A group ofCall of Dutyfans are rallying together in asking for a remake of one of the series' best iterations -World at War.
I have to agree with the fans. I’ve played a lot ofCall of Dutyover the years and the main installment to resonate with me wasWorld at War. It may not have had the same mainstream appeal as aModern Warfare, but it came at a time whereCall of Dutycould seemingly do no wrong. The setting of World War II was a welcome one and the weapons felt both authentic and also strong in multiplayer.
The next Call of Duty is capitalising on the success of the Modern Warfare brand
Advert
Advert
While there were plenty of people in agreement, a contingent of Twitter don’t want to see focus put on the World War era games. One user summed up the opposing side pretty well saying “We did they called itVanguard” referencing the most recent trip into the past that both critically and commercially seemed to disappoint.
The issue withremasteringWorld at Waris the fact that the game is remembered for particular things that are done better now. A perfect example of this is the much-lovedzombies mode. That originated inWorld at War- you had to beat the game before it unlocked - and the more recent attempts at zombies are better. The same goes for multiplayer because it was tightened up over the years. While a remaster would be nice, it’s unlikely it would make sense at Activision.
Topics:Call Of Duty
