by Jack Grimme, Contributing Writer
Last year, rumors emerged that Activision Blizzard were leaning towards making Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II (2022) their first multi-year title since the first game in the franchise, opting to provide an extra year of support and content to the game instead of a full-fledged release. I am not sure if this was ever officially confirmed, but most fans had come to accept this as fact until they announced Call of Duty: Modern Warfare III (2023) a few months back. Fans and critics alike were immediately skeptical, as it felt like another unabashed display of endless greed by the mega-corporation.
The game looked exactly like its predecessor, and they masqueraded this as a selling point instead of a clear flaw. All weapons and cosmetics carried over. There were no new maps, only reimagined versions of fan favorites. It played the same, except for a handful of changes, most of which were features in old games, inexplicably removed for the 2022 title, and brought back after ceaseless complaints from the fan base. It seemed like they intended to slap their fans across the face with half-baked nostalgia-bait, charge them 70 dollars, and take a bow to uproarious applause. But hey! Let’s give them the benefit of the doubt. Surely, the 75 billion dollar super-giant cares more about their fans than that!
All jokes aside, this game is exactly what you think it is. If you do not like Call of Duty, this is not the game that will change your mind. However, there are many fans of the genre who are wondering if this is worth the price tag. Let’s break it down into a few categories. First, ask yourself, “What do I look for in a good Call of Duty?” Generally, there are three main groups: campaign fans, zombies fans, and multiplayer fans. I think campaign fans will be the most disappointed of the three. The new release features the shortest single-player campaign of the entire franchise by a substantial margin. Fans can complete the story in three to four hours. It is brief, uninspired, anticlimactic, and honestly just boring.
The zombies mode is handily the most revolutionary aspect of this title. The classic round-based style has been abandoned in favor of an open-world extraction variant, which is a complete redesign of the formula that ended up being okay at best. This new approach simply lacks every single element of the zombies experience that made it so special. I think it has the best chance of growing on me with time because there are completely new avenues that take time to explore. However, this is one part of the formula that benefits from Call of Duty’straditional iterative style: Familiar mechanics with a rich story conveyed by some of the best map design the franchise has ever seen makes the mode a consistent highlight. This is not the part of the game that needed an overhaul. But I still give them some credit for genuinely trying something new.
The multiplayer sub-group has one question to ask themselves: What is nostalgia worth to you? This year’s multiplayer is a Frankenstein’s Monster of different mechanics, guns, maps, and elements of previous titles. That statement is true for all entries in the franchise, but this year is particularly shameless. I am not sure if there is a single truly original idea in this entire section of the game. Sure, perks are called gear now, and there are a bunch of pretty new camos to unlock, but that is not nearly enough to justify the ridiculous price tag. Most of these elements would’ve been underwhelming even if it was just released as downloadable content.
I’ll admit, it does feel slightly disingenuous to spend the whole review bashing on the game, as there are some circumstances where you will probably enjoy it. Chiefly, if you are a diehard fan of the series, you will probably have a good time. You know what to expect, and this entry feels more polished than previous years, which is appreciated. However, those people probably aren’t reading this review because they had it preloaded and played it at midnight upon release. You also may enjoy the game if you are like me: a casual fan of the series who hasn’t played the past few titles. Honestly, that may be the best way to engage with the franchise. Growth in the franchise is ridiculously slow, and often a “two steps forward, one step back” type scenario. Skipping every couple of games will make the new elements much more noticeable and appreciable. However, I still wish they tried a little harder. The gimmick of bringing back fan favorite maps 10-plus years later is fun at first, but quickly grows old. I genuinely enjoy reminiscing about ancient gaming memories that are reignited by loading up maps like Estate and Afghan. But it would still be nice to have some new areas to explore.
Fortunately, it was announced that maps will be added within the next few weeks. Unfortunately, those are just maps from last year’s game. It shows that they intend to add content, but still fails to justify the game’s existence. Especially if they end up charging for the new content. I am not sure if that will happen, but I would be far from shocked if that was the route they took.
If you read my review for Overwatch 2, you might be having déjà vu. Both games are clearly greedy cash grabs that showcase the most grim aspects of the AAA games side of the industry. Knowingly purchasing the game feels like enabling a corrupt organization that is actively harming the industry. If you are at all interested in the game, I would recommend at least waiting for it to go on sale. The insanely inflated price makes a mockery of smaller developers who create far more meaningful work and are more deserving of financial support. If nothing else, I hope the mountains of money generated by these titles fuel the career of the subset of Activision Blizzard employees who generally care about the work they produce. Never forget, that is exactly how we got the Titanfall and Jedi: Fallen Order franchises!
Rating: Low side of It Was Just Okay
You can read more from Jack Grimme, and follow him on Twitter, Instagram, and Letterboxd