• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

Thrill_house

Member
Oct 27, 2017
10,691
Then...there is no point. Multi was all most people cared about. Lame if true but I'm not believing it just yet
 

defaltoption

The Fallen
Oct 27, 2017
11,529
Austin
Don't even release if true, I would be freaking pissed and I will not support another call of duty again. I have bought every release since 2 on day 1 and since mw3 I've barely played them at all but still bought to show support anyway. If this is true WW2 will have been my last CoD. MW2 was the best in the series and my personal favorite this would piss me off.
 

Lukar

Unshakable Resolve - Prophet of Truth
Member
Oct 27, 2017
23,515
I wonder if it'll be a Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary situation where the multiplayer is actually just new content for the previous game (in this case, Modern Warfare Remastered). It wouldn't be ideal, but it would be better than no multiplayer at all. Spec Ops would be really nice too.

I'll get this regardless though— I loved MW2's campaign.
 
Oct 25, 2017
29,699
Yep, the writing it kinda on the wall now that Infinity Ward is going back to the Modern Warfare franchise next year.
I loved IW's campaign but they really messed it up with timing and the bad multiplayer,
and everyone seems to despise Ghosts.

If Activision was strict enough to push WW2 onto Sledgehammer late in development(as discussions have it) there is no way they let IW do anything but MW4
 

ASleepingMonkey

The Fallen
Oct 26, 2017
4,498
Iowa
I'm always there for the campaign of a Call of Duty, MW2 is almost the peak of the series. BUT... the reason why MW2 is MW2 is because it's the complete package. Ridiculously great campaign, fast paced, awesome multiplayer that took it to the next fucking level, and a kick ass co-op mode. It was a true bang for your buck, everyone had something they could grab on to. There was nothing that was half-assed even when you consider that Spec Ops reuses things from CoD 4, it all feels right and like they didn't cheapen anything to shoe in a mode to meet a checkmark on the box.

I'll get this if true but... what we really need is campaign AND multiplayer. You could live without Spec Ops but taking away the one thing people really want a remaster for just seems odd, people remember MW2 fondly for the multiplayer mostly. It kept the game alive for many years.
 
Oct 27, 2017
16,692
The comments in this thread prove that:

1) People don't even really want new COD games. They just want their favorite old ones to continually improve which makes it even more sensible to just make one COD with season passes or other improvements every year, instead of a new $60 game.

2) It proves why big publishers known for live-service games have resisted remasters for so long. Companies like EA and Activision want to keep you on the new shit. Remasters usually aren't live services. They're just individual products that keep your attention on the past.
People do want new ones it's just after awhile the new ones couldn't touch the old ones in terms of quality.

They'll release the multiplayer next year for the 10 year anniversary if they go the split route.
 

ASleepingMonkey

The Fallen
Oct 26, 2017
4,498
Iowa
DOA. Nobody buys CoD for the SP
*whistles casually*

More often than not, THAT is the selling point for me. And while I'm an avid multiplayer person, Call of Duty's MP has gone down hill for the most part this gen with BO3 and AW being the only good MP entries in the series so far ironically. WWII has its moments and I do like it but they really force the loot and Destiny-like shit down your throat.

Outside of playing what I needed to for review, I haven't touched Infinite Warfare's multiplayer since launch week. What a joke that was, granted not as bad as Ghosts.

The one thing that CoD consistently does to get my money is sell me on a campaign and sometimes I stick around for MP for longer than a month.
 
Oct 25, 2017
29,699
The comments in this thread prove that:

1) People don't even really want new COD games. They just want their favorite old ones to continually improve which makes it even more sensible to just make one COD with season passes or other improvements every year, instead of a new $60 game.

2) It proves why big publishers known for live-service games have resisted remasters for so long. Companies like EA and Activision want to keep you on the new shit. Remasters usually aren't live services. They're just individual products that keep your attention on the past.
I'd buy the new campaigns if they released separate at a lower price,
For MP id be fine with MWR/MW2R being permanent with constant maps and maybe guns now and then.
BO3 as well for the contrast, one gets old and switch.
 

Seppala

Member
Oct 27, 2017
177
I really enjoyed the campaign i MW but the game for me is its multiplayer. Both spec-ops (wich was excellent) and competetive.
 

Jacob LeBeau

Banned
Dec 17, 2017
675
If this ends up true, then it confirms my theory that EA, Activision and other companies are competing to be the worst company of the year.
 

Savantcore

Member
Oct 28, 2017
880
Eurogamer agrees

CharlieIntel sources indicated Modern Warfare 2 Remastered is real after a listing for the game popped up on Amazon Italy for PlayStation 4 and Xbox One priced €19.99 with a 30th April release date. Eurogamer sources have backed this up.

CharlieIntel also reported Modern Warfare 2 Remastered does not include multiplayer. Eurogamer sources told us this is indeed true.
 

shinobi602

Verified
Oct 24, 2017
8,493
DOA. Nobody buys CoD for the SP
giphy.gif
 

Kalor

Resettlement Advisor
Member
Oct 25, 2017
19,670
I understand that they wouldn't want it to compete with BO4 but multiplayer is why most people would buy it in the first place. If they don't want to compete, release it at some other time in the year. I'm sure it would still do well.
 
Oct 28, 2017
6,119
I wouldn't have bought it with MP. SP only, it's gonna be cheaper. I'll buy it. CoD's multiplayer sucks and that includes MW2. The campaign is really fun though.
 

djshauny1

Member
Oct 27, 2017
887
Whats the fucking point Activision? people want this for the multiplayer. Hopefully this can be added later?
 

Falconbox

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,600
Buffalo, NY
I enjoy the single player of these games, but no way I'd buy a remaster of one that I've already played.

It's a fun 1 time experience. I don't need to run through the 6-8 hours again.
 
Oct 28, 2017
742
There is no way this is happening. Not only is MP the main draw of the game but it's also where they stand to make a ton of money on microtransactions.
 

ShadowFox08

Banned
Nov 25, 2017
3,524
If this is true.. They're probably gonna release SP first and then MP later. Would be hilarious if they sold both separately.
 

EvilChameleon

Member
Oct 25, 2017
23,793
Ohio
I'm dying to see how Activision officially announces this. The amount of dislikes on a trailer might rival that of the one on the Infinite Warfare trailer. Will they even mention why MP isn't included? I bet it will be some of your standard "we have a great multiplayer experience coming out this October in Black Ops IIII, so to include one here would be counterproductive.".
 

Woetyler

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,418
This is just hilarious. Like, man I can't even think of something to say other than to laugh. I feel like that nicolas cage gif of him laughing in Face Off.