Treyarch Isn't Infinity Ward Yet, Says EA Boss

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT
 

Treyarch Isn't Infinity Ward Yet, Says EA Boss

image

EA CEO John Riccitiello questions whether Treyarch has the ability to make a Call of Duty game on par with Infinity Ward.

Call of Duty creator Infinity Ward was shaken up by a massive employee departure when co-founders Jason West and Vince Zampella were ousted from Activision. Treyarch stepped up to the plate for Activision by following up on Infinity Ward's Modern Warfare 2 with Call of Duty: Black Ops, which sold magnificently, but according to EA CEO John Riccitiello Treyarch still isn't a studio on par with the original Infinity Ward just yet.

In an interview with IndustryGamers, Riccitiello noted that sales numbers don't necessarily indicate quality. Black Ops may have beaten out Modern Warfare 2 at retail, but its average review scores are slightly lower. Because of this, he feels it's a little too early to call Treyarch an Infinity Ward replacement.

"I don't know that having two guys that probably don't play the games, in the form of the CEO of Vivendi and the CEO of Activision, come out and say 'Treyarch is our lead developer,' like you could anoint that," Riccitiello said. "They didn't make a 90-rated game; I think it's 86 now. I don't think review scores are the be-all, end-all, but we all know a mid-90 when we see it, but this was mid-80s. I don't think you could anoint them by an executive saying, 'it's so.'"

"The question, I think, really is, 'what developer is going to put forward the next great FPS that sort of follows [what Infinity Ward did],'" he continued. "It's wishful thinking, and let's hope for Activision's sake they're right. I think it's far from proven that the gaming consumer views a product from Treyarch in the same category as a product from what was Infinity Ward."

Of course, Riccitiello thinks that EA has the goods to release a game on par with the products that Infinity Ward put out in the past, once it works out some kinks. EA's Medal of Honor reboot scored lower with reviewers than Black Ops on average, but Riccitiello still views the game, and other EA properties, as successful efforts in the shooter war. "Next year we'll make a lot more progress," Riccitello believes. "We've got a couple of third-party games in the form of Crysis 2 and Bulletstorm, and then our big focus is Battlefield 3 in the second half of the year. I'd be shocked if we didn't take a notch out of [Activision]."

Riccitiello also criticized Activision for taking as long as it did to sell so many copies of Call of Duty. "Activision will do 25 million on the tail of last year's Modern Warfare 2 and the start of this year's Black Ops, and then probably something similar next year," he said. "But it took them, what, five or six editions to get into double digit millions?" Riccitiello has been pretty vocal about EA's potential to take on the massive Call of Duty franchise, so all that's left is for the company to back up his talk.

Source: IndustryGamers

Permalink

"...then our big focus is Battlefield 3..."
Yay, i hope its gonna be great on pc.

On topic... well, i dont care if they arent the IW replacent, all i care is if the game is good.

Doesn't it seem like forever ago when EA was the devil's company and Activision was the underdog?

My god, how times have changed

OT: I can see, and mostly agree, with what he's saying. Though Medal of Honor "exceeding expectations" when he said (in the source) "It's somewhere around mid-70s? Jeez, those are some interesting expectations you ahve there.

If that comment was coming from Activision, I'd think by that he really meant "they still have room for improvement to screw people out of their money", but coming from EA? Erm... hmm... not quite sure what to think. Personally, I think World at War was better than CoD4. MW2 sucked and I haven't played BLops, so no comment on that.

No they certainly aren't.

Thank you Activision....you pricks.

The call of duty fatigue might be setting in among the major reviews I don't know about main casual audience that COD franchise lures in every year.

F*** that. Treyarch, this game was MILES better than MW2. Those guys deserve medals for saving the CoD franchise.

Out of the Cod games I have played
Cod 4
Cod Blops
Cod WaW
MW2

So Treyarch have not got the top spot but MW2 was awful in terms of plot and multiplayer. Too many killstreaks and perks that allow a player to cheat the game (only Spec Ops redeems it). WaW and Blops were good but 4 managed to get a modern setting without making it all about who has the newest technology. MW2 was just Chopper Gunner! Nuke! (how is it tactical to call a nuke in on your own position?) AC-130! Harrier! Stealth Bomber!

Love Treyarch, used to love IW, now I don't.

I think both Treyarch and IW are more marketeers than game designers; none of them is particularly good at all, as all they do is stick with the always safe triple A action game formula, but Black Ops is definitely a better game than Modern Warfare 2; review scores on the most popular sites mean absolutely nothing, we all know IGN and Gamespot only hire those who give in to the hype as much as humanly possible. Overall, Treyarch has the stench of motherly milk all over; they are just starting and this lead for them taking more risks and going for the unfamiliar more often in BO, while IW did nothing but stick it to the safest possibility since ever.

Treyarch makes games a bit more with their hearts, while IW goes for the numbers.

Of course Treyarch aren't Infinity Ward!
The difference being, despite the woobie status IW took on, when they were sitting pretty, they were a bunch of arrogant "hur, our game's da best!" jerks. People only felt sorry for them when the bigger asshole sat on them.

Treyarch doesn't seem quite as arrogant.

Jumplion:
Doesn't it seem like forever ago when EA was the devil's company and Activision was the underdog?

My god, how times have changed

OT: I can see, and mostly agree, with what he's saying. Though Medal of Honor "exceeding expectations" when he said (in the source) "It's somewhere around mid-70s? Jeez, those are some interesting expectations you ahve there.

Blame Kotick...

Also, I see his point, but we all know the new IW is one who can make a fair and balanced MP.

No Treyarch is no where near Infinity Ward, you haveto understand that 95% of CoD5 and CoD7 is Infinity Ward's work.
Treyarch simply re-skinned the games best they could, but if they were to build something on their own it would be CoD3 all over again.

The part Treyarch actually made for COD7 was the zombie thing, and it stands out like a sore thumb compared to the polish of the rest (that was already in CoD6).

They made the multiplayer miles better, though it still isn't that good, and the story made some degree of sense. The only part their lagging in is graphics, but who cares?

Did you just manage to criticize the people who made one of the most successful entertainment products in history by saying they didn't do it fast enough, John? That's some skill in PR.

Other than that. Yes. Yes, actually. Treyarch is not IW. Even if you though BlOps was better than MW2 (and I didn't), you have to look at the track records. Even if you liked CoD 3 and World At War better, Treyarch did not create the formula. IW did. [1]

I'm not going to deny that Treys are getting surprisingly good at those games... but, as a long-time series fan, they're not there yet. Yet.

[1] Please, don't correct me that MoH created the formula. The games are really different. They're as different as military shooters get.

I just can't believe Sledgehammer games is making the next Call of Duty. Black ops is a piece of garbage, so at least it isn't Treyarch doing it. But still, wtf has Sledgehammer games done to earn this duty?

I don't know ANY Sledgehammer games...

by actually putting in a bot mode, they've made up a lot of ground in my mind. But I can still name every MW and MW2 mission because they are so distinctive, even when you fight in the same place more than once.

Black Ops is a far superior game to the unbalanced mess that was Modern Warfare 2, Riccitiello is just frustrated that the Call of Duty franchise didn't end with Infinity Ward.

Well WaW is the best CoD game, and lets see who made that...

BruceyBaby:
I just can't believe Sledgehammer games is making the next Call of Duty. Black ops is a piece of garbage, so at least it isn't Treyarch doing it. But still, wtf has Sledgehammer games done to earn this duty?

I don't know ANY Sledgehammer games...

before sledgehammer became sledgehammer, they were Visceral Games. so Dead Space, Dante´s Inferno and some other minor things.

TerribleAssassin:

Jumplion:
Doesn't it seem like forever ago when EA was the devil's company and Activision was the underdog?

My god, how times have changed

OT: I can see, and mostly agree, with what he's saying. Though Medal of Honor "exceeding expectations" when he said (in the source) "It's somewhere around mid-70s? Jeez, those are some interesting expectations you ahve there.

Blame Kotick...

Also, I see his point, but we all know the new IW is one who can make a fair and balanced MP.

Which not even IW could do *kekekekeke*

Oh, c'mon, as far as I've played, none of the new CoD games have ever been balanced in terms of multiplayer. It's like, every other second you expect to die compared to something like Bad Company where it's a much more slower paced game and you get rewarded for helping your teammates.

Wait, I think I may have started something...

Crap! Get to the bunker!

I have played CoD 3 and MW on console, and Blops on PC.

CoD 3 had an ok single player but the multiplayer was extremely lacking.

MW was great. It had a solid single player and introduced weapon unlocks and levelling to the CoD franchise.

I tried the WaW demo on Xbox 360, but the terrible graphics burned my eyes when I looked at it. I don't understand how anyone could stand that. But lots of people liked it, so it must have been an improvement over CoD 3.

Then I switched to PC.

I didn't get MW2 because of the entire controversy around it. It was like the personification of bad console ports. No thanks.

But Black Ops? It's a great game. The single player is now atrocious, which is the reason for the low review scores, but the multiplayer is great fun. No, it's definitely not on par with Battlefield games. But it's still good, quick fun. And at least it's not MW2.

So I would say, thank god Treyarch isn't Infinity Ward yet. Infinity Ward got worse before exploding. I really hope that doesn't happen to Treyarch. They seem to be getting better and better. They won't be Infinity Ward until they completely screw over PC gamers, their CEO gets fired, and a lot of devs leave the company.

Thats actually insulting to Treyarch, IW only made two games and I even fail to see where they could go from there other than to make another generic modern warfare game, trearch kept things the way they usually do, old fashioned, and it worked. Black Ops was BETTER than any Modern Warfare game I've played.

Treyarch are terrible developers; the only reason people tolerate them is because they pretend to be listening to the community. Activision should stop publishing Call of Duty games and have Treyarch make a full Nazi Zombie game. Let's all hope that Sledgehammer Games can make the first good Call of Duty in five years.

Rubbish, WaW and Black Ops were the good ones!

Well old school IW yes, the new IW that Activision ripped the soul out of to keep them quiet? I think they might just be better.

On a side note if Activison owned pixar it would have removed John Lasseter and they would be making toy story 12 by now.

Jumplion:
Doesn't it seem like forever ago when EA was the devil's company and Activision was the underdog?

My god, how times have changed

Ahhhhh 2008, How we miss thee...Note* Which is a better response than "This".

The "EA evil" brings back some amount of nostalgia.

Is he kidding? Blops beats the SHIT out of MW2, for one reason.

....*deep breath*.....

DUAL WIELDING SHOTGUNS?????!!!!!!!!!!

I used to echo his sentiment, but after seeing Treyarch's community support and listening to the disproportionate amount of crap they take for not being Infinity Ward, I'm willing to say that they're at least as good.

Sturmdolch:
I have played CoD 3 and MW on console, and Blops on PC.

CoD 3 had an ok single player but the multiplayer was extremely lacking.

MW was great. It had a solid single player and introduced weapon unlocks and levelling to the CoD franchise.

I tried the WaW demo on Xbox 360, but the terrible graphics burned my eyes when I looked at it. I don't understand how anyone could stand that. But lots of people liked it, so it must have been an improvement over CoD 3.

Then I switched to PC.

I didn't get MW2 because of the entire controversy around it. It was like the personification of bad console ports. No thanks.

But Black Ops? It's a great game. The single player is now atrocious, which is the reason for the low review scores, but the multiplayer is great fun. No, it's definitely not on par with Battlefield games. But it's still good, quick fun. And at least it's not MW2.

So I would say, thank god Treyarch isn't Infinity Ward yet. Infinity Ward got worse before exploding. I really hope that doesn't happen to Treyarch. They seem to be getting better and better. They won't be Infinity Ward until they completely screw over PC gamers, their CEO gets fired, and a lot of devs leave the company.

You played the same pc that I played?! I mean the one full of bugs that had to be solved, but not enterily with a patch ( http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/709244/Call-of-Duty-Black-Ops-PC-Patch-Details.html).
Anyway, I played all the COD's except COD 3 (I only played for 30 min. so I'm not counting this one). COD's are more more the same game. Cheap thrills and re skin graphics. For multiplayer sure it changes a little, but they are unfriendly. Lot's of kids with spare time play these game religiously, just like Counter Strike and it's no longer fun play a game that everyone is so addicted to it that they will curse you in the slightest sign of error.

Jumplion:
Doesn't it seem like forever ago when EA was the devil's company and Activision was the underdog?

My god, how times have changed

Yeah, now they're both devil companies!

I guess that would make Ubisoft the underdog? Maybe? Are there any other giant publishers I'm forgetting right now?

OT: Yeah, I think everyone knew this already. Treyarch games are getting better, from what I've heard, and judging by MW2, Infinity Ward is getting worse.

brazuca:

You played the same pc that I played?! I mean the one full of bugs that had to be solved, but not enterily with a patch ( http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/709244/Call-of-Duty-Black-Ops-PC-Patch-Details.html).

Yup. I played it on two PCs, actually. First, my 1.5 year old gaming laptop. And now that I have a new computer, on that.

I have yet to encounter the bugs that everyone seems to be talking about. Yes, the game crashed a couple of times. And I sometimes have trouble connecting to my friend's server. But it's hardly game breaking.

I think some people are just putting their settings too high, or playing on too old computers.

Should Black Ops be this graphically demanding? Of course not. It's very poorly optimized for PCs. But all the same, the problems with not being able to run the game most likely stem from the wrong settings or other programs on your computer interfering with the game.

Double A:

Jumplion:
Doesn't it seem like forever ago when EA was the devil's company and Activision was the underdog?

My god, how times have changed

Yeah, now they're both devil companies!

I guess that would make Ubisoft the underdog? Maybe? Are there any other giant publishers I'm forgetting right now?

OT: Yeah, I think everyone knew this already. Treyarch games are getting better, from what I've heard, and judging by MW2, Infinity Ward is getting worse.

Well, I'd say that EA has redeemed most of their past sins right now. Certainly better than what was going on before. I'd like to think that Dead Space sparked the initial change in EA.

JourneyThroughHell:
Did you just manage to criticize the people who made one of the most successful entertainment products in history, John?

See:

Riccitiello noted that sales numbers don't necessarily indicate quality.

[/obvious]

SODAssault:
I used to echo his sentiment, but after seeing Treyarch's community support and listening to the disproportionate amount of crap they take for not being Infinity Ward, I'm willing to say that they're at least as good.

Amen.

EA is also very hypocritical when it comes to metacritic scores. When the shit hits the fan for their own game, they suddenly declare the score means nothing and has absolute no impact on their decision making process.

Whilst when Activision is doing something, they come up with the biggest rant possible. Screw EA for making idiotic statements whilst I have been gaining respect for them. Activision is still made of phail and Satan but EA shouldn't be cocky, BioWare is the only thing that backs them up for the most part.

Tom Goldman:
In an interview with IndustryGamers, Riccitiello noted that sales numbers don't necessarily indicate quality. Black Ops may have beaten out Modern Warfare 2 at retail, but its average review scores are slightly lower.

Too bad that he doesn't realize that review scores don't indicate quality either. It's the actual reviews that do that, not the utterly stupid number at the end. If both games are good games, then they are good games. That is that. It doesn't matter if one has a 89 and the other has a 90 on Metacritic, the second worst site on the internet in relation to gaming (first is IGN).

 Pages 1 2 3 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here