Shackpets | Available on iOS and Google Play Store

Call of Duty 3 Developer Treyarch Likely Developing New COD World War II Title

54
A job posting by Activision-owned, California-based Treyarch suggests that the studio responsible for Call of Duty 3 (PS2, PS3, Xbox, X360, Wii) is returning to the still remarkably popular World War II first-person shooter genre for its next project. One qualification for the level design position is "working experience with first-person shooter or third-person shooter genres (console or PC)." The post adds, "And if you're a fan of World War 2 shooters, then even better!"

It is likely Treyarch is working on the next Call of Duty game, be it a main numbered entry or a spinoff. Treyarch has developed Call of Duty: United Offensive (PC) as Gray Matter, which merged into Treyarch; Call of Duty 2: Big Red One (PS2, Xbox, GCN); and Call of Duty 3. All of Treyarch's standalone Call of Duty games have been console-only.

In order to keep the successful series releasing on a yearly basis, publisher Activision juggled entries such that creator Infinity Ward worked on Call of Duty 4: Modern Combat while Treyarch worked on the prior game. Given that setup, it is plausible that Treyarch would now be working on Call of Duty 5 while Infinity Ward moves onto Call of Duty 6.

Given the language of Treyarch's posting, it is almost certain its next game is set during the ubiquitous world War II. Infinity Ward, however, has seen critical and commercial success with its new modern-day game, which may prompt Activision to keep new entries in that vein. In a Shacknews interview this year, lead designer Steve Fukoda said the studio had not decided whether it would retain the setting.

From The Chatty
  • reply
    December 8, 2007 5:11 AM

    Oh god, I think I just vomited in my mouth

    • reply
      December 8, 2007 5:26 AM

      Bit of an overreaction. I'm not interested in it at all but a lot of casual gamers will buy it and enjoy it.

      • reply
        December 8, 2007 5:35 AM

        Really. Not as if the guy has to play any WW2 style game anyway. Of course, Remo would say that, as gamers, we should all strive to persuade developers and publishers to put out innovative and differing games instead of an endless line of games.

        *pats Remo on the head and gives him a doggy biscuit*

        • reply
          December 8, 2007 5:47 AM

          Then I disagree with Remo too :). I think we have to encourage and persuade devs to put out innovative games by supporting those titles with our wallets. But not really at the expense of franchise titles like this. When I worked in a Game I found out how much casual gamers want these sorts of titles. And there's nothing wrong with that in my opinion it creates more gamers and makes more money for the industry.

          It's like Pop music for kids, they start off liking Pop and as their tastes mature so does the type of music they're willing to listen to.

          • reply
            December 8, 2007 7:32 AM

            Kids are capable of liking good music, too, though. Why feed them shit made by cunts when they could start on the real stuff? :(

            Not that I didn't like crap music when I was very young, but that's all they played on the radio and all I was exposed to. Once I heard better stuff I, still young, liked it a lot more threw away the old stuff.

            • reply
              December 8, 2007 7:53 AM

              Yeah they can like "good" stuff. But if they enjoy Pop whats the problem it's just being extremely elitist if you say kids shouldn't listen to pop music. Games like Call of Duty 3 and the Need for Speed titles are "Pop games" and I think a lot of gamers are very elitist about them.

              • reply
                December 8, 2007 3:04 PM

                If they listen to better music then (a) they'll more quickly develop an appreciation of the artform; (b) it might give them something to think about lyrically, and musically if they are that way inclined; and (c) they'll have stuff from their childhood that they can still appreciate years later, which is cool in itself.

                Even if you don't value any of those things much, what's the advantage to having them listen to crap?

                • reply
                  December 8, 2007 8:12 PM

                  Because they enjoy it? Pop music often has melodies that are very catchy and lyrics that are easy to sing too and appeal to kids. Music and games are both meant to be fun people forget that sometimes I think.

                  • reply
                    December 9, 2007 7:44 AM

                    They'll enjoy both types of music so that isn't an advantage in bad music's favour.

                    Some pop music is good so don't think I'm saying that only obscure stuff is good or anything like that. I'm just saying, why feed children like Britney Burgers when they could eat a nice, well-cooked steak? They will enjoy both and, in the long term, they'll get more out of the better stuff. Plus we will be rewarding the people who made the best things more than the people who make crap.

          • reply
            December 8, 2007 12:53 PM

            Euro Trash is interpreting my opinion in an incorrect way. I'm not sure specifically what he's basing it on. I believe we should encourage the industry by voting with our wallets as well. Good games should be supported, whether they are franchise titles or not. I support titles I find to be innovative because I think there should be more of them. I also recently bought Halo 3, The Orange Box, Super Mario Galaxy, and so on--I've even give all of those glowing Shacknews reviews.

            • reply
              December 8, 2007 1:03 PM

              I would like to see you review Spider Solitaire :(

        • reply
          December 8, 2007 12:44 PM

          You got a hard on for me or something?

      • reply
        December 8, 2007 6:22 AM

        Yeah, because if you happen to play and enjoy a WW2 fps game, you are a casual gamer.

        WW2 = casual
        Modern times = hardcore

        What?

        • reply
          December 8, 2007 7:05 AM

          Franchise games seem to appeal to casual gamers.

          • reply
            December 8, 2007 9:53 AM

            Popular, big "names" attract casual gamers, but that's not news. It's not about the setting, it's about the status.

            Modern war is actually more commercial, every shooter like CS, Battlefield or CoD4 in that setting always make big bucks.

          • reply
            December 8, 2007 10:04 AM

            Even my cousin is a casual gamer and he was complaining about how many WW2 games there are out there.

            Personally, I don't care. As long as it's fun, I'd play it.

          • reply
            December 8, 2007 12:32 PM

            COD 4 *is* a franchise game, whether you like it or not. Just because it isn't set in WW2 doesn't change the fact that it's Call of Duty "4"

Hello, Meet Lola