The big ruckus right now is the fact that the Treyarch’s
Call of Duty: World at War teaser trailer is available on LIVE, but I beg to differ. The trailer is fun and all, but all that really matters is that a weapon very near and dear to my heart has been revealed to exist in yet another World War II game.
The
flammenwerfer is a beautiful weapon. It was utilized in World War II initially for its ability to clear brush quickly in Northern Africa, but it eventually became the ultimate pillbox evacuator. The concept has been around since the Byzantines, but all that really needs to be known is that it is a wholly awesome weapon that does nothing but spew video game death in its wake.
Perhaps it’s that flash of bright orange brilliance, or that tiny spark that just begs the attention of Benzin that gets me all excited, but I am totally ready for another WWII shooter now. I wonder if players will have the opportunity to use it in multiplayer like they can in Return to
Castle Wolfenstein: Tides of War. Spawn camping with fire is just way too damn funny and satisfying.
Oh, and I guess that whole "we're dropping the 5" thing is now confirmed, as well as the tone that Treyarch is looking to find. Call of Duty: World at War certainly does look particularly grim, nasty, and filled with doom.
Flamethrower or not, despite the fact that it should've already been in the game since game 1, it's not gonna save another WW2 game.
Seriously, did they all just completely ignore EVERYONE saying "We are tired of WWII games!"
"OMG OMG OMG There is a flame thrower in COD5, the game is going to be AWESOME!" What the hell people.
If you want to be excited about a flame thrower play a game that utilizes is in new and unique ways, like Farcray 2 plans to do. Even in that game though I honestly don't give a rats ass that there is a flame thrower.
Really though, this game looks bloomtastic, wtf is up with that? Lol. Just use the same COD4 engine and it's win, all that bloom isn't necessary.