By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
shikamaru317 said:

Apparently there was a leaker over the summer who said that Taiko would release on Xbox and now here it is on Gamepass in January. The same leaker also said that Persona 3-5 ports were planned for Xbox. I know that alot of Xbox fans were disheartened about the prospects of Persona making it to Xbox after the recent Xbox snub from Persona 4 Arena Ultimax, but apparently this leaker has suggested that Arc System Works is actually to blame for P4A skipping Xbox, not Atlus.

Taiko actually leaked on TrueAchievements around month or two ago



 

Around the Network
shikamaru317 said:
jason1637 said:

CoD doesn’t work with a 2 year cycle. With the current gaming landscape and how many Gaas games there are it’s crucial to keep people engaged. If there’s 3 devs each game has a 3 year development cycle with yearly releases which works just fine. A 2 year release doesn’t make sense. A CoD game doesn’t need a 6 year development cycle.

I'm thinking remove Sledgehammer from CoD entirely, it was even rumored that they don't want to work on it anymore and want to do a new IP which is why the co-founders both left, one of which is now with Take-Two I believe starting a new studio there. That would put a new CoD out every other year, with Infinity Ward and Treyarch each getting 4 years of development instead of the 3 years they currently get. 

 

I say don’t remove them tbh. The yearly releases has worked for the past 15 years. If it ain’t broken don’t fix it.



That MS Smash clone better come now, Crash and Spyro plus all the Overwatch characters. That roster will be amazing, they better give me Captain Price as a playable character.



Ryuu96 said:
jason1637 said:

I say don’t remove them tbh. The yearly releases has worked for the past 15 years. If it ain’t broken don’t fix it.

Last years CoD proved it is broken though, all of that crunch, every studio under Activision working on it and it released to awful reviews and noticeable decrease in sales.

How much of that is down to the pandemic is an unknown though but something has to change, every Activision studio shouldn't be a CoD support studio.

But Vangaurd was still the best selling game last year. They need to address crunch by keeping it to 3 devs 3 year cycle but the yearly releases need to stay.



jason1637 said:
Ryuu96 said:

Last years CoD proved it is broken though, all of that crunch, every studio under Activision working on it and it released to awful reviews and noticeable decrease in sales.

How much of that is down to the pandemic is an unknown though but something has to change, every Activision studio shouldn't be a CoD support studio.

But Vangaurd was still the best selling game last year. They need to address crunch by keeping it to 3 devs 3 year cycle but the yearly releases need to stay.

Ever occur to you that some of those people might wanna make some other games? There's no good reason to release a yearly CoD, when CoD fans can not only play the previous entry for a couple of years, but also have Warzone to fall back on. Literally the only reason it comes out every year is so Activision can appease their shareholders.



Around the Network
Angelus said:
jason1637 said:

But Vangaurd was still the best selling game last year. They need to address crunch by keeping it to 3 devs 3 year cycle but the yearly releases need to stay.

Ever occur to you that some of those people might wanna make some other games? There's no good reason to release a yearly CoD, when CoD fans can not only play the previous entry for a couple of years, but also have Warzone to fall back on. Literally the only reason it comes out every year is so Activision can appease their shareholders.

With how CoD campaigns have been on decline for the past few years, I think it would actually be a really smart decision to slow down on it's releases anyway. The majority of CoD players will be fine with seasonal content flow in F2P Warzone anyway



 

Angelus said:
jason1637 said:

But Vangaurd was still the best selling game last year. They need to address crunch by keeping it to 3 devs 3 year cycle but the yearly releases need to stay.

Ever occur to you that some of those people might wanna make some other games? There's no good reason to release a yearly CoD, when CoD fans can not only play the previous entry for a couple of years, but also have Warzone to fall back on. Literally the only reason it comes out every year is so Activision can appease their shareholders.

A lot of CoD fans like me don’t like Warzone and prefer MP or zombies. One of the great things about CoD was actually the yearly refreshes. A fresh start, new theme, everyone starts from zero and grinds out dark matter etc.

CoD is such a big franchise that it doesn’t matter if that’s not what they want to make. If 343i didn’t want to make Halo anymore they’d still have to cause of how big and important the franchise is.



Agreed that CoD should only be released every two years. The manpower behind all that is insane. They should let one studio make something else.
Vanguard campaign is supposed to be pretty meh. Cold War had nice ideas but had the shortest campaign of all CoD games. MW reboot was probably the best in a long time. BlOps4 didn't have a campaign at all....

Besides, that would give MS the opportunity to release a Gears, Halo or maybe Doom game in every other year so they're not going to have as much competition in the shooter genre during the holiday season.



Sometimes I wonder if people even realize what language "Klobrille" is and what it means...



shikamaru317 said:
Barozi said:

Agreed that CoD should only be released every two years. The manpower behind all that is insane. They should let one studio make something else.
Vanguard campaign is supposed to be pretty meh. Cold War had nice ideas but had the shortest campaign of all CoD games. MW reboot was probably the best in a long time. BlOps4 didn't have a campaign at all....

Besides, that would give MS the opportunity to release a Gears, Halo or maybe Doom game in every other year so they're not going to have as much competition in the shooter genre during the holiday season.

Bingo. The last thing Xbox wants is their Halo Infinite campaign expansions, Doom/Wolfenstein/Quake, and Gears competing against CoD for the Holiday season shooter crowd. That alone is a good enough reason to take Sledgehammer off of the CoD rotation to work on new IP's (I'm pretty sure one of their satellite studios is already working on something new). That would give Treyarch and Infinity Ward 4 years each to work on their CoD games, a gap year between CoD's for big Halo Infinite expansions, Doom, Wolfenstein, Quake, and Gears games to release in, and that extra year for each CoD game would allow Xbox to remove some of the CoD support studios like Toys For Bob and Beenox so that they can work on all 4 of Xbox's platformer IP's; Crash, Spyro, Banjo, and Conker; as well as possibly more Tony Hawk games.

That gap year between CoD games will also allow Xbox to expand the length of the DLC support for each CoD, meaning that Xbox can sell season passes in that 2nd CoD year to keep revenue coming in.

CoD hasn’t do t map packs for awhile now. It’s the Fortnite system all the maps and zombie expansions have been free the last several years.