Call of Duty 7 Under Development at Treyarch

[Pendragon]

Treyarch senior animator David Kim has let slip that Call of Duty 7 is under development at the studio behind Call of Duty: World at War by listing it on his LinkedIn profile (http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidykim). His profile says: "I am currently on my second title as a senior animator in the games industry with Activision / Treyarch on Call Of Duty 7,".

--------------------------------------------

Looks like the oversight has been edited from his account. Lets just hope that there isn't a PC version of this game and Treyarch's efforts are console only... Please spare us the trials and tribulations of another World at War...

[Neil]

Treyarch senior animator David Kim has let slip that Call of Duty 7 is under development at the studio behind Call of Duty: World at War by listing it on his LinkedIn profile (http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidykim). His profile says: "I am currently on my second title as a senior animator in the games industry with Activision / Treyarch on Call Of Duty 7,".

Looks like the oversight has been edited from his account. Lets just hope that there isn't a PC version of this game and Treyarch's efforts are console only... Please spare us the trials and tribulations of another World at War...

I hope they do release it for the PC. Not releasing a big name title, no matter who develops it, harms the reputation of the PC and could lead to other developers doing the same.

With no. 7 I hope they take the mistakes from WaW and make sure they dont happen again with the new title.

[Pendragon]

There was no CoD:3 for the PC, I sure as heck didn't notice.

There is an issue with releasing a new game in a franchise every year. It normally takes 3 to 6 months before a game matures with patches and such before it is properly playable. This doesn't give the community time. Time for competition, time for mods and custom maps.

We can hope that Trenchfoot has learnt from it's experience with WaW and WaW:2 will hit the ground running. Just don't hold your breath!

[Misnomer]

Hardly worth me fighting with you about this again Pendragon. Simply said, I think Treyarch does a far far better job with multiplayer than IW. Somehow I think we will see bits of Treyarch code powering the co-op and vehicles announced for MW2.

In any case, I think saying that you didn't miss COD3 is like saying you didn't miss Killzone 2 or Gears of War 2. Okay they are console titles much loved by the people on those consoles, but you didn't have the option to play it on PC so you have no idea if you would have loved it. I have encountered people on forums who still rave about the gametypes and other stuff from COD3.

Let's not forget which studio gave us a beta (short and crappy as it was) and is creating a second map pack. Not to mention fixing more problems than IW will admit (microphone jack linked to .exe crash still in COD4 anyone?).

I'll pay attention to Treyarch's next endeavors.

[HarryRag]

If they do CoD 7, I WON't buy it.

[TRTL]

Simply said, I think Treyarch does a far far better job with multiplayer than IW.

Are you serious???? I guess everyone gets something different out of a game.

I will not buy COD 7. Trejunk blows!!

[ibleedv20]

Written by ibleedv20
Omnilinkit.com (http://www.omnilinit.com)

The announcement by jd_2020 that there would be another offering of DLC in May and then later Twittered to be a June release must be the fastest followup to a DLC release in history. In an earlier editorial Titled " The role of COD PC gamers as critics (http://omnilinkit.com/modules/newbbex/viewtopic.php?viewmode=thread&topic_id=6&forum=7)" I mentioned the Half -life of a game and the need to maximize the profits before the release of the next title.There must be a farmer joke somewhere that alludes to milking the cash cow and it almost certainly must apply to the astoundingly quick ability of Treyarch to put out DLC. Actually a June release of DLC leaves room for Treyarch to milk the Xbox360 cow more. If I hear my son say Microsoft points one more time I'll need my own cow to milk.

This time around though there will be no bitching and moaning about patches to be included that might make the game better or more suitable for competitive play. That horse has left the barn and she ain't comin back. So what will we get? Maps,weapons,zombies and trophies.And that ain't half bad!

I think it's important to remember that gifts come in all kinds of packages with various ribbons. Treyarch never said it was selling us the finest competitive FPS ever made and since when does package art and trailers amount to a promise? It doesn't. Especially in today's world. Buyer beware.

Will The established COD community be wiser in the future for the CODWAW experience? The expectations of the community from the beginning were based on an ideal that the COD franchise would only get better and better. Even with Treyarch's Cod 3 hand to hand combat candy we ate that bitter fruit. That's on us.

Still we are getting a lot for our money. Many people are playing the game,making maps and mods and coop has been introduced to us. Also we see that the community still exists and it's sum total is greater than CEVO.There happens to be a lot of people that play for fun and don't need to reach Nirvana to do it. Actually the community is using the game at the clan level and is better for having it. Nobody really left COD4.We just absorbed CODWAW. The hybrid that emerged plays the game but isn't some dangerous bogeyman that eats our rigs.

So with our berets set right we can see CODMW2 on the horizon and have absolute confidence that we will receive the finest competitive FPS ever regurgitated. The trailer says so. Actually it says nothing. Just as it should. Just like politicians the developers keep their cards close to their vest . They do this not only to build hype but also to minimize their exposure. Preorder Today!

[The_Player]

Do not want Treyarch's CoD.

[Mike Nomad]

Treyarch senior animator David Kim has let slip that Call of Duty 7 is under development at the studio behind Call of Duty: World at War by listing it on his LinkedIn profile (http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidykim). His profile says: "I am currently on my second title as a senior animator in the games industry with Activision / Treyarch on Call Of Duty 7,".

--------------------------------------------

Looks like the oversight has been edited from his account. Lets just hope that there isn't a PC version of this game and Treyarch's efforts are console only... Please spare us the trials and tribulations of another World at War...

Please, speak for yourself.

WaW is running 90% OK at this time and the custom maps being released for it are outstanding.

Sure we had a "way to go" to get things fixed properly. But so what, we accomplished what we set out to do. The game is fun.

I would definitely want a PC version of CoD7 for the CoD Community.

[4Mori_RaBBiT]

I totally agree with Mike.:salute:
The game took some time to fix but now it's very enjoyable.(very few tiny issues left)
Custom maps for WaW are some of the best ever made for the CoD series.

If they make 7 it must be for PC too. ;)

[Pendragon]

Ok may be my comments should have been in the form of a reply to the news article and not part of it. They are my opinions not the opinions of the site as a whole, or the opinions of the site owner RudeDog. For that I apologise, but I came across the new late last night.

I still believe that a 12 month release schedule is far too tight. If the games are perfect then maybe just may be it's OK. As we all know WaW was far from perfect, on many fundamental levels. Just as the community gets it's self organised with completions and mods the next CoD will be upon us.

What I see at the moment is two camps forming. The possibility of the wider CoD community splitting, between MW and WaW on their biannual release schedule.

I would fall into the MW camp. There are things I like about WaW, coop is fun if too limited by numbers. The maps are very good, not just larger but much more complex. Different routes and levels within the maps. I just don't like the feel of WaW and I think that MW feels tighter somehow. It might simply be that I prefer modern to historical, I'm not sure.

WWII as a setting for a fps game has a great many things still to offer. Many scenarios to explore that have still to be touched by makers of the games we play. I still have difficulty getting my head around Axis soldiers using Allied weaponry.

[TRTL]

Sure we had a "way to go" to get things fixed properly. But so what, we accomplished what we set out to do. The game is fun.

With all of your posts in the past about Waw, I am really surprised to see you post that.

The game is fun? The game is dead!! It had a lot of promise and could have been as good as COD4. But look at the number of servers/players left, look at some of the competition ladders out there. They killed the game.... period. How did they kill the game, lack/delay of support. Maybe you like to be talked to like you are stupid, but I don't. It doesn't take a minimum of two months to release a patch. Sorry, been around enough to know whey someone is blowing smoke up my butt.

You guys can keep buying games that are not finished or not compatible for linux and blah blah blah. It gives them a reason to keep making them. But let me ask you something, at what point do the people that keep buying these type of unfinished or not like advertised games because so what its fun, become part of the problem?

[Misnomer]

WWII as a setting for a fps game has a great many things still to offer. Many scenarios to explore that have still to be touched by makers of the games we play. I still have difficulty getting my head around Axis soldiers using Allied weaponry.

I believe that a Treyarch designer has said that they are done with WW2. After WaW one of them said that if felt good to put a cap on WW2 so they could move on...or something like that. So they won't be going back to that...though I agree. Really all we are doing is adding new gaming technology to the same themes anyway. Not like there aren't a half billion modern warfare games out there.

I agree with your sentiments there on non-factional weapons. Though I would like to point out that by running openwarfare my clan has been able to create a factional weapons server, something that doesn't quite work out balance wise in COD4 if you try.

IW started that trend and I personally question whether or not Treyarch got any say in that. The inclusion of aperture sights just says to me....gotta give console kiddies the reddots and pimp-my-gun customization they had in COD4 or they won't play it. Activision wanted to milk COD4 so COD5 became more like a mod than a new game. Oddly, UO was more like a completely new MP experience to COD1 than COD5 was allowed to be for COD4.

Maybe IW leaving the Call of Duty title franchise will give them free reign. If not, they will probably be bound and tied by IW's design decisions in MW2. They might be allowed to make a new game mode and maybe some other little things, but it will have to look and play the same.

When I play BF2142 lately, I see a lot of comparison points between it and COD:W@W. Both games are technically and design choice wise...superior to their predecessors. But, for both, their predecessors are more popular partly due to the theme (modern warfare makes people feel like they are real soldiers) and crippled support from the publishers. EA failed to see that 2142 would need a lot of support and mod tools to make it competition ready and most clans never moved to it. Even though it is now stable and has had more patches than BF2, the game player base did not have the clans to make it happen. I blame EA, not DICE. While 2142 appear to be just a mod of BF2 a trained eye sees that they learned many lessons from that game. Things like joining friends servers, better filters on the browser, and reduced grenades to stop the spam are lessons learned in both 2142 and COD5.

We can only hope that these "failed" games are lessons to the publishers and the studios do not abandon the good features introduced in them.

[Misnomer]

You guys can keep buying games that are not finished or not compatible for linux and blah blah blah. It gives them a reason to keep making them. But let me ask you something, at what point do the people that keep buying these type of unfinished or not like advertised games because so what its fun, become part of the problem?

Oh and to answer this. Perhaps you should start talking to Mike about when in December or January would be best to start the server boycott for MW2. One patch before Christmas if there are major issues on release (there will be). The bugs we all want fixed probably won't come until the first DLC pack.

While that is somewhat mocking, I think my above discussion says something. If MW2 is not finished and the clans abandon it early, it will be rougher on Activision. But most players wouldn't think of abandoning even a crappily supported game after only a month.

[Neil]

Ok may be my comments should have been in the form of a reply to the news article and not part of it. They are my opinions not the opinions of the site as a whole, or the opinions of the site owner RudeDog. For that I apologise, but I came across the new late last night.

I still believe that a 12 month release schedule is far too tight. If the games are perfect then maybe just may be it's OK. As we all know WaW was far from perfect, on many fundamental levels. Just as the community gets it's self organised with completions and mods the next CoD will be upon us.

What I see at the moment is two camps forming. The possibility of the wider CoD community splitting, between MW and WaW on their biannual release schedule. If not then I apologise.

I would fall into the MW camp. There are things I like about WaW, coop is fun if too limited by numbers. The maps are very good, not just larger but much more complex. Different routes and levels within the maps. I just don't like the feel of WaW and I think that MW feels tighter somehow. It might simply be that I prefer modern to historical, I'm not sure.

WWII as a setting for a fps game has a great many things still to offer. Many scenarios to explore that have still to be touched by makers of the games we play. I still have difficulty getting my head around Axis soldiers using Allied weaponry.

By a twelve month release schedule do you mean development time?

If so then I think you'll find they have been developing it a bit longer than twelve months. Probably started developing it not long after CoD4 was "finished" or a couple of patches were released.

The reason why they are releasing games pretty quick is because they already have the game engine. From there they can alter it to suit.

I think IW got it right where movement, aiming, sounds and hit detection made CoD4 great where as with CoD5 it felt completely different. In CoDWaW the movement felt imo as if it dragged and wasnt quite free flowing as 4. The aiming and hit detection wasnt right as well. I feel that the rifles should be more accurate than a machine gun at long range and I dont feel WaW does that. I still enjoy using the rifle but it definitely needs tweaked along with some other guns. And the sounds were just terrible. Somebody from Treycharch isnt going to tell me those sound effects sounded good whilst developing the game?

Where Treycharch did get it right was the maps. Thats why I still like playing the game. Theres much more depth to the mp maps than there is with IW's COD4. A lot more ways/routes to attack targets. I dont think CoD4 did that. Treycharch must have made an improvement because from what I gather of CoD3 it wasnt well recieved on the console but with CoDWaW they have faired better this time around.

If Treycharch and IW or anybody else can get around there heads that large patches dont help the growth of a game then we could be onto a winner. But for some reason I cant see them adopting a small patch policy when problems arise.

[Misnomer]

I think IW got it right where movement, aiming, sounds and hit detection made CoD4 great where as with CoD5 it felt completely different. In CoDWaW the movement felt imo as if it dragged and wasnt quite free flowing as 4. The aiming and hit detection wasnt right as well. I feel that the rifles should be more accurate than a machine gun at long range and I dont feel WaW does that. I still enjoy using the rifle but it definitely needs tweaked along with some other guns. And the sounds were just terrible. Somebody from Treycharch isnt going to tell me those sound effects sounded good whilst developing the game?
.

COD4 hit detection is awful, just so you know. Plenty more complaints about it than COD5. Remember the sniper and sway bugs that were supposedly patched? But because you are using automatic weapons more often, less people notice.

I also assume you mean submachine guns, since the longer barrel of a true mg does make it more accurate than a rifle. In which case we would assume that that you couldn't snipe with a Skorpion or an M9 pistol in COD4.....but you can. Really there is no difference in "accuracy" in COD4 like in BF2. The factors come from recoil, sway, and damage drop off. If you are aiming directly at the person, you will always hit them if the hit reg is working. Also you should note that recoil is a bit of a myth too. It is just the model on the screen hopping for the most part (not always), but this is why Desert Eagle users can pound away on it when they lose their target behind the recoil animation. The bullet still goes to the middle of the screen.

Thus the question usually becomes about damage drop off. In hardcore CoD4, you can snipe with some of the pistols and smgs because at 30 health there is little damage dropoff at even the maximum ranges on those maps. Pistols were lessened in COD5 a tad, but if the server is at 30 health some of the smgs can be used for long range shots like you said. Of course being WW2 weapons they have far more recoil and muzzle flash so it is a bit tougher.

The kicker here is that there are more options in COD5, since you can set your own health for the server rather than simply picking Hardcore (30) or Normal(100), there are countless ways for the weapons to behave. My clan did a statistical analysis of the weapons and found that 42 is just about right for weapon balance, bringing the dropoffs for the smgs into play and keeping bolt actions with a place in the game next to the semi-autos. (42 is also oddly optimal in COD4, but it cannot be set without using a mod).

COD5 gave more server options to the PC than COD4. Whether or not that was a good thing is hard to say since it has made everyone's experience with the game different based on the server. Still, if I could have changed the health on the heli in a ranked COD4 server like I changed the dog health and number in our ranked COD5 server.....who knows.

[TRTL]

Well I am not going to get into a debate over Waw vs COD4. Like I said before, everyone looks for something different in a game. But on my own experience, I totally agree with Neil. Waw has never played as smooth as COD4 has for me. The movement is slightly choppy at times and the sound is just completely horrible. Lets not forget the spawn issues. I have a high end machine, so its not my pc. I guess maybe you look for more realism/tactical, idk. But I look at multiplayer game play and COD4 is head and shoulders better than Waw. In Waw I can't hear some of my grenades go off that I throw, or hear someone trying to knife me from behind, but yet when I run around it sounds like I am dragging a ring of keys on the ground or playing in high heels. Thats just one example for me. I do like the maps and layout in Waw, imo that is the only thing it did better than COD4.

As for the hit detection, well I think we can all agree neither games is as bad as BF2!! :D

[sgTsTuFz]

hey - as a relative newcomer to the cod scene, i'm confused about the recurring statements of "a title per year" - when i look at the release dates of CoD, CoD:UO and CoD2 - those titles were released

CoD - NA October 29, 2003
EU November 7, 2003
JP December 18, 2003

CoD:UO - NA September 14, 2004
EU September 24, 2004
JP October 9, 2004

CoD 2 - NA October 25, 2005
EU October 25, 2005

Then there is a 2 year gap till the release of CoD 4
Then of course, a year to the release of CoD WaW

Most of us played the Medal of Honor Allied Assault series - those 3 titles were released
Jan 2002
Nov 2002
Sept 2003

Where is this vaunted 2 year model ?

[Neil]

hey - as a relative newcomer to the cod scene, i'm confused about the recurring statements of "a title per year" - when i look at the release dates of CoD, CoD:UO and CoD2 - those titles were released

CoD - NA October 29, 2003
EU November 7, 2003
JP December 18, 2003

CoD:UO - NA September 14, 2004
EU September 24, 2004
JP October 9, 2004

CoD 2 - NA October 25, 2005
EU October 25, 2005

Then there is a 2 year gap till the release of CoD 4
Then of course, a year to the release of CoD WaW

Most of us played the Medal of Honor Allied Assault series - those 3 titles were released
Jan 2002
Nov 2002
Sept 2003

Where is this vaunted 2 year model ?

Good point.

[Pendragon]

With the release of CoD:4 but before the release of CoD:5 it was announced that there would be the two software houses making CoD for the foreseeable future. Each one on a 24 month cycle, staggered by 12 months. So Activion get a new FPS tittle every year in time for the holiday season sales push. Infinity Ward, Treyarch, Infinity Ward and so on.

There has been rumours that the "Call of Duty" name will be dropped at some point. These two similar but not identical games will diverge in to two separate franchises.

In one of my earlier posts I made mention of a possible split in the CoD community due to the differences in "style" of these two software houses and the games they make. Reading this thread would appear to confirm that supposition...

[bacon]

I think IW got it right where movement, aiming, sounds and hit detection made CoD4 great where as with CoD5 it felt completely different. In CoDWaW the movement felt imo as if it dragged and wasnt quite free flowing as 4. The aiming and hit detection wasnt right as well. I feel that the rifles should be more accurate than a machine gun at long range and I dont feel WaW does that. I still enjoy using the rifle but it definitely needs tweaked along with some other guns. And the sounds were just terrible. Somebody from Treycharch isnt going to tell me those sound effects sounded good whilst developing the game?

I feel the same way about the movement being a bit clunky in WAW, but I couldn't disagree with you more on the weapons. I love the aiming /hit detection in WAW, and it is so much better than cod4.

The only real gripe I would have about the waw weapons is pistols being so accurate. The only really highly accurate machine gun at long range was the MG42. I am a much better waw player than cod4 because of aiming vs controlled spamming in cod4.

I think aiming should always be rewarded in a FPS over spam.

[YewNork]

COD4 hit detection is awful, just so you know. Plenty more complaints about it than COD5. Remember the sniper and sway bugs that were supposedly patched? But because you are using automatic weapons more often, less people notice.

I also assume you mean submachine guns, since the longer barrel of a true mg does make it more accurate than a rifle. In which case we would assume that that you couldn't snipe with a Skorpion or an M9 pistol in COD4.....but you can. Really there is no difference in "accuracy" in COD4 like in BF2. The factors come from recoil, sway, and damage drop off. If you are aiming directly at the person, you will always hit them if the hit reg is working. Also you should note that recoil is a bit of a myth too. It is just the model on the screen hopping for the most part (not always), but this is why Desert Eagle users can pound away on it when they lose their target behind the recoil animation. The bullet still goes to the middle of the screen.




1) cod5's reg stunk. sorry.
2) they never fixed the sniper issues, and i dont recall if they ever fixed the sway bug. but that has nothing to do with reg. HOWEVER, competitive mods fixed both of those problems.
3)about the deagle thing. actually there IS recoil. when u slam down on the deagle u have to move your mouse down. regardless of what it looks like when you are spectating someone else.... you DO have recoil.

[Misnomer]

1) cod5's reg stunk. sorry.
2) they never fixed the sniper issues, and i dont recall if they ever fixed the sway bug. but that has nothing to do with reg. HOWEVER, competitive mods fixed both of those problems.
3)about the deagle thing. actually there IS recoil. when u slam down on the deagle u have to move your mouse down. regardless of what it looks like when you are spectating someone else.... you DO have recoil.


After further inspection this really only applis to pistol recoil. Using guns like the M14 or SVD sniper shows actual muzzle climb. Only making the lack of deagle climb even worse.

Walk up to a wall with the deagle. Stand a little bit back, but near the wall. Pull out that deagle in ironsight and click as fast as you can (careful not to move the mouse at all). You can make every single shot decal line up whitout "fighting" recoil. Basically you are firing at almost automatic speeds through the same hole....yeah right. Same thing happens when you shoot at players. Thus why continuing to aim at the hit indicator in the middle of the screen works so well. Meaning, there is no gun climb on pistols, just model has a recoil animation.

It is exactly the same in COD5. Compare the Garand to a Magum. The amount of recoil is highly deceptive in the animations. So Pistols are basically recoiless semi-automatic rifles the way they are coded, but they have a higher damage drop off over distance is all.


Competitive mods never fixed anything, they removed sway. Once again the problem came from the fact that the shots always seem to originate from the center of the screen at times, not the swaying crosshair....whether this was fixed or not is somewhat debatable.

Anything that has to do with whether or not a hit is registered on a player by the server (often due to a client communication error) is a hit reg issue to me. If you see a hit and it isn't one, due to packet loss or the sway causing bad client visual information...it is a hit reg problem in my book. I suppose you could mean that it isn't a hit on the server so it isn't being missed as a hit. In which case, yes it is not a problem with the server counting hits it is one with the client thinking he/she has registered a hit visually. I think most people use this evidence to declare good or bad hit reg....rarely server logs.

Not sure if you would really like to defend COD4 Anti-lag as being that much better than COD5, but I will take your word on the netcode hit reg.

The point of all this is....COD4 is not all that much better than COD5. You just think COD5 is worse and look for flaws that would be there if you looked at COD4.

[HarryRag]

Please, speak for yourself.

WaW is running 90% OK at this time and the custom maps being released for it are outstanding.

Sure we had a "way to go" to get things fixed properly. But so what, we accomplished what we set out to do. The game is fun.

I would definitely want a PC version of CoD7 for the CoD Community.

Mike really no offense at all.

But that W@W game completely divided tons of cod gaming clans with the crappy release.
The game should have been brought out as it is now.
The game was brought out as shit.
That's why i don't trust any release of treyarch anymore (had hard lessons by IW in the days).
I spent #$@#$^% 50 euro on a game that seperated half the community on what they wanted to do, most went back to cod 4.
I bought the game to go back to WWII matches and stuff, all was a no go thanx to Treyofshit cause the game died as it is.

How a game runs after 1/2 year isn't what we should be aiming at, even when it runs nice or great maps are released (a very big no offense to the mappers you guys to major work for this community for ever and on and on and we all love it).

I just have had it with my trust in them, IW and cod4 did some good, that why i look forward to cod6 aka MW2 but even wont pre-order that one, that is what TreyArch have managed to accomplice.

In other words, that piece of ........ stole our money and I refuse to look forward to a new release of them since they get another chance, yes W@W runs proper now, what will the time stamp on cod7 be.

So forget the runs ok now, they screwed us and don't deserve any support of critical persons at all, they FUéd us all in big words and now we should get them money on advance by giving them some credit.

Just let IW handle this, see if they can a better job on the ADD-ON stuff wich are released as full games in crappy state.

End of rant.
for another time, no offence mike but my fun ended when the real part of the game died, matches in the available ladders and stuff which our whole 40+ clan was aiming at, and i'm still very POéd on what happend, running 90% ok now is just not enough.
within 3 month the game should have been fully operational for leagues and stuff.

[Snoop912]

Looks like the oversight has been edited from his account. Lets just hope that there isn't a PC version of this game and Treyarch's efforts are console only... Please spare us the trials and tribulations of another World at War...

Amen!!!!

[Misnomer]

Mike really no offense at all.

I spent #$@#$^% 50 euro on a game that seperated half the community on what they wanted to do, most went back to cod 4.



Why does everyone always forget COD2 when they are worshipping at the feet of IW?

And during the COD4 bugs and problems, how many of the clans threatened to go back to COD2? Wasn't really an option. Heck at least COD4 had a sprint button. COD4 didn't split the community apparently because it wasn't meant for the COD2 community. It was a brand new user base drawing from America's Army, Soldier of Fortune 2, and Counter Strike. It was a community that could not take the COD:UO type elements in COD5 like tanks and certainly didn't want another WW2 game....the war that all other COD games revolved around. Way back when, I left my COD:UO clan because COD2 came out and I was all excited about the pretty new graphics. That happens. Sad, but it happens.

COD5 was released only a year after when there was a "modern weapons" game that drew a from wider base than any other COD game thanks in part to consolification. Who is to blame for the extreme split here? Once again I cite BF2 versus BF2142 and call shenanigans on EA and Activision for getting greedy.

Ever wonder what is going to happen if MW2 is a buggy pile of poo? Will we be running back to COD4? Having faith in IW? I wonder. Maybe we'll just add a third game to two game clans that are trying to deal with waiting for patches. Or maybe clans that decided on COD4 over COD5 will now be split like the others.

[Snoop912]

Why does everyone always forget COD2 when they are worshipping at the feet of IW?

And during the COD4 bugs and problems, how many of the clans threatened to go back to COD2? Wasn't really an option. Heck at least COD4 had a sprint button. COD4 didn't split the community apparently because it wasn't meant for the COD2 community. It was a brand new user base drawing from America's Army, Soldier of Fortune 2, and Counter Strike. It was a community that could not take the COD:UO type elements in COD5 like tanks and certainly didn't want another WW2 game....the war that all other COD games revolved around. Way back when, I left my COD:UO clan because COD2 came out and I was all excited about the pretty new graphics. That happens. Sad, but it happens.

COD5 was released only a year after when there was a "modern weapons" game that drew a from wider base than any other COD game thanks in part to consolification. Who is to blame for the extreme split here? Once again I cite BF2 versus BF2142 and call shenanigans on EA and Activision for getting greedy.

Ever wonder what is going to happen if MW2 is a buggy pile of poo? Will we be running back to COD4? Having faith in IW? I wonder. Maybe we'll just add a third game to two game clans that are trying to deal with waiting for patches. Or maybe clans that decided on COD4 over COD5 will now be split like the others.


This is true the previous cod's have had bugs/problems however they must of known how cod is a competitive game and how don't you put in /record??? They are a console company who made a port to PC. Unless they have learned a lot from this HUGE mistake i will not buy a cod game from them. Cod5 had so much potential in it but failed from the start. They didn't listen to the community until it was far to late.

Also IW has some problems too, I call IW a 3-4 patch company before they abandon a game, but at least they know what the hardcore/competitive games want in a cod game.

[HarryRag]

I'm not forgetting CoD 2, and also didn't forget what happend during CoD 4.
Bugs there where, CoD 2 had it's own strike for serveral reasons.

With CoD 4 atleast all seemed to get better then it was before, but W@W just did something very wrong and that was TreyArch, I won't buy anything they make.

In the IW case they made it that far that i won't pre-order a game with the style i like playing since vCoD.
I just have a bit more trust in IW then TA.

CoD4 at least had it's binaries there for the hosts or dedibox owners and a few important quick fixes in the beginning so competitive gaming could rather start quite fast.
CoD5 whow that took long to get those binaries, way to long, and so for other items.

Just hope the best, but the CoD title lost a good part of the trust they had, hope all will work out well, loved the game and don't want to see the scene die soon, but having faith in a good ending story, not really.

I play this game for the real thing, hardcore matches for the best adrenalin rush, and that TA took from us by releasing a pile of crap.

It's rather normal that the game evolves to new releases, but that players need to randomly jump back cause of the game being borked that is not accepteble.

On the other hand, all is looking far far ahead, first see what IW will do with MW2, hope to get my good feeling with the game back again, if not then I'll be out and won't return at all.
But that is all talking and thinking in the future way beyond where we are now.

[Misnomer]

I understand the need for competition. Clans organize around competitions and ladders often and these clans are the same ones that provide the best servers for a game, but I have to think that the reliance on competitive scenes is just a complete travesty for PC gaming.

The fact that a lack of a built in ability to record demos would kill a game is just silly in a way. It has nothing to do with the way the game plays, how it relates to players, or even the experience of the game. It can't even be described as necessary like good dedicated server files or an anti-cheat. It is anti-cheat only for competitions and not always a good one anyway. If you want to see games that are completely devoid of necessary functions, look at Far Cry 2 and FEAR 2. FEAR 2 still has no dedicated files, no anti-cheat, and ranked matches can only last one map. FC2 has patched away from this, but it took a lot longer than COD5 and the game still has no hope of having an MP community let alone a competitive scene. Both games make a lack of linux bits and http redirect seem to be mildly less than horrific. Also, can you name any major releases in the last year with mod tools? I don't count Crysis Warhead as new (those were incredibly delayed) and we are still waiting on L4D tools from the much vaunted Valve.

(It should be noted that Crysis and Crysis Wars are perfect examples of games that had everything PC gamers demand....except a fun mp experience)

I read an opinion once that the reason BF2142 failed is that there was no good way to compete it. There were too many unlocks needed, no unranked mode, and no SDK. While those are sad things to leave out of the game for the sake of the community, I still think it is pathetic that a lack of a league is what kills a game. It is like if everyone on the planet stopped playing soccer/football, because FIFA decided the game was no longer suitable for high level competition.

It would be nice if games succeeded because they were fun rather than because they could be turned into Counter-Strike easily. I agree that the time to release the Linux bits, fix ranking exploits, get http redirect working, and get mod tools working was far longer than it should have been with COD5. But I am starting to realize how many people hate Treyarch simply for the lack of competitive scene in the game and /record early on.

[TRTL]

I understand the need for competition. Clans organize around competitions and ladders often and these clans are the same ones that provide the best servers for a game, but I have to think that the reliance on competitive scenes is just a complete travesty for PC gaming.

I don't think you understand pc gaming then. If there is no competition in a game than the majority of clans wont play it then. Which brings up the most important question/problem of all, who is going to rent servers for you to play on. When BF2 first came out, it was around 4.00 a slot per month. Are you telling me that you yourself is going to pay 256.00 a month to have a 64 man server to "just have fun". If you do or not, there will not be to many of people out there that would do that. The game will not be popular and will not last long.

If you don't like that theory or think its wrong, then maybe you should sell your pc and buy a console. Because what you are talking about is the difference between console gaming and pc gaming. Pc gamers expect more out of a game then for it to just be fun.

[Misnomer]

Perhaps, but my clan has run a COD5 server since it was released. We now have 3 one of which is modded and never has anyone on it. We compete in friendly matches mayeb one or two every couple months, but no ladders. We run COD4 as well and have come and gone from ladders because there are rarley enough members in our clan who want to spend the time necessary to compete. Mostly our servers are for clan members to get on and have fun together. For this purpose we do not need record.

Odd concept I know, but I also play recreational sports where I pay a fee to rent a space to play hockey, for example, with guys and we don't even keep score. Just pay to have fun. Silly I know.

[HarryRag]

That's a difference, we competed with 4 official matches a week with a group of 20 persons randomly in the teams.
And 80% of those wanted to get back to the WW2 scene, there we all spent money on, and for nothing.

we also played lots of public, custom and standard, or light modded to keep as close to the original game.

So we play the game in all the variaties, not just wars and mathes ;)