‘Modern Warfare’

[J4MES OX4D 10,036]

New COD is simply called Modern Warfare and not MW4. Suppose this was to either avoid conflict with COD4 or to avoid it being a continuance if the trilogy when it may not tie in at all.

 

Reveal is expected to be May 30th.

[The3rdWalker 1,271]

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare

 

https://twitter.com/jasonschreier/status/1131924425526468609?s=20

[The3rdWalker 1,271]

•    ⁠Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (2007)
•    ⁠Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (2009)
•    ⁠Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 (2011)
•    ⁠Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Remastered (2016)
•    ⁠Call of Duty: Modern Warfare (2019)

 

On Treyarch's side, we have:

•    ⁠Call of Duty: World at War (2008)
•    ⁠Call of Duty: Black Ops (2010)
•    ⁠Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 (2012)
•    ⁠Call of Duty: Black Ops 3 (2015)
•    ⁠Call of Duty: Black Ops 4 (2018)
•    ⁠Call of Duty: Black Ops 5 (2020)

 

The game is really all in on the BO and MW name yeah?

[techno 3,511]

22 hours ago, The3rdWalker said:

•    ⁠Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (2007)
•    ⁠Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (2009)
•    ⁠Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 (2011)
•    ⁠Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Remastered (2016)
•    ⁠Call of Duty: Modern Warfare (2019)

 

On Treyarch's side, we have:

•    ⁠Call of Duty: World at War (2008)
•    ⁠Call of Duty: Black Ops (2010)
•    ⁠Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 (2012)
•    ⁠Call of Duty: Black Ops 3 (2015)
•    ⁠Call of Duty: Black Ops 4 (2018)
•    ⁠Call of Duty: Black Ops 5 (2020)

 

The game is really all in on the BO and MW name yeah?

As thunder said does anyone really care what it's called it's more about how it plays

[J4MES OX4D 10,036]

I'd just be happy with a traditional modern shooter with real guns in real locations with enjoyable maps (not these 3 lane forced design ones) fun killstreaks and a memorable campaign. We've been to the future, the further future and the further further future and back to WW2 but hopefully they can capture some of the brilliance the MW series once had. Activision will ultimately ruin it but it would be nice to have something half decent especially after the latest Treyarch shitshow that will keep people interested more than just a few weeks. If this fails then the franchise is fucked completely. 

[The3rdWalker 1,271]

They better figure out a non shit version with the CWL putting up 60mil franchise fees for teams. 

[NCA-Paendrag 2,758]

To Infinity - And BEYOND! 

 

 

#Buzz Lightyear 

[GazzaGarratt 11,055]

Does this mean they are pausing? Or still going to have another CoD this year? Surely they should realise if they took a little more time and care they'd probably be able to make a solid CoD, one that most CoD lovers could enjoy.

[J4MES OX4D 10,036]

13 minutes ago, GazzaGarratt said:

Does this mean they are pausing? Or still going to have another CoD this year? Surely they should realise if they took a little more time and care they'd probably be able to make a solid CoD, one that most CoD lovers could enjoy.

This years COD is a brand new game built from scratch over 3 years by Infinity Ward even though it's called COD Modern Warfare - it's not any form of remake but supposedly a 'soft reboot' however they wish to define that.

 

Next year is Black Ops 5 which is being made by Treyarch a year earlier than planned and will likely be severely rushed after Raven and Sledgehammer were removed from development. 

[Diddums 4,346]

On 5/27/2019 at 10:39 AM, GazzaGarratt said:

Does this mean they are pausing? Or still going to have another CoD this year? Surely they should realise if they took a little more time and care they'd probably be able to make a solid CoD, one that most CoD lovers could enjoy.

 

 

You think they give a shit about the players? Don't be silly. It's all about the shareholders and nothing else.

[cyberninja2601 1,106]

On 6/23/2019 at 12:17 PM, Diddums said:

 

 

You think they give a shit about the players? Don't be silly. It's all about the shareholders and nothing else.

 

Yes it is. And as a public company that is the fiduciary duty and responsibility. Ours is to not buy shit and they their share holder will demand better products which hopefully they can execute on

[phil bottle 9,765]

 
Yes it is. And as a public company that is the fiduciary duty and responsibility. Ours is to not buy shit and they their share holder will demand better products which hopefully they can execute on

Profit, by any means necessary, enshrined in law. How wonderfully fucked up.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

[J4MES OX4D 10,036]

Publishers like Activision are under pressure to keep shareholders on board, income thriving and the company value in growth. The minute the value starts declining, shareholders walk away, share price sinks and the value diminishes. BO4 made record breaking money yet they started making cutbacks soon after release.  If it wasn't for them publishing Sekiro outside of Asia as a one-off, they would've been in deep shit even after generating huge figures. 

 

With supply drops under fire and with no season pass, they are going to have to monetize the absolute fuck out of the game just to come close to BO4. The company as a whole as a tiny portfolio now so this is one of only a few brands that makes money. Base game sales don't even touch the sides and they have to make up all those lost sweet revenue streams somehow. 

 

This game will be fine for a week or two and then it'll be a casino.  Supply drops, operations, in-game shop plus more. 

[cyberninja2601 1,106]

13 hours ago, phil bottle said:

Profit, by any means necessary, enshrined in law. How wonderfully fucked up.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
 

 

I am sure when you look at your retirement fund and what ever portfolio you might have you feel differently 

 

They aren't doing anything illegal nor do you have to buy the product. I keep hearing a number of people on this site complaining about how Activation sucks and is a poor company. Then a few days later I read on how everyone purchased the game anyways. 

 

 

[Plumbers Crack 4,062]

15 hours ago, cyberninja2601 said:

 

Yes it is. And as a public company that is the fiduciary duty and responsibility. Ours is to not buy shit and they their share holder will demand better products which hopefully they can execute on

 

Correct.

 

13 hours ago, phil bottle said:

Profit, by any means necessary, enshrined in law. How wonderfully fucked up.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
 

 

Enshrined in law to ensure that shareholders, especially smaller shareholders, aren’t ripped off by unscrupulous management and corporate greed. Shareholders get a bad press in my opinion but without them some companies wouldn’t be able to thrive and expand, some certainly wouldn’t exist 

 

57 minutes ago, cyberninja2601 said:

 

I am sure when you look at your retirement fund and what ever portfolio you might have you feel differently 

 

 

 

 

Correct again imo. I would imagine even the smallest private pension plan in this country involves a share portfolio. Also, If you’ve spent all your working life serving others in local councils and the like, the chances are that your (justifiably) rather nice pension is backed by investments in share funds amongst other things

 

Like Pat says, voting with your wallet is the only thing that they’ll listen to

 

[J4MES OX4D 10,036]

I don't have a problem with shareholders and in the gaming industry, I never really considered them until recent years.  For me, people that invest in scummy companies who don't need the capital in the first place to make a big return out of horrendous practices such as supply drops can burn. At no point in the past decade did Activision need to make so many shares available - they've just made a company that was worth X billions into a few billions more. The investments that are made in the company plus the money that is received from sales is never truly invested back in the products and even without shareholders, the next game would be easily funded from unit sales regardless. 

 

I think a lot of AAA gaming companies are raising unnecessary money that the gamer will never benefit from and the people that support these arseholes in their heinous practices to make easy money rather than support a product are no better. A company worth 10bn just becomes worth 15bn - the gamer doesn't really benefit. It's all about making a quick buck from the perspectives of the publishers and the shareholders and gamers and games are being destroyed for it. COD is probably worth 10X more than what it was a decade ago and that's down to supply drops, not investment in the product or a drastic improvement in quality. 

 

I can't blame shareholders lumping in though with gamers being as dumb as they are these days! 

[Plumbers Crack 4,062]

But will you buy the next CoD James?

[phil bottle 9,765]

Phil's monthly rant inbound, no structure whatsoever, so apologies, I'm multitasking, and spouting off random thoughts. Again.

 

As I say, it's a completely fucked up way of organising anything. It leads to short term thinking, and having such a law is a get out of jail free card for corporations to engage in the most anti-human practices imaginable. And here I'm not exclusively talking about the gaming industry.

 

Car companies willing to take lawsuits rather than withdraw dangerous cars, clothing companies using child labour, tech companies building phones in China driving their employees to suicide, Amazon working conditions, the gig economy, zero hour work contracts etc etc etc all in the name of financial profit. But does profit care about humanity? I don't think so.

 

Back to gaming:

 

People didn't buy Anthem (among a number of recent EA flops), in fact they didn't buy it in droves, EA will not change their business practice despite that, and despite all of the continuing negative feedback. Because they've decided the direction they want to move in already. For profit. So how does the argument, 'don't buy it' work then? There's always a market who will buy shit because they don't know any better and will accept anything they are handed. Bethesda released a piece of shit when they could have held it back and finished it properly. Short term profit thinking here has almost destroyed Fallout. Don't even get me started about Mass Effect: Andromeda.

 

Did anyone see the defence of loot boxes this week in the UK parliament? Surprise mechanics lol. The surprise is how gullible we all are. But profit must be made, so these robots robotically churned out a point of view only understood by robots. Robots with massive balls to be fair.

 

BTW, please don't mention a pension I'll probably never see, Brexshit will see to that. We'll be working into our 80s.

 

 

 

[J4MES OX4D 10,036]

2 hours ago, Plumbers Crack said:

But will you buy the next CoD James?

Probably😁

 

I'm happy to spend the cost of a game but I wont stretch to any other form of soulless monetization to it which only really lines pockets rather than benefits the game.  

 

1 hour ago, phil bottle said:

Phil's monthly rant inbound, no structure whatsoever, so apologies, I'm multitasking, and spouting off random thoughts. Again.

People didn't buy Anthem (among a number of recent EA flops), in fact they didn't buy it in droves, EA will not change their business practice despite that, and despite all of the continuing negative feedback.

Same thing happened with Black Ops 4 - game 'under performed' so instead of enticing more players to the product with assurances and improvements; to mitigate the lost revenue, they simply just monetized it more aggressively instead and held existing owners to ransom. $1 for an operation level instead of playing 45 minutes or buy a gun that costs 75% of what you paid for the main game. 

 

Because they are rolling in so much money from secondary revenue streams, that's why so many AAA games are poor, neglected or well below the expected standard these days. 

[Greboth 2,721]

3 hours ago, phil bottle said:

Phil's monthly rant inbound, no structure whatsoever, so apologies, I'm multitasking, and spouting off random thoughts. Again.

 

As I say, it's a completely fucked up way of organising anything. It leads to short term thinking, and having such a law is a get out of jail free card for corporations to engage in the most anti-human practices imaginable. And here I'm not exclusively talking about the gaming industry.

 

Car companies willing to take lawsuits rather than withdraw dangerous cars, clothing companies using child labour, tech companies building phones in China driving their employees to suicide, Amazon working conditions, the gig economy, zero hour work contracts etc etc etc all in the name of financial profit. But does profit care about humanity? I don't think so.

 

Back to gaming:

 

People didn't buy Anthem (among a number of recent EA flops), in fact they didn't buy it in droves, EA will not change their business practice despite that, and despite all of the continuing negative feedback. Because they've decided the direction they want to move in already. For profit. So how does the argument, 'don't buy it' work then? There's always a market who will buy shit because they don't know any better and will accept anything they are handed. Bethesda released a piece of shit when they could have held it back and finished it properly. Short term profit thinking here has almost destroyed Fallout. Don't even get me started about Mass Effect: Andromeda.

 

Did anyone see the defence of loot boxes this week in the UK parliament? Surprise mechanics lol. The surprise is how gullible we all are. But profit must be made, so these robots robotically churned out a point of view only understood by robots. Robots with massive balls to be fair.

 

BTW, please don't mention a pension I'll probably never see, Brexshit will see to that. We'll be working into our 80s.

 

 

 

 

I don’t wholly disagree with your post but the don’t buy it does work.  The problem is though is that people are still buying the games / loot boxes.  If they weren’t then, by your own arguments as there wouldn’t be profit in it, they wouldn’t do it.

 

I honestly feel we’re at a point where we need a huge change, a paradigm shift if you will, to have things better.  

 

I’m not disillusioned to think we could have amazing games for cheap prices or anything like that.  However the more people that don’t pre order, that don’t buy day 1, that wait to find out of a game is actually a full game at release, that don’t buy loot boxes etc.  Companies like EA, Bethesda, Blizzard etc. would have to change practices or ultimately face closing their doors.

[phil bottle 9,765]

It's certainly an interesting discussion. Things never stay the same, so let's see what happens.

I'll leave it this: a fool and their money are easily parted [emoji39]

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

[Greboth 2,721]

1 minute ago, phil bottle said:

I'll leave it this: a fool and their money are easily parted
 

 

Have you been spying on me again? 🤣

[Dan94 913]

Sent from my Samsung S9+ using Tapatalk

[Dan94 913]

https://www.facebook.com/1462357813994521/posts/2419925548237738/?sfnsn=mo


Sent from my Samsung S9+ using Tapatalk

[MrBiron 1,453]

Killstreaks are fine for TDM type game modes but for objective game modes all they do is encourage players to ignore the objective and go for straight kills. So there will be no chance of me playing something like DOM when I'm playing solo.