Activision is Considering Remastering Old Call of Dutys

[Steven Bogos]

Activision is Considering Remastering Old Call of Dutys

Because one Call of Duty game per year just isn't enough.

The "remaster" phenomenon has been quite a thing with this generation, where developers will take a title from the last generation, slap on a few more graphical bells and whistles, and then sell it on their newest system for full price. Activision Publishing CEO Eric Hirshberg thinks remastering games is a great idea, and is actually thinking about it for its Call of Duty franchise.

"If done well, I think [remasters] can be great," he said. "You talk about nostalgia, and people have such connection to the games they love from the last cycle. They want to see what it would look like if someone did it right for this cycle. It's always the opportunity cost, meaning we need every body we can get to make the content we're already committed to for our new games. It's always a matter of finding great people to do that work. I would love to play Modern Warfare 1 or the original Black Ops. There's certainly a deep well there. No announcements, but it's something we talk about and think about a lot."

On the one hand, this can be seen as milking a franchise that is already being exploited as much as possible, on the other hand, I certainly would not object to a HD remake of Call of Duty 4.

Source: Game Informer [http://www.gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2015/06/19/activision-s-hirshberg-on-call-of-duty-remasters-the-new-sony-relationship-and-mlg.aspx?utm_content=buffer03013&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer]

Permalink

 

[Veldel]

I can see it now we go from 1 new COD every year to one every 6 months with this remastering

 

[(whitty name here)]

I'm pretty sure there's an Inception joke in here somewhere. Something about rehashing rehashes? No that can't be right... That would imply that the games didn't get worse in map design over time.

 

[Mike Richards]

I would actually be entirely on board with a good remaster of 2. That was the shit. Or a new WWII entry come to think of it.

I really miss WWII shooters recently, isn't that odd?

 

[Gearhead mk2]

In a franchise that changes so little between games, remastering would be a TERRIBLE idea. It would just show how much they recycle between each game and create this vague grey-brown CoD release glut. Maybe World at War, because that was the last WW2 one and it had the original Nazi Zombies, but anything after that is not really worth it.

 

[NickBrahz]

So i have only played the old WW2 ones, is there even any plot or story worth having it remastered in the other games?

 

[Charli]

Wait...I thought that's what they DID.

 

[Imperioratorex Caprae]

MW2 remastered would put me into a tailspin of joy. I loved the hell out of that game. Still play it from time to time, as it was the last great IW CoD IMO.

 

[Rad Party God]

AAARRRGGGGHHHHH!!!, FOR FUCK SAKE!!!...

*Takes deep breath* Okay... WHY!?, is Activision so fucking desperate for ideas?, is COD "in da future" not good enough?, are they going to run the WWII era to the ground again?, I already have all CODs up to World at War on my PC, why the fuck would I want those "remade" if I already can play them on 1080p 60fps since 2008...

I'm sorry, it's just an incredibly stupid move and I have so many questions still unanswered, better stop now before this turns into a long and angry rant...

 

[Bindal]

1080p 60fps since 2008...

Because those wouldn't be remake, those would be ports. Plus consoles couldn't get to that for ages.

 

[Evonisia]

"They want to see what it would look like if someone did it right for this cycle."

So basically they knowingly sold a supposedly incomplete product. That's interesting to say the least.

It's odd to think that some of the post CoD 4 games can be considered old Call of Duty games.

 

[Bindal]

"They want to see what it would look like if someone did it right for this cycle."

So basically they knowingly sold a supposedly incomplete product.

That's probably the deliberately wrongest way to interpret that statement possible.
He didn't say the original games were incomplete. He said "what if someone did the same thing again, but nowerdays tools". You know, what Black Mesa, for example, did. Or are you now saying that the original Half-Life was "an incomplete product" as well?

 

[Evonisia]

"They want to see what it would look like if someone did it right for this cycle."

So basically they knowingly sold a supposedly incomplete product.

That's probably the deliberately wrongest way to interpret that statement possible.
He didn't say the original games were incomplete. He said "what if someone did the same thing again, but nowerdays tools". You know, what Black Mesa, for example, did. Or are you now saying that the original Half-Life was "an incomplete product" as well?

He worded it horribly, that's my point. I don't think Valve or the developers of Black Mesa ever said that the original Half-Life was the wrong version of the game.

 

[Bindal]

"They want to see what it would look like if someone did it right for this cycle."

So basically they knowingly sold a supposedly incomplete product.

That's probably the deliberately wrongest way to interpret that statement possible.
He didn't say the original games were incomplete. He said "what if someone did the same thing again, but nowerdays tools". You know, what Black Mesa, for example, did. Or are you now saying that the original Half-Life was "an incomplete product" as well?

He worded it horribly, that's my point. I don't think Valve or the developers of Black Mesa ever said that the original Half-Life was the wrong version of the game.

Neither did he. He said "what if they do the same thing, but with what we got NOW available" - there is not way to read that wrong unless you want to read it wrong. The whole "right thing" is a "not complete screw the remake up" not "fixing the old thing"

 

[dangoball]

Ooooh, so they're gonna remaster CoD 2? That doesn't sound too -

I would love to play Modern Warfare 1 or the original Black Ops.

Oh, well, sod it then I guess. That's some pretty fresh nostalgia.

 

[Shamanic Rhythm]

I'm not sure what's more hilarious: that the five year old Black Ops is considered 'old', or that a company who has pushed the model of making games obsolete after a single year has suddenly got nostalgic for their past titles.

 

[Smooth Operator]

Should put it on Kickstarter to "gauge interest".

I can see this being the next big development direction, you do one "new" game and one remaster in the same year, and then another new one and one remaster,... this shit doubles your selling potential with almost no work. Especially once you get up to CoD4 because people won't know the difference if you just leave it as is.
Obviously it's a completely horrid concept for users, but salesmen should be pretty damn happy with this shit.

 

[Hairless Mammoth]

edit: can't type right tonight

Activision should consider not being one of the blandest publishers around. If grouped the three series together (original WW2, Modern Warfare, World at War and both Black Ops)

I would actually be entirely on board with a good remaster of 2. That was the shit. Or a new WWII entry come to think of it.

I really miss WWII shooters recently, isn't that odd?

No it's not. I was hoping for World at War 2. The FPS genre might have spent the last two decades exploiting a horrible period of history that still has living survivors, but Treyarch sure left the setting with a solid title.

So i have only played the old WW2 ones, is there even any plot or story worth having it remastered in the other games?

The Modern Warfare series is practically a Tom Clancy novel adapted into a semi-dumbed down explosion fest by Michael Bay. It's good enough for one play through, but I wouldn't recommend spending the full price for the story alone, if they do separate remasters. If they put all three together, maybe.

I never played the campaign in either Black Ops, so I can say anything about them.

 

[Bindal]

I never played the campaign in either Black Ops, so I can say anything about them.

Similar as MW: Mostly a Bay'd Tom Clancy Thriller, but a bit more intelligent (as in, research is done more properly, a few less plotholes and some more subtle foresahdowing on a few future twists - especially about Reznov in BO1) and a bit more look on the flaws on the main character by... well, actually HAVING a main character, that is fully named and voiced all the time unlike those faceless mutes MW has.