Infinity Ward On Call Of Duty 6

Call of Duty 4 was top notch because it was developed by series originators Infinity Ward, so it’s pleasing to know that it’ll be returning to them in 2009 for its sixth installment. This was confirmed by Activision Publishing CEO Mike Griffith at yesterday’s Activision Blizzard Analyst Day. No other details yet, although the rumour-mill suggests that the theme might be sci-fi war. I’m not so sure this has anything to do with the COD series: why break a winning formula? I think there’s a whole lot left in the contemporary combat theme.

That exciting-sounding Acti-Blizz Analyst Day was covered in detail over on VG247.


  1. Cunningbeef says:

    Oh god they’re all coming so fast.

  2. Ketch says:

    As long as they don’t take it to Vietnam, games always go bad when they end up in Vietnam! (See Conflict: Vietnam, Battlefield Vietnam)

  3. Jonas says:

    Yeh but Ketch, if anybody can make a good Vietnam game, it’ll have to be Infinity Ward. They’ve already proven they can show what a mess war is while still making it fun to play, and there are so many great Vietnam films they could pilfer from. I mean let’s face it: The CoD games are great because they steal from pretty much every film and TV series ever made about their subject matter. Imagine a CoD game “inspired” by Apocalypse Now, Platoon, and Full Metal Jacket!

  4. darthpugwash says:

    2009 will be right on time – Infinity Ward seem to have a schedule, one COD game every two years.

    I’m looking forward to it already, might be interesting to see what they do with the sci-fi theme if that is what they’re doing. I was somewhat dissapointed when I heard that COD4 was going to be set in the present, but it turned out to be my favourite game in the series.

  5. Flint says:

    Mmmm, scifistic COD. Yes please.

  6. Carra says:

    CoD4 didn’t have anything to do with the original CoD either. Great game none the less.

  7. weegosan says:

    If they targeted future tech possibilities in the same way that say Minority Report did (sans the seeing into the future nonsense) it could be pretty superb. If it’s aliens and worlds and dogs with lasers for eyes then it will lose something that’s been maintained really well through the series so far.

  8. Pavel says:

    CoD4 is great and all, but…I want some new IP dammit.

  9. MetalCircus says:

    I hate this already.

  10. Jamie says:

    Don’t care where it’s set, can’t wait

  11. Ian says:

    @weegosan: You don’t think the dogs of the future will have laser-vision? =O

  12. araczynski says:

    i’ve always found ‘contemporary combat’ (in games) to be boring as hell. i have not and will not ever buy any games that are based around it, including cod4, cod6, cod8…

  13. onkellou says:

    i’ve always found ‘contemporary combat’ (in games) to be boring as hell. i have not and will not ever buy any games that are based around it, including cod4, cod6, cod8…

    That’s mainly cosmetics, surely. Doesn’t matter much in the end whether you kill someone with a WW2-machine pistol, and M16 or a laser rifle in a game, in my opinion. It’s the mechanics that have to work.

    It will have more of an influence on the atmosphere of a game, but CoD4 had that in spades.

  14. Jonas says:

    Yeah araczynski, if you think CoD4 is anything like eg. Flashpoint, ArmA, or AA, you’re sorely mistaken. For better or worse, it’s pretty much CoD2, transposed into the present day.

    Personally I would be a little sad if IW move up to sci-fi already. I should like another game or two from them set in a contemporary setting.

  15. cliffski says:

    Am I the only one who would welcome a move back to WW2?

  16. Jonas says:

    Well Treyarch’s CoD5 is set in WW2, so I’m not sure that’s relevant – you’re already getting it :P

  17. Justin says:

    Why? The upcoming CoD World at War already is…

  18. sigma83 says:

    araczynski: You are missing out. COD4 is my favorite Call of Duty. They’ve taken the lessons they’ve learned from all the design flaws in the previous COD games and this one is just a joy to play.

    On topic: Honestly, as far as I’m concerned Infinity Ward, as well as Bioware, Valve, Relic, and Blizzard, pretty much have carte blanche to make games. Blizzard could, tomorrow, announce a casual puzzle title, and I would play it.

    Call of Duty: Waterloo? Still playing it.
    Homeworld: The Prewarp Years? Still playing it.
    Mass Effect 4? Still playing it. Still be pissed if they release it on consoles tho. =P=P=P

    So yeah. They could release a third person stealth game with a rabbit as the protagonist and I would still get it.

  19. Ravenger says:

    I found COD4 very enjoyable, but the continual respawning of enemies and the forcing you to advance all the time got a bit stale after a while. You eventually realised there was no point in staying in cover and taking out the enemies since they’d just respawn anyway.

    Still playing the multiplayer months later though. Recently got my Gold AK, and now I’m trying to get all the machine gun awards.

  20. sigma83 says:

    I wouldn’t mind if they made the game _even harder_ but did away with the infinite respawn mechanic. Defeating enemies should be more meaningful, but this is just an imo. It could actually be an unfun mechanic.

  21. sbs says:

    “Acti-Blizz”? Oh, come on, can’t we all agree to “Actard”?

  22. Sum0 says:

    CoD4 was great, though I wish they had more Marines/Middle East levels rather than yomping around in some Central Asian swamp.

    Re the Vietnam discussion: if anyone could make a Vietnam FPS work, it would be Infinity Ward. The thing with Vietnam is that you either leave out all the political and social commentary, in which case you get a tacky and bland jungle shooter that ignores the setting’s biggest strength, or you shoe-horn in some swearing and atrocities and long musings on the horrors of war and you get something trite and embarrasing.
    But I felt that CoD4 was almost approaching art, in the sense that it was suggesting some pretty important themes and concepts (without patronising the audience and spelling them out). Remember the mission to rescue Nikolai – having fought a bloody battle outside, you get to the house, switch off the power, flip on your NV goggles and suddenly it’s just a case of gunning down the blind and scared soldiers inside. Or that AC-130 gunship mission, which is clearly going for the whole post-Gulf War “war is a video game” concept – it’s literally point-and-click killing from a distant, goreless, hazy perspective, with your crewmates offering a running commentary on the carnage far below you. Video games don’t do that sort of thing very often, and FPSes never do. CoD was just Saving Private Ryan: The Game, but CoD4 was a sign of Infinity Ward evolving into something else altogether.

  23. LQB says:

    Call of Duty 4 had a God-tier single player campaign, I’m actually surprised that they might not stick with the modern war theme and venture into the world of Sci-Fi.

    On the other hand I guess it isn’t all that surprising since working from a completely fictional universe can let them flex their creative muscle a lot more.

    Also, since this is CoD 4 related, I can’t help but complain about its twitchy, spammy, CS-esque, 1337 jacksun snioper, bullshit multiplayer.

  24. Real Horrorshow says:

    I think they should stick to modern warfare as well. Perhaps flip it around: British conventional military missions like the Marine ones in CoD4, then U.S. special ops instead of SAS. Navy SEALS? Would rule.

  25. cosa says:

    onkellou – the difference is that instead of the laser rifle you can telefrag them, use a guided mini-nuke or a sniper rifle that warps time to make getting a headshot easier, throw an alien grub that’ll charge them and explode, or back off through a doorway and throw a laserbeam grenade that’ll drill a hole in the next guy to open the door. And your enemy can have a personal forcefield, a cloaked tank, a mech suit or an army of decoy holograms.
    Futuristic FPS combat is absolutely more tactically interesting than contemporary/WW2 combat. Nevertheless, there are still good and bad games in both camps – for instance, if you’ve never played BF2 you’re badly missing out.

  26. Nick says:

    “COD4 is my favorite Call of Duty. They’ve taken the lessons they’ve learned from all the design flaws in the previous COD games”

    Apart from the endlessly respawning in the same location enemies lesson.

    Hmm, modern day/near future to futuristic sci-fi. Hey, it worked for Battlefield!

    Oh wait. It sucked all charm and sense of place out of Battlefield. Whoops.

  27. Christian says:

    I don’t think the elements that make CoD great would really translate well to a sci-fi setting. What I would like to see is a “Cold War gone hot” WWIII scenario.

  28. Eschatos says:

    The fact that they’re talking about another sequel before the next one is even out is a very bad sign.

  29. Serzus says:

    @Eschatos: IW isn’t making world at war, I assume they’ve been working away at #6 since CoD4 went gold. Treyarch’s games in the series have always been much more poorly received.

    I can’t wait for six… IW’s had my eye and wallet since the first demo for CoD1. Just outstanding single player, and great multiplayer as well. I doubt they’ll go Sci-Fi just yet – And I certainly agree with the aboves that a Vietnam setting would be a great match with infinity ward. I don’t generally like contemporary settings, but CoD4 was so great I’d be just as excited for another game in modern times.

  30. Dorian Cornelius Jasper says:

    The Middle Eastern levels were the boring, repetitive levels. The best CoD4 levels were all SAS, like the Price and MacMillan chapter.


  31. Nick says:

    Agreed, the SAS levels were mostly superb.

  32. sigma83 says:

    ‘The fact that they’re talking about another sequel before the next one is even out is a very bad sign.’

    Why, when it’s two different development houses doing both?

  33. sigma83 says:

    ‘Agreed, the SAS levels were mostly superb’

    The sniper missions were particularly awesome, but Shock and Awe remains one of the best FPS missions I’ve ever played in a series that’s very well renowned for their awesome FPS missions.

  34. Bobsy says:

    Give me a Civil War Call of Duty, fuck YES. American or English, I don’t care. But god, god yes give me that game.

  35. Dracko says:

    They should do the Korean War. Or the Troubles.

  36. Carlton says:


    I always thought that on the American side of things the Revolutionary War and Civil War was terribly underutilized, or even the French and Indian War. God, if Infinity Ward did a game focusing on different perspectives in the French and Indian War I’d go nuts.

  37. Nate says:

    Wars previous to WWII were being avoided because IW wanted to be realistic– and there was no room for anything close to the heroics you need for a fun video game. Want to represent WWI? Spend a week in a trench, then rush out and get mowed down by a MG. Repeat fifty times.

    More recent conflicts were avoided because they remain very controversial. Can you sell a Vietnam game to SE Asians and US Americans at the same time? Can you sell it to anybody in Sweden?

    I’m willing to bet IW was sick to death of WWII by the time of COD2. Remember, it’s the same folks that did the good MoH game too, whichever one that was. But they were good at WWII, and they knew their material. CoD4 was a hell of a risk. And there’s only so much room for imaginary, uncontroversial modern conflict games. Hell, they already managed to piss off some folks with CoD4.

    But you got to remember, video game designers are every bit as nerdy as the rest of us. All they want to do is make a game that finally does justice to Star Wars, or Blade Runner, or Aliens. Eventually, you take the risk and see what happens. I think it’s going to be hard to get right. We’ll see.