Soapbox: Call of Duty: Modern Warfare Remastered's Infinite Warfare Exclusivity Is a Disaster

yeah it is, as i said in a different article they should have released this separately BEFORE Infinite Warfare then people might be more inclined to buy IW because they would be "Riding the CoD Train" so to speak

"Gearbox's disgustingly dishonest marketing for Aliens: Colonial Marines"

Possibly the only news site on the Internet to have the guts and integrity to tell it like it us and remind people that yes, that really did happen. I applaud you, Pushsquare.

Not wanting to distract from the article itself which is first class, good work. More of this, please.

Great piece it's hard to comment because you've covered the suject so well. I agree with the comments that Battlefield 1 looks better than Infinite warfare based on the two short trailers and I won't get both but I'd buy the MW Remaster as a stand alone because I've always enjoyed it.

I was truthfully going to skip this years CoD given how much I hated Ghosts.

But, they had to go and pull this stunt so yeah they'll get my money this time and I'm not happy about it either.

I also decided to get the $120 version at GameStop since it comes with the season pass Why? Because we all know Activison is going to add the missing maps from CoD 4 remastered to the maps packs for Infinite War cause anything to screw over the customer right?

@SkanetWasTaken Ahaha, very good.

Where is the "I think they're making a mistake but I'm still planning to buy infinite warfare for it" option?

I think it makes sense to bundle it with the new game. There is no reason to sell it seperatly they want to sell more copies of the current game and this will boost numbers. If they sold it seperatly that will split the player base more. This way the gamer is getting both games and sales will be up. Later on maybe 6 months after release rhey can decide if they want to sell it seperatly or not. Fans will buy the game whatever or where ever it is based battlefield fans will still buy battlefield.The launch is fine happy with the setting for the next COD.

I'm still trying to figure out what's so special about the Battlefield 1 trailer. Yay, we're going back to the past. Before MW1 people were bored of the World War settings. Maybe we see let both these games release and play them before calling one the second coming and one a disaster? The cool thing has been to hate on CoD for years anyway and champion something as the next big thing. It's happened with Battlefield 3 and 4 as well, both were supposed to kill off CoD and I have no problem saying I thought both Battlefield 3 and 4 sucked as much as any Call of Duty game I've disliked. Don't really see how this will be different. My reaction was pretty much 'meh' to both trailers.

Great article though. It'll be strange if MW Remastered isn't available separately at some point.

Uhm, why do people automatically assume the Modern Warfare remaster's value is $20? That's the price you get it for if you buy the legacy edition, sure, but if I were Activision I would give all the negative Nancies their way and make the game avaliable separately....for $60. Other remasters go for $40- $60, so they'd be fools to just give it away for $20. If you're willing to buy the legacy edition you'll get 2 games for $80, if you don't and only want MW, then you can cough up 60 bucks.

Do people even realize Activision is in the money making business?

It wouldn't surprise me if the next 2 CoD games after Infinite Warfare came with remastered editions of Modern warfare 2 and 3. Imo the CoD franchise was at its best with the Modern warfare games and its gone downhill ever since. Modern 3 was the last CoD i truly enjoyed.

@kyleforrester87 that's exactly why they're doing. They're not making some huge mistake they're playing their fans like a fiddle.

I don't mind because me and my cousin are just going to go $40 each, and share but i would not buy it on my own

I'm all for the remaster and if truth be told if it was sold seperately I'd quite happily pay up to £40 for it but being forced into buying Infinite Warfare to get at it is only making not bother to take the ride down nostagia st. I'll pass and pull out my 360 for a blast on CODMW.

Brilliant article. I have utter apathy towards Call of Duty these days, but Modern Warfare was undoubtedly great. We can only hope that Activision are punished by consumers for what is a very unpallatable decision.

@kyleforrester87
I honestly feel that a huge part of the outrage stems from the fact that gamers did "the math" and now believe they are entitled to buy the MW remake for just £15, which is completely wrong obviously.

Furthermore I don't get what's wrong with this setting; it's basically the same old terrorist threat but instead of fighting in the Middle East, the terrorists now come from outer space. Weapons and abilities will probably be a lot like the ones we have now in Blops 3, with some zero gravity set pieces thrown in the mix for variation's sake.

Although I think it's a bold move of EA to have a WW1 BF, they will have to use weapons and vehicles that were highly experimental and practically never used in WWI in order to have some decent ground combat. The skies will benefit the most with some real old skool fighter planes, but I think CoD made the smarter decision thematically.

Technically however CoD feels like an old gen game for me and that's why I can't believe they just didn't took a sabbatical with the MW remake and a season 2 of Blops 3 filling in for Infinite Warfare, so it could debut in 2017 on a new engine on par with what DICE and other studios are working with.

@kyleforrester87 This is EXACTLY what will happen. Creating this illusion that you can only get MW by pre ordering IW limited edition makes those pre orders go up, and that's what they want. Guarantee by Christmas MW remaster will be sold seperately.

The ruler of The Evil Horde is not a fan of Call of Duty.

Personally I have pre-ordered the Legacy Pro edition to go with my last 5 Steelbook CoD games. Whilst I am 'content' to be getting a 'remastered' CoD4, I would have pre-ordered Infinite Warfare had that not been included.

CoD4, as great as it was in the day, is certainly flawed by todays standards. It doesn't allow for much creativity in its create-a-class as some perks are pointless and others are 'essential'. The weapons weren't very well balanced either. Its campaign was fantastic but mainly because it was revolutionary at the time. Whether it would still be seen as great if it released 'new' today, who knows - the fact it was the first to do a lot of the things we have come to expect now, coupled with the nostalgia, I think this game is put on a pedestal - rightly so for its era but it was also the game that gave us camper's, quick/no scoping etc too.

Personally I have no issue with releasing it as 'part' of the legacy edition only. Only CoD:W@W has actually sold less since it released and all other games - including Advanced Warfare, Ghosts, BO3, BO2 have all sold in excess of 20m - something CoD4 never managed. I see it as a 'bonus' for all the hard-core fans (not the casuals or those wanting a nostalgia trip) - its not including al the Maps so its hardly like getting GoW:Ultimate (with extra content that never made it to console) or Nathan Drake collection. Its a 'reward' for buying the game - like getting fan favourite maps (zombies and nuketown on BO3) - only playable by those with the special editions/season pass.

I think it would have made more sense though to release it 6months later (around May/June) although that does coincide with their traditional reveal - something for those craving a nostalgic trip and for those that may have finished with the latest release too.

@Serenadeofsins
Don't take this the wrong way but I think you will be the type of consumer mostly buying this bundle. You will complain about not wanting the IW game but still buy it for the remaster and to boot buy all the other garbage. You could be patient and wait to buy the remaster seperately after people complain and then activision sell it seperately after the release of IW( which is what they were planning anyway). These companies know most people complain but have no patience and the feed off of it. I like the remastered game but probably will not buy any of them separately or not.

@Flopsy my sentiments exactly. The cod and modern warfare isn't for hardcore fans overall. At least not in the sales of the annual purchase. No matter how unscrupulous these companies are they wil sell 15-20 million copies worldwide every year until they can't take anymore of the regurgitated franchise. COD blacks ops3 is my last game for awhile. The campaign is why I play these games and BLOPS 3 campaign was horrific. I don't see the campaign for any of these titles getting better because the franchise has run out of ideas.

@Ewflex Treyarch's campaigns are more 'experimental'. Infinity Wards are more 'traditional'. Ghosts had a good campaign and I have no doubts this will be good too - especially as it has two ex-Naughty Dog developers at the helm. Saying that BO3's is 'bad' and therefore Infinite Warfare is going to be bad is ridiculous. They are made by completely different studios. IW campaigns have been, on the whole, quite good. The weakest was MW3's but that was 'rushed' because of the break-up of IW.
I am really interested to see what the two Naughty Dog developers bring to the franchise. I quite like what they have said so far regarding the campaign.

"Yes, I'm not buying Infinite Warfare to play it."

Completely agree that MW won't go for $20 if it gets released seperately. Full or close to full price. I have said it before but I think it is a sign that the franchise is running out of steam and is purely concerned with making hay while the sun shines. It is business, sure, but I am not sure it is good long term business.

Great article - also agree there were so many other ways for them to tie in the two titles in a different way and still be able to squirm around on the bed with all that COD money (which is what, I assume, Activision does).

@Gamer83 I guess everyone is tired of the modern/futureesque settings by now. To be fair (and correct me if I'm wrong on this), WW1 has mostly been untouched by games, so it's fresher than WW2 at least.

As for the article, I'll admit that I'm enticed by the MW remaster. But, while I don't hate COD with the fury of a thousand suns like the rest of the internet, I'm pretty blase toward the series today. As such, I wouldn't buy this edition just for the remaster.

But I'm pretty confident that the remaster will be sold separately at some point. It's one of their best titles, if anything making it a bonus only would actually hold it back.

I'm just done with most annual franchises altogether.

I would buy Modern Warfare if it got a separate physical release. $40 and it's a done deal (which is only $31.99 with GCU).

I've heard nothing but complaints about Battlefield, but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't intrigued by Battlefield 1. It's not a preorder, but I will definitely watch reviews closely. If the campaign is good I'm on it.

Na definitely not buying IW just to play Modern warfare... Sorta out of principle too, not gonna have Activision shove a game at me cause they haven't got the confidence that it's gonna sell on its own... And with battlefield 1 coming out and looking more "fresher" than ever I'm going with that. Probably would buy modern warfare separately for the right price

Seriously its Activision when do them or EA give a crap about anyone.
Especially when they have El sheppo's that will buy anything.

Example im hardcore gamer that only ever plays COD or FIFA.
Then Im so bored of FIFA COD ill buy another COD/Fifa.

Then lets buy a legacy edition muppets.

They should sell it about 5 months later. Done.

Yeah it'll definitely get released separately six months after IW's launch. There's no reason to have a game that could be making money sitting around not making money.

I don't see what's wrong with them only selling it with IW, if you don't wanna pay the high price just buy the normal edition. It was remastered to release an Legacy Editon for IW, not to be sold as a separate game.

If you really only want MW just buy the code of eBay where it'll be near guaranteed to end up after launch.

The only positive I can take from this is hopefully Activison realise people don't want all this futuristic stuff in COD anymore, like you already have a spacey-futuristic FPS with Destiny (which imo is a lot better than COD).

I also feel like this could be the year that Battlefield finally overtakes COD.

The great thing about these soapboxes is that people are able to tear apart everything I say and point out things I forgot to mention. Love it. Okay, let's see...

@get2sammyb DANG IT. I forgot to mention in the article that, yes, selling it at a later date is likely. Activision may be foolish enough (imo) to maintain its current plans for bundling it with Infinite Warfare, but it'd just be lunacy to not sell it separately at some point. And the fact that IW is attempting to leech off Modern Warfare's legacy to reel in consumers could be a very telltale sign that Activision has not only lost some faith in CoD's continued success as a whole, but also Infinity Ward after Ghosts marked a low point. But if Activision really wants to make more revenue, they'll separate IW and MWR. I doubt the amount of people willing to compromise and buy the former to get the latter will be greater than those that choose to skip out entirely. MWR may indeed outsell IW in that case, but money is money...if Activision likes it, I really think they'd sell it separately at launch rather than later on.

Like you said, I also have no doubt IW will sell well, but Activision has got to pull a Battlefield 1 next year to go against the grain of the present/near-future time periods of FPS games for the past 10 years. For now, it just has to work with what its got.

@FullbringIchigo Hmm, this would be interesting! Releasing it on the same date (or afterwards at the very least) is more likely, but getting people hyped up for IW with MWR would be an interesting tactic. Perhaps it could entice people with a special demo or access to a closed beta if it came out early? It’s a possibility, but I unfortunately don’t see it happening.

@kyleforrester87 Yeah, it is in retrospect! I suppose “shameful” or “foolish” would’ve been a better word to use. Anyway, you also pointed out the one possibility I forgot to mention about it being released later on. (I get the feeling I’m going to find this everywhere in the comments section below. ) I wouldn’t put it past Activision for pulling this either, but the language it’s using to describe MWR’s exclusivity is troubling so far, and those bad possibilities I mentioned near the end would only solidify suspicions that this won’t be sold separately down the road. I think the publisher is already going to lose more customers by not doing this at the onset of IW’s release, but that’s just my prediction at best.

@LieutenantFatman Thanks! I don’t think anyone should ever forget what Gearbox did with that game. It was embarrassing for the whole industry, and the developer should have hurdles to jump if it seeks to regain its reputation in the future. But hey, glad you enjoyed the article, too!

@Draythedestroyer Thanks! You know, one thing I want people to understand is that I don’t say anywhere that I think Battlefield 1 will be better. For all I know, IW might tear it apart! I’m just saying that from a purely consumer-oriented perspective, B1 is the result of EA listening to what shooter fans have wanted to return to for years, whereas Activision isn’t willing to take a risk like that yet. However, just as I thought, it seems like EA’s boldness is paying off, which might give it the edge over Call of Duty this year.

@Serenadeofsins Yeah, it’s hard, man. It’s not like the bundle is a bad deal, it’s just whether or not you think getting a hold of MWR is worth $80 for the time being. Like I said, I’m looking forward to both games, so I went ahead and pre-ordered the Legacy edition because...why not? It’s not like what Activision is doing is harmful to the industry. It’s just stupid. It can go ahead and go through with what it has planned now and I personally won’t mind, but I’m just saying that this is inconvenient for a lot of other people and will cost the publisher some profit, especially if the season pass locks MWR DLC behind it and whatnot. Now, if stuff like this actually happens, I’ll think about cancelling my pre-order or forgetting the season pass because I don’t want to deal with that. I might just cancel it altogether because I only pre-ordered it to get a sweet MWR poster, so...yeah.

@SkanetWasTaken I like how Dwight is Treyarch and is trying to get everyone to calm down.

@darkswabber That’s the option I’d pick!

@dryrain Theoretically speaking, that’s exactly what Activision hopes to accomplish. And while I have no doubt a lot of people will compromise and get IW to have MWR, the backlash to this decision cannot be ignored. So many people are saying they’ll just resell the game or not by the games at all, so there’s already going to be a split in the player base because of this. It’s not like people who buy IW to get MWR will also play I. They’re going to play MWR! There’s going to be a split no matter what happens, so I believe it’s best to cater to that natural divide by selling the games separately (and together for those who want both), which should effectively increase the amount of players who will play MWR without entirely compromising IW’s success at launch. But who knows! You might be right in the end.

@Gamer83 I never called IW a disaster nor B1 the “second coming.” I actually see a lot of potential for both games, but to judge their quality from launch trailers would be naive. I just think the bundle itself is a disaster in the making for the backlash it’s received that might have minor yet significant financial repercussions for Activision. And yes, I definitely remember that time period where people clamored for modern shooters, but we’ve seen this time period explored tirelessly for over 10 years. It’s time to mix it up a bit, and B1 might just do that in a way we haven’t seen before. (When’s the last time you’ve seen a WW1 shooter?) But that wasn’t really the point of the article. I’m just saying if Activision wants to be seen more favorably by consumers, it will sell MWR at launch separately to doubly contend alongside IW with B1.

Okay, part 2.

@Boerewors Exactly! I pose a similar strategy in the third paragraph from the bottom. I think it would be more than fair to sell MWR separately at launch for $30-40 and no one will complain, even if it’s only $20 bundled with IW. Can you imagine how many copies would fly off the shelves? I’m not even including the holiday season! And yes, I definitely know Activision is in this for the money, but if it wants to truly earn as much as it can, it will reconsider its current ideas and do something similar to what you suggested. I think $60 is a bit steep, but $40 is definitely reasonable. I see that price tag being the most viable path for a separate release that will satisfy everyone.

@xStormxBringeRx Hmm...I can see MW2 happening with Sledgehammer’s next Call of Duty, but Treyarch? I think it would remaster World at War if anything. I can still see this being a pattern for future Call of Duty games though: a new CoD + a remaster. I just hope future titles won’t emulate what’s going on now, but if it turns out to be successful, I guess we’ll have to get used to it and hope Activision will release the games separately down the line. But I have my doubts about that success.

@TomKongPhooey And you’re the kind of person I’m talking about in this article! You’re a lost customer for Activision, but it could have you at launch if it sells MWR separately. I hope this will happen!

@Flopsy Oh yeah, I’m sure it will still sell well! But I believe some of the, um, “masses” won’t be willing to get MWR once they find out they have to buy the new game. Keep in mind there’s likely droves of these people who haven’t played CoD in years that will catch wind of this and want to re-experience CoD4 again, but won’t be bothered for $80. I’m no expert on economics, but I can’t shake the gut feeling that this masterplan isn’t as smart as Activision thinks it is. What’s important is that it needs to capture fans’ attention in the holiday season with a separate MWR rather than later on. The opportunity to garner the most interest and hype surrounding it will be during IW’s release, so I guess we’ll see where all of this goes.

@TXP Thanks! I don’t care what anyone says...MW2 and 3 may have been dumber than the first game, but strike me down if I say I didn’t have fun playing them! It’s an excellent trilogy, and the top dog deserves more special treatment than this.

@Boerewors I agree that people who feel entitled to MWR for only $20 separately need a reality check (ha ha). There’s a way to compromise between both parties here, and I feel like you and I came to some reasonable, similar solutions. As for WW1 Battlefield, I think it’ll hardly be accurate to history. It will certainly use weapons, vehicles, and settings from that period, but like you said, I think they’re going to greatly exaggerate the action and diversity of combat with experimental equipment to keep things interesting. That’ what resonates with people, whereas IW boasts the same type of time period that has been in every CoD for the past couple years with a slight spin everyone saw coming (being in space). I think it could definitely work, but as @get2sammyb said, B1 stands out from the crowd while IW doesn’t despite its cool ideas. It’s somewhat of a shame, really, but people aren’t really...open or forgiving to games these days.

@BAMozzy Same. And great points about CoD4. I concede that it’s not as groundbreaking as people think it is from a critical perspective, but I still think it’s a phenomenal entry despite its flaws.

I’m sure Raven is planing to balance out the multiplayer without compromising what made it unique. And while CoD4 didn’t sell as much as its sequels, you’ve got to keep in mind that this was after CoD3. When comparing the sales of that game to CoD4, the difference is astronomical due to its critical reception and because it was the first modern CoD. The subsequent games significantly owe it for their success, especially MW2. It’s no wonder that it performed so well compared to World at War based on name recognition alone!

MWR may not come with all the multiplayer maps, but I find it somewhat disparaging to call it a “bonus.” It may come with less maps in multiplayer, but it only has six less than the original (not including the DLC). If this remaster only had the campaign, that would be one thing, but the fact most of the multiplayer is intact, it’s just baffling that this remaster doesn’t justify a separate release. Just an HD touch up? Fine. Only the campaign? Sure. But multiplayer and the campaign with new cutscenes, remade assets, motion capture, new graphical upgrades, and more? I personally think MWR is more than a bonus, and Activision knows it. Where do they plan to go with this...

Part 3. I'll be back to check the comments section later. Joey needs a break now.

@Rudy_Manchego Thanks for commenting! This does give cause for concern that Activision doesn’t have as much faith in newer Call of Duty games and is therefore banking on CoD4 to help carry IW, but like you said, “I am not sure it is good long term business.” Activision will still make a profit this fall, but how much that will entail depends on if it adapt its plans for bundling both games.

@DerMeister Bingo. That’s what makes B1 so fresh as a FPS. WW2 has been beaten to death, but WW1 has been barely touched, even during the PS2 era! For DICE to go back to that period is risky in this console generation, but risk entails exploring new grounds, and that’s what a lot of people have desired for a while. DICE is giving it to them, but for better or worse remains to be seen.

Right. The least Activision can do is release later on separately, but I think this would be detrimental to not only MWR’s sales, but also IW’s sales. It could be minor in the end, yes, but releasing them separately at launch seems the wiser decision to me.

@JaxonH It’s why I gave up on Assassin’s Creed. I love the games, but...gosh, I can’t keep up with them! I think CoD fits this cycle, but it would be nice to see the brand branch out to the third-person shooter genre or something every other year to at least separate the releases of FPSs. And I haven’t pre-ordered B1 either despite my mentioning it positively in the article, but if the gameplay looks promising and receives positive reception from live demos, I’ll be following your lead by getting on the B1 hype train.

@sham8nix It’s not just the very concept of this bundle that might turn off people, but also the message it sends in how confident Activision might actually be in IW. I like how you point that out as a reason for you not being interested in the games for now. It’s definitely a valid reason.

@Bad-MuthaAdebisi Ha, that’d be nice! But as I said a couple times above, I think a good portion of damage will have already been dealt in that time period. If that’s the way it has to be, fine. But Activision would likely be serving itself much more generously if it separately released the games at launch.

@RaymanFan2 Exactly! All the more reason to release it at launch!

@itshoggie I see what you’re saying, but MWR screams to be sold as a separate game. I’ve truly never seen a remaster of this depth sold as an extra for a collector’s edition. It just doesn’t make sense to me, and Activision will be sacrificing a lot of retail sales should it not separate both games. And yes, I expect Sledgehammer Games to follow up IW with a Vietnam or WW2 FPS. If it doesn’t, well...I can’t imagine the amount of negative reception another near-future CoD game would receive next year.

@DrJoeystein I feel as if it's, Activision knows people are fed up with the futuristic style CODs at this point, but considering there's 3 teams that have a 3 year gap to make their next game IW was probably too far gone to scrap it for something else so they thought "hey, we'll give them MWR to try and ease those cries" but it isn't going down well this could be the worst COD in years (sales wise, it could still end up being a really good game). And, it wouldn't surprise me if the next COD game is a futuristic type game considering that 3 year development time.

That what I really don't understand about COD, they've 3 teams making 3 different games but there almost the same every year? If one team made an old school type COD game, another made a future type one and the third just mixed it up I don't think people would mind, it would be nice to have the change every year. And I ain't even a COD fan anymore since I paid 65€ for Ghosts which I regretted after about an hour of gameplay.

I understand the viewpoint that you basically have to pay $80 for the modern warfare remaster if you have no desire to play infinite warfare. But the flipside of that for those of us that were going to buy it anyway is we get the MW remaster for $20 instead of the usual $40 or $60 they normally charge for remasters. Also, after ghosts if they released a MW remaster side by side with infinite warfare, no one would buy infinite warfare. Which is kinda the vibe I'm getting from the article, you don't want to buy this years cod because you would be happy to just play MW.

I highly doubt that the newest CoD wouldnt sell as a "stand alone" without the remaster ... its just a plus, everyone rumored about, many wanted/demanded it, so why not? its a big plus imo, one of the best shooters ever made, fan favourite, adds to the whole package - better than selling as a stand alone imo
Wheter or not BATTLEFIELD1 will lead the sales - most Fans wont buy both anyway and stick to one of them as always (only I am so crazy lol)

If I wanted to scale on walls & jet pack I would play halo!!!!!! I enjoy realistic military games. I like many hate halo, it is a kids style game... I reserved the LEGACY EDITION of CALL OF DUTY INFINITE WAREFARE only to get the REMASTERED CALL OF DUTY MODERN WAREFARE. I will be selling my INFINITE WAREFARE on craigslist unopened. I would have gladly bought the remastered hard copy of MODERN WARFARE WITH A SEASON PASS if it was available & I would have paid $120.00 for a complete collector hard copy with season pass for my XBOX1. I also bought BATTLEFIELD 1 for my . XBOX1, all the new CALL OF DUTY GAMES ARE JUNK!!!! THEY SHOULD HAVE NEVER WENT HALO STYLE.... IF I WANTED TO PLAY HALO I WOULD BUY HALO...... WAKE UP YOU MORONS @ ACTIVISION & INFINITYWARD.

@DrJoeystein oh, no, what I meant was that they shouldn't bother to release them together at all, and just have separate release dates, that may probably affect sales of the next two November releases though.

It's more that selling it separately at launch would result in some people buying it instead of Infinite Warfare. Since they can't charge full price for it this would be a terrible business move. Putting it with IW at first and acting like that's the only way it will ever launch will result in massive preorders for IW. Then a few weeks/months after IW launch when sales are dying down they release this separately and get a new wave of sales. To announce that now would result in people waiting for MW and not bothering to preorder IW and would be a pretty stupid move.

This is video game marketing 101 and has happened countless times before. The chance of Modern Warfare Remastered not being released alone is absolute zero.

@DrJoeystein Maybe 'Bonus' is the wrong word here as we are still expected to pay for it. Think of it more as something for the dedicated fans of CoD, the ones that buy the hardened or prestige editions every year. Not the gamer that maybe buys CoD once in a while, not the gamers that played CoD4 and hasn't touched another CoD since etc. Its for those that want to play the 'new' and 'old'. If they were remastering the whole game - with the extra '10' maps inc DLC, I could understand a single release. Charging £20 for something that only has 'half' the maps, and no doubt missing someones favourites would no doubt cause more 'internet' negativity. So far I know 5 of the Maps but I could easily pick another 10 that I 'want' in the game.

From a commercial stand point - only World at War has sold less than CoD4 since 2007. CoD4 was a massive success - selling 17.1m and World at War, the best selling WW2 shooter in the franchise yet didn't sell 15m units. ALL games since 2009 have sold over 20m units inc Advanced Warfare (21.6m). MW3 is the best selling at 30.7m, Ghosts managed 27m (4th highest), BO2 (29.5m - 3rd highest) and BO 2nd highest at 30.3m. BO3 is currently at 22.5m (as of Apr) but still selling units - its number 2 this week in sales and only 2.5m units behind MW2 - the 5th best selling CoD game. Stats provided by http://www.statista.com/statistics/321374/global-all-time-unit-sales-call-of-duty-games/ This shows that modern/future settings far exceed the sales of WW2 based shooters (I know the original BO was more 'historic' but it was relatively 'modern' compared to the tech in WW2) and if they can get the movement right (like BO3 has), it can sell well.

I am actually more excited by the new game. BO3's movement has added a whole new dimension to the fast paced arcade style shooter without altering the 'flow' or format that made CoD successful. I hope some (if not all) of this comes to Infinite Warfare. Boost jumping as done away with climbing ladders and mantling, done away with only having 1-2 ways into an upper floor area (which helps to get 'campers') and enables more 'gun on gun' action. Whether Infinite Warfare will have 'wall running' or swimming, I don't know.

From what I hear, CoD4:R will have exactly the same MP set-up it originally had, same weapons, same perks, same killstreaks. I am 'slightly' disappointed by this as the perks, by todays standards, are a mess. Tier 1 extra explosives (inc Frag x 3, Claymore x2 - great for campers) and extra ammo - no Flak Jacket either. Tier 2 was all about stopping power and Tier 3 was usually Steady Aim (the perk that made no scoping easy). The game was a lot slower too. If you played it, you can remember the places people liked to 'set-up' with their claymores and snipers or M16. I certainly think it was 'ground breaking' back in 2007. Not just the fact it was the first to move into the modern era but the story was ground breaking. Mixing up stealth and full-on action, killing a lead character etc. The MP was ground breaking too - adding in RPG elements and killstreaks as a reward for 'success'. Obviously it got things 'wrong' but it learned from those mistakes and fine tuned the things it got right. Stopping Power is 'effectively' built into to all classes, things like 'steady aim' are now attachments (so snipers can't abuse it), to carry 2 grenades (you can't carry 3) is costly and can be countered by Flak Jacket, weapon balancing is more fair across the board. Gone are things like Last Stand and Martyrdom.

Incidentally anyone thinking they can pre-order the Legacy editions and sell the Infinite Warfare part 'unopened', like @mrmotorsports you can't. Its not a 'separate' item. It will be a 'download' code inside the case. You will have to break the seal to open the case to get the code to be able to download the game. Selling the 'Legacy' edition without the MW:R part without indicating the fact its missing is illegal.

I can see this game getting a stand alone release - maybe 6 months to a year after the release of Infinite Warfare. I can see the 'missing' maps being added to it too.

To be quite honest I'm loving the fact that all the whining CoD kiddies say they're going to run off to battlefield, knowing that after a month or two they'll go running straight back to CoD when they find out how slow it will be, with WW1 vehicles/horses and very few automatic weapons and how massive the Battlefield maps are compared to even the largest of the CoD maps. I can't believe how many people have consigned CoD to the bin before they even know the tiniest bit about the multiplayer components of either game.
I must say however that many years ago I did say that the only game that would kill off CoD is CoD itself.

Do not want the infinite warfare.

@itshoggie Right. Sledgehammer might have more time to adapt to this, so I totally understand why Infinity Ward went with the near-future IW. And it might just be the worst selling CoD in several years, even if it turns out to be really good (which would be a bummer for the developer). And yeah, now that we've got three instead of two taking turns with the franchise, you'd expect more diversity and back-and-forth in terms of where the devs take the settings, gameplay, etc. I think Advanced Warfare was one of the best indicators of this diversity since the gameplay, in my opinion, felt like the most unique CoD in years, but yeah. Here's hoping things are more greatly shaken up next year.

@Ps4all Right! It's a really good deal if you want both games, which is why I'll be buying the bundle. And I don't know...I kind of disagree that people wouldn't buy IW if MWR came out side-by-side. I think a lot of people won't even bother or just wait out if they only want MWR. And even if a good amount purchase the bundle only for MWR, they won't be playing IW anyway or just sell it immediately. To me, it's why just going ahead and releasing both games separately at launch will look better and be more profitable for Activision. It gives off the idea that it's confident in IW's quality alone, rather than relying on MWR to carry it.

@consolfreak1982 That's why I believe the bundle will entice people even more if it's $20 less than if one were to buy MWR separately for $20 more. Are droves of people really willing to pay $80 for a remaster alone? And who's to say how many pre-owned copies of IW will be flooding the market, thereby - as I said - devaluing its worth in retail? If this is the general impression a lot of people are getting, I can guarantee many will be planning to just pick up IW pre-owned rather than new since so many people who are willing to buy it only for MWR will toss it to the side for $40-50 online in new condition. However, it's hard to say how people will behave later on and what Activision plans to do, so my guesses are decent at best!

@Bad-MuthaAdebisi Oh! My apologies. That's a possibility, though. Honestly it's the most likely outcome to expect from all of this to sucker in those who only want MWR by buying both games at launch in the Legacy editions and then releasing it separately later on for the patient folk. It might be a bad idea though, and yes, it could very well affect the franchise's sales next year!

@PorllM But that's not accounting for how many people are planning on not even playing IW and selling it. Depending on how many people do this, it could have an adverse effect on IW's sales down the road as I detailed in responding to @consolfreak1982. And I'd disagree that we've seen something like this happen before. MWR is a really big deal, and the potential for it to sell like hotcakes in Nov. compared to several months down the line seems greater to me. I have no doubt, like you said, it will eventually be released later on, but is that really the best decision considering all of the factors? Hmm...

@BAMozzy Sure. And you could say they are remastering the whole game, it's just those 10 multiplayer maps that will be missing. I'm still on the side that despite that fact, this still warrants a separate release. Like, I just look at some of the remastered games out there like the Definitive editions of Tomb Raider and Dishonored and laugh because they were sold on their own and, compared to MWR, the amount of effort and overhauling it's receiving is far greater than either of those games. I get why it's a present of sorts for the hardcore fans of CoD, but that's not including everyone who loved CoD4 and jumped off years ago. There will be so many who want this that were casual fans back in the day, but they'll skip out on the bundle at launch since it costs $80. But a $40 standalone release? People would be all over that.

Thanks for the statistics! And yes, there's no doubt that the modern games have sold really well, but the fact the franchise has peaked and is slowly declining in sales is troubling. You'd think interest would grow over time (with new, younger audiences and all), but MW3 was the point where people started to fall off, likely a lot of older fans. So, I think by giving younger fans IW, older fans MWR, and people who want both the bundle, you're bringing in a full force of CoD fans that, combined together, would result in amazing sales for both. Maybe!

I'm sure some aspects of that kind of gameplay will make it into IW, and I hope they do, but I honestly hopped off BO3 faster than any other CoD. For some reason, I'm just no good at its multiplayer, despite the fact I've always been able to turn out good matches in past games. Might have to do with the greater verticality of maps or the boosted health of players, but maybe Infinity Ward will strike the balance I'm looking for.

Oh gosh, I think CoD4 still has the best stealth missions. And yeah, it brought so much to the table with multiplayer, but I certainly remember all the flaws it had with perks and balancing. That's why I'm saying it might have the same setup but will accordingly balance out some things like Juggernaut and Stopping Power to be less effective. One can hope.

Oh, I'm not saying that will be possible. Of course it will need to be opened. But for those who want IW, they'll essentially be getting it new as a pre-owned item just without MWR for a cheaper price than the retail version. That's what I'm thinking will affect the sales of the standalone version of IW if MWR isn't sold separately as well.

@W0rJ4ckie People are quick to judge, so I also have no doubt a lot of these "fans" will be crawling back to CoD. (ha ha) But how many is the question? We're not talking BF3 vs. MW3, we're talking about two games with completely different settings, and one of them has what the majority wants. B1 might just have the upper hand this time, but it's definitely too early to tell if that will be the case with sales.

Battle F!eld for life and killzone

@DrJoeystein I agree %100 that this sends the message that they are not confident in Infinite Warfares sales potential. I can see why, Ghosts seems to be the least liked COD of all time, and Infinite Warfare's trailer just hit over 1 million dislikes on YouTube. I know I would probably skip it this year if it wasn't for MW being bundled in, I was on the fence before that. Especially with the new Battlefield being launched a week before.

THE REASON GOSTS WAS DISLIKED BY SOME, WAS BECAUES OF THE LARGER MAPS. YHE KIDS COULD NOT CORNER CAMP EASILY, BECAUSE MANY DIFFERENT WAY TO ATTACK THE SAME POSITION.WHEN THE GLITCHES WERE FIXED THE GAME PLAY WAS WAY BETTER THAN THE JUNK BLACKOPPS III. BLACKOPS III GAME PLAY SUCKS WITH THE SERVER CRASHING ALL THE TIME.

They need to pay more attention 2 game play instead of wasting space on the server w/all the characters, crypto keys, black market ect. The knee slide is a joke!!! The enemy can hear it across the map & it usually gets both you and the teammate trying to slide past you killed, because the enemy heard the slide.

A REMASTERED MODERN WAREFARE COLLECTORS EDITION With a season pass [ hard copy] is worth the average price of any new release game... It is by far the best shooter game ever!!!!!!!

ATT: BAMozzy. you have no way of knowing how they will distribute the item I am 51 years old & have played & owned every council to date. I have received both not packaged together in other titles. The fact remains that it will be sold!!!!!! Even the top critics say infinite warefare will be filling up the used shelves. Infinityward did not even know they were next to make a COD game until th3ey were reminded by Gameinformer magazine last month, this is why it is the worst game trailer of all time & worst youtube vid of all tine.You must be young!!!! true COD players want a true realistic war game. If we wanted robots or wanted to scale walls or jump pack we would play HALO..... Do your resurch before you write another response to anything! COD 4 : Modern Warfare is rated # 1 of all COD games. With this game infinityward did what no other thought of (or should I say the makers of Titanfall,Respawn Entertainment) They took the RPG leveling mechanic & introduced it into the shooter gener. soon after this became the standard for all shooter games & numerous other geners (such as racing games) have also adapted this progression modle. Titanfall won over 60 awards before it was released! The owners of this company are the original developers of COD. This is why COD has other company's making their games. The Franchise went south when these 2 left infinityward. THE ONLY REASON THE NEW TITLE IS SELLING IS BECAUSE OF THE ADDITION OF THE REMASTERED COD 4......... Because they strayed from realistic military format & the loss of the original developers is why the franchise is failing.THE ONLY THING THAT SAVED THEM IS THE REMASTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Next time respond to something you know about!