I despise the current "slight future" setting, so any change would be good. I've found CoD intensely boring (not mechanically) for a long while.

Why? There aren't just, like, two options: modern and WWII. You could do Vietnam, the Zulu Wars, the Crusades, the Civil War, or literally any other war in existence.

WWII has clearly defined good guys / bad guys, modern setting give you a billion unlocks via gun attachments etc to keep people playing. Vietnam also has the problem with being only one enviroment setting jungle which would get very boring. Zulu, Crusades and Civil wouldn't really be fun shooters the guns take 5 min to reload each time.

Civil War boys.

I'd like nice long single or coop campaign with modern graphics and game design elements. Maybe try getting really in depth and dealing with huge number of people on screen, the logistics moving such large military groups around, and the down time to edge of your seat thrown into the middle of a hurricane moments.

I don't trust Activision. Not interested in another set piece and corridor shooter of following a subordinate on a guidedaily tour.

While my first choicer is Korea, I think an alternative history game could be AWESOME.

I think an alternative 1950s were all the enemies and allies of WW 2 were forced to come together to fight machine intelligence aliens. The trick being humans can only really use human technology, not of that "we captured alien" tech bullshit that Resistance used. Think of it this way imagine we were fighting cavemen, do you think them capturing a jet fighter means they can make their own in five years? Fuck no! The most cave men learn form a jet is what parts of a "jet" are vulnerable to what weapons they have...the rest is a mystery.

I woudl love a game where you fight white what amount to Korean/Vietnam war technology against aliens.

I like the Korea and alternative history suggestions.

Just re-downloaded world at War cause I was feeling a wwii shooter. Wouldn't mind someone going back to that now, it's been awhile.

not so crazy to see them do a wolfenstien, kinda sci-fi, 40's type weaponry, bunch of nonsense story stuff. Christ, I'm sure there is more than enough years left in the series for that.

Personally if I were running Activision after Ghosts I would have told Infinity Ward to make a WW2 shooter. While working on that I would also have them split a section of the team off (or hire a separate studio) to make an Modern Warfare Remastered Trilogy for the 10th anniversary of CoD4 on current gen for next year.

When everyone was bemoaning the WWII shooter a few years ago, I just sort of shrugged because I always liked that setting. So yeah I would definitely welcome a return to that style of game. Instead of looking at the war from a macro perspective, why not focus on one small troop of soldiers and their trials and tribulations ala Band of Brothers. I think that could be cool. And give me another Company of Heroes while you're at it.

It's been time for a great WW2 game for a few years now.

You do realize that you're basically asking for the exact same thing that happened to WW2 shooters, right? Constant, unending future military shooters that are going to become as exhaustive as WW2 were is just going to make everyone sick of that as well. We had Black Ops 2 start that trend three years ago since that time we've had Killzone: Shadowfall, Titanfall, Advanced Warfare and Black Ops 3 in the past two years with another Tf2 due out this year, AW2 most assuredly coming next year, and a 50/50 shot at a spiritual successor to BO3 coming in after that. And, oh yeah, possibly a future military shooter from Infinity Ward this year!

You want to talk about milking the same backdrop...

It's been eight years since a WW2 shooter was released; it's time for a new one. It doesn't have to play exactly like the old ones. There's plenty of things they can do to make it feel new.

@tpoppapuff: You're right. We've had loads of futuristic shooters. I'm pretty sure the list is just as long as the list of WWII games that just keep coming out, hah.

The backdrop of futuristic shooters is something I'll always be a sucker for; just like how people can keep going back to WW2 games. I guess the backdrop (for me) is important and not important. It's tied with the gameplay; Black Ops 3 is probably the first one in the (CoD) series that I've found compelling enough to keep playing. I think largely it's the pacing for me; getting back to the fight is faster; there's verticality; the specialist class abilities are different; the map design; the gunplay is smooth in a way that works with the hectic pace... I could go on and on why I've had so much fun with this game.

And yeah, sure, milk this backdrop. Why? Because, despite the same sort of back drop, they can be new and different, it's easier to experiment. They're not bound by historical facts. It's sci-fi.

I'd like to pause here to say I hope I'm not coming off as argumentative. I've never been the target audience for WW2 games. I definitely see the appeal (you only have to see Drew's excitement during his segments on UPF). The setting is cool and fun in its own way, I just haven't been 'wowed' by a WW2 game in a long time. I'm also having trouble imagining how they can possibly go and make a Call of Duty WW2 shooter feel 'fresh' and 'compelling', without doing the same thing. Would they incorporate some of the specialist elements from Black Ops 3? Would it even still be a traditional CoD shooter? I genuinely hope they find something that sets it apart from your average WW2 shooter. Because if they don't... Well, what's the point?

Edit: Or, maybe go back and remaster/redo one of the old CoD games? That could be interesting. Or like some people suggested, alternative history?

I would be interested in a WWII CoD, unfortunately I can't see how they would make it. CoD has been only getting faster and faster and crazier and crazier, it would be tough to now scale it back.

I also feel like MGS V satisfied my craving for a retro-feeling military game.

I mean I can't really give a cut and dry yes or no. A call of Duty WWII game? I dunno, maybe? A different company doing one? Yeah, I could be down. But, I mean, there have been WWII shooters coming out all this time, just not 'mainstream' releases.

@thepanzini: There's no such thing as clearly defined good guys and bad guys in war. And yes, there is a way to make Civil War warfare fun. Dismissing that entire era because no one's figured it out yet is lazy

@bernard_bernoulli: Yes on a phyllisophical level there are no good guys and bad guys in war, but for entertainment Nazi's are always the bad guy and can be dehumanized will little to no consequence. Civil Warfare fun? now the op asking for WWII COD. You'll can't make a run and gun Civil War era game, it would never be fun for a COD audience. However I never dismissed the era or said a Civil War FPS game couldn't be made.

@jonny_anonymous: But how many of those actually fit with the type of gameplay Call of Duty brings?

After reading what most people have said, it occurs to med we could define what were are talking about when we say PLAY CoD.

Some of us mean just the online multiplayer. Some of use mean the single player campaign. And some of use mean, some sort of re-imagining of what CoD is entirely.

I want Korea, but what I really mean is I'd like the campaign to be in Korea, and for that to be the multiplayer setting as well. To make that worthwhile I really think the campaign needs to matter again, and not just some nonsense someone at the studio cooks-up for the storyline with creazy weapons. I liked CoD AW, but I don't necessarily need rocket jumps and remote turrets in my game to have fun. That why something like a return to WW 2, Korea, or even an alternative history set in the 40, 50s, or 60s would be appealing.

I'd be more interested in a WW2 game than another future war game.

I love the atmosphere of historic games, and prefer role playing as if I am a real soldier trying to stay alive in the madness of war than jumping around like a lunatic.