The setting is what made the game stand out in the first place, now it will be generic. But I think there will be a twist of some sort because Techland must know this too.

Odd choice of name for the game. Does that mean that the hunt for the treasusure of Juarez will be a focus of the story still but now in modern times?

Well, ok. Only ever played the demos of the previous 2 games, and didn't like how they played (cover system was weird).

At least the characters might stand out in modern times, compared to army and space marine characters. More like Kane and Lynch.

I guess they weren't up to the challenge of putting out another Western game after Red Dead raised the bar so high.

Wimps.

did juarez even have a cover system? i dont think it did? are you sure you're thinking of the right game?

Honestly? Honestly?

Seriously, do you really think that after Red Dead Redemption, any Western game is going to have even half a chance unless it is a AAA experience? The Call of Juarez games were alright, but they were never really something to right home about. Keeping the series in the Old West is only going to beg direct comparisons to Red Dead Redemption (as everyone truly just want more of that), and now that the bar has been raised incredibly high, developer Techland simply does not have it in them to deliver the caliber of game that is going to distinguish itself in that genre any longer.

If anything, setting the game in modern day Los Angeles and Juarez, Mexico, gives Techland the ability to create a "pulled from the headlines" story and setting for the game. If Techland can't find a way to truly distinguish their game with this kind of source material, then maybe it's time for them to call it quits, and give it a rest.

could be decent if they take abit of a Mad Max spin on it.

Screens look nice...always liked their engine

i prefered call of juarez to RDR personally, so it's a shame they'd be chased away from the western genre becasue of that. juarez just seemed more fun. something majorly lacking in RDR. RDR was far cry 2 with horses. lots of travelling, lots of repetition. a crappy story and forgettable characters. juarez wasnt as technically able. but it was a damn sight better as a game for me. hell. it's the only western themed game i've actually enjoyed.

They watched the First season of Justified and wanted to make a game from it?

Both CoJ games werent AAA games but still I liked them much more then RDRGTA blabla. Thats funny how KORN describes RDR---FC2 with horses - thats exactly what I say to people. Its fun for first 2hrs and then You realize You are going to spend another 10 or 30hrs doing the same thing...no thank You. CoJ had cool characters and better story...RDR did not.

Yes, Bound in Blood had a cover system.

well this is just an awkward game now. from wild west to modern? its like taking Halo from its future time and placing it in present day. instead of fighting the Covenant you're fighting crack dealers. in this case, instead of fighting the native indians you're fighting crack dealers. point is, modern day is boring.

I find RDR and CoJ vastly different games. RDR is free roaming CoJ is a linear shooter. Okay, granted in bound in blood you could ride a horse in like 2 chapters, but come on guys it really is a different genre.

Call of Juarez 2 was soooo good.

And you seem to have missed the point.

Look, I'm not against your POV, but you have to admit that people who prefer COJ over RDR represent a pretty niche group - dare I say, most gamers have never even played CoJ, but over 8 million have played RDR and loved it. And here is your problem if you are a CoJ fan. Any game set in an Old West setting is going to immediately draw direct comparison to RDR, by the 8 million fans who played and loved RDR. Under that kind of scrutiny, either Techland manages to pull a AAA status CoJ out of their development studio, securing an entire new audience of fans who picked up the game expecting more RDR, but got a different kind of AAA experience, or risk getting their franchise killed off altogether, with a mountain of people who are not pleased with the product at all, on top of tons of reviews featuring lower scores than normal for the series, in the wake of expectations created by RDR.

Whether you like RDR or not, it is one of those rare games like Half-Life or Halo, that creates a paradigm shift in it's genre. You can literally play just about any shooter, and even if you could manage to make all the things like graphics equal, just on gameplay alone, you can tell if the shooter was made before Half-Life or Halo, or made after. For Western games, RDR is that game. For better or worse, it changes everything in the genre by changing the caliber of game people expect from the genre. And in the wake of that, Old West franchises like CoJ and Gun, either need to truly bring their A-game, or risk getting their franchises wiped out.

Not saying that CoJ has to become more like RDR. Just saying that if Techland and Ubisoft expect to keep the series in the Old West, they need to step up their game in a major way - yet remain distinctly CoJ in the process. One of the things that I have always liked about the CoJ series, is if you play through the games with a critical eye, you can see where there is a AAA title hiding beneath the surface. It's like watching a championship team, with the potential to be true champions and take home the gold, who always seems to step over their own feet and not quite make it, just trying to get through the playoffs. You know in your heart they could be champions, but somewhere in there, they have to know it too, plus they have to figure out how to unleash their A-game so they can be champions. This is what has always held the CoJ series back, and now that RDR has raised the bar for the genre, if Techland can't find a way in the development process to unleash the inner AAA game that has been in the CoJ series all along, they simply cannot expect to go up against a juggernaut like RDR and expect to come out of the other side whole (ie. continued funding for the series from Ubisoft).

Were it up to me, I'd rather the series stay in the Old West, Techland step up their game and finally produce the AAA title that I have known CoJ could be all along, sell a few million copies, giving the franchise a new lease on life and millions of new fans. Unfortunately, it's not up to me. And someone, whether at Techland themselves, or at Ubisoft, no longer feels the IP can continue to expand it's customer base in an Old West setting. It would not surprise me following Bound in Blood, if Ubisoft did not put out an ultimatum of sorts to Techland concerning the series, which likely prompted the change to the modern era - a decision that likely came about almost a full year before RDR was released and became an unstoppable Old West hit. The fact that RDR is such a huge hit, only makes it that much harder on any other Old West franchise that shows up and does not bring their A-game.

As for CoJ: The Cartel being set in the modern era, I am still hoping Techland brings their A-game. No matter what time period the game is set in, if the developer brings their A-game, gamers are in for a treat. You could put Halo in the stone age, but so long as Bungie, or 343 brought their A-game to the party, it would still be one of the best games around. And as for that Old West feel, anyone actually keeping track of the situation in Juarez already knows, that in many respects what is going on now, is like the Old West reborn. And why not have some of these modern day criminals in search of the Gold of Juarez; likely to fund their criminal operations; set in the back drop of an untrustworthy military force who is supposed to be returning law to the land, politicians who are either apathetic, under threat, or on the take, set in the murder capital of the world, where the law of the gun, is the law of the land. Story wise, I think there are the possibilities here for a story as rich as any from the CoJ series so far. Some people are complaining the game is going to become generic simply because of the shift in time periods, but I will counter with this: there has been nothing generic about the Call of Juarez series so far, I highly doubt that Techland will decide to go all generic on us now. In my heart something tells me, that long time fans of the series are going to be in for a pleasant surprise from the new game.

RDR has done the Western atmosphere perfect, but no it's not the best Western "game". There is loads of possible improvement on the formula.

RDR has too many annoying design flaws (horse riding), control issues, bad aiming, awful missions (mini-games with no evolution), goose-chase pacing, and narrative issues (no Act 1). RDR had a great open world, just incredibly repetitive missions with no evolution and never took advantage of the world. They all were painfully linear, penalty-ridden, and no experimentation was possible.

I did not miss You point mate, actually I understand and agree with most things You post. In a nutshell : taste of majority is killing the industry, originality. Sure IM happy to see Techland didnt kill CoJ ip but many davs did it with they games - mostly because it didnt sell well, and they didnt sell well because "the taste of majority"( 12-16yrs old kids) wasnt sate. On the other hand in my opinion huge popularity kills quality in sequels. Closed circle...thats it

all of that is an opinion, and why did you put "game" in quotations? are u saying its not actually a game? i never saw any flaws in anything you just mentioned. sure maybe the missions got a little repetitive but seriously there was no point in the game where i thought it was boring or frustrating. you make the game sound like it is a horrible mess.