There is a lot that has not been covered in world war 2 games that I would still love to see. Black Ops had some stuff for the Vietnam war, but is not solely based on the war. I have also yet to see the Korean war included in any of their games.
I'd like to see more games have setting in WW1, WW2, the Vietnam War, the Korean War, and the Gulf War.
Some of these settings have been less explored than others and deserve a treatment from the shooters genre more than the fictional wars depicted during the modern times.
I wouldn't mind the future too much, just as long as it's not a 10 to 20-years-into type of thing like Black Ops 2 or the more recent Ghost Recon games.
I believe that anyone should be allowed to play the game that they wish. If I want to play a game based on WWII because I like historic games I should be able to. If I want to play a futuristic game I should be able to. Basically, what I am getting at is that there should be multiple games. A Historic game and a futuristic game. Therefore the customers will be happy.
In older games such as Call of Duty World at War, we only have weapons used in WWII, like sub-machine guns and older shotguns. In futuristic games such as Black Ops II, you have a much wider variety of guns, better attachments, and explosives. Futuristic war games bring a better gaming experience to today's modern gaming society.
I am all for evolution and change. While I think the old school retro games were awesome, I always despise seeing recycled versions with "revamped" graphics. I guess my point is that games should not be afraid to go anywhere in setting or gameplay but never limit themselves to a particular boundary.