Cliff Notes – Call Of Duty is being ruined by constant change and endless gimmicks
- Activision’s failure to listen to the broader community has led to a perception of stagnation in the Call Of Duty franchise, with recent titles criticized for lacking innovation and coherence.
- The ongoing reliance on gimmicks, microtransactions, and frequent gameplay changes has eroded the franchise’s core identity, alienating long-time fans and risking its future success.
- Other successful franchises have thrived by maintaining their core DNA and actively engaging with player feedback, highlighting the need for Call Of Duty to refocus on its foundational elements.
Call Of Duty is being ruined by constant change and endless gimmicks – Reader’s Feature
Call Of Duty: Black Ops 7 is controversial long before launch (Activision)
A veteran Call Of Duty fan considers the current antipathy over Black Ops 7 and argues that Activision is not listening properly to its fans.
This is a response to Jonesy and their comments on Call Of Duty: Black Ops 7 in the weekly Inbox. First, I just want to talk Call of Duty only, and I agree there is a bit of franchise bashing going on at the moment. I’ve certainly done that with my friends I play with, but will admit that when Activision listen, Call Of Duty is great. However, the last few entries, while not necessarily stale, they haven’t been listening to a wider community, only very select people it seems.
In terms of people criticising them for being stale, I feel that is more of the (likely larger) Warzone playerbase and that, frankly, needs a bit of an overhaul (and potentially splitting from the main game, as many commentators have suggested over the last two years). Looking at maps alone, Caldera and Al Mazrah were not particularly good in reality, and Urzikstan felt like it was more a return in a better direction, but having that for nearly 18 months before Verdansk 2.0 came back was too long a time.
Off the back of that, everyone had a blast on Verdansk, myself included, but the changes made the following season broke a lot of things, and the changes they were trying to make weren’t addressing any of the core issues the game had. The next big map is following in early 2026, which is the same tag line used for Verdansk, so I’d expect another April release – which gives us a full year on a map a lot of us fans likely played to death during the pandemic.
Comparing Black Ops 7 to Modern Warfare 3, I feel is reasonable. I would disagree with the lack of complaints about Modern Warfare 3 though. Pretty much every outlet called it glorified DLC, and that was what the rumourmill was suggesting, amid the chaos around the time of the Microsoft takeover.
Herein lies another strand of discontent with how Black Ops 7 looks. But talking about other Call Of Duty games I wanted to look at a slightly wider picture. As a long-time gamer, it very much feels like we are circling around the times post-Ghosts, which was Advance Warfare through Black Ops 4. It’s there it felt they had lost their way, and were trying anything to captivate new audiences with new gimmicks, and that saw core mechanics changing every new game.
I really struggled through that period, and to me, after this last year, and all the new features being shown in the Black Ops 7 trailer, event and press releases, it feels like we’ve come full circle to that moment once more, and it’s why I won’t be getting this year’s. But I will come back once they realise they have gone too far the gimmick route and return to form, much like they did with Modern Warfare 2019.
Expert, exclusive gaming analysis
But I want to move more into a conversation about shooter games in general. The success of Battlefield 6 is a big moment in the genre this year, but we should really be asking why those games are getting that kind of negative sentiment.
In my opinion, there’s so much choice, that games in the genre absolutely have to find and nail their identity. Call Of Duty, over the last few titles, has deviated away from what its core once was. Whether by accident or design, I wouldn’t be able to say, but it feels like they have been trying to dip their hands into as many pots as possible, be it gameplay changes, battle passes, skins, and crossovers etc., that it has genuinely eroded what was once great about Call Of Duty (and also introduced a lot of issue in core gameplay along the way).
Other big games have seen the same issue. Look at Destiny 2, the former darling of space shooters, now at an all-time low. No real new content, lacklustre campaigns and an oversaturation and reliance on microtransactions have eroded its once stellar reputation. Now, clutching at straws, their next expansion is ‘Star Wars inspired’ which I don’t see doing well. There are so many lapsed players, and an ongoing cost of living crisis, I can’t see a mini-campaign (Edge Of Fate being 10 to 12 hours) selling for £35. Only the still current enthusiast will be interested and that I feel is where Black Ops 7 has landed.
Looking at the likes of Arc Raiders, Escape From Tarkov, Battlefield 6, Borderlands 4, Overwatch 2, Fortnite and the like, they have their core DNA and stuck to it, resulting in success. Yes, the last entries of Battlefield, Borderlands, and the end of Overwatch 1/start of Overwatch 2 all had their issues (and in fairness the first week of an Overwatch 2 season always does have additional issues), but they still manage to listen and learn from communities, and kick on.
Borderlands 4 is a big return to form after a mediocre third instalment (even with the PC issues that are being worked on). Battlefield 6 I don’t need to be talked about, but 2042 took a good 12 to 18 months to get to where it should have been on release and nearly killed that franchise. The end of Overwatch 1 was a struggle, and so was the start of Overwatch 2, but they have really invested in listening to people and it’s in one of the best places it’s been in years.
This brings me back to my point, games need to find their identity, their core DNA, and stick to it. If it’s a franchise like Call Of Duty, then chopping and changing that DNA every entry makes it struggle for players to stay with you. Then compounding that with more novel gimmicks from other games, too many microtransactions, pay to win elements, battle passes… it is all slowly putting a lot of players off in a world of finite disposable income.
The more these big developers listen to their communities, and not just select individuals in a small focus group, the absolute better the genre will be. Having a lot of great games come out over the last 12 months, that have all returned to their core roots, has cemented their DNA, which has massively benefitted them.
Not only does it give players a sense of familiarity and expectation, it also allows the developers to build on that core in interesting ways, as long as they do not deviate away from that core too much. The likes of Black Ops 7 may well struggle, and while I hope I am wrong, the last few years have been a substantial miss because they don’t know where to go with them.
Fingers crossed over the coming years, developers will take note of releases this year and realise that having that core identity is a valuable asset and not something you need to ignore. After all, you don’t need to try and reinvent the wheel for the sake of it!
By reader NewAgeM3ssiah
Black Ops 7 is out next Friday (Activision)
The reader’s features do not necessarily represent the views of GameCentral or Metro.
You can submit your own 500 to 600-word reader feature at any time, which if used will be published in the next appropriate weekend slot. Just contact us at gamecentral@metro.co.uk or use our Submit Stuff page and you won’t need to send an email.
Comment now
Comments
Add Metro as a Preferred Source on Google
Add as preferred source