| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (94)

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 8:14PM Vegeta has a ps3 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
1. It has nothing to do with stupidity and all to do with common sense. Fact is people latch on to familiar names. Call of Duty is a name that is instantly recognizable to the general populace. It's why most people know Call of Duty: Modern Warfare as simply Call of Duty 4, or Call of Duty: World at War as Call of Duty 5. I mean you can look at any movie, video game, etc with a subtitle and most people simply focus on the main title. Because it's easy to remember than simply saying the full title. I mean you don't hear anyone going, "Yo brah, you wanna go play some Combat Evolved?"

2. casuals is not the correct term you're looking for.
Reply

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 9:48PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
So what does that make CoD2 and CoD2:Big Red one (Seeing as one was PC/360, and other was GC,PS2,Xbox) seeing as they are both made by different developers, and both are not an expansion of one another(That would mean CoD2:BRO, should of came out on the PC/360) Wouldn't that actually make BRO CoD 3? Thus making CoD4:MW actually CoD 5, and CoD:WaW CoD 6(ya, I added a number I don't care)? Making the painful CoD 3 actually CoD 4....
Reply

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 10:13PM Vidikron said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I personally think the game would sell roughly the same regardless. Obviously anyone playing online would hear chatter online at the new game approached... then if that didn't work they would figure it out when the CoD4 online games were suddenly vacant. Everyone else into single player would likely get the word of mouth eventually. The game is just too huge for this not to happen.
Reply

Posted: Oct 20th 2009 12:37PM Bootes said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This is how I think of it. Anything made my Infinity War = Call of Duty. Anything made by Treyarch = pretend it doesn't exist.
Reply

Posted: Jul 10th 2009 8:14AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
If they want to attract the casuals so bad, they need to call it Modern Warfare Party and put mushrooms on the box.
Reply

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 7:26PM KiloTangoBrovo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I wouldn't hesitate buying it if it was labeled Call of Duty 6: Modern Warfare 2 because any game with two numbers in it is awesome to me.....

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 7:28PM tsoulx said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Brand name sells more, and they can tote later on numbers like "Call of Duty series has sold 'X' Million copies to date." It was really stupid for them to think they could "start up" a new "brand" without the established name presence. Think of how many Mario games have sold well because the blue/red plumber was attached.

This is a smart thing as this allowed them to "branch off" the CoD brand. Modern Warfare 2, soon to be followed up by World at War 2. Next up will be Call of Duty: Future Warfare. Supposedly Inf Ward is working on a futuristic warfare title, but you can bet adding CoD to the title will help. It helped the Battlefield series.

So we probably won't see another "Numbered" game in the series for a while. World at War wasn't even referred to as CoD5: WaW, just CoD: WaW. This is the same thing the Grand Theft Auto series did with GTA3, then it was Vice City, San Andreas, etc.

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 7:33PM JXCGunrunna said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Thats a good point. GTA used the subtitles tho because they were all on the same engine. CoD 2, CoD4, W@W, and MW2 all use the same engine and starting with 4, they all have the subtitles instead of numbers. Hopefully IW moves up to idtech 5 sooner or later.
Reply

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 7:46PM ZombieHuggles said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It wasn't stupid. I know that W@W sold way more than it should have because it carried the CoD surname. But that doesn't mean that MW2 wouldn't have sold really well itself. It'll simply sell more because a large portion of consumers by names.

Starting their own brand was a good chance to be recognized as their own franchise with their own timeline.

Maybe next year we'll see Call of Duty: Mario at War?
Reply

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 10:15PM Vidikron said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
"I know that W@W sold way more than it should have because it carried the CoD surname"

Bullshit. W@W sold well because it's a good game. Otherwise it wouldn't have lasted so long as one of the top Live games and the map packs wouldn't sell millions. It would have quickly fallen off the charts.
Reply

Posted: Jul 10th 2009 1:37AM ZombieHuggles said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
"Bullshit. W@W sold well because it's a good game"

Lots of great games don't sell well at all. A games quality is never the sole reason for it's popularity. Call of Duty is a well-known, popular franchise and W@W came out right after the heavily hyped and loved Call of Duty 4. The game could have been absolute crap and sold nearly as well.
Reply

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 7:32PM jediyoshi said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Hey this story looks familiar.

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 7:36PM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
does anyone besides me see the WASHINGTON D.C Capital BUILDING in ruins in the background!!?!?! cause i do and it just made me want it that much more

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 7:57PM darkinchworm said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
TERRORIST
Reply

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 8:01PM Bravo9zero said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Isaac
And Call of duty: Modern Warfare 2, Doesn't sound generic?
Modern Warfare 2 was a much better title..


Reply

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 8:37PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Im going to take a good guess and say that activision MADE infinity ward put the Call Of Duty name on it for a few reason the main one being MONEY.

Infinity ward originally wanted to set Modern Warfare apart because of the problem they have with call of duty right now. They wanted to own the IP themselves and not have activision lay claim to it again and let Treyarch mess up their own franchise. While I am pleased that W@W did not suck quite clearly enough as CoD3 did the fact remains that Infinity Ward builds the engine for the game and then is forced to turn over their engine to Treyarch so they can copy and paste WW2 models into it. Since the CoD name was added it will help bring recognition to the game but at the cost of Infinity Ward losing the rights to the IP.

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 9:14PM Wickerman22 said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I kind of understand what you're saying, but Activision owns IW and Treyarch. They pretty much make the calls for everything. I feel they (Activision and IW) wanted to branch off a try to better separate what Treyarch does and IW does, but ultimately, because of all the polls, buzz, etc, they simply got scared. I don't blame them. No matter how you look at it, when you have one of the most successful and recognizable video game franchises ever, it's a big gamble to completely remove that branding from the game.

This wasn't "always" the plan as they seem to indicate. They dropped Call of Duty from the name, tried to branch off a new franchise and got scarred and realized "Call of Duty" is so huge and has so much brand power and recognition.
Reply

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 7:48PM hsol said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
It seemed kind of silly to leave CoD out in the first place. Modern Warfare was too generic of a title to make it into a brand name.

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 7:53PM Jechtshot78 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yeah Activision, crack that whip let everyone know whos the asshole boss around here.

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 7:58PM Petebot330 said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Call of Duty 6: Modern Warfare 2--Call with a vengeance, Volume 1.

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 8:03PM Bravo9zero said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Oops ment to type @HSOL
It's 1 in the morning here xD

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 8:09PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@bravo9zero

I ment on the box in the background there is a shadow of the U.S capital building and i was wanting to know if anyone had seen it.

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 8:09PM horngreen said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm glad they spent money on research to tell them the obvious.

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 8:09PM oOWallaceOo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think I am just gonna call it "Postmodern Warfare", I'll refer to Modern Warfare as "Pre-Postmodern Warfare", World at war shall be known as "Classic International Warfare".

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 8:09PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@bravo9zero

oh sorry i just read you other comment saying you werent talking to me sorry

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 8:32PM Jacksons said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'd love to know how many sales will result from those three little words.

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 8:53PM ZayCube said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
@Offtopic: How can I view my previous comments without being have to click on my name or visit the articles I have commented on? Isnt it some kind of profile where I can view my comment historylog or something?

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 8:54PM xboxsonic said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
It should never give up the CoD name.

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 9:40PM Jayslacks said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
This game could be called, "Buttholes and the people who love them 8: The Buttholes from Outerspace" and I'd still buy it. It had my money before I even knew that it existed.

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 9:44PM BoBsS said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well at least it isn't call of duty 6: modern warfare 2 lol

I think Infinity War/Treyarch/Activition should stick to having Call of Duty: x (like modern warfare, world at war).

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 10:08PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
smart move.

Posted: Jul 9th 2009 10:06PM Danzaiver said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Just wait a little and ppl will start calling the game's name wrong like COD 5 Modern Warfare 2 or something like that

Like Vice City San Andreas or GTA 4 China Town wars or who knows... sometimes people amazes me a lot

Posted: Jul 10th 2009 12:05AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Seems to me treyarch would benefit the most from the name change. Infinity ward doesn't need to hold on to any ones coat tails.

Posted: Jul 10th 2009 12:46AM Spike Spiegel Humble Bounty Hun said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Should be Call of Duty: Cash Cows.

Same crap, different maps.

Posted: Jul 10th 2009 9:59AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
That box art is eyeball torture tbh, it's awful.

Posted: Jul 10th 2009 9:22AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2: wtf is call of duty doing here ?

Posted: Jul 10th 2009 3:10PM Johnny Neat said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think it can't hurt and I think it should have been left alone but I see why Infinity Ward was trying to distance itself from the Call of Duty series after Treyarch being allowed back. Plus they, IW, are constantly being associated too often at too many times with Treyarch. So being bundled together is not what IW wants and I can't blame them because they are not one and the same especially in overall quality.

But for everyone out there, leaving the Call of Duty name in there is a win win marketing to the layman wise.

Posted: Jul 10th 2009 10:09AM Walo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Whether it is "COD MW2" or "MW2" its ok to me. The only thing that matters is that they have finally splitted the COD series into the traditional WW2 era games and the MW era. Now everyone can be happy that there will be no more doubts at whats gonna be the era setting of the next COD games.

Posted: Jul 10th 2009 10:25AM buttscratch said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
ok now what is in the collectors edition??????

Posted: Jul 10th 2009 10:47AM Captain Planet Planeteer Power said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I think he was referring to the new Leisure Suit Larry game:

Call of Booty: Modern Whorefare 2

Posted: Jul 10th 2009 1:38PM ChomskyKnows said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
grammar kitty is upset -- you mean "pussies"...or did you mean that Call of Duty's pussy itself is possessing Modern Warfare??? Well then, I stand corrected.

Posted: Jul 10th 2009 4:06PM Amoveo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
So wait Treyarch isn't allowed to make a Call of Duty 5 and Infinity Ward is going to make Call of Duty 4-2? Who is going to make Call of Duty 5 then?

Posted: Jul 10th 2009 5:27PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I have a lot of disdain for this impromptu act.

First and foremost, the Call of Duty name has been tarnished because of Activision's attempts to milk the franchise. The series has become the Guitar Hero and Madden of the FPS genre. Secondly, Treyarch added a plethora of gimmicks in the previous Call of Duty game and the average Call of Duty gamer, who doesn't do any research into a title, will expect those gimmicks to be featured in the game. And when they're not, they'll bitch on the forums.

Finally, this can be seen as a "fuck you" to IW. It became clear after the release of MW 1 that they expressed some interest in splitting from the manacle that has become the Call of Duty series. That sentiment was exacerbated with the subsequent release of World at War. Instead of severing from Activision, IW procured an unofficial split from the Call of Duty series.

This might be a good thing in terms of sales, which is all the mercenaries at Activision care about. But in terms of keeping continuity within the community, this is a man made disaster.

Featured Stories

Engadget

Engadget

TUAW

TUAW

Massively

Massively

WoW

WoW