Call of Duty development offer declined by Gearbox

4.6
You may be familiar with Gearbox, they are the company who developed Borderlands. Well, reports are coming out that Gearbox has turned down an opportunity to develop a Call of Duty game because their studio boss Randy Pitchford "saw no real challenge" in it.

During an interview several months ago with the German site KGN, Randy Pitchford stated that Gearbox only develops a game "when we can contribute to an existing brand something new - a kind of unique perspective and a new approach."

Mr. Pitchford does not feel that opportunity is present with the Call of Duty series.

Seeing how important the Call of Duty series is to Activision, and how dominant the game is due to a set formula the previous developers have followed each year, Pitchford went on to question just how much flexibility his studio would even have if they were to pursue the next Call of Duty.

Pitchford stated, "You have to play by the rules of the series." He then stated, "You have to do what is expected of a Call of Duty. In this I see but no real challenge for us. It would not strengthen our reputation as a studio, it would not be really motivating for our team."

Posted:
Related Forum: Xbox Forum

Comments

"Call of Duty development offer declined by Gearbox" :: Login/Create an Account :: 178 comments

If you would like to post a comment please signin to your account or register for an account.

M14Posted:

I think this would've been great to see a completely new company develop a call of duty game. 3arc and infinity ward are running out of ideas. It would've be great to see what a new company has to offer.

xDespisePosted:

HDITeRRoRiZeI
fknvlink
HDITeRRoRiZeI
TheDeLiPLank286 I like all the people here that hate on cod and say it is the worst game.. yet it has the best sales :)


The Grand Theft Auto series has more sales overall than Call of Duty, sales mean nothing. that game is just for noobs. if you want a realistic shooter, play Battlefield 3 or Operation Flashpoint but don`t complain about if if you terrible at it.

I think Mr.Pitchford gets the point that is just the same game being built again and again just with different campaign and different maps. the whole of the game hysics are still the same which shows how lazy Treyarch are.


1. bf3 isn't realistic. 2. people don't play CoD for its realism so why would you bring it up. 3. game sales do not in any way reflect how good a game is (directed at the guy you quoted).


Battlefield is much, much more realistic than cod if you had a brain that would be a simple correct point.I didnt say it was bad for its realism, i was just pointing out that is was unrealistic.


Battlefield 3 is not realistic. The graphics are good, but if we're talking realism (how many shots it takes to kill, sprinting, vehicles, gore, etc) Call of Duty, sadly, takes it. almost 10 bullets to kill someone with an automatic rifle, a .50cal bullet to the chest doesn't kill someone or take them down, body parts stay intact, you can sprint forever, the vehicles are in BF3 which does add realism. Call of Duty is more realistic in gore wise, look at WaW, in damage from bullets (granted it sometimes takes 4 but that's way less than 10) you can't sprint forever because let's be honest, no one can run forever, yes some Bolt Action rifle don' kill one shot all the time, but it is 95-99% more likely to get a one shot kill on CoD than on Battlefield. I'm not siding with either, I think FPS's have gone down the shitter since CoD 4, Halo 3, Halo 2, WaW, and MW2. I'm a Halo guy and I cannot STAND Halo 4. It is the worst Halo ever made. No video game is 'realistic' but in terms of realism, CoD takes it. In graphic and setting realism, BF3 takes it. Argue all you want but all that I pointed out was true facts.

Lunch_BoxPosted:

fknvlink
iCustom
sir_greco
Nin guys don't understand, making call of duty is no challenge.
Use the same engine.
Graphics will be the same.
If they ever want to make cod, they would use a new engine if available as said above they wanted to do something 'new'.
Not the same gameplay like the rest of the CoDs


because its so easy and worth time to make a new engine that can work for systems that were built ten years ago? or they can wait until new systems come out, which will be able to handle a new game engine. and i agree. it must be hard for gearbox to **** up the graphics so much. i mean look at borderlands. its like a bad cartoon. that **** would look awesome in a cod game. (sarcasm was used here for all the retards on this site that cant see it)


People ask to make CoD in a new engine like if it were so easy to make a new one. Building an engine takes like 2 years no matter how many people are working with it. But people doesn't seem to understand that and they think that switching CoD to another engine is like switching food to a new plate.


pretty easy since they have what? like 3 companies working on CoD now and all they have to do is make antoher engine. they could also hire another company to make a new engine while they develop, sorry i mean copy and paste there games. they have more then enough money to do this. but i am sure they already are making a new engine for the next gen system


Not to mention every other game has done it.

LevisPosted:

it would be nice for something differnet

VEVOPosted:

Why is it every damn the the words "Call of Duty" or "Battlefield" are in a news post, all the comments are all about CoD vs. BF?

HDITeRRoRiZeIPosted:

fknvlink
HDITeRRoRiZeI
TheDeLiPLank286 I like all the people here that hate on cod and say it is the worst game.. yet it has the best sales :)


The Grand Theft Auto series has more sales overall than Call of Duty, sales mean nothing. that game is just for noobs. if you want a realistic shooter, play Battlefield 3 or Operation Flashpoint but don`t complain about if if you terrible at it.

I think Mr.Pitchford gets the point that is just the same game being built again and again just with different campaign and different maps. the whole of the game hysics are still the same which shows how lazy Treyarch are.


1. bf3 isn't realistic. 2. people don't play CoD for its realism so why would you bring it up. 3. game sales do not in any way reflect how good a game is (directed at the guy you quoted).


Battlefield is much, much more realistic than cod if you had a brain that would be a simple correct point.I didnt say it was bad for its realism, i was just pointing out that is was unrealistic.

322Posted:

iCustom
sir_greco
Nin guys don't understand, making call of duty is no challenge.
Use the same engine.
Graphics will be the same.
If they ever want to make cod, they would use a new engine if available as said above they wanted to do something 'new'.
Not the same gameplay like the rest of the CoDs


because its so easy and worth time to make a new engine that can work for systems that were built ten years ago? or they can wait until new systems come out, which will be able to handle a new game engine. and i agree. it must be hard for gearbox to **** up the graphics so much. i mean look at borderlands. its like a bad cartoon. that **** would look awesome in a cod game. (sarcasm was used here for all the retards on this site that cant see it)


People ask to make CoD in a new engine like if it were so easy to make a new one. Building an engine takes like 2 years no matter how many people are working with it. But people doesn't seem to understand that and they think that switching CoD to another engine is like switching food to a new plate.


pretty easy since they have what? like 3 companies working on CoD now and all they have to do is make antoher engine. they could also hire another company to make a new engine while they develop, sorry i mean copy and paste there games. they have more then enough money to do this. but i am sure they already are making a new engine for the next gen system

xEclipticsPosted:

Gearbox.

PsychonautPosted:

TheDeLiPLank286 I like all the people here that hate on cod and say it is the worst game.. yet it has the best sales :)


I know right. Even if it's 'the same game over and over' millions of people still want to play it and I respect them. If I were to develop a game I would decline cod because it won't let me be creative, but I know many people will want to

Scared_of_WaterPosted:

LuckyOtTer I like how you all thing just because it's gearbox they would have to have the same graphics as another game they made. Gearbox has made other games that look nothing like borderlands they even participated in Halo 1. I just don't understand how people can play the exact same game year after year.


Exactly they have made a lot more games then just borderlands. And in my opinion Brothers in arms is a better series then COD.