Well it is what it is, some people like Treyarch, some like IW games. At the end of the day I think it's unfair to blame Treyarch for a game that's not released or made yet, in which as stated they had to "Rescue" from Sledgehammer/Raven who abandoned/bailed/fired whatever it is.
I think people should revisit last October, now MW on launch was the worst ever? They are still fixing things in it, the updates are getting bigger the sbmm feels higher. The game lags more after every update. It takes longer to search for games, I struggle to get a game below 70-90 ping MMS most of the time.
As for recycling maps, Crash/Shipment/Vacant/Rust/ Backlot etc
So what did MW give us for innovative new maps? Shoothouse fair enough. Atlas Superstore, gee thanks I will just grab a tent and hide in a shelf like the rest.
Base maps: Low in numbers and unsatisfying. Picadilly, Azhir Cave, Ramazaa, I would state more but that's literally half of them.
Now I'm no anti or pro either developer, but I'm all for fairness.
I'm sure IW had some time for MW and didn't exactly blow everyone away from launch. Some people quit at the beta.
The newer engine is nice, the gunsmith rocks.
Took them a ridiculous time to add warzone, which I don't really care for but others wanted it.
PS no BO4 campaign doesn't bother me, the game was cartoony, was full of specialists, OP DLC guns.
But the maps flowed pretty good for the most part. I enjoyed the game, but probably because I hadn't played in years and it was my first game back.
If advanced warfare or infinity warfare were one of the games I cameback on, who knows I might not even be here lol.