There are still so many question marks surrounding Microsoft’s pending acquisition of Activision Blizzard. (Image credit: Xbox)
Microsoft’s $68.7 billion USD (about $93.7 billion CAD) acquisition of Activision Blizzard has been rejected by the U.K.’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA).
In a statement, the regulatory group said Microsoft “failed to effectively address the concerns in the cloud gaming sector” that Microsoft’s buyout of Activision Blizzard would lead to “reduced innovation and less choice for UK gamers over the years to come.”
Specifically, the CMA estimates that Microsoft already controls 60 to 70 percent of the cloud gaming market thanks to Xbox, Windows and its Azure cloud network. Therefore, there are concerns that ownership of Activision Blizzard’s extensive catalogue would only “reinforce Microsoft’s advantage” in this space.
For the CMA, cloud gaming presents an affordable alternative to consoles and PCs and “gives them much more flexibility and choice” regarding where they can play. “Allowing Microsoft to take such a strong position in the cloud gaming market just as it begins to grow rapidly would risk undermining the innovation that is crucial to the development of these opportunities,” it argues.
Over the past few months, Microsoft has been attempting to address anti-competition concerns by striking 10-year deals with the likes of Nintendo, Nvidia and Ukrainian cloud company Boosteroid to guarantee games like Call of Duty on those respective platforms. Microsoft said it offered similar agreements with Sony, although the PlayStation maker has instead been trying to block the deal altogether.
However, the CMA says there have been three major “shortcomings” in Microsoft’s case to buy Activision Blizzard:
“It did not sufficiently cover different cloud gaming service business models, including multigame subscription services.
It was not sufficiently open to providers who might wish to offer versions of games on PC operating systems other than Windows.
It would standardise the terms and conditions on which games are available, as opposed to them being determined by the dynamism and creativity of competition in the market, as would be expected in the absence of the merger.”
In a statement, Microsoft president Brad Smith said the company remains “fully committed” to the acquisition and will appeal the CMA’s decision. “We have already signed contracts to make Activision Blizzard’s popular games available on 150 million more devices, and we remain committed to reinforcing these agreements through regulatory remedies.” He went on to say that the decision “appears to reflect a flawed understanding of this market and the way the relevant cloud technology actually works.”
We remain fully committed to our acquisition with @ATVI_AB and will appeal today's determination by the CMA. Here's our statement. pic.twitter.com/ylvDP5RUqQ
Microsoft has signed a 10-year deal to bring its PC games to Ukrainian cloud gaming company Boosteroid’s platform.
The Redmond, Washington-based company says this will include existing and future Xbox games, as well as Activision Blizzard titles, should its acquisition of the Call of Duty publisher be approved.
Boosteroid says it’s the largest independent cloud gaming provider in the world with more than four million global users. Despite the ongoing Russian invasion of Ukraine, Boosteroid also says it’s continued to see growth in the past 13 months. Some of the markets it serves beyond its native Ukraine include the U.S., U.K., France and Italy. It remains to be seen whether the partnership with Microsoft might push Boosteroid to expand into Canada.
This is the latest 10-year game licensing deal that Xbox has signed in an effort to get approval for its Activision Blizzard deal. This includes similar decade-long agreements with the likes of Nintendo and Nvidia. While Microsoft has said it’s willing to make a similar commitment with Sony, the Japanese tech giant has been trying to block the deal by arguing that it’s anti-competitive. Most recently, the company expressed concerns that Xbox would give PlayStation inferior versions of games like Call of Dutyto prop up its own hardware and services.
Call of Duty: Mobile will likely be “phased out” after Call of Duty: Warzone Mobile releases.
The news comes from none other than Microsoft as part of a larger piece for U.K. regulators in regard to its pending acquisition of Call of Duty owner Activision Blizzard. According to Microsoft, Call of Duty: Mobile “is expected to be phased out over time with the launch of Warzone Mobile” everywhere except China.
Call of Duty: Mobile is one of the biggest mobile games on the market, having topped 650 million downloads last year. However, the free-to-play Warzone brand has also been popular on consoles and PC, so it makes sense that Activision wants to tap into it on mobile.
Warzone Mobile is set to release sometime later this year. Of course, “phased out over time” doesn’t mean that Call of Duty: Mobile will immediately go away later this year, but regardless, it’s worth keeping in mind if you’re an active player.
Microsoft, meanwhile, has been working hard to get its Activision Blizzard acquisition approved in the U.K. As part of its efforts to squash anti-competition concerns, the company has signed long-term deals with the likes of Nintendo and Nvidia on Activision Blizzard games like Call of Duty. While Sony has been trying to block the deal,Reuters reported last week that it’s expected to get approved in the U.K. thanks to these agreements.
Microsoft is optimistic that it could overcome the technical limitations of the Nintendo Switch to bring Call of Duty to the platform.
In a filing to the U.K.’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), Microsoft outlined what could be done to make good on its 10-year “binding” agreement with Nintendo to bring Call of Duty games to Nintendo platforms should its acquisition of Activision Blizzard be approved.
According to Microsoft, the engine powering the popular battle royale series is “mature and has been optimized to run on a wide range of hardware devices.” This includes the Xbox One, a nearly 10-year-old console, and PC GPUs “released as far back as 2015” — both of which predate the Switch’s 2017 launch. Further, Microsoft notes that Activision also offers a (yet-to-be-released) mobile version of Warzone that “runs natively on mobile phones which have much lower performance specifications than the Nintendo Switch.”
More specifically, Microsoft said there are “standard techniques” that have been used for Switch ports of the likes of Apex Legends, Fortnite, Doom Eternal and Crysis 3. On top of that, Microsoft says it’s “confident” in Activision Blizzard’s developers, who have a “long history of optimizing game performance for available hardware capabilities.”
Of course, this is all hypothetical until Microsoft actually owns Activision Blizzard. As it stands, European regulators are still deliberating on the deal, although Reuters reported last week that Microsoft’s deals with the likes of Nintendo and Nvidia have helped stave off governmental anti-competition concerns. Sony, for its part, has staunchly opposed the acquisition, arguing that Call of Duty would give Microsoft an unfair advantage. Most recently, the company expressed concerns that Microsoft might release inferior versions of games on PlayStation.
We’ll know for sure which argument ultimately wins out when the CMA delivers its final ruling on April 26th.
Microsoft has announced that it has signed a 10-year deal with Nintendo to bring Call of Duty games to the Japanese company’s platforms.
On Twitter, Microsoft president Brad Smith said this is a “binding” agreement that will see Call of Duty games come to Nintendo on the same day as Xbox, “with full feature and content parity.” Given that this is a 10-year deal and we’re nearing the end of the Switch’s life cycle, this would, presumably, primarily apply to the console-handheld hybrid’s yet-to-be-revealed successor.
We’ve now signed a binding 10-year contract to bring Xbox games to Nintendo’s gamers. This is just part of our commitment to bring Xbox games and Activision titles like Call of Duty to more players on more platforms. pic.twitter.com/JmO0hzw1BO
In December, Microsoft said it had committed to a 10-year deal with Nintendo, but the February 21st announcement means that it’s now legally binding. Microsoft is making this deal in an effort to help get its pending acquisition of Call of Duty Activision Blizzard approved in the EU.
In his tweet about the Nintendo deal, Smith said “this is just part of our commitment to bring Xbox games and Activision titles like Call of Duty to more players on more platforms.” It should also be noted that a similar 10-year agreement has been offered to Sony, although the company has not yet agreed to the deal.
As it stands, it’s unclear if and when the Activision Blizzard acquisition may be approved, although Microsoft is hoping it will close by July. Last month, Microsoft Gaming CEO Phil Spencer reiterated his confidence that the deal will be approved.
The United Kingdom’s Competition & Markets Authority (CMA) has released a report proposing that for Microsoft to acquire Activision Blizzard, a “partial divesture” involving the Call of Duty series being separated from the transaction could be required. This would allow Activision Blizzard’s most valuable brand to be “capable of competing effectively under separate ownership,” says the CMA.
In a recent press release, the CMA says that in its current state, the $69 billion USD (about $92 billion) deal “could result in higher prices, fewer choices, or less innovation for UK gamers,” before going on to say that its report “raises concerns about cloud and console gaming” and that the acquisition would make Microsoft “even stronger in cloud gaming.”
The CMA says the acquisition would limit competition and “could also harm UK gamers by weakening the important rivalry between Xbox and PlayStation gaming consoles.”
Other findings include the fact that the Call of Duty series is important to the rivalry between Xbox and PlayStation, and, unsurprisingly, that Microsoft making Activision’s titles, including the aforementioned shooter, exclusive to its consoles would be beneficial to the company.
Microsoft recently pledged to continue releasing new Call of Duty games on PlayStation consoles for the next 10 years, and said that it will also bring the franchise to Nintendo’s Switch. In response to the CMA’s report, Microsoft’s Microsoft corporate VP and deputy general counsel Rima Alaily told Engadget the following:
“We are committed to offering effective and easily enforceable solutions that address the CMA’s concerns. Our commitment to grant long term 100 percent equal access to Call of Duty to Sony, Nintendo, Steam and others preserves the deal’s benefits to gamers and developers and increases competition in the market.”
The CMA says that its investigation took place over five months, involved business leaders at Microsoft and Xbox speaking with the organization and the examination of three million internal documents from both companies. Microsoft has until February 22nd to address the CMA’s concerns ahead of the regulator’s final report regarding the acquisition on April 26th.
Microsoft first announced plans to acquire Activision Blizzard last year and has encountered significant resistance from regulators and Sony, which say the deal is “a game-change that poses a threat to our industry.”
Xbox head Phil Spencer recently sat down for a podcast and discussed the current landscape of the Activision Blizzard acquisition. During his time speaking with Second Request podcast, Spencer touched on Sony’s desire “to protect its dominance” in the console space. Spencer also believes “The way they grow is by making Xbox smaller.”
Microsoft and Sony are in direct opposition over the former’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard. With a $68.9 billion USD (roughly $93.9 billion CAD) deal on the line and multiple blockbuster franchises in the mix, both are fighting to legitimize their arguments. Xbox largely hopes to bring IPs like Call of Duty, Overwatch, Diablo and Activision’s associated studios under its wing. Sony, afraid it may lose access to these games on its consoles, is fighting against Microsoft on the basis of being anti-competitive.
Microsoft is currently looking to appease regulators, especially authoritative bodies in the U.K. However, Sony has been combative throughout the process. “Sony is leading the dialogue around why the deal shouldn’t go through to protect its dominant position on console, so the thing they grab onto is Call of Duty,” Spencer states.
Call of Duty has largely been a focal point throughout this ordeal. The blockbuster franchise is currently a multi-platform juggernaut and one that PlayStation wants to ensure access to. Spencer has tried to appeal to Sony. Microsoft assures the company that Call of Duty will retain its positioning on PlayStation consoles. Spencer went as far as to offer access to Call of Duty for “at least several more years.” PlayStation head Jim Ryan publicly claims this offer is “inadequate on many levels.” Spencer then brought a 10-year offer to the table.
Sony has yet to accept or deny the offer. In a further attempt to prove its positioning against anticompetition, Microsoft offered the same deal to Nintendo, which wholeheartedly accepted. Similarly to what was offered to Valve and Steam, Call of Duty may potentially land on Nintendo hardware for the next decade if the deal goes through. However, it remains to be seen whether Sony will play ball with Microsoft or continue placing barriers.
“The largest console maker in the world raising an objection about the one franchise that we’ve said will continue to ship on the platform,” Spencer says.
U.K. regulators and Sony aren’t the only bodies fighting against Microsoft. Last week, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filed its opposition against Microsoft’s acquisition. The EU, who is also looking into the deal, has a deadline of March 23rd, 2023 to finalize its investigation.
The Federal Trade Comission (FTC) has officially filed a suit in order to attempt and halt Microsoft’s acquisition of Activision Blizzard. This raises new hurdles as Microsoft’s $68.7 billion USD (roughly $93 billion CAD) deal is already seeking approval from regulators.
The FTC is filing its suit after months of investigations. The commission believes that the acquisition would “enable Microsoft to suppress competitors to its Xbox gaming consoles and its rapidly growing subscription content and cloud-gaming business.” Since Microsoft announced its plans to acquire the Call of Duty and Overwatch publisher, anticompetitive concerns have surfaced.
“Microsoft has already shown that it can and will withhold content from its gaming rivals,” Holly Vedova, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition, says in a statement. “Today we seek to stop Microsoft from gaining control over a leading independent game studio and using it to harm competition in multiple dynamic and fast-growing gaming markets.”
Agency notes that Microsoft decided to make several of Bethesda's titles including Starfield and Redfall Microsoft exclusives despite assurances it had given to European antitrust authorities that it had no incentive to withhold games from rival consoles /5
Microsoft has been facing pushback throughout the year as it seeks approval from regional regulators. Sony, one of Microsoft’s biggest competitors, argues that the acquisition may unfairly tip the scales in the industry. With blockbuster IPs like Call of Duty, Overwatch, Candy Crush, and more laying in the balance, U.K. regulators have been investigating the deal. Pressure from the FTC only increases the hurdles presented currently.
We continue to believe that our deal to acquire Activision Blizzard will expand competition and create more opportunities for gamers and game developers,” Brad Smith, Microsoft’s vice chair and president said in a statement. “We have been committed since Day One to addressing competition concerns, including by offering earlier this week proposed concessions to the FTC. While we believe in giving peace a chance, we have complete confidence in our case and welcome the opportunity to present it in court.”
Microsoft has shown a willingness to quell concerns over IP exclusivity. With Call of Duty’s presence on Sony’s PlayStation hardware in question, Microsoft has attempted to appeal to Sony and the U.K.’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). Most recently, Microsoft attempted to offer Sony a 10-year deal, securing access to Call of Duty on PlayStation hardware. Sony has not accepted the offer at this current point. This offer has also been agreed upon by both Nintendo and Valve.
Since publishing its statement, Activision Blizzard executive Lulu Cheng Meservey provided a statement. On Twitter, Meservey wrote, “This vote departs from precedent but the law hasn’t changed.” She continues, “Any claim the deal is anticompetitive ignores facts; the deal benefits gamers and the industry, especially given competition from abroad.”
Activision Blizzard is currently under investigation for reports of workplace harassment and “frat boy culture.” Likewise, CEO Bobby Kotick is also under investigation following allegations that he was aware of such acts and decided not to make meaningful changes.
Microsoft’s pending acquisition of Activision Blizzard could face a major roadblock from the U.S.’ Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
Politico, citing “three people with knowledge of the matter,” reports that the FTC will likely file an antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft in an effort to block the tech giant’s takeover of the Call of Duty maker. While the publication notes that the FTC hasn’t yet made a formal decision, the agency is nonetheless skeptical of Microsoft’s case for purchasing Activision Blizzard.
As the deal has faced regulatory approval across the globe, a key point of contention has been Call of Duty. Rival Sony has argued that Microsoft owning the massively popular first-person shooter franchise would provide an unfair advantage.
“Call of Duty is not replicable. Call of Duty is too entrenched for any rival, no matter how well equipped, to catch up. It has been the top-selling game for almost every year in the last decade and, in the first-person shooter (‘FPS’) genre, it is overwhelmingly the top-selling game,” wrote Sony in a filing to the U.K.’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). As an example, Sony mentioned that EA’s Battlefield, which is a direct Call of Duty competitor, “cannot keep up” with Activision’s series.
Microsoft, in turn, has said it’s willing to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation for many years while arguing that it would still be third in the gaming market after Sony and Tencent even upon acquiring Activision Blizzard.
“The suggestion that the incumbent market leader, Sony, with clear and enduring market power, could be foreclosed by the smallest of the three console competitors, Xbox, as a result of losing access to one title, is not credible. Sony’s PlayStation has been the largest console platform for over 20 years, with an installed base of consoles and market share more than double the size of Xbox,” said Microsoft in a November 23rd statement to the CMA.
However, Politico reports that FTC investigators are also concerned about Microsoft’s plans beyond Call of Duty. The outlet notes that there’s uncertainty surrounding how Microsoft could use future unannounced Activision Blizzard titles to boost its business. So far, Microsoft has only said it intends to make these titles available on its Xbox Game Pass service. Microsoft has also outlined plans to leverage Activision Blizzard to create an app marketplace independent of Apple’s App Store and Google’s Play Store, which it claims will offer consumers more choice. Naturally, such a move would also face significant regulatory scrutiny.
Interestingly, Politico adds that Google is also opposing Microsoft’s Activision Blizzard bid. While the search engine giant’s gaming efforts will be limited to Android games following the January 2023 closure of its Stadia streaming service, Google’s issues with Microsoft reportedly concern other matters. Specifically, Politico reports that Google is alleging that Microsoft purposefully degrades the quality of its Game Pass service on Google Chrome in an effort to steer consumers towards Microsoft products and services. Google claims that Microsoft owning Activision Blizzard would only bolster Microsoft’s efforts in this regard.
Ultimately, it remains to be seen what action the FTC will take. Politico reports that investigators may move ahead with an antitrust case as early as December, although it could opt to do so later down the line, given that Microsoft is currently subject to in-depth probes in both Europe and the U.K. As it stands, Microsoft and Activision Blizzard aim to close the deal by June 2023.
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II is here, marking the arrival of that time of year again.
It’s a new fall season with a new blockbuster campaign and multiplayer suite. Developer Infinity Ward has again reached into the well that is Modern Warfare for a sequel to the 2019 reboot of the acclaimed series.
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II is a brand new entry in the series and acts as a soft reboot for the ecosystem Activision has laid out since 2019. Infinity Ward and countless development partners have big plans for the future of Call of Duty, and it all starts with Modern Warfare II. This includes the upcoming free-to-play battle royale Warzone 2.0. Plus, there’s the emerging Escape From Tarkov-inspired DMZ mode on the horizon. Of course, there’s also the competitive core multiplayer built into the bones of Modern Warfare II.
Fans of the franchise have a lot of hope for what Call of Duty can deliver each year. Some clamour to see the set pieces the campaign brings to the table, while others, including myself, hope that multiplayer provides a balanced competitive space for players.
Following in the footsteps of Modern Warfare (2019), it’s to no one’s surprise that the sequel is fairly well-rounded in its current state. While the overall UI and menu system are rather messy, the campaign delivers an action-packed experience in spades. The multiplayer offering is exceptional thanks to a smart new Gunsmith progression system, top-of-its-class gunplay and pinpoint accurate audio.
The campaign of Call of Duty is often an afterthought for a large segment of players. Perhaps it’s understandable as it’s uncommon that entries offer a memorable experience. We’re very far removed from the gut-punching ending of the original Modern Warfare 2 or the memorable “The numbers, Mason. What do they mean?” from Black Ops. However, I firmly believe Modern Warfare 2‘s campaign isn’t one to be missed.
Modern Warfare 2 is a direct sequel and sees players touch base with Task Force 141. The campaign features some well-trotted territory from military shooters of the past. Following a missile strike, assassinating Iranian general Ghorbrani in Al Mazrah, Task Force 141 begins a hunt for the new leader Major Hassan Zyani and stolen U.S missiles. This leads the likes of Captain Price, Soap, Ghost, Gaz and others to Mexico as Hassan assumes a partnership with the Las Almas cartel. However, the game does not exclusively take place in Central America. We also find ourselves back in the fictional Urzikstan, the Netherlands, and the United States.
“A mission that truly stands out is a rather short visit to Amsterdam. This skip across the ocean beautifully displays the developer’s prowess in level design and lighting. The photorealistic streets were awe-inspiring to walk down.”
Throughout the bite-sized six-hour campaign, I found myself traversing through fantastic backdrops and set pieces. A mission that truly stands out is a rather short visit to Amsterdam. This skip across the ocean beautifully displays the developer’s prowess in level design and lighting. The photorealistic streets were awe-inspiring to walk down. Sights aside, Modern Warfare 2 delivers some of the most bombastic set pieces in recent memories. One mission taking place in Urzikstan tasks players with taking out a military convoy. In perfect Call of Duty splendour, players must hijack a number of occupied vehicles barrelling down a series of roads. To make matters more intense, I had to balance firing weapons out of the driver-side window and steering myself out of harm’s way. Modern Warfare 2 even successfully incorporates a very close reimagining of the original Modern Warfare‘s acclaimed ‘All Ghillied Up’ mission.
While the game does offer some really neat setpieces, some overstay their welcome. In one mission dubbed ‘Alone,’ players find themselves on the run from a rival militant faction. Without weapons, I used stealth to make my way through a small township. This is when the MWII introduces a backpack and crafting system that’s neat for the first five minutes. Unfortunately, the game goes on to use it for far too long. It even reappears in the game’s climactic moments, making for an abrupt Die Hard-esque finale.
From a thematic and narrative perspective, Modern Warfare 2 does its best to strike a deeper level of storytelling. While getting away from the archetypal “bro shooter” mould, it doesn’t quite reach its full potential. The game’s inciting incident is primarily inspired by the assassination of Iranian military officer Qasem Soleimani in 2020. The writers are on the brink of making a political statement with the game. For example, in one mission, two Mexican Special Force agents fight to cross a Trump wall dividing the U.S. and Mexican border. Following this, they are apprehended by American police who remark, “It’s hard to tell you boys apart from the cartel.” Though, there’s barely enough time for this moment to resonate with players before we’re instructed on the next mission. There are many opportunities for the game to say something, but much like its predecessor, it moves too rapidly to properly explore them.
“Gunsmith 2.0, in theory, can remove some of the grind. For those looking to be ready for Season 1 and the introduction of Warzone 2.0, this will come as a relief.”
Multiplayer is the real core Call of Duty community. Each year, the competitive landscape looks on as the franchise iterates once more. Modern Warfare 2‘s new multiplayer component comes with some of the most drastic changes in recent years.
The biggest change seen in the game is the integration of Gunsmith 2.0, the new progression system. Working through the ranks of Modern Warfare 2, the game offers an altered way of unlocking new guns, attachments, etc. Gunsmith 2.0, in theory, can remove some of the grind. This will be a relief for those looking to be ready for Season 1 and the introduction of Warzone 2.0, especially when max levels on weapons now range to around 20 or lower.
Gunsmith 2.0 is pretty grating and overwhelming at first. Breaking it down, each weapon has a new system called the ‘receiver.’ Levelling up a singular weapon unlocks new receivers for a weapon. In doing so, a new weapon which shares the same receiver and attachments is available. This means rather than having to unlock the same barrel for every assault rifle, players merely need to unlock the receiver across compatible weapons. In theory, this allows for less grind and more customization in both how weapons operate and their core stats. That said, we’re still in the early days of Modern Warfare II, so the long-term effects on the meta are yet to be determined.
The other substantial change is the UI. We’ve gone through three iterations of Call of Duty where the template for navigating stayed roughly the same. In Modern Warfare II, the menus and UI remind me more of Disney+ than a multiplayer game. The main menu screen mashes up the campaign, multiplayer and a small assortment of co-op missions. Options to filter specific modes from Quick Play also appears small on the screen. There’s also no shortage of ways to accidentally back out entirely when simply attempting to thumb over to the ‘Weapons’ or ‘Operators’ menu.
“It’s disappointing when the coat of paint impacts the quality of life of the player and ease of use.”
The game’s Social menu is also in a totally separate menu system. My biggest gripe, though one that should have an easy fix, plagues the 2XP system. Currently, the game will not display how long a 2XP token is in effect. Given that these are crucial for levelling ranks and weapons, you may want to set a timer on your phone like I’ve had to. I understand wanting a new coat of paint to accompany this new generation of the Call of Duty ecosystem. However, it’s disappointing when the coat of paint impacts the quality of life of the player and ease of use.
For console players, it’s worth noting that the ability to turn cross-play off is only available on PlayStation. Currently, Xbox players are unable to opt-out of playing with PC players. This is despite input selection, whether its controller or keyboard and mouse.
Modern Warfare 2 does have a lot working for itself, however. Unsurprisingly, Infinity Ward continues to prove that the studio is a leader in the FPS genre. The tight gun controls shine beautifully here. Whether you’re a run-and-gunner or a sniper, every gun I’ve used handles exceptionally well. Of course, this depends on the build and the balancing of attachments, but when you finely tune a weapon and its receiver, I’ve been able to have some great matches.
Infinity Ward has also scaled its movement in the game. No longer can players slide cancel around the map. With sliding now nerfed, the emerging new movement meta seems to be bunny hops around corners and a diving mechanic. Though, its aim-down-sights (ADS) recovery leaves much to be desired. The result of all of this makes for slower movement, leading Modern Warfare 2 to feel more like Rainbow Six Siege than recent entries in a way.
Audio is also something Modern Warfare 2 can proudly tout. The game can render sounds with pinpoint accuracy, whether it’s footsteps, gunfire, or AI callouts. This is especially true while wearing a pair of headphones, but clean audio also came through very well on my soundbar. It may be an overlooked component, but when footsteps are crucial to awareness, the improvements in audio clarity are a surefire winner for me.
As far as the game modes are concerned, Modern Warfare II delivers a fairly balanced offering. ‘Team Deathmatch,’ ‘Domination,’ ‘Free-for-all,’ ‘Search and Destroy’ are all available in their current state. The game doesn’t yet feature ‘Hardcore’ (now renamed Tier 1) until the launch of Season 1 on November 16th. Additionally, a third-person mode has been reintroduced after many, many years. While novel, it feels like a step back from the first-person perspective. It does enable a different scope in map awareness for a change of pace, though.
“Invasion mode reads as Infinity Ward’s attempt to capture the magic left behind by Battlefield. In many ways, it successfully does replicate the feeling of larger multiplayer battles.”
Rather than a Zombies game mode, Modern Warfare II introduces Invasion. This large-scale 20v20 game mode incorporates real players with AI bots. Each team fight to be the last team standing in a pseudo-Team Deathmatch. Invasion mode reads as Infinity Ward’s attempt to capture the magic left behind by Battlefield. In many ways, it successfully does replicate the feeling of larger multiplayer battles. Vehicles spawn in to use while choppers fly through, dropping off more AI opponents. It’s chaotic and fast-paced, though without the ability to spawn on your squad, I’ve more often found myself running into battle than engaging in meaningful firefights.
The map selection is also fairly strong. Modern Warfare 2 has 10 core maps and five battle maps. Notable standouts include Mercado Las Almas, which offers a healthy blend of close quarters with long-range opportunities. Crown Raceway, a nighttime race track blooming with colour, is also standout. Zarqwa Hydroelectric combines broken-down buildings with small pools of water for players to swim through to flank the enemy. But not all maps smell of roses. Santa Sena Border Crossing, a conjected highway map, is purely not fun due to its design and layout. Not even its Breaking Bad easter egg can put it in my good graces. Unfortunately, Valderas Museum, a great map in the beta, is no longer available. The map’s disappearance may be due to copyright issues with the Getty Museum in Los Angeles. If true, this is very disappointing.
Overall, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II is in an excellent position. With Tier 1, Warzone 2.0, and DMZ around the corner, the foundation of gunplay, movement, and progression pave the road for an exciting year. However, Infinity Ward and its development partners should be wise to listen to community feedback in these first few months. There are quality-of-life issues to address. Though, there’s nothing currently baked into the DNA of the game that can’t be improved via updates and fixes down the road. Despite my gripes, Modern Warfare II brings the blockbuster action and tight FPS fun I’ve been craving this fall.
