Don't mourn Guitar Hero...mourn Call of Duty

Rm_headshot
Thursday, February 10, 2011

Guitar Hero is dead.

Mega-publisher Activision Blizzard dropped the hammer on their long-standing franchise yesterday during their Q4 financial conference call. And even as they get out of the music business, Activision's launching Beachhead Studios to oversee "the development of an innovative new digital platform and special services" for its billion-dollar baby, Call of Duty.

That might feel like a dramatic shift in the gaming landscape. It's not. We're just in the middle of a slow-motion explosion...the real damage has yet to come. Guitar Hero's body isn't even cold yet, but it's time to officially start the Call of Duty deathwatch, because Activision's about to run their golden boy completely into the ground.

Guitar Hero 5
You're as free as a bird, now....

 

Their financial report cites "continued declines in the music genre" as the motivation for completely dismantling the Guitar Hero franchise, its dedicated business unit, the DJ Hero spin-off, and the developers responsible for them. It might just as well say "because Call of Duty makes so much money." It's no secret that Activison Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick mandated a new COD every 12 months, plus downloadable content support, and why wouldn't he? These are the top-selling games year after year, and gamers buy the DLC in ludicrous numbers. A $5 price hike (some might say "gouge") over comparable downloadables didn't stop the Stimulus Package -- a buggy, insultingly named, two-fifths-recycled map pack for Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 -- from breaking sales records. And it's Kotick's job to repeat those successes as often as humanly possible.

Only more games don't equal more money.

Oversaturating the market with Call of Duty games can only serve to dilute the brand and the ideas behind it until nothing worthwhile remains. The franchise bounced between developers for years with the requisite fluctuations in quality, but now five studios actively work on this one property: Infinity Ward, Treyarch, Sledgehammer Games, Raven Software, and Beachhead. One COD game a year? I think not. We're about to be swamped in Duty.

We know this will happen because we've seen it happen. Guitar Heroes 1, 2, 3, World Tour, On Tour, 5, Rocks the '80s, Metallica, Aerosmith, Smash Hits, Van Halen, and Band Hero all happened over the course of four short years. Look where the franchise is now...though in all honesty, the series wore out its welcome long ago.

Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
We had to destroy the franchise to save it.

Call of Duty might be next. While former benchwarmer Treyarch and newly minted Sledgehammer tag-team the yearly commercial releases, former champion Infinity Ward (limping along after the entire senior staff departed en masse last spring) and Raven will provide support content. Beachhead's job might be a Halo Waypoint-ish community hub, but it also sounds suspiciously like the long-rumored Call of Duty Online, while "special services" could be the multiplayer fees Kotick's often lovingly spoken about charging. By his reckoning, Call of Duty makes up 60 percent of Xbox Live profits and not one dime goes to Activision. Bobby Kotick wants his multiplayer money.

Officials at Activision periodically claim COD will never charge subscriptions, but those denials tend to run concurrent with interviews Kotick gives where he tends to say the exact opposite.

The scenario unfolding before us might look like this: While Call of Duty Online attempts to sustain a subscription model that has never worked for a first-person shooter (though a few have tried and failed), the new COD title hits like clockwork in November, followed by two or more staggered DLC releases and possibly buffered by smaller, episodic-sized games until the next COD releases a few months later. Repeat ad infinitum.

Here's the problem: Almost nobody plays more than one Call of Duty game at a time. A constant cycle of product adoption, abandonment, and adoption can't possibly sustain forever. Buyer fatigue must set in at some point, if sheer boredom or poor quality doesn't first.

Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
Nice knowin' ya, boys.

Honestly, this tactic reminds me too much of the punishing game-a-year schedule publisher Eidos foisted on Core Design, effectively turning Lara Croft and Tomb Raider from a cultural phenomenon to a warning label in just four years...not unlike Guitar Hero. The pain culminated in Core co-founder Jeremy Heath-Smith swearing at his own game on the floor of a buyer's conference mere months before Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness' release. He just couldn't get Lara to vault a simple garbage bin.

Admittedly, only one team bore that crushing pace, whereas Activision's spreading the COD love pretty thin. It's still fair to wonder how fast the cracks might start to show.

Certainly, it won't take long before a new Call of Duty game stops being an event. They'll become ubiquitous, ignorable, like the endless series of Dynasty Warriors sequels, inspiring more yawns than thrills. Even if the quality maintains, I expect a level of sameness to creep in until the individual games blur into a single, amorphous mess. Maybe they already have. That's what happens when a company takes a greater interest in dollars than in protecting their franchises, nurturing ideas, and making good games.

So tick-tock, Call of Duty. It's a shame, but you're on borrowed time.

 
Problem? Report this post
RUS MCLAUGHLIN'S SPONSOR
Comments (16)
Fedora3
February 10, 2011

I completely agree. The Guitar Hero games have already been on life support for a while, so it was no surprise Activision finally pulled the plug. Unfortunately the oversaturation GH caused in the genre ruined business for other games like Rock Band, while their Tony Hawk franchise continues to die without much effect on skateboarding titles. Call of Duty's inevitable death will perhaps be a little less destructive to the industry and hopefully show how it's not just Madden that can become truly stale.
Great Commentary!

Default_picture
February 10, 2011

The one, possibly major, point that you are not taking into account is the "far-future" setting COD could jump to. I believe that this alone, if done right, could add another three years to the franchise life-span. If that happens and COD takes place in some Starship Troopers universe it probably would not be the next iteration(2011). That in my opinion would put the next death knell for COD around 2015. 

 A PERFECT TIME TO GO BACK TO WW2 AND BRING OUT  "THE CALL OF DUTY"

or not.

164509_184978324846425_100000027754882_677051_4358835_n
February 10, 2011

I couldn't agree more with this article. I'm already burned out on CoD. Putting it on a yearly release schedule will just make everyone else tired of it as well.

Imbarkus_picard_avatar
February 10, 2011

Very true.  I called this a while ago, right after the West & Zampella split here:  http://www.gamepro.com/article/news/214252/analysis-how-the-infinity-ward-scandal-affects-call-of-duty/

As someone has pointed out, just look at Tony Hawk for a blueprint of what will happen for CoD.  The Spiderman games make a good example too.  Activision sucks the meat from the bones of Intellectual Property until there is nothing left.

This is simply what happens when business people make all the decisions regarding a creative enterprise.  The creativity suffers and soon the product is a hollow enterprise.  The goose that lays the golden egg has been prematurely wrung for all that she can offer in the short-term.

And the long-term payoff of nurturing a brand instead of milking it is sacrificed.

Sunglasses_at_night
February 11, 2011

I agree to a certain extent.

The market for Guitar Hero games is over-saturated certainly, but I don't see this as a problem more than the fact that they're all basically the same game. Then again, you could make the argument that they're all so similar BECAUSE of the quick turn-around time on their development.

Is Call of Duty going the same way? Almost certainly. However, the Call of Duty series, unlike the Guitar Hero series, has multiple studios on it to ensure longer development cycles. Hopefully thanks to this the games will manage to differentiate themselves slightely from one another, which is more than GH managed to do over its final few iterations.

Me04
February 11, 2011

I think we could all see this coming with the painful death of the Tony Hawk games.

That said, I don't think ActiBlizz is in trouble. Knowing their fortunes, they'll just find a couple of new franchises to suck the life from. The Bobby Kotick model of game releases tends to favour mining everything they can out of a franchise, as opposed to building and sustaining them.

The only thing that could possibly do them harm is their short sightedness. If I were an ActiBlizz shareholder right now, I'd be pushing them to find new franchises to run into the ground before Call of Duty implodes. Either that, or selling whilst my shares are worth something.

And unless Kotick is only interested in feathering his own nest, then I expect he'll be concerned about this too.

Shoe_headshot_-_square
February 11, 2011

Great article!

Rm_headshot
February 11, 2011

It's interesting so many people brought up Tony Hawk...in a much quietier moment, outside the financial report, Activision official confirmed they're not planning to make any Tony Hawk games for the foreseeable future, either. Activision really seems to be consolidating around a few core franchises and licensed games at the moment.

And as for new franchises to pimp and drain dry, keep in mind they've got Bungie in their back pocket now.

Robsavillo
February 11, 2011

This article ignores the fact that we've seen a new Call of Duty game (including expansions) on a yearly basis since inception (see: Call of Duty's [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Call_of_Duty_media]release timeline[/url]). That's pretty much seven straight years of uninterrupted new Call of Duty titles, and we've only seen sales increase with each subsequent release.

I don't think the music game analogy really works here. There's something about Call of Duty games that sets them beyond a mere fad (which is how I would characterize Guitar Hero and Rock Band). I'd also argue that the first-person shooter has more room for innovation in terms of gameplay than the simon-says design of the music genre.

Default_picture
February 11, 2011

Typo: Paragraph 4 has the word "comperable." Should be "comparable."

Brett_new_profile
February 11, 2011

Really, the only way I see the continued record-breaking sales of Call of Duty games continuing is if Activision pulls the plug on online support for older games. If people can't play Modern Warfare online anymore, they'll have no choice but to upgrade. It's a disgusting practice, but I can absolutely see Activision enacting it.

Rm_headshot
February 11, 2011

Rob: Not entirely so. World at War, the Treyarch entry between Modern Warfares, sold about half as many units as Modern Warfare 2. Given the next Treyarch game -- Black Ops -- came much closer to MW2's numbers, I'd attribute that to a difference in marketing budgets. Certainly, Black Ops got the kind of coverage MW2 did (and World at War didn't), and it'll be interesting to see if Activision falls into that "big COD, little COD" pattern again with Treyarch/Sledgehammer/et al, or if they'll try to go big all the time, every year, with everything.

Default_picture
February 12, 2011

Well a quick heads up. Guitar Hero 1-2-80s where made by Harmonix. The people behind Rock Band. But still Neversoft pushed out like 9 games in that short amount of time.

Profile_pic4
February 13, 2011

Great article and discussion!

I must admit I really enjoy playing CoD games.  I find the campaigns thoroughly entertaining, and I enjoy the Treyarch zombie mode and MW2’s SpecOps too much.  My gaming backlog/stack of shame told me so.  Even though I fatigued out on competitive multiplayer with MW2, I bought Treyarch’s last map-pack for the Ascension zombie map alone.  Ascension is FANTASTIC and worth every penny.

As far as the GH analogy goes, I see some differences and think it falls short.  The music genre relies on new content in its music licenses.  Then there's hardware mechanic to think of... that whole I-gotta-buy-new-plastic-instruments-why? factor.

The CoD games have Halo to thank.  While others may have been first, Halo did FPS best and opened the consumer door, leaving all us poor saps waiting far too long between Halo 2 and Halo 3.  Enter the CoD series, where it had a very tight control scheme, evolving competitive multiplayer, and a rewarding campaign experience.  Perfect franchise for a fairly FPS-friendly gaming world.

My only fear is one brought up several times.  Quality.  MW was incredible.  WaW was fantastic, if only for the zombie mode I played more than was necessary.  MW2's SpecOps were fantastic, and I get a twitchy left eye every time I hear someone say “Juggernaut”.  And now Black Ops takes almost all my multi-player gaming time.  Ascension makes my other games cry. 

If the quality goes down, there will be other FPS titles to take my gaming dollars.  I’ll live, and my other games will appreciate it, actually.

Robsavillo
February 14, 2011

Rus, I'll admit a bit of hyperbole on my part, but it's definitely true that Call of Duty sales have trended upward over time. That's not the case for the music genre, though, and I think you're cherry picking the World at War sales in this instance.

My point was that the market has always been saturated with Call of Duty games: We've seen a big release at least once a year since 2003, and peppered inbetween are various expansions and DLC map packs. The military shooter genre is quite healthy, as we have multiple franchises experiencing some level of consistent success. But music games [i]together[/i] dropped like a rock in the last year or so. I don't think the comparsion really allows us to draw any meaningful conclusions.

Demian_-_bitmobbio
February 15, 2011

I think Activision could sustain successful yearly releases of CoD for a long time. The question is, are they content with one game a year? Guitar Hero had 15 SKUs (that's counting each platform version) within a little over two years. If Activision ramps up the release rate on CoD, that could be trouble.

You must log in to post a comment. Please register if you do not have an account yet.