Remember World at War? Yeah, before its announcement everybody called it COD5. Even when the game was announced sans a number, people still called it COD5. WHEN IT CAME OUT, SOME PEOPLE STILL CALLED IT COD5. Playfire has it labeled as "Call of Duty 5: World at War."

And most people I know who play COD4 called it that, not "Modern Warfare." It's such a generic name that it even got Andrew Pfister confusing it with Battlefield 2: Modern Combat for previews and reviews of WAW.

I'm not saying that the game's gonna suck because of that, but you're gonna confuse a big chunk of your audience because people knew it as "Call of Duty." Modern Warfare is such a generic term that it could mean anything. It'd be like EA calling the next Battlefield game simply "Bad Company 2."

Remember World at War? Yeah, before its announcement everybody called it COD5. Even when the game was announced sans a number, people still called it COD5. WHEN IT CAME OUT, SOME PEOPLE STILL CALLED IT COD5. Playfire has it labeled as "Call of Duty 5: World at War."

And most people I know who play COD4 called it that, not "Modern Warfare." It's such a generic name that it even got Andrew Pfister confusing it with Battlefield 2: Modern Combat for previews and reviews of WAW.

I'm not saying that the game's gonna suck because of that, but you're gonna confuse a big chunk of your audience because people knew it as "Call of Duty." Modern Warfare is such a generic term that it could mean anything. It'd be like EA calling the next Battlefield game simply "Bad Company 2."

My thoughts exactly. Who do you know that called COD4 just Modern Warfare? Nobody that's who. No need to ditch the COD name just because Treyarch didn't bring justice to the name...

I actually like the idea of splitting the CoD games into seperate franchulettes.

"I actually like the idea of splitting the CoD games into seperate franchulettes."

And most people I know who play COD4 called it that, not "Modern Warfare."

I personally think that COD4: Modern Warfare is popular enough that they can get away with just "Modern Warfare 2". But is it confirmed that the box is just going to say that? We don't know yet. I mean the first trailers for spider-man 3 just ended with "3" and that wasn't the name of the movie.

i like modern warfare 2. because other wise people will call it cod6 which it totally isn't, or what?? cod4.2? call of duty four point two!?!! LOL

It seems that most people referred to Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare just as COD4. I think the abbreviation has become synonymous with Call of Duty, so I believe the abbreviation should make it into the game title.

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. Mission Accomplished.

Call of Duty 6: yes it's still good.

It seems to me that Infinity Ward deserve to use the name Call of Duty.  They created the series and they are the reason for people still buying Call of Duty games.  If Call of Duty 4 hadn't been released I would honestly have given up on the CoD franchise right now, CoD3 and then CoDWaW were pretty bad when compared to even Call of Duty 1 and 2.  The battles just don't feel the same, they feel very contrived and static.

"i like modern warfare 2. because other wise people will call it cod6 which it totally isn't, or what?? cod4.2? call of duty four point two!?!! LOL"

It will use the Call of Duty name, end of discussion.

"nobody says world at war. Nobody."

In my opinion, it's really as if though Infinity just handed over the name to Treyarch.

I think it's quite clear that they're trying to position Call of Duty as two separate series, and may even go for three in the future if they decide to explore a futuristic setting, or some other historical period.

Think of it this way: with this new approach, a Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 and a Call of Duty: World at War 2 could theoretically come out at the same time, although this is unlikely for marketing reasons. How can you define which is Call of Duty 7 and which is 8? You have to just stop thinking of it as a single ongoing series, because it no longer is. It's kind of just becoming Activision Blizzard's label for a certain type of war game, seeing as multiple developers handle the games.

Think of it like Crime Scene Investigation and its various spin-offs. Modern Warfare is the modern take on the series, and World at War (an existing term for WW2) is for the WW2 take.

Well blame Activision really, they made some decisions to the CoD franchise letting Treyarch make 3 and WaW and now IW was to gfto out of that name.

They're transitioning the brand.

Maybe this is what Robert Bowling meant when he said their new contract with Activision gave them the possibility of a creating new IP that they'll have complete control over.  Come to think of it, pretty much every time he's mentioned the game in his blog, he refers to it as just Modern Warfare 2. I don't think he's included Call of Duty in the name even once. Then again, it may just be a working title. It's completely understandable why Infinity Ward would want this, though. If Infinity Ward is the sole developer of their own franchise, then everyone can expect every entry in the franchise to be of high quality. But Call of Duty has many companies developing games of varying quality with the name on it (Treyarch, Spark Unlimited, etc.), which is probably confusing for your average gamer who doesn't really know (or care) about who's making what games. They just see the name Call of Duty on the box and think, 'Oh, Call of Duty 4 was awesome. I should totally get this!'

In the end though, I don't really care what it winds up being called, as long as they get it in my hands ASAP.

Considering how shit World at War was, distancing themselves from that inferior product can only be a good thing.

there has only been 3 call of duty game 1,2 & MW

I call it Modern Warfare.

also i never called Call of Duty, Cod and 4 was just Modern Warfare to me.

I hate it when people call World at War COD 5!! I try calling it WaW but then again I don't need to say it that often because I don't own WaW..

I think it'll do fine.

"Considering how shit World at War was, distancing themselves from that inferior product can only be a good thing."

It's funny to see what will happen now, on XBox live for example, the game is being called Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2. Either way it's interesting to see how the game will be promoted. If IW will in fact branch off and sell it as Modern Warfare the series. I can see how they think people are tired of seeing Call of Duty on a yearly basis. Then again how can IW not include Call of Duty in the gamebox itself that would be pretty dumb. Call of Duty is established and i'm sure they want the world at war crowd to migrate back.

Maybe it'll be positioned like the 'Tom Clancy' brand (who pretty much has nothing to do with the games nowadays, nor their stories).

It's just like Halo 3: ODST; no one knows what the title entails.

"I agree. When I first saw that I was like, "Call of Duty 2: Modern Warfare?" And also, nobody says world at war. Nobody."

activision could just keep infinity ward doing the numbered releases and treyarch doing the subtitled, but not numbered releases. sort of like how rockstar made gta3, then vice city and san andreas, then gta 4. when you think about it, cod:w@w didn't even have a number in the title, so  the next game could theoretically just be called cod5: mw.

"

activision could just keep infinity ward doing the numbered releases and treyarch doing the subtitled, but not numbered releases. sort of like how rockstar made gta3, then vice city and san andreas, then gta 4. when you think about it, cod:w@w didn't even have a number in the title, so  the next game could theoretically just be called cod5: mw.

"

I'm really not quite sure why they don't just stick with non-numerical suffixes after the series' name.  Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 makes sense and apparently- from reading this sort of topic on several forums- will please both sides of the argument.  To drop the series name to me seems like they would alienate a lot of CoD fans.  Since the series has already adopted such loose guidelines for what their games are with the addition of modern warfare it would not make sense to ditch the name after the first "Modern Warfare" already had the Call of Duty prefix...

i agree with both sides : its true that the Call of Duty name is fading out and the new turn in the COD franchise requires new badass names like Modern Warfare and World At War ..

seriously who cares as long as the gameplay's good

" i agree with both sides : its true that the Call of Duty name is fading out and the new turn in the COD franchise requires new badass names like Modern Warfare and World At War ..

STILL, its Call of Duty.. thats the name of the game.. they should never lose it..

i like to call this game Call of Duty 6: Modern Warfare 2"

" @Ahmad_Metallic said:

" i agree with both sides : its true that the Call of Duty name is fading out and the new turn in the COD franchise requires new badass names like Modern Warfare and World At War ..

STILL, its Call of Duty.. thats the name of the game.. they should never lose it..

i like to call this game Call of Duty 6: Modern Warfare 2"

Yeah, I'm sure that's what most people will call it, and internally, it's still known as both I don't think they're actually sure which direction they're trying to go in. "

" It's just like Halo 3: ODST; no one knows what the title entails. "

Ah, another thread for people to hate on W@W...

" NinjaSquirrel said:

"nobody says world at war. Nobody."

I do. "

It's not a problem, every ordinary person is just going to call this COD 6.

I rarely called call of duty 4 cod4 or world at war cod 5 i both called them cod and I think I will call MW2 Warfare or again cod

" seriously who cares as long as the gameplay's good "