Where Are the WWII Shooters?

The reason modern and future shooters are selling so well right now is because most of the people that buy FPS games these days are roughly 20, or so it appears.  A generation of gamers have come of age since Call of Duty 1 and because of that, gamers these days have a hard time relating to the past.  Today’s culture is all about what’s new, what’s coming.  The history channel rarely runs history content.  Most of what’s floating around the internet is future-shooter hype.  And overall, everyone seems to have forgotten the foundation for modern gaming.

That’s not entirely bad, but I do miss capping Nazis in the dome in World at War, a lot.

Recently, DICE started their celebration of the Battlefield franchise’s 10th birthday.  A lot of what they talked about and considered was a potential return to the WWII era, and I’m all for it.

As much as I love Gunships and Predator Missles, I miss mowing down enemies with the Browning .30 Cal LMG and sniping with a bolt action, iron-sights-only, rifle.  Believe me, there’s nothing like being in an Attack Helicopter and pounding tanks into bits of digital dust, but that’s every FPS game these days.

Part of what made the COD4/WaW period of COD’s history so interesting was the diversity we had access to.  Yes, Black Ops 1 was set in the Vietnam War era, but it was still trying to be modern.

My feeling is that FPS gaming is starting to get a little bland.  Not bad or entirely boring, just that it lacks diversity and has me less engaged and interested than I used to be.

What are your thoughts?  Do you miss the nostalgia of bayoneting people with the M1 Garand?  Do you think a lack of setting diversity is hurting the FPS gaming scene?  Let us know in the comments.

Thank you for reading.

  • Tom

    If they ever make BC3, I hope its a WWII game.

  • i don’t know but i sure do miss em screw modern warfare!

  • ButteredBread

    Agreed, for some reason WW2 shooters had a more emotional attachment to them. I enjoyed them way more then the generic shooters nowadays. BRING BACK WW2 SHOOTERS!!!!!!……………………….please. 😉

    P.S. WW2 in the frostbite 2 engine would me unbelievable.

    • Jared Kaiser

      Because world war 2 was a war on beliefs and it was a very close war with the best generation to determine the future, modern shooters are based on jihad terrorists and there is no meaning behind it. The war right now is nothing but combat training.

  • Nathan Cox

    I think that part of the issue may be that infantry weaponry hasn’t changed a whole lot in the last 60 or so years. The AK-47 was (and I can’t believe how many people don’t know this) designed in 1947. The M-16 was first deployed in 1963 in Vietnam as a replacement to the M-14. Most of the weaponry on the field today is some variation on those two weapons, save for PDWs which are slightly different in mechanical design. Even the M249 SAW, generally seen in my experience as a modern weapon, was introduced in 1894 which makes it 28 years old.

    In order to get a weaponry change you have to really go back to WWII, and it’s been done to death so I don’t think many developers are going to put a lot of stock into trying to beat it out some more (even though I, personally, would love to see it).

    • Bradley Griffiths

      I’m guessing that is either suppose to be 1994 or 128 years old. But either way I agree that this is part of the problem. The guns have been upgraded with scopes and improvements to the mechanical design as well as other things but you see a lot of the same guns all the time.

      What they need to do is switch up the releases or find something that makes them different. Modern shooters are cool but we have had a lot of them. If every other year we had a WWII game that would be better than 6 WWII then 6 modern but its what is hot at the time.

      • Nathan Cox

        Actually it’d be 1984. That’s 0/2 between us. Bad omen.

        • gh

          The next step in FPSes is a fully destructible environment, anything else is basically a retread even if you go into the distant future.

  • sgt_mofo

    I wouldn’t mind seeing the WWII theme make a comeback, but at the time the market was just too over-saturated with WWII themed games. The gaming industry seemed to adopt a mentality of ‘WWII-or-bust’. There was the MoH series (console and PC), CoD series (console and PC), BF1942 (and its expansions), Company of Heroes, Red Alert, the WWII MMO, Day of Defeat, etc. Honestly, I was kind of glad it went away when it did.

    That being said, the modern/near-future setting has also run its course (at least for me) much the same way the WWII setting did. Hopefully we can see at least a couple WWII shooters when the new consoles arrive.

  • There was a time, not that long ago, when you could have flipped this article around and lamented that every shooter was set in WWII and how boring and stale it had become. Let’s not rush backwards. There are plenty of other time periods to explore in war/shooter games besides just modern/WWII.

    • Really? I never got bored of WWII shooters. They always interested me. I got bored of the modern shooters pretty fast though… :/

      • man i love killing nazis with my thompson :3 (no disrespect to any germans)

        • Robcart944

          How do you sort out the “Nazi” from the Germans who are fighting for their families and country?

    • df

      Gamers have short-term memories, one of the biggest factors of why COD4 was successful was that it was a fps set in the modern era.

      There were shitloads of WW2 shooters back then.

    • “There are plenty of other time periods to explore in war/shooter games besides just modern/WWII.” like what? lets see vietnam,WW2,WW1,modern warfare, future warfare……

      • Combat Carlton

        Are you stupid? There has been war sense the begging of time so don’t say that Vietnam,WW2,WW1,modern warfare, future warfare were the only time periods to explore.

        • Dan

          Actually, he’s 100% right. The conflicts he mentioned cover basically all of the gun-based conflicts of the post 1900 era. True, there has been war “Sense” the “begging” of time, but unless you’re talking about a pre-1900 era game which wouldn’t sell.

          • Jose

            Dan and Jonathan have a point. Nobody wants to wait 5 seconds to reload a 30 round clip, what makes you think they’d wait a minute in between individual shots?

    • asgaro

      It IS a long time ago. And Modern Time has been milked to death. Let’s see:
      Battlefield 2
      Battlefield Bad Company 1
      Battlefield Bad Company 2

      Battlefield 3
      CoD Modern Warfare 1
      CoD Modern Warfare 2

      CoD Modern Warfare 3

      I personally would love a return to WWII. I miss the feeling of being in old cosy buildings from that time, I miss the sound of the guns, I miss Omaha Beach and everything else about D-Day, I miss the German shouts, etc.
      Plus, with tech like Frostbite 2 we can get whole new refreshing experiences!

      • Jason

        I agree 100%! Between the titles you mentioned and all of the BS “fictional” settings like Halo, Crysis, etc, shooters have become boring.

        There’s no reason the market can’t sustain at least ONE historical shooter backed by a REAL developer on the level of a COD game.

        • asgaro

          In the meantime there is a bit hope on the horizon 😀 Check http://www.heroesandgenerals.com/4/en/index.html
          It’s a Free To Play WW2 shooter that recently got in open beta. Unfortunately, most gamenews sites haven’t yet reported on it. Also, it’s PC only.

    • I don’t know about you, but I’ve always looked forward to WWII games. Back when MW2 was released, I was waiting for a WaW2, but I guess we got Black Ops 1 instead (which is also fine by me, but I really wanted WaW2).

    • Dirtknap

      That was exactly my thought as I read this article. Who knows where the trend will lead next, but its inevitable, modern shooters can’t reign supreme forever, I just hope the developers don’t flog it like a dead horse the way they did with titles based in the WWII era, and move onto something else for us to explore.

    • Russell

      True and at the time of Battlefield 1942 but i do distinctivly remember that Desert Combat became more popular than 1942 did and that was merely a mod. So i’ am sure at some point EA and no doubt many other game developers realized that WWII shooters where getting stale and decided to go with the whole modern warfare pathway. Although i must admit even that is becoming quiet stale these days. I think in general FPS is getting stale well so to speak don’t get me wrong i love playing FPS but other than bringing new maps / perks to certain games there not really putting much into expanding the actual game play. Allthough i guess there is only so much expansion they can do with a first person shooter thou.

      • Russell

        Also don’t forget at the time of MOH and COD the 1st installments of them even hollywood and television was going abit for the ole WWII theme as cod and moh have very similar scene’s in them from a couple of movies saving private ryan and enemy at the gates just to name a couple then you had the whole Band Of Brothers and later The Pacific.

    • Jason

      Disagree. there are more “modern” warfare shooters now than there were WW2 era shooters during the time you are describing. Nowadays, all we have to choose from are fictional settings (Halo, Gears, Crysis) or modern/near future settings (COD Modern Warfare, Black Ops 2, Battlefield, Ghost Recon ). The article is correct–we need a *major release* historical shooter simply for the sake of variety.

      To be honest, I think the market is big enough to support both modern and historical shooters of equal quality. When Treyarch released Back Ops 1, I welcomed and loved the historical setting. As you might expect, I was supremely disappointed when Black Ops 2 jumped to a terrible “near future” setting.

  • Hitlersgasbill

    Im 13, And i would love a WW2 or even a Korean war setting Game. Im always watching the military channel and it would be cool to it be a game again

    • sdf

      You’re 13 and you’re already a scumbag, Hitlersgasbill?

    • M for Mature

      You’re 13 so shouldn’t be playing mature shooters…

  • acer25

    I’m still playing Red Orchestra 2 every once in a while and waiting for Rising Storm to be released, hopefully very soon. It’s a solid WWII sim and has an atmosphere incomparable to any other shooter.
    But a WWII game will never draw as much attention as a current-gen game so that may be a huge factor for publishers, thus the lack of variety in today’s market ):

    • asgaro

      “But a WWII game will never draw as much attention as a current-gen game”
      Why? How? Do you have a source/numbers?
      People say the same with Splinter Cell: they think the game wouldn’t sell well when the franchise would return to its roots by focusing on pure stealth. I call BS on that too.

    • Dan

      “But a WWII game will never draw as much attention as a current-gen game”

      Completely incorrect. Word at War and Block Ops 1 were both historical shooters released AFTER the “modern setting” was popular, and both set sales records.

  • Andy H

    I for one am glad that there haven’t been any WWII shooters. With MOHAA, COD1 and COD2, WAW, and the new RO2, I think we’ve squeezed just about every drop out of that theme. The entire genre is suffering from lack-of-innovation-syndrome. Whether it be Modern or Classic. Unless we stop focusing on the pretty, and start focusing a bit on the core gameplay factors. It’s just going to stay the way it is. We need innovation, and we need to stop reinventing the wheel over and over again..

    • then give us WW1!

    • asgaro

      And with Modern Time, we have not squeezed every drop??
      Battlefield 2
      Battlefield Bad Company 1
      Battlefield Bad Company 2
      Battlefield 3
      CoD Modern Warfare 1
      CoD Modern Warfare 2
      CoD Modern Warfare 3
      Oh yeah, and Battlefield 4.

      • dasd

        8 or so games vs the dozens of WW2 titles?

        • Dan

          Please feel free to tell us the “dozens of WW2 titles” that have been released in the past 5 years.

          You’re incorrect. There are vastly more modern and near-future shooters for this generation of gaming than there are WW2 shooters.

    • Dan

      At least ONE historical shooter would be welcome to offset the dozens upon dozens of modern and near-future dreck that’s flooded the FPS market for the past 5 years, but I do agree with your second point.

    • jake


  • Andy H

    Why do I bother commenting when my comment gets instantly deleted…

    • deleted

      Well it’s still here at the moment, but you have a point – I have seen many people complaining about deleted comments, and even experienced it myself. Gets a bit silly after a while :

      • Hey guys. Yes, the DISQUS comment system has a few issues to work out. It’s a known issue. Apologies for any unjustly deleted comments. We STRICTLY only delete rude and offensive comments or trolling, etc.

        • cheeseburger eddy

          check out this account – faraz. ive been trying to stop him from trolling on duty, i know ive said mean things i wouldnt normally say but i have to get my point across. please check him out if you ever have the chance David, much appreciated

        • Mr. X

          Hey David, here is an idea I had for a new type of FPS, you could use it in an article if you like, I think this could be where the evolution of FPS could be going: http://www.reddit.com/r/gamedev/comments/11l3na/hq_rush_idea_for_a_new_type_of_fps_game_thoughts/

  • Bruce Leeroy X

    Medal of Honor:Airborne imo is better than waw and not hacked like it as well. I agree ww2 needs to come back with emotional feeling attached like MoH:Airborne . Also a game based on the civil war would be nice. go play history channel civil war secret mission

  • ..

    Are you serious?? It wasn’t really *that* long ago when we were all complaining about how every FPS was set in WWII… :
    Give it time. When everyone is definitely sick of modern warfare (not capitalised, notice) then we’ll probably head back to WWII.
    Black Ops 2 most definitely went into the future because people are starting to find current settings stale, but aren’t quite ready to go back to the past yet.

    • BOSS jediZOHAN

      I’m not sick of moder shooters, I want a choice of both new and old. We had that before.

    • Kevin

      This is partially incorrect. The bulk of gamers were not complaining about WW2 shooters over the past 7 years because there weren’t as many as you think there were. If there were, World at War would never have been made *AFTER* COD 4.

      The market can sustain both settings. The author is “serious,” and he’s correct.

  • EcHo84

    I loved playing Day of Defeat alpha/betas pre Dod:Source….

    • sgt_mofo

      I did too, but the ‘bleed out’ mechanic in beta 3.1 needed work. It was a shame they abandoned it entirely for DoD 1.0 Retail as I thought it could’ve promoted teamwork even more. dod_caen FTW!

  • Chuckz28

    I have no interest in a world war 2 game. I didn’t even find them mildly interesting back in the day vs the likes of Doom and Duke Nukem. Old guns have no appeal to me.

  • al client

    I like WW2 games, but not as much as modern shooters. The guns and killstreaks are much more fun to use. Campaign is one thing but multiplayer is another.

  • Personally, I don’t really miss WWII shooters at the moment, but I was kind of upset to learn that Battlefield 4 would once again be a modern shooter. I don’t really know what I was hoping it would be, but the announcement of it being modern again was just… meh.

    • FROST14179

      I agree. I don’t miss the WWII setting but I would like to see developers highlight wars that happened before and after WWII. I know activision and Cauldron HQ released a civil war game in about 2006/7 but I haven’t seen another company pick up where they left off. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_History_Channel:_Civil_War_%E2%80%93_A_Nation_Divided

      I would love to see a WWI game with a lot of trench fighting and using that era of vehicles but no developer has seemed to take this on. A korean war would be interesting since most people nowadays don’t learn anything else about it after reading it in their textbooks. I think to many developers have tried Vietnam and most have missed the point minus Shellshock: Nam ’67 who actually captured the gruesome reality of that war. After Vietnam there were no major wars after that just small conflict which could be used but most developers won’t dab into that.

    • pollinho

      Yeah I totally agree… There’s nothing against a specific theme, but you just need some diversity. BC2 was perfect because the Vietnam pack was just such a nice feature in the end, where it pretty much offered a standalone game experience which stood in quite a contrast to the main game… Gameplay and movement were similar, sure, but it was just differently themed in all ways…
      Kind of sad to see they are sticking to the modern day theme all the way in BF3 and even in the next title… I don’t see the point when there are no major technical improvements and if its just for the next gen consoles, you could simply port it onto them and focus on a new, different title. Plus, its not the only modern day-game that EA plans to release *coughs*…I’d prefer some variety, especially given the power of Frostbite 2

      • Definitely true. You’re right. The BF4 announcement was especially surprising considering MoH:W’s setting and the fact that we all know BF4 will be followed by another MoH, most likely set in yet another modern setting. All on the same engine too.

        While I wouldn’t mind another WWII-themed shooter imagined in the FB2 engine, I almost want to see DICE build on BF2142 with something just way out in the future. Like, I’m talkin straight-up lasers and other sci-fi stuff. I mean, with their sound design team, they could put in some serious effort without making it sound dumb.

        Lots of people hate on sci-fi shooters, it seems, but I think that’s just because it hasn’t been done ‘right’ yet or hasn’t been made ‘cool.’ Imagine a darker sci-fi shooter in a setting more like Blade Runner or the darker parts of Mass Effect or Deus Ex. Just thinkin’ aloud now. Lol.

        • pollinho

          I guess thats the bad thing when developers are owned & controlled (or at least heavily influenced) by big companies like EA, who won’t take bigger risks. On the other hand these casual modern day shooters don’t seem to be that successfull, at least in terms of financial profit (except for CoD + BF3)…
          And I would definitively welcome a more SciFi oriented shooter… How cool would it be to have an ME multiplayer as a standalone game, based on BF gameplay on an epic scale…(You could still bundle both games to have an complete package) ME3 had nice ideas, but PVE just is not as fun as PVP and I havent touched the game after I finished the campaign, not even for the new ending…
          I’d just wish that the big publishers could get a little out of their comfort zone and give innovations a chance. I’m pretty sure that an 2143 title would be pretty successfull, just because Battlefield as a franchise is an established product now (even the pretty poor F2P-BF-Games). I just hope that Activison set an trend with (at least partly) leaving the modern day theme…

          • If DICE made Battlefield: Mass Effect… goodbye world.

            • MrLadyfingers


    • Kazuela

      it wasn’t that hard to realize it would be on the modern timeline again since the other 2 numbered battlefield were modern shooters too.

      honestly i don’t miss wwII shooters either, i would pretty much see a true Vietnam shooter like a Battlefield: Vietnam 2, complete with the fall of saigon, it would be a really emotional experience 😀

      • Dan

        You missed his point. Numbered sequels have nothing to do with what the setting of a game is going to be. Call of Duty 3 was in WW2. Using your logic, Call of Duty 4 should have been there, too. It wasn’t.

        • Kazuela

          that’s true to cod if it weren’t that since Cod 4 they changed the numbering to Modern Warfare insert numer here.

          battlefield has a different numbering sistem, only the modern era are numbered, wwii and future setttings use a Date like 1942, 1943 and 2142 and bad company is another breed, similar to what became of the modern warfare and black ops quasi spin-offs.

          battlefield: vietnam is other case since that game has never gotten a sequel

    • Kris113

      I think the with the new military innovations being developed has kinda people wanting to use new weaponry instead of the older vanilla weapons. I do think with next gen consoles coming within the next 2 years, we may see some older maps redesigned and I doubt there will be full games dedicated to WWII. Companies just want the money and the will keep putting out what sells the most.

      • Jason

        Your first point is incorrect. The “new military innovations” aren’t exciting in the least. If you follow actual military developments, the majority of them are intended to lessen the role of the human soldier on the battlefield: drones, remote sentries, electronic options, etc.

        Furthermore, if you think the weapons from the past were “vanilla,” you really should take some time to read about them. Nowadays, the weapon development process might as well be on Twitter–any minor innovation is rarely kept secret, and guns are copied and modified to death. In past eras, opposing forces were forced to “reverse engineer” weapons during actual times of conflict if they wanted to match a weapon’s specs. Today, they can visit a website and make the same thing.

        I do agree that, sadly, modern shooters sell. That said, I think there’s plenty of room for at least ONE historical shooter backed by a major studio.

        Remember, they said the same thing about the film industry. Who would’ve thought a pirate trilogy set in the 1800s would have been such a hit?

  • I prefer modern warfare because there is more action than the past warfare, there is a slow tank or bad guns or even unbalance game,Ex. in modern warfare there is helicopters when the past warfare there isn’t. Modern warfare’s got a lot of guns, vehicles and environments .. at the end this is just my opinion

    • Hol_Up

      in WW2, there were frontlines. in modern day wars are fought miles away.

  • Alex, you didn’t start playing COD until WaW. For those of us who played when EVERY FREAKING SHOOTER was set in WWII, it was even more over-saturated than the current modern-FPS market. It was completely overdone not too long ago. Some day WWII shooters will return, but it’s too soon right now.

    • BOSS jediZOHAN

      Dude, I played Castle Wolfenstein too.

  • Mr. X

    I want a ‘trench war’ World War One FPS, complete with protracted trench battles, bombardments, mortar, and no health regen.

  • talonkard044

    I pray we NEVER see a resurgence of WWII shooters. Being one of those who played a majority of them – going as far back as playing the Medal of Honors on PSOne – we were inundated with TONS MORE WWII shooters then there are Modern Ones today.

    The reason Modern Warfare, Counter Strike, Battlefield – when they made the jump to Modern Combat and later the first Bad Company – did so well, is people were utterly tired and burnt out on that genre of shooters. World at War did it right, but sooooooo many that were made back then were too generic past “Ok. Your an alliance soldier. Kill Nazi’s.” … That was pretty much it.

    The original Medal of Honor games as well as COD 1-3 (including Big Red One) did a really good job with campaigns dealing directly with history of those battles and putting you “in the boots” of soldiers during WWII.

    I think a time period that truly needs to be explored is Vietnam, but with current gen consoles and “next-gen” PCs. There were quite a few games during that time period, but so many were crap.

    Personally I would be interested in a lot of sniper stuff based around that period – kinda biased because that’s the role I usually play in FPS’s – but it’s when countries like the US, Australia, Britain all really started to introduce Snipers as a viable part of soldier detachments. Before then they were used sporadically and mainly for light recon. During Vietnam, they really became invaluable.

    Just my 2 cents

  • Totally right. How cool was it when BFBC:2 added Vietnam? Who DIDN’T love the flamethrower? We need more of that – not just WW2. What about Gettysburg type fighting in the rocks? WW1 fighting? More vietnam? Korea? And why are most of all WW2 Europe (Except for one MOH and BF1943) – more Pacific action!

  • Didn’t we all say this after WAW ?? about ww2 shooters ? all done to death

  • codplayer

    i wonder if there would be a shooter game that would be set in the ages when you had bows and crossbows, would be an interesting shooter

  • MazeMatik

    Although it’s a fact that there’s been a bunch of WW2 shooters in the past and that modern shooters like CoD4 brought the franchise to a new level and may even have saved it, past wars like WW2 are the foundations of Call of Duty. It served as a testing/starting ground for Activision and they didn’t know back then how popular their games would become.

    Fortunately for them, their line of products became famous and well known in the industry but one day or another they would have to revolutionize the franchise and they did it with CoD4. Meanwhile, graphics changed, improved, engines got tweaked and pushed to limits never imagined before and it brings me to this points: Wouldn’t you like to see a brand new WW2 based shooter benefits from all the improvements, innovative ideas ans new that concepts past modern shooters have met in their development?

    My personal answer is YES! I would like to play a new WW2 shooter but with awesome graphics and sound effects. I can already imagine all the weapons and accessories we’ve sen before but this time with beautiful lighting and texture effects. Smoke, particles, fire and explosions! Add some blur effect while you’re at it! And this is just the visual aspect of the game… now think about the killstreaks, the customization level, the way you handle and prepare your guns for each and every specific context you’re jumping into, whether you’re playing Domination on a wide open map designed for snipers or on a close-range map located in a factory where shotguns and the flamethrower are your most lethal best friends!

    I think the WW2 era deserves a comeback on the market with everything we like about modern shooters that developers have came with so far.

  • Skemba

    I sure do miss those times… Imagine Battlefield 1942 revamped with frostbite 2…destruction,teamplay…Tiger tank 😀 Damn….If nothing BC3 should be set back in WW2

  • asgaro

    I completely agree with this article! I think with current technology (Frostbite 2 engine) we can get totally refreshing experiences for WWII games.
    It’s a shame Red Orchestra 2 is so damn hard. It’s the only recent WWII shooter I know off.

  • tludt888

    They’re back in 1945 where they belong… Enough with the WWII shooters, it’s just been done to death.

    The reason why modern and future shooters are far more popular, is that you’re working with an infinite medium… thus, tons of creative liberties can be taken. Far less wiggle room for creativity in a past setting.

    However, I’d like to see a game set in the Rhodesian Bush War, or some other low-level conflicts.

    This is all coming from someone with a BA in 20th Century History… so it’s clearly not a new-aged “I hate the past”, dish…

  • PertAndPopular

    If Dice makes a ww2 game I’m in! They should make a map where you storm a concentration camp and there’s malnourished Jews shuffling about, but they can get in the line of fire and spray Jew blood everywhere! I’m talking about multiplayer…It would be awesome! Be a SS officer and see Americans storming in, so you just execute the Jew rats!…Stupid Americans.

  • lagu

    COLD WAR GAMES PLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEASSSE! n NOT BLACK OPS! I wanna see a dice game akin to rainbow 6/arma/soldiers of fortune/black set in gold war for PS3!!!!

  • geaw

    I remember when people hated on WaW because it was “another” ww2 shooter.

    Now weve kind of come full circle and a ww2 game would be more fresh than “another” current day game.

    • Niosus

      It’s been a long time since any good WW2 shooter came out and the market is flooded with modern shooters. Some variety won’t hurt 🙂

      Edit: excluding Red Orchestra 2… great game but sadly also a niche game.

    • Jason

      Not really. At that time, there were already a few modern shooters, so WaW was welcome. In fact, in hindsight, it was one of the best CoD games re: quality, etc.

      I see your point, but we haven’t come full circle per see, because there are more *major* modern shooters now than there were *major* WW2 shooters 6 years ago. That’s just math.

  • Hol_Up

    If you want a good WW2 game, check out Battlefield 2’s WW2 Mod, Forgotten Hope 2. It covers the European and North African Fronts and you can even play as the Canadians and Italians.


  • hambone

    Ww2 has been played out. Id luv 2 c civil war or rev war

  • Zdanz

    A Vietnam era would be perfect right now, since it fits right in the middle of things like WWII and modern shooters. Gotta love jungle fights! 😀

  • Now its future. It was modern for a few years. I miss WW2 …the dev of BLACK and BODYCOUNT is using crytek to make a ww2 shoter its called Enemy Front.

  • WW2 Game- Enemy Front-
    • Blazing gunplay and spray-and-pray close quarters combat;
    • Class-driven, cover-based enemy behavior;
    • Vehicular bosses;
    • Destructible environments;
    • Multiple mission types including sabotage, espionage, assassination and assault;
    • Deep gameplay customization;
    • Exaggerated, over-the-top weapon effects create an immersive, visceral and emotive shooter experience;
    • Rich story arc played out in faithfully recreated theatres of conflict including France, Norway, Greece and Poland;
    • Huge array of authentic weaponry;
    • Built on CryENGINE 3 to ensure top-quality graphical fidelity.

  • I don’t want a return to WWII shooters. Played them all and after a point, it was just too much of the same, which is what we’re getting now. I liked the idea behind Homefront, but they didn’t go far enough and the game was flawed in many, many ways. I want something set in present or near present day, but a little more of neighborhood battles. Focus on regular people fighting with custom designed weapons and makeshift armored vehicles. Homefront got the setting right in the single player, though nothing felt unique about the weapons, and the multiplayer (while fun at times) just didn’t compare to other projects. I want something that feels, looks, and plays unique. Maybe Homefront 2 will do that, but I don’t have my hopes too high after the first one fell short. For now, I appreciate the variety (to a degree) that I get with BF3 and maybe Aftermath changes the game with makeshift vehicles and weapons, but I doubt it. It’s still going to play like the same game.

  • Totally agree on this if any big game went to the world war 2 setting again i would totally buy it!

  • Rony

    I don’t think we need to go back to WWII. It’s not the modern day setting that’s getting old, it’s the military theme. I had a blast playing shooters like RAGE and The Darkness 2, and I’m sure Far Cry 3 will be really good as well. I would love to see a crime themed FPS, and I don’t care what year it takes place, although a 1920s Chicago gangster theme would be pretty sweet.

  • MyssterNassty

    i would LOVE if DICE made a WWII or Vietnam era shooter w/ frostbite 2…and id prob piss my pants if i heard that. You know how sweet that would be? A full Vietnam or WWII Battlefield running on Frostbite 2? FUUUUHHHHHCCCCKKKK lol

  • What abount a westen FPS free roam??

  • I miss WW2 shooters, they were great, there’s just something about them, I mean sure I play the modern ones too but idk man, it’s just not the same

  • Cycovision

    Future shooters will be the new norm in the next few years as more and more people get tired of modern shooters. Then we’ll head back to the past as people tire of future shooters, then back to modern.

  • They disappeared because they’re overdone.

  • roland0811

    FPS gaming is starting to get bland? It’s BEEN bland for quite some time now. Pretty much every campaign is a half-assed 5 hour “run down the corridor with crap flying at your face” mode. No thinking, no strategy, just run and hold the trigger down.
    Only a couple of decent FPS games have been released over the past few years. Too much cookie-cutter action going on in the genre. The same thing happened with fighting games in the ’90s. Too much imitation, not enough innovation.

    • the man

      Have you played metro 2033 the exact opiste of what you said (;

      • roland0811

        Almost that WHOLE GAME was just long hallways and on-rails shooting. So ya, it fits into what I said. Except for turning off some lamps there was pretty much no strategic or tactical gameplay, just run down the hallway and hold the trigger down.
        It bored the hell outta me. Sorry bud, but it was just barely average in my eyes.

  • Socks

    Yes people, there were a lot of WW2 titles but lets think, how many were actually good? And on top of that how many of those can we go back now and play on multiplayer servers anymore (most of them have been shut down). And how many of those that still have servers running, aren’t hacked the shit out of *cough cough Cod World at War*.
    I could go, with amoungs these new titles like BF4 and BO2 a good WW2 shooter

  • Problem is, as long WWWars are good scenarios for campaing, they’re not entirely to multiplayer. Mainly because players want weapons in extraordinary quantity and many customization options.

  • Diversity? Could care less. BUT what made World at War awesome was the fact that WWII lent itself to an awesome competitive MP experience. Absolutely everything about the weapons, attachments and killstreaks felt visceral and challenging. The sounds everything in the game made were horrifying. It had no problem getting me motivated.

  • maseephus

    I would love a reboot of the WWII era. I mean, you don’t want everyone to do WWII games, like it used to be, but every once and awhile it’d be nice. Honestly, I love history and historical games. I think a WWI game could be good if done right, and WWII is something that has shown to be doable. Also, I think it’d be nice if CoD did a Vietnam game, entirely Vietnam. Black Ops hardly had any Nam. It’d be awesome with all the jungle and traps!

  • Juan

    They need to smarten up those AI first.

  • Okada

    I’d like to shoot US soldier zombies with MP44 and Type2 SMG

  • WeCameAskingTheDevil

    Give us a next gen WWII game! All we have is what, COD: WAW and Battlefield 1943 in this generation (only extremely popular games)? That is near not enough. Everyone saying that developers overused the WWII FPS is not considering what console you were playing on. MOH and MOH: Underground (PS1), COD: Finest Hour, COD 2, COD 3 (PS2/Xbox). Another reason why modern shooters are so popular is because of customization to your weapons. Old guns didn’t have rails to mount lasers sights, ACOG scopes, foregrips, etc. In my opinion, I could care less about all that customization. In a way, it could bring a sort of fairness between players in multiplayer (some LVL 100 Colonel couldn’t destroy all the new players. I personally miss WWII. With all these crazy game engines nowadays, they could make an awesome WWII game.

    • WeCameAskingTheDevil

      Also MOH: Frontline and MOH: Rising Sun (PS2/Xbox)

    • Dan

      100% agree.

  • Mike Edge

    It seems the days of WWII FPS are dying boys, franchises only make modern games because their young clients only care about how many kills it takes to get a AC-130. I believe if a great game like Battlefield 3 combined with Iron Front Liberation 1944 the gaming community will realize how great WWII games are! It looks like we’re stuck with WAW and Battlefield 1943…

  • kyle

    yes there hads ben a lot of wwII shooters but you all have seem to forgotten that the capabilities of the graphics and gameplay in general where not at all what they are today I would love to see iwo jima in todays graphics as well as Omaha beach,bastonge ect. I think that over the years it wasn’t the era that got boring it was that no one truly tried to make a perfect realistic shooter instead they went for the arcade style and we all know how fast that gets old except for maybe brothers in arms but that furious 4 crap makes me want to throw up in my mouth I think if world war /Vietnam shooters where to come back it would have to measure up with the gameplay style of red orchestra but the compelling story telling of call of duty…

  • Michele Fraddosio

    actually the modern ones aren’t really modern but are set in a near future with modern stuffs and weapons… just black ops is different, ’cause black ops 1 is set up in ’60-’70 and black ops 2 in a middle-far future (2025)… so it’s quite normal that, ’cause developers can move better in a modern-futuristic time on the plot, the most part of the FPS are timed not in the past but in the “present” … that lets them make anything they want with the plot ’cause actually any problems with the historical-reliability can’t be… in order to create a good multiplayer mode in a full commercial CoD-fashion it’s an imperative to let the gamer be free with classes, weapons and perks and other things on multiplayer… the 3arc tried getting a mp ww2 style with CoD World At War but actually failed, because it’s not easy to accomplish casual gamer’s requests and WW2-fan’s ones… it’s useless so discuss about this, CoD will change this never or just if the gamers finally get bored about Modernity… you must just take a look to the BO2 and MW3′ spots to understand the Infinity Ward an 3arc’s business idea: THE FUTURE IS BLACK ( OPS 2 ) … AND MW3—>WW3… actually they are using to manage the present to get a good future plot… that’s all