Why does Call of Duty keep selling so well?

[Ashbax]

I would just like to say to all the people saying CoD has good graphics and high production values, the problem there is, it has a high budget for sure, but they don't do jack shit with it. The game has the exact same graphics it did in 2007, in fact, they even used some of the same buildings that were in CoD4. This is a fact.

The game is actually beginning to look pretty crap. Especially if you look at the PC version, then compare it to a high-end PC game, because PC games look much better than console ones. (Example - BF3 on xbox/ps3 is running on the equivalent of 'low' graphics settings for the PC version). I don't care about graphics, I play games that are old as shit on a daily basis, but for a lot of people, its a big deal, and I really think those kind of production values are good enough for how big the game is.

The amount of change that has happened from CoD4 to CoD8 is too small for 4 games, it would better suit 1 or 2 sequels. For its budget, its sales and its importance in the gaming industry, it has low production values, out of date technology, and very little change in the yearly releases.

It should not sell as well as it does.

 

[Ashbax]

well I agree with the sentiment that It's fun, and that's what a good game is supposed to do, however the reason why CoD keeps selling so well is because the game is quite accessible, it's well marketed, while it tries to be realistic, it has a step above of reality to remind us that it's a game unlike Battlefield 3 which obsesses over realism.

There is a ~HUGE~ difference between authenticity and realism. Neither of those games has a semblance of realism, but they work very hard on authenticity.

 

[Drexlor]

The reason that I have played every Call of Duty game since 3 is simply because I enjoy them. They are well made and I rarely have any problems with quality (apart from World at War's veteran difficulty). I mostly play for the campaign and they are some of the few games that will always get multiple playthroughs from me. I also play multiplayer and they are also some of the few games where you can guarantee that you can easily get into a full lobby for a match for over a year after release.

 

[42]

well I agree with the sentiment that It's fun, and that's what a good game is supposed to do, however the reason why CoD keeps selling so well is because the game is quite accessible, it's well marketed, while it tries to be realistic, it has a step above of reality to remind us that it's a game unlike Battlefield 3 which obsesses over realism.

There is a ~HUGE~ difference between authenticity and realism. Neither of those games has a semblance of realism, but they work very hard on authenticity.

It doesn't matter, Authenticity is done to make it feel real, and realism is how close it can be to reality and to be quite honest, Realistic warfare shooters, including CoD and BF, just really aren't that fun as people think. CoD gets a small break because it at least draws a line in how real it gets, however BF just straight across the board aims for realism. and i don't give a shit about how authentic or realistic it is, because if you're playing games for those reasons alone then i'm sorry but you need you're priorities sorted.

 

[Ordinaryundone]

It doesn't matter, Authenticity is done to make it feel real, and realism is how close it can be to reality and to be quite honest, Realistic warfare shooters, including CoD and BF, just really aren't that fun as people think. CoD gets a small break because it at least draws a line in how real it gets, however BF just straight across the board aims for realism. and i don't give a shit about how authentic or realistic it is, because if you're playing games for those reasons alone then i'm sorry but you need you're priorities sorted.

They aren't as fun as people think? Nearly 7 million people disagree.

There is no magic and no conspiracy to why these games do well. They are fun. They are rewarding. They are easy to pick up and play, and do not require a large timesink to have fun, while simultaneously rewarding dedicated players.

Also, Activision has an awesome PR department who would carve Call of Duty on the moon if they could. This, plus favorable word of mouth means it cultivates some pretty hefty brand recognition. Pretty much everyone has at least HEARD of Call of Duty, which goes a long way when selling to people who only dabble in the hobby, or are just starting out.

 

[silent-treatment]

Why do movies like The Expendables do well? Why is Justin Bieber popular? Why is the main stream main stream? Easy it's accessible. It is easy to get in, have fun, and get out. One does not lightly play hardcore games just like people dont lightly get into David Lynch films.

Except that each Call of Duty is the equivalent of an Avatar or Titanic.

I would disagree with that. The first Modern Warfare was on par with those two movies the rest that followed have more in common with The Expendables. What I mean is that the two movies you mentioned brought something new to their genre (like Titanic added an epic, used like the epic in "epic poem", story to romantic movies, and Avatar had brilliant technology) Expendables was just an action movie that repeated all of the old action troupes and added nothing new. Consistence is not necessarily a bad thing, but to get this industry moving we need a little more diversity and MW3 is not helping anything.

Side Note: Are you trying to be massively abrasive, cause you sure are coming off that way.

 

[Trippy Turtle]

Because whether you like it or not it is a solid game series that is fun to play. Its like bread. It won't amaze you and make you start a religion about it but it is a decent game that you can depend on to get some decent gameplay from.

 

[Peteron]

The Call of Duty franchise is an addicting one, no doubt. In fact, I never had the same issue with any other FPS, even if it was a good one. (Halo franchise, etc.)
Essentially, the game is simple, fun, and never gets old. Really, people buying the games aren't buying it for the game itself, but rather a continuation of the addictive multiplayer experience. New perks, guns, maps, etc. So essentially, everyone is buying 60$ DLCs.

 

[kouriichi]

CoD is the guilty pleasure very few people feel guilty about.

You can jump on CoD, kill 300 people with your favorite guns, and then get back to your daily life. You can have amazingly fun times in CoD.

Sure, you can also have BAD, HORRID, BRAIN FUNCTION DISRUPTING times in it too, but that just makes the fun times shine even better.

The only reason i havent bought it is because my XBL subscription is up, and its the only multi-player game i would own right now.

 

[Indignator]

Why do movies like The Expendables do well? Why is Justin Bieber popular? Why is the main stream main stream? Easy it's accessible. It is easy to get in, have fun, and get out. One does not lightly play hardcore games just like people dont lightly get into David Lynch films.

Except that each Call of Duty is the equivalent of an Avatar or Titanic.

I would disagree with that. The first Modern Warfare was on par with those two movies the rest that followed have more in common with The Expendables. What I mean is that the two movies you mentioned brought something new to their genre (like Titanic added an epic, used like the epic in "epic poem", story to romantic movies, and Avatar had brilliant technology) Expendables was just an action movie that repeated all of the old action troupes and added nothing new. Consistence is not necessarily a bad thing, but to get this industry moving we need a little more diversity and MW3 is not helping anything.

Side Note: Are you trying to be massively abrasive, cause you sure are coming off that way.

What I mean is that each Call of Duty game sells in such massive amounts that they can be compared to Avatar and Titanic, not the Expendables. I don't want to sound like a broken record, but it's the staggering (I'm running out of synonyms for very large) and consistent sales figures that interest me.

As to being abrasive, no I'm not trying to be that way. In all sincerity, could you point out where you thought I was abrasive, so that in the future I might avoid doing it again?

 

[TheTim]

It doesn't surprise me that its doing good, it surprises me that it keeps doing better for mere carbon copies. it is a genuinely fun game series, but it doesn't change at all.

 

[Indignator]

I really want to flame the OP, but i'm going to take the high road.

COD has a large playerbase, because FPS games are the most popular segment in gaming. COD is above and beyond the best FPS game. It is fun, but it is also more fun.

The only way you can surpass COD is to make a multiplayer FPS game that is regarded by the masses to be better than COD.

Why do you want to flame me for asking a question?

 

[sketch_zeppelin]

two reasons:

1) call of duty is one of those games that appealse to more than just gamers. i'm talking about people that don't usally play video games but occasionally somthing comes along that sounds like fun. madden would also fit into this. Call of duty is a game that appeales to a much larger demographic than say skyrim. the so called hardcore gamers make up a much smaller percent of the gaming market than they belive. they're are casual gamers, children, ect and call of duty is one of those games that all of these groups will likely buy (even the kids despite being too young)

2) we are fastenated with hyper realistic violance. i don't mean perfect recreation of blood and gore. i mean we love guns and weapons and fighting. the military is where the biggest and best of these things comes together and call of duty has done an amazing job recreating that feel and keeping the experince simple and addictive.

 

[juyunseen]

Call of Duty, where to begin.

Call of Duty is what I like to call a Specticle Shooter. It's campaign relies on large setpieces and scripted events which, as Half-Life proved as is admittedly better at than CoD, are a good way to tell a story, and with CoD's excelent first two outings CoD established itself as a strong shooter amd built a fanbase.
Call of Duty 3 had both a weaker campaign mode and a stronger multiplayer, almost a precurser to the current formula, and i do mean formula because like Legend of Zelda, CoD is a formulaic game with almost no difference between games.
CoD4:Modern Warfare.
What came out 2007? I'll tell you. The Orange Box, Halo 3, Bioshock, and CoD4. Emphesis on the 4. Think about this for a moment. Halo predates CoD by two years, BUT CoD was already on it's 4th centeral game and 6th overall game. Why? Because Activision had a plan. They decided to try to dominate the market, and they found the perfect game to do so with. Call of Duty is reletivly easy to produce, each game runs on the same engine with almost no tweaks between. That means that all that is required is to make new models, and layout a new story, instead of revamp the engine, make new models, layout a new story, new AI, new enemy design, ect...
The fact that a CoD game can be pushed out in a year means that is is never far from the public concionciousness, meaning that no other franchise can plant itself in a similar position because everyone is already playing CoD.
Add that to gameplay that is easy to get into and you can see the success right there.

So the reason? It's a solid enough game to make people want to play. It has established itself as a household name. It is always there, no matter what, there will always be a new CoD game.

(My apologies if this is incoherent, i spent very little time writing it and can only hope i got my point across.)

 

[SyphonX]

It is the quintessential entertainment device for a world of despair and violence, where people are fed on an annual basis, a regimen of uncreative military-industrial-complex fetishism. It might as well be called "Military Industrial Complex: The Game". They could create wonderful iterations like, "Military Industrial Complex 2: The Blackwater Experience" or a suspenseful "MIC 3: Iran's WMDs", or even a controversial but widely successful "Dept. of Homeland Security: Domestic Black Ops; How to Subjugate an Unhappy Populace!"

It is absolutely not fun, and I have never seen anyone actually have "fun" with the franchise. What their "fun" usually amounts to is an emotional roller coaster of "That killstreak was neat, I'm special." to "FUCKING FUCK ALL OF YOU." The latter occurring for a period of time no less than 7 hours straight. It engages a person's mind and the aspect of their ego much the same way someone gets "engaged" with a gambling addiction. Die, respawn, die, respawn, die, respawn. Each iteration they continue telling themselves "This time I'll do better". The utter definition of insanity. It's bad in how gambling might contribute to personal or interpersonal economic destruction and "Modern Warfare" gaming might contribute to an "Eyes Wide Shut" observance of a system of utter destruction with the human race pitted against itself.

Yet there is hope, gaming critics and journalists the world over are panning the franchise in spite of it's enormous success. Proving once again that interstellar financial gains does not always equal critical success. Instead, what we have created as human beings on this planet, is another "McDonalds". A place where a great many go to eat yet any patron of Micky D's is bound to feel guilty; (it's binding, trust me) ye trade thy soul for a Big Mac. Nevertheless every single sentient being (especially the chickenses and cows) on the planet agree that McDonalds is not a place for any human being to be. So like a cancerous tumor, the rest of us cells must do our best to contain the growth lest it spread and destroy us all.


TLR = Call of Duty is kinda like McDonalds, right?

 

[Dreamer of Theaters]

It's nice that you can say you liked MW2. It seems to have become the trend to blatantly insult MW2, when in fact it was actually a good game.

 

[Dreamer of Theaters]

Honestly, I have no idea. I reckon that it's because the multiplayer of the previous games becomes outdated, and people don't wanna play MW1, 2, WOW or Blops by themselves. Because the CoD games have a HEAVY emphasis on multiplayer, they are exploiting this by making a new game every year, so if you love the multiplayer, you HAVE to buy the next in order to actually play online.
But honestly, how the fuck could MW3 sell that many copies? I mean, I knew it would be popular, but more popular then MW2? There must be some mistake in that. I thought this was gonna be the 'Halo Reach' of the CoDs, not another brand new 'MW2.'
I might buy MW3 if it becomes like $40, but I severely doubt. The only games I want to buy on the Xbox 360 anymore is Limbo, Braid, 'Splosion Man, Gears of War 3, Portal and Portal 2, and four of those are XBLA games. Fuck the new line-up, it's terrible. Too many FPS and unnecessary sequels. (I'm looking at you AC Revelations)

 

[Joccaren]

It is FUN. I know it is hard to believe, and while a lot of people here will argue that it is not, that is their OPINION. In fact, this is an a opinion very few people have, thus why it still sells so much.

Other games are fun too. Battlefield, Mass Effect, Portal, Skyrim - yet they sell nowhere near as many copies as CoD. Why does CoD sell so much more? That is what the OP is asking, read and understand the full OP. We know some people find it fun, but they would also find games like Battlefield fun, and many of the ones I know also find Skyrim fun, and Minecraft, so why do those games not sell as well as CoD? They are all fun, so they should all sell as well as each other, seeing as that is the only factor determining sales. Oh Wait. It isn't. What are these other factors that make CoD sell better? That is what is being discussed.