Xfire Debate: The Future of Call of Duty

This past Wednesday (the 18th) I had the unique opportunity to represent Maximum PC in The Two-Handed Sword’s debate about the Future of Call of Duty.
Paneling the debate was Destructoid’s Anthony Burch, MoBdeep’s Call of Duty 4 Team Leader Matthew Gomez, Team Pandemic’s Joseph Amorosa, PC Gamer’s very own Evan Lahti, the Cyberathlete Amateur League’s Operations Manager Sean Henderson and myself. And, the man in charge of moderating the whole rowdy lot of us was Dan “Shoe” Hsu (who you may remember from the late EGM).
If this sounds like something you’d be interested in checking out, you can find the transcript here. And, be sure and check out other debates in the future over at Xfire! They did a great job setting up the event.
Image Credit: Xfire
![]()
bingojubes
March 23, 2009 at 7:46am
why not just
Call Of Duty: Ancient Warfare ?
id buy that just for the promising title. it WILL have slings and spears and rocks. maybe a dinosaur hunt mode (but totally different from TUROK spinoff) or something or as recent as riding an elephant thru a battlefield. WWII was fun for the first few times. and Zombie Nazis don't count in my book as a valid Nazi resurrection. for demonic zombie nazis and other hideous (but cool themed enemies) i prolly should go finally play Wolfenstein, but that setting is in WWII, even if altered somewhat. but the WWII aspect has gotten old for me. History Channel coverage is great, and i get my healthy dose of that war from their shows every year, so i do not need to spend an extra 50$ for another WWII game.
as i am sure many players go online to get the most out of their games, but i prefer the solo campaign, which unfortunately has become a cool way of being a "tutorial" for the online segments, with not much depthbesides maybe the storyline(s).
![]()
Netram
March 21, 2009 at 2:14pm
Everything after CoD:UO sucked.
CoD2 onwards where all designed with consoles in mind, that's why you have the retardedly easymode grenade indicator, minimap bips, small (16 player) maps, hit indicators ect ect.
IW are sell outs, the only real game for competition these days is Quake Live, pretty much everything else is RNG based or console based.
![]()
avanish11
March 21, 2009 at 10:38am
I think it was an online debate in a chatroom. Why else would Shoe say that his text turned black? ;)
![]()
GFC
March 21, 2009 at 2:40am
I wish it was in mp3 format, but oh well.. it was nice to read it though. ;)
![]()
Whudunit
March 21, 2009 at 8:26am
I totally agree. I can't believe these total street cred geeks forgot, or didn't bother to record this meeting. I'm sorry I can't be bothered to read it.
![]()
andysalisbury
March 21, 2009 at 12:35pm
The debate itself was done entirely through text, so that's why we didn't record it.
![]()
comptech08
March 20, 2009 at 2:30pm
IMO i think the CoD people really screwed up when they decided to go back to a WWII game. There are plenty of WWII games and not that many Modern warfare games like the Cod 4.
![]()
johnny3144
March 20, 2009 at 2:39pm
it's eaiser to just change and twist some historical facts to make an interesting story, but i guess it does also limit their freedom to create something different.
![]()
MAJORzer0
March 23, 2009 at 5:52am
They should take a few weapons from the newer games. Get a nuke launcher in there or something. Maybe have a few lasers or something.
Whats a pulse rifffle? Is that a new type of potato chip?
~No one said it would be easy....they just said it was worth it...~
















