Is one CoD a year too much?
Many believe that the annual release of the Call of Duty series is pushing things a bit much. Eric Hirshberg, boss of Activision, disagrees with these people.
Said Mr. Hirshberg,”The cadence of the releases seems to have found a nice equilibrium with people’s appetite.”
He went on to explain his stance, pointing out, “There’s demand and excitement each and every time out. Then people are playing throughout the year. We have our biggest community of players today. Right now there are more people playing Call of Duty today than ever, which is remarkable for a franchise that’s been around as long as Call of Duty has. But, we don’t take anything for granted.”
When asked how Activision aims to keep the series from stagnating, he simply pointed out their current setup. With an alternating development studio strategy (giving each game 18+ months of development time), Infinity Ward (Modern Warfare and Ghosts) and Treyarch (Black Ops) are in charge, and the two studios constantly strive to outdo each other.
Said Hirshberg, “Having alternating studios is one of the secrets to the franchise’s success. You have different creative people who are strong willed and have minds of their own. Everyone gets what makes a great Call of Duty game. Treyarch and IW are the masters, and have built this thing. So, there’s a lot of common DNA from year to year.
“But then people come in and want to top each other. There’s some healthy competition. There’s a desire within the creative team to not do the same thing and not be stagnant, the same way there is in the player community.”
He wraps up this part of the answer by stating, “Overall it seems to be a good system.”
So what do you think? Is a Call of Duty game a year too much? Or is the strategy successful in keeping the series from stagnating?