MovinSoSlow18 wrote:
Certifiable wrote:
Zombehfication wrote:
It's pretty obvious that Halo: Reach was set in a time before H:CE.
Since when does that matter? Vice City took place in time before GTA III did. As did San Andreas. Fallout: New Vegas took place after the events in Fallout 3 took place. When the time period of the game takes place has never been controlling.
Halo Reach isn't considered Halo 4 or Halo 5, or anything but a spin-off of Halo 3, because for some reason this weird sequential logic being discussed here only occurs in the COD community.
Maybe it is Activision's fault. But even if it was, Activision is wrong too. And it's not as if they have actually named any of these spin-offs as COD 5, or COD 6, or anything else. The best argument for the other side that I can see is that they used these titles as working titles during actual development. Which is something Hollywood does, too. But working titles don't mean anything. That's why they're working titles and not actual titles.
If you think about it logically...They are not planning to stop making call of duty games anytime soon..And maybe they thought to themselves. "We do not want the game titles overrun with numbers like final fantasy". And they stopped using numbers, or as you say they are titles the developed use to keep track..Either way, w@w is the 5th installment and is considered cod 5 and there is no proof that there will be a cod gaming coming out with call of duty 5 in the title. I have no idea why people are making such a big deal out of it..It is perfectly logical and reasonable to assume that W@W is call of duty 5 just with out the 5 in there.
When I think of a numbered sequel, I think of the next game in the series to have BIG changes. Like the engine, or so many core features that the game doesn't have the same "feel" anymore. At least modern games. Like how GTA IV was extremely different from III and all the spin-offs. Or, like how COD4 was dramatically different from every COD before it. Which is the weird thing here. MW2, WAW, and BO are not dramatically different from COD4. The differences are relatively minor. There has been no big step forward (or backward, with some series). The day that COD takes that big step forward, then it would be worthy of being called COD 5. A new engine, or a series of changes that drastically altered the feel of the game.
And that's why sequential numbering has taken on the form it has with other series in the video game world. I'm not saying there will be a COD 5, but I'm seeing no real proof that WAW and MW2 and BO are CODs 5, 6, and 7, other than that the community has chosen to give them those unofficial nicknames. And this may be because Activision used these numbers during development. And maybe they decided not to keep the numbers upon release for the reasons you state. Or maybe they didn't. But there doesn't seem to be any evidence either way. So until there is, I don't know what's so crazy about assuming that COD is no different from the rest of the video game world.
