963 replies to this topic

[TheDR]

Video Link

Its not particularly interesting, but it is just teaser trailer

If you watch the GT Analysis video, it goes into the video in depth.

A few points from that video that seemed interesting:
Set in Vietnam
Controlling helicopters
Some sort of high altitude flight

Anyway, anyone interested in the game?

[Alias]

In typical Treyarch style, looks utterly generic and utterly boring.

[Warbz]

No.
/Thread.

[Chyros]

I'd have to try it before I can make anything out of it. Treyarch have this massive tendency to make terrible copies of IW CoD games though so I'm not exactly on the edge of my seat atm. But I'll surely give it a try at the least.

*can't imagine a very wide variety of weapons being used in a Vietnam game and as a result of this, in advance, pins all his hope on the AK-47 again and wonders if it will look shiny and sound good and have a pretty reload animation, God if I see one more lame AK-47 ripoff that looks like a turd in a sock I'm going to kill someone*

[deltaepsilon]

The Cold War/Vietnam War aspects still have me intrigued.

[Warlock]

I'm quite interested in the Vietnam War Era and I wanna see the variety of weapons and vehicles, although... I haven't really enjoyed Treyarch Call of Duty Games in the past either.

I'll give it a go before making up my mind to buy it or not

[Mbob61]

That teaser trailer looked pretty bland and gave nothing away really.
I will watch the more in-depth video in the morning.

Mike

[Kalo]

Judging from those tiny frames? no, but Treyarch has this tendency to try their own thing so who knows, maybe it will be good.

[BeefJeRKy]

I'm looking forward to the potential for the black ops missions. It could prove to be an interesting angle.

[TheDR]

It's quite interesting to see the overall hate towards the Treyarch games.

Even thought it's a Treyarch game, generally the bad eggs of the series, could it possibly be the best new CoD we are going to get ever since Infinity Ward crumbled?
Also, do people think it will sell well to the casual audience on the PC, 360 and PS3 who haven't got a clue that its made by a different Dev?

[Alias]

TheDR, on 2 May 2010, 18:58, said:

Also, do people think it will sell well to the casual audience on the PC, 360 and PS3 who haven't got a clue that its made by a different Dev?

Seemed to work for Command and Conquer...

[Pav:3d]

Yes Im interested because I really enjoyed W@W and dont have the "OMG NOT IW NOT COD" mentality. Also, flying choppers looks like fun :o

[Shirou]

Alias, on 2 May 2010, 11:06, said:

TheDR, on 2 May 2010, 18:58, said:

Also, do people think it will sell well to the casual audience on the PC, 360 and PS3 who haven't got a clue that its made by a different Dev?

Seemed to work for Command and Conquer...

I dunno how did CnC4 sell?

I'd actually like to see CoD done a bit different as the IW additions CoD2, 4 and 6 have all had the very same basic gameplay. I want something different.

[Wizard]

*Actually waits to reserve judgement until more is known*

Shocking isn't it

[Stalker]

I just can't understand all the Treyarch hate.

Sure, W@W wasn't as awesome as MW1 but it was still an excellent shooter, SP and MP.
Also this teaser doesn't show much but remember MW2's first teaser. At least this one showed something at all.

I like the concept, and I'm looking forward to it. Mostly the MP part.

[Camille]

might be interesting, though i'll reserve my judgement for when more info is released.

[Kyouko]

Yeah, Im sick of the whole Treyarch Stigma. World at War was alright in my opinion and it was one of the best CoOp I've done over LAN(Emphasize LAN). I am gounna have hopes for this game but as after this whole Activision debacle, they probaly wont be able to do much for the game.



Just as long as they have Dedi and LAN. Not the shitty multiple copys just to play over a network MW2 lan.

Edited by Iron_Golem, 03 May 2010 - 02:14.

[TheDR]

Kotaku made a news post similar to the discussion we are having in this thread.

They basically said that Treyarch might not have had control on what they could do perviously, and thus had to tweak rather than innovate. They go on to say that now IW isn't a full company anymore, Treyarch might have a bit more control on the CoD franchise, so we have the possibility of innovation from them, instead of the usual tweaking that they did in their previous CoD games.

This game might not be the same as all the other CoD games, which makes me interested in seeing what they come up with.

[Chyros]

TheDR, on 3 May 2010, 16:58, said:

Kotaku made a news post similar to the discussion we are having in this thread.

They basically said that Treyarch might not have had control on what they could do perviously, and thus had to tweak rather than innovate. They go on to say that now IW isn't a full company anymore, Treyarch might have a bit more control on the CoD franchise, so we have the possibility of innovation from them, instead of the usual tweaking that they did in their previous CoD games.

This game might not be the same as all the other CoD games, which makes me interested in seeing what they come up with.

As with anything Treyarch, they'll indubitably come up with at least some innovative ideas, but by no means it'll be a title you'd want to bet your money on beforehand. Try before you buy without a doubt. Doesn't mean it can't be fun though.

[Dr. Knickers]

I honestly cannot think of any games besides Battlefield: Vietnam set in the Vietnam War era. There must not have been any/many popular or mainstream Vietnam War games as of late. Seeing how Treyarch didn't completely screw up World at War, maybe they'll do a good job here, since this is a setting that I don't feel has been really explored by other games.

[Alias]

Vietcong.

Way better than BF:V, too.

[CJ]

Dr. Knickers, on 4 May 2010, 15:37, said:

I honestly cannot think of any games besides Battlefield: Vietnam set in the Vietnam War era. There must not have been any/many popular or mainstream Vietnam War games as of late. Seeing how Treyarch didn't completely screw up World at War, maybe they'll do a good job here, since this is a setting that I don't feel has been really explored by other games.

Maybe it hasn't been explored because it's actually one of the fewest wars in which USA had it's ass kicked, and therefore game developers are afraid of the possible bad reaction of the Vietnam veterans and patriotic guys?

[Chyros]

Alias, on 4 May 2010, 16:46, said:

Vietcong.

Way better than BF:V, too.

Wooo :o .

*wants to play as VC*

[Kalo]

Argetlam, on 4 May 2010, 15:48, said:

Dr. Knickers, on 4 May 2010, 15:37, said:

I honestly cannot think of any games besides Battlefield: Vietnam set in the Vietnam War era. There must not have been any/many popular or mainstream Vietnam War games as of late. Seeing how Treyarch didn't completely screw up World at War, maybe they'll do a good job here, since this is a setting that I don't feel has been really explored by other games.

Maybe it hasn't been explored because it's actually one of the fewest wars in which USA had it's ass kicked, and therefore game developers are afraid of the possible bad reaction of the Vietnam veterans and patriotic guys?

Lost, yes, and because a lot of CoD fans (Not even just CoD fans, more like 80% of the Americans since the beginning of this actual country) are all HURR DURR AMERICA IS TEH BEST, they probably think it wouldn't sell. Even if America did kick a bit of ass before they lost.

[amazin]

or its because it would be more challenging to create a tense, oppressive shooter set in a jungle rather then a balls out explosion fest in another destroyed city, forest, or desert environment?