While plenty has been said about the various issues plaguingCall of Duty: Warzone, one of the most consistently debated topics is something that is meant to be exciting. Integration with new, standaloneCall of Dutytitles allowsCall of Duty: Warzoneto evolve, getting additional arsenals of weaponry and batches of Operators for battle royale fans to try out.
Unfortunately, two messy integrations have seen theCall of Duty: Warzonecommunity becoming divided. Some players support the concept of integration, as they prevent the game from feeling stale. Others feel that integration does more harm than good, bringing about problems that did not exist when the game had a more focused content pool. As a result of this divisiveness, some gamers have called forproperCall of Duty: Warzonesequelsin place of integration, and this could benefit the franchise in a few key ways.
RELATED:Call of Duty: Warzone Players Accuse Bundle Of Being ‘Pay-To-Lose’
The Problems With Call of Duty: Warzone’s Integration Plan
There are a few major issues withCall of Duty: Warzone’s integration periods, but one of the most noteworthy is weapon balancing. Longtime players will remember how unplayable the game was during the earlyCall of Duty: Black Ops Cold WarSeasons, as weapons like the DMR 14, FFAR, and AUG were the only viable choices. Unfortunately, theCooper Carbine fromCall of Duty: Vanguardis proving to be overpowered as well, showing that this remains an issue.
Another problem with integration is that additional content usually brings new and returning bugs along with it. Not only did Rebirth Island and Verdansk 84 have problems with out-of-map glitches and exploits, but so too has Caldera. TheCall of Duty: WarzonePacific map has also been the victim of the returning demon texture glitch, with countless otherproblems tied to Caldera’s Gulagas well. New skins have been bugged, too, giving players unfair advantages or ruining the experience.
On top of this, there is getting to be too muchcontent inCall of Duty: Warzone. Having over a hundred weapons makes balancing all of them difficult, while the sheer number of Calling Cards, Emblems, and Operators can see players searching through menus for ages just to find what they want. The gadgets and tools fromCall of Duty: Modern Warfarecan feel out of place alongsideCall of Duty: Vanguard’s old guns, hurting immersion for those that care about it. Perhaps the biggest issue with the overwhelming amount of content, though, is that not everyone wants it.
Some players preferredCall of Duty: Warzonewhen it was limited toCall of Duty: Modern Warfarecosmetics and weaponry, believing the game has become too unfocused with each passing integration. Others would have preferred ifCall of Duty: Black Ops Cold Warcontent was the only thing available when that game was active, and the same can be said forCall of Duty: Vanguard. Thepopularity of the Vanguard Royale playlists, and outrage around their recent removal, is proof of this.
Why Call of Duty: Warzone Sequels Could Prevent Integration Issues
While hypotheticalCall of Duty: Warzonesequels would obviously need to stick to the free-to-play approach, as that is a big reason that the battle royale genre is so successful, they could be different in other ways. A sequel could release every other year, and it could be directly tied to a previousCall of Dutygame. For example,Call of Duty2023could get its own version ofCall of Duty: Warzonein 2024, with the game being built aroundCall of Duty2023 weapons, Operators, and features. The next standaloneCall of Dutygame could then get its ownCall of Duty: Warzonegame, leaving behind the previous version ofWarzoneinstead of merging the two.
With this approach, keepingCall of Duty: Warzonebalanced would be significantly easier, as the pool of content would be more limited. Players would be able to easily navigate through the weapons and cosmetic items from a singleCall of Dutytitle, not worrying about having too much to keep track of. ACall of Duty: Warzonesequel could make full use of the mechanics seen in theCall of Dutytitle it is tied to, and it could have a map that shares the same era. ACall of Duty: Modern Warfare 2version ofWarzone, for example, could feature a modern city map and mechanics like night vision. Likewise, afuturisticCall of Dutytitlecould get a version ofWarzonewith advanced movement, and aBlack Opsversion ofWarzonecould have swimming and Specialist gear.
By keeping aCall of Duty: Warzonesequel tied to just one mainline title, the game would hopefully be more polished. Players could run into lessCall of Duty: Warzoneglitches, and Raven could patch problems that do arise more quickly. With just one map and a third of the content to manage, eachCall of Duty: Warzonesequel would be more easily accessible. Further, players could stick to theCall of Duty: Warzonegame that they like most, enjoying the arsenal and locales of one time period without worrying about other era’s gadgets being introduced.
RELATED:Call of Duty: Warzone Glitch Is Randomly Killing Gulag Winners
How Call of Duty: Warzone Sequels Could Improve The Franchise’s Yearly Release Format
Perhaps the best thing aboutCall of Duty: Warzonesuccessors is that they could make the series’ yearly release format less problematic. Many gamers have been critical of this approach, especially in recent years since the format seems to be having a negative impact on the quality of new releases. However, it is unlikely to ever change, as evenCoDtitles likeCall of Duty: Vanguardthat sell lessthan usual perform very well commercially.
WhileCall of Duty’s yearly rotationwill likely stick around for the long haul,Call of Duty: Warzonesequels being brought into the fold would give developers more time to make games. A two-year cycle forCall of Duty: Warzonegames could be seen, with one releasing in between every main entry. The Treyarch-madeCall of Duty2023 could be a mainline entry, while Raven could release aCall of Duty: Warzonegame in 2024. Sledgehammer could drop a new mainline title in 2025, while Raven could use that game’s assets for a newCall of Duty: Warzonetie-in in 2026. Infinity Ward would be up to bat in 2027, Raven in 2028, and then Treyarch again in 2029.
DroppingCall of Duty: Warzonetitles after a main entry would keepCall of Dutygames yearly without damaging quality. Treyarch, Infinity Ward, andSledgehammerwould have twice as long to make their games, ensuring that each is full of content and as polished as they could possibly be. In the years when aCall of Duty: Warzonesequel releases in place of a premium game, the game from the previous year could continue to get new content. This would mean that games likeCall of Duty: Modern Warfarewould be kept alive for longer, withCall of Dutytitles thriving for two years as opposed to one. If aCall of Dutygame is popular, seeing it abandoned after just a year is always a letdown, so this would be a welcome change.
Obviously, this is unlikely, as Activision is finding plenty of success with its current approach. However, dropping a newCall of Duty: Warzonegame every other year could be the healthiest thing for the series. Fans could get more content for the games they pay for, while the free-to-play battle royale games would avoid all the problems that integration has been causing. With the current state of theCall of Dutybrandforcing Activision to apologize, something needs to change. Considering that theCall of Dutyfranchise is now built aroundCall of Duty: Warzone, the battle royale title is the first place Activision should look when making the necessary adjustments.
Call of Duty: Warzoneis available now on PC, PS4, and Xbox One.
MORE:Call of Duty Dev Calls out Activision Over Its Vanguard and Warzone Apology
