Will Activision rethink The COD yearly installments?

The reception for IW has been rough. Personally, I like the game, but most seem rather disappointed and only bought the game for the remaster of MW. Is it time for Activision to rethink their yearly release strategy?

I can't see them doing that anytime soon. While I don't really know what the sales are for Infinite Warfare right now I'd be willing to bet that they are still very healthy numbers.

Hell yeah, I know this has been said before, but the COD franchise is the Madden of shooters. They knew that the sales would be bad, that's why the included the best COD game as a bonus for buying IW. But nobody is stupid, most people know that within a month or 2, COD4 will be sold separate as a download.

The COD community sent a CLEAR message to Activision this year, so hopefully they get the massage and rethink the COD brand or it's going to be all downhill for the franchise from now on.

It all depends on the sales of this years release.

If they are making a healthy profit they will most likely continue , if it´s a flop financially then my guess is they will do a Ubisoft and call a break on COD after next years which is already in development.

I don't think the yearly installments would be a problem if they would change up the setting. I think what is more important is they need to take a break from the overdone futuristic setting. People are sick and tired of it. From the moment that Infinite Warfare was announced, it was receiving a lot of criticism for using another futuristic setting and the trailer even became the second most disliked video in the history of Youtube.

Other futuristic shooters like Titanfall 2 are selling poorly as well. Meanwhile, the new Battlefield game which has a World War 1 setting is selling very well and exceeding expectations because in the midst of all of the futuristic shooters that have been released over the past few years, Battlefield's World War 1 setting feels like a breath of fresh air.

I guarantee if Activision announces that next year's Call of Duty will mark the franchise's big return to World War 2, the reveal will receive tons of positive feedback and it will be the best selling Call of Duty game in many years.

It would not surprise me if they finally took a year off and said it was because they released two games this year.

I skipped their last WW2 Cod and I will skip any WW2 because they just suck for all the FPS. WW2 FPS are not fun and offer nothing as dull setting. futuristic or Fantasy setting does offer more.

that's just your opinion though. don't say it as though it's fact

Probably not. It's not like Activision has any other franchise that can reliably generate revenue. Blizzard do their own things, so unless they want to give Blizzard more influence over the Activision side of things, nothing will change.

More likely, they'll rethink the package formula. Right now it's just the same damn package every damn year; 5 1/2 hour scripted campaign, gimmicky multiplayer, zombie mode. They may take a second look at that, but even that is unlikely to result in any drastic change; Activision is not known for anything other than subtle incrementalism.

Doubtful. I'm all for COD taking a break, refreshing and trying something a little different. But it wont happen

Does activision really have any other big ips?

As far as I can could tell, it's just COD and Skylanders.

@wiouds: Futuristic settings in COD offer complete bs, lame ass guns, maps, and load outs. They've taken a great online shooter and turned it into this "everybody should be equal" sjw bs game. Everything they've done is to allow even the worst cod player the ability to get kills because of lame maps and HORRIBLE lag and map design. I'd take WaW over this future bs any day of the week.

That might be the reason. Sucks for them that they stopped courting devs that approach the games fresh, and just got copy and paste devs to do their jobs year after year. That being said, I like the IW campaign so far, even though after like 3hrs its getting repetitive as hell. This is my first COD campaign since Black Ops though, if that means much.

Unlikely. They got 3 studios working around the clock for those yearly releases. That's alot of people and a lot of cash put in to make sure these installments get there on time. I'm guessing even tough they sold half of what they usually sell, half of a crap load of money is still a very good amount of money.

Sorry, I did not know about I had to write for the lower thinking people.

I prefer the futuristic settings and themes of the current Call of Duty games myself. I'm not necessarily automatically opposed to them but it would really depend on how they are done.

I loved the modern warfare series SP campaigns. Just that they were too short Imo. Have not played any other, well I did play a little bit of Black Ops when it first came out and it wasn't bad by any means. The war stuff just hasn't interested me in a while.

you just have to write with an understanding of the concept of opinions

they have dozens of IPs, they just sit on them and don't do anything with them.

*oh you said "big" IPs...ummmm no, probably not. I Don't know I personally would love another Prototype game, I loved the first one and I thought the second was OK.

You know not a single problem you talk about is from the setting itself. They can make a "WW2" setting and have every problem you tall about.

How do you write for someone that does not understand the concept of opinions?

I am talking about WW2. You know who fought it, the weapon used and the area it was fought in it. How does it offer more that what you can get from futuristic or fantasy setting?

so ultimately what you're saying is any video game based on events that have occurred offers less than one based on events that are imaginary

You may know a few

Skylanders, Destiny, Guitar Hero

Not to mention Blizzard´s IP´s

Wow, Starcraft, Overwatch, Diablo , Hearthstone,

Since it is Activision-Blizzard and not just Activision alone.

agreed