Thoughts on Modern Warfare (2019)

This game feels absolutely brilliant.

It isn’t. At least, I wouldn’t go that far yet. Modern Warfare on the surface features the traditional set of perks, killstreaks, weapon customization, and game-modes you’ve come to expect from COD that has released dozens of games in the dozen years since Modern Warfare… the original, COD4. 

That won’t get confusing.

However, in-terms of the moment to moment gameplay, the animations, sound-effects, weapon-recoil, and most directly the movement, feels fan-bleeding-tastic. Playing PUBG after this game’s beta felt like the Heavy to Scout analogy in my F1 video backwards. Even something as simple as the “Tactical” sprint, that grants players an extra burst of speed for brief periods, used to time pushes with your teammates or just crossing an open-ended street, is something I instinctively want in Shooters now.

Whether or not I actually want it beyond my lizard brain is something I’m sure Favyn will assist answering.

I also want the visceral animations that make just reloading a shotgun feel powerful, let alone the recoil animation that makes it seem as if said Shotgun is firing bricks. (Wouldn’t be the first time COD’s had a brick blaster.

Mark Grisby, Sgt. Griggs and Credit Rapper himself, wasn’t making things up in this interview with Game Informer. The whole game is presented like the Shotgun he loves more than I ever could. Even the basic assault-rifles have a kick to match their beefier sound, while crucially, not straying into the Tactical Shooter genre Call of Duty wasn’t designed to be. These hefty weapons can still be controlled, at least on a mouse, with relative-ease, just without being literal laser-beams as in previous games.

It’s a notable leap that really makes one wonder why it wasn’t made earlier. Was there something in Activision’s contract that ensured reloads had to remain majestic & smooth? Even in the heat of battle? Rather than clicking the magazine with the commitment of someone looking for another victim?

Who knows, perhaps like MOH 2010’s overkill weapon-effects, maybe the novelty’s just corrupting my mind like kids having an Ice Cream breakfast, and I’ll grow out of it. 

I’m genuinely curious what gun-nuts think though, as COD’s never exactly be renowned for the weapons themselves. Instead, they often got credit for the context of said weapons. What it’s like to hear twenty Tommy Guns on the beaches of Normandy, or a barrage of M4’s in Middle-Eastern streets. It’s something the campaign will hopefully have on full display.

Back to Multiplayer though, its going for every-scale and does so surprisingly well, for the most part… in the short term (this is why I generally don’t do previews).

The 2v2 mode that piqued the interest of even my most jaded friends is fun, but raised some concerns. I quite enjoy fighting game quick round formats, as they sell the pressure of a long-term match and comeback potential while not being that long in reality. And of course, the enjoyment of a small-scale mode in Call of Duty is that one player going down stacks the odds 50% against the favor in the next Gunfight. When a teammate falls, each second you don’t return the favor is working against you, and that’s the kind of pressure that hasn’t existed in COD’s core-modes.

Though my main-concern is that there’s no reason for a player to push-forward. Yes, there’s a neutral-capture point after a set-period of time, but otherwise it’s not an option, and one-team can just hold at the back with snipers until that flag spawns. It’s something that an enemy-team I faced did, and immediately felt tedious and boring, and part of the frustration was that I couldn’t logically argue against their tactics. They had long-ranged weapons at spawn, and we couldn’t push without being one-tapped. But I always feel that in-shooters, ironically, two people shooting at each other is the least interesting part about them in games like this, where deaths are lightning quick. Military shooters are at their best in what’s done to influence gunfights in your favor. In Siege it’s intel. In Squad, it’s strategy. And in Modern Warfare, it’s speed.

Yes, it’s not as big-brained gamer, but Call of Duty I don’t think was ever meant to be overly complex, and in-fact, the bloated classes and customization of Infinity Ward’s previous effort, Infinite Warfare, was one of the things I and many criticized; which the studio has now focused.

They emphasize the fun of making an aggressive push in tactical sprint, slamming open doors with shotgun aimed, sliding on the floor, pumping a hefty round into your surprised opponent, and letting the gratification fuel your next run; which Call of Duty honestly hasn’t done in a while. Whether it’s through clunky-wall running in Infinite, or cookie-cutter ””””””””competitive”””””””” maps in World War II, running around in Call of Duty hasn’t been this fun in a long-time.

Although, that could always just be because people haven’t found the exploits yet, or the perfect hiding spots, the most overpowered sightlines, etc. But honestly, I’m a lot more worried about Activision’s hand than I am worried about this community in-regards to self-sabotage.

In short, what I feel about this game, while also working on a Call of Duty 4 video, is that I don’t blame anybody.

What I mean is, I don’t blame people for buying into this one, because it’s pulling me too. The game is a notable step-up in feel and production from prior titles, its direction is more focused and flexible, and the game looks and sounds beautiful.

But I also don’t blame people avoiding it due to the owner’s practices, cynicism, or just being burned too many times. After-all, this positive press also got pushed for Black Ops 4. It’s why outside of this post, and perhaps a few tweets I probably won’t be talking about this game in full-detail until many more moons have passed.

But regardless of how it turns out, I wish its developers the best, their effort and passion for even the smallest details really comes through.

P.S. Also the POOP clan was fun.