Activision Studio Neversoft Developing a New FPS.....SERIOUSLY?

Quote :

To say that the Call of Duty franchise is selling well for Activision is an understatement. The CoD juggernaut has had a firm lock on the FPS genre for the past couple of years, at least sales-wise.

What can Activision do to further profit from the genre? Aside from having four studios develop games for the Call of Duty franchise, looks like they’re planning on having another studio develop another FPS. The studio is Neversoft, whose last work has been for the Guitar Hero franchise.

Looking at Neversoft’s site, you can clearly see a plethora of job openings that are available. Notable ones are for a “Lead Multiplayer Level Designer,” and “Multiplayer Design Scripter: FPS.”

Both job ads do not disclose if this is for a new IP or for another Call of Duty. If it is indeed for another CoD, Neversoft will join Infinity Ward, Treyarch, Sledgehammer Games and Raven Software to be the fifth studio developing Call of Duty titles.

For those not familiar with Neversoft’s works, the studio is mostly known for the Tony Hawk skating series, and of course, the Guitar Hero franchise which they’ve worked on since 2007.

Is anyone up for more first-person shooters from the house of Call of Duty? Either way, looks like we’ll be getting more FPS action from Activision and with the CoD franchise selling like hotcakes and setting sales records, can you really blame them?

Oh boy i can't wait for ANOTHER generic first person shooter. Thats only the 20th this year!!!

You gotta be kidding me!
Neversoft, Treyarch, whoever is working on MW3, Bungie, AND ALOT MORE ARE WORKING ON FPSs FOR ACTIVISION!?!?!?!?

They will fail. Unless of course it has "Call of Duty" on the box. Kinda like Wii Sport and Wii Fitness. It will for it's name, not quality.

There's actually only been like 4 or 5 this year so far.

BlackStigma wrote:

There's actually only been like 4 or 5 this year so far.

Only four or five generic shooters so far this year . . . in April? That's more than one generic shooter a month. Not good at all.

TRF wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

There's actually only been like 4 or 5 this year so far.

Only four or five generic shooters so far this year . . . in April? That's more than one generic shooter a month. Not good at all.

I wouldn't call Bulletstorm, Crysis 2, or Homefront "generic". Killzone 3 is pretty generic, but from what I played of the beta, it's still pretty good.

Dude says Homefront isn't generic, then calls Killzone 3 generic lol

BlackStigma wrote:

TRF wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

There's actually only been like 4 or 5 this year so far.

Only four or five generic shooters so far this year . . . in April? That's more than one generic shooter a month. Not good at all.

I wouldn't call Bulletstorm, Crysis 2, or Homefront "generic". Killzone 3 is pretty generic, but from what I played of the beta, it's still pretty good.

You're the one who said there were four or five so far this year. I don't know which ones you were talking about. Homefront is kinda generic. Killzone 3 is a bit generic too.

igame wrote:

Dude says Homefront isn't generic, then calls Killzone 3 generic lol

How is it generic?

BlackStigma wrote:

igame wrote:

Dude says Homefront isn't generic, then calls Killzone 3 generic lol

How is it generic?

It's a military FPS.

There's been 89 of those this gen.

Pickles1337 wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

igame wrote:

Dude says Homefront isn't generic, then calls Killzone 3 generic lol

How is it generic?

It's a military FPS.

There's been 89 of those this gen.

IS THAT IT? It's generic because it's a military FPS?

yup.

I'm not saying it's bad(I haven't tried it) but it's not the most original game out there.

Pickles1337 wrote:

yup.

I'm not saying it's bad(I haven't tried it) but it's not the most original game out there.

Yes, yes it is. It's got a Battle Point system so that you can spend BP in game to buy Rockets or drones or call in an airstrike. You can also spend BP to spawn in a vehicle or helicopter. And unlike shit like COD it's actually team based. Battle Commander is also original because in it as you build up a killstreak you get stars and your wanted level raises. As it does you get buffs and it shows your general location to enemies. Unlike what some idiot say, "herp derp cod ripoff" it's only similarities to COD are its controls. Multiplayer isn't anything like COD. It's more like battlefield style gameplay if anything. Also, you aren't fighting freaking Russians.

Just saying that first person shooters are overused and besides duke nukem forever and battlefield 3 i have no interests in any other announced FPS right now or some that are already out.

Rage looks pretty sick as well

BlackStigma wrote:

Also, you aren't fighting freaking Russians.

No, but the premise of the game is illogical and unrealistic.

Ihsahn wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

Also, you aren't fighting freaking Russians.

No, but the premise of the game is illogical and unrealistic.

No it isn't. It's actually pretty well thought out.

resistance 3 looks awesome too..i don't get why people aren't including it

BlackStigma wrote:

Ihsahn wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

Also, you aren't fighting freaking Russians.

No, but the premise of the game is illogical and unrealistic.

No it isn't. It's actually pretty well thought out.

You're right. A country with a smaller military would be able to invade and sustain itself in America.

Ihsahn wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

Ihsahn wrote:

BlackStigma wrote:

Also, you aren't fighting freaking Russians.

No, but the premise of the game is illogical and unrealistic.

No it isn't. It's actually pretty well thought out.

You're right. A country with a smaller military would be able to invade and sustain itself in America.

You know if you would pay attention to homefronts story you would know that it took some hard work for korea and that it had multiple reasons why they took on USA so easy. A huge economic crisis is one of them.

I haven't played it. I'm going off the premise that is being advertised to me. North Korea invading and sustaining itself in America just sounds horribly illogical. I don't know what plot device could somehow change that. America's allies far outnumber Korea and South Korea DESPISES North Korea so why they would join together makes no sense to me.

Waaiiit?

North Korea and South Korea teamed up? Yea that definitely doesn't make much sense.

Alanski wrote:

Waaiiit?

North Korea and South Korea teamed up? Yea that definitely doesn't make much sense.

Thats the only part were i was like WTF?

Alanski wrote:

Waaiiit?

North Korea and South Korea teamed up? Yea that definitely doesn't make much sense.

Yup.

More original premise, but ultimately falls flat.