Options

Call of Duty 5: Medal of Honor 5

1234689

Posts

  • Options
    FyreWulffFyreWulff YouRegistered User, ClubPA regular
    edited June 2008
    Dragkonias wrote: »
    You know...a futuristic shooter that isn't just "lol lazers and aliens!" would be nice.

    I think Perfect Dark had a pretty good mix of weapons that were both futuristic and not just all lasers.

    FyreWulff on
  • Options
    SirToastySirToasty Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    PD had some awesome weapons. In fact, most were non-alien. There were only 6 alien weapons I believe.

    SirToasty on
  • Options
    DragkoniasDragkonias That Guy Who Does Stuff You Know, There. Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    SirToasty wrote: »
    PD had some awesome weapons. In fact, most were non-alien. There were only 6 alien weapons I believe.

    Oh yeah...forgot about PD...too but PDZ kind of shat all over it.

    Dragkonias on
  • Options
    SkutSkutSkutSkut Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
  • Options
    SirToastySirToasty Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Yeah I don't much like it. Definitely going for the darker, grittier look.

    SirToasty on
  • Options
    darksteeldarksteel Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    SkutSkut wrote: »

    Here's hoping Laurence Olivier does the narration for this game.

    darksteel on
    shikisig6-1.jpg
  • Options
    FoodFood Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Interesting that none of the boxes actually say "Call of Duty 5". Maybe they're going to market it as more of a spin-off? That would be a good idea in my opinion... I've told a few random guys on xbox live that Call of Duty 5 wasn't going to be developed by IW and they were pretty pissed.

    Food on
  • Options
    TrevorTrevor Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    You know, the more I think about it the more I'm glad Treyarch isn't just trying to piggyback onto the back of COD4 and repeat what they did. I'm not sure it should be called COD5, though. I can't help but think of this one as some sort of Big Red One-type offshoot.

    Trevor on
  • Options
    SirToastySirToasty Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Trevor wrote: »
    You know, the more I think about it the more I'm glad Treyarch isn't just trying to piggyback onto the back of COD4 and repeat what they did. I'm not sure it should be called COD5, though. I can't help but think of this one as some sort of Big Red One-type offshoot.
    zing
    The burn was probably unintentional.

    SirToasty on
  • Options
    HearthjawHearthjaw Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDEX2Bkj6No&feature=related
    This clip has a sort of survival horror WW2 feel to it..

    Hearthjaw on
    steamid: sewersider
  • Options
    darleysamdarleysam On my way to UKRegistered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Pharezon wrote: »
    darleysam wrote: »
    That was a girl, wasn't it?

    No

    I assumed he was referring to Kim Phuc, who is.

    darleysam on
    forumsig.png
  • Options
    HearthjawHearthjaw Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    darleysam wrote: »
    Pharezon wrote: »
    darleysam wrote: »
    That was a girl, wasn't it?

    No

    I assumed he was referring to Kim Phuc, who is.
    I assume he meant this

    Hearthjaw on
    steamid: sewersider
  • Options
    SimBenSimBen Hodor? Hodor Hodor.Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Hearthjaw wrote: »
    darleysam wrote: »
    Pharezon wrote: »
    darleysam wrote: »
    That was a girl, wasn't it?

    No

    I assumed he was referring to Kim Phuc, who is.
    I assume he meant this

    Yup, that's the one.

    Also, I'm so glad this isn't named CoD5. That way, I can ignore it. If the next IW one is named CoD6, then I'll go back and get it for completion's sake. If it's named CoD5, I can just keep on ignoring it. And if it has just a subtitle, well I can STILL keep on ignoring it because by that time I can assume that all future CoD games will be spin-offs and I get to cherry-pick which ones I want (hint: the IW ones).

    SimBen on
    sig.gif
  • Options
    PharezonPharezon Struggle is an illusion. Victory is in the Qun.Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    darleysam wrote: »
    Pharezon wrote: »
    darleysam wrote: »
    That was a girl, wasn't it?

    No

    I assumed he was referring to Kim Phuc, who is.

    BITCH I WAS RIGHT!

    Pharezon on
    jkZziGc.png
  • Options
    SimBenSimBen Hodor? Hodor Hodor.Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Y'know, as much as the gameplay is probably gonna be same ol' CoD3 territory, I can't help but feel giddy at the thought of this having CoD4-quality graphics. Making it the prettiest WW2 shooter ever.

    Gorgeous games are something I can get behind.

    SimBen on
    sig.gif
  • Options
    APZonerunnerAPZonerunner Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Dragkonias wrote: »
    SirToasty wrote: »
    PD had some awesome weapons. In fact, most were non-alien. There were only 6 alien weapons I believe.

    Oh yeah...forgot about PD...too but PDZ kind of shat all over it.

    Maybe as a game (though I will continue to defend PDZ's multiplayer to the hilt, I still believe it's awesome.) it did, but the weapons in PDZ were just as good as those in PD, with a decent selection of modern and futuristic weapons, and modern day weapons with futuristic functions.

    APZonerunner on
    APZonerunner | RPG Site | UFFSite | The Gaming Vault
    XBL/PSN/Steam: APZonerunner
  • Options
    sp1ttlesp1ttle Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    I second the motion of having a Korean War version. The Vietnam War had at least a Battlefield Vietnam, so why not have a CoD (or any decent war shooter) set in the Korean War?

    sp1ttle on
  • Options
    JWashkeJWashke Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    http://www.gametrailers.com/player/35341.html

    Trailers up on Gametrailers.

    I think I have to be the only person in the world excited for this game.
    It helps that I eat up anything to do with World War II, no matter how tired of it everyone else is. But also because Treyarch's last CoD, Call of Duty 3 was actually pretty damn good. Not as good as the Infinity Ward games, but better than their previous attempts.

    Since this seems to be just another side story, and not Call of Duty 5. I see this as a little bonus game while we wait for Infinity Ward's next title.

    JWashke on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    NiqleNiqle Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    DharmaBum wrote: »
    Joystiq had an article about the game
    http://www.joystiq.com/2008/06/09/call-of-duty-world-at-war-revealed-treyarch-to-develop/


    It revealed a few interesting things about the game
    Joystiq wrote:
    According to the article, Treyarch aims to "explore the darkest corners of WWII," giving the military shooter more of a survival horror flavor by "tackling darker themes" and pitting players against a "new, seemingly alien fighting force." Activision has yet to officially announce Call of Duty: World at War, though it seems clear that we'll be trading in our guided anti-tank missiles for submachine guns sooner than we'd like.

    We'll have to see how it turns out. But goddamn that paragraph makes it sound like its turning into RE.


    Gonna go ahead and say that I haven't read the rest of the thread, but based on this, 10 bucks says it pulls an Assassin's Creed and turns out they're in a simulation and its really the future.

    Niqle on
  • Options
    JWashkeJWashke Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    I assumed by seemingly Alien Fighting force it just meant the combat style of the Japanese during World War II. Like Banzai charges and all that.

    JWashke on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    NiqleNiqle Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Oh I'm sure thats what it really means JWashke, but still, if what I said happens it won't surprise me at all. :P

    Niqle on
  • Options
    JWashkeJWashke Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    No It probably wouldn't surprise me either.

    I was just trying to think of the Harry Turtledove novels about alien kobolds invading during World War II and was like OH SHIT ITS CALLED WORLD AT WAR COINCIDENCE?!! but then I looked It up and its Worldwar.. not World at War.

    Sigh... someday I will be able to shoot kobolds with an mp 40.

    JWashke on
    steam_sig.png
  • Options
    Waka LakaWaka Laka Riding the stuffed Unicorn If ya know what I mean.Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    sp1ttle wrote: »
    I second the motion of having a Korean War version. The Vietnam War had at least a Battlefield Vietnam, so why not have a CoD (or any decent war shooter) set in the Korean War?

    The Korean War is one of the most under-themed games of the large World Wars, I think I've only ever seen one of them.

    Waka Laka on
  • Options
    NiqleNiqle Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    JWashke wrote: »
    No It probably wouldn't surprise me either.

    I was just trying to think of the Harry Turtledove novels about alien kobolds invading during World War II and was like OH SHIT ITS CALLED WORLD AT WAR COINCIDENCE?!! but then I looked It up and its Worldwar.. not World at War.

    Sigh... someday I will be able to shoot kobolds with an mp 40.

    Yeah...one can dream though right?

    Niqle on
  • Options
    The Dude With HerpesThe Dude With Herpes Lehi, UTRegistered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Waka Laka wrote: »
    sp1ttle wrote: »
    I second the motion of having a Korean War version. The Vietnam War had at least a Battlefield Vietnam, so why not have a CoD (or any decent war shooter) set in the Korean War?

    The Korean War is one of the most under-themed games of the large World Wars, I think I've only ever seen one of them.

    The problem with the Korean War, from a purely video game standpoint, is that it wasn't a terribly interesting war as far as wars go.

    I mean, outside the initial conquering of virtually the entire peninsula by North Korean forces off the bat; Americans hopping over from Japan and moving the fight actually past Pyongyang before politics stopped the push to the Yalu. After that, the war shifted borders to more or less what we see today with a virtual stalemate for years. Sure, there were a few epic battles, but neither side made any progress for various reason, all political.

    It just wouldn't make for a great video game to have an epic first act, then have your character sit there for 3 years in a trench while leaders make feigned attempts at cease fires and diplomacy; ending in an anti-climatic cease-fire agreement which is still in force today; seeing as how the Korean War technically still isn't over.

    Anyway, it's a fascinating war from a historical and political perspective. It's just not the greatest war for entertainment purposes. And that statement sounded terrible.

    The Dude With Herpes on
    Steam: Galedrid - XBL: Galedrid - PSN: Galedrid
    Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
    Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand

  • Options
    FyreWulffFyreWulff YouRegistered User, ClubPA regular
    edited June 2008
    Probably the best way to do a Korean war game would be to get the MASH license and then license the Trauma Center engine.

    FyreWulff on
  • Options
    squirlysquirly Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    FyreWulff wrote: »
    Probably the best way to do a Korean war game would be to get the MASH license and then license the Trauma Center engine.
    I'd buy a game like that.

    squirly on
    Diablo2 [US West; Ladder]: *DorianGraph [New/Main] *outsidewhale [Old]
  • Options
    AxenAxen My avatar is Excalibur. Yes, the sword.Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    I think there were enough intense battles in Korea for a game, I mean two million some odd people didn't die from rabid wolf attacks y'know. The only problem I see is a way to end the game that is both entertaining and gives some kind of sense of accomplishment.

    The game could start off with the player playing a South Korean soldier at the onset of the war, then switch to a U.S. Army soldier at the time the U.S. intervened. Then the game could end after the Chinese Spring Offensive. That seems like as good climatic ending to me.

    Axen on
    A Capellan's favorite sheath for any blade is your back.
  • Options
    AntihippyAntihippy Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    FyreWulff wrote: »
    Probably the best way to do a Korean war game would be to get the MASH license and then license the Trauma Center engine.

    They should do it.

    They really, REALLY should.

    And if they do a Persona 3 like social system in between, then shit just got even more awesome.

    Antihippy on
    10454_nujabes2.pngPSN: Antiwhippy
  • Options
    Istvaan ShogaatsuIstvaan Shogaatsu Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Hmmm... if they have a game set in the Japanese theater, there better be at least one, 30 minute long level, dedicated solely to finding members of Unit 731 and stabbing them in the stomachs and eyes with rusty bayonets, and leaving them to bleed out slowly or be pecked to death by crows or something.

    Istvaan Shogaatsu on
  • Options
    FyreWulffFyreWulff YouRegistered User, ClubPA regular
    edited June 2008
    Antihippy wrote: »
    FyreWulff wrote: »
    Probably the best way to do a Korean war game would be to get the MASH license and then license the Trauma Center engine.

    They should do it.

    They really, REALLY should.

    And if they do a Persona 3 like social system in between, then shit just got even more awesome.

    I think what would greatly help the game is you have both a historical context and seasons upon seasons of episodes to base 'levels' off of.

    FyreWulff on
  • Options
    -SPI--SPI- Osaka, JapanRegistered User regular
    edited June 2008
    I wonder if we'll get some Operation August Storm Soviets vs Japanese action in this? CoD has been probably the best series to acknowledge that there were more people fighting in WW2 than just the Americans, so I guess it's possible but somehow I can see them ignoring that aspect of the war here.

    -SPI- on
  • Options
    devolvedevolve Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    now that the trailer is up on xbl.......................................i don't think I'm going to care about this game too much at all. It's just nothing special. They try showing this "darker" side but it comes off flat and cheesy. And obviously there's no game play what so ever, it's just pure in engine fluff.

    devolve on
    detriot.png
  • Options
    interceptintercept Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Waka Laka wrote: »
    sp1ttle wrote: »
    I second the motion of having a Korean War version. The Vietnam War had at least a Battlefield Vietnam, so why not have a CoD (or any decent war shooter) set in the Korean War?

    The Korean War is one of the most under-themed games of the large World Wars, I think I've only ever seen one of them.

    The problem with the Korean War, from a purely video game standpoint, is that it wasn't a terribly interesting war as far as wars go.

    I mean, outside the initial conquering of virtually the entire peninsula by North Korean forces off the bat; Americans hopping over from Japan and moving the fight actually past Pyongyang before politics stopped the push to the Yalu. After that, the war shifted borders to more or less what we see today with a virtual stalemate for years. Sure, there were a few epic battles, but neither side made any progress for various reason, all political.

    It just wouldn't make for a great video game to have an epic first act, then have your character sit there for 3 years in a trench while leaders make feigned attempts at cease fires and diplomacy; ending in an anti-climatic cease-fire agreement which is still in force today; seeing as how the Korean War technically still isn't over.

    Anyway, it's a fascinating war from a historical and political perspective. It's just not the greatest war for entertainment purposes. And that statement sounded terrible.

    MacArthur and the UN forces were nearly finished overtaking the entire peninsula, and he wanted to push into China and kept arguing with Truman that we should nuke China.

    I think that was a pretty big deal. In terms of significant battles, I think the Choisin Reservoir was a pretty big deal. 300,000 UN troops managed to defeat six entire Chinese divisions after the initial shockwave.

    It's a very significant war. The United States hates talking about it for several reasons:

    1. We didn't win.

    2. Ultimately we gained nothing from it directly, but Japan profiting enormously from the war. This was good because the United States was intentionally extremely lenient on Japan to create a strong, strategically placed ally to watch the USSR and Red China. But we don't like to talk about it because Japanese war crimes are a touchy issue for the US. We turn a blind eye to it because they're such important trade allies, and it's a bitter source of resent from China, South Korea and North Korea.

    3. Even though we lost, we can get away with not talking about it or discussing it's significance in class because it was a policing action that received almost unanimous public approval. Everyone including the American public thought it was a great idea. That's why we were able to send so many troops.


    We have to talk about Vietnam because it was extremely controversial and brought about less subtle changes. JFK was the guy who put is in there. Because of Vietnam Congress decided the ability for a president to declare war was too powerful, so we have the rule we go by today. A president may take an emergency military policing action to intervene in anything he sees as a threat, but he must notify Congress within 48 hours and it is Congress who decides to declare war. The second change was the age to vote. Previously you had to be 21, but people began asking why is it that we can send our 18 year old kids off to die in war but they can't vote for the people who send them to fight?

    But coming back to the Korean War, I think you really underestimate how crazy that war was in terms of battles. And it would make a refreshing new commentary about war. The really sad thing is ultimately, these men literally died for nothing because of dumb politicians who couldn't play their cards right. The borders are more or less the same. The DMZ still stands there as a grim reminder of the longest ceasefire in history.

    intercept on
  • Options
    PunkBoyPunkBoy Thank you! And thank you again! Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    I dunno, as someone born in South Korea, I'm extremely grateful that at the very least there was a South Korea at the end of the war.

    PunkBoy on
    Steam ID:
    steam_sig.png
    The Linecutters Podcast: Your weekly dose of nerd! Tune in for the live broadcast every Wednesday at 7 PM EST, only at www.non-productive.com!
  • Options
    FoodFood Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Yeah, maybe from an American political perspective we didn't gain much from the Korean War, but I know plenty of South Koreans who are pretty happy that they their country exists.

    edit: I'm going to go watch this trailer. I'm sure it'll be terrible, though.

    Food on
  • Options
    -SPI--SPI- Osaka, JapanRegistered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Korea would make a pretty amazing FPS if you took the Australian perspective. The battle of Kapyong alone would make an epic campaign. With the withdrawl where four soldiers held the rear of the units pulling back against wave after wave of Chinese troops, several hundred at a time. FOUR! With one bren gun! Against HUNDREDS upon HUNDREDS.

    The battle of Kapyong would work pretty well in a CoD game, since the chinese forces would work perfectly with CoD unlimited spawning.

    -SPI- on
  • Options
    SteevLSteevL What can I do for you? Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    -SPI- wrote: »
    I wonder if we'll get some Operation August Storm Soviets vs Japanese action in this? CoD has been probably the best series to acknowledge that there were more people fighting in WW2 than just the Americans, so I guess it's possible but somehow I can see them ignoring that aspect of the war here.

    Maybe. I noticed in the description of the video on Xbox Live that it said it takes place in both the European and Pacific theaters.

    SteevL on
  • Options
    AntihippyAntihippy Registered User regular
    edited June 2008
    The Cold War would make a pretty interesting dating sim- like game.

    Where instead of giving people random crap, you try to negotiate around nuclear death.

    Antihippy on
    10454_nujabes2.pngPSN: Antiwhippy
  • Options
    Zen VulgarityZen Vulgarity What a lovely day for tea Secret British ThreadRegistered User regular
    edited June 2008
    Isn't CoD5 being made by that piss poor developer of the third game?

    Zen Vulgarity on
Sign In or Register to comment.