Poll: What are your opinions on Treyarch?

[Eggsnham]

EDIT: Fixed some minor typos.

For those who don't know, Treyarch is the game company hired by Activision to create some CoD games, the other company that creates CoD games is Infinity Ward. The two companies alternate in which company gets to create the next CoD game every year.

There are many different opinions on Treyarch, some think they're too nostalgic about WWII, some think they're trying too hard to fill IW's boots, and some think they're a joke.

I personally think of them as "fanboy crowd control" at this point. They basically just make games so that fans of the MW series won't be without a "fresh CoD experience" while waiting for another of IW's golden nuggets of sweet sweet delicious war.

So, what do you think?

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

I like them better than Infinity Ward.

Infinity Ward has the most popular shooter of all time, and only gave the massive fanbase one okay map pack.

Treyarch does more than one game series, gave us a side of WW2 few games ever do, and listens to their fans when making DLC. Making a better Nazi Zombies mode, one map pack at a time for the fans of that. And adding decent multiplayer maps, too.

And they gave us campaign co-op. CoD has been begging for that since CoD 2.

Also, to those saying they "Stuck with WW2 too long"

THEY DID ONE MORE WW2 GAME AFTER CoD4! JUST ONE! First, they did CoD 3. And had no clue that IW was going to go "Modern" with 4. So they did one more WW2, and did it differently than other WW2 games. They did the Pacific Theater.

It had a two year development cycle, like every CoD game. Each studio works for 2 years on their game, if the pattern continues. And it was in development before the launch of CoD4 in that case, since it came out a year after CoD4. Do you want a two year developed WW2 game? Or a rushed Modern Warfare game?

 

[Babrook]

To be honest all CoD games are generally dull and samey, so I couldn't tell the difference between Treyarch or Infinity Ward for the life of me.

 

[Hybridwolf]

Good company, but they kept with world war two for too long. They did a good job of it, but a mix of the genade throwing A.I in single player and the MP40/PPSH on mp ruined it for me.

Still at least they did offer more content, and they have the balls to make the next one in vietnam. Give them credit, contraversy will be leaking at the seams judging at the amount of media one level in Modern warfare 2 got.

 

[orangebandguy]

I liked Call of Duty 3, I thought it was really good. The campaign was very engaging, and finally included the Poles and Canadian armies in mainstream WW2 FPS.

And of course one of my favourite quotes shouldn't go amiss: 'Glory or a glorious death await!'

 

[MetalDooley]

Tbh I think they receive a lot of unwarranted hate simply because they're not IW.WAW was a good game that had the misfortune of following CoD4 so it was always going to be judged harshly

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

Good company, but they kept with world war two for too long. They did a good job of it, but a mix of the genade throwing A.I in single player and the MP40/PPSH on mp ruined it for me.

Still at least they did offer more content, and they have the balls to make the next one in vietnam. Give them credit, contraversy will be leaking at the seams judging at the amount of media one level in Modern warfare 2 got.

Kept with it too long? THEY DID ONE MORE WW2 GAME! First, they did CoD 3. And had no clue that IW was going to go "Modern" with 4. So they did one more WW2, and did it differently than other WW2 games. They did the Pacific Theater.

 

[Julianking93]

Treyarch is like the retarded little brother of Infinity Ward that got dropped on their head too many goddamn times.

 

[WINDOWCLEAN2]

Well there still technilly the same, its really just a legal bypass to swap responsibiltiy and profit betwwen the two.
EG: If COD 8 was terrible they are still covered by claiming that the company was differant then the prvious game and thus keep some reputation

 

[Distorted Stu]

I like them because they like Tanks =]

 

[DragonsAteMyMarbles]

They made Spider-Man 2, didn't they? Can't be all bad.

 

[DoctorNick]

'Whats a Treyarch?' is my reply.

That's literally the first time I've heard this companies name, partially because I have almost, not quite, but almost zero interest in anything Call Of Duty related.

Anyway, to the Googlemobile! [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ns-JASaalj8]

...

Aaannnddd...they've made exactly nothing I've ever played. So I guess they're alright, I've never played their games but they've never pissed me off either.

Lets call it a wash.

 

[Louis343]

Treyarch is like the retarded little brother of Infinity Ward that got dropped on their head too many goddamn times.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[fix-the-spade]

Treyarch: Ostensibly hack developers hired to fill the gaps between 'proper' sequels of another developer's major series.

Evidently unhappy with this reputation, Treyarch have worked hard to get to rid of it, delivering good player support and updates. CoD3 was a huge misfire, but with WaW they've shown plenty of quality, if not necessarily any originality (other people have done the Pacific).

If CoD3-WaW and MW-MW2 show the future trands of Activision's cash cow developers, I'd rather see Treyarch carrying CoD than Infinity Ward. They pulled a huge improvement with WaW, whilst MW2 had a distinct Matrix Reloaded feel to it...

 

[Hybridwolf]

Kept with it too long? THEY DID ONE MORE WW2 GAME! First, they did CoD 3. And had no clue that IW was going to go "Modern" with 4. So they did one more WW2, and did it differently than other WW2 games. They did the Pacific Theater.

Really?Well thats intresting. I honestly did not know they had started work before modern warfare. You learn something new...

So maybe they weren't beating such a dead horse. But infinate grenades and balancing issues still soured the game for me.

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

Kept with it too long? THEY DID ONE MORE WW2 GAME! First, they did CoD 3. And had no clue that IW was going to go "Modern" with 4. So they did one more WW2, and did it differently than other WW2 games. They did the Pacific Theater.

Really?Well thats intresting. I honestly did not know they had started work before modern warfare. You learn something new...

So maybe they weren't beating such a dead horse. But infinate grenades and balancing issues still soured the game for me.

Well, it had a two year development cycle, like every CoD game. Each studio works for 2 years on their game, if the pattern continues. And it was in development before the launch of CoD4 in that case, since it came out a year after CoD4. Do you want a two year developed WW2 game? Or a rushed Modern Warfare game?

 

[Hybridwolf]

Well, it had a two year development cycle, like every CoD game. Each studio works for 2 years on their game, if the pattern continues. And it was in development before the launch of CoD4 in that case, since it came out a year after CoD4. Do you want a two year developed WW2 game? Or a rushed Modern Warfare game?

Two years seems barely enough if you ask me. The newest one has more bugs then a dung heap and WAW had balancing issues which set the bar for future cod games. Seems to me that two years is barely enough time as it is to get the game out in it's current state, but since I don't know who dictate how long people spend making a game, I not going to point the finger of blame. Anyway, WHO CARES. COD 8 has already won favor with me for being in vietnam, we'll see how they handle themselves this time eh?

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

Well, it had a two year development cycle, like every CoD game. Each studio works for 2 years on their game, if the pattern continues. And it was in development before the launch of CoD4 in that case, since it came out a year after CoD4. Do you want a two year developed WW2 game? Or a rushed Modern Warfare game?

Two years seems barely enough if you ask me. The newest one has more bugs then a dung heap and WAW had balancing issues which set the bar for future cod games. Seems to me that two years is barely enough time as it is to get the game out in it's current state, but since I don't know who dictate how long people spend making a game, I not going to point the finger of blame. Anyway, WHO CARES. COD 8 has already won favor with me for being in vietnam, we'll see how they handle themselves this time eh?

Yep. MW2 is a broken as it gets. And WaW had the MP40 be over-powered as fuck.

 

[Dapper Ninja]

They made some good Spider-Man games, I guess. And I guess their Call of Duty games were okay or something.

 

[Hyldago]

i guesse i don't mind treyarch but i hate thier games. its not their fault though. treyarch and infinity ward both make the same kinds of games. the problem is the setting of those games, while infinty ward makes games set in the present or near future allowing them to create the story and use some really impressive weaponry treyarch is stuck in ww2 meaning all of thier games must fit within ww2 limiting their options and it means they have to use the weapons of the time. both companies are good and esencially realeased the same game nut mw2 was suppieror to WaW because WaW was just another ww2 game. proof of concept is that one of the most intersting and funnest things about WaW is nazi zombies and thats only supposed to be a side note (im not saying nazi zombies was the best part of WaW but being the only thing not ww2 it were deffinatley the must interesting).