Activision's always been a company with a finger squarely placed upon the pulse of the gaming culture. It knows what we need -- and what we need is more World War 2-based first-person shooters. Call of Duty's part-time developer Infinity Ward struggled with that notion for years according to a recent Official PlayStation Magazine interview with Ward's Vince Zampella. If Activision had its way, Zampella explained, Modern Warfare probably never would have happened. Whoa, did anyone else just get a really weird chill down their spine?
Zampella said Activision "thought working on a modern game was risky," and went so far as to conduct "market research" supporting its fears to quell Infinity Ward's desire for modernization. We're not sure which market Activision surveyed, however, as Call of Duty: Modern Warfare moved over 14 million units. We bet the publisher talked to WWII veterans. "Yeah, our war was the coolest! Kids today with their AC-130s. That's not fightin'. That's just flyin' a big, bomb droppin' robot kite."
Reader Comments (109)
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 5:03PM (Unverified) said
So instead of a generic WW2 shooter they made a generic modern-day shooter? Good job, guys.
*hides*
Reply
*hides*
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 5:08PM (Unverified) said
Well I'll say this. I think it's possible for something to be generic and high quality at the same time.
Reply
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 5:11PM (Unverified) said
It's really not generic, the class system is incredibly well implemented, the multiplayer is extremely fun, and just really everything about is anything but generic.
Reply
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 5:27PM (Unverified) said
@cafecito: Well, if you want to use that kind of thinking, then Gran Turismo, Uncharted, GTA IV, Any sports game, Street fighter, and Left 4 Dead are all generic. Not a new idea, but well done.
Reply
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 5:42PM CaramelZappa said
It depends on what you consider generic. If you just look at trailers and gameplay videos, yea, it just looks like a military shooter, big deal.
But when you start playing the multiplayer, it's so rewarding, from perks to customized loadouts. Other games have tried these, but I don't think any of them have got it as perfectly has COD4 did. Add the best matchmaking system in the industry, and you have an online experience few could match. Maybe the setting and look of the game is generic, but when you're playing it it doesn't feel like "just another shooter"
Reply
But when you start playing the multiplayer, it's so rewarding, from perks to customized loadouts. Other games have tried these, but I don't think any of them have got it as perfectly has COD4 did. Add the best matchmaking system in the industry, and you have an online experience few could match. Maybe the setting and look of the game is generic, but when you're playing it it doesn't feel like "just another shooter"
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 5:58PM Stumpymcdonut said
You're all getting mixed up with what he meant by generic. Yes, _it wasn't generic in the sense that it was a good game to play_, but what it is actually based on (Soldiers fighting terrorists, with class-based online team game modes - to filter it down to its simplest) was pretty damn generic. I think that's what he meant.
Reply
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 6:04PM TheDarkWayne said
@Tracer Left 4 Dead and Uncharted were new ideas. What game had coop AND competitive in one mode like L4D? What game had combined Gears of War shooting with Jak and Daxter platforming? And yeah, as far as setting goes, Modern Combat is just as generic as WW2, and the single player campaign was just about the definition of generic, the only thing i can think of that was new in that was maybe the javelin missiles
Reply
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 6:23PM (Unverified) said
Neuromancer is a frickin idiot just look at the avatar that says it all!
Reply
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 6:29PM (Unverified) said
Some of you are really stupid. Are you having a Clinton moment with the whole "It depends on what the definition of is is."
Reply
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 6:52PM Cafecito said
As Huehuahuehuahuehe said, I think it's generic in that exact sense: It's a military FPS set in mostly present time, and we've seen thousands of those (Modern Warfare must be the best outta the whole bunch, tho). But, WW2 shooters are even MORE generic nowadays.
Reply
Posted: Oct 8th 2009 9:30AM Walo said
I don't know why you people toss the word "generic" around like it's a bad thing. COD4 may be a "generic" shooter, but its one of the best, if not The Best one around. Remember videogames don't need to change drastically to be good, sometimes a fresh coat with a few additions and modifications and some good polish is what is needed to make a good franchise "impressive".
Reply
Posted: Oct 9th 2009 4:31AM TheDarkWayne said
the AC-130 was just a fancy version of the bomber levels in other CoDs and war games, as for the sniping, well, if you've ever played Sniper Elite they wouldnt seem that impressive
Reply
Posted: Oct 11th 2009 7:51PM (Unverified) said
I hope everyone was as entertained by the way this all went as I was.
Reply
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 5:15PM (Unverified) said
Does it matter? Many things can be spelled differently. Color/colour, Bobby Kotick/money grabbing douchebag. No different.
Reply
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 5:19PM Uncle Jesse said
The Medal of HONOUR series and WWII shooters can still be done well, but I'm pretty sure everyone is glad that the new game is set in modern times. CoD4:MW is a lot of gamers' FAVOURITE all-time game. Everyone in my NEIGHBOURHOOD still plays it almost every day. Having it set in modern times just adds some much needed COLOUR to the series.
Reply
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 5:27PM Zoot Suit Jedi Grammar Hammer En said
I think that "Honor" must be used here if it's a play on words regarding the Medal of Honor game series.
Unless, of course, that is how they spelled it on the box in the land of "ours" not "ors"
Reply
Unless, of course, that is how they spelled it on the box in the land of "ours" not "ors"
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 6:16PM maveric101 said
well Joystiq is based in the US i think, so technically "honour" would be the "foreign" term here... not that i care at all. i can't believe that guy bothered to say anything.
also, fuck activision
Reply
also, fuck activision
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 6:19PM maveric101 said
also, you know what they say... hindsight is 20/20. corporations are generally hesitant to try new things, and for good reason.
Reply
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 6:35PM (Unverified) said
Yeah, I know.
Activision is made up of self-promoting assholes.
Reply
Activision is made up of self-promoting assholes.
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 5:10PM darkinchworm said
I'm probably going to be set on fire for this one, but...
Maybe they polled Jews?
Reply
Maybe they polled Jews?
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 5:16PM JXCGunrunna said
You mean because W@W was a skin of CoD4 with a fun co-op mode? I think that and the name is what sold W@W.
Reply
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 6:25PM (Unverified) said
@dark,
Wow really? You make a comment like that and it's considered humorous and get's up voted? Well, then again this is joystiq.
Reply
Wow really? You make a comment like that and it's considered humorous and get's up voted? Well, then again this is joystiq.
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 7:44PM (Unverified) said
@wages
Know what the best part about Jew jokes are? We (Jews) came up with the funniest ones. Guess who coined the term self-hating Jew? Again, us jews. Frankly, I found his joke pretty damn funny. Although if he had said gassed instead of set on fire, I might have laughed even louder.
Hi, I'm Avatar. I'm Jewish and I approve this message.
Reply
Know what the best part about Jew jokes are? We (Jews) came up with the funniest ones. Guess who coined the term self-hating Jew? Again, us jews. Frankly, I found his joke pretty damn funny. Although if he had said gassed instead of set on fire, I might have laughed even louder.
Hi, I'm Avatar. I'm Jewish and I approve this message.
Posted: Oct 8th 2009 1:13AM darkinchworm said
Try not to take offense, for I discriminate equally.
Reply
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 5:06PM Cheesus Crust said
Its natural, I'm guessing ANY company wouldn't want a cash cow to try something totally diff from their current(and successful) work, but in the end since they provided funding for it, it's all good.
Reply
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 5:13PM (Unverified) said
You're just now hating Activision? Activision is this generation's EA. EA got their act together and it paid off.
Reply
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 5:45PM sonicspike41 said
So does that mean next generation Activision will become the great company that EA currently (mostly) is?
I wonder who's going to be the day old used bag of douche next time around.
Reply
I wonder who's going to be the day old used bag of douche next time around.
Posted: Oct 8th 2009 8:12AM Angry Frank said
EA got its act together. Activision got Blizzard.
Apples and oranges.
Reply
Apples and oranges.
Posted: Oct 7th 2009 5:08PM TonyRockyHorror said
I quit playing WWII shooters when Day of Defeat went to the Source engine.
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.
Featured Stories
The most popular posts
in the last 7 days
- Vita 'UMD Passport' won't be offered in US 220 comments
- Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning review: A tempting fate 153 comments
- David Jaffe leaves Eat Sleep Play, layoffs hit developer [Update] 108 comments
- Don't call it a remake: Final Fantasy X is a 'remaster,' to be clear 95 comments
- Battleship movie adapted into FPS by Double Helix 93 comments











