Hey, It’s A Call of Duty Trailer

I know! Who’d have thought that there would be another Call Of Duty game. And that they would advertise its existence with miniaturised motion pictures on the internet! Well, dowse your incredulity and set course for hyperbole island, because below the jump is a trailer for the fifth Call of Duty game. World At War, for that is its entirely generic subtitle, is a World War II game, and it’s being developed by Treyarch, who did Call Of Duty 3. And it actually got announced last month or something, but we were busy looking out of the window to bother mentioning it. The details that have emerged so far is that there will be four-player co-op and “swimming elements”. It should be out later this year. For Christmas, probably.

Jungles, crashing planes, dudes getting chopped with big knives: it’s one of those videogames we all know and love.

I’m still more excited about the new Brothers In Arms. I am SO slightly-left-of-mainstream.


  1. Forceflow says:

    Where are the stereotypical nazi’s ? This is *not* a videogame we know and love.


  2. Sahagin says:

    There’s a guy just standing around, engulfed in flames towards the middle of the video there.

  3. Lambo says:

    If the flamethrowers in this are as good as I hope they’ll be then I’ll forgive them for leaving the lovely modern setting.

    Although tbh we all know this is going to be good regardless of the setting.

  4. Doug F says:

    I’m not as optimistic as Lambo on this one. Treyarch is not Infinity Ward, and CoD3 was not CoD4. The last good thing I remamber from Treyarch was the webswinging in Spider-Man 2, and they dropped that for Spidey 3. Seems like Activision is pumping out a yearly installment regardless of whether the good developers can keep the pace.

    I’m holding out hope for Call of Duty 6 though.

  5. Fartmonger says:

    Why the hell are Treyarch in charge of this instead of IW? Compare CoD3 with CoD4… Looks like number 5 will be another episode of the series worth skipping. Let’s just hope IW develop CoD6.

  6. Vasara says:

    Sounds like a pretty generic shooter, and it’s not made by Infinity Ward. Not exactly on the top of my list of games to buy, but I’ll keep an eye on it. “Swimming elements” sounds intriguing.

  7. Gap Gen says:

    Ah, I assumed this was console-only, like CoD3.

  8. Janek says:

    Call of Duty: Developing the same pattern as the Star Trek films?

    We’ll see. I certainly won’t be getting excited until IW are back on the job.

  9. Erlam says:

    “Although tbh we all know this is going to be good regardless of the setting.”

    We do? I don’t know that at all.

    By ‘world at war,’ do they still mean ‘America at war, and a couple other countries helped too’? Just curious. I’d like to play as anything except America at this point.

  10. dufake says:

    This is not COD5 ,the title says this.

    However, I have no idea why they use “COD” as their trademark.

    It’s Pacific war.
    Japnese snipers climbed up trees.
    That’s why they can’t survive like the others.

  11. Optimaximal says:

    If I get to kill flamingly-stubborn Japanese soldiers, I might just play it… I won’t be happy if Cpt. Price doesn’t at least have a cameo though!

  12. Heliocentric says:

    Um.. Its not in middle europe, Yay?

    Heres hoping for playable flamethrower action.

  13. Mr. Mechanical says:

    I never played Call of Duty 3, though I did read that Treyarch only had like eight months to develop it so it was kind of a rush job on their part. They’ve had about two years now to work on this game, at least that’s what the local Treyarch fellow over at the Quarter to Three forums was saying. So, you know, there’s a chance this one might be just as worth playing as Call of Duty 4.

    As long as it doesn’t have a bunch of dumb QTE segments…

    But yeah! Pacific Theater is ripe for the picking, as far as WWII shooters goes. What was the last game that used the setting, that Medal of Honor game that no one liked? This game should be at least better than that one, right?

  14. derFeef says:

    We all know Call of Duty: Space Command is going to be better.

  15. Bema says:

    To be honest, the COD3 gameplay and story wasn’t too bad. Sure it was a bit ‘samey’, but that’s because we’d had plenty of WW2 games around that time (Medal of Honour, Brothers in Arms etc). Whilst im not 100% convinced it’ll match IWs effort with COD4, im willing to hold off judgement for the time being.

    One problem for me however is, reverting back to WW2 means we’ll already know how the story will pan out and end. Atleast in COD4 (although we knew the ‘West’ would win) had some element of mystery to the way it moved forward. But thats the problem with WW2 shooters.

  16. Tolga K. says:

    Keep in mind that the following statements are in regards to the single player aspects of the games I mention (unless otherwise noted).

    If this is anything like COD4, it’s going to be boring.

    In COD4, they put so much effort into the multiplayer that the campaign was boring as hell. It was hours upon hours of whack-a-mole and scripting, with AI pretty much non-existent.

    The multiplayer will have the feel of COD3 with the perks of 4, so it wont feel like anything new.

    What they need to do is have a solid and exciting campaign (WITH AI, please) and live up to the hype of the COD series being the most realistic shooter. Give me gameplay that doesn’t have an infinite amount of enemies waiting for you at the same locations. Give me some believable ragdolls instead of rigid death animations. Let me be flanked and suppressed and outplayed, not just outgunned. On top of it all, don’t mess up the new game concepts. A flamethrower can send its flame over 30 yards and keep its target burning for minutes to hours. When did a shooter EVER show the true devastation of what those weapons can do?

    Right now, they have a lot of hype to live up to. COD4 can easily be topped in the gameplay department. I hope for their sakes that this game deserves the hype it gets, unlike COD4.

    While some of you might not care for single-player, it’s the primary reason I would buy a game. Multiplayer in most FPS games is essentially the same experience with different guns, different player agility, and different graphics. Only my involvement in a great story, combined with great gameplay elements, will make a purchase worth the money.

  17. melonnnnnn says:

    I’m really looking forward to Call of Duty : Vietnam.

    Ok,ok that was joke :P But, COD:Vietnam could be nice idea I think. Anyway, please Activision, sack Treyarch and let IW making COD for consoles and PCs!!

  18. Springy says:

    I thought Call of Duty 3 was absolutely dire, uninspired, loosely assembled rubbish. I’m not thinking good thoughts about this; I’m far more curious about what Infinity Ward are thinking of doing for their next installment in the franchise.

  19. Radiant says:

    Tolga let me guess you played it on Veteran?
    NEVER play CoD4 on Veteran.
    It’s not ‘harder’ it’s shitter.

    CoD4 single player was aces.
    For me it was one of the best shooters ever made.

    As for this CoD…I’m really looking forward to another ww2 shooter because that concept is toothpaste fresh.
    Not to mention that I’d love to re-enact the real life mowing down of thousands of soldiers.
    Because that’s not morbid at all.

  20. Kieron Gillen says:

    Mr Mechanical is correct: This is the first game which Treyarch have had the full 2 years on, as opposed to anything else they’ve done. It’s clearly an uphill battle – sequel to the biggest game of last year and all – but I wish ’em luck.


  21. Man Raised By Puffins says:

    If this doesn’t have narration by Laurence Olivier then I’m not interested.

  22. Kieron Gillen says:

    I was watching that this morning. It would help any game.


  23. Limbaboel says:

    Any game? Including “Limbo of the lost”?

  24. Bema says:

    Especially Limbo of the Lost. :)

  25. malkav11 says:

    I’ve never once played CoD4 multiplayer, only singleplayer, and it was far and away the best “real-world” shooter I’ve ever played. So, YMMV.

  26. Mr. Mechanical says:

    CoD singleplayer has always been a heavily scripted, flashy, shooting gallery. Why anyone thinks that’s going to change anytime soon is beyond me, the games are selling like gangbusters as it is so why would they change it up now?

    I’m really enjoying CoD4 singleplayer on Veteran right now, actually. I just got to Shock and Awe and it’s pretty apparent to me that once you’ve got the difficulty up as high as it’ll go there’s a very specific way they want you to get through each level. Mostly that being shoot enough bad guys to clear a way forward long enough to push ahead and reach the next checkpoint, and you know what? I’m pretty happy with it like that. It’s simple, it’s fun, it’s good target practice for multiplayer (which is where the game has legs, as we all know). There’s a very “old school” sensibility to it this way. Maybe that’s not your thing. That’s fine, but CoD is what CoD is. Gone are the days where a videogame sequel could be totally different from the game before it, such as Zelda II, Mario 2 (US, at least), Castlevania 2, etc.

    The most I’m hoping for with this new game is that they take the level design off the rails and let me explore an open battlefield a bit, tackle multiple objectives in whatever order, that sort of thing. I think that sort of thing was done in one of the past CoD games (or was it a Medal of Honor game? They’re all so hard to tell apart sometimes) but now we’ve got some bad ass technology to really bring that stuff to life. I’ll be disappointed if the game is just a bunch of linearly connected paths, we’ve been down that road.

  27. Cruz says:

    Has it been announced as a multi-plat title that will actually include the PC this time around? If I recall, didnt PC gamers get stiffed on CoD3 (considering I’ve never played it)? Just wondering if we should care at this point.

  28. Taximan says:

    Just Pacific?

    Look closesly, towards the end of the trailer, right after the Corsair crashes into the powerlines, there’s clearly some Soviet troops propping German prisoners up against a wall, preparing to summarily execute them? Also, the people running around in the grassy field, the burning man standing still, and the massive IS-2 Stalin tank (thank you Red Orchestra trained eye) show that there will at least be some Ostfront action.

    So the next step is war atrocities? Will the US Marines be extracting gold teeth from the gaping maws of felled enemies (true anecdote)? Imagine that achievement (Gold Digger! Extract 10 gold teeth from still-warm corpses/ cut rings from fingers. Unlock concept-art!)

    Shooting surrendered enemies may be something that happens in war, but its still nasty. The few times I did it in Hidden & Dangerous 2 I felt pretty dirty afterwards. Didn’t help if I tried to explain it in the ingame context of there being the standing order by Germans not to take any Commando-unit members alive, or that the executed guy may with some probability just have shot my medic (bio says he was married *gasp*) a few minutes back. Its still a dirty thing to do to draw your break-top revolver and plug the poor sap a clearly (in-game decal) visible hole between the eyes while his hands are raised and his face turned to you.

    The game *did* sort of punish it by not making you able to steal his uniform (which is an executable offense there too according to war conventions), as supposedly it had been too splattered and gored up. This didn’t however take into account any shots to the extremities which may have been fired in order to induce the surrender in the first place (say a burst of fire across the legs, applying entry-exit-wound decals across the kneecaps, and then in the immediate air above their head). No punishment for stealing still-warm trousers with tattered goreified knees (with optional imaginary splattered tendons & ligaments) then. Still, you could always strip them of their clean clothes, and then plug them in the head while they’re kneeling bound in their undershirt and pants. But that just seems even more cold.

    One of those “man, Games!” discussion subjects which could be applied to being genocidal in Civilization, Colonization, Europa Univeralis, Total War etc. To summary executions in Rainbow Six and SWAT too. Or just shooting a downed, but still alive enemy writhing on the floor, armed (as in COD) or unarmed and defenceless (as in Mafia).

    More games should have dynamically surrendering enemies (with the potential to commit further violence, or for humane action, with added causality for both). It’s more realistic, and brings the potential of Deus Ex’s universally applauded Lebedev assasination scene dilemma into play.

  29. ryan in exile says:

    where did the italicized love quips to GT go?

  30. Tolga K. says:

    Radiant: I played it on all but the easiest level for varying amounts of time. It felt like the same experience to me each time. I prefer games where there is an open map and all the enemies you will face spawn in the beginning of each level (or section of the level), and then let the AI take care of the rest. If enemies have to be scripted in during the middle of the level, it should at least be done in a believable way and without infinite swarms of them.

    Playing COD4 felt like playing one of those online flash FPS games with a level of Frogger tacked on in the middle (the sniper mission). An exciting game should make you fear the enemy. It should not make each encounter the same, long boring shootout, over and over and over again.

  31. jamie says:

    Personally I enjoyed CoD3, there supposedly ripping all the good elements from CoD4 multiplayer (matchmaking/ranks/upgrades) and adding vehicles and grips/legs to the guns to attach them to walls as turrets like. I’m excited.

  32. Radiant says:

    I see what you mean.
    Eventually someone will get around to making that multiplayer-esque experience into a single player game.
    A few have tried but have always lacked that story/rollercoaster element that CoD4 did so well; they always seem so shallow or never offered enough of a challenge.

    When I played CoD4 on the harder levels it really exposed the mechanics of it, as you say, loads of [seemingly] endless enemies and grindy DIE RESTART TRY AGAIN gameplay.

    But on the first play through on the right skill level I found it a fantastic bash.
    The part where it has you making your way cross country to a nuke base, seeing said nukes fire, then fighting across the base and then roping down into the bowels of it was just an awesome game experience.

    It’s what I always hope episodic games would deliver.
    A short blast of a ‘game experience’ followed by another and another.

    But you’re right that ‘outhinking an opponent’ gameplay that multiplayer delivers in spades is absent in CoD4 single player. It’s more about that experience.

  33. Valentin Galea says:

    Infinity Ward secured the rights to rest of the franchise from Activision, so they will be making COD6+ ! Hooraaay!

  34. Chris Keegan says:

    There is no Chas ‘n’ Dave I’m not playing it end of story.

  35. Jonah says:

    What’s so bad about scripted levels and bad AI. Some people really enjoy this small-time series called Half-life…

    Open levels can be very difficult to make it so that you get an enjoyable experience every time. Often times it ends up being very “messy.” Whereas with scripted levels the developers can be certain that a given part of the game will be enjoyable and leave an impression on the player. Either way can be great if properly executed.

  36. Tolga K. says:

    I’m not sure about HL1 (it’s been a while since I played), but HL2 has pretty decent AI compared to most other games. They actually respond to your movements in more open areas.

    Pure scripting is what usually sucks, when there’s no intelligence behind NPCs whatsoever. That’s what I was getting at with COD4. The only decision making the opponents did was whether to shoot at your or not when you were in the open. Even in that “open” mission where you had to search a few houses for some enemy leader, there was no AI in the guys that were surrounding the house. Provided you had enough ammo, you could sit at one of the windows for hours, picking off the same wave of idiots as they ran to the same exact spots and planted themselves there until you killed them. Not even the illusion of AI saved the game in my eyes. While purely scripted games can and have been fun, the COD series messed it up by (I know I’m saying this again) turning it into whack-a-mole. To me, it’s like playing a flash shooting game where you can move around, and it’s extremely boring.

  37. Caiman says:

    Isn’t everyone sick of WWx themed FPS shooters by now? Sure, change the setting to a jungle setting but it’s still the same ol’ same ol’. It’s a pity the majority of games these days consist only of moving through a 3D environment and pressing the left mouse button over designated objects.

  38. Forceflow says:

    There’s nothing wrong with scripted sequences …. The COD-series have always been an example of ‘scripted sequences done right”.

  39. Thiefsie says:

    Just an aside, HL1 had way better ai than HL2, marines and all.
    Only game to come close was FEAR (Pretty damned good) but HL2’s ai was pretty lacking compared to the first. (Zombies, etc)

    Also, games for windows means PC release, at least for now.

  40. phuzz says:

    But then exactly what intelligence would you expect from a rotting corpse with an alien crab burrowed into it’s brain? The combine and resistance had pretty good AI, and hunters are a pain in the arse.

    Haven’t played any of the CoD games, or MoH, or indeed any of the war shooters, unless you count Return to Castle Wolfenstine.
    What do you mean undead nazi super-soldiers don’t make a realistic war game?

  41. Taxman says:

    I wonder why they didn’t bother jumping into the Korean war that had pretty much everything, huge infantry battles, tank fights, ariel dog fights, navel assaults with the Soviet Union, Chinese, North Koreans vs the South Koreans & the Allies.

    Maybe it’s still too politically sensitive with China and Korea, the North & South are still technically in a state of war I think.

    The WW2 Pacific conflict hasn’t been as well trodden as the European one but it still feels stale overall, I’m guessing somebody out there is still buying WW2 games as they keep getting made.

  42. The Hammer says:

    2 years of development time allowed aside – and I am confident that it will make a better game than Treyarch’s previous mediocre offerings – it’s still not filling me with confidence to see another return to WW2, and with the developer’s inclusion of arbitrary QTE-style one-on-one battles in Call of Duty 3, which is a design flaw not suited to the rest of the gameplay, I must say I’m not expecting a great deal.

    Also, I heard that, since Activison want to start yearly updates of the COD series, that Treyarch will be handling the odd numbers, and Infinity Ward the even ones.

  43. M. Banana says:

    I have hopes for this. It seems to basically just be an expansion, since it’s on the same engine and all. Treyarch did the expansion to COD1, and it was really, really good, especially the MP.

  44. Bobsy says:

    Call of Duty: London Blitz Survivor.

    I wish.

    Or ANYTHING involving the super-secret tunnels dug into the white cliffs of dover. They’re just awesome-cool.

  45. Tricky says:

    Hey, you tagged it “Call of Cuty 5”!

  46. Lavitz says:

    Idk what you guys are getting scared about. But there is only thing that is giving me scares and thats GAMES FOR WINDOWS LIVE!! I played lost planet colonies :S oh dear !

  47. Al3xand3r says:

    It says Games for Windows. Not Games for Windows Live. Most all newly released games list that because it’s the new way to show Vista compatibility or something along those lines (so in the trailer it’s basically telling you this game will be for PC and X360). Games for Windows Live is as good as dead, in its current form at least, so it shouldn’t worry you any further.

  48. Jochen Scheisse says:

    Wee Ostfront campaign, maybe I can shoot my Granpa!

  49. Jives says:

    So… will I get hurt by rabid fanboys if I say that this looks much more unique than cod4?

    Aint never seen planes hitting telephone wires in a game before

  50. restricted3 says:

    Someone at Activision should be ashamed for shitting all over the Call of Duty name. Again.

    I’m afraid he’s too busy counting money, though.