Also, near proof that the modern-rumors are swilling around the crap barrel. The original article had some interesting points to make.

According to our source, Call of Duty 4 will be developed by Infinity Ward
The three-way deal established between Infinity Ward, Treyarch, and Activision states that Infinity Ward will develop all even numbered titles while Treyarch develops the odd numbered games, such as Call of Duty 3. Treyarch did develop Call of Duty 2: Big Red One as well, however.

Call of Duty 4 is said to step away from the war torn locales of World War II, instead focusing on the battlefields of present day.

The source compared Call of Duty 4’s technical achievements to other games saying that while most shooters have two or three critical points on the head, Call of Duty 4 has 16, saying that you can shoot the side of an opponent’s helmet to make it spin on their head, or knock the helmet clean off. Supposedly you will even be able to shoot an enemy’s ear off.

Shooting somebody' s ear off? Sounds like a Teen game to me.

the multiplayer is certainly something to write home about. Our source has said that there have been multiplayer bouts with 54 players. Infinity Ward is supposed to be bringing Call of Duty 4 to the PC as well as consoles. Call of Duty 3 is only available on consoles and eventually the PSP.

So past/present tense grammatical errors aside... the PSP? 54 player multiplayer over Xbox live? Smells like rumor mongering to me.

Some of that article does sound a bit over-hyping certain aspects like all those head hitting areas.

However what concerns (well potentially annoys) me is the possible move to a modern-day setting - frankly I have no interest in that sort of thing. I much prefer the historical settings, so don' t mind WW2 or Korea, or maybe even a fictional cold war setting.

" April 25, 2007 - Just when you were about ready to run up to the window and yell, " I' m mad as hell at World War II shooters, and I' m not gonna take it anymore!" , Activision and developer Infinity Ward are announcing today that the fourth entry in the Call of Duty franchise is moving on from World War II.

The game is not quite ready to be unveiled (the game' s trailer is being debuted on ESPN during the NFL Draft on Saturday), but the subtitle of the game gives away the new direction -- Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. The game looks set to transfer combat operations from WWII to the modern battlefields our soldiers face today.

Little is known about Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare at the moment, but we' re hopeful that the move to recent times also ushers in other big changes for the acclaimed franchise. Although some gamers are bound to feel that this sequel is coming uncomfortably quick on the heels of Call of Duty 3, franchise creator Infinity Ward has actually had a good deal of time to work on part 4 -- developer Treyarch handled COD3 while COD4 was deep in development. Activision has not yet announced which platforms the game will be released on, but IGN confirmed in February of 2006 that the development team had been scoping this game out primarily for Xbox 360 and PS3.



Look for the worldwide debut of the Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare trailer Saturday, April 28 on ESPN around 10 am Pacific Time / 1 pm Eastern Time during the NFL Draft. If you miss it, check IGN to ogle the new footage."

http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/783/783270p1.aspx

Fuckin' A!!!

I wonder whether it will cover a real life conflict with a story mode or whether it' ll be primarily multi-player focused like the Battlefield games.

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

I owned the game on PC and 360, I haven' t played it much on PC. Speaking only for online play, I didn' t like it. I sold it after a week. The advantage of more then 8 people per map is useless when the maps work best with 8 people or less. I was on a map with 40 people, it was stupid. You couldn' t even zoom through your scope without being killed 5 times over. I think my average life span online the first time I played on PC was 20 seconds, not even. There was just too many people, I respawned right next to enemies almost every time.

Then you have the whole friends list thing with the 360. Which some of you guys might not care about, but so far it' s made every FPS a lot more fun playing with regular people who all have headsets. Doing the same thing with any PC game is difficult, at least until Live on PC is released.

COD 2 is clearly geared more towards a console, the same way that Battlefield is geared towards PC. Has anyone played the Battlefield on 360? It' s horrible.

ORIGINAL: Agent Ghost

Has anyone played the Battlefield on 360? It' s horrible.

The single player is horrible, ...disgusting even, ...but the multi-player is cool. It was a launch title too so while CoD2 was having problems i spent most of my time playing Battlefield, and that lasted until GRAW games out and for a couple of months after.

The vehicles control like shit and the game is a snipers paradise but once you get into it it' s pretty damn good.

I haven' t played it in months though and i do prefer the PC version.

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

I owned the game on PC and 360, I haven' t played it much on PC. Speaking only for online play, I didn' t like it. I sold it after a week. The advantage of more then 8 people per map is useless when the maps work best with 8 people or less. I was on a map with 40 people, it was stupid. You couldn' t even zoom through your scope without being killed 5 times over. I think my average life span online the first time I played on PC was 20 seconds, not even. There was just too many people, I respawned right next to enemies almost every time.

Then you have the whole friends list thing with the 360. Which some of you guys might not care about, but so far it' s made every FPS a lot more fun playing with regular people who all have headsets. Doing the same thing with any PC game is difficult, at least until Live on PC is released.

COD 2 is clearly geared more towards a console, the same way that Battlefield is geared towards PC. Has anyone played the Battlefield on 360? It' s horrible.

No, I completely disagree with this. Besides the fact that COD 2 is best played with 16 people, you can play with 8 people on the PC if you want to just as easily. Simply filter. There is zero advantage to the X360 version. Zero.

As far as this announcement is concerned: Disappointing. I' m not interested in whored out franchises and COD is now putting on the red lipstick. Nobody will take away Iron Sights, UO' s 1942 meet COD awesomeness, or COD 2' s interface. But, it will go down in history as a cash cow for a greedy company, and that' s sad.

F***!

I feel abandoned. If I want " Modern Warfare" then I' ll play " Modern Combat" .

I really hated to think the rumors were true, and there was enough information to assume they weren' t, but... dang man. Arent Battlefield, GRAW, Gears, Crysis, the Darkness, MGS4 enough modern combat for the market? I played Call of Duty because I liked the setting.

No matter how old the genre, Infinity Ward still managed to make it fresh.

There was something epic about seeing a hundred men armed to the teeth scaling a rock face and advancing on an MG nest. There' s nothing epic about what we' re doing now. You wait around a civilian-crowded street for somebody to walk towards you and hit the detonator, or have someone shoot you from a block away inside an apartment. Then you fire in whatever direction you heard gunfire from and hope you didn' t just pop a civilian.

Bad move Infinity Ward. I' ll be scouring the previews before I buy this.

No, I completely disagree with this. Besides the fact that COD 2 is best played with 16 people, you can play with 8 people on the PC if you want to just as easily. Simply filter. There is zero advantage to the X360 version. Zero.

The map-editor and story-mode creator isn' t an advantage?

The question is now, where does this put Treyarch' s Call of Duty 5? Y' think they' re gonna have to follow suit. I' m personally hoping not.


...


Oh, and did I mention? F***!!!![:' (]

Edit:

I gagged a little uploading this.[:' (]

I couldn' t agree with you more Eddie. I know everyone complains about yet another WW2 shooter but they do seem far less prevalent than present-day or near-future ones. I like the low-tech rifle in hand approach, it seems much more visceral sort of game rather than sniping someone from a far.

How come I haven' t gamed with you yet?

This we will have to rectify.

Operation Flashpoint 2...



...and CoD4 will destroy it.

I wouldn' t worry.