I'm convinced a Call of Duty Civil War edition could work.

[pastro243]

Strategyking92 said:

Scoobes said:

Strategyking92 said:

Scoobes said:
^if publishers make decisions like film makers do, then they probably want to keep the scenarios where the US was directly involved. For some reason, the decision makers seem to think that unless it has Americans in then American audiences won't pick it up.

The US was not directly involved? I guess the half million troops over there didn't exist then?

That many? Really? I didn't think the US intervened to such an extent. I stand corrected then.

Good side:

590,911

480,000
63,000^[1]
26,791^[2]
17,000
7,430^[3]
5,455^[4]
3,972
3,421^[5]
2,163^[6]
1,389
1,294
1,271
1,068
900
826
44
Total: 1,207,010

Bad side:

260,000

926,000
26,000
Total: 1,212,000
Note: The figures vary by source; peak unit-strength varied during war.

I dont know if in a war there are a good and a bad side, but well, I dont care.

OT: A game like that wouldnt work at being massive, why? no one cares about the civil war, and the weapons are not apropiate for a shooter. Could be a minor game, a spin off if you wish to call it like that, but it wouldnt work as a main COD.