First Black Ops 2 Trailer Revealed

[Gamer87]

Dunno what the whinge is about modern soldiers riding horses. I mean a quick internet search shows it's not exactly a fantasy

srs?
Because its not modern
The game is obviously set in the future..
With robots... and hovering jets n ****...

[Ralph Wiggum]

Horses don't exist in the future (2025)? Holy ****, I'm off to the local stables for one last ride

[AzzA82]

so i guess source is a pos too by that standard? nothing wrong with the cod engine. it works. thats more than can be said about others

Well Yea it is starting to show its age even more so then COD but at least everytime they release a new game they improve it ( its been a long time for source tho.... eagerly awaiting "Ricochet 2" tho ) But COD has hardly change since Modern Warfare 1 and they are doing near yearly updates, you would expect more.

Until the console sheep stop scoffing this down, they wont make any real effort to further the tech or gameplay of this series. Honestly it has not changed much over the years and its getting old IMHO.

The graphics don't exactly inspire me but I'm willing to give this a go...I've always enjoyed the COD singleplayer franchise.

I agree Ralph its the SP portion thats brought me back most times but even that has fallen short in the MW2+3.
I absolutely loved MW1 SP + MP but i got MW3 on launch and i only 3 days ago got around to finishing the SP side.
And don't play MP any more ... hmm thinking of that back to BF3 strange considering 5 yrs ago id laugh at BF2.... irony

[Jez]

Dunno what the whinge is about modern soldiers riding horses. I mean a quick internet search shows it's not exactly a fantasy

srs?
Because its not modern
The game is obviously set in the future..
With robots... and hovering jets n ****...

I think the trailer makes it pretty clear that their advanced machinery has been turned against them, "someone else has the keys and whatnot".

Horses don't exist in the future (2025)? Holy ****, I'm off to the local stables for one last ride

I lol'd. Probably horses and CoD will both still be around in 2025.

[hooray4boobies]

I'm surprised everyone is annoyed at them actually doing something different with the franchise...I remember everyones anguish at MW2 when that was going to hit without dedi servers and it still managed to outsell every game that year.

[RSOblivion]

Wish I hadn't got MW2, source of more frustration than any game until MW3 turned up.

Hell you know something is wrong when 40% of the recorded steam time is time stuck in the damn lobby not doing anything useful...

Pity really as both MW2 and 3 had relatively good weapon and perk balance, which had they had dedicated servers would have made them better than avg. However both had too many failings too.

This time Treyarch look to have done something different and possibly interesting, so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt until something truly smelly arises. Hopefully the only smelly bit is the corpse of an engine they use. CoD on CryEngine with full bullet physics would be a nice departure from the norm, but one can wish

[DoHo_]

Most news stories here get between 10 and 15 posts - this has a little over 50, most of it people complaining. No wonder it does so well. ;D

[realOne]

Not all Afghanistanians can afford hover horse technology in the future.

[Rogue]

I've been telling myself to plunge in and by a CoD game and just see what it's like but I can't help but feel I'll be on the street within an hour selling my body to earn that $100 back...

Why you'd pay $100 is beyond me; surely you can pick up a CoD game that still has a decent userbase for $20 or less. Even CoD4 had enough servers to find a multiplayer game without any trouble last time I checked.

[DoHo_]

I've been telling myself to plunge in and by a CoD game and just see what it's like but I can't help but feel I'll be on the street within an hour selling my body to earn that $100 back...

Why you'd pay $100 is beyond me; surely you can pick up a CoD game that still has a decent userbase for $20 or less. Even CoD4 had enough servers to find a multiplayer game without any trouble last time I checked.

I meant brand-new, when it's new and all the rage. I also meant (without saying) trying it with no pre-conceived notion of what it would be like. ftr I've played CoD4, WaW and MW2 on both PC and 360 (sporadically at friends houses) so I know how they play, but I always go into it thinking "uuuuuuuuuuuuugggggggggggggggggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh" and I wonder if Black Ops 2 is different enough that I could go into it thinking otherwise (since I like sci-fi stuff), but I doubt the core gameplay will be any different to CoD4.

[exe3]

I think that they honestly just wanted to do something different.

"Sir, we'd like to make a change to our most profitable cash cow ever and do something different, maybe shift the setting to the future"

Say that to their board meeting when the game is still making constant rate of income and they will look at you as a deviant.

Say that to their board meeting when the game sale is decaying however and you'll get an actual serious thought.

This is not new, years ago it was WW2 stuff and the exact same thing happened though the companies were smaller in some cases while others that are now gone were still around strong as ever.

Ironically, that was how MW1 came about... and the resistance when they tried to sell the idea to their board is... well... you know the rest of the story.

There's no such thing as 'i wanna do something different' when it comes to cash cow flag titles without serious wrestling with their board. And there's nothing that gets their serious attention more than sales figure.

You already said what I was gonna say, MW1 was already in this situation. IW wanted to drop WW2 but Activision didn't want them to but they gave in, how could that be different to Treyarch wanting to do a future setting? Activision probably ok'd it as well because they'd still have IW doing modern CoD's probably just as how they had other teams still doing WW2 settings while IW went over to Modern times.

[Ralph Wiggum]

Quite frankly I'd rather my game end up a victim of its own success rather than bomb out with a financial loss. At least the mortgage and bills get paid...

[Bronze_D]

You already said what I was gonna say, MW1 was already in this situation. IW wanted to drop WW2 but Activision didn't want them to but they gave in, how could that be different to Treyarch wanting to do a future setting? Activision probably ok'd it as well because they'd still have IW doing modern CoD's probably just as how they had other teams still doing WW2 settings while IW went over to Modern times.

That is exactly the point, they had to wrestle the idea through and convinced them that not only it could work, it was necessary (WW2 setting was in fatigue point already by then).

A similar situation with the condition now where they've in fact pushed it even longer than in the previous case (when one look at the time chart of Call of Duty title, starting from Call of Duty and the time between it and Modern Warfare, a similar gap existed between Modern Warfare and BlackOps2 except longer by 1 year in BO2 case). Whatever the exact figure with their MW3 sale might be they must've already had some idea of the predicted outcome based on the pattern before and based on the sales of their flagship title current to that point in time.

And just like the time when MW1 was being developed, there was a clear sign that the market was over saturated with the WW2 settings and in dire need to move on.