Doom Creator: 'Really Happy Seeing The Success Of Call Of Duty'

John Carmack, one of the creators of Doom, is currently putting the finishing touches on RAGE, a shooter that could redefine the scale of the FPS, but speaking to Industry Gamers he claimed that he's a bit peeved at the "snooty attitude" of some developers towards shooters and, more specifically, shooters like Call of Duty.

"As long as people are buying it, it means they’re enjoying it," claimed Carmack. "If they buy the next Call of Duty, it’s because they loved the last one and they want more of it. So I am pretty down on people who take the sort of creative auteurs' perspective. It's like 'Oh, we’re not being creative.' But we're creating value for people - that’s our job! It’s not to do something that nobody’s ever seen before. It’s to do something that people love so much they’re willing to give us money for.

"So I do get pretty down on people that - you see some of the indie developers that really take a snooty attitude about this. It’s almost as if it’s popular, it’s not good. And that’s just not true."

It's interesting - especially given the news that UK retailers expect Modern Warfare 3 to surpass Black Ops' pre-order record. Despite the fact that a subset of gamers are becoming bored with the military shooter, it's still a huge growth area for developers and publishers.

I understand that a great number of you guys are bored with the series, but will you still buy the new Call of Duty game?

Doom Creator Fires Back at Devs with 'Snooty Attitude' [Industry Gamers]


Comments

    Pre-ordered it last night-already waiting by the mailbox in anticipation.

    He's a smart man.

    I'm fairly certain that I will buy MW3 because if it's anything like MW2 then I know I will enjoy it. Simple straightforward fun.

    BF3 is what has me worried though with the direction they have taken with the BC games.

      Chazz, the Bad Company series isn't truly part of the Battlefield 2 or 3 series, it's just a spin off created for the consoles in the begining, Bad Company 1 was console only.

      Battlefield 3 is more true (according to DICE) to Battlefield 2 and they say it's a true successor for Battlefield 2, one that fans and BF2 deserves.

      You have to rember tho, that BC was made manly with the Console in mind, and is treeted as a spin off rather than a continuwaiton on the BF games.

      BF3s class system is going to be the same as 2142, so 4 classes insted of 5. Knife is back to be a standed wepone rather than a COD style knife, witch will make getting a kinfe even more rewarding.

      Personaly, I will be getting BF3, as you actully have to use some sort of team work. Cod has no team work at all. I have all COD5 aka World At War, I think was the last of the true COD games. Now all we get is COD4.

        I hope you guys are right but so far, spinoff or not, it seems that BC2 is what they'll be building off of. If they decide to rework the whole lot to make it more BF2/2142 then that's great but there is no guarantee, so for me it's cautious optimism.

        At least with CoD (whether you love it or hate it) we know what we're getting rather than having to be of the more blind loyalty mindset.

    The last COD I bought was COD4. Have since moved over to the Battlefield series and won't be going back. It's the sheer scale of battles in BF games and the use of squad tactics as opposed to COD's confined, run and gun play. There has to be some element of realism in the genre and not just a pastiche of 80s action movie cliches of the invincible loner.

      I know a few million people who might disagree...

    No I will not buy the next Call of Duty game, BF3 for me.

    Carmack is a funny guy.

    Hey Carmack, those poppy farmers in the golden triangle are also creating value for people - they are doing something people love and will give them money for. I just prefer to do something a little less... wrong.

      so developing cod and making drugs are on the same level now?

        No, my point was that just because something is popular doesn't mean it's a good thing.

        However, having said this you have to be on drugs to find leveling up to level 70 ten times fun while playing a kahki, frat boy, monstrosity of a game.

    There's a difference between "creating value for people" and just copy+pasting a game as a cash in.

      If COD's target market didn't believe the game provided value for them, they wouldn't buy it.

      They buy it. A lot. This would indicate the game DOES provide value for them.

      Utility is subjective.

      I have not even the slightest interest in COD games whatsoever. But what you say is completely ridiculous. People would not buy these games if the games created no value for them.

      Now, if COD doesn't create any value FOR YOU, then fine! It creates no value for me whatsoever. But neither your tastes nor mine are barometers of some transcendent, eternal, immutable "real value."

        If you, or anyone, finds value in buying a $100 graphics update every year, be my guest. My point is it could be so much more and it's lowering the standards of games, in particular FPSs, in general.

          $100 may be retail but plenty of people aren't paying that price or anywhere near that price so it's a moot point. And it isn't lowering the standard at all.

          The Gears games are fine, you've got the Bioshock series, Rage is on the horizon, Borderlands 2 (when it happens), Bulletstorm was lots of fun. There is plenty happening with FPS. Just because one game hogs the limelight, it is not a reflection of the entire genre.

          And of course they're interested in creating something of value. They wouldn't be selling anywhere near as many copies of games if they weren't. They're listening to what the majority find valuable (which will also net them the most money) and creating that.

        And if you think for a second that Activision has any interest in creating something that has value for customers, then YOU are ridiculous. Kotick openly admits that he will exploit a franchise for money.

          And the only way you can make money in the first place is by creating value for customers.

          If a customer doesn't believe a product has value (for them), they won't buy the product in the first place.

          You can argue that the CoD players have bad taste (I'd agree with you on this point). But that doesn't mean they aren't getting "value." If they believe they are being TRULY ripped off (i.e. the price of the good is higher than they're willing to pay) then they will either pirate it or not buy it.

          Value is subjective.

          That doesn't mean CoD is objectively good. It means that FOR MANY PEOPLE it is subjectively good.

          You don't have to like CoD. I don't either. But many people do and some of them might find your comments condescending at best.

    People always have problems with things that are popular, everyone wants to feel unique by trying to oppose the mainstream view of things.

    Modern Warfare is a good series, it's undeniable, it gets good reviews and tremendous sales; it helps our industry grow.

    So yes I will be buying the 3rd one, because if it's more of the same, then it's more of a good thing.

      I hate this view that you must be hating it because it's popular it's as freaking arrogant as the view that your just hating cos it's CoD

      The Game does nothing to help the industry. all the money goes to one mega corp which already has more money than it knows what to do with. That doesn't actually make that many games.

      Fact is the series has gone downhill since CoD 4(hell i think that bowling said that himself) way too much focus on stupid KS that promote camping and the like. Than on gunplay which is the whole point of a shooter.

      Not to sit in a corner popping people with a shotgun until you get the AC130, which they make so OP by putting red squares around everyone. It's not hard to track people in infra red. and at least then you can hide from the stupid thing

      Oh please, Call of Duty may have been undeniably good at one point, but definitely not now. If you can't see that it's a copy/paste cash cow then you are blind, it's in the same league as EA Sports games these days.

    Yeah, first call of duty that i'll be totally avoiding. Not buying this copy and paste crap

    Oh look, the MW3 vs BF3 topic again.. It seems you can't mention either game and not incite the debate.

    Surely everyone is getting over posting about which game they are buying.

      Serrels identified that many are bored with the series and asked if we were going to buy a new COD game. I felt it prudent to justify why not, explaining my reasoning. Would you rather read comments which simply say "yes", "no", "no", "yes", "FIRST!", "no", "yes"?

      Well of course you mention MW3 and BF3 together, Dice created the game as a direct opposition to COD and marketed it in such a way AS to cause debate and to draw attention

    Modern Warfare is good, it had an amaazing campaign mode and multiplayer was decent.

    That being said, paying full price for a 4 hour campaign and online modes nearly identical to the previous year is a huge ripoff, and you'd have to be some sort of idiotic sheep to keep buying every single one.

    Some people like Pepsi, some people prefer Coke..

    Call of Duty is undoubtedly the best and most addictive multiplayer experience for ME, so I am happy to support the franchise.

    Haters gon' hate.

    I think the problem that a lot of people (myself included) have with COD isn't that it's popular but the fact that it's not improving. They're just treading water at best, and more likely going backwards (they've had 3 tries to top COD4 and still haven't managed it, even if its selling more).

    Carmack probably isn't the most impartial observer, either. Guy who makes shooters happy that people are buying shooters? Whodathunkit?

      Look at Battlefield, that's been downhill since BF2. Bad Company improved graphics and physics sure but they also noobed it up with the new spotting feature, they messed up class kits (what kind of a medic enters the field with an LMG of all weapons and no medkit or defib?) and if the map design doesn't result in one sided battle then it results in a boring stalemate that ultimately comes down to which team loses the most people to boredom.

        Bfbc2 had medkit and defib. Bad company and battlefield2 are two very different games. Much the same as cod being more infantry focused and battlefield more teamwork and vehicle based.

          You don't get the medkit straight off the bat, you had to unlock it which as a medic is a HUGE pain in the arse. More so because they felt the need for a medic to carry a highly inaccurate LMG because they removed the support class.

      oh my god, why are you always beating me to the punch!? Damn you! :)

    I agree totally with Carmack: just because it's popular doesn't mean it's not good, or what people want. Plus there's little point to technical or gameplay innovation if you can't put it into a product that someone will enjoy.
    My only real beef with Medal of Honour and Halo is actually a beef with the rise of the console FPS and the implications of designing games for that platform. PC is *still* the superior platform for FPS.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRV0tclxXMQ

    'nuff said.

      And yet, IIRC, there were far more console pre-orders and sales for the last two CoD games than PC - and I mean both Xbox and PS3 versions separately sold more than PC. Think what you will, but the prevalence of PC-based FPS games is declining.

      Regardless, that's irrelevant because i have a picture of a pop tart cat flying through space spewing forth a plethora of colors from his rear end on my PC

    Just shut up Carmack and give us Doom 4, its what the people want to see and it better be at this years QuakeCon, i was dissapointed last year not seeing anything Doom 4 related.

      Really? I grew up on Wolf 3D and Doom and I am more interested in Rage right now. Would prefer Doom got the full reboot treatment.

    I won't be buying MW3 because each time a new one comes out I just end up back at cod4. I agree with Carmack though, clearly people still love and want modern warfare games and they want them to adhere to the formula they love. If that is not what you want in an fps get one of the many many others that are also being made.

    The only reason i dont like CoD is in my opinion they are simply not fun games to play and are not innovative. The popularity is simply because of multiplayer and its clear that devs (not just CoD devs) are putting most of their effort into multiplayer and just shoehorn in some generic war plot as single player.

    I dont play multiplayer, never have and never will and it saddens me to think that in a few years time that all games are going to be just multiplayer.

    Considering that COD4 plays differently than MW2 and MW3 has yet to come out, how exactly is it more of the same? Oh right. There is that other studio that makes a direct copy of the last one to come out.

    I've given up on the COD series, and its clones - the multiplayer is all twitch and no tactics, and the singleplayer is so 'on-rails' these days I find it detracts from the immersion, and thus isn't fun. I think they LOOK amazing, but I had no sense of achievement from completing a level.

    I will be buying both, but battlefield 3 first. If enough of my friends get battlefield 3 I willpeobably not get it at all, unless it's something different. I really rated the weapon unlock system in mw2 and black ops was a huge letdown. I'm just afraid it will be laggy for me- infinityward cods are always more laggy than treyarch

    I like the way this guy thinks. Pointlessly fighting over a series is rather immature and when the Call of Duty 3 website was bought to direct to Battlefield was really immature and stupid. Especially when they claim they're not fighting against them.

    The advertising for Battlefield and even Black Ops was along the lines of, "We're not doing all the bad things COD does".

    The only thing I hate about the popularity of the recent CoD games is that every game since then has been copying the instant gratification feeling the CoD games have produced. Pretty much every game has huge headshot detection boxes and gives the player a cookie for spraying their bullets everywhere. You're rewarded with a medal/ribbon or something, a commendation, and then a killstreak to get more kills freely.

    Even Halo (which I love) has copied this, with headshot capable weapons, the Banshee bomb, tank, and bad spawning locations. It's why everybody spams the DMR, because it's unbalanced and rewards the player with a medal for doing so.

    Played all the COD's and I think this will be the first one I pass on.

    Aside from being slightly bored with the whole ordeal, my main concern is that MW2 was horribly unbalanced with bullshit perks like 'commando', 'stopping power' and 'one man army'. With a bastardized Infinity Ward at the helm, I have little faith it won't be full of cheap class set ups, noobtubers, and quick scope snipers.

    Although no one else seems to agree with me, Black Op's, in my opinion, was far superior in terms of balance and map design, and therefore fun. I never thought I'd say it, but I think I'll wait for the next Treyarch game.

      I 100 percent agree Milbo!!

      IW dropped the ball BIG time with MW2 IMHo.. Treyarch at least make a pointed effort NOT to alienate the international community - Case in point, how long did it take for local matchmaking to become an option in MW2? No excuse considering Treyarch had adopted it quite successfully in [email protected]

      Black Ops is not PERFECT, but Treyarch have made the most BALANCED game in the series.

      I couldn't agree with you more. Treyarch make cod enjoyable, mw2 for me was kind of arcade of duty, It wasn't fun. Will more than likely pass on mw3, not unless major changes have taken place, cod is in need of a sea change. well bf3 is a must purchase for me

        Pfffft... Treyarch screwed up Black Ops so badly... It was unbelievably bad, and about as far off the polished MW2 experience as one could dread. I will definitely be buying MW3 and hoping to hell it washes out the still lingering bad taste of Treyarch's loathsome effort. Eurgggh.

        ------
        "Hating on Treyarch for as long as they make sh*tty games like CODBLOPS" ;-)

    i'm not buying a game series that doesn't evolve, simple as that. i find them utterly boring. no CoD for me

    While I both agree and disagree with Carmack on this issue, I would like to point out that "creative auteur" refers to the act of having creative direction handled by somebody who is considered qualified and motivated to create something that is in line with their individual vision. ie: Spielberg and E.T. Lucas and Star Wars, James Cameron and Avatar, Miyamoto and Zelda, Suda51 and No More Heroes, Hideo Kojima and Metal Gear Solid, and not to mention a great deal of fiction authors.

    If you think that Call of Duty in its current incarnation is an auteur production, then you're definitely up the wrong tree. Especially since the original creators are no longer on board.

    Regardless of personal taste in games, it's hard to argue that COD isn't doing something right. I have played every COD but MW2 was a big let down in single player (excellent MP) and Blops was just a big let down overall (both SP and MP).

    That being said I was a massive fan of BF2 and poured countless hours into BC2, so I have already preordered BF3. As for MW3, it'll be a rent and try before I decide at this point.

    Can someone tell me if COD has updated their game engine at all or just modified it? I remember playing games like Doom, then Quake, Then the new Doom and now Rage. All different game engines that improved on the previous game (using Id examples because of John), I think if the game sells millions then so be it, it must have something right but for me personally. Why can't you have a new game engine for the COD:MW3? Improve on what is already a great standard, DICE are doing this (sorry for BF vs COD) with BF3. The graphics are amazing when compared to COD, I think everyone has to compare the two there

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now