Call of Duty WWII
- Thread starter F.F.C._fritz
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Would've been interesting yes. Or have a Monte Cassino campaign with Morrocan troops. But why put effort into this **** anyway? 
Age of Empires II: The Densetsu said:
That's a cool video! I also find the bare graphics very appealing; it reminds me of the last wave of public excitement about virtual reality in the 1990s, and of late 1980s/early 90s 3D graphics. Even now seeing that sort of world excites me in a way that realistic buildings in games cannot. I used to have fantasies of creating a polygonal version of my own house and street in a computer game for my Amiga, but never learnt how to use the editor. I also enjoyed that sort of environment in Robocop 3. There's something that feels right about it, a true computer game city, not a real one.
"Cool woman with gun wearing a suit in an urban setting" is the easiest way to sell a game to me.
Captured Joe said:Would've been interesting yes. Or have a Monte Cassino campaign with Morrocan troops. But why put effort into this **** anyway?
*Late answer*
Well, a goumier campaign set in Cassino could have some issues, since those guys are infamous (in Italy, at least) for mass raping of local men, women and children, particularly in the aftermath of the battle. So, as in the marketing department would say, diversity box ticked - but maybe not in the nicest way.
Anyway, I'm playing the campaign, first COD campaign I'm playing after BLOPS 2.
Enjoying it so far. They did a good job for "authenticity" (wouldn't say "historical accuracy"), you can see they made some solid research. Just try to compare it with the more bland "World at War", where Makin, Peleliu and Okinawa look alike and where Stalingrad and Berlin have comparable architecture. Even Call of Duty 2, while well researched in some parts like in Point du Hoc, had a lot of other stuff noticeably less thouroughly researched. In "WW2" every level feels different from the other. It's just sad that the obvious research they made for this is rarely underlined. They could have included some short documentary like as extras to explain stuff like the tactical use of Flying Fortressess in Operation Cobra, the Hurtgen stalemate or the Paris Liberation, just like they used to.
That said, authenticity and realism predictably doesn't transpire much from gameplay and gunplay, but it hardly ever did in this kind of games. It's classic COD, you are the classic COD ubermensch etc., and that was to be expected, guess they cannot change it. The same with the inclusion of weird guns in SP, since SP main purpose in this kind of AAA FPS is to train the player for the MP, and SP is sadly subordinate to MP.
The game plays like one of those good old WW2 shooters (with few new tweaks), which for me is a plus. There are many in-game references to that golden era. For example, the level set in the Paris prefecture seemed to be a remastered edition of Medal of Honor Underground, both for the setting and for the "show me your papers" gameplay. Being that game one of my childhood favourite, I was exhalted to "kinda" playing it again. It's heartwarming to think that some of the set-pieces, back in the day, only existed in my imagination and now here they are.
All in all, I'm having a lot of fun with COD WW2 singleplayer. It's too bad they didn't have the courage to invest more in it, like the games they took inspiration from, instead of focusing on that horrible multiplayer. But, alas, I guess they cannot do otherwise, MP is where the real money comes from and they cannot change a winning formula.
I really enjoyed the campaign, too. The Paris undercover mission, as you mentioned, was really nice. And it even evolved into a stealth mission which I also enjoyed. I'm glad that the campaign lets you play around with many different mechanics. Rather than just being a completely linear shooter, you get to go undercover, stealth, drive vehicles, fly planes, and all kinds of other things. I really liked the 'heroic actions' you could perform in each mission as well - such as saving a fellow soldier from getting stabbed, dragging a wounded teammate away from sniper fire, and more. The squad mechanics were nice as well with the free ammunition, artillery strikes, medkits, and the others. I'm a big fan of the whole Battle of the Bulge scenario, and I found myself just walking around, taking in the scenery and atmosphere before the whole gunfight kicked off. It was cool to walk around, seeing all the soldiers digging trenches, getting ammunition, and telling stories. All around the campaign was very enjoyable, and I am most definitely going to replay it. More than once, probably.
Dystopian
The singleplayer is nice until you realise you just have to run forward through most missions to advance the checkpoint or break the enemies morale. You never have to actually fear the Germans, they run around like slapstick cartoons sliding and slipping. It could have been much much better, and the multiplayer ****ing blows.
ＤＹＳＴＯＰＩＡＮ said:
That's basically COD since Modern Warfare, methinks, advance 'till they stop spawing. I remember my main objective while playing World at War on Veteran was to advance to the next checkpoint, THEN start shooting
Anyway, having finished the game, the lack of an historical narrative before each mission is even more regretful.
For example, after the battle of Hurtgen you're just stuck in the Ardennes, but the game never explicitly explains that there have been a german offensive, the situation looked kinda grim etc. etc.
I mean, if you knew this stuff before it's gonna be ok, but if you don't...and again, it's a pity.
The game includes relatively "rare" battles such as the fall of Aachen (which was included and better explained in Finest Hour) and the battle of Huertgen, a costly and relatively forgotten american debacle. I thought the Hurtgen levels were some of the best (although I don't know of any Hill 493); in two levels the show all you should expect in great detail: the opening scene in the U.S. camp, where you can stroll around; the semi-abandoned bunkers of the Siegfried line; then the fog, the rain, the mud, the bad, uneven terrain in which the battle was fought and a series of doomed, bloody assaults sometimes interrupted by artillery shells - the effect of treeburst is shown in detail - sometimes by a counteroffensive. Heck, at a certain point you'll even get lost after one of said assaults and will have to wander in the fog, back to your lines. Although most of the Hurtgen levels are based on 4th and 28th divisions' own ordaly and the germans in the forest weren't SS and didn't have Tiger II tanks, I've rarely seen a COD game - or a game, in general - getting the atmosphere and the reconstrution of an historical battle so perfectly without even bragging too much about it.
It had its flaws, but maybe because I'm a WWII enthusiast, maybe because I don't play COD since BLOPS 2, I confirm this campaign is one the whole saga very best, despite all the hatred it gets.
I think that if you only look at detail like dat soviet weapon in Normandy or dat wrong epaulette in that uniform, without grasping the general context of a level of, for the matter, of the game - AAA arcade shooter, made for general public, etc. - you will miss a lot of good stuff.
People complaining about lack of realism must have never played a WWII shooter back in the days. Or maybe they are all Red Orchestra enthusiasts, that's why there's millions of players online everyday
With World at War, back in 2008, I don't remember hearing complaints about how stereotyped the gung-ho Marine and the crazy Soviet characters were, how easy it was to land on Peleliu, what the hell was that hybrid Thompson you got, why most japanese used SMGs, why everything sounded like toyguns, why Stalingrad and Berlin share similar architecture, how Hitler birthday date is wrong, you can't quickscope with an anti-tank gun, etc.
Wehraboo detected.F.F.C._fritz said:
...and I didn't even started on how boring it was to show not the USMC, not the Japanese, not the Soviet but the Wehrmacht, in 1945 Berlin, all wearing the same standard feldgrau uniform without a single variation.
As incredible as it sounds, after 15 years later Medal of Honor Frontline is still the best thing ever for wehraboos and other feticists, in terms of german uniforms' accuracy and variety.
As incredible as it sounds, after 15 years later Medal of Honor Frontline is still the best thing ever for wehraboos and other feticists, in terms of german uniforms' accuracy and variety.
How about the Company of Heroes series?F.F.C._fritz said:
Михаил Илларионович Голенищев-Кутузов-Смоленский said:
How so?
It had 300 possible combinations of different facial model/uniform/backpacks. The main problem was that sometimes SS had Wehrmacht decal helmet and viceversa and the shoulder stripes reversed, but i doubt it was intentional. It featured Heer, Kriegsmarine, Luftwaffe and Waffen SS (only the autumn pattern for the Tarnjacke, sadly) - including niche stuff like Panzertruppen and Feldgendarmerie. They even got the US paratroopers uniform changing from the Normandy M42 to the later M43 and a Sten and Lee Enfield models created just for a single level! Not to mention the mosquito net attached to some of the german helmets - only recently I figured out what that sort of mask was eheh.
Captured Joe said:How about the Company of Heroes series?F.F.C._fritz said:
They really took that FeldGRAU as literal as possible.
300 combinations eh? Well, I haven't played the game in probably a decade but as I remember it, in addition to being an obvious graphical step back from Armed Assault by necessity, it had the vast majority of its enemies in plain gray, with - like Bowman said about CoH - an overzealous interpretation of the term Feldgrau. Even the original Medal of Honor had you facing a different collection of enemies on each mission or even each level, peadot camo, winter camo, greatcoats, Kriegsmarine port sentries, sailors and officers, scientists in labcoats, drydock workers in greasy overalls, Gestapo agents with armbands; not to mention Underground which added French collaborationist militia, Afrika Korps, Italians, and tropical-fitted archaeologists* to most of the original game's wardrobe (and even gave a single-player justification to the old multiplayer easter eggs like the zombies from Shock Waves or the attack dog that walked on its hind legs ) You're probably right about uniform accuracy and diversity among individuals though. Simply having the texture resolution to differentiate collar tabs gives it an edge over the PSX games.
Actually my real complaints about Frontline are to do with its plot and how it recycles locations and set-pieces from previous games at the expense of its own timeline (Jimmy is recruited by the OSS for his actions as a downed pilot on D-Day -1, but he was also somehow on the beaches of Omaha embedded with the Rangers the very next day?); how the disguise missions have no real disguising or stealth in them because they immediately erupt into gunfights (why even include them if they're not going to be done right?); and the asinine inclusion of an end-boss villain to what was previously a game that, while ridiculous in its mechanical conceit of pitting one soldier/spy against countless enemies, was very serious in its tone and treatment of the history that gave context to its missions. The previous Allied Assault was probably the most conservative in the spectacle it threw at you. It was a tightrope walk and Frontline was the game that slipped, in my opinion. I'm sure nostalgia goggles have a role to play in that perception.
* And SS-knights in plate armour in that one Wewelsburg level
) You're probably right about uniform accuracy and diversity among individuals though. Simply having the texture resolution to differentiate collar tabs gives it an edge over the PSX games.Actually my real complaints about Frontline are to do with its plot and how it recycles locations and set-pieces from previous games at the expense of its own timeline (Jimmy is recruited by the OSS for his actions as a downed pilot on D-Day -1, but he was also somehow on the beaches of Omaha embedded with the Rangers the very next day?); how the disguise missions have no real disguising or stealth in them because they immediately erupt into gunfights (why even include them if they're not going to be done right?); and the asinine inclusion of an end-boss villain to what was previously a game that, while ridiculous in its mechanical conceit of pitting one soldier/spy against countless enemies, was very serious in its tone and treatment of the history that gave context to its missions. The previous Allied Assault was probably the most conservative in the spectacle it threw at you. It was a tightrope walk and Frontline was the game that slipped, in my opinion. I'm sure nostalgia goggles have a role to play in that perception.
* And SS-knights in plate armour in that one Wewelsburg level
Similar threads
