Call of Duty: The Civil War?

July 27, 2009

By Mike Neil — Filed in FPS, Required Reading — Viewed 2,215 times

civil-war

As we await the impending arrivals of blockbuster games such as Halo 3: ODST and Modern Warfare 2, many of us have been occupying ourselves with Techland’s Call of Juarez: Bound in Blood, which is arguably one of the best Western games seen to date.

While trudging through Bound in Blood, the thought of a Call of Duty game based on the Civil War has crossed my mind, mainly because of the opening levels and some of the themes that the game explores.

For most followers of the Call of Duty series, the modern games currently represent the preferred format and as such, MW2 will be one of the most sought after titles of this year upon its release.

In regards to subsequent titles after MW2, it appears that Treyarch’s next stab at the franchise may center on the Vietnam War with possible espionage missions based on The Cold War era, and I have previously suggested that Future Warfare would be received well, should it be the decided direction when the series inevitably shifts gears again.

But what about the Civil War? Would this be a viable course for the franchise at some point in the future?

For history enthusiasts, it would be a fascinating experience to participate in this significant conflict, while partaking in famed battles such as Gettysburg may present an entertaining and refreshing digression from what’s been offered by the series thus far.

At the same time, after Modern Warfare 2, a Civil War CoD game may be going too far backward in history. In particular, the use of old fashioned weapons could be uninteresting for some, and perhaps without Bound in Blood’s concentration modes, duels and hilarity of the Brothers McCall, the setting would have been mundane?

Keep in mind the purpose of this entry wasn’t so much to craft detailed arguments for or against the concept of a Civil War Call of Duty game, but rather to suggest the idea for feedback and/or discussion.

15 Responses to “Call of Duty: The Civil War?”

July 27th, 2009 at 4:55 pm Ryan Joseph says:

I dont think a civil war COD will work only because there isnt that much of a variety of weaponry. Also, the weapons available at the time were kind of slow and only allowed one shot with very little accuracy and very long re-load time. That would just annoy people to all hell.
Now vietnam is a whole different story. But instead of making an entire game about it, why not make a bunch of battle re-enactments (similar to Battlefield: 1943) and make it available online on PSN or XBL. But then again i’m probably biased because i’ve been playing almost nothing but Battlefield: 1943 ever since I got it. It’s a winning formula, and should be used by other game developers.
July 27th, 2009 at 5:22 pm SB_tanker says:

I’m cool with treyarch making a game based on any major war that took place after WWII. Or even in a near-future type setting would be fine. Just no more WWII…..please.
July 27th, 2009 at 6:34 pm Brasi says:

@ Ryan Joseph

Civil War didn’t use muskets as you are referring too. By the time the Civil War came into play rifling was already here and guns such as Lever Action and Revolving was introduced. Also later sources have found that Gatling Guns were used during the period as well. A Civil War game to me would be a great direction as World War scenarios are getting very old.
July 27th, 2009 at 7:26 pm Stg 44 says:

Would a WW1 game be any good?
July 28th, 2009 at 12:19 am unknown says:

Anything below WW2 isn’t Call of Duty; with all due respect, the franchise isn’t just based on military combat, it’s always been about balls-to-the-wall action, octane set pieces, bullets zipping in all directions, but best of all: mobile automatic weapons constantly mow down anybody who gets in your way (aka feeling like Rambo).

I don’t mind seeing a WW1 game or a Civil War based title but the technology and the style just doesn’t fit with COD’s core values.
July 28th, 2009 at 1:31 am sharif says:

civil war? really, trench warfare would bore the hell out of me, reloading ever 5 seconds sounds even worse, but hey if they can make it work then why not? i just like infinity ward more though.
July 28th, 2009 at 1:55 am Anti 2 says:

They’d never do a Civil War Call of Duty, because they know that the sales would bomb compared to previous titles, as anyone outside of America don’t care about America’s Civil War and thus wouldn’t sell outside of the US.
July 28th, 2009 at 8:54 am Reg says:

Yeah because that would sell really well outside of the U.S……sarcasm.
July 28th, 2009 at 9:53 am Mike Neil says:

@Anti 2 & Reg
I would have to disagree with you on the assumption that sales would bomb outside of the US.

@ Stg 44
A WW1 CoD game would be interesting, I think.
July 28th, 2009 at 7:28 pm ryan H says:

Cowboys VS indians FTW. I’d rock a bow and arrow!
July 29th, 2009 at 11:37 am Michael says:

It doesn’t really matter what era they pick. This is Treyarch. The slogan on their website says Defining the next level but all they’ve managed to do so far is make the old levels worse. They took the jewel encrusted crown of Call of Duty 4 and wrote ‘King’ on it in felt tip pen, then dropped it a couple of times in HDR syrup while playing Squash with it.
I’d like to see Activision drop Treyarch, Infinity Ward should be making the Call of Duty series alone, they’re the only ones who can do it justice. And for god sake Activision, stop getting Beenox to do crappy PC ports. You’re a game publishers, do it properly.
August 12th, 2009 at 3:19 pm protoman says:

I WOULD ABSOLUTELY love a Civil War CoD. I would definately uy that sort of game. my friends ad i were talking but a civil war CoD and we all agree they should. Let’s just hope Treyarch makes one!
August 27th, 2009 at 1:33 am StumanRH says:

I’ve had this idea for a long time. I live in a historic area that a lot of the civil war took place in. The Civil war fascinates me. There are many civil war stories to play of of. Also there IS enough weaponry for this game. Sure you would have a musket w/ bayonet for obvious reasons, but you could have revolvers, sabers, long/sawed off shotguns, bowie knife, gatling guns. It would also be a cool idea to have cannons that you would aim by rotating the joysticks. And the “air-strike” could be a calvary that rides through the map on horses slashing with sabers. I played Call of Juarez 2 recently and thought that it freaking rocked! I think that the game would be like that game but better!
August 29th, 2009 at 7:30 pm Colin Kotomski says:

I think Infinity Ward should in fact partake in a call of duty game based on the nouth and Korean and south Korean war.
and at same time partake in Vietnam war at the same time and show at some time how these to wars connect? it would be a great game and have extremely good story line.
Infinity ward did very good on call of duty 4 modern warfare and when i get modern warfare 2 for my PS3 it will probably be a quality game, just like modern warfare.
Back to the topic if Infinity Ward did do a game one that i would say that they would get many rewards for it like modern warfare did.
Two wars that connected some how that were very far apart and something is revealed?
That would be the best call of duty game in my opinion and the buyers.
If Ifinity Ward did this game they would in fact be the best game company in many gamers faces
December 14th, 2009 at 8:39 am Cody Cummings(Rebel) says:

A war between the states game would be pretty awsome…most people dont know that there were plaenty of repeating rifles and “machine” guns…also there was more than just trench warfare…there was battle charges, gurilla warfare, and skirmishes, and much much more…but who ever makes the game should be fair about it…most people like history channel, doesnt give the confederates much to choose from…what they should do is make every thing equal…and be historically correct…i found plenty of flaws in the history channel “civil” war games

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Call of Duty: The Civil War?

15 Responses to “Call of Duty: The Civil War?”

Leave a Reply