Support NeoGAF

[X26]

As much as people love to hate on the franchise, CoD has some of the best bang for your buck you can get, hard for me to ever see it as being a ripoff in any way (although I do think the map packs are overpriced).

 

[Kazzy]

Not to the people who buy these map packs. Value is not an objective concept, it's 100% subjective.

Exactly, I don't play COD but I know I have been in a similar situation where I have been perfectly happy to buy similarly priced DLC for a game I'm really into. I have no doubt that players are getting their money's worth out of these map packs, as much as they are a money spinner for Activision they are also greatly extending the replay value for the game itself. I know a number of people who largely only play this game, taking into consideration the cost of the entire run of DLC, I'd say they are getting value if they are still playing it this long after release.

In summary, if consumers feel as though they are being ripped off they won't buy the product.

 

[ToxicAdam]

Horse armor ... you've come a long way, baby.

 

[Forsaken82]

What used to happen is that games like this would be open to the community. So you'd play some game, and you would have a ton of dedicated fans working tirelessly to make the game better for you and everyone else for free. Through maps, or mods, texture, models whatever. Companies took this away (and it's not like it's Activision alone here) so that they could sell you maps. So now you don't get free maps, you don't get mods, you don't get different game modes or whatever else.

Wow... You act as though every game ever released prior to the current trend of DLC had Mod support tacked onto it, when in actuality it was a very small percentage (much like now) had actual mod support. Where does this mentality come from? For every id, epic or valve developed game that released WITH mod support, there were at least 10 other games out there without mod support. If anything, mod support has only IMPROVED. Now we have Companies like bethesda, crytek, ubisoft, and even GSC Gameworld along side the valve, id and epic releases.

Is it the fact that CoD is an idtech powered game with no mod support? So is Brink...

Look.. I get it... CoD 4 was moddable... Battlefield 2 was moddable... CoD 5 + and Bad Company aren't moddable... but instead of modding those games, we get CryEngine 3 and UDK releases on a monthly basis... we get to create our own games if we so choose to... with TF2 now free 2 play, we even have Hammer available to us. So really... what has changed besides companies trying to make a few extra bucks by extending the life of their games?

 

[Mithos]

Call of Duty 7....

Maps not included... =/

 

[The Xtortionist]

Shit 8 hour games don't have much value, amazing 8 hour games on the other hand.

I've platinum'd/1000'd my share of non-RPG single player-focused games this gen and it really only extends most of them out to about 12-15 hours. That's comparable to a CoD map pack for me. So unless you're going to play through some of those games 3 or 4+ times, I don't see the long-term appeal.

 

[PairOfFilthySocks]

I always find these threads really interesting, because of just how polarized opinions become. I loved CoD/2/3/4, tolerated World At War, didn't much care for MW2, and didn't like Blops - so, I'm not a huge fan of the series anymore. That being said...

CoD's success is so controversial in gaming circles, I think, because it challenges our identity as gamers in a way that has never been done before in quite the same way. CoD is a game which is played by people who don't particularly like games - you don't get those kinds of sales figures by appealing to the usual suspects. You need to appeal to the people who play one game, and who see gaming as the console marketplace as an extension of the wider entertainment industry (including film, television etc.)

But, at the same time, it IS a video game, and gaming is notoriously tribal, territorial, and volatile. So, there are 'immigrants' who have colonised gaming through titles like CoD and WoW, and through their massive buying power, have rewritten the rules of how the economic models of gaming will operate, how the social models of gaming will operate, and how gaming is culturally codified.

The problem with THAT is that you have the old guard of gaming 'natives' who really resist all of these changes that are completely out of control, in a sector of their lives which was appealing BECAUSE of their ability to control it. When gaming was for 'gaming hobbyists', we did have mods, independent content, shareware, and a more personal element - stuff like Carmack's .plan file, or the love/hate relationship with Romero. The industry is now radically different, and the tribal element of gaming has roared to the surface around things like Cod - the 'hardcore' vs. 'casual' split and so on. What it really is, is a way of identifying as a member of gaming's original wave of pioneers, versus the new audience of (equally valid) players, who have unwittingly altered the configuration of the gaming landscape.

The solution, I guess, is to amplify your love of the perennial elements of what gaming was. It isn't dead, guys. CoD is a monolith, but you don't HAVE to play it. Give Tripwire your money. Or Taleworlds. Play Quake Live and tell people about it. The anger towards CoD has you identifying the wrong enemy, though. CoD isn't the problem - CoD is the gaming equivalent of Dylan going electric. It is just a part of a new evolutionary wave, and represents the point where the hobby has become a component of wider multimodal culture.

Keep it as a hobby wherever you can, and I'll see some of you on the RO2 servers.

Nail, head, etc...

 

[WickedLaharl]

Bought the first 3 and only didn't purchase the forth because i got the moon map for free. I'd buy more if they put them out.

Feels good.

 

[Uno Venova]

I've platinum'd/1000'd my share of non-RPG single player-focused games this gen and it really only extends most of them out to about 12-15 hours. That's comparable to a CoD map pack for me. So unless you're going to play through some of those games 3 or 4+ times, I don't see the long-term appeal.

If the quality is high enough sure, I've done that with top notch campaigns such as Uncharted 2, Infamous, Reach, InFamous 2. Upcoming games that will probably get the same treatment is U3 and Arkham CIty. You definitely don't need an MP or a map pack to get some long term enjoyment out of a game. That's just me.

 

[Wohmfg]

I always find these threads really interesting, because of just how polarized opinions become. I loved CoD/2/3/4, tolerated World At War, didn't much care for MW2, and didn't like Blops - so, I'm not a huge fan of the series anymore. That being said...

CoD's success is so controversial in gaming circles, I think, because it challenges our identity as gamers in a way that has never been done before in quite the same way. CoD is a game which is played by people who don't particularly like games - you don't get those kinds of sales figures by appealing to the usual suspects. You need to appeal to the people who play one game, and who see gaming as the console marketplace as an extension of the wider entertainment industry (including film, television etc.)

But, at the same time, it IS a video game, and gaming is notoriously tribal, territorial, and volatile. So, there are 'immigrants' who have colonised gaming through titles like CoD and WoW, and through their massive buying power, have rewritten the rules of how the economic models of gaming will operate, how the social models of gaming will operate, and how gaming is culturally codified.

The problem with THAT is that you have the old guard of gaming 'natives' who really resist all of these changes that are completely out of control, in a sector of their lives which was appealing BECAUSE of their ability to control it. When gaming was for 'gaming hobbyists', we did have mods, independent content, shareware, and a more personal element - stuff like Carmack's .plan file, or the love/hate relationship with Romero. The industry is now radically different, and the tribal element of gaming has roared to the surface around things like Cod - the 'hardcore' vs. 'casual' split and so on. What it really is, is a way of identifying as a member of gaming's original wave of pioneers, versus the new audience of (equally valid) players, who have unwittingly altered the configuration of the gaming landscape.

The solution, I guess, is to amplify your love of the perennial elements of what gaming was. It isn't dead, guys. CoD is a monolith, but you don't HAVE to play it. Give Tripwire your money. Or Taleworlds. Play Quake Live and tell people about it. The anger towards CoD has you identifying the wrong enemy, though. CoD isn't the problem - CoD is the gaming equivalent of Dylan going electric. It is just a part of a new evolutionary wave, and represents the point where the hobby has become a component of wider multimodal culture.

Keep it as a hobby wherever you can, and I'll see some of you on the RO2 servers.

Great post.

 

[Chavelo]

I always find these threads really interesting, because of just how polarized opinions become. I loved CoD/2/3/4, tolerated World At War, didn't much care for MW2, and didn't like Blops - so, I'm not a huge fan of the series anymore. That being said...

CoD's success is so controversial in gaming circles, I think, because it challenges our identity as gamers in a way that has never been done before in quite the same way. CoD is a game which is played by people who don't particularly like games - you don't get those kinds of sales figures by appealing to the usual suspects. You need to appeal to the people who play one game, and who see gaming as the console marketplace as an extension of the wider entertainment industry (including film, television etc.)

But, at the same time, it IS a video game, and gaming is notoriously tribal, territorial, and volatile. So, there are 'immigrants' who have colonised gaming through titles like CoD and WoW, and through their massive buying power, have rewritten the rules of how the economic models of gaming will operate, how the social models of gaming will operate, and how gaming is culturally codified.

The problem with THAT is that you have the old guard of gaming 'natives' who really resist all of these changes that are completely out of control, in a sector of their lives which was appealing BECAUSE of their ability to control it. When gaming was for 'gaming hobbyists', we did have mods, independent content, shareware, and a more personal element - stuff like Carmack's .plan file, or the love/hate relationship with Romero. The industry is now radically different, and the tribal element of gaming has roared to the surface around things like Cod - the 'hardcore' vs. 'casual' split and so on. What it really is, is a way of identifying as a member of gaming's original wave of pioneers, versus the new audience of (equally valid) players, who have unwittingly altered the configuration of the gaming landscape.

The solution, I guess, is to amplify your love of the perennial elements of what gaming was. It isn't dead, guys. CoD is a monolith, but you don't HAVE to play it. Give Tripwire your money. Or Taleworlds. Play Quake Live and tell people about it. The anger towards CoD has you identifying the wrong enemy, though. CoD isn't the problem - CoD is the gaming equivalent of Dylan going electric. It is just a part of a new evolutionary wave, and represents the point where the hobby has become a component of wider multimodal culture.

Keep it as a hobby wherever you can, and I'll see some of you on the RO2 servers.

Needs to be quoted more. +1.

 

[Enosh]

Call of Duty 7....

Maps not included... =/

they were

 

[Emitan]

But RO2 uses Punkbuster...

 

[kuYuri]

Look.. I get it... CoD 4 was moddable... Battlefield 2 was moddable... CoD 5 + and Bad Company aren't moddable... but instead of modding those games, we get CryEngine 3 and UDK releases on a monthly basis... we get to create our own games if we so choose to... with TF2 now free 2 play, we even have Hammer available to us. So really... what has changed besides companies trying to make a few extra bucks by extending the life of their games?

For the record, the only mainline CoD that was not officially moddable is MW2.

 

[FrankT]

Horse armor ... you've come a long way, baby.

Never forget.

 

[Wizman23]

Good for them. I don't understand why anyone cares and are calling the people that purchase these map packs the problem of this generation. COD multiplayer is fucking fun just like Halo multiplayer and Battlefield multiplayer are.

 

[Emitan]

Good for them. I don't understand why anyone cares and are calling the people that purchase these map packs the problem of this generation. COD multiplayer is fucking fun just like Halo multiplayer and Battlefield multiplayer are.

You say this purposely ignoring the vocal group that hates the way CoD plays and is worried that every shooter on the market is borrowing it's mechanics.

 

[-Pyromaniac-]

I think the map packs are overpriced as hell, but I also don't get the hate on the COD series. They are pretty good games. I despised MW2 though. They are addicting, they are something you can throw on when you're bored at any point in the year and have some fun and the game offers you opportunities to feel like you're always accomplishing something (prestige, etc...). It's a game I totally understand why became so popular with the core gaming crowd AND the mainstream. It has something for everyone. The map packs though overpriced keep the game fresh throughout the year.

 

[kuYuri]

You say this purposely ignoring the vocal group that hates the way CoD plays and is worried that every shooter on the market is borrowing it's mechanics.

I'm going with this:

People, express your dislike for the Call of Duty series all you like, but don't try to blame Activision for the creative bankruptcy of other devs and publishers.

 

[bwtw]

You say this purposely ignoring the vocal group that hates the way CoD plays and is worried that every shooter on the market is borrowing it's mechanics.

Vocal minority.

 

[MrCookiepants]

Nobody knows exact figures, but it's like:

Xbox
.
.
.
PC
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
PS3

Ahahaha. Black Ops has sold about 5 million copies on the PS3 in America alone, and it's probably done just as well in Europe. For Activision's 23 million total figure to be correct, there is no possible way it could have sold more on PC.

 

[Emitan]

.

I'll say something like that if someone's argument is "it's fun". It's like saying Halo is fun the same way chess is fun. They're two different kinds of fun enjoyed by different people.

 

[WrenchNinja]

Ahahaha. Black Ops has sold about 5 million copies on the PS3 in America alone, and it's probably done just as well in Europe. For Activision's 23 million total figure to be correct, there is no possible way it could have sold more on PC.

It's Cheech.

 

[MrCookiepants]

It's Cheech.

I'm new.

 

[Forsaken82]

For the record, the only mainline CoD that was not officially moddable is MW2.

I wasn't aware of this, i figured any mods that came from these games were merely hacks, and not made via official tools (much like the Gun game in MW2), but if this is true it just furthers my point. Modding is a much larger thing now than it was even before DLC became a premium trend.

 

[(._.)]

Translation:
*goes back to TF2 knowing I could play for free but I will buy virtual goods anyway*

Spoiler

That's me

Nothing wrong with spending money on TF2!!!~ What's not to like about putting a cartoony baseball helmet with soda cans on the side on your character? stuff like that blows the fuck out of overpriced* crappy deathmatch/frag maps for one of the most uninspiring games to captivate the public.

*not really that overpriced

 

[Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku!]

Nothing wrong with spending money on TF2!!!~ What's not to like about putting a cartoony baseball helmet with soda cans on the side on your character? stuff like that blows the fuck out of overpriced crappy deathmatch/frag maps for one of the most uninspiring games to captivate the public.

(._.)

 

[Mithos]

they were

Numbered release is only on 4 from what I've seen. But I get your "point".

 

[-Winnie-]

Jesus H Christ, this thing can't be stopped, can it?

 

[mxgt]

Jesus H Christ, this thing can't be stopped, can it?

It's the Angry Birds of the FPS genre

 

[The Xtortionist]

You say this purposely ignoring the vocal group that hates the way CoD plays and is worried that every shooter on the market is borrowing it's mechanics.

Every shooter? You could play Gears, or Halo, or TF2, or Crysis 2, or Uncharted, or Quake Live, or Battlefield, or L4D. Plenty of unique games to choose from.

Edit - And all the games "copying" CoD aren't even doing it right. What they should really be going for is 60FPS. Strip away the framerate and CoD's core run/aim/shoot gameplay couldn't support itself against other games. What CoD does is it takes a bunch of solid mechanics and wraps them in the most delicious bacon ever. Until developers figure out that framerate matters, nothing will change. Someone has to take the good things about CoD (load times, matchmaking, progression, FRAMERATE) and combine them with new and interesting mechanics.

 

[Shurs]

...myriads of idiots...

I appreciate irony.

 

[aeolist]

Every shooter? You could play Gears, or Halo, or TF2, or Crysis 2, or Uncharted, or Quake Live, or Battlefield, or L4D. Plenty of unique games to choose from.

I completely agree with most of your post but Crysis 2 blatantly copied CoD for single and multiplayer design.

 

[Shalashaska161]

I still find it totally hilarious that people are ok with paying $15 for maps.

 

[shintoki]

Exactly. If COD's success is harming the games you play, then maybe it's time to broaden your horizons. Creativity might not be thriving in the mainstream, but in the digital age we have more options than ever.

About two years ago, I was that person. I still played many of the titles, but they always ended up blending together. Basically anticipating the next big release on HD consoles. Most of them delivered exactly what you would expect. A solid experience, but nothing particularly remarkable.

In the past year I've played: Witcher, Super Meat Boy, Tales of Vesperia, Vanquish(Would have been GOTY for 2010 if I played it then), Deus Ex:Human Revolution, Torchlight, Eve Online, Lead and Gold, Precursors, AssCreed Bros, Magicka, Crysis, Castlevania SOTN, Doom, Nation Red, Defense Grid, Minecraft, Spiral Knight, and Demon's Soul. All of these for the first time ever(Witcher was more of, finally could run well). Along with more League of Legends, Team Fortress 2, Warband, and Killing Floor. Basically everything I spent at least several hours playing.

Thing to note is, Titles like Super Meat Boy, Warband, Nation Red, Precursors, MineCraft, Spiral Knight, and League of Legends would not have existed 5 years ago. Or if they did, It would be a hassle to get your hands on them. While I managed to get each of them for a few bucks or even free in two cases. Games developed by two people or ones from Eastern European nations. 10 years ago, it would have been heard of. Now, we just call it Steam, GoG, Gamersgate, Amazon, GreenmanGaming, Beamdog, XBLA, whatever.

The typical gaming most of us were use to has changed. Gaf isn't the main focus now, but the niche audience. Yet, both gamers and developers have more tools now than ever. 10 years ago with retail being the only method to buy games. Then sure, it could have been the end of gaming for many of us. Now... Torchlight II for 20$ or RO2 for 40$ or DOTA2.0 for Free. In some ways, maybe it was the best thing to happen. Developers and publishers who couldn't compete with what Activision and EA did ended up pushing the Digital Stores. Valve, Stardock, CDProjeck, and others. Smaller developers followed and most of the larger ones are only catching on now. We end up with more variety now than ever.

I completely understand the disdain for it. I know that action titles will lose their degree of difficulty in favor of cinematics and ease of play like GoW. There will always be those golden days, but its not the end of the world. Heh.


Sorry about this, I kept restarting and lost track on entirely what I wanted to say. So I'll give it a read over and fix it up later.

 

[ajf009]

I still find it totally hilarious that people are ok with paying $15 for maps.

not me, I just download them off my friends accounts haha

 

[Gaspode_T]

Would be funny and sad if map packs from a single game generate more revenue than the entire XBLA channel. Gamers need to play more XBLA/PSN

 

[sp3000]

I always find these threads really interesting, because of just how polarized opinions become. I loved CoD/2/3/4, tolerated World At War, didn't much care for MW2, and didn't like Blops - so, I'm not a huge fan of the series anymore. That being said...

CoD's success is so controversial in gaming circles, I think, because it challenges our identity as gamers in a way that has never been done before in quite the same way. CoD is a game which is played by people who don't particularly like games - you don't get those kinds of sales figures by appealing to the usual suspects. You need to appeal to the people who play one game, and who see gaming as the console marketplace as an extension of the wider entertainment industry (including film, television etc.)

But, at the same time, it IS a video game, and gaming is notoriously tribal, territorial, and volatile. So, there are 'immigrants' who have colonised gaming through titles like CoD and WoW, and through their massive buying power, have rewritten the rules of how the economic models of gaming will operate, how the social models of gaming will operate, and how gaming is culturally codified.

The problem with THAT is that you have the old guard of gaming 'natives' who really resist all of these changes that are completely out of control, in a sector of their lives which was appealing BECAUSE of their ability to control it. When gaming was for 'gaming hobbyists', we did have mods, independent content, shareware, and a more personal element - stuff like Carmack's .plan file, or the love/hate relationship with Romero. The industry is now radically different, and the tribal element of gaming has roared to the surface around things like Cod - the 'hardcore' vs. 'casual' split and so on. What it really is, is a way of identifying as a member of gaming's original wave of pioneers, versus the new audience of (equally valid) players, who have unwittingly altered the configuration of the gaming landscape.

The solution, I guess, is to amplify your love of the perennial elements of what gaming was. It isn't dead, guys. CoD is a monolith, but you don't HAVE to play it. Give Tripwire your money. Or Taleworlds. Play Quake Live and tell people about it. The anger towards CoD has you identifying the wrong enemy, though. CoD isn't the problem - CoD is the gaming equivalent of Dylan going electric. It is just a part of a new evolutionary wave, and represents the point where the hobby has become a component of wider multimodal culture.

Keep it as a hobby wherever you can, and I'll see some of you on the RO2 servers.

You can apply this exact same argument to Wal Mart and it works. People used to say that the existence of a Wal Mart in town would only supplement existing smaller shops. That didn't happen. Through aggressive cost cutting, or is this case, appealing to the widest possible market, the smaller business could not compete with it. Instead you had a group of niche stores catering to a specific audience, and the giant of super stores. There was no middle ground.

The point isn't that indie studios are going anywhere. Tripwire and such will be around. The point that you miss is that the middle tier has been destroyed. You are now either AAA big budget blockbuster cash cow or you are indie.

While I don't generally agree with him, Cliffy B brought this point up during one of his presentations

"I'm going to go on the record and say that I believe the middle class game is dead," he said, before drawing an analogy with the movie business.

"It needs to either be either an event movie – day one, company filed trip, Battlefield: LA, we're there. Avatar – we're there. The Other Guys starring Will Ferrell and Marky Mark? Nah, I'll f****** rent that, I don't really care - right?

"Or it has to be an indie film. Black Swan – I'll go and see that. I'll go to The Rialto or I'll go to the AAA Imax movie. The middle one is just gone, and I think the same thing has happened to games."

This is bad for the industry. There is no middle ground anymore. Think about all the studios that closed in the past couple of years, or were eaten by some larger corporation and then simply dissolved. Pandemic, Ion Storm, and Massive Entertainment come to mind.

With the tremendous cost of game development, it's no longer enough to sell a million copies. You need to sell five million. So bring on the casualization, the dumbing down, and the motion control gimmicks.

 

[GillianSeed79]

Needs to be quoted more. +1.

It's even better if you read it in the voice of Daniel Day Lewis playing Bill “The Butcher” Cutting in Gangs of New York.

 

[Emitan]

There is a middle ground. The issue is that they're selling middle ground games at the same price as AAA blockbusters.

 

[unomas]

I've never bought a map pack in my life, who are these 18 million horse armor purchasers?

 

[Emitan]

I've never bought a map pack in my life, who are these 18 million horse armor purchasers?

Probably people who want to play the game they paid for without getting kicked out of lobbies every other game.

 

[Dark Octave]

Wow. Activision know how to hit the iron when it's hot.

Unfortunatley, they also tend to take that same hot iron and burn a hole through the table it's laying on.

 

[The Xtortionist]

Probably people who want to play the game they paid for without getting kicked out of lobbies every other game.

That only happened in World at War.

 

[Optimus Lime]

This is bad for the industry. There is no middle ground anymore. Think about all the studios that closed in the past couple of years, or were eaten by some larger corporation and then simply dissolved. Pandemic, Ion Storm, and Massive Entertainment come to mind.

With the tremendous cost of game development, it's no longer enough to sell a million copies. You need to sell five million. So bring on the casualization, the dumbing down, and the motion control gimmicks.

Oh, I agree with you on those points - I don't believe that the new model is good for the industry except in a purely commercial sense. But, what we're seeing done to gaming is the same things that were done to all other areas of popular art - film, television, radio, literature. They were all ultimately corroded by their aggressive corporate invasion and now exist, for the most part, as rusted out husks of what they once were.

The mid-tier price/development point has been eliminated, and I agree that it is awful. What I'm saying, and maybe I wasn't aggressive enough with this, is that CoD is emblematic of a new, destructive economic paradigm within gaming - it is symptomatic of a wider problem.

And, independent gaming will always exist. The GOOD thing about gaming - as opposed to the other forms of popular media - is that we, the users, own the distribution models. Notch can create Minecraft on a whim and it can become a game that competes economically with the major titles. Taleworlds can put together Mount & Blade, and it can be hugely successful. Paradox can throw up their middle finger at cookie cutter FPS's, and still have a passionate, dedicated fanbase by making extremely intricate strategy games. The problem exists while you see gaming as an inherently corporate cultural object - which it isn't.

 

[zeelman]

You know who will really get hit, other shooters trying the me too project/COD clone (get that piece of the pie)

And they'll fall flat on their faces, like they always do.

 

[Poimandres]

18 million seems deliriously high when so many fantastic games don't even break a million.

I really enjoyed COD4, but have had no interest in the series after that. I must be totally out of touch with the game playing masses.

 

[Ninja Scooter]

You can apply this exact same argument to Wal Mart and it works. People used to say that the existence of a Wal Mart in town would only supplement existing smaller shops. That didn't happen. Through aggressive cost cutting, or is this case, appealing to the widest possible market, the smaller business could not compete with it. Instead you had a group of niche stores catering to a specific audience, and the giant of super stores. There was no middle ground.

The point isn't that indie studios are going anywhere. Tripwire and such will be around. The point that you miss is that the middle tier has been destroyed. You are now either AAA big budget blockbuster cash cow or you are indie.

While I don't generally agree with him, Cliffy B brought this point up during one of his presentations



This is bad for the industry. There is no middle ground anymore. Think about all the studios that closed in the past couple of years, or were eaten by some larger corporation and then simply dissolved. Pandemic, Ion Storm, and Massive Entertainment come to mind.

With the tremendous cost of game development, it's no longer enough to sell a million copies. You need to sell five million. So bring on the casualization, the dumbing down, and the motion control gimmicks.

Maybe all the other publishers should CREATE the middle ground by making more and more lower budget (not in a negative way) games at a middle ground price point instead of thinking everything should be $60.

I don't buy your WalMart analogy. WalMart came in and killed the smaller shops and local businesses because they could undercut them directly on the same products. People are only going to go to one place to get toilet paper, or milk or dog food. It doesn't leave much room for others to have success. Game publishers can have success in CoD-dominated world, it's just going to take some creativity in terms of content and delivery.