 A reader has some ideas for how Microsoft should handle Call Of Duty in the future and keep it away from the influence of Activision's CEO. Call Of Duty is going to be celebrating its 20th anniversary in October, but that's the least important milestone it's got going at the moment. Microsoft is finally going to be able to buy Activision Blizzard and they've said they may stop the yearly sequels. At the same time, the games are losing players and the general buzz around the series is poor, with the only thing fans have been getting excited about being the older entries getting their online matchmaking back. This year's Call Of Duty is a jumped up piece of DLC and I imagine that's going to be very obvious, which is going to lead to even more negativity. That in turn is going to make the older games seem even more popular and I don't think you have to be too clairvoyant to imagine that Activision is going to try and take advantage of that with new remasters and remakes. As has been pointed out by others, Call Of Duty is getting to that sort of age where people have grown up with it and even though the game hasn't really changed that much over the years it's the earliest entries they remember with the most fondest, just because it's mixed in with nostalgia for when they were younger and what else they were doing at that time. I'm sure people don't need nostalgia explaining to them, considering that's all that movies and TV seem interested in at the moment, but games aren't much different. But for a series like Call Of Duty it doesn't really make much sense. The easiest way to make new games more like the old ones is just strip out all the modern quality of life options that people have got use to and remove two-thirds of the modes, but somehow I don't think anyone's going to be happy with that. I think what actually needs to happen is two-fold. The first is stop the yearly sequels and make them every other year or, id){kind=link}
A reader has some ideas for how Microsoft should handle Call Of Duty in the future and keep it away from the influence of Activision’s CEO.
Call Of Duty is going to be celebrating its 20th anniversary in October, but that’s the least important milestone it’s got going at the moment. Microsoft is finally going to be able to buy Activision Blizzard and they’ve said they may stop the yearly sequels. At the same time, the games are losing players and the general buzz around the series is poor, with the only thing fans have been getting excited about being the older entries getting their online matchmaking back.
This year’s Call Of Duty is a jumped up piece of DLC and I imagine that’s going to be very obvious, which is going to lead to even more negativity. That in turn is going to make the older games seem even more popular and I don’t think you have to be too clairvoyant to imagine that Activision is going to try and take advantage of that with new remasters and remakes.
As has been pointed out by others, Call Of Duty is getting to that sort of age where people have grown up with it and even though the game hasn’t really changed that much over the years it’s the earliest entries they remember with the most fondest, just because it’s mixed in with nostalgia for when they were younger and what else they were doing at that time.
I’m sure people don’t need nostalgia explaining to them, considering that’s all that movies and TV seem interested in at the moment, but games aren’t much different. But for a series like Call Of Duty it doesn’t really make much sense. The easiest way to make new games more like the old ones is just strip out all the modern quality of life options that people have got use to and remove two-thirds of the modes, but somehow I don’t think anyone’s going to be happy with that.