It seems there's a little bit of confusion going around about the name of Infinity Ward's upcoming title.
When the game was originally revealed, the trailer referred to the title as simply Modern Warfare 2, distancing itself from the Call of Duty name. Follow up press releases regarding the title did the same, and I was even corrected by Activision PR in casual conversation when I called it Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2.
In an earnings call yesterday, Activision's Michael Griffith referred to the title as Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2. He then went on to confirm that they expect the game's sales to single-handedly fill an empty money pit with gold. Now, reports are flying around that the Call of Duty name has been reattached to the title.
It should also be noted that a few retailers, including Amazon and GameStop, are also listing the game as Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2.
"The name of the game is Modern Warfare 2," an Activision spokesperson told us when contacted today.
So there you have it; that's the official line... for now. Also, BioShock 2 is not called BioShock 2: Sea of Dreams this week, but may be called that next week. And Harmonix's upcoming game featuring The Beatles was not a Rock Band game a few months ago, and is one today.
At the end of the day, does it really matter to you what the game is called? You know Infinity Ward is going to deliver an amazing experience, based on past performance. But do you think attaching "Call of Duty" to the title is a smart marketing move, or was the first Modern Warfare reception positive enough to let it stand on its own?
I think Activision wants Infinty Ward to do this so they can start pimping Modern Warefare out every year like CoD so now there will be two games every year.
Over saturating everything again. ::sigh::
Also, i'd totally play GH: Modern Warfare.
Got to get that black plague perk.
Guitar Hero: Modern Warfare... dont be giving Activision ideas... im actually little serious and a bit frightened here. How long until they start combining their franchises any half-assed way they can?
If they make a game where I can mount a catapult and launch plague ridden corpses over the walls of a city thus infecting your team, I'd buy that game in a heartbeat.
Also what falinter said worries me because I can totally see that happening. You'll get a Call of Duty and Modern Warfare game every year now if this title is in fact the case. Not that it really would be a terrible thing but if the quality of the game suffers because of the truncated timetable to make one every year then I say its a bad thing.
It's absolutely smart of them to keep the Call of Duty name attached. Why they're rebelling, I don't know. But you can believe that people that never heard of "Modern Warfare 2" will probably think it's just another generic shooter compared to what the "Call of Duty" franchise has done for itself the past 2 years. I know some people that never played a CoD4, but know what it is since it's so popular. This is the case with Halo also, some know it, but never played it.
all of this posturing and naming-unnaming nonsense is due to statistical marketing research and focus groups and mumbojumbo dumbo the elephant like that.
yes i just said dumbo the elephant.
As far as the game is awesome (and I'm sure it'll be), the name doesn't really matter.
Infinity Wards is being such a child, of course the game is part of the Call of Duty series. They're probably jealous or annoyed that Treyarch is sharing the Call of Duty series with them.
Modern Warfare 14 anyone?