I have an amazing idea for an FPS MMO based around call of duty they should hire me!!! or atleast get my opinions! :(

yeah i agree with all of u treyarch dose support PC more then anything i would say, but like what TexasRebel said --- Right part of the staff, i bet if it was just IW then coduo would proble be better lol. i just realy dont like any of the treyarch thats my personal opinion i think they failed on cod3 and failed on codwaw they rushed on codwaw thats why its basicly a modders dream to make codwaw alot better, im more of a console player and a rushed game is a fail, nothing realy gona change my mind on how Treyarch sucks period.

edited on Nov. 19, 2009 11:46 am by liltc64

I'm not sure who owns the IP on Call of Duty. I'm sure its Activision though. Activision know that brands die, and they are going to drain Call of Duty for all its worth! they are actually considering turning it into an MMO subscription based FPS.. Errrrr wtf? Best thing we can hope for, is for IW to leave Activision, make a new IP, and get a better publisher.. because Activision are like the Imperial Empire for games. If you read that Bob Kotick interview, you will know what im talking about.

Well obviously liltc64 you don't belong in here and thats just my opinion. We are a group of modders/mappers that support pc stuff and for you to come in and knock something and all you do is play it on console well thats just down right idiotic. Console games are far different from pc games and if you've ever taken the time to check it out you would understand and notice the differences. Don't come in here dissing on companies without checking them out 100%

I myself have played console and pc versions of all the cod games and I think treyarch has done the best.

Not only is Call of Duty successful but when Treyarch and Tripwire did Red Orchestra it became a hit so I think that goes to show that they have a few more games that are hits because as far as I know Infinity ward only has one thing they are based on.

You do not need to personally attack litt for his opinion, I actually agree with him on the failure of cod3, yes a console game but nonetheless a failure. As for WaW I have not played it since my computer can not run and will make no comments about its gameplay or the gameplay of mw2 either. Do I believe there should be dedicated servers, yes but at the same time I understand money makes a big part of the decision making process.

I also do not see how you can make the statement

1.) unless your his friend or relative I would not believe you to know if he does not play PC at all.

2.) Playing games on console is not idiotic. They add for another type of gamer in the world.

I believe this topic was made to assess the news of a new developer coming into the rotation of making cod games, and give input on the developers. But I do not believe it is a place to attack someone for disagreeing with your viewpoint.

The forums are for opinions, but such opinions should begin with "I think" and not be direct statements as if they are facts.

"Because if we look at the facts:

COD1 = (IW fresh from MOHAA)
CODUO = (Treyarch 1 Year Development)
COD2 = (IW 2 Year Development)
COD3 = (Treyarch 1 Year Development)
COD4 = (IW 2 Year Development)
CODWAW = (Treyarch 2 Year Development)

Since CODWAW added 3rd person back to SP after about 5 years and a burn system + decapitation system + dyn water + 4 player co-op AND yet their having to use IWs code each time and work around their files I'd say their overhauls are pretty darn good.

Treyarch now has time to work on their COD games, but even during the 1 year dev cycles of the past they did an amazing job... anyone like UO?"

This is a quote from me from another forum where the same argument started, Treyarch are now in control of their Dev cycles and they really show it with CODWAW, not only did they take IWs engine but they upgraded it and they supported the community at the same time.

I'm not saying which developer is better, but competition between developers means better results for us, Treyarch however have shown that on top of making good games they actually care about what we want.


edited on Nov. 19, 2009 07:45 pm by techno2sl

CoD3 wasn't even a year, it was just 8 months. Pure crunch from the get go.
I thought it was a good game for having such a short development time; campaign was alright but the MP was really fun for what it was. No where near a "failure" in my opinion.

Quantum of Solace by Treyarch was decent too, although they dropped support for it really fast (was supposed to have a map pack [you would get a token in the 'special edition' of the game or could later purchase on Marketplace] but MP1 never got released). Not necessarily a CoD game, but it used IW's technology.

edited on Nov. 19, 2009 08:11 pm by SparkyMcSparks

You both are right on taking in the consideration of how much time they did have, and what they did accomplish.

Adding another developer party into the mix may lead to new and interesting ideas for the series. As you stated its a healthy competition that can benefit the player.

The reason I did not like cod3 was because I could not get into the game, and that may have just been me not liking to play consoles all that often to begin with.

CoD will die someday when people finally realize that Activision is sucking every last cent out of the series.
Not unlike now where half the Steam boycott group was playing Modern Warfare 2 on the day of release (oh well it gave me a good laugh).

A couple of corrections:

@sherlokpwnz -



Treyarch had nothing to with Red Orchestra. That was entirely Tripwire.

@techno2sl



The only time Treyarch used IW's code was for UO and for WaW. For all their other COD titles they used their own engine - the Treyarch NGL engine. This was used on COD: Big Red One and COD 3, as well as all their Spider Man titles.