Support NeoGAF

[Thick Thighs Save Lives]

The latest entry in Activision Blizzard's popular Call of Duty video-game series was made in half the time of previous iterations, a fact that may be contributing to a spate of bad reviews, according to people familiar with the development process.

Critics have panned the game, the first big release since Microsoft Corp. closed its $69 billion acquisition of Activision last month, saying the storyline feels rushed. Most Call of Duty games are developed in around three years, but the bulk of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare III, which comes out Friday, was made in less than a year and a half, said the people, who asked to not be identified because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly. The abridged production schedule proved stressful for the development team, they said.

Call of Duty has generated more than $30 billion in revenue over the last two decades. It’s the most important series in Activision’s portfolio, with thousands of developers across the world. New Call of Duty games will always top the charts, but some of the makers of Modern Warfare III say they hope their new corporate owners don’t judge them too harshly for the negative reception after a shortened development cycle that was beyond the studio’s control.

The process was hurried because this year’s game was conceived to fill a gap in the release schedule following the delay of another Call of Duty title previously planned for 2023. Call of Duty: Modern Warfare III was originally pitched to staff at Foster City, California-based developer Sledgehammer Games as an expansion to last year’s title, but it morphed into a full sequel during development, Bloomberg earlier reported.

An Activision spokesman denied that Modern Warfare III was originally an expansion and said it was conceived as a “premium game” from the start. But more than a dozen current and former Call of Duty developers said that conflicts with what they were told at the time. Some of the employees said the plan was left ambiguous during the first few months of development, while others said they were directly told it was an expansion. All said they were under the impression it was an expansion until much later in the process.

Aaron Halon, the studio head of Sledgehammer Games, said in an interview that some team members may have been convinced the new game was an expansion because it is “a new type of direct sequel” to the previous game. Unlike previous Call of Duty titles, Modern Warfare III allows players to transfer their weapons and gear from last year’s game.

Some staff at Sledgehammer, who had to work nights and weekends to finish the game, said they felt betrayed by the company because they were promised they wouldn’t have to go through another shortened timeline after the release of their previous game, Call of Duty: Vanguard, which was made under a similarly constrained development cycle.

For the first few months of the project, which was codenamed Jupiter, the story was conceived as a smaller-scale Modern Warfare spinoff set in Mexico that would be more achievable on a short timeline than the usual globe-trotting escapades of a full new campaign. But in the summer of last year, Activision executives rebooted that story, and told the developers that instead they would be making a direct sequel to Modern Warfare 2 centering on the villain Vladimir Makarov and featuring missions all across the world.

The reboot ate into the schedule and forced the developers to complete the new campaign in roughly 16 months — the shortest development time for a new Call of Duty game in years.

The game’s story has received bleak reviews from the largest gaming outlets. GameSpot critic S.E. Doster offered a “mediocre” 5 out of 10 rating, and a declaration that the story “doesn’t do much worth seeing.” At IGN, reviewer Simon Cardy gave the game a 4 out of 10, and wrote that the game “feels hastily put together,” adding that “if this is the quality we've come to expect from Call of Duty campaigns, maybe it's for the best if a year or two is taken to reset and raise this low bar back to the heights of old.”

Sledgehammer’s Halon said in a statement that the game was “a labor of love” and that his team has “worked hard to deliver on this vision, which has been years in the making.”

Analysts said that even a critical flop probably won’t change much about the series over the next few years.

“I don't see it having a lasting impact on the franchise or on any of Microsoft's plans with the franchise even if it is universally panned,” said Kevin Tsao, an analyst with Bloomberg Intelligence. But a consistent drop in quality starting with this game, he said, might drive Microsoft to shift its strategy or cut back on the annual release schedule that Call of Duty has followed since 2005.

After Call of Duty: Vanguard, developers at Sledgehammer had originally pitched a project codenamed Anvil that would be set in the universe of the company’s futuristic 2014 game Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare, according to the people familiar. But before it could get very far, Anvil was shelved as the company was informed it was instead working on another Modern Warfare.

The nature of this new release was left hazy, but the scope was ambitious and included an update to the popular zombies mode, several multiplayer maps and a single-player campaign. Few developers were surprised when they were later told that the release would be a sequel to last year’s Modern Warfare II, but the shortened cycle took a toll on Sledgehammer’s staff.

Developers also said they were frustrated at having to run their content by executives from Infinity Ward, the Activision studio that’s normally responsible for the Modern Warfare series. Staff on the game said they dealt with inefficiencies waiting on feedback and making significant and sometimes unwanted changes based on directives from above.

New ‘Call of Duty’ Draws Harsh Reviews After Rushed Development

Game is the first in the series after Microsoft’s big acquisition.

www.bloomberg.com

 

[balls of snow]

 

[SJRB]

Imagine having to work nights and weekends for this piece of shit.

Fucking videogames, man.

 

[Fake]

Is that obvious?

 

[MiguelItUp]

The development length was incredibly short compared to the norm, so it was bound to happen. It's just absurd that it's glorified DLC and they still charged $70 for it, lol. I wish fans would retaliate against this behavior, but unfortunately they're not going to.

 

[analog_future]

Imagine having to work nights and weekends for this piece of shit.

Fucking videogames, man.

It’s why this whole “lazy devs” rhetoric is such a crock of shit.

99% of the time, when a game is bad, it’s because of poor leadership/poor vision/corporate execs rushing the game to release. Not laziness.

 

[Wastelander92]

More of that quality Microsoft first party output.

 

[GreatnessRD]

It's the same fucking game. How it possibly be any worst than it already is? That's a bunch of bullshit, lmao.

 

[Sushi_Combo]

Just be thankful that Microsoft saved this studio.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

how is MS/Xbox going to deal with this shit around Activision and Blizzard is going to be the 'Career Moment' Phil is dreaming or having nightmares of.

Is clear that devs on both companies (A-B) expect big changes in leadership or at least in their pipelines or/and culture.

Shit is going to get pretty real.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

COD games rotate every 3 years from team to team. Yes, if you read the wikis each team might help out another team but in general IW, Treyarch and Sledgehammer focus on their COD game every 3 years.

Sledgehammer is junk though. Here's hoping MWIII MP turns out well. I dont see how it can get any easier. All they got to do is update maps from 2009 as their main focus.

Then again it's Sledgehammer. Never mind 3 years dev time. You can give them 30 years and it'll still probably stink. By the looks of it, they already messed up the SP campaign.

 

[adamsapple]

Then again it's Sledgehammer. Never mind 3 years dev time. You can give them 30 years and it'll still probably stink. By the looks of it, they already messed up the SP campaign.

It sounds like Infinity Ward was the problem here

 

[diffusionx]

For me it's how you literally boot up MW2 to play it. Imagine paying $70 for this piece of shit.

 

[The Infectious Paradox]

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'd like to see COD succeed. I have not been interested in the last 3 iterations. But I'd like to see them change the formula and make something new and worthwhile.

Idk if it's possible at this point with what they've been producing lately, but I'd like to be proven wrong.

 

[wolffy66]

Nobody cares about the campaign. It could literally not exist and people would still buy it

 

[adamsapple]

Maybe I'm crazy, but I'd like to see COD succeed. I have not been interested in the last 3 iterations. But I'd like to see them change the formula and make something new and worthwhile.

Idk if it's possible at this point with what they've been producing lately, but I'd like to be proven wrong.

It will 'succeed' regardless of reviews. The audience that buys CoD every year is mostly made up of people who will buy it regardless of what it scores. Just like Fifa.

 

[The Infectious Paradox]

It will 'succeed' regardless of reviews. The audience that buys CoD every year is mostly made up of people who will buy it regardless of what it scores. Just like Fifa.

Yeah.. and thats the worst case scenario. They won't see these effects.. but man, as one of the people thats disappointed I wish I could support the franchise

I say "succeed" in redeeming themselves with mass audiences

 

[M.W.]

It’s why this whole “lazy devs” rhetoric is such a crock of shit.

99% of the time, when a game is bad, it’s because of poor leadership/poor vision/corporate execs rushing the game to release. Not laziness.

Well, they could be there browsing NeoGaf instead of working.

 

[ReBurn]

Yeah.. and thats the worst case scenario. They won't see these effects.. but man, as one of the people thats disappointed I wish I could support the franchise

I say "succeed" in redeeming themselves with mass audiences

Mass audiences don't seem to have a problem with stuff like this, though. They buy every year.

 

[The Pleasure]

Why are people surprised? Sledgehammer makes the worst COD games. Treyarch is the best. Followed by Infinity ward, then Toys for Bob. Then Raven. Then the interns. Then Kotick. Then maybe sledgehammer.

 

[darkangel-212559]

More of that quality Microsoft first party output.

Yikes that's ban hammer baiting if I ever saw it.

 

[diffusionx]

Why are people surprised? Sledgehammer makes the worst COD games. Treyarch is the best. Followed by Infinity ward, then Toys for Bob. Then Raven. Then the interns. Then Kotick. Then maybe sledgehammer.

this isn't a Shithammer game though, it's a DLC pack for MW2.

 

[ResilientBanana]

More of that quality Microsoft first party output.

MS had nothing to do with this and is all the more reason Activision should have been purchased

 

[twilo99]

For me the important part of the game, which is the multiplayer bit, feels and looks quite nice.. from what I see so far, its a solid CoD game. Is it as good as your favorite CoD of the past? Probably not, but you are also older now.. remember that lol

 

[twilo99]

MS had nothing to do with this

I think a lot of people around here think that Spencer was the lead dev on the project

 

[DaciaJC]

On the one hand, pretty much everyone saw this coming after the rumors of a glorified expansion pack turned into Activision's promise of a "premium standalone game" for 2023. No way you're putting out a fully fleshed-out and polished CoD game with such a quick turnaround time.

On the other hand, it seems like most criticism is being leveled at the crappy campaign - but if the whole "play through the story a week before launch" deal didn't exist and reviewers were playing the campaign and multiplayer at the same time and scoring them together, I imagine the Metacritic would be significantly higher than it is now, since impressions of the MP beta were generally positive and Sledgehammer seems to have made some decent changes per community feedback in time for launch.

 

[Kilau]

More of that quality Microsoft first party output.

But all the sudden MS will likely have the best selling game of the year in NA.

 

[Rocco Schiavone]

Imagine having to work nights and weekends for this piece of shit.

Fucking videogames, man.

More like fucking Craptivision, man .

 

[Wastelander92]

MS had nothing to do with this and is all the more reason Activision should have been purchased

But Xbox fanboys on Twitter are saying otherwise...

 

[The Pleasure]

this isn't a Shithammer game though, it's a DLC pack for MW2.

Fuck that. This is now Battleborn: Modern Warfare III

 

[chromhound]

It was supposed to be a DLC lol

 

[TheMan]

I wonder how Phil Spencer is feeling- all the time and money put into closing the ABK acquisition, and the first COD game to release post acquisition is complete shit.

 

[Snowdonhoffen]

But Xbox fanboys on Twitter are saying otherwise...

Yup, some of them are even saying that the only reason why COD is now being criticized is because it belongs to MS lol

 

[NoLootBoxDev]

It’s why this whole “lazy devs” rhetoric is such a crock of shit.

99% of the time, when a game is bad, it’s because of poor leadership/poor vision/corporate execs rushing the game to release. Not laziness.

No better way to say it. It is not the developers, it is the management. When management is shit, you expect shit results. This was supposed to be a DLC, but who made the last call to change it to a supposed Full Game? Yes, management.

Who places the poor bastards to work weekends/nights, bringing the morale to the floor? Management again.

 

[knguyen]

They could give 2 shit about harsh reviews as long as there are idiots buying there game.

 

[DrFigs]

Is it possible that this is also the cheapest COD game in a number of years? Less dev time, reused maps, 3 hour campaign... This may be the most profitable pos cod game ever....

 

[Operations66]

The worst thing about Call of Duty games is that they take up half of your console's memory. It's ridiculous!

 

[Elder Legend]

More of that quality Microsoft first party output.

Hey dingus you realize this game was made and decided upon before MS even purchased ABK? The deal didn't even close until October of last month. Smoke more of whatever you are smoking you silly plastic toy warrior.

 

[FalsettoVibe]

But all the sudden MS will likely have the best selling game of the year in NA.

The best selling game that they had absolutely nothing to do with and also sells better outside their platform.

 

[twilo99]

But Xbox fanboys on Twitter are saying otherwise...

Lots of confused people on x.

The only thing Microsoft has to do with this game is making money from it...

 

[Kilau]

The best selling game that they had absolutely nothing to do with and also sells better outside their platform.

Of course but it’s theirs now. I wonder if we will actually get sales numbers for a MS game.

 

[twilo99]

They could give 2 shit about harsh reviews as long as there are idiots buying there game.

People buying a game they enjoy are idiots? What games do you buy which somehow don't make you an idiot?

 

[FalsettoVibe]

Of course but it’s theirs now. I wonder if we will actually get sales numbers for a MS game.

We will get whatever sounds better. Engagement numbers or sales numbers. lol.
In the case of CoD.....probably both.

 

[kikkis]

I believe the Activision executive saying it was full experience from the get go. Sledgehammer just wasnt informed well.

If it was supposed to be some minor dlc and they say otherwise, you could sue Activision for fraud.

 

[kikkis]

The worst thing about Call of Duty games is that they take up half of your console's memory. It's ridiculous!

Yet some people insist there is hidden plan to take as much as space possible to prevent other games from being played.

But its really a double edged sword. When they uninstall cod at some point, people aint gonna bother cleaning up space for cod again.

 

[knguyen]

People buying a game they enjoy are idiots? What games do you buy which somehow don't make you an idiot?

I guess you are one of those who buy call of duty year after year? Same with those who buy FIFA, Madden every year. I just call you guys what the same way Activision, EA do, nothing personal.

 

[mckmas8808]

Nobody cares about the campaign. It could literally not exist and people would still buy it

Not true at all.

 

[twilo99]

I guess you are one of those who buy call of duty year after year? Same with those who buy FIFA, Madden every year. I just call you guys what the same way Activision, EA do, nothing personal.

I just don’t understand, are you saying that’s people who enjoy any particular game are idiots, or just the games you don’t like?

 

[Salz01]

Im passing on it this year. First time like in 15 years I’m not getting a CoD. Hope next years version is a return to form and offers a decent campaign and not just some recycled maps.

 

[poodaddy]

I just don’t understand, are you saying that’s people who enjoy any particular game are idiots, or just the games you don’t like?

He's a jackass troll who's just trying to arouse your ire. Don't give him the satisfaction, just ignore idiots and move on.