This comes from Infinity Ward.

" Insert boring update about some mundane ' what we' re doing' detail that no one actually cares about (such as new employees or kleenex testing) because they' re just reading these updates for the glimpse hope that we' ll slip and say something we' re not suppose to about our next title, or that we' re going to allude to the fact that maybe, just maybe something that actually is interesting is coming up in the near future (and by near future I mean next Saturday).

Amazing Things To Happen On April 28th:

1758 - James Monroe, 5th President of the United States is born.

1788 - Maryland becomes the seventh state to ratify the Constitution of the United States.

1932 - A vaccine for yellow fever is announced for use on humans.

(Then nothing really happened for a long time.... but now....)

2007 - What goes down this April 28th is equal to, if not surpasses, the magnitude of any of those.

Call of Duty 4 anyone?

Yay! Infinity Ward kick ass!

Lets hope there was some truth to it not being set during WWII.

Really? If they' re doing anything but WWII, then I' d like to see something done in the Korean War. It was a really interesting conflict and it hasn' t been touched on at all in the industry.

Bah, they do kick-ass stuff with World War 2, if they can keep it fresh, then I don' t mind them not changing a good formula.

It' s rumoured to be Gulf War-esque but meh, i would kill for them to do a Vietnam game.

I don' t think it will be a new Call of Duty title. Which is good, because they completely half assed COD 2 in every way.

I mean, really, I liked Call of Duty because of United Offensive. COD 2 had many interesting innovations in the cinematic regard, but it completely negated the progresss that United Offensive made. Let' s also not forget the awful " select your own way to kill" routine that had no bearing on gameplay quality or added to the depth of the game.

I' m interested, but I' m not going to be excited because this developer hasn' t warranted that emotion.

I don' t need to read previews. I' ll be first in line to buy the game.

ORIGINAL: DontPeeOnBilly

I don' t think it will be a new Call of Duty title.

Why not?

Why not?

A. Because I hope not.

B. Because Treyarch handled 3.

C. Because I don' t want to play COD 4 ever. That series is done for, with much help from Infinity Ward.

It' s already been revealed that Trearch will take the odd numbered COD games while Infinity Ward will handle the even numbered games. They' re sharing the license.

I don' t think it will be a new Call of Duty title. Which is good, because they completely half assed COD 2 in every way.

I mean, really, I liked Call of Duty because of United Offensive. COD 2 had many interesting innovations in the cinematic regard, but it completely negated the progresss that United Offensive made.

Do you mind elaborating? Call of Duty 2 is still my favorite Xbox 360 game, and the PC version holds merit with me due to the map editor.

It' s already been revealed that Trearch will take the odd numbered COD games while Infinity Ward will handle the even numbered games. They' re sharing the liscense.

Wasn' t that news in the same category as the " CoD:4" promo art? (read as photoshopped " Enduring Freedom" photos)

The original story that started both of those rumours was incredibly hard to belive. I doubt they' d swich from the formula that' s sold millions.

I thought this was confirmed. Maybe I' m wrong. I guess we' ll see next Saturday.

CoD4 was announced about 3 months ago wasn' t it, it' s due out Q1 08.

Nothing wrong with another CoD seeing as they are only up to 42/43 still 2 more years worth of battles to go.

Nitro Vietnam was done in BF vietnam and TBH it wasn' t one of the best of the BF series.


Korea would be good, doubt if they would do a Gulf war title as it is still a political minefield.

They should do a game based around the Kosovo conflict. That' d be awesome!

The Falklands would be a good one, trying to dodge all the Exocets.

I don' t need to read previews. I' ll be first in line to buy the game.

I' ll fight you for the spot.

The ultimate shocker! They go back in time to WW1! Can' t say it wouldn' t be interesting right?

Do you mind elaborating? Call of Duty 2 is still my favorite Xbox 360 game, and the PC version holds merit with me due to the map editor..

I' ve had a pretty detailed history in the field of WW2 FPS games. When COD came out I bought it largely at the whim of my peers. When I played it I thought it was inferior to other WW2 shooters at the time (Day of Defeat, Battlefield 1942) but it had one thing that those other titles didn' t, iron sights. Iron sights made the game for me. When UO came out I purchased it and I experienced what I thought then, and still think, is the best WW2 concotion ever created. UO successfully blends the cinematic nature of COD while putting in massive elements of BF1942, but stifling them enough to keep the action hot. It was COD meet UO, and I loved every second of it.

COD 2 took many great steps to improve the formula for cinematic gameplay. The dodge for health scheme, the invisible inventory, and the overall feel of the game made it more cinematic. HOWEVER, it FAILED to incorporate the online immersion of UO and I was turned off by the sequel after completing the game and simply touching the online component. The fact that " choose your own route" gameplay was a gimmick only added insult to injury.

Needless to say, despite the innovation within the series, I' ve found it very hard to approve of something that doesn' t move fully forward with its ideas. To add insult to injury, COD 3 was console exclusive and came out quickly afterwards and the former console titles were nothing special at all.

I' m going to level with people here, I' m terrible at videogames. However, I know my WW2 fps, and COD has provided many good memories, but it' s a series that I cannot put weight behind after the failures it made in its execution.

For the record, DOD hasn' t evolved properly either. I never really liked BF1942.

Imo COD2 is more fun on 360 than on PC.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/show_blog_entry.php?topic_id=25585488&om_act=convert&om_clk=multimodule&tag=multimodule;picks;title;2

preferably be a fan of World War 2 shooters

So unless Treyarch will be handling WWII and Infinity Ward a more modern game it looks like we' re stuck with WWII for a while yet.

At least we know it is definitely a 4th COD game that' s being unveiled in 4 days time. Should be awesome.

Imo COD2 is more fun on 360 than on PC.

Don' t know why that would be the case at all.

it FAILED to incorporate the online immersion of UO and I was turned off by the sequel after completing the game and simply touching the online component.

Did you play the console version or the PC version? There' s some pretty large differences. The console version is still my favorite 360 game yet, but the PC version blows it away by comparison.

360 Version
8 player multiplayer.
Rough start to multiplayer.
Originally had some bad glitches.

PC Version
64 player multiplayer.
Smoother multiplayer experience.
CoD:2 Radiant (Lets you create your own multiplayer maps and story-mode maps, complete with effects. Very very cool.)
Mouse & Keyboard support.

While the chose your own route thing did turn out to be a gimmick, the game itself hardly felt like it was on rails. Nowhere near as bad as Call of Duty 3.

Call of duty 2 would build a 10 foot barrier of steel & cars where Call of Duty 3 would give you a 2 foot wall & tell you that you can' t clamber over it.