I would say that stealth games penalizes you for killing anyone except special targets on some occasions. Dishonored and Deus Ex would be Thief-likes, unlike some games with a similar lineage(System Shock) like Bioshock and other games I've forgotten.
Late reply but if Rare had been acquired by Activision they would've eventually been sent to the COD mines for absolutely no reason like Toys for Bob.
I'm sure they would've eventually, but Microsoft banished them almost immediately. They got out a couple of decent early 360 games and that was pretty much it.
Toys for Bob certainly didn't stay in the COD Mines for long, the Microsoft buyout is going to bring with it a whole corporate restructure. They won't even have a new COD game out by the time this is done IIRC.
That's more a matter of fortuitous timing than anything else. Other companies, like Raven Software and High Moon Studios, have basically been COD factories/support studios or major COD game creators for years now. Pretty much every developers they have has been turned to producing COD games at this point. Them changing from pumping out COD every year to now deciding to actually take time to develop them is a relatively new development.
COD was the last thing that was a large revenue stream for activison as far as console games went. Things may get better since they won't need to use COD as a crutch anymore. However Microsoft has a habit of buying shit out and then letting it waste away, so there's still no guarantee that things will get better when it comes to game output and variety.
Something I actually agree with you on. I do think things will change now; with Bobby Kotick on the first bus out of there when the deal completes, and possibly looking at a trip to a jail cell besides (if allegations regarding insider trading pan out), and with Microsoft having its own IPs that are underutilized, I actually think that the age of the yearly COD and no less than six different studios supporting it are over. Microsoft, as far as we can tell from their past acquisitions, seem to prefer variety from their studios, and they just don't need a COD every year. Now, questions regarding actual game quality can only be answered after the fact.
Why? It wasn't like AB bled money and couldn't afford other games.
Money wasn't the issue. It was an issue of corporate direction. Bobby Kotick was only interested in IP he could endlessly farm out and dump out every year for easy cash. Its what he did with COD, what he did with Guitar Hero, and what he did Skylanders. He singularly focused on those things he could endlessly churned out and spurned the rest. The Xbox game division is not run that way, nor does it need to be. Microsoft has more than enough IP to invest in and is willing to invest in new IP. They don't need to churn out the same two games every year. Under Microsoft, we will probably see another actual Spyro or Crash game.
Good! How could anyone not be sick of that series after 15+ years of a new game every single year? You'd have to be a braindead retard not to think it at least needs a break.
And because of that they have become their recognizable IPs. If Microsoft tells them to make a Secret Service 3, who would care? The last release is almost 20 years old.
Don’t forget Nioh 1 and 2. Pretty much one of the best game series in the 2010’s.
No, because of that, both Guitar Hero and Skylanders are dead because people got tired of them. COD was on its way to a similar fate; the quality of the games have been dropping and sales for the series have been diminishing since Modern Warfare 3. The most recent games, in particular Vanguard, landed with a massive thud critically and commercially, which is why they are abandoning yearly releases.
Largely irrelevant. Microsoft is outright funding the creation of entirely new IPs from their acquired studios, such as Redfall. Reviving an old IP isn't that different from creating a completely new one.
Because COD has become an extremely tired franchise and franchise fatigue is a real problem. New projects can be more original and do thing COD isn't or can't do.
With the development hell that game has fallen into, there is a good chance its going to get cancelled whether this merger goes through or not.
Yeah but it's like one of the most viscerally nostalgic games if you romanticize specifically the little bit of time between The Matrix and 9/11
Fixed your post, you're welcome.
because vanguard is fucking shit, not because people are tired of it. watch the next not shit cod have everyone go apeshit over it again.
>arkane
I figure they must be like sports games for their fanbases: essentially the same thing every year, and since that's all they play, they don't mind it all being the same thing over and over.
I think there is more than a small degree of franchise fatigue setting in as well. The series' sales largely peaked with the original Black Ops and Modern Warfare 3. While the games still sell, there has been a clear trend downward. This isn't just a one off issue; its a consistent one. Call of Duty: WWII only sold as well as the original Modern Warfare. Last game to break 20 million was Black Ops III, all the way back in 2015.
Hardly irrelevant to my point about Microsoft's policy regarding new or revived IP. Also, Microsoft only began their buying spree in 2018, and didn't acquire Zenimax, for example, till the end of 2020. It would be unreasonable to expect Microsoft to match Sony's output in that amount of time (not that Sony's output is particularly amazing. Since 2018, Microsoft has published (not counting Zenimax titles) 44 games, and has 11 in development. At least 5 of those in development games are new IPs.
