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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - I'm convinced a Call of Duty Civil War edition could work.

gurglesletch on 27 November 2009

WW1 would be dumb. they all had bolt-action rifles and the mgs were emplaced because they wee brand new tech




Get your Portable ID!

Around the Network
A Bad Clown on 27 November 2009

I don't think they can do the civil war war, and for Vietnam half the weapons in MW1 and MW2 dateback that far.



19:44:34 Skeezer METAL GEAR ONLINE
19:44:36 Skeezer FAILURE
19:44:51 ABadClown You're right!
19:44:55 ABadClown Hur hur hur
19:45:01 Skeezer i meant
19:45:04 Skeezer YOU ARE A FAILKURE
19:45:08 Skeezer FAILURE*
pastro243 on 27 November 2009
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.



- Our album on spotify https://open.spotify.com/album/56mEbEgyBYGzcDyZ1eMQ1v?si=hYKgir5YRSCrzywgGmV4oQ

- Our videoclip 

- My manga: https://www.webtoons.com/en/challenge/blanca-the-world/list?title_no=313068

richardhutnik on 28 November 2009

If one doesn't care one bit to remotely simulate weapons of the Civil War properly, then there may be a chance Call of Duty could work. The reload time is tedious for Civil War weapons. And if you end up with it following Call of Duty 3, you would have to move to controller sticks to mirror actually reloading the weapons.



jonager on 28 November 2009

i think civil war is too usan centered to really has a WW appeal



Around the Network
Shadowfest3 on 27 December 2009
Strategyking92 said:
oh, and:

Yeah, I would love to pick this game up.  However, this game doesn't have multiplayer online and Call of Juarez: BiB does.  I wish they would make a Civil War game that had multiplayer online.  I really enjoy CoJ:BiB but there aren't enough people playing it.  Oh, I think WWI, Korean, or Vietnam Wars would be interesting as well.  I love history and to play games that incorporate it is always fun.