Call of Duty and the Stagnation of a Genre

Default_picture
Tuesday, November 01, 2011

One of my English professors once told me that some academic circles in the field consider Earnest Hemingway to be one of the most damaging influences to English literature in recent memory—not because he wasn't fantastic and groundbreaking, but because his style influenced writers and readers for so long that there was less room for innovation. I can't speak to the truth of this statement, but I can speak to the validity of the idea of the detrimental influence that a resoundingly good idea can generate.

     This is, in fact, why myself and many other gamers find fault in the recent iterations of the Call of Duty franchise. Be you a veteran digital soldier or a complete non-participant in gaming, chances are you've at least heard of Call of Duty—and with good reason. The series was initially centered around World War II, as were many shooters at the time; many gamers today think modern shooters are done to death (which they are), but the sheer volume of World War II games in the early 2000's was staggering. Even so, the first three Call of Duty games managed to carve out a fair slice of sales amidst the crowded genre.

     Then there was Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, a game that will likely resonate with hardcore gamers for years to come. It represented a leap forward in the industry and the genre—much like the first Halo game did—and introduced staples that appear in most shooters since. Perhaps the greatest innovation it had to offer was its role-playing game style multiplayer perk system: rather than simply tallying your kill to death ratio, every action and kill players achieved netted them points that would level up their player rank, provide new equipment, and unlock statistic-modifying “perks” with which players could personalize their character. This genius system added both a sense of progression and persistence to a genre that had largely never seen anything like it before; almost overnight, players were hooked.

     Unfortunately, rather than using this unfathomable fame and popularity as license to push the envelope, developers Activision and Treyarch played it safe. Each subsequent release of the franchise features some relatively tweaked variant of CoD 4:MW's perk system and has shifted its focus almost entirely to multiplayer. The first Modern Warfare's single player campaign had some truly shocking and memorable moments, but as the series has aged (and developers have learned what makes them money), these moments are now fewer and farther between. While there are of course great single player moments in these subsequent games, the stories and script seem to receive less and less attention and relegate the single player experience to that of visually dazzling fodder. Many gamers don't come to the Call of Duty franchise looking for a grand single player narrative experience, and I realize that, but the wasted opportunities in our current cultural climate is almost tragic. If multiplayer is going to be the selling point, however, the relatively modest additions to the system don't do enough to warrant such frequent releases.

     Furthermore—while there are of course exceptions to this—with modern shooters crowding store shelves, competing developers often go the “if you can't beat them, emulate the hell out of them” route. The worst part? They all sell like hotcakes. It makes sense—why would a developer, if they knew they could make ludicrous amounts of money by tweaking and rehashing an established formula, what incentive would they have to stray from it? These developers may be raking in the profits, but they're shoving those dollars down the throat of creativity and choking it to death.

     The Call of Duty games are a hell of a lot of fun—I don't know that many would argue otherwise—but the series has kept the industry from taking the same crucial step forward that they made with CoD 4: MW. What started out as an innovative leap has partially stagnated much of the genre and games in general. There are always more stories to be told and new ways to tell them; here's hoping some developer out there is both bold and apt enough to leap forward from that dusty spot that Call of Duty and its many clones cling to.   

 
Problem? Report this post
BITMOB'S SPONSOR
Adsense-placeholder
Comments (11)
Dscn0568_-_copy
November 01, 2011

I made some formatting changes because the text background made things a bit difficult to read. I don't really have a lot of experience with Call of Duty, but I did find your teacher's comments about Hemmingway interesting since he was so well known for concise writing.

Wile-e-coyote-5000806
November 02, 2011

This problem is much bigger than Call of Duty and FPS's, and is, I think, the biggest roadblock for the medium.  So many gamers have a very clear idea of what games should be and dismiss anything that doesn't fit into those ideas.  I often proselytize about Heavy Rain, but many people dismissed that flawed-but-groundbreaking experience as being "all QTE's" instead of embracing the things that it accomplished.

I don't have a problem with Call of Duty, or with Call of Duty fans, but some of them seem to think that all FPS's should be like CoD (I call those people Cod-pieces).

100media_imag0065
November 05, 2011

Great read.

I agree mostly. One thing I don't agree with is that the majority of gamers are going to ignore the single player. Now I don't have the exact numbers right infront of me, but according to VG Chartz, Black Ops sold about 24 million copies on the PS3 and Xbox 360 combined. Now I have a very, very hard time believing that 24 million gamers are playing Black Ops online. I think that a large majority of that number is for those who play and try to enjoy the single player. They may check out the multiplayer every once in a while, but I doubt it is for long.

Last year I was at the midnight opening for Black Ops in my local mall. I wasn't there to purchase a copy, but I was helping a friend working at that EB Store with secutiry. There were hundreds of people there. Someone in the crowd yelled something like "Who's playing multiplayer tonight" and there was a loud applause. Then someone else yelled "Fuck multiplayer, whose playing the single player!" and there was an even louder applause.

What is even more astonishing is that a large majority of the people in line were in their 40's. Most of these guys and gals didn't look the multiplayer type. I know that the multiplayer is VERY popular in CoD and I am not trying to downplay that. I also know it makes Activision a ton of money. What makes me sad is that Activision is alienating the large crowd that is buying their games for the single player buy making them shorter and shorter and less enjoyable with each iteration.

Modern Warfare was a 7 hour game. World at War was a six hour game. Modern Warfare 2 was a 4 hour game. I beat Black Ops in 3 hours, 22 minutes. Yes, I timed it. So not only is Activision completely alienating those of us who prefer single player over our multiplayer, they are alienating us more and more with each new Call of Duty. Because of this, I have decided against buying Modern Warfare 3 this year. I will have Gamefly ship it to me, I will play the single player and send it back.

I am not going to support Activision anymore when they clearly don't want to support me. Moving on, I totally agree that the great strides Modern Warfare has made has completely stalled innovation. However, much of the blame can be piled upon gamers, not developers. Developers are just doing their jobs. They are making games that people want to play. It is the gamers fault that they let truly unique games rot on shelves while flocking to the stores everytime a military shooter releases.

I have sat by and watched amazing shooters like Metro 2033, Call of Juarez: Bound in Blood, Singularity and Resistance 3 rot on store shelves while everyone buys a game that is going to play exactly like the one that came before it. These were great, original shooters that had heart. They were all unique and completely refreshing amongst the landslide of generic military shooters flooding the shelves, yet gamers largely ignrored it.

According the VG Chartz, Modern Warfare sold 14 million copies. World at War sold 11 million copies. Modern Warfare 2 sold 22 million copies. And Black Ops sold 24 million copies. Compare that to the 490,000 copies Metro 2033 sold. Compare that to the 1.5 million copies Call of Juarez: Bound in Blood sold. Compare that to the 430,000 copies Singularity sold. And most depressingly, compare that to the 550,000 copies Resistance 3 sold.

It is a sad day to be a gamer. Gamers aren't giving these companies any reasons to make original games anymore. We have shown them that we are willing to throw our money down for games like Battlefield 3, which sold 5 million copies even though half of the game is complete garbage. We have shown them that as long as you look and sound like Call of Duty, or any generic military shooter, we will come out in the millions to open our wallets.

All of this goes on while truly unique and original adventures like Metro 2033 get thrown into a closet and locked inside. They are actually making a sequel to Metro 2033, but it was no thanks to the gamers.

Rant complete.

Justme
November 05, 2011

So, what you are saying is...I should play Metro 2033. :)

Default_picture
November 05, 2011

@Lasse: I guess so. Lol.

@Ed: But hey, at least one half of Battlefield 3 was freaking awesome. (End retort)

All that said, I really would like a little more balance in the FPS wars. And by balance, I mean I'd really like more recognition for games that aren't following the tired military shooter formula. For some time, I was worried that I'd miss out on something if I didn't buy Modern Warfare 3. After thinking about it though, I realized that it's just not as interesting if it doesn't follow up with a great single-player scenario.

I'll definitely look at all those games you suggested. I think there are a couple others that seemed interesting. I just forgot their names. If I remember, maybe I'll write more about them.

Bmob
November 07, 2011

Amen, Ed. Amen.

100media_imag0065
November 08, 2011

@Lasse

Oh please do. Seriously Metro 2033 is one of the best shooters of this generation. I tell everyone the same thing before they play it...It does not make a great first impression. The controls are a bit floaty, and the beginning of the game would have you think it is just going to be a generic non-stop action game. 

It isn't. It is so much more than that. It is the most atmospheric, intense, original and unique games this generation. They are making a sequel because the original has become such a cult hit and THQ has promised that this time they are actually going to agressively promote the game.

I don't know a single person who hasn't fallen in love with it after just a few hours.
 

100media_imag0065
November 08, 2011

@Jonathan

You can't go wrong with any of those games.

Metro 2033 is one of the most original and atmospheric shooters this generation.

Call of Juarez: Bound in Blood is a FPS western that has some of the best characters and story this side of Half Life 2.

Singularity is by far one of the most fun shooters of the last few years. It doesn't do anything totally unique, but it was loved by many reviewers and ignored by the gaming public. It is a lot like Bioshock in terms of atmosphere and direction.

Resistance 3 is another wonderful shooter that everyone is ignoring. Great story, great characters, great action and set-pieces. It is an all around AAA shooter that most have ignored. Oh, and it has the best collection of weapons ever put in a video game. Best of all, you can carry them all at once, there is no two weapon limit.

Chas_profile
November 06, 2011

I think people put too much stock in "innovation" when it comes to franchises like this. The millions of people who made Call of Duty one of the best selling franchises of the modern generation don't care about innovation. We just want more of what we love. With a mega-popular franchise like this, it's vital to keep the changes just substantial enough as to not isolate the huge fanbase.

I think the people somehow upset that Call of Duty and franchises similar to it aren't "innovating" aren't really fans to begin with. You can't really argue with the incredible sales numbers the games put out. That's not to say its creators could eventually drive it into the ground, but I think they know what they're doing and aren't selfish and misgudied like the execs at Nintendo who can't see past their own egos and only make the games THEY want to play.

 

In short, it's ridiuculous to call the FPS genre stagnant and to point the finger at Call of Duty when the two are the biggest money-makers in the industry right now. I think anyone opposed to what Call of Duty is doing need to find out why they personally take issue with the series because they're the ones with the problem, not the games or the millions who buy them.

Default_picture
November 06, 2011

Well, I guess it's hard to do something innovative when a company's franchises practically kick-started almost an entire generation of gaming systems. But Nintendo tried out plenty of other IPs, such as Pikmin and Animal Crossing. One was obviously more successful than the other.

It's not as if Nintendo hasn't tried releasing more mature games. Their most recent effort at a more adult-oriented franchise was Metroid: Other M. They'll probably hit a home run with the new Zelda game. That franchise still has a horde of fans. It also has many of the big-budget production values as many of the other AAA franchises.

As much as I want to accept Call of Duty as a long-lasting franchise, I can't. I mean, what other ideas would they come up with? World War 4? Or maybe it's World War 5. I can't remember. At this rate, it may fall under the Shrek curse of too many sequels.

Chas_profile
November 06, 2011

With that Nintendo comment I was referring to the way Nintendo execs have actually admitted that they simply don't want to make games they know will sell better in favor of those that they enjoy making more. The biggest example is how they continually make 3D Mario games that will never sell nearly as well as 2D Mario games, but still insist that each new 3D Mario game is deisgned to appeal to fans of both types. They do the same with Zelda. Skyward Sword will sell well compared to most modern video games but classic-style Zelda (aka, not Puzzle Zelda) is much more successful . Unfortunately, the current producer behind the series isn't a fan of the older Zelda games so he refuses to make them and instead focuses on selfish things like building Zelda games around what his son is currently interested in (ie, trains.) Other M is another example where a series creator either doesn't understand what people enjoyed about the original (successful Metroid) games or simply doesn't care about them and instead chose to focus on what he personally enjoyed.

With Call of Duty, I don't see any of that. People can say what they want, but I think the staff behind the franchise enjoys COD multiplayer for the same reasons its millions of customers do. I say they have another year or two of sticking to their current release trend before they can develop something like "Future Warfare" to revitalize the series. Multiplayer is everything, so the plot doesn't matter. If that were the case, World at War, Modern Warfare 2, and Black Ops would have failed miserably at retail. "Future Warfare" could free up some creative space that directly influences multiplayer mechanics, allowing for weapons and perks that may have been a bit too much of a stretch in a more modern setting. I'm not talking about lasers and spaceships, but stuff more along the lines of that Future Weapons show that details experimental technologies.

There's still plenty of room for the franchise to grow, and even when things look to be slowing up, they can move to a longer release schedule than the current annual one. The only stagnation going on are the wannabe developers coming out with first-person shooters that have no chance of competing with the top franchises (Call of Duty, Battlefield, Halo, etc.) and can't even fall into their own little niche of second tier games.

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.