backtop


Print 102 comment(s) - last by Reclaimer77.. on Nov 10 at 7:10 PM

Analysts predict the game will sell 5 million copies the first day

The global economy may still be poor, but some categories are doing well despite the economic downturn. One of those categories is video games. One of the most anticipated video game launches of all times is set to happen this week with a new game called Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2.

The game is set to hit stores Tuesday and analysts are predicting massive sales for the game. Activision has a lot riding on the launch according to Reuters. Some analysts expect the game to count for as much as 16 cents of Activision's earnings per share for the December quarter.

MKM Partners analyst Eric Handler said, "This is the one game that could buck the economic trend for the holiday season."

The game will sell for about $60 per copy and Activision is partnering with 12 retailers including GameStop and Best Buy to hold over 10,000 midnight launch events across the country. Estimates peg sales for the game at 11 to 13 million units by the end of 2009. Activision CEO Robert Kotick expects the game to be one of the biggest media launches of any kind of all time.

Handler expects that the game will sell about 5 million units on the first day of sales and a total of 7 to 8 million games the first week. Those sales numbers would put the game ahead of last year's top title, Grand Theft Auto IV. The game will carry an M rating for violence and blood. Some of the most popular aspects of the Call of Duty franchise centers around the multiplayer aspects of the game, which the new version is sure to have.

GameStop executive VP Tony Bartel said, "By all indicators, we anticipate 'Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2' will be the biggest entertainment launch of 2009, as well as the biggest video game launch in GameStop's history."



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

F@%# Infinity Ward, right in thier stupid faces...
By Iaiken on 11/9/2009 1:17:27 PM , Rating: 5
Most of those sales will be console gamers as no self respecting PC gamer is going to give up COD:MW1's dedicated servers and modding community.

You know something is wrong when EA-Dice is calling you out on the stupidity of your actions.

What actions?

Well try this on for size, COD:MW2 will not use dedicated servers. There will also be no user-developed content as they have decided to not release an SDK. Finally, the game is DX9.1c.

What does this mean for PC players?

- No dedicated servers
- No mods
- No clan play
- Complete reliance on IWNet
- Reliance on an idiotic matchmaking system
- Smaller battle sizes (9v9 is the max)
- Even if you have a copy, you can't play it online until the game is enabled on Tuesday.
- Restricted to the same DX9 limitations as COD:MW1
- The game may not allow for hardware AA.

Combine the above with a 14-hour single player campaign and you really have to ask yourself if it is worth the $60 asking price to play what is essentially a COD:Halo full conversion mod. :P

Cancelled my pre-order, sent them a photocopy of the receipt and told them where they can stuff it.

Will it change anything other than saving me $60? Nope... according to Inifity Ward, PC gamers are a "loud minority".




By Ristogod on 11/9/2009 2:10:01 PM , Rating: 4
How do you figure there is going to be any less cheaters when there is no way to kick those players anymore? At least in the previous versions with dedicated servers and punkbuster, cheaters, and simply annoying people could be removed. That is no longer an option.

Forget MW2 and IW. Get Bad Company 2 instead when it comes out.


By cleco on 11/9/2009 2:45:24 PM , Rating: 2
Probably referring to VAC? The worst anti cheat system ever.

And like you, I'm patiently waiting BC 2


By Glix on 11/9/2009 2:44:15 PM , Rating: 2
No there will still be cheaters, vac isn't perfect. And with no Dedicated servers, keeping cheaters from spoiling your game online will be harder...


By Golgatha on 11/9/2009 3:04:52 PM , Rating: 2
Yeap, and no dedicated server admins to kick the cheaters either.


By The0ne on 11/9/2009 1:44:48 PM , Rating: 2
I wonder if EA is going to ruin the next battlefield the same way? :)

got to have mods...that's where the replay value comes in! :)


By InternetGeek on 11/9/2009 2:49:05 PM , Rating: 2
thats where you got it wrong. Your replay value its the dent in their profits. Hell, if they had their way you' have to pay everytime you'd fired up the game!


By The0ne on 11/9/2009 3:16:02 PM , Rating: 2
I'm confused by your statement. I said mods offer replay value. I said nothing about eating at their profits although that could be argue both ways. So where is it that I got it wrong?

They could do a Blizzard on us, sure but only time will tell. But I'm talking about mods and replay value.


RE: F@%# Infinity Ward, right in thier stupid faces...
By eid on 11/9/2009 3:08:06 PM , Rating: 3
Ars Technica has an excellent post regarding the shortcomings of the PC version

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2009/11/pc-mode...

You forgot to mention:
-P2P host system
-Inability to pick the host or choose not to host
-5 sec game freeze if the host decides to leave the game
-removed console commands
-removed demo/replay recording

and my favorite quote:

"Moriarte: Ignoring IW.net, is the PC version a direct port of the console version?

Mackey-IW: No, PC has custom stuff like mouse control, text chat in game, and graphics settings."


By EglsFly on 11/9/2009 10:29:25 PM , Rating: 3
I WILL DEFINITELY NOT BUY IT!

No better way to protest....

I have enjoyed MW1 and continue to enjoy World at War.
Been playing a lot of COD World At War, on the [NC] clan server (hard core/tactical):
http://www.gametracker.com/server_info/69.162.110....
42 Person Multiplayer, Admins that manage the server by kicking the necessary players, everything that MW2 CANT do.


By Iaiken on 11/9/2009 4:42:20 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I also thought like you with the game, but after playing it I really change my mind... and realized how stupid people is when they base their actions from rumors and not facts.


No, no you didn't think like me at all. You are looking at this from the perspective of a 360 console gamer whose idea of online multiplayer was defined by games like Halo.

You obviously don't know how most multiplayer mods work if you think they "divide" the community. Instead, I look at it as adding variety. You can play arcade mode if you like, or hardcore, or tactical realism, or scenario play or whatever people can think of that other people will enjoy. The possibilities are essentially limitless.

You then go on to state that the value of the game comes from it's mutliplayer, but what Infinity Ward has done here is actively engage in gutting the multiplayer element by forcing everyone into an XBL style matchmaking system.

quote:
The smaler 9 vs 9 is not that bad... i guess it would be better a 12 v 12 max but use your brain again (if you have one)... a 24 vs 24 is stupid... throw a grenade and you kill half the team... COD is not battlefield... the tactics on COD are more Swat like... small teams.


This sounds conspicuously like opinion in the absence of fact. I've played on 50vs50 tactical realism servers with absolutely massive maps that require that many people to even give people something to shoot at. Hell, even the normal maps (with the exception of backlot) are enough to support 24v24 with plenty of elbow room.

Your notion that the game is SWAT-like is as asinine as it is narrow. There are MANY ways to play COD:MW1 for PC and tact-squad play is just one of them.

quote:
DX9 is not a limitation.


Yes, yes it is. Again you demonstrate your lack of knowledge because you are just another idiot follower of the following console equation:

ZOMG1080i++slowassresponstime+blurfilter=goodgrap x

No, not at all. Go ahead and play it on a 1920x1200 (or bigger) monitor without AA and tell me it looks awesome. It won't. One of the "faults" of PC gaming is that you can notice the jaggies in all of their angular glory. You will notice any problems with the textures, particles and lighting.

Which brings me to the textures particles and light of COD:MW2. All of this is smoke and mirrors on a big screen TV. They just use blur filters to make things look good, this doesn't actual add to the detail, but rather detracts from it in an effort to cover up the shortcomings of fixed hardware. The 360 replacement is still 5 years (or more) out and we've already hit the graphical limitations of the hardware and it's supporting software.

We've moved on and DX11 will be opening up compute shading/reflection, higher detail textures, improved texture filtering, improved AA, improved AF, tessellation and implicit parellellism. All of that is on top of the shopping list of improvements that were brought by DX10.

Go back to your console kiddie... :P


By invidious on 11/9/2009 3:07:53 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
- Smaller battle sizes (9v9 is the max)
- The game may not allow for hardware AA.
I did not know about these two, kind of the nail in the coffin as far as I am concerned. $10 more than usual to get less content than usual? I will pass. It is a shame because I have been waiting for a good shooter, I haven't really gotten into one online sense BF2.

Maybe I will just go back to CS, best $20 I ever spent.


By abhaxus on 11/10/2009 5:12:11 AM , Rating: 2
the hardware AA one is FUD. Just was playing with 2x AA in 1680x1050 on a 8800GTS SLI setup. 4x AA would probably work if I had the 640mb versions.

Gonna pick up a 5850 as soon as they are available :)


By lagitup on 11/9/2009 4:36:15 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I'm a PC gamer, and I have MW2 on pre-order... I don't use "dedicated servers", and I never modded my COD4 game.


Then you've not played CoD4 online. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_server#Types_of_... for more.


By FlyTexas on 11/9/2009 6:34:10 PM , Rating: 1
You are correct, I have never played COD4 online...

I play very few games online, I much prefer single player games.

If I want to spend time with people, I'll either spend it with my kids, or reading posts on DT. ;)


By Ryanman on 11/9/2009 7:21:09 PM , Rating: 2
While I respect your multiplayer tastes, I reject the idea that the single player is worth 60 dollars. It's supposed to hover around 6 hours of play. Given, reviewers have said that it was amazing, but $10 an hour for something that will still pale in comparison to Half Life 2 isn't worth it for many of us.


RE: F@%# Infinity Ward, right in thier stupid faces...
By walk2k on 11/9/09, Rating: -1
By walk2k on 11/10/2009 12:23:26 AM , Rating: 1
Sounds like someone is just mad at losing their "hacked" servers. ...


By Reclaimer77 on 11/9/2009 4:30:26 PM , Rating: 3
I want to thank you for posting this. I was pretty jazzed up to buy this game, until reading your post.

Now ? No thanks. I don't see any point in paying for the PC version of what amounts to a bad port of a console game. Stripped of features, mods, and won't even have cutting edge graphics.

/spits


"I mean, if you wanna break down someone's door, why don't you start with AT&T, for God sakes? They make your amazing phone unusable as a phone!" -- Jon Stewart on Apple and the iPhone











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki