No kidding. I was assuming that was sarcasm since COD was the running joke of the SOCOM community this generation and why SOCOM 4 was dumbed down.
COD is NOTHING like SOCOM. NOTHING. SOCOM required teamwork and actually communicating with people while having great map layouts that support multiple strategies. The average COD game has none of that. Hell, the only recent MP game to even give me the teamplay aspect from SOCOM has been The Last of Us surprisingly enough and I've run into quite a few SOCOM players on there who said the same thing. Ironically enough, those SOCOM players were the only ones using voice chat.
I think Activision has to know that COD's success is finite. It will be profitable for quite some time, but I don't think it's going to be the game everyone talks about anymore. If they were willing to take risks, they would realize their sales aren't guaranteed after Ghosts and try to actually shake the series up quite a bit and show people that they're willing to change the formula and keep the game fresh and new. I think if Ghosts doesn't do as well, they have to be willing to take chances and keep the game relevant by attracting some of the gamers they've lose with their repetitive gameplay. Sure, it's risky to change the formula that's printed money for you for so long, but it's also certain that keeping everything the same will hurt you eventually too.
I just think that spending the time and money to develop a new engine would go a long way. People want a next-gen experience on the new consoles and PR statements about fish A.I. aren't going to cut it. The engine was good enough for this generation since 60FPS was very unique, but now they're looking at games that look drastically better yet run at 60FPS too and then their one excuse is gone. It's one thing for the gameplay to remain exactly the same, it's another for the overall look to never change as well as other series progress.