By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - why do you hate WW2 setting games

alot of people complain about WW2 games,why though?

i think it is fun to play em,i just played COD3 on pc after playing COD4 and i still liked it



tag:"reviews only matter for the real hardcore gamer"

Around the Network

Not hate;...Their are just to many games about WWII...

After a time it gets boring...






consider the fact that there is all these WW2 games and its like watching the same movie about the same battle zone for 10 days straight do you want to do that? nah thats why COD4 was huge and fun not only the multilayer but it was more Modern.

were just tired of the same war...



Incert Witty Comment on how i'm a fanboy of all systems including PC here.

^^ what he said. Just about every war game ever made were based on WWII with the exception to the few that weren't (only COD4 comes to mind at this moment).



Proud Owner of all 3 current-gen systems

Currently Playing:
SSBB, Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn, MKWii, GTA IV (360), MGS4, DQIV, Jeanne d'Arc, FFVII: Crisis Core, Chrono Trigger (PSX)

Mario Kart FC: 4897-6731-4375
SSBB FC: 1504-5406-8515
Wii Friends Code: 1020-2726-1535-3964

XBL:
PhatLaosBoi
PSN: PhatLaosBoi

Because they've been done too many times and block the path to innovation in war games. Just imagine a whole market, full of new World War I games. Imagine new gameplay mechanics to struggle in the bloody stalemate of Verdun. Just start to think about what could be done to revolutionize the genre, and why these World War II shooters are stopping that. Hell, I'd love to see a Revolutionary or Civil War game that didn't suck more than a chicken (movie reference, see if you can get it!).



 

 

Around the Network

I think its hypocritical. They get tired of all the shooters being set in WW2, but they never get tired of all the sci fi shooters that may have different names for their outlandish creatures, yet down deep its the same old crap they've been getting since Doom with just a new name in the title of the game. But they never complain about. Only about being in WW2 with army soldiers of different names and different missions and maps.



MontanaHatchet said:
Because they've been done too many times and block the path to innovation in war games. Just imagine a whole market, full of new World War I games. Imagine new gameplay mechanics to struggle in the bloody stalemate of Verdun. Just start to think about what could be done to revolutionize the genre, and why these World War II shooters are stopping that. Hell, I'd love to see a Revolutionary or Civil War game that didn't suck more than a chicken (movie reference, see if you can get it!).

yeah they should innovate more,after playing crysis i want more games of that type to be released



tag:"reviews only matter for the real hardcore gamer"

WW2 is so last gen, i am sick of shooting germans also



Wii/Mario Kart Wii Code:2793-0686-5434

^i think even if they made it to fight the japanese,or other people in WWII i think they would still complain



tag:"reviews only matter for the real hardcore gamer"

Well, when you think of fps you really only have three types (generally): WWII, shoot terrorits, aliens on a rampage. That's it. This encompasses almost every single hyped FPS. Resitance: check, Halo: check, COD1-5: check, doom: check, quake: check, Haze: check, Half-Life:check...etc. So to say WWII is more overdone than the other two genera of FPS is incorrect.

Not only that, CoD5 is going to be in the Pacific, which is a significantly different type of war than that of the European theater (and its going to have at least on arial mission woot). I say we should judge the game based on how good it is instead of it being a wwII game. If not, then we should be attacking all the games in the other two genera of fps as well.



Now Playing: The Witcher (PC)

Consoles Owned: NES, SNES, N64, PS1, PS2, Wii, Xbox 360, Game Boy, DS