Game reconnaissance section. Discuss old, present, and yet to be released games.
53 posts Page 1 of 4


Literally having a nerdgasm over this. 8)
Image

I just hope the singleplayer will be more longer than 5-10 hours like all other FPS games since 15 years.
Image
Zolk wrote: I just hope the singleplayer will be more longer than 5-10 hours like all other FPS games since 15 years.


That was my first concern, single player campaigns have been hard to find that are worth playing.
Image
We shouldn't jump on the hypetrain though, that turned out to be a bad idea quite a few times already. I hope they don't turn it into an action movie. But i would love it to be as awesome as the trailer suggests.
Image
Call of Duty was always a good game, they just lost the AAA when they went away from WWII. That and the constant price tags attached and the lack of customizing the files for unique MP experiences. I personally enjoyed redesigning their graphic skins to fit the Allied Airborne Army. Not to mention realism mods for the servers.

Call of Duty World at War is a great game and while I do enjoy a solid single player game (and it looks like they are putting the time and effort into making CODWWII a solid SP game), it's always what we can do with the multiplayer side that has my interest.

We will just have to wait and see, but given the fact that they are releasing the trailer now and the game isn't due out until Christmas time should be a good sign. BF1 is a solid game. COD has to out do it.
Image

Kanga wrote: We will just have to wait and see, but given the fact that they are releasing the trailer now and the game isn't due out until Christmas time should be a good sign. BF1 is a solid game. COD has to out do it.


That's the best option, i would love it to have both a great SP and MP, but we will just have to wait and see.
Image
"In game footage..." of every cut-scene.
Looks promising. Im not a huge fan of SP games, especially for $70 USD. If they have a nice MP part I will definitely get it.
Image
scoutsniper wrote: Looks promising. Im not a huge fan of SP games, especially for $70 USD. If they have a nice MP part I will definitely get it.


They will most definitely have a MP side. Mostly likely it will be the main focus of the development. That is where COD, BF and MOH all made their money.

When they do launch this game, I can definitely see the Allied Airborne Army host a server or two. :)
Image

I've been scouting out the recommended system specs (I never go for min, now). There's nothing official and the speculation runs fairly consistant:

Recommended System Requirements:
Operating System: Windows 10 / 8.1 / 8 / 7 SP1
CPU: Intel Core i7-3820 @3.6 Ghz or FX-8350
RAM: 8 GB
Hard Disk Drive Space: 65 GB
Graphics Processing Unit: NVIDIA GTX 960 or Radeon R9 380 (+2048MB)
DirectX: DX 11

http://www.en.magicgameworld.com/call-o ... uirements/

PC System Analysis for Call of Duty: WWII
Although no official requirements are released yet, based on presumed game engine, we predict that the latest COD WW2 will require a reasonably powerful processor. Either a i5-6600 or a AMD Ryzen R5 1400 accompanying a GTX 1060 graphics card or the new AMD Radeon RX 570. We also strongly advise 16GB of RAM to get some reliable frame rates at 1080p, as our PC a few years back kept crashing with 8GB on a COD title, and COD BSOD was fixed with some extra RAM. Min specs for COD WW2 will be along the lines of an i3 CPU with either GTX 1050 or RX 460 GPU and 8GB to get around 30FPS at lower resolutions.

http://www.game-debate.com/games/index. ... ty:%20WWII

RECOMMENDED:

OS: Windows 7 64-bit, Windows 8 64-bit, Windows 10 64-bit
Processor: Intel Core i5 3rd Generation or better
Memory: 8 GB RAM
Graphics: AMD Radeon R9 380X – Nvidia GTX 960 2 GB
DirectX: Version 11
Storage: 45+ GB available space
Sound Card: Any
Internet Connection: Any

http://www.thenerdmag.com/call-of-duty- ... fications/

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image
Image
If you are going for a AMD at this pricepoint i would suggest the Ryzen 5 1600, more cores and more power efficient. Also why is the 960 so expensive???? I could buy a 1060 for 250€.
Image
JohnDavis wrote: If you are going for a AMD at this pricepoint i would suggest the Ryzen 5 1600, more cores and more power efficient. Also why is the 960 so expensive???? I could buy a 1060 for 250€.


Dunno. Current Newegg prices. Was just going for a new build estimate.
Image
I feel bad for you guys then :O
Image
Image
Like in the old days of gaming, COD released a press-kit for WWII. It's loaded with screenies and logos. :)

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image

Image
Image

53 posts Page 1 of 4

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron