That's your opinion, which I don't knock ya for lol In my experience, IW has never really made a "good" Call of Duty, but that's just my own personal experiences since 3 on. Both companies have some major issues they need to hammer out, of course.. if I agreed that 3Arc wasn't an A developer, than I'd have to admit that the light from their trail can't be seen by IW anymore (old IW is NOT the current IW, so you can't compare 4 and under to MW2, 3, and Ghosts... new IW team entirely).. but that's not how I see them. They're both A developers, but any A developer that has only 2 years to create a game will never get everything right, or even good most of the time... always consider the timeline restraints they have man. Now with Sledgehammer, they each have a third year.. which means the games should start getting noticeably better, but we won't truly notice until the next IW CoD in 2016...
See, I look at the whole picture... I understand how hard it is to make a "semblance" of a solid title in the short developing time each company has... so I can't complain when there are issues.. with a few exceptions.. there's zero excuse for poor netcoding and server issues by this point, and there should be no major spawning issues... those are not difficult systems, many of which worked well in the past but have since gotten worse with each passing title... that's just lazy, and it should be among the first things both companies should be concerned with.. with both WaW and BO1 Treyarch was right on top of things, if a lag comp or spawning issue arose, it was fixed very quickly... but BO2, I don't know what happened, I don't know if they replaced the veteran devs from the two prior 3Arc CoD's with greenies or what, but a lot of crap that worked very well in BO1 just went to the dogs with 2... couldn't figure out why there was such a contrast..
With IW, 4 had a LOT of problems, but the original team (now at Respawn) were very good support.. at that point IW was the flagship developer.. by the end of MW2's lifespan, though technically they were still considered the CoD developer of choice, their real position as "flagship" was usurped invisibly and without warning.. MW2 was good, but it had a lot of problems that didn't need to exist and could have been handled in a single patch (hell, we pointed out 90% of the games total problem list before patch 1)... yet 5 later basic connection, comp, and spawning issues were still present... why? complete lack of ambition my guess.. this was proven with MW3, though.. that game, and I might butthurt some people, was the most unsupported hunk of crap in the CoD series.. a s*it smear on the face of the franchise.. and it was all due to LAZY programming and lack of support.. but I won't destroy IW in text for it, it wasn't the fault of the original team.. they weren't there.. the new bulk of the team were untested in CoD terms, and it really showed... glaringly... Ghosts has been far better by far, and at least the new team is trying to fix things.. they just need to get their priorities straight... I hope Sledgehammer doesn't flop out this year.. cause you only get one first impression.. lol
In the end, both teams are A developers in my view... but because of stupid large time constraints and disorganized priorities, we get sometimes very busted CoD titles.. but I can't blame the developers for all of it.. time constants determine a lot of bad things in a video game.. as we, the fans and players of Call of Duty can rightfully stand as witness to... lol