Would you buy Call of Duty 9: Realistic Warfare?

By Updated on

Today I traded in my copy of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 despite not even prestiging once, it has to be said that the game does a lot right (as mentioned in my hands on review), but on the whole in many people’s opinions the multiplayer aspects of the game are far too arcady.

This got me thinking about the next Call of Duty instalment which will almost certainly arrive in November 2012, this game will probably be developed by Treyarch and our readers have said that they would prefer to see Black Ops 2 over World at War 2 – but how about something completely different? Let me introduce you to my idea: Call of Duty: Realistic Warfare – yes, I agree the name sucks, but it’s the concept which is important.

A lot of people who play Call of Duty have never played Counter-Strike, but in early 2012 Valve is set to release Counter-Strike: Global Offensive. This game will be downloadable via Xbox Live/PSN/Steam and the fact that millions of gamers still play CS 1.6 and CS Source suggests that it will be a massive hit. What’s great about CS games is the fact that they concentrate heavily on balance and reward skill, the same can’t be said about any Call of Duty game.

Many CoD gamers, like myself, aren’t too bothered about a campaign, all we want is solid enjoyable multiplayer. MW3 servers for the Xbox 360 of the game are great, but once you get into a game it is usually full of campers, spawn killing, halo jumping and noob tubing – the run ‘n’ gun style which the game promotes is starting to grate on the most hardcore of CoD fans – so why not mix things up with the next release?

Imagine next November being able to download Call of Duty: Realistic Warfare from your platform’s online store for roughly £15 / 1200 Microsoft Points, when you load it up there is just multiplayer, nothing else and when you get into games there are no killstreak rewards or unrealistic perks/attachments and gameplay which actually promotes tactical gameplay and rewards people who can aim a gun. Giving other titles barebones playlists isn’t enough, maps need to be specifically designed for this type of gameplay! Also people shouldn’t be rewarded with deathstreaks!

The fact is each Call of Duty game which hits the shelves will sell millions of copies no-matter what. Activision, Treyarch and Infinity Ward have a strategy and it’s working, so the chances of ever seeing such a game is just a pipe dream. The question we want to know is whether you would buy such a title – please allow us to gain some insight by answering the poll question below:

[poll id="412"]

Also See: COD: Advanced Warfare PS4 Midnight launch price, or pre-load

  • Tray Caddy

    I love the call of duty series! And I know it’s not the most realistic game out there but that’s why it’s fun. I would most likely buy it if it was “realistic warfare” but I think a big change like that could hurt the franchise.

  • Youngscrips

    I agree with the first comment. With the release of Battlefield 3 and other more realistic shooters, COD is better off remaining an arcade shooter. It gives variety to the genre. Sometimes I don’t want to be all tactical, that’s the beauty of COD. It gives me an opportunity to just run and gun.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1479585518 Raymond Santiago

    My comment is that what COD has in place now sales.. The game has made a BIllion dollars. My only sugestion to the franchise is to add options where gamers can make the game what ever they want.

    Give them the option to remove the jump or attachemetns and perks. Have all kinds of lobbies with all difernt ways of playing the game.

    Once they do that it is going to be the final nail in the coffin for other online shooters.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_JPVYQBVBILZU7RNP7OIL4BKMDE rich

      Soooooo, in “Realistic” warfare we can’t jump? And weapons can not have attachments? Why kind of world of you live in?

  • espned

    You say a more tactical ModernWarfare is what you want…but you also mention that you don’t want campers, Halo jumpers, spawn campers etc…what’s tactical to you, may not be viewed as tactical by others. I believe it’s all based on perception, what I may consider camping etc., may be viewed as tactical by others. All in all, I believe both the Battlefield series and ModernWarfare (Black-Ops) series can continue to appease either style of play.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_TN4RFJYSHSB73XEKNCLXQN4ZEQ Kevin

    espned makes a good point i hate snipers on cod but its a style of play but riot shields are not realistic in a battlefield but in a riot so what is it doing in cod its not cod riot police so get rid of em! luckly a semtex takes care of them but this article makes a good point i cannot stand quickscoping snipers that is not real at all no one in rel life could aim down a scope and be right on target for a fatal shot in .01 seconds or so but yet snipers on cod can luckily i learned aim and a good aim with your assault rifle will ruin their attempt and duel weild pump action shot guns are also unrealistic but not a big deal

  • Hggi

    RRetarded idea … dumbass

  • Zsf0419

    they already have that game its called bf3….what an idiot

  • Rockycrab

    That’s what makes CoD fun; the “campers, spawn killing, halo jumping and noob tubing.” I have played CoD since the first game and I don’t want them to copy Battlefield. I own Vietnam, BF2, and BC, but those games are totally different. It’s like saying Forza should be more like Elder Scrolls. Let the tactical people have their games and let the run and gun people have their games!