Call of Duty: Black Ops gets first trailer

Plenty for the frame-by-framers to get stuck into there.

The spacesuit looking thing is a Gsh-6A pilot helmet. The spaceship looking thing is probably an A-12.

Most of it looks like its from Vietnam, theres some snowy bits to thats probably Russia.

The visor’s a different shape, non?

http://gauntletinternational.com/helmets/GSh-6A.htm

Hum, indeed. Could be a GSh-9AP then?

That looks very similar, aye.

The voice on the trailer sound like a voice in prototype…

Poor Medal of Honor

Well, that went a little too fast for my liking. Even MW2′s first teaser was longer.

That said, it’s actually made me intrigued as to possibly how good it may be. And that’s something a Treyarch Call of Duty game has never made me do.

Binware.

Rubbish.

http://kotaku.com/5528653/black-ops//gallery/1

Is it just me or did we get a distinct whiff of Assassin’s Creed’s Animus-type shenanigans? All that stuff between the quick-cut action sounded like they were trying to get the subject to remember stuff.

@11 Yeah, I think CoD may have now (after MW2′s micheal bay explossion extravaganza) dropped it’s semi seriouse nature entirely and has gone into all out movie crazyness.

the vietnam part doesn´t look like a 60´s / 70´s conflict…looks more like a more modern setting – i´m a little disappointed about that. but the footage looks cool anyway. i think the trailer is pretty good. the game footage looks sweet, but it´s not much…i am as well sceptical…but i enjoyed w@w and it seems like treyarch are taking things even more serious with this one..on the other hand there will be brink and halo reach and so many other promising games/shooters this fall / winter. this year is really killing me…

Just gonna throw this in there for consideration, but given the very first scene in the vid (you lying down semi-conscious in a lab), could this be an Assassins Creed type stoyline across a broad timeline of military history?

God, they are doing the game with the same old engine. I won’t buy this.

Even Medal Of Honor have a chance to be a better game. Engine looks much better then this piece of Quake 3 engine crap in 2010.

I just hope they’ll bring zombie mode back , but no doubt that they’ll do that, the first one was popular, right?

bloody hell i do hate treyarch.

@11 i was thinking the way samething XD

@16 yeh that was the most popular thing i believe

@17 shut it you havnt seen enough yet *slap*

i hate treyarch too but at least it is finally not set in ww2 so i am willing to keep my eye on this despite my feelings for activision and treyarch.

If they make a good game, who gives a monkey’s bum who makes it. Just enjoy it.

I hate Treyarch even more now for creating a trailer/game that’s got me interested and looking forward to Call of Duty.

How dare they?!

More inf. in http://www.clandragonrojo.es/1%C2%BA-trailer-de-call-of-duty-black-ops

*sits back and watches as all the Activision haters get excited about the next Call of Duty game and proceed to go out and buy it*

@23 Thats how works first impressions and marketing campaign. You need to tease people right

But i won’t buy it. I don’t care about marketing campaigns. I know that it is Treyarch that makes a Call Of duty game on the same old engine.

After IW and Treyarch dissapointments i won’t buy their games until they will change engine, graphics, story and game design formula that is old for 5-7 years.

@20 I don’t remember good Call Of duty games. First Call of Duty i liked and Modern Warfare 1 was not bad, but not good, great or brilliant, so i don’t expect from them a good game with old engine.

Well I bought World at War on a steam sale so i win

What would you consider a brilliant game, Erthazus? Besides Fallout 2, that is.

I didn’t get WaW and I probably won’t get this one, since I doubt Treyarch have it in them to do anything ground breaking. The new Medal of Honor is definItely my one to watch shooter this year.

@26 a lot of games, i can make a list to you if you really want. Just name the genre if you are interested.

Well, consider me teased.

@13 Actually there’s nothing in that video to suggest anything much later than 1977. The Steyr Aug is the most modern thing in the video, and the Vietnamese combatants are all wearing pyjamas, rather than military uniforms, indicating Vietcong.

That’s not to say they won’t go further than 1977, but there’s nothing to indicate it, except for the rumor about the (1980) Iranian embassy siege being featured.

Why do people say they hate Treyarch? I was blinded for some reason too when W@W came out. I just gave the game a chance but i kept saying ‘But just wait for MW2,its gonna destroy this’ while the campaign mode was damn well made and enjoyable with awesome moments.

Nazi Zombies mode was great and ok…online wasn’t as good as MW1, but still good.

I haven’t found the Treyarch titles to be as good as the IW titles, but they’ve never been bad either.

I think Treyarch are more than capable of carrying the franchise on. They had Online Stats, a good SP and an alright engine.

The thing I find annoying is that Treyarch games use IW’s engine, so their games are almost identical. I really don’t see the point in getting it when I can play the one I already own. I also dislike how Activision have this need to bring out a new Call of Duty every 6 months.

I don’t think Treyarch bring anything unique to the CoD brand whatsoever.

It seems as though they’ve basically been led by the hand with WaW to the extent that it’s essentially just a CoD4 re-skin with a few minor tweaks.

From my point of view, their games haven’t added anything noteworthy to the CoD brand in the least.

The first CoD game that I ever played was CoD on the PC. Way back when I was into Unreal Tournament and Half Life: Opposing Force. I only played it a few times, but didn’t really think much of it. Then after seeing someone on my 360 friends list playing CoD2 night after night after night (when pretty much all that I played was Gears or GRAW), I decided to try CoD3 as a day 1 buy…

What a joke! I played it a handful of times and lost interest. ‘What’s all the fuss about this game?’, I thought. ‘It’s rubbish’. I wasn’t really that aware of the difference in quality between the two studios at the time.

Then I continued to play Gears pretty much every day until the CoD4 beta took my interest. I got a beta key, and that was pretty much that. I really enjoyed the beta, got the game as a day 1 and I’ve mostly just been playing CoD ever since.

Then WaW got announced. ‘Oh no!’ I thought. Treyarch are going to butcher this version like they butchered the last one. Even now, my memories of CoD3 include watching an enemy spawn right in front of me (the only game that I’ve EVER seen that happen) and an MP that seemed so bad that I only played it once or possibly twice.

That’s why most CoD fans didn’t want WaW. Because CoD fans liked the CoD brand and they’d rather have one every 2 years, than see the stuff that Treyarch was coming out with getting released.

So then WaW got released and I got it anyway (Eventually, as my pre-ordered copy got stolen by a post man and replaced with a 99p DVD). I enjoyed the SP campaign, but the MP was a blatant step down from CoD4, no doubt about it. From Attack Choppers to dogs!? From a G36c to an MP40!?? Not only that, but the thing looked horrible. The textures were covered in ludicrous amounts of unnecessary ‘noise’. The atmosphere was always dark and dingy, even on daytime maps. It was just nowhere near as good.

The very fact that CoD4 consistently managed to beat WaW in the XBL charts, even though it was a year older, proves that even though people might have wanted something new, WaW just didn’t seem to provide it.

Metacritic, the sales and the stats all prove that WaW wasn’t a step up from CoD4, so Treyarch haven’t given any indication that they’re equipped to carry the CoD brand without IW, the way that I see it. MW2 showed Treyarch how to follow up from CoD4. I don’t think that they’ve shown a single thing in any of their CoDs that makes me think that they could make a similar step without being led by the hand and painting by numbers.

I intend to watch this game before release, to see what they come up with this time. I’m not expecting anything at all other than an MW2 re-skin. I’m certainly not going to buy it so far. Not without an amazing set of reviews or a beta that can convince me, anyway…

I actually enjoyed WaW MP more than I did any of CoD4, but not as much as MW2. The thing about WaW, at least on the PC, was that it just got better and better. Sure dogs don’t seem like much but they wanted to power down the killstreaks and I can agree with that, makes it more pure in my eyes. All the map packs they made were amazing though, each post release map was just brilliant and the game is still great fun.

I do agree tryarch need to learn to innovate though. They make great games, but not original games and it’s time for them to step up with some ideas, or maybe it’s time for Acti to actually let some of their ideas out.

I think the reason why Treyarch are percieved so underwhelmingly is that Infinity Ward kept setting the bar higher for every game they made.

If you look at the evolution from Call of Duty to Call of Duty 2 to Modern Warfare and Modern Warfare 2, every game has raised the stakes. No matter how much hysterical anti-hype or trendy Kotick hatred people project onto Modern Warfare 2, it’s pretty obvious to sane people that it was far better than it’s prequel in every way.

When I played World At War I just couldn’t really escape the fact that I had more of an experience playing Call of Duty 2. It just felt more like a generic expansion to that game than anything else. Granted, I was playing it at a friends place and didn’t do multiplayer, so it may have totally redeemed itself there.

Who knows, maybe the cold war theme will bring vindication for Treyarch. Call of Duty did have three games that were set in the exact same war – before World At War – and how much can you really do with a series that’s done the same war three times already?