So I Just Played Through CoD 2 in 2 Sittings and...

[Menegrothx]

On topic, I giggled at the thought of a revolutionary or civil war based fps game. There might be some of them out there, but in the reality the game would play as: Hang out in a camp for weeks waiting for orders. Maybe there will be a fight, maybe not. If you're "lucky" enough to get into a battle, the reloading times would take minutes.

There are war games based around ”less popular wars”, but they are strategy games and history tends to play a big role in them. Their playerbases consist of history geeks and armchair strategians rather ADHD kids and esport douchebags, it's a completely different world of gaming.

Isnt there a FPS game that combines the American civil war with some time travel scifi stuff that was released not too long ago?

[sabrage]

Isnt there a FPS game that combines the American civil war with some time travel scifi stuff that was released not too long ago?

You're thinking of Gettysburg: Armored Warfare (which isn't even an FPS)

Proven wrong below, but that's another Civil War game.

[pankakes123]

On topic, I giggled at the thought of a revolutionary or civil war based fps game. There might be some of them out there, but in the reality the game would play as: Hang out in a camp for weeks waiting for orders. Maybe there will be a fight, maybe not. If you're "lucky" enough to get into a battle, the reloading times would take minutes.

There are war games based around ”less popular wars”, but they are strategy games and history tends to play a big role in them. Their playerbases consist of history geeks and armchair strategians rather ADHD kids and esport douchebags, it's a completely different world of gaming.

Isnt there a FPS game that combines the American civil war with some time travel scifi stuff that was released not too long ago?

Actually yes, there was. It was called Darkest of Days. Also don't forget the two History Channel FPS games that were released a few years back.

[Erik_Twice]

I've been running a gaming channel on Youtube for 3 years now which now has over 300 videos and more than 1500 subscribers. Therefore, I KNOW WHAT THE HELL I'M TALKING ABOUT!

I don't think I can contribute much here then, my blog only has like 3 followers, meaning I'm an ignorant!

[pankakes123]

I've been running a gaming channel on Youtube for 3 years now which now has over 300 videos and more than 1500 subscribers. Therefore, I KNOW WHAT THE HELL I'M TALKING ABOUT!

I don't think I can contribute much here then, my blog only has like 3 followers, meaning I'm an ignorant!

I like your Fox News approach of cutting off everything else I said in a desperate attempt to continue attacking me.

[Erik_Twice]

I like your Fox News approach of cutting off everything else I said in a desperate attempt to continue attacking me.

Why should I bother with the rest of your post? Is that going to change the fact that you think you are right because you have 300 videos in your Youtube channel?

I'm not twisting anything I'm quoting you word by word

[Cronozilla]

I'm skipping most of the horseshit in this thread and just reply with what I think about the original idea(s):

Specifically when talking about Call of Duty games ... I think 2 was the best one. It's a little rough around the edges now, thanks to the lack of sprint and grenade buttons, but overall, is a really solid game. It's strength is the level design. Most of the weaknesses ... are still in the MW games ... so. I'd argue it's probably the pinnacle of the series in terms of quality. I don't particularly care about MP and the like. It just got so much right. Where as, 4 eliminated clever level design and encounters for siege moments and set pieces. Which was very disappointing.

In terms of WW2 shooters ... personally, I loved them. The first one I played was Wolfenstein, but it was just "a shooter" at the time, not even it's own genre
But, I played Medal of Honor when it came out, which is what, arguably ushered in the movement. Followed by Underground and Allied Assaults.

A lot of popular and ground breaking games owe quite a bit to the WW2 setting that was often used ... so it's a little disappointing to often hear people rag on them just because of the setting. I know, for example, most people never played Call of Duty until 4, because it was WW2.

I don't think the "Modern Warfare" setting that's being used in everything now ... which is to say, shooting Arabs in various Arab countries as opposed to Nazis ... is necessarily a better shift.

[pankakes123]

I like your Fox News approach of cutting off everything else I said in a desperate attempt to continue attacking me.

Why should I bother with the rest of your post? Is that going to change the fact that you think you are right because you have 300 videos in your Youtube channel?

I'm not twisting anything I'm quoting you word by word

I never said you were twisting what I said, but now you are. That was just one in the list of many reasons why I do have experience with gaming. Take that part out and your left with the fact that despite my age I have been gaming for 11 years, I have a fairly large collection of around 200 games, I have played hundreds of games, I have over 10 different systems, etc. The thing about Youtube was merely yet another example of my passion for gaming, and some how you are so much of a troll you turn that around and use it against me in a completely ridiculous way. In fact, if it weren't for people like you, I never would have even had to bring up Youtube. JESUS give me a break already. Did you even look at my post at the end of page 2 clarifying this entire topic. Stop butchering everything.

[pankakes123]

I'm skipping most of the horseshit in this thread and just reply with what I think about the original idea(s):

Specifically when talking about Call of Duty games ... I think 2 was the best one. It's a little rough around the edges now, thanks to the lack of sprint and grenade buttons, but overall, is a really solid game. It's strength is the level design. Most of the weaknesses ... are still in the MW games ... so. I'd argue it's probably the pinnacle of the series in terms of quality. I don't particularly care about MP and the like. It just got so much right. Where as, 4 eliminated clever level design and encounters for siege moments and set pieces. Which was very disappointing.

In terms of WW2 shooters ... personally, I loved them. The first one I played was Wolfenstein, but it was just "a shooter" at the time, not even it's own genre
But, I played Medal of Honor when it came out, which is what, arguably ushered in the movement. Followed by Underground and Allied Assaults.

A lot of popular and ground breaking games owe quite a bit to the WW2 setting that was often used ... so it's a little disappointing to often hear people rag on them just because of the setting. I know, for example, most people never played Call of Duty until 4, because it was WW2.

I don't think the "Modern Warfare" setting that's being used in everything now ... which is to say, shooting Arabs in various Arab countries as opposed to Nazis ... is necessarily a better shift.

Yes! Finally a real response to what was supposed to be an innocent and fun topic! Sir, you have made my day, thank you! (No sarcasm included.)

[Jmustang1968]

I like your Fox News approach of cutting off everything else I said in a desperate attempt to continue attacking me.

Why should I bother with the rest of your post? Is that going to change the fact that you think you are right because you have 300 videos in your Youtube channel?

I'm not twisting anything I'm quoting you word by word

I never said you were twisting what I said, but now you are. That was just one in the list of many reasons why I do have experience with gaming. Take that part out and your left with the fact that despite my age I have been gaming for 11 years, I have a fairly large collection of around 200 games, I have played hundreds of games, I have over 10 different systems, etc. The thing about Youtube was merely yet another example of my passion for gaming, and some how you are so much of a troll you turn that around and use it against me in a completely ridiculous way. In fact, if it weren't for people like you, I never would have even had to bring up Youtube. JESUS give me a break already. Did you even look at my post at the end of page 2 clarifying this entire topic. Stop butchering everything.

I think it still is a gauge of your overall possible experience level. You have grown up with WW2 shooters being one of the biggest settings for FPS. Then you say WW2 shooters were the driving force behind console FPS. Others hastily refuted that by saying the console FPS came over from the PC side of things with the classics. And before Goldeneye and Perfect Dark, almost all console FPS were PC ports. I would say Halo and Goldeneye were what really put console FPS games on the map, and they weren't set in WW2.