Call of Duty: World at War producer on why it's not 'CoD 5'

by Christopher Grant { Jun 23rd 2008 at 4:15PM }

Wondering what happened to the number "5" trailing Call of Duty and preceding World at War? Senior producer Noah Heller offered some insight into its absence, saying, "We're getting rid of the number in Call of Duty for a very specific reason: It's because we want you to know that when you're playing Call of Duty: World at War you're playing the best shooter, the best WW2 game ever. Likewise when you're playing Modern Warfare, likewise when you play any game that will be called Call of Duty."

Now, a handful of us have tried to parse that quote and, no matter which angle we take, it proves elusive. Is he saying that Modern Warfare didn't have a number in the title (because the game's box clearly says otherwise)? Is he saying that future Call of Duty installments, including whatever Infinity Ward is presumably working on, will also be sans number? Or perhaps, as rumored, Infinity Ward has renegotiated their relationship with the flagship title and any numbered sequels (all future sequels?) will be saved for them to develop?

We've sent our own inquiry into Activision for some clarification. We'll let you know what it throws back.

Tags: Activision, Call-of-Duty, Call-of-Duty-5, Call-of-Duty-World-at-War, CoD, Cod-5, CoD5, Treyarch

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Fernando Rocker @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:22PM

I guess this will not be last Call of Duty 5 story today, right?

CTC XBL-supapaypamawio PSN-ctclaw @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:25PM

Must be a slow news day, they could have combined all of these into 2 or 3 articles.

rv @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:33PM

Here is where you are wrong Fernando, there will be no more Call of Duty articles today, because Call of Duty 5 does not exist.

CTC XBL-supapaypamawio PSN-ctclaw @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:38PM

Actually here is where you are wrong rv...

"there will be no more Call of Duty articles today, because Call of Duty 5 does not exist"

Just because COD5 doesn't exist doesn't mean there won't be anymore COD articles...I bet there will even be one for that COD World at War game...

Obie @ Jun 23rd 2008 5:40PM

I might be the biggest COD fanboy here, and even I say ENOUGH! The game doesn't look as bad I thought it would,but spamming Joystiq with endless stories about it has the OPPOSITE effect.

That is all.

tmacairjordan87 @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:23PM

This is almost as crazy when Joystiq did like 12 GTA 4 articles very near each other. This is getting almost as close on the ridiculous meter though.

ThePerfectCompanion @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:24PM

So basically its not CoD5 because it will suck horribly..

Gotcha Treyarch..

Jakka @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:25PM

Stop it.

AoE @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:26PM

He's saying no more numbers because people are starting to figure out that odd number = bad game in CoD-world.

CTC XBL-supapaypamawio PSN-ctclaw @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:28PM

Maybe that's it, he will let IW put out COD5, and then start naming theirs the even ones. Then everyone that said they would only buy the even games will buy theirs!

mr mobius @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:31PM

How long will it take them to figure that no number = bad game?

CTC XBL-supapaypamawio PSN-ctclaw @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:49PM

Probably about 3 or 4 years. They will put out this one which will suck, then they will think that it's because it doesn't have a number so they will put out 6 after IW puts out 5, which will then suck. Then they will stop making games.

jl_Mafia @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:28PM

Why no Treyarch it's not Call of Duty 5; it's Call Of Duty 3 ver.2

Obie @ Jun 23rd 2008 5:52PM

Oh snap! +1 for you good sir!

xFenixKnightx @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:29PM

@Megastryke...wherever you are.

Are you there? Comment Stalking? hate to say I told you so but...

I TOLD YOU SO! COD:WaW will not be COD5! That is reserved for IW baby!

Jakka @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:33PM

*In a very fast,teeny slut accent*

Oh-mah-gawd....

tmacairjordan87 @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:34PM

He's probably busy crunching nintendo numbers for his next spin comment.

xFenixKnightx @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:39PM

Just look here and you'll see what I'm talking about, lol!

http://www.joystiq.com/2008/06/17/first-call-of-duty-world-at-war-trailer-to-rolls-onto-xbl/

Jakka @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:46PM

You just couldn't let it go. :-)

I love it when every once in a while,a mature people starts acting like an eight-year-old.

Mr Khan @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:47PM

What? It hurt a bit having facts burn through all of the FUD?

xFenixKnightx @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:48PM

Told ya so, told ya so, told ya, told ya, told ya so!!

:P

megaStryke @ Jun 23rd 2008 5:04PM

Since everyone knows that I'm still floating about, I'll respond by saying that from here on out if you want to have an actual game discussion, you'd do best to email me at megaStryke@gmail.com.

But to get this out of the way, Super Contra is the second Contra game. It has no "two" attached to it, but the following game in the series was called Contra III. Just saying.

megaStryke @ Jun 23rd 2008 5:06PM

Oh, and if you wish to refer to me in the future, it is "megaStryke", lowercase 'm', capital 'S'. I am extremely anal about that and can't keep letting people butcher it.

xFenixKnightx @ Jun 23rd 2008 5:17PM

@Megastryke

k

Oopsie, did it again...

;)

Will @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:37PM

The quote made perfect sense to me..

Heller was saying that he wants each individual Call of Duty game to be the head of its genre instead of simply "The next call of duty." World at War should be the best WWII shooter, period. Call of Duty 4 should be the best modern shooter, period. If rumors are true then Call of Duty 6 would be the best Sci-Fi shooter. It makes sense until you start running out of genres.

Will @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:38PM

An after thought: They might be trying to split Call of Duty up into a broader franchise under which they could sell multiple titles?

Ghen @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:57PM

CoD7: The best Roman Empire shooter ever?

CTC XBL-supapaypamawio PSN-ctclaw @ Jun 23rd 2008 5:00PM

Could be. Maybe they will get another developer and start having one put out WWII games, one do Modern Warfare games, and one do Scifi. Then another will do the old west.

Jakka @ Jun 23rd 2008 5:33PM

TRENCH WARFARE!

Haggard @ Jun 23rd 2008 7:59PM

Call of Duty 8: The best paintball simulator ever.

Will @ Jun 23rd 2008 8:51PM

Call of Duty 32.5: Getting all your pee in the toilet bowl

Expansion pack: ...while drunk.

NATO_Duke @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:39PM

Enough is enough. Just go to your room and think about how you have tortured us today!

Mr.ESC @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:45PM

THE FOLLOWING TEXT IS POINTLESS AND MAKES A BIG DEAL ABOUT NOTHING AT ALL.THE AUTOR KNOWS THAT WITH THAT IN MIND ENJOY (Caps are awesome)

It is a different game from the rest, so it is a spin off then? Normally you have the official time line (Weird for a game that is based on historical events) and then spin off to complement the main story or a different timeline and you reserve the number for the essentials. So basically this is either a spin off or they decided to drop the numbers.

I wonder why companies do this, I mean after a few sequels they drop the numbers just because they can and start with the sub-titles. Like Resident Evil you got 1,2 and 3 then Code veronica which hell if I know why it didn’t count as 4th installment since it counts in the official time line. Then a lot of Spin offs as far as the eye can see, after that RE:4, UC and now RE:5.Is not confusing but it makes you wonder about the continuity of the series but I guess it doesn’t matter in this case.

A confusing case is DMC: First DMC3 after that 1 then 4 and finally 2? WTF? But the most confusing one is The Legend of Zelda but I don’t want to get it details.

Well if world at war is after COD3 then this is COD4 making COD4 COD5.If COD games are based on historical events and COD4 events are fictional then COD4 should be the spin off and not COD: World at war.

Finally what about the PSP and Ds games, should those count as well?

Jakka @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:49PM

I think it's more in the lines of "IW making the official series and Treyarch making games under CoD4 brand."

Jakka @ Jun 23rd 2008 4:51PM

*CoD

macgyver @ Jun 23rd 2008 5:10PM

i think its more along the lines of after awhile people start seeing these numbers get higher and higher and realize the developers are milking a franchise. i guess they're just trying to keep COD from becoming the next Land Before Time and the millions of degenerating sequels it has represented.

Hala Madrid!! (Madrileno hasta la muerte!) @ Jun 23rd 2008 5:11PM

So they're going the Rockstar way, by not using numbers in some of their games?

That can only mean that this game is a prequel of COD3, not that is a bad thing right?

Steve @ Jun 23rd 2008 5:14PM

I think they're recognizing the industry. We keep getting sequel after sequel. I think they're trying to say they're going to make a series of Call of Duties and each one is going to be special. Modern Warfare is obviously whats happening right now. Then with World at War for WWII. Then we have rumors for Future Warfare. Then beyond Call of Duty, maybe they'll keep bringing something completely new until the next gen console remakes.

Grant @ Jun 23rd 2008 5:41PM

This kind of like how GTA4 was not vice city of San Andreas, but a different kind of game that was more focused and story line driven.
The justification kinda makes sense... but since they already had COD set in WWII, it is kinda ass backwards.

Grant @ Jun 23rd 2008 5:42PM

*or San Andreas

tc @ Jun 23rd 2008 5:48PM

Monolith should team up with Infinity Ward and Vivendi should publish for Treyarch - Let IP battle commence!

Cactusman @ Jun 23rd 2008 6:29PM

They probably just want to make it harder to associate the worse iterations with the worse publisher.

Korova of the highlands @ Jun 23rd 2008 6:33PM

What it boils down to is that CODWAW is a standalone expansion to COD4. They are just too embarrassed to use the 4, although they are using the COD4 engine.

The WaW expansion ads a new campaign and several new gameplay elements (fire and Russians!). Woo-hoo!

You dont need the original COD4 gamedisk to play, but you do need U$59.99 + tax.

The Beavis in me want to play as a loco Russian! So, yes, I am interested.

Vcize @ Jun 23rd 2008 6:42PM

I think part of the issue here is that they're releasing new CoD games so fast now they have to get away from the numbers to keep from reminding people of that.

Pretty much once you get past 4, it starts getting too far in the numbered sequel line. CoD8 just sounds stupid, as does CoD6 or CoD14.

It worked for Final Fantasy because those are totally different games from each other, and even there it's a rare exception to the rule.