After the merger and the launch of “Name of Obligation: Black Ops Chilly Struggle” Season One, there’s ample proof both this plan hadn’t been correctly conceived, or that the technical limitations to merging these video games have been too large to totally overcome. As an alternative of syncing the three video games in any clever style, every part simply feels lumped collectively. The consumer interface is difficult and messy, largely as a result of sheer quantity of stuff being pressured to coexist in the identical place. Transitioning multiplayer events to or from “Chilly Struggle” to one of many different video games often leads to dropped gamers. Comparable parts, like ending strikes, are geared up in a different way in “Chilly Struggle” than they’re in “Warzone” or “Fashionable Warfare.” Double XP tokens accrued in “Warzone” earlier than the merger now can’t be utilized in “Warzone.” Among the “Chilly Struggle” weapons introduced into “Warzone” behave so poorly it’s comical.
“Warzone” acquired the most important content material dump with the unification, absorbing “Chilly Struggle’s” weapons into its choices. However the infusion feels as deft as duct taping a trunk to the roof of a station wagon. For causes that defy logic, there are a number of variations of the very same gun. There’s a “Chilly Struggle” MP5 and there’s a “Fashionable Warfare” MP5. There’s a “Chilly Struggle” AK-47 and there’s a “Fashionable Warfare” AK-47. And what’s even sillier is that they each have totally different stats and behave in a different way when fired. There’s even a “Chilly Struggle” AUG, which is a burst marksman rifle, and a “Fashionable Warfare” AUG, which is a completely computerized SMG.
Then there are weapons like “Chilly Struggle’s” Bullfrog, which seems fairly just like “Fashionable Warfare’s” Bizon SMG. Ditto for the Sort 63/SKS and DMR/FAL. Did we actually want them each? Logically? No. However virtually, together with each variations seems to have resolved one large integration concern, which is how one can deal with the actual fact “Chilly Struggle” and “Fashionable Warfare” have completely totally different weapon attachments. That distinction carries over into “Warzone” (“Chilly Struggle” weapons can’t use perks like Absolutely Loaded, for instance) and the one rationale clarification is that it was simpler for the builders to execute the merger.
Reasonably than curate the gamers’ arsenal, Activision has taken all of Name of Obligation’s many options and thrown them right into a closet. Searching for one thing particular? It’s in there someplace, you simply must know the place to look. Wish to evaluate a “Chilly Struggle” AK-47 loadout in opposition to a “Fashionable Warfare” AK-47 to see which is best? Trial and error is the one manner. It’s a variety of work to reply a query that shouldn’t even must be requested within the first place. (Which of the 2 nominally an identical weapons is best?)
For those who’re a participant who simply believes “extra is extra,” or for those who simply favor a “Chilly Struggle” gun however haven’t performed “Fashionable Warfare,” you’re most likely okay with this. However for those who’re a “Fashionable Warfare” participant, a sport that set a really excessive bar for gunplay, the expertise with “Chilly Struggle” weapons is jarring. And for those who have been hoping for a wise, smooth integration of parts throughout all three titles, you’re going to have finger nail marks in your scalp from all the head-scratching selections.
And so, mere days after the a lot ballyhooed megamerger between Name of Obligation titles and the debut of a brand new map, and we’re speaking about “Warzone’s” warts as an alternative of the fantastic addition of the Rebirth Island map. Reddit is chock stuffed with posts a few see-through scourge haunting Verdansk. “Fashionable Warfare” gamers are crafting memes about their new unwelcome actuality within the “Chilly Struggle”-dominated ecosystem.
I completely perceive the enchantment of uniting the worlds of “Fashionable Warfare” and “Black Ops” beneath the “Warzone” banner. It is sensible. Create a full “Name of Obligation” world with a unique model of the sport for each sort of COD participant. Wish to play tactically? Mount your weapon to your coronary heart’s content material in “Fashionable Warfare.” Wish to quickscope? Snag your sniper rifle and boot up “Chilly Struggle.” It doesn’t matter what they’re taking part in, they’re taking part in Name of Obligation, so why make them select?
However that considering ignores the essential proven fact that the three video games are very totally different. These three video games could all carry Name of Obligation of their titles, however the actuality is that they have been crafted totally different builders. They use totally different phrases for a similar objects. They’ve totally different DNA. You’ll be able to’t simply toss all of that into the identical place and count on it to make any sense. Both Activision must peg all Name of Obligation titles to a standardized core expertise and sport engine, or gamers are unlikely to ever see good integration between the totally different titles.
A part of the enchantment of the merger for “Fashionable Warfare” gamers was the chance they might obtain continued help for the sport as an alternative of the standard Name of Obligation cycle of merely transferring on to the subsequent sport. The primary disappointing signal that could be a pipe dream? Once you begin up “Fashionable Warfare” there’s no reference to the sport wherever on the display screen … simply “Chilly Struggle” and “Warzone.”
Though gamers can nonetheless earn XP for “Warzone” and “Chilly Struggle,” and the brand new battle move taking part in “Fashionable Warfare,” the one advantages they’ll apply to “Fashionable Warfare” are issues like car paint jobs and calling playing cards. The brand new battle move weapons are for “Chilly Struggle,” and the “Chilly Struggle” weapons aren’t out there in “Fashionable Warfare.” It makes you marvel if future battle passes can have any important content material (character skins, new weapons, weapon blueprints) that may be utilized to “Fashionable Warfare.” Proper now, it doesn’t appear to be it’s within the playing cards. And so whereas Activision could tout how “Fashionable Warfare” gamers are nonetheless included within the plans, the one gamers actually benefiting are these of “Chilly Struggle.” “Warzone” simply occurs to take a seat on the epicenter of the mess.
It doesn’t appear to be this union of titles was deliberate from the outset. It feels prefer it’s being pressured. It seems like nobody tried to determine if commingling these video games is definitely an excellent factor for any of them. The early returns counsel that slapping them collectively will not be as sensible because it first appeared.
Can all of them exist beneath one umbrella? Certain, however it’s going to require extra creativity than merely crunching them collectively in the identical place. Proper now, gamers could have one “Name of Obligation” development system for 3 video games, however to play all three video games they nonetheless will need to have at the very least two “Name of Obligation” apps on their console house screens that at the moment complete 349 GB with all modes downloaded on a PlayStation 5. At that very primary stage, there must be a greater manner.
Someplace down the road, Activision’s final imaginative and prescient could possibly be realized, however it should require a break from conference. Think about, one “Name of Obligation” app for consoles and PC. Inside it, there can be particular person downloadable parts, just like what the video games have now, the place gamers can choose modes from all totally different COD titles that they need to preserve and ditch those they don’t. Equivalent weapons from an ever-expanding arsenal would behave constantly from sport to sport (an AK-47 is the AK-47 and never the “Chilly Struggle” AK-47) and have standardized attachments that permit the identical weapons carry the identical statistics throughout all video games. It might be a extra streamlined, tailor-made expertise, and positively higher than what we’ve got now: A too-big-for-its-britches model with a lot stuff crammed into it that it’s splitting on the seat of its pants.