New COD WW2 "leaked"

[Snadzies]

I'm ready for a WWII again and I'm ready for a CoD game as well (haven't bought one in 4-ish years).

[AntonChigurh]

I used to love COD back in the day. Everything before Ghosts, I loved. WAW, MW2, MW3, BO1, BO2, I played the shit outta the multiplayer on those. But then it took a turn for the worse. Ever since Ghosts/AW, COD has been trash. I mean BO3 was ok, but the supply drop guns made it super unfun to play online. Now I only buy the games on deep clearance and all I play is the zombies. Hopefully they can turn it around with this. And hopefully Sledgehammer can make a good zombies mode this time, unlike the bin of ass cancer that was exo zombies.

[Mira Yurizaki]

I'm just craving going back to WWII.

[Iankiller99]

Why couldn't they just hand it to Treyarch...

[ARikozuM]

3 minutes ago, Iankiller99 said:

Why couldn't they just hand it to Treyarch...

They're probably already on their next game. I'd rather see Treyarch move to their own projects as they've had the most success with campaigns and multiplayer since they've joined the [franchise].

[Rupe]

8 minutes ago, Iankiller99 said:

Why couldn't they just hand it to Treyarch...

Treyarch are still making CoD games. They just have longer now to create their game, which is a good thing imo

[Theminecraftaddict555]

2 minutes ago, Rupe said:

Treyarch are still making CoD games. They just have longer now to create their game, which is a good thing imo

What he meant was, why can't they hand this ww2 game project to treyarch or have sledgehammers and treyarch work on it since treyarch has had good experience with making ww2 games in the past

[ApolloFury]

My question is: is the decision to go WWII was planned way ahead by Activision themselves or a response to Battlefield 1's WWI theme? Because if it's the latter then I do not know how they could make a WWII game that short in development when Battlefield 1 was only announced a year ago.

Edited April 25, 2017 by ApolloFury
grammar

[Rupe]

17 minutes ago, Theminecraftaddict555 said:

What he meant was, why can't they hand this ww2 game project to treyarch or have sledgehammers and treyarch work on it since treyarch has had good experience with making ww2 games in the past

It does not necessarily mean that Treyarch won't be working on a WW2 game. Definitely possible they will want to bring out more than one given the bad reception of the recent near future games

[PSUGuru]

I don't have high hopes as I have a strong feeling they will simply just screw it up. COD has been going downhill ever since Modern Warfare 3.

[Ezio Auditore]

Fix for night pls

[AlwaysFSX]

1 hour ago, ApolloFury said:

My question is: is the decision to go WWII was planned way ahead by Activision themselves or a response to Battlefield 1's WWI theme? Because if it's the latter then I do not know how they could make a WWII game that short in development when Battlefield 1 was only announced a year ago.

The game has already been in development for two years since all three studios are on a three-year development cycle.

[4960X]

is this based on a new engine?

[ARikozuM]

14 minutes ago, 4960X said:

is this based on a new engine?

Depends what your definition of new is. Did they modify major parts of their current engine? Then yes. Did they scrap the old one and make a new one? Then yes. 

 

Some people think that a new engine has to be newly made rather than a modification of the old, but it isn't feasible to create hundreds of millions of lines of code for a single release.