[citation][nom]roguekitsune[/nom]Well if Treyarch is helping to develop the next CoD we all know it is going to suck. I mean they are the ones who worked on World at War, which imo is worse than CoD3 and I think CoD3 was bad. I dont know what they do different from infinity ward but it is something not good for the CoD franchise.[/citation]
Little know fact about Treyarch's CoD games -- with the exception of World at War, the developer had LESS THAN 12 MONTHS to finish those games, including CoD3. With World at War (which is a good game, IMO), they had a little more than a year. So to answer your question about what IW did differently....they took their time and had a reasonable development cycle, whereas Treyarch did not. Activision wanted to put the CoD series on a Guitar Hero-like schedule of releases with at least one title a year (gee, over-saturate much?) and since IW didn't want to play that game, Activision passed interval CoD titles over to Treyarch, which caused some serious bad blood between IW and Activision, as well as IW and Treyarch (as I wrote in a previous post in an earlier Activision-IW article, IW loathes Treyarch and mocks them openly for taking IW's baby).
There's speculation that the reason West and Zampella were dismissed was because they did not want Modern Warfare to be rushed into development for 2011 and then they and the rest of the IW team objected to Activision handing MW3 over to Activision's new studio Sledgehammer. And although Actvision doesn't clearly state that Sledgehammer's new CoD title for 2011 will be Modern Warfare 3...I'm sure we can all read between the lines. MW2 could be the last CoD title IW ever puts out, sadly.
RIP, Infinity Ward, 2002-2010