CODBLOPS 2 Does Modernish Warfare

By Adam Smith on May 1st, 2012 at 1:09 pm.

It's a future so near that it could be TOMORROW

Call of Duty 9: Black Ops 2: Modern Warfare 4 was rumoured to exist but if you’re anything like me, you’ll be flabbergasted to hear that the series is indeed continuing and the website for the game is now live, although the trailer that takes centre stage doesn’t work just yet. It’s apparently due to be premiered (red carpet?) this evening during the NBA Playoffs. The website does reveal that the game takes place in the near future, during a 21st century cold war. I bet it’s a cold war that involves surfing on top of a stealth fighter while shooting down a space shuttle full of nukes. November 13th is when the CoD blops once more. One more pic below.

Drones, droning, in the world of tomorrow.

Oh, and here’s confirmation of the setting, just in case the screenshots may suggest an alternate history rather than a shooty future.

“Pushing the boundaries of what fans have come to expect from the record-setting entertainment franchise, Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 propels players into a near future, 21st Century Cold War, where technology and weapons have converged to create a new generation of warfare.”

Technology and weapons converging? Good lord! That’s how accidents happen. Atomic accidents.

, , .

113 Comments »

Sponsored links by Taboola
  1. Greg Wild says:

    I look forwards to Call of Duty 10: Post-Modern Warfare, where Soap McGhost-Price engages his foes with rhetorical debate deconstructing the ontological foundations of the modern FPS.

    • Premium User Badge

      RedViv says:

      Superstructural expansion pack DLC. Calling it.

    • Kollega says:

      I actually endorse this suggestion. “Post-modern warfare” sounds like something that could be actually interesting.

      • Synesthesia says:

        To the molymachine!

      • Greg Wild says:

        I do actually seriously yearn for the day we get a modern-war FPS that takes the mechanics and the setting a little more introspectively.

        • Tyrone Slothrop. says:

          Spec Ops: The Line bills itself as doing just that.

    • sketchseven says:

      Surely post-modern warfare is when we’re just hitting each other with sticks and rocks.

      • Kollega says:

        No, no, post-modern warfare is the kind of warfare that makes us question what is warfare and what is just an illusion caused by the workings of our mind, or a set of unsupported presupossitions passed down from generation to generation!

        *snooty voice activate* It’s not my fault that you don’t get it.

      • Premium User Badge

        RaveTurned says:

        Presumably you’re talking about modern post-warfare, where people hit each other with sturdy pieces of timber. Or is that warfare that somehow uses the postal system? I’m so confused. :/

    • ThatGuy says:

      You know, I can actually see this happening. The kids playing it forget it was ever an FPS and just load up the game to swear at each other whilst numbers fly across the screen giving them rank ups at completely inconsequential intervals until they can level up to swear against 32 people.

      Every now and then an explosion will appear when someone says the randomly chosen swear. This of course gives them a kill-streak of “instant win” and it’s all over.

    • Premium User Badge

      Thirith says:

      You mean it’ll be Metal Gear Solid?

      • Premium User Badge

        Mo says:

        “Snake … do you think it’s possible to find love on the battlefield?”

    • mrwout says:

      COD is dead. COD remains dead. And we have killed it. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become CODs simply to appear worthy of it?

    • Premium User Badge

      Surlywombat says:

      Weeel I’ll be, you sure is good wid all dem fancy words boy, how in tarnation do you manage to fit em all in that head o’yours I’ll never know!

    • roryok says:

      Call of Duty: Post-Modern warfare would surely not be as entertaining as Call of Duty : Modern Post-Warfare, where you play a civil engineer tasked with re-building infrastructure of a battered, identity seeking nation while trying to keep your imported foreign workers spirits up and their families protected in a hostile environment

    • GT3000 says:

      Day One purchase. You fools know this to be true. BLOPs tore at my Cold War loving strings, and the promise of a campy take of a 21st century dominated in a bi-polar world with ‘splosions. You’d have to be braindead not to love it..And braindead.

  2. Premium User Badge

    selkcip says:

    Eventually there won’t be any room on the disk for the actual game, it’ll all be filled with the subtitles.

  3. pakoito says:

    Let’s receive it with a big *yawn* it deserves!

    • Premium User Badge

      Chaz says:

      That’s the problem isn’t it. The trend for these massive epic proportioned set pieces of destruction have become so common place, not only in games but films alike, that they now no longer inspire any kind of awe, just apathy.

      I yearn for the feel of a smaller, more intimate experience, where the action and violence is in much smaller measured doses, but when it arrives it hits you like a thunder clap, not a constant drizzle of carnage.

      • Obc says:

        watch the movie Drive. there isn’t much action, but when there is: its fast, brutal, unnerving and because of the general “calm” of the movie even more horrible/awesome.

        • Premium User Badge

          Chaz says:

          I shall have to watch that then. I was thinking of stuff like the early Beat Takeshi movies like Violent Cop and Hana-bi. There’s not much violence in his films but when it happens it’s realistically quick dirty and brutal. There’s an excellent scene in Hana-bi where the film has so far been generally relaxed and jocular and then there’s a sudden cut from a guy striking a cigarette lighter to a gun shot, and it hits you like a slap in the face. Utterly briliant.

          • SkittleDiddler says:

            Outrage is full of serene moments followed by totally brutal violent bits. Watch that one if you haven’t seen it yet.

          • Obc says:

            sounds awesome, haven’t seen those films. to be honest i haven’t seen any takeshi kitano films (but to many takeshi miike films xD). so gonna do it now.

            btw drive has an awesome soundtrack and ryan gosling ;)

  4. Arkanos says:

    http://www.youtube.com/v/upCWKsa9Skw That private video pulled from the source of the webpage. But it’s private, so… :|

    Embed it, RPS! :D You’ll be the first. ;)

    This here is the YT-screengrab you can see: http://i2.ytimg.com/vi/upCWKsa9Skw/maxresdefault.jpg

    I scoured through the decompiled flash file for the player and I’m done everything I can. However, until this http://www.youtube.com/get_video_info?video_id=upCWKsa9Skw spits out something other than a file that basically says “this video is private”, I can’t get at that video. Unless I can figure out how the server-side generates the tokens…

  5. CaspianRoach says:

    CoD10 will be the same stuff but the place will take during WW2.

    • Premium User Badge

      RedViv says:

      Now that’s something I’d actually want to play. Of course it would have to be a nuke-dispensing German flying saucer I would shoot down.

    • Dances to Podcasts says:

      Iron Sky – the game? Hmm…

    • Eukatheude says:

      Nah, they didn’t use weapon attachments in WW2.

  6. Tridae says:

    Oh how I wish this COD disease was published by EA, then they could tack it onto their Origin and I would not need to interact with either one. . . BF3 should be the one free of legalized spyware

  7. Kollega says:

    First thing to take away: CoD does sci-fi after all. And it’s… interesting to me what they’ll do, shall we say.

    Second thing to take away: the mention of the trailer’s premiere during NBA playoffs makes me think that the publicity and recognition we always wanted for our beloved medium has come – but at a uncomfortable-to-terrible price.

    • Jad says:

      Previous Call of Duty games have had their premiere air during the NBA playoffs as well, at least back to Modern Warfare 2, as I remember seeing that trailer with the Captain Price, et al, during the playoffs a couple of years back and getting quite excited by it (this was shortly after I had played COD4, which was brilliant).

  8. MD says:

    Call of Duty 9: Black Ops 2: Modern Warfare 4: Millwall nil

  9. diebroken says:

    I’m guessing those green lights on the HKs UAVs means that they’re ‘good’…

    • ThatGuy says:

      You can tell they’re the good ones for several reasons, first being as you pointed out, they’re green. The next dead giveaway is the fact it isn’t shaped like a swastika. The last subtle tell of the evil UAV is the routine sacrifice of children on the battlefield.

    • Milky1985 says:

      They look strangly like the orcas from C and C 3 i think, the transport ones that needed 4 engine bits.

  10. mr.ioes says:

    A cold war setting must be boring for CoD series, noone would die.

  11. RockandGrohl says:

    Guys, can we please just not buy this trash? All it does is persuade other developers to:

    Raise the price of their games
    Reduce content on disc
    Withhold good content for DLC
    Tack on unnecessary MP modes

    When they see the groundbreaking sales COD gets (not like it deserves it)

    Support something like BF3, or games like Tribes, or anything.. COD is the cancer of gaming, I said it.

    • Kollega says:

      I can bet that half of RPS* is not going to buy the game, and another half of RPS is going to say they’re not buying the game and then buy it anyway. So you are at least partially preaching to the choir.

      * Statistics completely made up.

    • CaspianRoach says:

      And the game’s target audience don’t read this site since it’s not console-orienteed.

    • YourMessageHere says:

      Oh come on. I agree on the price, but otherwise:

      – CoD has its niche and fills it nicely, live and let live. Plenty of people are quite happy with it.

      – Surely it makes more sense to not buy the crap other developers make that’s so bankrupt of originality it has to copy whatever’s at the top of sales charts, rather than the people who are being copied because what they do is popular?

      – You must realise that crap tacked-on MP modes is a problem that predates CoD by many years. Mentioning it in relation to CoD is particularly silly as the multiplayer is IMO the only reason to buy it – to me, the singleplayer is the tacked-on, disposable frippery that wastes developers’ man-hours and cash which could be spent on more maps and features.

      – The cancer of gaming is a) consoles, holding back where games go technically, in terms of gameplay mechanics (must work on a pad) and b) the media industry’s massive aversion to risk and obsession with control, which kills things like modding, diverts huge resources into pointless shit like DRM, and most of all prevents taking creative leaps.

      • shizamon says:

        A game working on a game pad is not holding back gameplay, that’s a complete fucking fallacy. You can still do anything that you can with K&M, you can move in any direction while looking in any direction. And you can use either pressure sensitivity (MGS) or shift keys to make up for less buttons. It’s the aversion to risk that is holding back innovation.

        • Milky1985 says:

          So why did mass effect 3 have the same button for taking cover/running/leaping/climbing ladders EVEN ON THE PC when that caused control issues in multiplayer if you were trying to run away from something shooting you in the back (and instead stuck yourself to a wall) if a lack of buttons is not an issue.

          To me , the pc having more buttons means theyu could have seperatied them out for that version (at least run and take cover) but they didn’t cause they were focused on the controller!

          • shizamon says:

            That’s an aversion to risk issue. If publishers/developers would just put their game out there and let people actually be challenged rather than this hand holding garbage, you wouldn’t see something like that. They also did away with holstering your weapon in ME3 (so I’ve heard), which you could do in the first 2 games. Does that mean the gamepads lost a button, or did they just want to make it more “accessible”?

            They could’ve used the left thumbstick button to sprint and A to take cover from what I’ve seen. Don’t know for sure as I don’t have/haven’t played the game.

          • Fierce says:

            Sorry shizamon, but YourMessageHere and Milky1985 are much more correct than you for various reasons.

            First of all, you haven’t played ME3 so you can’t really understand the depth of the “One Button Does Everything” problem in its multiplayer modes because you haven’t experienced it. Assuming you can imagine it though, it doesn’t change the fact that on the PC version of a game, control splitting (notice I didn’t say remapping) was not even considered as a viable optimization due to the console mechanic -a la gamepad- constrains of the games design. I personally have no doubt that either there were no QA sessions on PC that focused on controls as an area of concern, or there were and any alerts of OBDE issues were far too late in the games construction for it to be changed. OBDE isn’t new to ME3 either, as it was present in ME2; it was simply more mitigated by the design of the levels.

            So no. If you truly think that during the first month of development of ME3, BioWarEA staff weren’t looking at a controlling interface system based on the limitations of a 360 gamepads inputs, you’re very much short sighted on game development. Subsequently, if you believe “a game (designed to) working on a game pad is not holding back gameplay”, you also aren’t aware of the full domino effect such a design precept can have. Look to PC Borderlands initial inability to turn off Mouse Smoothing, or why a Tribes game will never be on a console for further reading material. Aversion to “challenging people” risk in lieu of “hand holding garbage” has nothing to do with it. Software design is based around the capabilities of the hardware that runs and interfaces with it, full stop.

            If any of this doesn’t hold validity for you, feel free to try the ME3 demo readily available for testing. Just be prepared to re-evaluate your claims.

          • Fierce says:

            Sorry shizamon, but YourMessageHere and Milky1985 are much more correct than you for various reasons.

            First of all, you haven’t played ME3 so you can’t really understand the depth of the “One Button Does Everything” problem in its multiplayer modes because you haven’t experienced it. Assuming you can imagine it though, it doesn’t change the fact that on the PC version of a game, control splitting (notice I didn’t say remapping) was not even considered as a viable optimization due to the console mechanic -a la gamepad- constrains of the games design. I personally have no doubt that either there were no QA sessions on PC that focused on controls as an area of concern, or there were and any alerts regarding OBDE issues were far too late in the games construction for it to be changed. OBDE isn’t new to ME3 either, as it was present in ME2; it was simply more mitigated by the design of the levels.

            So no. If you truly think that during the first month of development of ME3, BioWarEA staff weren’t looking at a controlling interface system based on the limitations of a 360 gamepads inputs, you’re very much short sighted on game development. Subsequently, if you believe “a game (designed to) working on a game pad is not holding back gameplay”, you also aren’t aware of the full domino effect such a design precept can have. Look to PC Borderlands initial inability to turn off Mouse Smoothing, or why a Tribes game will never be on a console for further reading material. Aversion to “challenging people” risk in lieu of “hand holding garbage” has nothing to do with it. Software design is based around the capabilities of the hardware that runs and interfaces with it, full stop.

            If any of this doesn’t hold validity for you, feel free to try the ME3 demo readily available for testing. Just be prepared to re-evaluate your claims.

        • f1x says:

          Thats pretty much bad design being present ALREADY on the gamepad, I happen to play many games on the XBOX (obviously with a gamepad) and also on PC with a gamepad (really many games are better with a gamepad)
          and the thing is, having so many actions on the same button is unnecessary, Xbox’s gamepad has 2 triggers, 6 buttons, the sticks and the analogic pad there is no need to bind everything on the A button, its just poor design even for the gamepad

        • Alexander Norris says:

          Erm, no, you very much can’t. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but the keyboard has 104+ buttons compared to a gamepad’s 12 or so.

          There’s one thing gamepads do that keyboards don’t – analogue movement, which is why they’re much better for platformers, racing games and the like. For the rest, kb+m is pretty much superior in every way – an in the case of CoD, a series in which the limited number of buttons on a pad has caused them to take out a feature before (leaning, not that it was a particularly integral feature), you literally cannot say “but pads can do exactly the same things as keyboards, claiming they influence the gameplay is bad and you are mean and wrong!”

          Perhaps more importantly, there’s the fact that kb+m gameplay is about three or four times faster than gamepad gameplay in CoD’s case. Go look at gameplay videos of, say, MW3 on consoles, then compare that to MW3 on PC. They are completely different experiences, and PC-MW3 is the worst of the two because the game was designed for the slow, plodding pace of gamepad gameplay, not the sprinting-everywhere-and-jumping-with-all-the-knifing-and-snap-aiming gameplay of kb+m.

    • scorcher24 says:

      BF3 ain’t better. The unlocks are even more annoying and EA is selling an Unlocker for 40 bucks. No thanks.

      • Heliocentric says:

        TBH, I cant stomch Battlefield since they started asking you to unlock grenades, or shock paddles ala 2142

        • Post-Internet Syndrome says:

          Grenades are not unlocked in BF3, and defib is unlocked upon reaching level 1 with the assault class, which is a trivial feat.

          • MisterT says:

            The whole vehicle unlock system in BF3 is infinitely worse, and makes 2142’s excessive unlocks seem relatively reasonable, at least you choose the order and don’t HAVE to grind the underpowered kit to unlock it’s kit, just earn points the best way you can, or use the balanced vehicles

            A person with all tank unlocks, compared to someone with none, can do the following:

            -Take several hits without incurring damage (reactive armour) including the usually vulnerable rear
            -Evade guided 1-2 shot disabling munitions such as javelins, AGMs, and guided shells
            -shoot guided shells at decently long range on a separate cooldown from the main gun, nearly doubling burst damage AND DPS.

            Unless you’re busy masturbating or sleeping, you can’t lose to an enemy tank with lesser unlocks, and the other classes of vehicles are even worse.

            Call of duty is actually pretty good about balancing people without as many unlocks with those that do have them, it’s one of it’s keys to being so successful to casual players

          • Alexnader says:

            MisterT, in terms of infantry you don’t start off with underpowered kits in BF3. The starter weapons for the assault, engineer and support classes are considered some of the best possible weapons to pick. They’re the most versatile, capable of functioning at a variety of ranges, working with both static and mobile playstyles and dealing decent damage.

            With the attachment updates they’ve made, it’s often the case that an unmodded gun can be comparable to one that’s completely tricked out. I’ve found with the latest patches what you get with unlocks is not so much power as specialisation.

            As for vehicles, with the cardboard tank changes I think you’ll find a new tank player can easily kill a fully equipped tanker if he gets the drop on him. Do it right and you get 1 shot disable, 1 shot kill. With reactive armour that becomes 2 shot disable, 1 shot kill. Of course, a fully equipped vehicle is still much more powerful than it would be without the unlocks, however it’s not quite as much of a big deal. As for the other classes, jets come with flares unlocked now and given jet play basically consists of evading stingers/AA missiles and dogfighting other jets you’re pretty much set. Helos are still a bit bleh, IFVs mainly come up against infantry rather than other vehicles so it’s easier to unlock stuff with them. Furthermore in things like tanks and helicopters it’s possible to unlock things by playing as the gunner in those vehicles, where your lack of unlocks is a bit less of an issue.

    • Premium User Badge

      piratmonkey says:

      I actually enjoyed Black Ops and am mainly a console player. WHOA.

    • Premium User Badge

      bear912 says:

      Y’know, I might just buy this game to spite people like you… wouldn’t that be ironic?

    • Shooop says:

      BF3?

      You really don’t get how completely and horribly self-defeating your plea is do you?

  12. Unaco says:

    Not my type of game at all… But that’s OK. Its existence doesn’t make me froth at the mouth, cause me to babble in tongues or light the fires of eternal hatred behind my eyes. I have some console playing friends who thoroughly enjoy the CoD series, as do millions of others. Not going to look down on them because they find the game entertaining. Hope this does well for them (the developers and players both).

    • Walter Heisenberg says:

      Congrats on being apathetic and being hipster like with your display of it here.

      We’ve got actual real people asking, essentially, “what’s wrong with being stupid?”

      Well if you think about it, an F really is just like an A+. It’s all just opinions, and my opinion is that Call of Duty is a hamburger. Gamers that waited at a midnight launch all cheered at the hamburger, and the hamburger made a gazillion dollars. I bit into this hamburger and laughed heartily. The hamburger shut off my brain.

      You see, there’s nothing wrong with being stupid. Being stupid is, well, it’s just like eating a hamburger! Sometimes you want a steak, but sometimes you cripple yourself with ignorance.

      Sometimes you go on the internet, after having eaten a hamburger, and try to convince everyone that your hamburger “wasn’t trying to be deep.” And we all know deep burgers. System Shock 2, for example, is a deep-ass hamburger. No, I don’t need to explain (or know) why System Shock 2 is deep. Just trust me when I say that I’ve performed a thorough, in-depth eating(?) of System Shock 2. So I can eat Call of Duty and tell you for certain that it’s not the same meat.

      Clearly the hamburger analogy isn’t a bad analogy. It’s simply a stupid analogy. And sometimes you feel like having an analogy that’s utterly moronic. Just like a hamburger!

  13. FlammableD says:

    Summary of comments: this is terrible and you’re terrible for not thinking it’s terrible.

    Also unrelated EA hate.

  14. Alexander Norris says:

    MW2 was atrocious, BlOps was quite good, MW3 could have been a lot better, BlOps 2 will be…?

    Hopefully better than BlOps, especially since they have a sci-fi setting and can just make gun stats up entirely rather than being somewhat constrained by realit (the AK-47 has to do more damage than the M4, you see, because 7.62 is more damaging than 5.56 because the numbers are bigger!).

    Treyarch did a pretty good job of balancing BlOps, AKS-74u aside, and BlOps actually had servers. I’m hoping BlOps 2 ends up fixing the mistakes they made in the first one and that this also actually has servers (as opposed to the completely half-assed implementation in MW3).

    • Premium User Badge

      Petethegoat says:

      Never understood the disdain for MW2. Complaining about the lack of dedicated servers is valid (although I personally found it smoother than BLOPS), but the game itself was vastly improved over COD4.
      No more shitty respawning enemies, no more spawning in front of bullets and on top of grenades in multiplayer, and a story that had no more absurd military posturing than COD4, along with a much more interesting set of locations to visit.

      • grundus says:

        Please, allow me.

        I’ll freely admit that I loved Modern Warfare, accepted and played World at War, loved MW2 up to a point, hated Black Ops and have only played MW3’s Spec Ops mode on split screen.

        MW2 specifically, there were definitely good parts; the maps were great, the weapons felt good to shoot at mans, throwing knives were really fun to use because they always felt like a gamble and if it paid off then well done you. Riot shields were, in my opinion, hilarious too.

        However.
        Around the time the Pavelow glitch was fixed, nothing else was, so if you weren’t one of the exploiters, you were exploited the fuck out of. I never wanted to play the game at light speed whilst running around with a pistol and knife in my hand, maybe I should’ve, but I didn’t. This is why I hate MW2, though it took me a while to realise it; I think it was around the time where they patched the Pavelow so that it’s kills did start counting towards killstreaks. I thought ‘well if they’ve come back to fix that, why haven’t they fixed ANY of the other issues?’ and then I realised that they wanted you to play like a cheater, they wanted you to exploit the most powerful and unbalanced weapons and they knew not everyone would, and those people would just become prey.

        I should add that my kill/death ratio was 2.05. How? Rage quitting. Lots and lots of rage quitting.

      • Alexander Norris says:

        I am not talking about the SP at all. The SP is a completely vapid experience tacked on to the multiplayer side of things – and MW2 is shit because so much of its design is absurdly terrible, as grundus has partly pointed out.

        That said, if you’re looking at SP: CoD4 had an early-Clancy near-future quasi-plausible and quite low-key plot with certain themes that stood out. BlOps was absurd, but absolutely 100% knew this, so it was fine.

        MW2 was both absurd and idiotic, and completely unaware of this. The writing is absolutely terrible, and they have stuff like a shockwave taking out the ISS, which, you know, defies physics.

    • Premium User Badge

      piratmonkey says:

      I agree.

    • againstthagrane says:

      i’m going to assume you don’t know too much about firearms because the weapon ratings in COD have been ultra ludicrous. take MW2. the famas and m16 has different ratings yet the fire the same bullet out of the same length barrel and the same rate of fire. the usp tactical .45 does the exact same damage a 9mm m9 beretta. i enjoy the games and look past this as it is just a balancing issue, i’m just here to say that none of the weapon ratings in the COD series have been even close to realistic.

  15. westyfield says:

    Call of Recon Advanced Warfighter?

  16. kwyjibo says:

    Black Ops was stupid and fun, and it knew this, and was better for it.

    Modern Warfare still thinks it’s fucking clever, this detracts from it.

  17. JackShandy says:

    It’s a little weird that I see so few COD fans, seeing as it’s the most successful entertainment product of all time.

    • FlammableD says:

      A massive proportion of those will be console gamers and/or unaware of RPS to be fair.

    • Milky1985 says:

      Also a lot (not all , but a big number) of the cod fans are “hardcore gamers” who don’t actually invest in the idea of gaming much. They are very focused on cod and maybe other shooters so will gravitate to sites and videos about that rather than general sites.

      Even the bigger general news sites seem to have more cod haters than supports in the comments sections.

      I guess they tend to nto go to the general news sites as much.

    • lijenstina says:

      It’s rather strange to see so few dead people posting on this site when the vast majority of people who ever lived are now dead.

    • int says:

      There are COD fans here but we hide under the floorboards, ready to knife you in a scripted non-QTE attack.

  18. Milky1985 says:

    They say its a cold war but then show shots of cities on fire with massive plumes of smoke appearing.

    Cold war according to the dictionary “a state of political hostility and military tension between two countries or power blocs, involving propaganda, subversion, threats, economic sanctions, and other measures short of open warfare, esp that between the American and Soviet blocs after World War II”

    Seems like quite a warm war to me from the shots given.

    • RakeShark says:

      “This word you keep using, I dunna think it means what you think it means.”

    • Booch says:

      Well there were several proxy wars fought between the US and the Soviet bloc (Vietnam, Korea, probably others as well).

      • shizamon says:

        Funny that the Soviets were never stupid enough to actually get involved, whereas the US was every time almost..

        • GenBanks says:

          The Soviets were involved in Vietnam (though not on the same scale obviously) and the Chinese were involved in Korea. and let’s not forget Afghanistan…

  19. Innovacious says:

    None of the pre-order things work either and if you use the pre-order link at the bottom of the page it says your IP is blocked. I get the feeling the website wasn’t supposed to be launched until the trailer goes live tonight. Also the pre-order page has steam listed as a place you can pre-order the xbox and ps version.

    note: I don’t actually want to pre-order it, just wanted to see what crazy monies they are expecting of people this time.

    • Milky1985 says:

      Same as modern warfare 3 I expect, apparently that didn’t sell quite as well as as blackops 1 (but still sold to make acitvsion able to buy britain 3 times over) so pushing the price up again may scare the shareholders a bit.

      I expect another monthly subscription thing tho, an extension on elite, that might increase in price.

  20. Tom Walker says:

    Of course the series is continuing. Did anyone think it wouldn’t? Every time the release something with Call of Duty written on it, ten million idiots give them thirty quid.

    I fully expect another just-about-interactive, banal CGI war film. And ten more after that.

  21. Premium User Badge

    yhancik says:

    Droning drones could make for interesting gameplay. If handled properly. In another game.

    (I’d happily play a Bohemia Interactive’s Take on Drones)

  22. S.T.A.L.K.E.R. says:

    ” that involves surfing on top of a stealth fighter while shooting down a space shuttle full of nukes”

    So Just Cause 2 then?

  23. GenBanks says:

    Those quad rotor things flying in the background exist already… Check out FPS Russia’s youtube channel, he uses a prototype of one to shoot stuff.

    Maybe this announcement will mean MW3 will be discounted soon?

  24. FreshwaterAU says:

    I enjoyed MW2 for a while, the campaign wasnt that great and not really what I’m looking for again but meh. I dont really see the appeal in getting these games over and over, but if its a game I love I go all out for it so I guess I understand it for people who really like the series.

  25. Chickenfeed says:

    They are releasing it to steal the potential audience from Battlefield 2143.

  26. DogKiller says:

    I wonder if working on the Call of Duty franchise is like the game developer version of Hell, where as punishment for your sins, you are forced to work on endless clones of the same game for all eternity until you finally go insane. It sounds terrifying to me. I’m also curious to see when the CoD bubble is going to pop.

    I’m happy for people if they enjoy CoD, but eventually these customers will get fed up, and the endless sequels are going to start making less and less money. Unless maybe it’s like those FIFA games, which are like a license to print money every year.

    Edit: Although, to be fair, if a company made annual versions of my favourite flight sim, I’d probably end up doing exactly the same thing.

  27. thinsoldier says:

    surfing on top of a stealth fighter while shooting down a space shuttle full of nukes

    You’re thinking of Just Cause 2.

  28. RichardFairbrass says:

    Damn, and there I was hoping the next version would be COD: Warhammer 40K where the over the top ridiculousness of COD would be inserted into a universe where ‘over the top’ is a gross understatement.

  29. roryok says:

    Call of Duty: Black Beauty

  30. YourMessageHere says:

    I’m rather disappointed that they’re giving up on the 60s/70s setting of the last game. That was the best CoD setting yet IMO; while the campaign wasn’t exactly splendid in any way, I did enjoy the way it linked to historic settings and figures, and the weapons of that era are more interesting than either done-to-death WWII guns or five-minutes-from-now drones and IR air support and endless gadgets.

  31. Tuskin38 says:

    BLOPs was the only COD I liked after MW1, I may check out the sequel.

  32. CorruptBadger says:

    In all honestly CoD is a decent game. Sure the single player is a piece of scripted, blockbuster style piece of shit that no-one can empathize or become immersed in, it feels tacked on and a waste of development time.
    Activision are completely abusing their community, and the player-base actually just lap up that shit and go mad like its catnip. The dlc’s are small and expensive. I don’t think you could say that any map after World at War was designed with it being a multiplayer map in mind. Most of them are just built to look good and conform with some level you remember from single player.
    Also, activision treat PC like shit, no dedicated servers with MW2, and then MW3 hits and they say, “hey, have dedicated servers, but they serve no purpose because the only real fun comes from big flashy writing on your screen yelling at you that you leveled up your guy, gun or perk.”
    Everything in the game feels generic, un-inspiring and half arsed.
    They’re so busy just pumping out the yearly crap, they’ve hardly updated their engine besides integrating DX11 and adding a few pretty lighting effects, and even then they have to cut corners because its so poorly coded, but they can’t alter the code or build it from scratch, or the fan boys would whine and the developers wouldn’t get their yearly zillion dollars.

    The game is utter bullshit, yet year on year IGN and Gamespot love giving that game 10/10 and GOTY, simply because the CoD fanboys flock their and give them lots of traffic(or they get bribed by activison to give it above x/10 or they will not allow them early access to it, essentially depriving them of a review and the traffic, and therefore revenue that brings.)

    Some guy earlier mentioned CoD is the cancer of gaming, and he would be correct. It has a stranglehold on the market, not because it is an amazing game and the developers are great a la CD Projekt Red, but because people just like the familiarity and brainless action.

    TL:DR CoD is a fad, a piece of shit that needs to wither and die, so that people can move on and the industry can learn from this mistake.

    • CorruptBadger says:

      it appears that I started by saying its a decent game, it turns out i can’t justify that claim and its actually just garbage, go figure.

    • CorruptBadger says:

      it appears that I started by saying it might be a good game, it turns out i can’t justify that claim and its actually just garbage, go figure.

    • Walter Heisenberg says:

      Also see this video

  33. ShrikeMalakim says:

    This article fails to address the biggest question this raises: What’s the snarky abbreviation/name we’ll use for THIS one?

    I propose: “CoDBlOps 2: Blop Harder”.

  34. hamburger_cheesedoodle says:

    If this trend continues, half a decade from now the intro movie will start out, “In 2291, in an attempt to control violence among deep space miners, the New Earth Government legalized no-holds-barred fighting. Liandri Mining Corporation, working with the NEG established a series of leagues, and bloody public exhibitions…”

  35. Shooop says:

    Will there finally be an option to just sit back and watch the movie play instead of having to push keys at certain moments to make it keep going?