Call of Duty 5: Modern Warfare... 2?

Active Member
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Mar 13, 2005
Messages
3,877
Best answers
0
Call of duty 4.

Its going to stay 4.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Mar 25, 2002
Messages
1,578
Best answers
0
I'm just glad it doesn't take place during WW2 >_>
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Sep 11, 2005
Messages
3,746
Best answers
0
This has been bugging me for the longest time. Call of Duty: World at War IS NOT Call of Duty 5, if it was, it would be called, Call of Duty 5: World at War.

People feel most comfortable slapping numbers on new games, when they aren't even direct sequels.
In this case, the game would be called Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare 2.

It's completely nonsensical to increase both numbers by one, when it's the first sequel to Modern Warfare.
 
The Sinister Minister
Retired Forum Staff
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Messages
3,637
Best answers
0
Then, technically, CoD 4 should have been CoD 2, as CoD 1, 2, 3, and 5 all took place in the WWII theatre, whereas CoD 4 took place in a modern setting :p
 

L

New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Mar 31, 2004
Messages
1,069
Best answers
0
I hope there's less grenade spam. That is all I hope for, I don't mind if the single player was the focus of MW2.. just please, less grenades.
 
Active Member
★ Black Lounger ★
✔️ HL Verified
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jul 14, 2002
Messages
6,873
Best answers
0
Well, seeing as how the multiplayer was a big hit, they may shift a little more focus on that instead of the single player.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Mar 7, 2007
Messages
1,172
Best answers
0
Yea more focus on multiplayer would be glorious. Maybe they'll let more than one person play online at once too.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top