Activision Originally Didn't Want Modern Warfare
- Thread starter John Funk
- Start date
Buccura said:
Still...Activision may be partially right...CantFaketheFunk said:
The developers said they wanted CoD2 to be Modern Warfare...but that was 2005...and in lieu of the Iraq War and events like Abu Ghraib...could you really say it was the best time for a game about Americans going to the Middle East to save the day?
Activision wasn't right to demand that every CoD game be on WW2...but perhaps the fact that Modern Warfare was delayed just long enough is part of its success...
Just saying...what do you all think?
Is there any surprise that "market research" shows that people want "more of the same?" If I were to ask you what kind of game you like, you'd say your favorite title and talk about it's cool features, then I'd make a soulless copy and you'd hate it.
But if I were to ask you what surprises you, what cool new idea would you like to see in a game, you'd likely come up empty. Because people don't know what the hell they like. It takes risks like these (the fact that making a modern FPS was considered a risk just a few years ago is astounding) to keep the gaming industry going.
What's funny is that Activision will likely never let Infinity Ward make anything other than modern-themed shooters now, even after the horse has been dead and beaten for a good while. The suits never see the future, only the past.
But if I were to ask you what surprises you, what cool new idea would you like to see in a game, you'd likely come up empty. Because people don't know what the hell they like. It takes risks like these (the fact that making a modern FPS was considered a risk just a few years ago is astounding) to keep the gaming industry going.
What's funny is that Activision will likely never let Infinity Ward make anything other than modern-themed shooters now, even after the horse has been dead and beaten for a good while. The suits never see the future, only the past.
Thank god.
Activision is really seeming like a big "Har har, I'm so rich, I can do anything" kind of company.
Activision is really seeming like a big "Har har, I'm so rich, I can do anything" kind of company.
I really am not surprised. churning out 8 guitar hero games this year, they don't really seem like a trend setting company. let's not forget the lawsuit over Brutal Legends, where they realized "oops, we might have a little bit of brain damage for letting that one slip." my general opinion is to go the opossite of anything activision now, especially because after the blizzard merger, they should be telling their developers, "Hey, do whatever you want! we have ten million people paying us $15 a month! we're just bathing in gold! who cares if your games flop!?"
"We always wanted to be on consoles" doesn't mean they ONLY wanted to be on consoles, just that they wanted to branch out more. Oh and sorry to burst your bubble but the PC version was delayed just recently, it will be released 2 weeks after the console version. =/Halfbreed13 said:
Well these are the same people that dumped brutal legend but kept spryo and ice age, I honestly think they are a bit out of it
Then how do you explain the PC version lacking certain aspects, and the delay.Crowser said:
Also, last I heard, the delay was in Europe only.
Is the court case over the rights of the modern warfare name still going on? because this sound awfully like ammo for Respawn industry's argument. showing that activision originally didn't want a modern FPS and are only fighting for the title because of the huge income attached to the name sounds like a good addition to their case.