setting is concerned, I'd be more worried about the movement. CoD:AW introduced a whole new dynamic that drastically changes how CoD games can be played. To introduce something like that only to revert back to the old way of doing things in
the next game because of the WWII setting seems a bit counter-productive to me since it strengthens the whole "more of the same" argument.

 

lag compensation is not in the engine.. its a side 'module' of the big beast

Anyway - give me vietnam already with a cracking soundtrack and beautiful scenery, underground tunnels and everything, or the pacific side of WW2. Would rather vietnam though so if you play as the american's you would actually lose!

 

[quote user="MajicB"]WaW was shovelware?[/quote]

MajicB, no WaW was not just shovel-ware. All CoD from pretty much MW2 on was shovel-ware. The last innovation in CoD was between CoD3 and MW (CoD4). It has been standard Control/V from that time onward.

 

I quit playing Cookie Cutter of Duty after MW3. I actually did buy Ghosts... but in my own defense (lol) B4 was sold out at the time, I had just gotten my X1 and there really wasn't anything else in the store besides that. It was better than going home with
a console and no games.

You can't tell me they don't have the funds to update the aforementioned 10 year old engine and actually build a decent game. They're either too busy raking that $ in or just don't want to take the time, or spend some of that $, to do it.

After Ghosts, I vowed to not buy another CoD until they actually took the time to make a new game with minimal reaching into the recycle bin. At minimum (for me) that means new net code and nothing short of that. I rented AW for the campaign only and never
touched the MP. Finished the SP... sent it back.

Whether I even bother renting the next one remains to be seen, but one thing is certain. It makes zero difference to me if they do another WWII/WaW or anything else along those lines. Until they update the online, I'm not interested.

 

@geek , I hope they do revert back .

Leaping around like a kangaroo should stay in Halo , not Cod .

@Kause , whats wrong with sticking with a proven popular formula , millions of people enjoy the anual cod games .

I am not bothered about servers or lag comp , as I am not very good anyway.

I started quickscoping last week , and the game is a lot more fun for me now , so I hope they keep that in .

I am not bothered about the timeframe , but I would like some claymores for camping .

 

Stay in Halo? It's never been in Halo until H5...

 

Halo type futuristic games.

Mixing Halo ,Titanfall and Cod is not a Cod game ....imo ...

 

I agree with IBakez, lag comp isn't in the engine, dedicated servers won't get rid of lag, but it should make the same amount of lag for everyone. Lag comp then makes it uneven again by giving different amounts for different people, a good player can adjust
them selves, but you can adjust if there is something in the way.

COD has different developers and has been going back and forth in time scale for years, and no one has been bothered, going back to not having exo suits won't be a problem, COD players know its a Sh thing and if they liked it will be happy to wait.

I will be interesting how treyarch shows off at the preview and what they announce, I am having big hopes for treyarch but the purchase is by no means close it will take a far bit to make it so, but I am watching with interest.

 

Not gonna happen the next cod will be black ops 3..no point in going back to the ww era. dont have to believe me once trey makes there next game information public they have no reason to go backwards in a series when the last 2 games where in the future
now black ops3 main attrection is zombies so cant wait

 

I would like them to do WaW2 but I agree Phychotic.

I just did some reading on this and didn't quite realize Black Ops II was so hugely successful - it makes ZERO sense for them to skip a Black Ops sequel for WaW2 - this will turn out to be a false rumor.

Eventually someone will have the balls to do it, maybe Dice with BF6, who knows

 

Every COD needs the brutality of WAW. Cod AW was made for toddlers

 

I wouldn't mind BO3, if they fixed the spawns, netcode, lag, put it on dedicated servers, and wasn't to far in the future, etc etc.

I am not 100% sure they will include zombies either, since the last cut scene wrapped up the series.

 

If they did make a WaW 2 then they better not goof it, get rid of all those crappy perks and bring back set classes, also bring back custom public lobbies like cod 2.

 

Treyarchs privaye match setup was always better than the other developers as was their stats on the game, so I have no worries there.

However I don't like the set classes, and i like the black ops 2 class system although I didn't like the streak system, or how it was separate from the perk points.

 

yes I would love to see a WW2 COD but this time it needs to have options like you can fight for the allies (America, France, Brittan) or axis (Germany,Italy,Japan) I am so sick of ww2 games that only let you pick the american side to fight for. Maybe we
want to be evil and play the bad guys.