We store cookies, you can get more info from our privacy policy.
Wii

Treyarch Puts Specialized Team in Charge of Next Call of Duty

by Nick DiMola - June 26, 2008, 10:39 am EDT
Total comments: 74 Source: CVG

The team is working to include Wii specific control schemes, strong graphics, and a compelling online experience to create "the best shooter on Wii."

In an interview with CVG, Treyarch, the developers of the upcoming Call of Duty: World at War, revealed a number of new details about the Wii version of the game. According to Treyarch, a special internal team of Wii experts have been assigned to the title and "live, eat and breathe Wii." Even at this point in development, Treyarch believes that Call of Duty: World at War "looks better than any Wii game on the market so far."

The specialized Treyarch team is also "doing a lot of control work and developing a lot of special technology" to create a well designed set of Wii specific controls, which will include support for the Wii Zapper. And just as with the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 versions of the game, the Wii version will feature an extensive online multiplayer mode.

Even though the Wii doesn't feature the same computing power as its competitors, Treyarch is pushing the system to its limits to match the other versions of the title. In some instances where the Wii version experience requires a different approach, Treyarch assures that they are looking for solutions without sacrificing the experience for players on the Wii.

Talkback

AVJune 26, 2008

Good I'm happy they are trying to make something worthwhile.

The problem is I am SO OVER World War II games and even if they do make the best shooter on Wii it will be hard to overcome that aspect.


Nick DiMolaNick DiMola, Staff AlumnusJune 26, 2008

Quote from: Mr.

Good I'm happy they are trying to make something worthwhile.

The problem is I am SO OVER World War II games and even if they do make the best shooter on Wii it will be hard to overcome that aspect.

I completely agree. WWII games are such a turn off for me that it doesn't matter how good this is, I'll probably overlook it. They do deserve to be commended though for actually putting effort into a Wii game. Props to that.

King of TwitchJune 26, 2008

a special internal team of Wii experts have been assigned to the title and "live, eat and breathe Wii."

That's hot

AVJune 26, 2008

Right now it's a rental for me if I have extra time.

Other wars happened. Civil War might work really well under the right developer, (have to compensate for slow muskets and impatient gamers)

War of Texas Independence might be fun too.

Vietnam doesn't interest me nor does Gulf War

The Gulf War was actually pretty fun in Conflict Desert Storm... 4-player co-op totally made it worth it. Oh wait... that wasn't an FPS. More of a squad cooperative tactical third-person shooter.

EnnerJune 26, 2008

At least its the Pacific side of WWII, which is something that hasn't gotten too much exposure in the FPS genre. Jungles and flamethrowers, oh my!

Nick DiMolaNick DiMola, Staff AlumnusJune 26, 2008

Quote from: >

a special internal team of Wii experts have been assigned to the title and "live, eat and breathe Wii."

That's hot

lol, I was telling Kairon before I posted the story that someone would instantly pick up on that quote. Though, I thought that it would've been Pro666 to pick up on it first.

King of TwitchJune 26, 2008

I suppose he couldn't figure out a way to turn it into a Caps-locked indictment of Nintendo ruining gaming?

MorariJune 26, 2008

Quote from: Mr.

Right now it's a rental for me if I have extra time.

Other wars happened. Civil War might work really well under the right developer, (have to compensate for slow muskets and impatient gamers)

War of Texas Independence might be fun too.

Vietnam doesn't interest me nor does Gulf War

There are morality problems with those wars though. Pretty much everyone can agree about the Nazis being dickheads. On the opposite side however, the American Civil War was always morally skewed from both sides anyway, with one wishing to legally secede and the other suppressing that for many reasons (some justifiably right if true). Vietnam was a poor attempt to cash in on the Communist boogeyman "threat" by killing lots of civilians. The Gulf War was ripe with the same backroom deals and scheming bureaucrats as any modern conflict. And only a bunch of redneck Texans would ever think of the Texas Revolution as patriotic. Stealing already stolen land through even more bloodshed doesn't exactly make for heroes.

ShyGuyJune 26, 2008

Wow, that's not political at all...

How about a FPS where you play as an oppressed Vietnamese freedom fighter circa 1970? that would be politically correct, right?

NinGurl69 *hugglesJune 26, 2008

Quote from: Mr.

Quote from: >

a special internal team of Wii experts have been assigned to the title and "live, eat and breathe Wii."

That's hot

lol, I was telling Kairon before I posted the story that someone would instantly pick up on that quote. Though, I thought that it would've been Pro666 to pick up on it first.

GoNintendo-class jokes are beneath me.

Quote from: ShyGuy

Wow, that's not political at all...

How about a FPS where you play as an oppressed Vietnamese freedom fighter circa 1970? that would be politically correct, right?

The problem is that FPS games limit us to war with guns. There's probably a slew of wars we could tap into if we didn't have to worry about that.

Smoke39June 26, 2008

First person shooters don't have to be about historical wars.  They can be about made up wars.  Or they don't even have to be about wars.  Make a sci-fi shooter that doesn't involve a generic space marine, like Deus Ex.  Or do something weird like Turok.  The first Turok, that is.  Not the latest stupid generic space marine re-envisioning.

We need a Bow-and-arrow FPS then. It'd be awesome. That opens up the medieval ages, or hunting cultures. Maybe even... a game about a feudal Samurai who specializes in the Bow?

Quote from: Smoke39

Or do something weird like Turok.  The first Turok, that is.  Not the latest stupid generic space marine re-envisioning.

Turok. In spaaaaaaaaaace.... &P

GoldenPhoenixJune 26, 2008

Quote from: Kairon

We need a Bow-and-arrow FPS then. It'd be awesome. That opens up the medieval ages, or hunting cultures. Maybe even... a game about a feudal Samurai who specializes in the Bow?

Quote from: Smoke39

Or do something weird like Turok.  The first Turok, that is.  Not the latest stupid generic space marine re-envisioning.

Turok. In spaaaaaaaaaace.... &P

Yes it would be great to have some non-gun wars in games.

Bartman3010June 26, 2008

Oh good. Treyarch. I knew there was a reason this sequel was coming up so quickly. They're the same folks behind CoD2, which was another sequel that came up too soon. At least its not World War II themed this time, I think. But come on. This IS too soon after CoD4, which is supposed to be this grand daddy of shooters.

Then again, I heard the same thing about Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter 2 and I hardly hear anyone talk about that anymore...

Smoke39June 26, 2008

Quote from: Kairon

We need a Bow-and-arrow FPS then. It'd be awesome. That opens up the medieval ages, or hunting cultures. Maybe even... a game about a feudal Samurai who specializes in the Bow?

I could go for that.

I'm very happy that I've only ever played one WWII game and because of that I'm not tired of them, because this one is sounding good.

NinGurl69 *hugglesJune 27, 2008

Back on GameCube, Ubisoft had a special team dedicated to produce all the Tom Clancy games.

Quote from: MADONNA

Back on GameCube, Ubisoft had a special team dedicated to produce all the Tom Clancy games.

Oh dear god...

NinGurl69 *hugglesJune 27, 2008

It's a winning strategery, yes.

EasyCureJune 27, 2008

Quote from: insanolord

I'm very happy that I've only ever played one WWII game and because of that I'm not tired of them, because this one is sounding good.

I can top that. I've NEVER played any of these WW games. If this one turns out as polished as they say i might just pick this up to see what all the fuss is about with the genre

AVJune 27, 2008

Quote from: Morari

Quote from: Mr.

Right now it's a rental for me if I have extra time.

Other wars happened. Civil War might work really well under the right developer, (have to compensate for slow muskets and impatient gamers)

War of Texas Independence might be fun too.

Vietnam doesn't interest me nor does Gulf War

There are morality problems with those wars though. Pretty much everyone can agree about the Nazis being dickheads. On the opposite side however, the American Civil War was always morally skewed from both sides anyway, with one wishing to legally secede and the other suppressing that for many reasons (some justifiably right if true). Vietnam was a poor attempt to cash in on the Communist boogeyman "threat" by killing lots of civilians. The Gulf War was ripe with the same backroom deals and scheming bureaucrats as any modern conflict. And only a bunch of redneck Texans would ever think of the Texas Revolution as patriotic. Stealing already stolen land through even more bloodshed doesn't exactly make for heroes.

EXCUSE ME PRINCESS.

Just trying to come up with some new ideas. The problem with shooters is that current technology could really make you feel like your at war and is possible to make a game where you shoot peoples guts out and such. My friend said he wants to play that, I am the other way around I would so be turned off on FPS's if they went to that degree. 

MorariJune 27, 2008

Soldier of Fortune was doing immense amounts of gore with the Quake 2 engine. The technology has always been there (and is actually pretty fun, regardless of how much SoF2 sucked), developers just don't want to alienate audiences. They apparently just don't have the vision that Steven Spielberg does. I mean, E.T. to Saving Private Ryan? :P

Maybe if war games were truly realistic, people would stop signing their lives away at recruitment offices. I'd be all for that. Wake up all the little kiddies that think war is just a game with free college packed in.

Nick DiMolaNick DiMola, Staff AlumnusJune 27, 2008

Quote from: Morari

Maybe if war games were truly realistic, people would stop signing their lives away at recruitment offices. I'd be all for that. Wake up all the little kiddies that think war is just a game with free college packed in.

Political discussion is not permitted in the forums, lets all keep our opinions to ourselves.

MorariJune 27, 2008

That was a moral truth, not a political opinion. I realize however that people, Americans especially, tend to dislike hearing the truth. Perhaps I simply fail to comprehend just how one keeps political discussion out of a thread concerning war "games". It's your forum though, so whatever...

GoldenPhoenixJune 27, 2008

::laughs at Morari:: Walks away.

DAaaMan64June 27, 2008

Quote from: Morari

That was a moral truth, not a political opinion. I realize however that people, Americans especially, tend to dislike hearing the truth. Perhaps I simply fail to comprehend just how one keeps political discussion out of a thread concerning war "games". It's your forum though, so whatever...

LOL. Aren't you quite the arrogant person. Tell me just how many American's have you met? Have you met me? I'm quite American and believe I've heard the truth as well.  I meet many people a day that believe they've heard the truth too. How ignorant of you to say something like that. haha

GoldenPhoenixJune 27, 2008

Quote from: DAaaMan64

Quote from: Morari

That was a moral truth, not a political opinion. I realize however that people, Americans especially, tend to dislike hearing the truth. Perhaps I simply fail to comprehend just how one keeps political discussion out of a thread concerning war "games". It's your forum though, so whatever...

LOL. Aren't you quite the arrogant person. Tell me just how many American's have you met? Have you met me? I'm quite American and believe I've heard the truth as well.  I meet many people a day that believe they've heard the truth too. How ignorant of you to say something like that. haha

Don't tease the animals. It isn't nice.

Nick DiMolaNick DiMola, Staff AlumnusJune 27, 2008

Quote from: Morari

Perhaps I simply fail to comprehend just how one keeps political discussion out of a thread concerning war "games".

Simple, you don't comment on it if you don't know how to respond with something outside of the political realm. Political discussion has happened on numerous occasions in the past and has caused nothing but bad blood and anger. Is there merit to political discussion? Yes, but not on a board about videogames.

Both points you made in both of your posts beg for someone with an opposing opinion to retaliate, and often times their retaliation and your retaliation to their post wouldn't be civil.

EDIT: Oh look, someone already did. NO POLITICAL DISCUSSION. PERIOD.

PlugabugzJune 27, 2008

Let us all talk about Mr. Jack. It's more appealing.

DAaaMan64June 27, 2008

I look forward to this game personally. Yes WWII shooters are a dime a dozen, but several of them are quite good regardless.

MorariJune 27, 2008

Quote from: Mr.

Quote from: Morari

Perhaps I simply fail to comprehend just how one keeps political discussion out of a thread concerning war "games".

Simple, you don't comment on it if you don't know how to respond with something outside of the political realm.

Well then, in the interest of not derailing this "videogame" discussion any further, let me just say that World War II shooters have always sucked and will only suck more and more as they are continuously milked. Call of Duty is especially bad in being a heavily scripted, bloodless affair with a weak sense of heroism trying to cover for it. Last time I checked, not even Id Software could make a truly entertaining WWII shooter, and the Wolfenstein series has zombies!

DAaaMan64: You were seemingly offended by taking my comment slightly out of context. I apologize for not being able to elaborate upon this position further.

GoldenPhoenix: Consider yourself lucky that this was all stopped.

Moderator Note: No need to reply to that section of discussion, continue with game discussion

User Note: It was ended here. That what I was doing. Duh!

DAaaMan64June 27, 2008

Offended? No.  Laughing at ignorance? Yes. I'm not sure what context I missed there.  But whatever I'll move on.

Moderator Note: No need to continue this further.

EnnerJune 27, 2008

>>that World War II shooters have always sucked and will only suck more and more as they are continuously milked.

Hey! Allied Assault and Call of Duty: United Offensive are great and exciting action games that bring a cinematic intensity with them. Match that with its historical setting and I think you have some great entertainment.

>>Call of Duty is especially bad in being a heavily scripted, bloodless affair with a weak sense of heroism trying to cover for it.

If this a morality issue about portraying a war (or any war) as Rambo-esque interactive entertainment, than fair enough.
In terms of gaming, I feel that great scripted FPSes are successful 3D adaptions of 2D soldier shoot 'em ups like Contra, Super Star Wars, and Metal Slug. Great, exciting, and explosive entertainment where the some of the fun or excitement is that you play hero. Now, if you say, "That's great and all, but why can't they do it in a deattached fantasy or cartoon setting like the titles you mentioned?", than another fair enough to that.

NinGurl69 *hugglesJune 27, 2008

Then sensationalized PG-13ish Hollywood heroics of the WWII shooters makes me sick like Ian hearing about the latest Friend Code game.  "Cinematics" have destroyed the personal atmosphere of cold dread and anxiety that should accompany the "soldier" "experience", particularly in the World Wars.

I guess the sense of danger and struggle and the value of teammate characters just doesn't belong in video gaming.  The market does not care about these things.

Rambo Raving Rabbids.

ShyGuyJune 27, 2008

I seriously doubt Call of Duty: World at War is going to influence anyone's world view, the video game by it's very nature is escapist fantasy. Whether using this subject matter for escapist fantasy is unethical is a separate issue that Jonny has already brought up last year.

In the spirit of this abstracted entertainment, I hope this game has good melee attacks.

GoldenPhoenixJune 27, 2008

Quote:

GoldenPhoenix: Consider yourself lucky that this was all stopped.

So frightening. Thankfully I'm so lucky!

Anyway hopefully this game turns out pretty good for the Wii and doesn't feel like a sloppy port.

EnnerJune 27, 2008

Quote from: MADONNA

Then sensationalized PG-13ish Hollywood heroics of the WWII shooters makes me sick like Ian hearing about the latest Friend Code game.  "Cinematics" have destroyed the personal atmosphere of cold dread and anxiety that should accompany the "soldier" "experience", particularly in the World Wars.

I guess the sense of danger and struggle and the value of teammate characters just doesn't belong in video gaming.  The market does not care about these things.

Hey whatever happend to having fun at the expense of not taking a great and terrible war not too or at all seriously!
... ew.

I totally understand the sentiment you're pushing forth. I wouldn't mind at all if video games stopped using WWII as a setting. There would be less thinking if playing a game is disrespectful to the people that actually lived through such dire times. Actually, to be honest, such thoughts hardly ever crossed my mind; too many bullets and explosions to do other than keep my hands on the keyboard and mouse and my eyes attentively on the screen. That, and I'm usually sad and pissed if I have an NPC ally die on me.

As for the sense of danger, struggle, and value, there is Gearbox's Brother in Arms series that the developer is always pushing for that personal and intimate edge. Though, I think key allies don't die unless scripted to. And there's also that slo-mo kill cam in Hell's Highway that details how you've blown apart a Nazi (probably intended to glorify the moment and/or show the awful deed you've just done).

Quote from: ShyGuy

Whether using this subject matter for escapist fantasy is unethical is a separate issue that Jonny has already brought up last year.

Ah, something for me to hunt down.

Nick DiMolaNick DiMola, Staff AlumnusJune 27, 2008

Quote from: Enner

Quote from: ShyGuy

Whether using this subject matter for escapist fantasy is unethical is a separate issue that Jonny has already brought up last year.

Ah, something for me to hunt down.

Current WWII Shooters Are Unethical

EnnerJune 27, 2008

Quote from: Mr.

Quote from: Enner

Quote from: ShyGuy

Whether using this subject matter for escapist fantasy is unethical is a separate issue that Jonny has already brought up last year.

Ah, something for me to hunt down.

Current WWII Shooters Are Unethical

Oh happy coincidence and blessed promptness gone to some waste. I actually found the thread and was going to edit the link in to my post. However, you sir have posted it first.
:<
Eh... sorry for the trouble and thanks!

MorariJune 27, 2008

The linked discussion is somehow not political to some degree? o_O

NinGurl69 *hugglesJune 27, 2008

Hilariously, Brothers in Arms for Wii has little collective hope from the internet going for it.  But I do desire that team-centric, vintage Rainbow Six squad experience where the in-game story presses the matter that lives are at stake.

I'm in the niche that desires tactical simulations (no life meters, one NATO round will usually take you out).  Being a simulation, it's ALREADY a fantasy, so I don't want all the extra fantasy sensationalism that removes the core challenge I sought from the simulation.  But thanks to MS, Ubi, Activision, Sony, and EA, video game war is... Spike TV Action Weekend (with commercials).

I'm also sick of the gritty dingy stylized off-realism in annual HD war gaming (ie. 300).  Whatever happened to good ol' cold photo-realism?

EnnerJune 27, 2008

Quote from: Morari

The linked discussion is somehow not political to some degree? o_O

I think it isn't. It's mostly about ethics and morals concerning the portrayal of WWII games.
Your army recruitment post is a bit of a slam against the political tool that is the military. Eep! Shouldn't be talking more about it.

Quote from: MADONNA

I'm also sick of the gritty dingy stylized off-realism in annual HD war gaming (ie. 300).  Whatever happened to good ol' cold photo-realism?

Now you Battlefield: Bad Company. Something that is pretty much Three Kings in eastern Europe with some postprocessed film grain effect.

MorariJune 27, 2008

Disclaimer: This is not intended to be political in the least bit. Some statements may seem contrary to clearly stated forum rules. This is not the case, and such statements are only made so as to provide background information. This information is provided as historical truth, and in no way reflects the political position or opinions of the poster. Any opinions provided are solely in the interest of discussing the ramifications of an increasingly poor genre of so-called historical videogames.

World War II games will continue to come out. They're very well established at this point, and sadly represent a lot of what many people probably "know" of said conflict. As mentioned previously, the setting provides for a clear enemy that is undeniably evil. Whilst all of those German soldiers were simply fighting for their country, much like any other serviceman would, the broader implications as seen through hindsight cannot be denied. For this reason, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone mourn the loss of a digitally represented Nazi and you'd have a hard time complaining that the German soldiers are being vilified.

However, things seemingly become confounded when you bring in other factions of the "Axis". People in general tend to know even less about the Japanese involvement in World War II, and certainly very little of the Italians. Add in the fact that Russia was an uneasy ally and immediately became hated enemies after the dust had settled, and you quickly begin to see potential campaign settings diminish. No one country were heroes, but videogames and films tend to stick with the United States and England above anyone else. The probable heroism of any given soldier is overshadowed or outright ignored in favor of showcasing the greatness of said country. This may simply be a case of history being written by the victors, but also doubles as a sort of Ministry of Truth, wherein the ends justified any heinous means potentially taken.

People like to be told how great their culture is, and how their country saved the world from evil. The large majority of persons that had been there are no longer here today, and certainly don't play videgames if they are. They make up an almost nonexistent piece of the potential market. The developers don't care if they offend, because ultimately they aren't selling history, they're selling an experience that smells vaguely of an assumed truth. People are familiar enough with the setting and primary characters that such games practically come preinstalled with a user base. Besides, people like to blast faceless and unquestionably evil stormtroopers, whether it be in Normandy or on the Death Star...

Quote from: Enner

Quote from: Morari

The linked discussion is somehow not political to some degree? o_O

I think it isn't. It's mostly about ethics and morals concerning the portrayal of WWII games.
Your army recruitment post is a bit of a slam against the political tool that is the military. Eep! Shouldn't be talking more about it.

The army recruitment post was not a "slam" against anything, per say. Even if it were, it would have been directed at the delusional masses that think war is something that it is not because they've played a few videogames and read the junk mail sent out to them by the government. In discussing anything related to war, the discussion will be political in nature. War is, in and of itself, a strictly political beast--until we get back to talking about clans of cavemen fighting over a fallen mammoth carcass to eat and survive, that is. In discussing the dilemma of appeasing veterans by not trivializing their efforts while appealing to the masses with an entertainment product, you are essentially speaking more of politics than you are morals or ethics. Me thinks that this "no political discussion" rule, while just enough, is vaguely implemented and narrowly enforced. ;)

EDIT: Many of these points seem to have already been discussed within the aforementioned "Current WWII Shooters Are Unethical" thread. I just wasted a lot of typing, apparently. At least I now know for sure that my comments aren't political in nature...

Shift KeyJune 28, 2008

Quote from: Mr.

Civil War might work really well under the right developer, (have to compensate for slow muskets and impatient gamers)

Mustache mini-games?

Nick DiMolaNick DiMola, Staff AlumnusJune 28, 2008

Quote from: Morari

Me thinks that this "no political discussion" rule, while just enough, is vaguely implemented and narrowly enforced.

As it needs to be. I think everyone knows when they are crossing into controversial territory, we don't need a laundry list in order for everyone to get the picture. It is narrowly enforced because just the smallest nudge across the line can really open the floodgates, I've seen it happen.

I know alot of people don't like the rule, but it is there for a reason. If you want to discuss video games and politics feel free to visit gamepolitics.com, they welcome that kind of discussion there. All other gaming discourse is welcomed and appreciated here.

EnnerJune 28, 2008

Quote from: Morari

Quote from: Enner

Quote from: Morari

The linked discussion is somehow not political to some degree? o_O

I think it isn't. It's mostly about ethics and morals concerning the portrayal of WWII games.
Your army recruitment post is a bit of a slam against the political tool that is the military. Eep! Shouldn't be talking more about it.

The army recruitment post was not a "slam" against anything, per say. Even if it were, it would have been directed at the delusional masses that think war is something that it is not because they've played a few videogames and read the junk mail sent out to them by the government. In discussing anything related to war, the discussion will be political in nature. War is, in and of itself, a strictly political beast--until we get back to talking about clans of cavemen fighting over a fallen mammoth carcass to eat and survive, that is. In discussing the dilemma of appeasing veterans by not trivializing their efforts while appealing to the masses with an entertainment product, you are essentially speaking more of politics than you are morals or ethics. Me thinks that this "no political discussion" rule, while just enough, is vaguely implemented and narrowly enforced. ;)

Actually, I think even with the caveman example there are some politics involved. There has to be some sort of government if they formed clans! :p

Quote from: Shift

Quote from: Mr.

Civil War might work really well under the right developer, (have to compensate for slow muskets and impatient gamers)

Mustache mini-games?

With bayonets. Don't forget the bayonets.
I just recalled the existence of a game called Gods and Generals based on the movie of the same name. HUURRRGGGH

GoldenPhoenixJune 28, 2008

Edited for Kairon. All I will say is cut it out to Morari and utilize the thread that was linked. The End.

SOOOOOOOO...

how's about that World War II guys?

Actually, I don't see why everyone's tired of World War II. I mean, you'd think people would be tired of bald space marines by now but nooo, they just keep pumping them out.

But since Infinity Ward did CODIV, you think that these two teams (TreyArch and IW) are leapfrogging with the games? One does one year then the other does the next year? Aren't there rumors that a call of duty will be going into SPACE in fact? Then people can get their Bald Space marines and their World War II games from a single franchise!

Smoke39June 28, 2008

That and GP just kinda likes yelling at people in general.

GoldenPhoenixJune 28, 2008

Because I make Kairon cry I am editing this.

Smoke39June 28, 2008

Regardless of whether your have a good reason to or not, you do yell at people a lot.  That's all I'm saying. :3

GoldenPhoenixJune 28, 2008

Quote from: Smoke39

Regardless of whether your have a good reason to or not, you do yell at people a lot.  That's all I'm saying. :3

I type I don't yell, unless my words have hidden sound effects in them. I also only type loud at the Evanllike folk and people with weird monsters as avatars who then try to cover them up with a cute bomberman.

Smoke39June 28, 2008

You see?  Now you're yelling at me and making fun of my avatar for no reason.

GoldenPhoenixJune 28, 2008

Quote from: Smoke39

You see?  Now you're yelling at me and making fun of my avatar for no reason.

Yeah, well, um. Ok YOU GOT ME! Happy now?!?! :P

Smoke39June 28, 2008

Delighted.

MorariJune 28, 2008

Quote from: Enner]Actually,

I had thought of that, but decided to simplify the statement for the benefit of my point. Most cavemen clans would probably be a broader family unit than anything else, and would thus take advantage of a somewhat natural hierarchy. While conflicts among cavemen may have been political in nature, I would tend to think that they were driven more so by base instincts. This would include survival, whether it be by defending said carcass, or attacking a neighboring clan and seizing their carcass. While the acquisition of "wealth" is still present, it probably could not be called out as greed or envy.

Quote from: Kairon]Actually,

There are far more things one could do with space marines, for one. You could have anything from Alien(s) to Doom. The possible settings are simply far broader than any oversimplified WWII theater. I don't think they should necessarily be bald however. Bald is a pretty grodie look, after all. How about growing some hair, guys? I mean, really. Geez. I would, however, totally go for Call of Duty: Rasczak's Roughnecks! I'd have to get it for the PC though, as I am still far from sold on the idea of a console FPS, even though you'd think the Wii would work great for such...


EnnerJune 28, 2008

Oh man. The Call of Duty 4 engine used to do a proper Starship Troopers (something based on the CG cartoon or, even better, the book). I would love that.

wanderingJune 29, 2008

Quote from: ShyGuy

I seriously doubt Call of Duty: World at War is going to influence anyone's world view, the video game by it's very nature is escapist fantasy.

The art/entertainment you take in has a big effect on your perception of the world. The gap between fantasizing about something and doing something isn't as big as people think it is.

ShyGuyJune 29, 2008

Can you cite some examples, Jack?

wanderingJune 29, 2008

Resident Evil can make people afraid of windows. Driving games make people drive recklessly.

GoldenPhoenixJune 29, 2008

From my experience teens don't need a racing game to cause them to drive like crap!

King of TwitchJune 29, 2008

On Morari's point, I think it's depressing that vidya game designers can envision a future with all kinds of teleportation and invisible shielding but not a world that's found a cure for baldness?

EnnerJune 29, 2008

Maybe they just like baldness? Think of the bald! Maybe they like saving all that money on shampoo.

King of TwitchJune 29, 2008

Maybe inflation in the future will make everyday conveniences prohibitively expensive, or a greedy cartel jacks prices up on everything. I can see it.

KDR_11kJune 29, 2008

Quote from: Kairon

Actually, I don't see why everyone's tired of World War II. I mean, you'd think people would be tired of bald space marines by now but nooo, they just keep pumping them out.

At least fictional scenarios don't have any real battles that developers feel they MUST include into every game (well, except for Star Wars...).

Quote from: Enner

Maybe they just like baldness? Think of the bald! Maybe they like saving all that money on shampoo.

I thin k the future has a bad case of head lice.

ShyGuyJune 29, 2008

Somebody watched Aliens 3

UltimatePartyBearJune 30, 2008

A friend of mine was in the Marines, and he kept his head shaved most of the time.  There's a simple reason: shaving your head is the cheapest and most convenient way to stay within regulations regarding hair length.  Trips to the barber cost money, and maintaining a haircut that's short enough for the Marine Corps could take a couple of haircuts per month.  Cutting your own hair and doing it well is too much of a bother for most people, but shaving is pretty hard to mess up.  All this adds up to a lot of real life Marines sporting the cue ball look, and video game developers striving for authenticity take it from there.  It doesn't hurt that a bald head is a lot easier to render than flowing locks, either.

NinGurl69 *hugglesJune 30, 2008

Solid Snake goes against the trend.

Quote from: UltimatePartyBear

It doesn't hurt that a bald head is a lot easier to render than flowing locks, either.

Honestly, I think this is the real reason.

MorariJune 30, 2008

Quote from: MADONNA

Solid Snake goes against the trend.

That's because Snake has character.

NinGurl69 *hugglesJune 30, 2008

We need a Jack Burton game to show what character truly is.

Got a news tip? Send it in!
Advertisement
Advertisement