Would you play Call of Duty Future Warfare?

Recommended Videos

ZomgSharkz

New member
Aug 4, 2008
354
0
0
WrongSprite said:
Not really. To be honest, I'm missing the WW2 stuff.
I'm with you on this one. I never really minded all the WWII games. Of the last few CoDs (Black Ops, MW2, WaW, and MW) World at War was probably my favorite.

OT: No I probably wouldn't play a Future CoD. I've been moving away from shooters and console games in general lately, and a future CoD isn't going to make me come running back.
 

TheLefty

New member
May 21, 2008
1,075
0
0
They'd have to make some massive changes and keep Infinity Ward FAAAAR away from it. The Modern Warfares were terrible, the only Call of Duty I can stand are the Treyarch ones, even then they're good, but far from great.
 

Smagmuck_

New member
Aug 25, 2009
12,681
0
0
I have an idea... How about Infinity Ward gets their heads out of their asses and make a game that isn't fucking retarded, really. Like we need another "Holy shit, the [Insert Socialist Country] is invading!"... It's getting old.
 

Treblaine

New member
Jul 25, 2008
8,682
0
0
They've ALREADY done this.

Before "modern Warfare", before "WWII over and over again", back in the 90's First Person Shooters were all set in the far future or some near-future apocalypse:

-Quake Series
-Unreal Tournament
-Doom Series
-Turok Series
-System Shock 1 & 2
-Deus Ex
-Aliens vs Predator
-Forsaken
-Descent
-Space Hulk
-Marathon
-Perfect Dark

Hell, this is when the term "Space marine" was coined, the very concept of a Space Marine is futuristic as based around space-travel and warfare.

I think the future is with the likes of Bioshock: the past but with an alternate take on history infused with fantastical elements. I'm thinking Steampunk, Classic Final Fantasy, stuff like that.
 

EHKOS

Madness to my Methods
Feb 28, 2010
4,815
0
0
No because the weapons would be even more OPd. I still play MW2 to death, an adiction really, but I have killed so many people from afar with the spaz it ain't even funny anymore...well ok maybe a little.
 

Reptiloid

New member
Nov 10, 2010
264
0
0
Nope, I'd continue to ignore new CoD releases like always. I do like to play the original 3 games from time to time though. You know, CoD 1-3. The good ones before the series pissed itself and died.
 

blue spartan 11

New member
Oct 13, 2009
207
0
0
Dr. McD said:
Nunny said:
I would, though aslong as they fixed up all thier other crap aswell.
You have idea how much I agree with you!

I wouldn't get the game unless Infinity Ward got brought back, Bobby Kotick got fired and Kotick's policies were removed.
Hell will have frozen over before and HL2:Ep3 will have been released. Damn you DNF. We lost a meme.

OT: Not really. I felt this year that with BO that the franchise was dead, milked to the end. I'll stick with battlefield that I discovered this year with BF:BC2.
 

Trolldor

New member
Jan 20, 2011
1,849
0
0
You know what would make me play a CoD game?

If it played nothing like any CoD game before it.
 

TheRightToArmBears

New member
Dec 13, 2008
8,674
0
0
Considering WaW is my favourite CoD game, I'll have to disagree. I want a proper 'Nam game, not with all this amnesia and black ops and things.
 

DrEmo

New member
May 4, 2009
458
0
0
Trezu said:
World war 2 has been milked dry But does the Future hold Salvation

Please state your Arguments

Yes i did read this in a Magazine but i wanted to know what everyday people think
Yes, but if it's like this:

You play as cyborgs. Perks are robotic parts, for example, steady aim is a heavy titanium arm, ghost is a radar jammer implanted into the cyborg's chest etc.

Real-time damage models which affect the other players:
If you get shot in the leg, you limp and can't sprint. If you get shot on your robot legs (if you have marathon equipped) you don't limp, but you can't sprint. If you get shot with something very powerful, you can lose a limb (Not very useful, since if it can rip your limb off it can kill you that fast, so I guess we can just add gibs.)

Improved gameplay: Keep the game fast paced, but make the maps bigger to make snipers useful.

Weapons: High-powered crossbows that shoot heated titanium spikes, railguns and a bayonet that's built into the player's arm.

Perks: Same old ones, plus Heat sensor (Allows you to see through walls and see heat signatures. For balance's sake, it will last only 2 seconds and you can only use it while standing perfectly still. It has a cool-down time of 10 seconds.), Arms dealer (Replaces your arm with your primary weapon, making it a lot more accurate and gives it more ammo. Cons: No secondary weapon slot, can't pick up fallen enemies' weapons if they're not the same as yours.)

Killstreaks: Same as the previous killstreaks, but with different names, plus some new ones:

Laser (11 kills)- Take control of a defense satellite for 5 seconds blasting a giant laser into the battlefield.

Hack (7 kills)- Upon activation, your weapon will emit a signal rather than shoot for a few seconds. This signal will hack an enemy player (killing him) and switches the zombie to your team (as a bot) until he gets killed.

Mech (5 kills)- unleash a mech on the battlefield to kill your enemies.

Tracker run (5 kills)- A friendly UAV scans the battlefield for 5 seconds. It shoots any enemy it encounters with trackers which make them glow bright red on the map and on the battlefield.

Summon Shub Niggurath (25 kills)- Summon Shub Niggurath, killing everyone, ending the game and possibly the world.
 

Natdaprat

New member
Sep 10, 2009
424
0
0
I would not play it. Ever since MW2, I've decided to not buy any more Call of Duty Games. The single player is poor, the combat is retarded and it's just the same shit over and over. I traded in all my COD games that I collected. Yeah, screw you activision.
 

Sn1P3r M98

New member
May 30, 2010
2,253
0
0
Yeah, I'd give it a try. There aren't a whole lot of future war games out, so why not? (well, I can actually think of many reasons not to play it, but the bottom line is yes, I would play it.)
 

JSF01

New member
Jan 19, 2011
55
0
0
I would definetly give it a shot. Actually I have been expecting somthing like that for a while.
 

Still Life

New member
Sep 22, 2010
1,137
0
0
Sorry.

I don't intend on picking up another Call of Duty game again; Black Ops was great, besides the issues I had with it on my PC, yet I grow tired from its very formulaic nature. I've had BF:BC2 since day one, and I am yet to get sick of it.

I guess you could say, that there are games more innovative and 'fresh' than what Activision are offering with their current cash cow.
 

Amishdemon

New member
Jun 3, 2009
155
0
0
Well if they make one MW3 will be in at least 2017-18 so yeah do it up. it can't hurt to continue a cliff hanger. I wanna see what happens to cpt price and soap. the multiplayer will be terrible if they don't think of something new.
 

Rad Party God

Party like it's 2010!
Feb 23, 2010
3,560
0
0
No, I wouldn't. There's a game already in futuristic warfare and it's called Halo, also there is another game about space nazis called Killzone.

Just play something else, I already gave up on the "call of modern battlefield evolved" craze and I started looking on older, simpler (and funnier) games. I'm having a blast playing Serious Sam and I plan to replay Painkiller, also I'm looking forward to Duke Nukem Forever and I always drool whenever I hear news about Brink. And Bulletstorm sounds like fun.
 

Drummie666

New member
Jan 1, 2011
739
0
0
I haven't seen this said yet, so I will.

Technically, Call of Duty: Future Warfare has already been released. It was called Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. It was set in 2016 and had some very advanced equipment that we don't have today (For E.G. Heart Beat Sensor). I mean, yeah, it's not 2100 or anything but still, technically future warfare.