Comments on: Are Annual Installments of Call of Duty Overkill?

By: BigWoopMagazine

BigWoopMagazine — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 13:57:22 +0000

I’ve been thinking the very things that this article is saying for a while now. I was very hesitant to buy the new COD game, because it does seem like a big rehash of whats already been done, ALA tony hawk. WaW was a huge disspointment, and a waste of money. Having played through MW2 I am very dissapointed at the 5 hour campaign. This should have been so much longer. HOWEVER, the co op Special Ops missions are of a decent length, and are very cool, as they take good coordination between the partners. The multiplayer has a big revamp on it, with the upgradeable skills, an insane number of equipment loadouts, and new attachments for all the weapons. It makes it a big dissapointment to know that they are working on another sequel already, instead of bringing us more maps, or more spec ops missions.

By: UberSilenus

UberSilenus — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 03:55:45 +0000

Just take a look at EA’s NFS series. From the Underground game to Undercover, NFS underwent a slow fall into mediocrity. Not did one team dominate the other as far as ideas go, but the general technical quality of the games degraded from release to release.

The fact is that current generation of consoles can take updated information and combine it with older games. Essentially creating Diablo II : Lord Of Destruction for games like Call of Duty and Need for Speed. This effect allows for development teams to have more time towards creating the next release in three or four years, instead of two, and a more intelligent and sustainable cost model that keeps big companies turning a profit. Unlike the current model that breeds mundaneness and high cost to benefit ratios.

By: shadowjin

shadowjin — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 02:12:15 +0000

Its a disappointment to hear they might start changing for online play.. i highly doubt it will be something simple like 3$ a month. Im not a big FPS guy, i just like to randomly join a few games with friends. If they choose to go with pay to play there no reason for me to buy it… I haven’t bought MW2 till the 23 and hearing they might switch to pay as you go now makes me think twice on buy it.

By: joinsideke

joinsideke — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 00:27:08 +0000

It’s weird, i hear a lot from both sides: yes to annual releases, no to annual releases. I guess it doesn’t come down to what people want, since there will always be a demand, it comes to whether or not the IW truly, TRULY believes they are delivering an updated, remarkably different game that people won’t settle for and that gives people something they can’t get anywhere else.

I just feel like they are adding the bare minimum, intentionally and release date motivated, because they know it will sell. I wouldn’t be proud to stick my name and label on a game that I half assed. Hypothetically, if it were me, and I had some great idea for a game I had been working on, and I told my project manager and they said “oh that’s great, but save it for next month when we start working on the sequel!” I’d feel pretty dirty for using my fans like that.

By: JohnnyTruant5

JohnnyTruant5 — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 18:07:41 +0000

@JackC8
You haven’t heard anyone say anything good about it? Christ you must have selective memory, there’s people saying good things all over. Why is everyone jumping on a bandwagon just because they bought the game? You don’t call anyone that bought U2 jumping on the bandwagon do you? Double standards make me laugh.

By: SolidCake_

SolidCake_ — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 16:46:17 +0000

that’s the reason I’m not interested in buying it, too much of the same thing over & over.

By: JackC8

JackC8 — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 15:12:13 +0000

I don’t understand the appeal of this game at all. The single player is 4-5 hours long, the story is dumb and boring, and the huge amount of enemies that respawn in areas you’ve already cleared is frustrating. I really haven’t heard anyone say anything good about it. Why would I want this when there are so many other truly great games out there now? Just to jump on the same bandwagon as everyone else I guess. Not my thing.

By: wtGp

wtGp — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 05:37:10 +0000

infinity ward makes awesome games, it’s treyarch that can’t seem to make up anything new.

By: victorinox

victorinox — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 05:34:18 +0000

i think the annual installments are nice…

no matter what you do, youll get tired of it…

a new one, adds new trophies, modes, guns, perks, etc… so overall it works well for people whom follow one or so game type

By: beta55

beta55 — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 05:27:56 +0000

Same Jonathan. No way I’m buying a game that….. ugggkkk…. treyarch made..

By: Jeff Belote

Jeff Belote — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 05:03:54 +0000

I don’t think it is overkill at all. I love COD. I now have four of them. I would rank them like this: MW2 > W@W > COD4 > COD Classic. I am so addicted to MW2 its not funny. I haven’t even touched online yet because I am having so much fun on single player and Special Ops.

By: ZemaOner

ZemaOner — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 04:47:11 +0000

Infinity Ward does a good job. The story of MW2 is epic, and an overall major upgrade from the last game they made. They don’t release a COD every year. The REAL COD is released every other year! I think there’s a good reason Modern Warfare 2 is breaking record sales.

By: Zak Deering

Zak Deering — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 03:59:32 +0000

One thing I’d like to add before anybody hastily labels me a CoD hater is that I have 17 days of playtime on the original MW and am looking to exceed that tour considerably on MW2 which I picked up at the midnight release. It just angers the hell out of me that Treyarch has been working on another game before MW2′s release and now IW are making MW3 RIGHT NOW!! It just isn’t fare, especially when you take into consideration that Activision is looking to charge user for playing online now.

It’s just getting pathetic now. If IW had more time to work on it, I’ sure MW2′s campaign, while epic in its own right, could’ve been considerably longer and even more action packed.

By: Devon Simpson

Devon Simpson — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 03:28:38 +0000

Great article, activision loves driving great franchises into the ground ala tony hawk. Treyarch has been the jr. Developer for activision even since those glory days (they developed the dreamcast version of tony hawk if you didn’t know). This article hits the nail on the head though, great innovative software keeps it self fresh till the same formula is played a million times over. I myself was very impressed with mw2 but I thought the single player was going to be even more epic than the first. After cod4 with the container ship level I thought infinity ward would one up them selves with mw2′s opening, I was disappointed. The snow level and single player campaign are great but after plaing cod4 mw I was disappointed with the biggest game release of all time. How can IW continue to amaze audiences in single when they have done it all (minus a cover mechanic), still in my opinion that container ship level in cod 4 is one of the greatest levels in single player history. As demonstrated by tony hawk if you can reinvent your franchise (like resident evil 4 and mgs4 did) how can your ip remain fresh in every more scrutinizing gamers eyes. Sorrty about the rant

By: Jonathan Leack

Jonathan Leack — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 03:25:17 +0000

I just skip a year. COD4 was a blast and now I’m addicted to MW2.