Garick Elordi
The video game industry is currently facing a renewed debate regarding the ethical distribution of profits and the long-term valuation of creative talent following sharp criticisms from a veteran developer. Gavin Goslin, a former long-time developer at Treyarch, has publicly called out Activision Blizzard and its parent company, Microsoft, over the massive financial success of recent re-releases for Call of Duty: Black Ops and Call of Duty: Black Ops 2. Goslin, who spent over 15 years at the studio as a level artist and level designer, argues that the current industry model allows executives to reap "massive financial windfalls" from decades-old work while the original creators—many of whom endured grueling periods of "crunch" to complete the titles—receive no additional compensation or job security.
The controversy centers on the performance of the July re-releases of the two iconic first-person shooters. Despite being characterized as "low-effort" ports rather than full-scale remasters, the titles have seen a staggering resurgence in the market. Industry data suggests that the re-releases of Black Ops 1 and 2 have collectively sold approximately 11 million copies, generating nearly $450 million in revenue. This financial performance placed the decade-old titles as the fifth highest-earning gaming products of the year, according to US data-tracker Circana. For developers like Goslin, the disparity between these earnings and the treatment of the workforce highlights what he describes as a "fundamental flaw" in the gaming business ecosystem.
The Developer Perspective: Blood, Sweat, and Legacy
In a detailed post on LinkedIn that quickly gained traction across the gaming community, Goslin expressed a mixture of pride and frustration regarding the enduring popularity of his work. Having contributed to both original Black Ops titles during his tenure at Treyarch, he noted that the games were built under "brutal hours" of development crunch—a practice where employees work excessive overtime to meet strict release deadlines.
"I poured my life into those games, spending countless, brutal hours in crunch alongside an incredibly talented team to make sure they were perfect," Goslin stated. "Seeing our blood, sweat, and tears still dominating the charts… is amazing, but it’s hard to watch the suits rake in giant financial windfalls from our old code while the actual creators don’t see a dime of it."
Goslin’s remarks strike at the heart of a growing movement within the tech and entertainment sectors demanding better residual protections for workers. While actors and writers in the film and television industries have long fought for—and secured—residual payments for the re-broadcast or re-sale of their work, the video game industry has historically operated on a "work-for-hire" basis. In this model, developers are typically paid a salary and perhaps a performance bonus upon the initial release, but they rarely retain any equity or ongoing financial interest in the software they help create, regardless of how many times it is repackaged or sold in the future.
Financial Performance and Market Context
The scale of the financial success of the Black Ops re-releases has surprised many market analysts, particularly given the nature of the products. Unlike "remakes" (which rebuild a game from the ground up) or "remasters" (which significantly upgrade textures and performance), these versions were largely "simple re-releases" intended to make the games accessible on modern hardware like the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X|S.
According to Circana, the surge in sales in July was so significant that it disrupted the typical sales charts, which are usually dominated by new triple-A releases or established live-service giants like Fortnite and Roblox. The $450 million revenue figure is particularly notable because the development costs for these ports were likely a fraction of the cost of a new title. This creates an exceptionally high profit margin for Activision, as the core assets, engine work, and design were completed and paid for over 15 years ago.
The technical reception of these ports has been lukewarm. Analysis from outlets such as Digital Foundry highlighted that the re-releases lacked significant technical enhancements, noting that they were "lacklustre ports" that failed to address long-standing bugs or provide the modern quality-of-life improvements expected of contemporary hardware. This has added fuel to Goslin’s argument that the publisher is "printing money" off the backs of original labor without reinvesting in the talent or the quality of the legacy products.
A Chronology of the Black Ops Franchise
To understand the weight of Goslin’s criticism, one must look at the timeline of the Black Ops series and its role in cementing Call of Duty as a global entertainment powerhouse:
- November 2010: Call of Duty: Black Ops is released. Developed by Treyarch, it moves away from the Modern Warfare setting to a Cold War-era narrative. It becomes a cultural phenomenon, selling over 5.6 million copies in the US and UK within 24 hours.
- November 2012: Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 is released. It introduces branching storylines and a futuristic 2025 setting. It reaches $1 billion in sales within just 15 days of release.
- 2013–2023: The series continues with multiple sequels, but the original two entries remain favorites for their multiplayer maps and "Zombies" mode.
- July 2024: Activision re-releases Black Ops 1 and 2 on modern consoles. Despite the age of the games, they skyrocket to the top of the sales charts.
- October 2024: Gavin Goslin goes public with his criticisms as the industry prepares for the launch of the next major entry in the franchise.
The timing of this debate is particularly sensitive as the industry prepares for the release of the next major installment, Modern Warfare 4. While early impressions of the new game’s campaign have been positive, the shadow of developer compensation and job security continues to loom over the launch.
The Broader Impact: Labor Stability in the Gaming Industry
Goslin’s critique is not occurring in a vacuum. The video game industry has been rocked by a series of high-profile layoffs over the past 24 months, with thousands of developers losing their jobs even at profitable companies. Microsoft, which acquired Activision Blizzard for $68.7 billion in 2023, has itself implemented significant staff reductions across its gaming divisions, including at Bethesda and Activision-owned studios.
"To watch executives rake in massive financial windfalls off our old code, while the actual creators face unemployment and don’t see a dime of that new compensation, highlights a fundamental flaw in how our industry values its talent," Goslin added in a follow-up response. He argued that if "legacy games" are going to be a consistent source of revenue for publishers, then "legacy rewards and protections" must be established for the workers who built them.
This sentiment aligns with the goals of various labor unions, such as Communications Workers of America (CWA) and SAG-AFTRA, which have been increasingly active in the gaming space. These organizations argue that the lack of residuals and the "churn-and-burn" nature of studio employment are unsustainable. They suggest that the current model encourages talent to leave the industry entirely, leading to a loss of institutional knowledge and creative quality.
Official Responses and Industry Implications
Activision has been contacted for comment regarding Goslin’s claims and the specific revenue figures associated with the Black Ops re-releases. As of this report, the company has not issued a formal rebuttal. Historically, major publishers have defended their compensation models by pointing to competitive base salaries and the high risk associated with funding massive development projects that may not always turn a profit.
However, the "risk" argument is harder to maintain in the context of legacy re-releases. For a game like Black Ops 2, the initial investment was recouped over a decade ago. The current revenue is almost entirely profit, yet none of that profit is contractually obligated to flow back to the artists, programmers, or designers who created the intellectual property.
Industry analysts suggest that this public outcry could lead to several outcomes:
- Contractual Evolution: Future employment contracts for senior developers may begin to include clauses for "re-release bonuses" or small percentages of long-tail revenue, similar to the "back-end" deals common in Hollywood.
- Increased Unionization: The disparity between executive bonuses and developer layoffs is a primary driver for unionization efforts. High-profile cases like Goslin’s provide tangible evidence for union organizers.
- Consumer Awareness: As players become more aware of the labor conditions behind their favorite games, there may be a shift in purchasing habits, with more support directed toward studios that demonstrate ethical treatment of their staff.
Conclusion
The success of the Call of Duty: Black Ops re-releases serves as a testament to the enduring quality of the work produced by Treyarch’s developers during the early 2010s. However, Gavin Goslin’s public stance has ensured that this success is viewed through a lens of labor ethics rather than just financial triumph. As Activision moves forward with the release of Modern Warfare 4 and the continued monetization of its back catalog, the pressure to reform how the industry compensates its "legacy talent" is likely to intensify. The conversation sparked by Goslin underscores a growing realization that while code may be permanent, the people who write it require more than just a paycheck at the finish line to sustain a healthy and equitable industry.
