Originally Posted by bd2003
I doubt that. Those series and others have those fans because they're serving those fans well. When that ceases, or something better comes along, they'll move on. The reason cod is still so popular is that nothing has beat it at its own game yet.
Take the same gameplay, the same quality/polish, but knock it out of the park on graphics or another significant area of appeal, and people won't care what you call it. A new console is often the place where that happens. Halo was that game. Even resistance looked like a real challenger for a while, but it just wasn't good enough.
BF3 does everything COD does and better. But it's not COD, and it doesn't do "it" as well.
Thing with games like COD is it's less about the game, than the social appeal around it. People know by default their buddy has it and they can all enjoy it. That feeds off itself, and it becomes what you buy for your FPS fix.
I don't know how else to explain how 6 years of yearly releases that amount of small map packs / expansion packs with no real improvements in the engine explains away a 3 billion dollar IP. My friends that play it, and have bitched about but bought every iteration can't either. They just do.
COD is it, and because it is it, it sells well. Some day it will be something else. COD isn't technically impressive, and is still running on a 10 year old engine who's only real claim to frame is running at 60fps, in a muddy texture, low poly, unimpressive world.
And it doesn't matter, people LOVE it.
And there' no guarantee people will love the next iteration on a new engine. It very well could lose "it" that makes it popular. And then on to the next thing.
COD is actually the post child for why new tech isn't going to save publishers. Content and costs are the issues, not the technology. COD wasn't technically impressive when it hit and it sure ain't now; but it's sold $3 billion worth of games. Content and hedging costs made it insanely profitable, along with a little luck and figuring out what gamers wanted.