Posted by Natasha Price
Natasha Price

Call of Duty is a well-established franchise of FPS (first-person shooter) games that has been around since 2003. The franchise is published and owned by Activison and developed by Sledgehammer Games, Treyarch, and Infinity Ward. There are 13 main games ranging from the original Call of Duty (set in World War 2) to Black Ops 3 (which takes place in the year 2065).

The most successful Call of Duty game is currently Modern Warfare 3, which raked in a whopping $1.23 billion. The third installment in the trilogy, Modern Warfare 3, was the ending to the most popular branch of Call of Duty games. Released in 2011, it was set in modern times and detailed the end of the war started by Vladimir Makarov in the first two Modern Warfare games.

Promotional poster for 'MW3'
Promotional poster for 'MW3'

In contrast, the least successful Call of Duty game to date is the Call of Duty (2003), the first game in the franchise and set in World War 2, which grossed just $70,000,000. The game probably didn't do as well as the others, as it was the first in what quickly became a very popular franchise. Though, most player reviews often say that Call of Duty: Ghosts (2013) is the least favorite in the franchise.

Recently, Call of Duty developers released the trailer for their newest game, Infinite Warfare, which is due to release near the end of this year alongside a remastered version of Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (one of the franchise's most successful games). The trailer brought in a record-breaking 2,800,000 dislikes — and just 450,000 likes — making it the second most disliked video on YouTube, bested only by Justin Beiber's Baby.

The trailer for Infinite Warfare itself didn't contain anything controversial or offensive. The trailer included gameplay for the main campaign of the game, along with a sneak peek of Modern Warfare Remastered. So what made people hate it so much?

Most players have said that their favorite Call of Duty games were games released chronologically before Black Ops 2. Recent games such as Ghosts, Black Ops 3, and Advanced Warfare have received critical and very mixed reviews. Many players say that they want Call of Duty to go back to a "boots-on-ground," present/past style as apposed to more futuristic one, which is mostly what's being released now.

Infinite Warfare is set to be another futuristic game, which a lot of fans don't like the look of. Since Call of Duty was originally a gritty, war-based franchise, a lot of players are complaining that the bright, technologically advanced future setting isn't working out for it. Others argue that when Call of Duty creators were releasing modern/past-era games, people complained they wanted something new. There's a lot of mixed opinions surrounding when the game should be set.

Another argument is that recent Call of Duty releases haven't been as well-made as previous ones. With new games releasing at least every year (even if they're made by different companies), the story for the campaign can be under-developed and multiplayer can be buggy. Some people suggest that Call of Duty games should only be released every two or three year — similar to most other franchises — in order to dedicate more time to development and production of the games. Perhaps this would give each game more depth and help to create a better experience for players.

Leading on from this, Call of Duty is best known as a multiplayer franchise, with few gamers even bothering to play the campaign. This is an issue, as it means that the campaigns are so bad or uninteresting that people would rather skip them and go straight through to multiplayer (or other popular game modes such as Zombies). For example, when most people say they hate Ghosts, they mean they hate the multiplayer (or rather, the way people play multiplayer) rather than the campaign — though, I doubt the Extinction mode helped the game's reputation.

Promotional poster for 'Ghosts'
Promotional poster for 'Ghosts'

Some big issues with the recent Call of Duty games are the DLC, the supply drops, and the general cost to play. Each game includes usually three or four DLCs that are released periodically in the months following the game's release. The producers plan to create DLC, meaning that some people argue that the content should be included in the original game. Rather than adding in map packs for an additional price, the extra maps should be included in the original version of the game, since DLC is likely already produced (or in production) by the game's release.

Similarly, supply drops are rarely given to the player but, more often, paid for. Supply drops contain new armors, skins, and weapons. Again, an argument can be made that this content should be included in the original game. Essentially, this DLC and supply drops are rewarding those who have a lot of money to waste, while those who struggle to get enough money for the base game itself feel left out. One Call of Duty game with the DLC costs over $100 for the player — and that's without the addition of supply drops.

A few people have even made the joke of dubbing the new game Call of Duty: Infinite Walletfare for it's extensive and unreasonable prices.

In order to better understand the problems with the trailer, I looked at some of the comments that people left on the YouTube video to complain about the latest release.

The dislikes on the 'IW' trailer (still increasing)
The dislikes on the 'IW' trailer (still increasing)

One of the first comments that stood out said, "Do we get a Master Chief DLC character if we pay 50 extra dollars?" This is a reference to the HALO series which is known for its futuristic, space-themed setting. These complaints (along with many others), suggests that Call of Duty is trying to be like too many other futuristic FPS games. Furthermore, it's also a jab at the idea of constantly paying money for additional content.

Someone else said, "Pretty hyped for HALO 6," again suggesting that Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare is straying too far from its origins and trying to become like other games set in the future. There are many other comments comparing Infinite Warfare to other games, including Star Wars: Battlefront and Destiny. Most fans are suggesting that COD go back to its war-themed roots.

Another interesting one said, "COD 4 map packs only available through supply drops." This is another jab at the overuse of supply drops in recent Call of Duty games. Many of comments like this complained that the remastered version of Modern Warfare isn't going to be available separate from Infinite Warfare. Some people are even saying that the remastered COD4 is the only reason that the new game will sell.

Personally, I think Remastered COD4 should be released separately with all the old map packs included, since it's not a new game. However, if Infinity Ward releases them together and charges people for the COD4 DLC, they're more likely to sell more copies of Infinite Warfare and get more money overall.

Promotional poster for 'MW Remastered'
Promotional poster for 'MW Remastered'

In conclusion, the biggest issues with the Infinite Warfare trailer are that it's too futuristic —a grave departure from the franchise's earlier WW2 style; the cost of DLC and over-saturation of supply are both too high; and that fans want to play Modern Warfare Remastered without having to buy Infinite Warfare.

Does this trailer deserve to be the most disliked game trailer in YouTube history? Definitely not. At the end of the day, the Call of Duty franchise still entertains millions around the world and the user base is very passionate. It just so happens that this passion can result in an event like this when those users want to voice their concern.


Are you looking forward to 'Infinite Warfare'?