Call of Duty is returning to its roots.
The next game in the series will highlight a first-person shooter in the middle of World War II called '
Call of Duty: WWII'.
The
firm teased fans on Friday with a promotional image that revealed its
plans for the game's Worldwide Reveal livestream on April 26.
When Call of Duty first hit the masses in 2003 it was set in World War II,
Polygon reported.
After
becoming a hit, Sledgehammer Games continued the series with similar
themes set during different time periods that ranged from the 1960s to
the far distant future.
The full
announcement states: 'Call of Duty returns to its World War II roots
with Call of Duty: WWII, developed by Sledgehammer Games.
'More
details are incoming during the game's Worldwide Reveal livestream on
Wednesday, April 26 featuring Sledgehammer Games co-studio heads and
founders Michael Condrey and Glen Schofield.
'Fans will be able to tune in to get a first look at Call of Duty: WWII and get intel on the studio's vision for the game.'
When Call of Duty first hit the
masses in 2003 it was set in World War II, Polygon reported. After
becoming a hit, Sledgehammer Games continued the series with similar
themes set during different time periods that ranged from the 1960s to
the far distant future (pictured)
Since Call of Duty made its debut, some have questioned whether the violence was transcending into the real world.
However,
a pair of psychologist have recently discovered that countries that
play the game are some of the safest around the globe.
In
a new book, titled 'Moral Combat', psychology experts Dr Patrick Markey
and Dr Christopher Ferguson claim that 'the war on violent video games
is wrong.'
DOES CALL OF DUTY IMPACT PLAYERS SOCIAL BEHAVIOR?
A
pair of psychologists have spoken up to defend violent video games such
as Call of Duty and Grand Theft Auto, claiming that they can have a
positive social impact.
In a new book,
titled 'Moral Combat', psychology experts Dr Patrick Markey and Dr
Christopher Ferguson claim that 'the war on violent video games is
wrong.'
They suggest that countries where video games are popular are some of the safest in the world.
The
pair write that video games 'actually have a positive social impact for
today’s youth and offer a comprehensive overview of their history,
culture, and scientific research.'
They
say that the British general public has been 'misled' into believing
that video games are responsible for horrific acts of violence by
'picture media, politicians, and other personalities.'
In
their book, the pair say that most well-adjusted children and teenagers
regularly play violent video games, while never exhibiting violent
behaviour in real life.
They claim that spikes in sales of violent games actually correspond with decreased rates of violent crime.
The pair write that video games 'actually
have a positive social impact for today's youth and offer a
comprehensive overview of their history, culture, and scientific
research.'
They say that the British
general public has been 'misled' into believing that video games are
responsible for horrific acts of violence by 'picture media,
politicians, and other personalities.'
They claim that spikes in sales of violent games actually correspond with decreased rates of violent crime.
As evidence for their point, the psychologists compared video game sales across different nations.
Fans will be able to tune in to
get a first look at Call of Duty: WWII and get intel on the studio's
vision for the game during the livestream. dailymail
The
pair write in their book: 'When we look at these countries, we find
that, contrary to the fear that video games make society more dangerous,
the opposite tends to be true. The countries that consume the most
video games are among the safest nations in the world.
'In
fact, the three countries with the fewest global game sales had a
nearly 200 per cent higher average violent crime rate than the three
countries that sold the most games.'
Statistics suggest that the Japan and North Korea are the world's biggest spenders on video games per 100,000 people.
The two countries spend almost £14million ($17million) per 100,000 citizens between them every year.
The United States is third in the list, with an average yearly spend of £4.9million ($6million) per 100,000 people.
Fourth place is taken by the United Kingdom, with £4.1million ($5million) spent per 100,000 people.
Post a Comment Blogger Facebook Disqus