360°

Call Of Duty: Vanguard's Campaign Is An Insult To World War II

A misguided attempt to rewrite history for the better demeans those involved.

Father__Merrin910d ago

The Whole entirety of WW2 was a sham to begin with. Peace terms should have been agreed 🤝 to avoid it all

Welshy910d ago

You might want to pick up a history book, the nazis weren't particularly interested in peace...

rdgneoz3909d ago

They were interested in peace for Germans / blonde haired, blue eyed, whites... Besides that, they wanted a piece of this place and a piece of that place...

4Sh0w909d ago

Merrin,

Seriously are you OK, it sounds like a 5 yr old jacked your account.

Kurt Russell909d ago

I think there is fair argument that the years of German economic depression set forth from the "peace terms" of WW1 were a catalyst for such people to talk their way into power.

Hopefully the world has truly learned from it all.

CrimsonWing69909d ago

Did you go to school? Like, I’m not trying to take a jab at you, I just literally have no idea where you got your info to make a statement like that.

Father__Merrin909d ago

@crimson it's because I dont believe in war. WW2 was too much suffering

TheColbertinator909d ago

Hitler and his Nazi lackey psychopaths had plotted violent uprisings and targeted assassinations for years before they conquered Europe.

The Munich Beer Hall Putsch was merely the first step for that madman. There was no negotiation with a man like that.

Kaozz1979909d ago

Dumbest comment I have read on N4g and that means a lot

Smok91909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

Completely disagree. Nazis needed to die.
This dude really wanted an agreement with Nazis.

iplay1up2909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

Einstein, Hitler wanted to take over all of Europe. His army took over everything from Poland to France! He also had 10 million killed in concentration camps. How would "peace terms" have affected that? Hand over all Jews, Gypsy's, gay people, also challenged people, have them all killed for "peace". You need a serious HISTORY LESSON! I can not even grasp your ignorance!

AnotherGamer909d ago

....what kind of world are you living in? There's hell lot of documents and history books about ww2, damn even video footage. Go get educated.

Yppupdam909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

WOW....(This is what happens when people only read Harry Potter novels) If you knew what you were talking about you would have known that at the beginning (1938), the then Prime minister of Britain, Neville Chamberlain hammered out a Peace Treaty with Germany (The Munich Agreement). Allowing Hitler to keep a large part of Czechoslovakia. Hitler has been known to say that he thought Chamberlan was a fool and the Munich Agreement a worthless piece of paper. He ignored the treaty and eventually took over The rest of Czechoslovakia, Poland and France. Peace treaties don't work with despots with aspirations of world domination and the genocide of races The Nazis deemed undesirable. The Nazis would have been all too happy, after every subsequent invasion, to sign peace treaty after peace treaty until they took over the whole world.

Rebel_Scum909d ago

Chamberlain made an agreement with the Nazi's to not grab anymore land. A year later the Nazi's invaded Poland. So much for the peace terms.

Rimeskeem909d ago

You act like it was avoidable. The only reason the US even fought was because peace could not be maintained.

909d ago
W34KN35S909d ago

The way you communicated your point came off as WW2 was a conspiracy and that people shouldn't stand up to evil , which is why you got the backlash. Just because you doesn't mean it wont happen. Some wars are needed , there are bad people in the world, and will be for a long time. Justified wars are when good people decide to fight back against evil people.

"The Whole entirety of WW2 was a sham to begin with." sham is not a good word to use in this instance.

Your point seems to be that you dont like people getting hurt or suffering, so wars that aren't JUSTIFIED are pointless . If that is your point then instead of your first comment, you could've said something along the lines of :

"I'm not a fan of people getting hurt or suffering and would love if we lived in a world where everyone could get along peacefully. "
wishful thinking but again , there will be people who hurt and cause suffering for a long time , which is why you need people who are willing to stand up against it and fight back, whether that be everyday life or war.

philm87909d ago

Father__Merrin you are the epitome of ignorance.

SurgicalMenace909d ago

So much anger and toxicity. The man said what he said, with that, is his right. Name calling, judgment, etc are all practices and behaviors exercised by the tyrannical figure you all have agreed deserved death. Let's take a moment to allow that to sink in....

Father__Merrin909d ago

Correct. And I stand by my original post it was a sham and could have been avoided. If all leaders politicians were out of the equation no pole would goto war with a Russian no German with a brit and so and and so forth....

Yppupdam908d ago (Edited 908d ago )

Anger? Toxicity? Just pointing out a bizarre statement it not Toxic. No one is "wishing death" on the OP. everyone is just pointing out his bizarre, "Peter Pan" like post. It would be a wonderful world if everybody was kind and reasonable. But, that is simply not reality. Another thing, It is his right to make that statement, but, it is also every bodies right to disagree.

SurgicalMenace907d ago

You're right, but to disagree with toxicity, anger, and judgment attached is not necessary. Speaks more volumes of the respondent than the communicator, as none of those elements were present in the original statement. Just an observation.

BTW, I was referring to Hitler deserving death, based on ideologies associated with his tyrannical practices. If the same actions/nature are exhibited by those responding, what do they deserve through their own eyes?🤔

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 907d ago
RebDomine2910d ago

it's an insult to German too ! Waw is way better.

EnricoPallazzo910d ago

So what I think Kotaku is saying is: game companies should stop trying to pander to "games journalists" and Twitter lunatics because these severely mentally unwell people will always find something to bitch about? Huh.

moriarty1889910d ago (Edited 910d ago )

Well said. The people making these games are all woke morons. every major company today has been infected with this ideaology. Rewriting history to cater to sensitive clowns and their woke minded overlords is their only priority. Making a realistic game based on actual history that is accurate is not. hopefully this woke crap dies off and the world gets back to common sense and reality. Might take a while but one can hope.

909d ago
4Sh0w909d ago (Edited 909d ago )

Damm he absolutely destroyed this game and frankly Activision should be embarrassed, you'd think knowing how successful the franchise is in regards to sales that they would put more effort into it, instead of just cutting a check to add woke crap, wash their hands and call it a day:

"In its desperate attempts to avoid controversy, the game grabs at armfuls of it, and then defies reality in response. Having a Black British soldier take the lead demands so much interesting commentary, of which there is absolutely none."

"Things venture more daringly when it comes to sexism, because of course they do. The female character, a Russian sniper, gets to say, “Because I’m a WOMAN?!” most of the times she gets a line"

"The whole game reeks of “even though”ism. “Even though she’s a woman…” “Even though he’s a Black man…” Rather than saying anything honest, its painful attempts to be right-on, to do everything short of punching a fist in the air and shouting “BLACK LIVES MATTER!” or “GIRL POWER!”, make it all far more offensive. There’s no truth here, but instead an attempt to wokewash history"

-But even then how did it fail so hard in terms of game stucture:

"My focus here is so heavily on the narrative, because what you actually do is almost a parody of the descent of this franchise. Where 2003’s Call Of Duty has you free to explore its open areas, even allowing you to run and hide to escape the terrifying combat, Vanguard’s very first mission immediately flashed up a warning on screen that I’d ventured three paces too far to the left, and should I not return to the prescribed route I would be killed. I was chasing an enemy soldier."

"As ever, the NPCs want to play the game instead of you, unless it’s about killing the enemy. Constantly shoving to the front, and when they can’t, literally teleporting ahead, your place is always at the back. They have to get there first so they can…not do anything. They all stand next to the German soldiers like old friends, oblivious to how these opponents are shooting only at you with psychic precision."

"Call Of Duty: Vanguard is probably the most visually astonishing game I’ve ever played. It’s also one of the ugliest. It’s a tragic depiction of the descent of a franchise, a game which simultaneously hides from the true horror of WWII and yet for which that horror is not nefarious enough, replaced with childish action heroes and humiliating worse-than-Hitler cartoon villains."

ManMarmalade909d ago

Nazis in Wolfenstein though

BenRC01910d ago (Edited 910d ago )

If Benetton went to war...
I mean really if you want to go down that road the making video games about millions of people who died isn't exactly pc

TheDoomedGuy910d ago

its fine if its "bad people" dying.

moriarty1889910d ago

that it is and this shit needs to die quick.

909d ago
Gardenia909d ago

What do you mean trash? Isn't it only normal that from now on every game will have at least 3 lesbians with short blue or pink hair, 5 trannies, 4 black guys (but never Asians) and 2 gender neutrals in a WW2 setting. This is historical accurate of course, but if you would disagree you'd be a racist and your opinion is not a fact.

I think I summed up pretty well what world we live in today.

Binarycode909d ago

Well said. World gone mad.

Ninver909d ago

We're fighting a different world war. This one is humanity's integrity.

Rachel_Alucard909d ago

When I played the campaign, I wasn't bothered by the race or gender of the characters. But the multiplayer clearly has some of the most stereotyped character stories I've seen. Like the one German female was forced to join the girls hitler youth, but just defied her superiors then ran away to be a lesbian with a polish soldier somehow. Why not just make her a polish lesbian instead of the whole first part?

Then you have characters that defy all logic even their own backstory just to paint their home team as the bad guys like the one Japanese soldier who got pissed at his superior officer being abusive and the acts his country committed so his grand plan was to beat him to death then start killing his own people with the help of the allied forces, only for them to turn around and nuke 150k of his own people later.

Finally, you have characters that are just white men in everything but model and pronouns. Their storylines are just things a man did but now blackwashed and male only aspects removed to be as generic as possible. There's the one black chick that is just a fast runner and that's it, a random somalian female but moved to italy so now shes covered under italian designation and her story is just "colonialism bad" so she just starts killing Italians, and finally the indian chick is the same as the somalian, except shes fighting british people instead of italians, shes clearly the only axis force on the allied team which makes no sense.

The bios don't affect anything gameplay wise, but its just jarring to see WW2 on everything only for space aliens and sasquatch to show up in the fight. I'm not surprised these characters are multiplayer only because there's no way they could have these people show up without clown tier laughter ensuing throughout the studio.

Show all comments (83)
230°

Despite Negative Reception, Call Of Duty: Vanguard Has Sold Over 30 Million Copies

Call of Duty: Vanguard has sold over 30 million copies, a milestone confirmed by the game's former social media strategist.

DarXyde34d ago

That's the thing about Call of Duty: it gets panned online, but still sells gangbusters.

Begs the question: is the online community complaining truly a vocal minority, or are people just unprincipled? Both I'm sure, but to what extent?

VENOM OF SINS34d ago

It's all about the hive mind, and I'm no exception to it. We buy each installment pretty much every year, regardless of the next installment being an improvement or not. Sad to say, but it is what it is.

Lexreborn234d ago

People know what they like, it’s really that simple. The people who play CoD love CoD and unlike the minority gamers they will support it regardless.

The vocal people online will make sure a game burns they don’t like without even trying it. But, the CoD crowd will buy the game PLAY it and give feedback that goes towards their games growth.

And as long as they can get online and shoot people they will continue to support it.

CPTN MITCHELL34d ago

Cod is not the same anymore, I didn't buy this one or mw3 and I no longer care about the franchise... People complain about Spider-Man 2 as being a copy paste but cod is the same game every single year and they're ok with that.

Lexreborn234d ago

@cptn you further validate the point, people who enjoy it keep playing, and people like you who don’t stop. But 30 million is greater than your displeasure of the game.

And if they like it, they’ll keep playing and paying.

anast34d ago

Most of them are young people that look up to characters like Dr. Disrespect.

Tacoboto34d ago

"are people just unprincipled?"

I mean... You're on this site. You've seen the discourse over COD, how awful it is, yet how aful Microsoft was for taking COD away from PS gamers, despite not once saying they wanted to do that.

Another similar one - fans of BG3 since day one refusing to buy Alan Wake 2 because it doesn't have a physical edition. Or anyone calling 30fps unacceptable but is enjoying DD2. Or anyone complaining about bloated open world games yet is complaining about shorter, focused narratives.

Neonridr34d ago

they haven't taken CoD away from PS Gamers.

WiiU-Dude34d ago

I've said something like this many times. When something is huge...it could be music, video games etc, it is fashionable to start the hate. I have loved every iteration of COD. Each has it's own merits. I have enjoyed them all and have never had a problem proclaiming it even when people heckled me. Oh well. People gonna hate.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 34d ago
RhinoGamer8834d ago

Just like Madden and Fifa (FC), the audience is conditioned to buy every year by EA and ATVI.

VersusDMC34d ago

Why talk about Vanguard? It was still the best selling game of that year. And at a 70+ metacritic.

Modern Warfare 3 last year was the 2nd best selling game of the year(been awhile since it wasn't 1st) and at a 50+ metacritic.

It would be cool to see the sales for all the call of duties to see if there's a trend and to compare.

jznrpg34d ago

I have only bought 2-3 CoD’s ever and the last time I bought one was at least a decade ago. The only reason I bought it back then was to play with my Son who was still in high school. I got some copies for free here and there from friends but I would only play the campaign. I’ve been burned out on PVP since Battlefield Vietnam on PC , Planetside stuff like that. I do enjoy PVE if done well but I doubt I’ll ever play a PVP game again unless they do something totally different than what’s been done before and I don’t see that happening anytime soon.

I have friends that buy every CoD and I ask them why do they still play after 20 years of the same game? Most of them say because of their online friends or real life friends that play it. Not because the game is good or it’s better than the last.

TheColbertinator34d ago

Battlefield Vietnam was so much fun

ocelot0734d ago

Maybe because people pre ordered it. I have pre ordered every COD since COD MW 2019. I enjoyed mw and cold war. Didn't play beta to vanguard I just pre ordered it like 2 days before release and regretted it a few days after release as it was bad.

Show all comments (30)
140°

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II ranked play arrives in 2023, says goodbye to older COD titles

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II ranked play arrives in 2023. Meanwhile, ranked play gets retired in two older COD games.

Read Full Story >>
gamefreaks365.com
Welshy555d ago

I'd only thumb this up if it meant SBMM was being entirely removed from unranked. Otherwise the only difference between ranked and unranked is the visibility of where the game deems your skill level.

gamer9555d ago

Exactly, we're already playing ranked play in quickplay, cod has zero clue what they're doing on quickplay vs ranked. All they need to do is copy other popular games but they can't figure it out

REDGUM555d ago

Don't laugh but I don't understand as I'm a casual gamer but what's the difference between the MW2 multiplayer that I'm playing online now compared to this ranked play etc? What is ranked play. I thought I was playing with a rank that increases at certain point stages.

TheEnigma313555d ago

Ranked means they will match you with similar skilled players. Like a level 50 will match with level 55 and a level 10 will match with a level 5ish.

Welshy555d ago (Edited 555d ago )

It's not account level that will be matched, but skill level via some MMR/ELO system. There are level 2 smurfs out there who will stomp lvl 55's.

I'm not entirely sure on how they'll grade it, whether it will be bronze/silver/gold etc like Rocket League or an ELO number like Siege. I suppose functionally it's the same thing so it doesn't matter.

gamer9555d ago

Is it going to be crap like all their previous ranked play? Timed events that place you in a ladder and you move up and down in that ladder? Just give us a normal ranked play like every other comp game please, let us move up and down between the ranks based on ELO, for the whole season

40°

Call Of Duty: Vanguard Fortress Map Gameplay

Here is a look at what is likely to be the last new map for Vanguard before the new game is released.