Initial Modern Warfare 2 budget was 'ridiculous'

by David Hinkle { Nov 3rd 2009 at 7:30PM }

During an interview with Develop, Infinity Ward's front-line man, Robert "fourzerotwo" Bowling, recalled the early planning stages of Modern Warfare 2. Unsurprisingly, publisher and owner Activision was eager to pour money into the development of the COD4 sequel, following the basic business formula: more money = better product = more sales = more money. Infinity Ward followed another school of thought: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

"Much like we don't let ourselves get distracted by hype, if you have excess you feel like you should use excess," Bowling said. Even though Activision "estimated out a ridiculous budget" early on, Infinity Ward "didn't let the budget affect [its] mentality." Since Infinity Ward apparently didn't take the money (or, at least, all of it), we do have a pretty good idea of what Activision spent it on: night-vision goggles for everyone!

Tags: activision, budget, call-of-duty, fourzerotwo, infinity-ward, modern-warfare, modern-warfare-2, robert-bowling

Related From Joystiq

Infinity Ward: Activision didn't want Call of Duty to go Modern
124 days ago
Infinity Ward has no plans for pre-launch Modern Warfare 2 demo
132 days ago
CVG: No multiplayer beta for Modern Warfare 2 [update]
174 days ago

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)

dunemonley13 @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:32PM

Can i say it?

ITS OVER 9000!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ulquiorra Cifer @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:33PM

I respectfully disagree. They should have taken the budget and deliver us a game on a new engine that didn't look like last gen and lasted a decent length. I am proud to say that i will be one of many who will not purchase this crap day one. There will be plenty in the used bins shortly after release, since the single player is only 4-6 hours probably.

Omega2k3 @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:35PM

Oh, yeah, just like the first one. Right??

Bobby Kotick 2: Echoes @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:35PM

Haven't you done enough trolling already?

http://www.joystiq.com/2009/11/03/gamestop-ps3-sales-remain-very-strong-post-price-cut/comments/22807675/

Don't bring this shit into MY territory, mother fucker.

Special Agent Steve @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:38PM

Hey Kotick, how many times was your house egged this Halloween? More than usual? YEAH, THIS IS WHY! Fucker.

Bobby Kotick 2: Echoes @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:42PM

Because we're funding for the sequel of one of the most successful FPSs of 2007?

Makes sense to me.

Special Agent Steve @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:43PM

Yeah, I know. But you still ruined the PC game.

nofriendo @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:44PM

Would you like a knife and fork for those words?

And Ulquiorra Cifer, it doesn't count if you just crawl into a cave after its release date with only your thoughts to vote up your crazed theories.

ejordan @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:45PM

He has a small point. Anyone in government work knows if you don't spend it this year, you won't get it next year.

Bobby Kotick 2: Echoes @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:46PM

I ruined it...

Take that up with the developers, Aspyr, not me.

lenandude @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:46PM

It took me nearly nine hours to complete Modern Warfare's single player on normal difficulty. Even though that is a little short, it was action packed and one of the best games I've ever played. You need to quit your trolling.

WINterfang ( Now with the power to piss you off ) @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:57PM

I think Ulquiorra was being sarcastic on his linked comment.

RKN @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:59PM

I will gladly pay $30 just to play the single-player portion of the game, they should sell SP and MP versions of the game separatedly don't you guys think so?

Bobby Kotick 2: Echoes @ Nov 3rd 2009 8:00PM

Right, because I totally wouldn't charge full price for both...

You can all thank RKN for giving me ideas!

Eh @ Nov 3rd 2009 8:10PM

They should have used as much money as they could. You dont have to add crap for the sake of spending money. More money means they can afford better things for what they currently have, like the best voice actors in the business if they wanted.

Jordan @ Nov 3rd 2009 8:40PM

While I agree they could make the games a little longer, but you are completely and utterly wrong about this game being in the used bins in no time. You do know how many people are waiting for this game JUST to play online, right?

phinnvr6 @ Nov 3rd 2009 8:43PM

With the sales they had an the budget of the first one MW2 should have the biggest baddest single player ever, along with a ton of awesome multiplayer maps, lag free gaming, much better sound effects from the original (they were terrible compared to games like Bad Company and Socom), and just be all around amazing. In addition to this I would expect some free DLC (like Bad Company and Socom have done) sort of as a thank you to all their fans buying their new game, and to ackowledge they are making millions upon millions off it.

Alas none of that will happen, and I will most likely not better getting this. I will keep enjoying amazing games like Demon's Souls, and Uncharted 2 until Bad Company 2 or MAG is released.

iluvmyzune @ Nov 3rd 2009 9:06PM

@dude with weird name whos a fanboy

yes 360 all the way

no to changing modern warfare 2

Sly @ Nov 3rd 2009 9:12PM

the single player might be short, but you forget that the game has competitive multiplayer and spec ops. COD4's online community is still really strong, and i doubt MW2's community will be any different.

Sly @ Nov 3rd 2009 9:14PM

@phinnvr

i dunno, the single player looks pretty epic so far, and all the multiplayer maps look good. and all the spec ops missions i've heard of so far all sound really good. i'd save my judgment for after release if i were you.

but yeah, free DLC would be much appreciated, but will never happen because kotick's a douche.

Adriaan @ Nov 3rd 2009 9:48PM

@ phinnvr6

The terms "bigger" and "baddest" bring back awful memories of Gears of War 2. Let's hope MW2 doesn't go that route.

lenandude @ Nov 3rd 2009 10:01PM

@Eh
You mean they could have gotten celebrities to do voice overs? They probably decided to get unknowns to do the voice-overs because unknowns really want to do as good of a job as they can and might do a better job. And they don't need celebrities for this game. I'm glad they got unknowns. I would rather have that than celebrities.

Dreaded Fear @ Nov 3rd 2009 10:31PM

@phinnvr6

So you played the game... No you didn't so shut up.

Mooninaut [PSN: atayde325] @ Nov 3rd 2009 11:04PM

Dude...
CoD4:Modern Warfare release in 07' I think.
To this day.
Im fraggin people in 30 seconds from game startup to Search & Destroy.
Its crazy easy to find a game.
Unless you dont have an internet connection (which is very few people in this modern age)
I wouldnt expect someone to trade it in.

Sly @ Nov 4th 2009 12:17AM

@lenandude

they actually have some pretty big voice actors in the game. i know 50 cent and the sniper from saving private ryan (who was AMAZING) are voice actors in the game. also the guy who voiced captain price last game.

Bobby Kotick 2: Echoes @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:33PM

You gotta admit, those night-vision goggles are pretty sweet.

CheeziePotato @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:33PM

IW, you should have used some of that money for dedicated servers.

CheeziePotato @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:34PM

And we want Party Chat.

Special Agent Steve @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:36PM

Money was spent to disable party chat. And no amount of money would allow Activision to stop being greedy and give us dedicated servers.. wait, I guess there is.

Dreaded Fear @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:39PM

Lets look at this realistically. Do you really think they will cave in to demands when this whole time they didn't? You really think they created IW.net just to scrape it when the backlash? The best thing people can do is simply not buy the game if they do not feel the need, for whatever reason it may be.

CheeziePotato @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:43PM

IW and Activision isn't going to listen to anyone. They already know their game is going to sell extremely well.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6238659.html?tag=latestheadlines;title;1

lotrfish @ Nov 3rd 2009 8:32PM

It actually cost more money to take away dedicated servers. They had to develop IW.NET and now they have to pay for their own servers. They already had a dedicated server browser (although one that wasn't very good). All they had to do was copy and paste and everyone would be happy. They could have even used the Steam server browser.

XGM @ Nov 3rd 2009 9:12PM

Yea too bad that budget didnt go towards stuff us gamers wanted. MW1 has some sick mods and maps on PC, and not to mention dedicated servers.

context @ Nov 4th 2009 8:24AM

Infinity Ward followed another school of thought: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."

I died a little inside when I read that part. Dedicated servers weren't broke but they still tried to fix them by not having any...

uncle jesse @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:35PM

I'm pretty sure they'd be safe to spend whatever amount they wanted... this ain't Waterworld we're talking about.

Bubbameister33 (Confused by Fanboyism) @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:45PM

Dry land? A mailman giving hope to people in a post apocalyptic future? Kevin Costner playing Robin Hood without an English accent?

Danzaiver @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:35PM

LOL @ the night vision goggles

The first COD MW was the best shooter I have ever played

I am sure COD MW 2 is going to be the best FPS this year

Dreaded Fear @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:36PM

Well, the lower the budget means that they will simply make more profit since the game will sell a gazillion copies either way. It is nice to see a developer who isn't complaining about how games cost too much to make and working within a budget. Of course, that is if he is telling the truth about the matter.

Premature ejaculation man @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:39PM

Unless I'm mistaken, isn't this story saying how MW2 had a ridiculously large budget rather than a small one?

Dreaded Fear @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:40PM

"Since Infinity Ward apparently didn't take the money (or, at least, all of it)"

Bubbameister33 (Confused by Fanboyism) @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:47PM

Someone spoke prematurely.

nofriendo @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:37PM

Activision's not worried. Whatever was spent, times it by a bazillion dollars.

I think Soap Mctavish's face is on the bazillion dollar bill.

khalid @ Nov 3rd 2009 7:43PM

Oh... so how do they explain the fact that MW2 cost £45 to buy compared to the usual price of £35 - £40 for all other games? The excuse at the time was that games development costs had gone up so the MW2 would be a test case to see if they could charge a higher price for the more expensive to develop games:

http://www.mcvuk.com/news/35050/5499-Modern-Warfare-2-to-lead-Xmas-price-hike

Oh, what's that sound I hear? It's the sound of the other foot dropping...