In Defense of Treyarch

Posted by YukoAsho (2061 posts) -

 

I've been a fan of Call of Duty for quite a while, though perhaps not as long as some. I've played nearly everything in the main series from CoD2 to Modern Warfare 2 and beaten them all on Hardened (can't get 1 or UO to work on my Win7 rig, nor on Vista before it). The games impress me for the sheer level of absolute balls-to-the-wall chaos and tense action. However, one thing about CoD has always annoyed the ever loving fuck out of me. It's not the overly amped up machismo of the whole affair, or the infinitely respawning enemies or the questionable friendly AI. No, it's something more insidious and annoying.

The Infinity Ward fanboys.

Now for those of you who don't know, Infinity Ward started the Call of Duty series in October 2003. However, even from the beginning, there were many studios involved with Call of Duty. Gray Matter Interactive developed the United Offensive expansion pack and worked with Treyarch on Big Red On before being merged into Treyarch at the end of that game's development. Of course, before Big Red One, there was Finest Hour, developed by Spark Unlimited, who as far as I know, never made another CoD game again due to FH being wholly lackluster. There are many other spinoffs, but it's not them that made the Infinity Ward worship so annoying.

See, it all starts with Call of Duty 3. The first CoD game developed since the merger with Gray Matter, Call of Duty 3 introduced the beginnings of the more character-oriented narrative that we see in the series today (the previous games had just had documentary pieces after each of the campaigns), was the first where you could cook off grenades, or pick up and throw back grenades. It was also the first and only title in the main series not to appear on the PC.

Now, having enjoyed the game much more than CoD2, I dismissed the rage of the community as simply PC gamers whining that the game didn't go on their platform (PC gamers tend to look down on console gamers, after all). It wasn't until World at War, a game I preferred over Modern Warfare, that I started seeing just what the Treyarch hate had morphed into. People were talking about how much worse the levels were, how lacking the multiplayer was; they were even criticized for including the Nazi Zombies mini-game after the end of the main campaign. You know it's bad when the fanboys are blasting you for adding extra stuff.

Then Modern Warfare comes out, with only the wholly lackluster two-player Spec Ops mode for those of us who loved the 4-player campaign co-op and Nazi Zombies mode from World at War, a glitch-riddled competitive multiplayer suite and an at-times nonsensical story in single player. This game, inferior in nearly every way to World at War, was fawned on by media and fans alike, everyone seeming to turn a blind eye at the game's faults.

Now there's obviously going to be differences in tastes, and World at War being a World War II game may have rubbed some people the wrong way. However, this cannot explain why everyone, from the lowliest forum troll to the most respective games journalist, was so eager to push aside all the issues with Modern Warfare 2, even when they were so willing to make up issues for World at War (“it's too safe,” “it's too gory,” etc.)

Now let's be clear, it's not like I don't get fanboys. Be it Nintendo vs Sony vs Microsoft, Democrats vs Republicans, or Burger King vs McDonald's, fanboys have been swinging off the nuts of one company or the other since before I was born and will likely continue to do so long after I die. However, the Infinity Ward thing just irks the fuck out of me. We all buy games from many different publishers and developers every single year. Well, most of us do, but we all know Nintendo fans. Anyway, the rest of us all buy games from many different publishers and developers every year. We've also bought games in a single series that have gone from developer to developer since the IP is owned by a publisher. However, this only seems to be unacceptable when it comes to Treyarch making Call of Duty games. I'm not sure why this company has earned the legion of mouth-breathing fanboys it has. Even before the MW2 layoffs and resignations, IW didn't exactly care much for community outreach like Bungie does. They don't have decades of nostalgia behind them like Nintendo. They haven't made a lot of games (in fact, IW itself has only made four – Call of Duty 1, 2, 4 and MW2).

This isn't to say that I dislike Infinity Ward's games, or that I don't look forward to what Respawn is going to bring to the table. However, I wish people would stop hating on Treyarch. They make good games, and deserve some love for all their efforts. Save the hate for the crappy Wiiware shovelware developers that the Bombcast so deliciously mocks.

#1 Posted by YukoAsho (2061 posts) -

 

I've been a fan of Call of Duty for quite a while, though perhaps not as long as some. I've played nearly everything in the main series from CoD2 to Modern Warfare 2 and beaten them all on Hardened (can't get 1 or UO to work on my Win7 rig, nor on Vista before it). The games impress me for the sheer level of absolute balls-to-the-wall chaos and tense action. However, one thing about CoD has always annoyed the ever loving fuck out of me. It's not the overly amped up machismo of the whole affair, or the infinitely respawning enemies or the questionable friendly AI. No, it's something more insidious and annoying.

The Infinity Ward fanboys.

Now for those of you who don't know, Infinity Ward started the Call of Duty series in October 2003. However, even from the beginning, there were many studios involved with Call of Duty. Gray Matter Interactive developed the United Offensive expansion pack and worked with Treyarch on Big Red On before being merged into Treyarch at the end of that game's development. Of course, before Big Red One, there was Finest Hour, developed by Spark Unlimited, who as far as I know, never made another CoD game again due to FH being wholly lackluster. There are many other spinoffs, but it's not them that made the Infinity Ward worship so annoying.

See, it all starts with Call of Duty 3. The first CoD game developed since the merger with Gray Matter, Call of Duty 3 introduced the beginnings of the more character-oriented narrative that we see in the series today (the previous games had just had documentary pieces after each of the campaigns), was the first where you could cook off grenades, or pick up and throw back grenades. It was also the first and only title in the main series not to appear on the PC.

Now, having enjoyed the game much more than CoD2, I dismissed the rage of the community as simply PC gamers whining that the game didn't go on their platform (PC gamers tend to look down on console gamers, after all). It wasn't until World at War, a game I preferred over Modern Warfare, that I started seeing just what the Treyarch hate had morphed into. People were talking about how much worse the levels were, how lacking the multiplayer was; they were even criticized for including the Nazi Zombies mini-game after the end of the main campaign. You know it's bad when the fanboys are blasting you for adding extra stuff.

Then Modern Warfare comes out, with only the wholly lackluster two-player Spec Ops mode for those of us who loved the 4-player campaign co-op and Nazi Zombies mode from World at War, a glitch-riddled competitive multiplayer suite and an at-times nonsensical story in single player. This game, inferior in nearly every way to World at War, was fawned on by media and fans alike, everyone seeming to turn a blind eye at the game's faults.

Now there's obviously going to be differences in tastes, and World at War being a World War II game may have rubbed some people the wrong way. However, this cannot explain why everyone, from the lowliest forum troll to the most respective games journalist, was so eager to push aside all the issues with Modern Warfare 2, even when they were so willing to make up issues for World at War (“it's too safe,” “it's too gory,” etc.)

Now let's be clear, it's not like I don't get fanboys. Be it Nintendo vs Sony vs Microsoft, Democrats vs Republicans, or Burger King vs McDonald's, fanboys have been swinging off the nuts of one company or the other since before I was born and will likely continue to do so long after I die. However, the Infinity Ward thing just irks the fuck out of me. We all buy games from many different publishers and developers every single year. Well, most of us do, but we all know Nintendo fans. Anyway, the rest of us all buy games from many different publishers and developers every year. We've also bought games in a single series that have gone from developer to developer since the IP is owned by a publisher. However, this only seems to be unacceptable when it comes to Treyarch making Call of Duty games. I'm not sure why this company has earned the legion of mouth-breathing fanboys it has. Even before the MW2 layoffs and resignations, IW didn't exactly care much for community outreach like Bungie does. They don't have decades of nostalgia behind them like Nintendo. They haven't made a lot of games (in fact, IW itself has only made four – Call of Duty 1, 2, 4 and MW2).

This isn't to say that I dislike Infinity Ward's games, or that I don't look forward to what Respawn is going to bring to the table. However, I wish people would stop hating on Treyarch. They make good games, and deserve some love for all their efforts. Save the hate for the crappy Wiiware shovelware developers that the Bombcast so deliciously mocks.

#2 Posted by davidwitten22 (1708 posts) -

In my opinion, the Modern Warfare series is better than World at War in every way. Except, WaW has Nazi Zombies, which is fucking awesome.

#3 Posted by Ryax (4630 posts) -

im kinda excited about the new one. haters gonna hate

#4 Edited by VanderSEXXX (552 posts) -

Good point there. I actually also notice how many game journalists easily ignore many flaws that Modern Warfare 2 has. But I sense some fanboys will still come in here and storm this post "in defense of Infinity Ward". :p

#5 Edited by TooWalrus (13219 posts) -

Here's your fucking defense for Tryarch: World at War was a MUCH better game than Modern Warefare1 & 2. The multiplayer was more fun, maps & weapons were more balanced, kill streaks were fucking AWESOME! (I love those dogs!) Not to mention the awesome voice acting from each of the multiplayer factions... Man, I need to play some more World at War.

#6 Posted by DanielJW (4915 posts) -

The thing about Modern Warfare 2's bugs, as many people have mentioned, was that when you get eleven million odd people banging away at your game, all trying to find a way to get ahead, more bugs are going to pop up. I imagine we'd see a ton of new exploits and bugs out of WaW if that many people kept pounding away at it too.  
 
Also I don't feel like WaW was bad, it just seemed too much like a WWII skinned Modern Warfare. They played it totally safe and just fed off of what Infinity Ward did, spinning it to World War II. While it had awesome aspects like Nazi Zombies, I felt like I couldn't get in to it because of how much it seemed to rehash MW. 

#7 Posted by HitmanAgent47 (8576 posts) -

Okay, however on gamerankings or metacritic, (watch a million ppl reply to me because they don't like being told what to think) treyard, can't make a game over 90% and infinity ward can't make a game under 90%. It's simply treyard does make good games, just not great games like infinity ward. Also I sort of dislike treyard games, I can't quite figure out why, it lacks that sort of talent of infinityward, yet it still tries it's best. Now treyard must be so happy because infinityward is gone, he's like finally ppl will give me attention for once.

#8 Posted by RandomInternetUser (6789 posts) -

I don't dislike Treyarch or their games, in fact I enjoy them a bunch, but I feel like Infinity Ward more consistently pumps out better games.  I agree though, the hate they get is unwarranted and just completely idiotic.

#9 Posted by Rockanomics (1150 posts) -

Wasn't much I liked about 3, WaW was fine, and I'm somewhat exited for what they are going to do now that they have more than scraps to work with.

#10 Posted by Sanryd (1362 posts) -

People have said it before, and I'll say it again: Nazi Zombies. That is all you need as a defense for Treyarch. They created that, and therefore are awesome, forever.

#11 Posted by Red (5995 posts) -

While the new Treyarch game does look pretty cool, I absolutely hated World At War. And I'd take Spec Ops over Nazi Zombies and World at War's terrible Co-Op integration any day.

#12 Posted by LiquidPrince (15967 posts) -

I enjoyed reading that, but you are blasting Modern Warfare a bit as well. It is not "glitch riddled" and the Spec Ops was intensely satisfying. I got all 69 stars.

#13 Posted by TonicBH (271 posts) -

Bravo. I actually liked COD3 and World at War, and thought MW2 was passable but not as good as COD4 or WAW.
 
It's too bad that the whole Infinity Ward fiasco soured any future interest I had in any COD games. I bet Black Ops will be the shit, but I don't want to be part of the problem by buying this game and giving Activision my $60.

#14 Posted by thevampirate (1 posts) -

I must say that the IW fanboys are annoying and while i do agree with them that most of the IW games were better than their Treyarch counterparts i do have to admit that treyarch has done a fairly good job at advancing the series. 
on the other hand i had one HUGE issue with World at war. the Multiplayer wasn't really exciting compared to the MW1 was. I think the guns really were what held it back. to begin with the WW2 era weapons held the game back: the semi auto rifles didnt have nearly enough ammo and didnt give you the punch you need (not to mention that they were all virtually the same gun but MW and MW2 have the same issue), the sniper rifles forced you to attach a scope, and the LMG didnt have a big enough punch. I think they dont deserve the spotlight but they dont deserve to be as insulted as they are either.

#15 Posted by ArcLyte (886 posts) -

i'll have to disagree with you. the IW CoD games will forever be remembered as the only ones that mattered.

#16 Posted by pwn4g3IEE7 (31 posts) -
@TooWalrus:  i agree with EVERY word that you typed World At War is much better Treyarch was awesome for gifting us with it. and i love treyarch for making a beta for Black Ops   
#17 Posted by thewonderwaffle (63 posts) -

Thank you. This is exactly how I feel. Treyarch deserves its props.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.