Who is Responsible for the Diminishing Appeal of Call of Duty: Infinity Ward Vs. Treyarch Vs. Sledgehammer Games?
Whose Responsible For Call Of Duty's Waining Reputation: The Fall From The Heavens
The Call of Duty franchise has reigned supreme since its early days on the PlayStation 2/Xbox consoles, and since, they have turned the online multiplayer gaming scene into something of a spectacular.
Medal of Honour. Brothers in Arms. Battlefield. All great first-person shooter franchises, only problem, they're competing with the Call of Duty franchise. A franchise that has woven a new string of first-person shooter gameplay that works all too well on its multiplayer, and smooth-as-a-button in its single player campaigns.
The original Call of Duty, released in 2003, took the PlayStation 2 marketplace by storm, as there was a single player campaign that would show true honour to the World War 2 war era. It was a thing of beauty, and things were only going to get better with the release of its sequel, Call of Duty 2 (the original), and Call of Duty 2: Big Red One (the PlayStation 2 edition), as there were improvements to the single player campaign to be made.
Call of Duty 3, released in 2005, was the last of a great World War 2 war era trilogy from the unforgettable Infinity Ward studios productions, and the covers to these great games still stand out today, if there is to be those lucky few who still retain a copy of the original Call of Duty trilogy, either for the PC, PlayStation 2 or Xbox.
Yep, these were the great days of the past, and although Call of Duty 2 and Call of Duty 3 did both have multiplayer game modes, they simply were not well evolved to the growing need for a strong multiplayer gaming experience, and as such, these games simply remained the nostalgia relics, most famous for their single player campaigns, and there efforts to bring to life a World War 2 moving experience, but rather for the gamers on the small screen, and not the silver screen (of course).
Then, Came The Golden Era For Console Multiplayer Online Gaming - Through The Innovations Made To The Xbox 360, The Proceeding Console To The Original Xbox
Online gaming has been a sight for the sore eyes since the PC gaming scene took off in the 90s, but back in these days the gaming scene was all the rage on the PC, not like recent times, as there were popular online games on the PC throughout the 90s and 2000s, including such franchises as Star Wars, Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six, Battlefield, and all too many more.
The Xbox 360 launched in 2005, the answer to the online gaming restrictions, previously seen with the PlayStation 1, PlayStation 2, and the Xbox, as the "360" aimed to remedy the situation, as Microsoft (the creator of the Xbox brand) had all the answers, as they sought out to bring the online gaming scene to their latest console generation, the Xbox 360. Through LIVE, the online system for the Xbox 360, gamers could play various video-game titles, all with their own respective multiplayer game modes, and players could finally have the PC gaming experience on their home console.
It was Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, which released in 2007, that changed the online gaming scene on the PlayStation 3 (now freshly launched by this stage) and Xbox 360, as it raised the bar for first-person shooters, in that the games multiplayer provided more fun, better fun even, than its single player campaign game mode. An innovators dream, as Modern Warfare had an online gaming experience that would appeal to the mass consumership on the current generation gaming consoles in 2007, and this was a time when gaming was still big on the PC, and as we could imagine, CoD 4 was a big seller on the PC back during this heyday for online shooters.
A Dawn Of A New Age: The Console Shooters Just Got A Whole Lot Better
Back in 2007, there were a few options on the table for first-person shooter fans on their respective platforms, but the Xbox 360 made the best sense for competitive FPS gamers, as it was the "360" which had exclusive rights to the newly released Halo 3 title, the most successful science-fiction genre first-person shooter of its time.
Call of Duty 4, standing on the other side to the spectrum, was the realistic first-person shooter franchise, and this was the first truly great modern war era shooter, taking the franchise aside from its original roots of being based around the great war to end all great wars, this era of course being World War 2. Aside the roots fact, Modern Warfare (CoD 4) was the best-selling game for 2007, and sold roughly ten times more copies than any of its predecessor titles in the franchise, and this figure came out to around 10 million total copies sales across all gaming platforms.
By 2008, Call of Duty was moving onwards and upwards to newer and more exciting ventures, and for the franchise traditionalists this was the most exciting year of all time for the CoD franchise, as it was the World War 2 war era based Call of Duty game that would tie together two of the greatest elements to the franchise, this being its remarkable World War 2 storytelling, experienced through the single player (also, 4 player co-operative) campaign, the ultimate multiplayer experience (using the same online game engine as Call of Duty 4), and even the third surprise game mode, Nazi Zombies.
Who was ready to compete with Call of Duty in 2008, perhaps the finest year that Call of Duty has ever had? Well, there was the brilliant Battlefield: Bad Company, a modern combat first-person shooter that tied together an open play single player campaign; with smart talking narratives, and humorous characters; blended almost perfectly with an all new game engine running its multiplayer, featuring wide-open maps, playable vehicles, and a whole array of soldier equipment to take onto the battlefield. What do we not like about Battlefield, even when it is as fun and as humorous as "Bad Company"? In truth... It's not Call of Duty.
Then, there was many, but none had the online game engines to support a player experience that could compete with Call of Duty, but Halo 3 still remained a strong seller in 2008, as there were still many strangler PlayStation 2, Xbox console users that were still only just transferring their gaming skills over to the PlayStation 3, Xbox 360 consoles. Online gaming was not really relevant on the PlayStation 2 and Xbox, whereas on the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 it was the abundance of its very existence, as players were beginning to shun single player game modes, even as impactful as the story modes, as it made more socially competitive fun to straight away take the player skills to the multiplayer competitive gaming scene.
Infinity Ward Are Responsible
Infinity Ward Are Responsible For Call of Duty's Fall From All Mighty Rulership.
Infinity Ward studios are the gaming studio responsible for Call of Duty's very making, as they were the studio to form the Call of Duty brand, and in those early days back in 2003, they were bought by Activision (the games publisher giant) for $3 million, and contracted by the publisher to make the first Call of Duty title, an epic story mode campaign that would replace the movies entertainment for something a tad more personal, a first-person shooter game.
Infinity Ward returned, and created Call of Duty 2 for the PC in 2004, and later released Call of Duty 2: Big Red One for the PlayStation 2, which vastly improved on the single player gaming experience as the player would experience first-hand the bloody dealings of the allies taking down the Nazi Germany empire. This instalment featured more vehicle gameplay, expanding on the player experience with tanks, and more immersive scene experiences.
To end the World War 2 trilogy, Infinity Ward made Call of Duty 3, the final game that the studio would make based around the WW2 war era, and this one lacked something, and it had been said that the games developer, Infinity Ward, had had enough of making WW2 era games, and so Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare would become their next trilogy starter, setting its war in the modern day combat arena, basing its events in the Iraq, US military wars.
Through the impressive innovations in console gaming technology at the time of Call of Duty 4's release, back in 2007, this enabled Infinity Ward to expand heavily on their games multiplayer, and as such the team created an all new and immersive game engine that would be unlike anything that the gamer had ever experienced before, in any online game. This success was major for the studio, and even more profitable for the games franchise publisher, as this would be the Call of Duty title (CoD 4) that would outsell all other games of the era, beating its predecessor title in sales by almost tens times more (Call of Duty 3 sold roughly 1-2 million copies), and Call of Duty 4 sold roughly 10-12 million copies across all platforms.
So far, Infinity Ward have gone from strength to strength, only proving with each new CoD game instalment that they are the best of the best, amongst the first-person shooter genre.
Until the Infinity Ward studios breakdown of 2009, the year that CoD: Modern Warfare 2 was released, the studios sequel (and multiplayer innovation) to Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. Now, CoD 4: Modern Warfare was perhaps the most successful online shooter of all time, in terms of the dedication that its fans/and more casual players, had to the individual CoD instalment, something we have seen diminish in comparison since.
Since the 2009 breakdown, the Infinity Ward studios is no longer run or operated by the same team of developers, having made their last ever game, Modern Warfare 2. This speaks nothing of the success of Modern Warfare 2, as the sales increase was phenomenal, officially moving on from 2008's Treyarch designed CoD: World at War.
In 2017, Modern Warfare 2 still remains the greatest online first-person shooter game by vast likings alone, and this level of online success has not been repeated since, as the internet has always gone in two separate directions when considering the CoD franchise. One side perfectly satisfied, and the other damn-near ready to burst out in tears, these people are so tear-jerkingly frustrated, its damn-neared irritating for the rest of us.
Concerning the Infinity Ward developing team that were responsible for the original Call of Duty titles, and Modern Warfare (CoD 4) and Modern Warfare 2, have since left the games studio in search of newer and more exciting opportunities after their fallouts with Activision in 2009.
For those of interest, the team left Infinity Ward in 2009, with Activision placing a new developing team in their stead at IW, whilst the original team set up a new games developing studio, named Respawn Entertainment, and launched their answer to the first-person shooting gaming universe, with a popular Xbox One/Xbox One X title, Titanfall, which released in 2013. Since, there has been a Titanfall 2, both extremely successful video-games, but Call of Duty still reigns supreme in the first-person shooter genre, each and every year.
In 2011, the new Infinity Ward was still reconfiguring its gameplay innovations, and so they had to bring in help from a little-known (now, well-known) games developing studio, named Sledgehammer Games, and together they made the sequel in their studios long successful CoD series, a massively popular (the best selling Call of Duty title of all time) game, titled CoD: Modern Warfare 3.
The games trailer was exciting, featuring two well known actors, Jonah Hill (playing the noob/newbie player) and Sam Worthington (playing the experienced/veteran player). Of course, at the time of the games release, Jonah Hill was popular in the comedy movies (like 21 Jump Street), and Sam Worthington was kicking ass in the action movies (like Terminator Salvation, Avatar).
2011's Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 was a safe bet for Infinity Ward, and it payed off because they used the exact same gameplay experience, and overall map design, multiplayer features formula as the previous title in the series, Modern Warfare 2, an extremely desirable game, online and otherwise. There it is, the game was good, but it had already been done before with MW2, with relatively little in the form of innovation to make the game anything other than approachable, and kinda really playable.
Bye, bye Sledgehammer Games, as it was time for them to step aside to venture off into their own games development portfolio in making their own Call of Duty game/s, and so it was down to the newly HR'ed (human resourced) Infinity Ward to launch the answer to the now completed Modern Warfare series, and their answer came out in 2013, with the years annual release cycle of CoD: Ghosts.
Ghosts, sounded good, felt like an ideal take on a newly formed campaign idea, and best yet, it seemed to be placed in the relatively modern time era for wars, and that sat well with the majority of the Call of Duty gaming community. When in reality, the campaign trailer seemed to reveal very little, leaving the most part up to the interested gamers imagination, and the final result, was, well, an average experience single player campaign. Then, heading over to Ghost's multiplayer, it felt totally different to the Modern Warfare series multiplayer gaming experience, as this was not for the better, as it felt like a far worser experience, and the proof is in the time, as now level of time playing the Ghost multiplayer would a player begin to feel like they were having the expected level of fun.
So, Ghosts, in its multiplayer felt like a Call of Duty nightmare, as the online provided nothing in the form of innovation, but rather a step backwards for the technological innovators in the online gaming industry, and the entire game felt like it wasn't cleaned, wiped, balanced, and then re-checked for bugs, before it was released to the public. A terrible multiplayer experience, with its only innovation coming in the forms of a live-fighter-dog that can be called in as a kill-streak to help defend your character, and this was extremely lacklustre. The prestige emblems were atrocious, and with that said, the game failed to deliver.
The final Infinity Ward game to be released comes with a similar set of problems, and to worsen the very foundation for the games design, it is all set in the far future, perhaps the only one to base its setting with the distant space included. The result, a fine line between broken, and purposefully made to be terrible, and there are so few gamers on the internet who support the Infinity Ward made CoD: Infinite Warfare, the annual release cycle title for Call of Duty, 2016.
Infinite Warfare, in fairness, is playable, but since when did that become the result of a Call of Duty (multiplayer, to be particular) video-game. Just playable. Now, that's how the Call of Duty franchise was selling between the years of 2014's Advanced Warfare, right through to 2015's Black Ops 3, and only piled on to an already heap of dirt with 2016's Infinite Warfare.
Treyarch Are Responsible
Treyarch, the most creative of all the Call of Duty development studios, having been the first to do a lot of relative things in the online shooter gaming industry with 2008's Call of Duty: World at War.
Sure, Call of Duty has always been great, if we skip back in time to the simplest state of the franchise when there were only two development studios involved in making the franchise, but there was something meticulously well-done about Treyarch's CoD: World at War, before 2017, the last game in the franchise to set its war setting around the events of World War 2.
Now, World at War was a brave title, and really the first ever Call of Duty title to be developed by Treyarch studios, so there was a lot riding on this. And, the games result, equalled something truly impressive, as the games single player story campaign had missions that covered every key aspect of the World War 2 war, including missions from the European theatre, the Soviet Russian lands, and the Japanese theatre, and there were simply so many memorable missions.
Seriously, it was the dumbest of dumb fun to return to the World at War missions to complete certain achievement challenges, such as playing the campaign using paint bullets, finishing it on veteran difficulty, and of course finishing it in 4 player co-operative mode. Plus, the sniper mission was epic, the tank mission was also epic, and the battle in the bush mission with the Japanese, also epic, and there were basically only missions that were playable in an epic way, including to the final cut of the games story-mode campaign.
Multiplayer, returned in a familiar, yet much more gritty, darker, surreal way in World at War, having just moved on a year since the release of the previous Call of Duty title, Modern Warfare (CoD 4), and there were still players sticking around on CoD 4, and then there were vast sums of gamers who were still stuck on the last generation (the PS2/Xbox) consoles, and so were unable to experience the shocking superiority of World at War in 2008.
The multiplayer just got better, as the maps became more varied, with smaller, medium, and large maps, and the thing that makes the large maps in World at War multiplayer large, is that they were the equivalence to perhaps 4 times, perhaps even 6 times bigger than a typical large map, as say in Modern Warfare 2, the game that released the year after World at War. The least to say, there has not been maps quite as big, big in any more recent Call of Duty title, as they were back in World at War.
Now, some may not have ever played, and thereby experienced World at War, online, and for this, would not realise the potential fun of playing on truly big/BIG maps, and the fun is truly remarkable. As for the first time, there are about a hundred different ways of playing the game, from lurking in the bush-line, to rampaging down the centre of the map in zig-zags firing a light-machine gun, to driving (yep, they were actually fully operational) the damned ally tank to take down enemies with shear drivable force, crushing enemies beneath the wheels-on-chains, and there was nothing more satisfying than using the tank main gunner to blast down any opposing enemy tanks.
The tanks, not that is something that has not been a reality since 2008's World at War, as Call of Duty developers have since decided that the smaller the map, the more convenient it is for gamers to have long lasting fun, without the time barriers to kill people. As, sure the game modes in World at War were still as they are today, and really great at that time, but it would have taken a little longer to get those kills on the bigger maps, but this never felt like a barrier (time equivalence, or otherwise), as there was always a snappy play-style that would be fun, not matter what weapons class, no matter how big the map (yep, even the big/BIG maps), no matter what else, everything was superior in the levels of fun that could be achieved.
The level of visual detail, in-depth map design, and close, to medium, to long range shots coverage was unbelievable, even unfathomable at times in World at War's multiplayer, and who doesn't reminisce about the times long gone playing the games online, and hanging around in bell towers to snipe, and then eagerly stepping into the tank to take down the pesky opposition that has taken up camp in the all-to familiar bell tower. Basically, all of the fun could be had around the bell tower, if memory serves, at least that was for one of the maps.
Then, in 2010, Treyarch decided to heck with their ingenious multiplayer groundbreaking innovations in World at War, and instead opted for a more safer, less risky style of multiplayer gameplay experiencing in 2010's annual Call of Duty launch, CoD: Black Ops. Now, one thing that wasn't mentioned regarding World at War, was the additional game mode (as if there wasn't already enough), Nazi Zombies, a surreal tight-space, confinement in the horde of zombies killing survival game mode. Separate from the games other features, the Nazi Zombies mode gained a lot of gaming attention, and started the franchises hit new, additional game mode series.
Nazi Zombies, of the exact same title, returned in 2010's CoD: Black Ops, and now it was better than ever before, having worked out all of the kinks that made it super-difficult to get to high/HIGH rounds on the zombies game mode, was not only simply difficult to get to high/HIGH round on Black Ops Nazi Zombies game mode. It remained a simplistic game mode, highly addictive once properly mastered, and with a whole new set of cool stuff to make the mode even better, including the weapon upgrade feature, the wider selection of weaponry, the circular pathway to ease difficulties in surviving at the really high rounds, and the return of everything old as well.
However, the real highlight for Black Ops was its single player and multiplayer features, both unique in design, quality, and overall deliverance. The single player campaign was gripping, including an unbelievably catchy narrative (which somewhat spreads into the zombies additional game mode), and felt like it paced itself extremely well. The single player campaign was anything but mediocre, and was a well formed masterpiece, including war subjects that pushed into the Vietnam war and the highly visual Cold War.
Finally, Blacks Ops's multiplayer, the star entry for the Call of Duty franchise instalment in question, and Black Ops's online multiplayer features are bravely done, as there were maps online that felt somewhat too visually blinding, and this made the game a lot harder to navigate, but then when comparing to other maps, everything is very easy to see without straining your eyes, and leads the team into a great set of battles, each as entertaining to experience as the last. Really, the online weapons were a mix between great (or, really good), to simply good, with far fewer being considered not so great, and this all tallies into the games actual gameplay, as this is always different, always edgy, and for Black Ops it worked phenomenally well, and from a prestige levelling up point of view, this is one of the better multiplayer Call of Duty titles.
Was there a sense of disappointment when looking back at 2010's Black Ops? I suppose, for me personally, there always has been. Not that the games single player, multiplayer, and zombies game modes were not good, as they most certainly were, but it is the fact that the game became less risky, and more to the side of playing it safe, and this is disappointing to a first-person shooter gamer that looks for innovation in future fandom games franchises, not, the playing-it-safe card dealers amongst the industry,
Treyarch were not about to abandon their most popular Call of Duty series of all time, and so they returned in 2012 with the next instalment for the Black Ops (CoD) series, CoD: Black Ops 2, and boy is it getting better. Finally, the creases are no more, as Black Ops 2 has made some substantial changes to the multiplayer gameplay features that simply blew people away, as the online gameplay now felt completely smooth, without all of the flaws to lay alongside the fan favourite, Black Ops (original, multiplayer).
The creases, as we have chosen to call them, are the inexcusable traits that come with the online gaming experience on 2010's CoD: Black Ops, as there were always weird quirks to the Black Ops multiplayer that felt somewhat diminishing to overall gameplay experience, and this would be very noticeable when using a sniper rifle or shotgun. Just, not the greatest multiplayer experience, but in Black Ops 2's multiplayer this was not the case, and all online gameplay felt smooth and satisfying, and although this is a point that very really comes up in conversations between gamers, it is definitely something that becomes apparent when comparing the two separate online multiplayer instalments.
The long wait: Boom goes the dynamite, as between the time when Black Ops 2 was made and launched in 2012, since there has been the disappointment that was Infinity Ward's CoD: Ghosts which launched in 2013, and then the almost forgettable CoD: Advanced Warfare, which was subsequently the first every fall Call of Duty title to be developed by Sledgehammer Games, and also the first ever Call of Duty title to alter gameplay war settings and gaming mechanics, with the game being set way out into the future, and the gaming mechanics now included jet-pack boosting, wall running, and more. After this heat-wave of a Call of Duty malfunction, breakdown, player-infused hate-fest on the popular Call of Duty YouTube channel, players are finally reintroduced to Treyarch studios original creations in the Call of Duty official annual launch for 2015, with the title CoD: Black Ops 3.
Huh, Black Ops 3 sounds like something that would be expected, as it was, only the darned development studio, geniuses that they were, hopped aboard the future warfare pipeline that was recently ran by Sledgehammer Games Advanced Warfare, to a relatively disappointed fanbase, as all of the original Call of Duty fans were beginning to step aside, leading way to an all new Call of Duty fan base, that actually accepted, neigh, wanted Call of Duty's creative input on a futuristic war-like scenario. Players were not at all pleased with the Black Ops 3 story campaign, as it was set way aside from Black Ops 2's story, something in itself disappointed fans, and wasn't in the slightest bit entertaining to have to endure.
However, Black Ops 3's multiplayer did carve out its own niche player-base for the online levelling up career side to things, but these players were still fewer, and more far between, than they had been in recent years, and there was a lot of dislike for the altered futuristic gameplay mechanics, that meant that players would be spending more time in the air in matches than they were with boots-on-the-ground. Almost a spit in the face of traditional Call of Duty warfare settings, and has very little point of accomplishment to gets the major fans onside, as even the main stories felt somewhat convoluted, and as though the development studios were not here to hang around very long.
Black Ops 3, in all, was a disaster for the Treyarch development team, as it was not a game that players took to all that easily, and many never even came to owning a copy, but they have no fears, as the game was still the top-selling video-game for 2015, its launch year. Although, besides from having a boring single player campaign, and a mediocre multiplayer, the games zombies mode was as always, a Treyarch classic, and it even played that way, but then again, players were boots-on-the-ground for this mode, without all of the hullabaloo of boost jumping and wall running.
Maybe, its simply the futuristic war setting that almost burned the face of Treyarch studios, but one thing's for certain, their best Call of Duty title, was, is, and may always be, 2008's World at War. But, given the current exciting state of Call of Duty in 2017, it may be interesting to see what Treyarch come out with for their official annual Call of Duty title launch in 2018, less than a year away from now.
Sledgehammer Games Are Responsible
Sledgehammer Games first started their work for Activision on the well-known, mega-popular, Call of Duty franchise back in 2011, when they co-created and co-launched alongside Infinity Ward, the official Call of Duty title launch for that year, CoD: Modern Warfare 3, a title that went on to sell more than 31 million copies worldwide, across all gaming platforms.
Sledgehammer Games had an already drawn-in canvas for Modern Warfare 3, as the old Infinity Ward (in their oldest, yet most innovative working order) had created 2009's Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, a game which had a multiplayer that was the most beloved amongst the internet for a first-person shooter franchise, which is quite obviously is. Infinity Ward (the new team order) and Sledgehammer Games basically copied off the original gameplay design for MW2, altered the map layouts/designs/functioning tactics, and reprinted the Modern Warfare 2.0, if you will (although, actually officially launched as Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3).
2011's Call of Duty efforts aside, Sledgehammer Games are the new innovators in town, and they finally received their opportunity to join the annual developing teams for the Call of Duty franchise, as they were tasked by Activision (the games publisher/rights holder) to make their own Call of Duty title, extending each Call of Duty annual developer to a 3 year life-cycle, and 2014's was Sledgehammer Games year, and there title was something new, something supposed to be better, with the release of Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare.
Set in the distant future, CoD: Advanced Warfare had an entirely new concept that they were trying to sell to the franchise fandom, and it wasn't catching on, with the games opening trailer being heavily disliked on YouTube, and heavily criticised on fan forums, it seemed that Sledgehammer Games's hopes for an Advanced Warfare 2 were going to have to be put on hold, and hopefully, forever... indefinitely. The games story was mediocre, and if a player is not a fan of the futuristic setting, then it becomes entirely useless to actual play in the first place, and the way it felt to the majority of the Call of Duty community, was almost as though Sledgehammer Games were trying to tell us that we have to play a futuristic title, even though Call of Duty gamers have always bought the game on the basis that it is set in near, or less-nearer historical war settings.
Sledgehammer Games came first, and many players argued that they had some good ideas, and offered some new game modes that were relatively fun in the multiplayer, but then again, they are the new development team in town, so really, it was never going to be an easy sell for the studio, especially since it was likely Activision who ultimately made the decision to push the franchise into the distant future. The fools, it was always the past (the more distant the better) that intrigued the Call of Duty franchise fandom, and also the casual gamers as well.
So, it made extremely good sense in 2017, nearly a whole decade since the last traditionalist Call of Duty to be set during the events of World War 2, and Sledgehammer Games were at the helm of production this year (Nov, 3rd, 2017), and they were keen not to miss a mark for exceptional standards. As, they named the game, Call of Duty: WWII, which strikes as a game that's basis is for a World War 2 story mode campaign, and they laid out all of the stops for a great first-person shooter experience, having pleased all online multiplayer gamers with a well-decorated, well-balanced, well-strategically-structured set of maps, game modes, weaponry and kill-streaks, and the additional Nazi Zombies mode is practical, to say the least.
A great story mode campaign, and a Nazi Zombies game mode of good taste, with horrifying moments, fun lasting rounding up gameplay, and objectives to carry through almost as though it was a story, it all sounds good for a single player and zombies game type fan. But, in truth, the money is in the multiplayer, and Sledgehammer Games have made sure to edge in everything, and we mean everything, which includes the all new Headquarters social space, that allows the player to wait for multiplayer lobbies, and all the while check out supply drop collections, collect orders from Major Howard, collect contracts (winter contracts, not too bad, but the regular contracts, totally unachievable), prestige your soldier, and prestige your division.
What else: ahh, yes, still thinking about the HQ social space (yep, there's a lot to cover), there is the daily post to collect your 100 depot credits (re-rolls every few hours), then there is the ability to open supply drops in front of other players, chat to the other 47 people in the HQ open lobby, try out various weapons and attachments at the firing range, try out score-streaks, do 1v1 battles with opponents, and all the while earn social score for doing all of this, which unlocks various rewards (via reaching each new social level, something that is separate from your soldiers level).
Whose Responsible For Call Of Duty's Sanctioned Hate Amongst The Grander Shooter Gaming Community: Infinity Ward, Treyarch Or Sledgehammer Games
Well, the honest truth is most peculiar, as it all seemed to appear as though it was falling apart after the release of Modern Warfare 3, the Call of Duty title that was released in 2011, and this is merely going by the overall sales figures, as any marketing analyst would throw the burning fire towards the games development studio which released the next title, the 2012 Call of Duty title, Black Ops 2, but in all, this title sold nearly as much as 2011's MWR3, so it is a tricky one. When going by pure sales stats, the argument will literally go nowhere.
As the true studio to blame, is Treyarch, and yes that is the studio that made and developed Black Ops 2, but not quite the only reason why they bare the blunt end to the blame. After 2009, the Infinity Ward games development studio was under new management, and Treyarch saw their opportunity to advance on their own marketshare dominance as a Call of Duty franchise provider, and so there efforts stretched closer to Modern Warfare's, or, at least, as close as they could possibly get.
Had Treyarch remained the good guy of the story, they could have laid claim to the historically accurate World War 2 era, through seeking backing from Activision for each of these ventures, and it is only fools who blame Activision for the misdirection of the Treyarch development studio, as they had clear plans on moving in a heated race to the future with their warfare battlefield designs. All did, and many may have argued that it was because of Treyarch that the big push came to souring into the future, as the Black Ops series was pressing buttons by Black Ops 2, making it almost too bloody obvious that the third in the series would go too bloody far into the future.
Infinity Ward, are simply a good studio turned bad through simple logistics, in that with their current development team they cannot deliver overall gaming quality expectations on time, even with the additional year for development that Sledgehammer Games added into the mix provides them with, and Infinite Warfare (CoD, 2016) is a simple example of this, as there is no way that is the quality game that a premium development studio produces after extensive funding and a 3 year development gap, simply poor execution with a bad state of affairs.
Infinity Ward will have to learn to become complacent over the next couple of years, or swallow all pride and subject themselves to radical changes, as they have shown for two consecutive Call of Duty IW cycles that they are lacking the pure ability to fulfil the needs and desires of the players, and the next instalment will be the true test, as it will hopefully feature a historically recognisable war as its main theme, to truly test their game development capabilities without Sledgehammer Games poor production work to soften the blow a couple of years before hand (to the shabby works of Infinity Ward).
That is why the blame falls onto Treyarch, as they should be the studio making the World War 2 war era video-game, and not Sledgehammer Games, as this is an era that covered the war before in spectacular form, and all that stands in-between Treyarch and the development of a World at War 2 is time. Sure, not quite the amazement, than it would have been 9 years ago, but still a relatively exciting idea. Come on, a franchise development studio that made the greatest World War 2 shooter of all time, should rightfully be the game studio that makes it the next time around, and that would be Treyarch and their magnificent World at War (CoD, 2008).
© 2017 Dreammore