First day of the COD XP event means the first day of multiplayer info, and they've just revealed quite a bit. Aside from the new trailers, we also now know the following:

The Infinite Warfare beta will be starting Oct. 14th for PS4 owners. Xbox One owners will be able to play the beta at a later date, and the beta will not be coming to PC. As of now, you can only get in the beta by pre-ordering, but if the previous beta is any indication, there's a good chance they'll let other players in towards the end. The actual beta length has not been announced, other than it will last a minimum of three days.

All 16 multiplayer maps from Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare will be coming to the remaster. The game will ship with ten maps, and the other six will be made available in December.

Other than that, there are a few new trailers today, so here they are:

And finally, here's a COD community member explaining some of Infinite Warfare's new gameplay elements, while also showing off the new remake of Terminal:

I read on GameSpot that the 6 additional maps for MW:R will also be made available for free, which has put aside one of my biggest fears about that news. At this point, the BF1 beta is doing nothing for me and nothing about Titanfall 2 has piqued my interest, so I'm genuinely willing to all-in on the IW legacy edition just to have MW:R be my main shooter this year.

I mean, I'll probably just end up playing CS:GO again in the long run anyway...

This is a really nice round-up, thanks. The Infinite Warfare stuff just feels like an information overload -- I watched all of these and still don't have a good sense of all the mechanics at work. I guess I'll get a better impression when the "Beta" arrives and people can break down everything/show the menus.

It's a damn shame about CoD 4 remastered -- I understand they don't want to split their playerbase by offering it as a separate purchase, but they could have put it out later in the Call of Duty "life cycle" -- maybe between July and September, after all the map packs are out and people are getting bored of the current game. How great would that be, if the "freshest" CoD game was this remaster, and everyone flocked to it? Between the price tag and releasing alongside *another complete, new CoD game,* it's not going to get it's "moment in the sun".

I guess it's nice that the remaining CoD 4 maps will be free, but... why not just put that thing out in the summer, as a complete package? Ah well, I'm sure it'll be for sale on it's own somewhere down the line.

It's kind of sad that every shooter these days needs it's own selection of heros or classes. I know this isnt new to COD but I was hoping they'd step away from it. Also does the MP have space combat or is that exclusive to the SP?

I enjoyed the Titanfall 2 beta and the BF1 beta but I am not going to buy all 3 of these games. 4 if you count the double pack with IW/MW. So many shooters and no time to enjoy them all. I will play the COD beta and probably decide from there. Most likely pick up COD because it has 2 whole games. This year is especially packed in the last 3 months.

I know just what you mean. My main concern with this game is going to be the weapon variants, and the idea of the developers making weapon balance adjustments. Apparently, you'll be able to earn salvage by playing multiplayer, and use that as currency of sorts to upgrade your weapons. Upgraded weapons will have better gun perks, as explained in that second video. I think you'll also be able to dismantle guns you don't want for more currency, but they haven't really explained how you'll get new guns in the first place, other than eventually being able to upgrade them.

Of course, they'll have to put in a supply drop system to keep investors happy, so how all that will work together could potentially lead to a serious problem with the game. Again, this is especially true when it comes to balance adjustments.

Imagine this scenario: After playing for many hours, I've finally earned enough salvage to upgrade my favorite weapon. I have a very low chance of earning this weapon in a supply drop, so this is the best way that I can get it, without paying money for the "super extra good chance of an epic drop premium supply drop" type of supply drop.

Now, in this scenario, my favorite weapon is my favorite weapon because it's extremely effective. Low recoil, high damage, good fire rate, etc. So I use all my salvage to pay for the epic version of this weapon. Thanks to supply drop system, I'd have to play for weeks to earn that much salvage again. They want to encourage people to play for supply drops, much like Black Ops III did. In that game, you have a 1% chance of getting a weapon, and even then, it could be a crappy melee weapon that you don't want.

So, I spend all my salvage to upgrade my favorite weapon, and then the developers decide that weapon is too overpowered, so it gets nerfed. My new gun perks are still there on my newly acquired epic variant weapon, but the gun now has way more recoil and takes an extra bullet to kill at longer ranges. Now a similar gun is arguably the best in the game, but I haven't used any salvage on that weapon, because it didn't used to be very good. I only own the basic variant of that one.

I hope that I'm wrong, but I really can see all that happening. Think about the buff / nerf nonsense that the VMP and the Vesper went through in Black Ops 3--with adjustments still being made as recently as last month--and imagine all that happening after players spent loads of hard-earned in-game currency to get the best versions of those weapons.

Anyhow, speaking of betas and shooters, I saw you playing a bit of the Titanfall 2 tech test the other week. What did you end up thinking of it? Depending on my feelings of the Infinite Warfare beta, I think there's a strong possibility that Titanfall 2 might end up as my shooter of choice this year.

Kinda odd year this is shaping up... I feel like I was one of the few that really dug the whole sci fi theme that CoD was going in while everyone was throwing a shit storm, but I decided to hold off for Titanfall 2. After the beta for TF2 though, I was pretty disappointed and I definitely won't be picking that up... I never bought a BF game after 3 and just decided they weren't really my type of game, but after playing the BF1 beta I'm sort of enjoying it, but just like with Battlefront, I'm losing interest the more I actually play it.

IW just seems chaotically fun and deep down, CoD has always been a guilty pleasure of mine to begin with. I just hope this doesn't end up having the problems that Ghosts had.

I'm very interested in trying this out. I skipped Black Ops III because I did not enjoy the beta. Based on the betas I played for Titanfall 2 and BF 1, this could be another no purchase for me. I'm just not a fan of the hero shooters. It's why I still play Call of Duty 4 every year and why I'm still playing Titanfall 1.

@spaceinsomniac Yep, definitely simpatico about the Supply Drop model. In BO3 I loved the Pharo (when the game came out). It got nerfed significantly, maybe twice? If that was a gun I had slaved away for, grinding out Cryptokeys... I would have been upset. The whole "start without microtransactions, introduce them in an update" will happen for the third time in a row this year. That's especially disappointing because they're still going to sell their 4 map packs -- so even if you go in for those, you'll be missing at least some significant piece of gameplay locked behind that slot machine nonsense. This is more just for my own interest, but tallying up the FPS DLC "scoreboard"...

Overwatch: First-class support from Blizzard -- free maps and heroes, only paid DLC is cosmetic.

Halo 5: Last year's game, but it got free maps/modes/content updates for about a year. Has paid REQ packs that could mess with Warzone, but that's one game mode of many.

Titanfall 2: Free maps, some other form of paid DLC, unsure of what that will be. (http://www.pcgamer.com/titanfall-2s-dlc-maps-will-be-free-because-ea-wants-you-to-be-happy/)

Battlefield 1: Paid map packs, but a $20 premium pass gets you everything. "Battlepack" microtransactions get you early unlocks, but you can earn everything through normal leveling.

CoD Infinite: Significant amount of content (CoD 4 remaster) is only available by paying $80 up front and is not included in Season Pass, which we don't know the price of on it's own. Likely to be a "Supply Drop" microtransaction system that locks powerful weapon variants behind a slot machine. Grind out tokens, making the core gameplay un-fun and stressful, or pay for a bunch of tokens like a sucker, and possibly not get anything you want.

So I'm turned off by CoD:IW right out of the gate. Maybe it could be mind-blowing, and the slot-machine stuff could be so insignificant that I could ignore it. But I just *really* doubt that.

Titanfall 2: Funny thing is, I was downloading it overnight and then didn't touch my PS4 for a few days -- I was just idling at the menu screen without realizing it. So I only got around to playing maybe 3 matches, only for the first weekend. But I liked the grapple and the ground slide, the movement still felt good. I didn't get a titan, so I don't know how they feel -- people were saying they're way weaker? I'm cautiously optimistic about Titanfall 2. Been playing the first game again for a few nights now. I feel like as long is it isn't a step backwards, I'll end up getting it for PS4.

I was very worried after watching the livestream this morning but after watching some gameplay I've mellowed out a bit. My main concern is with balance. When they were talking about rigs and weapon variants all kinds of red flags were popping up in my mind. I really hope they know what they're doing and don't pull an Advanced Warfare with the weapon variants. I never had an issue with the supply drops in Black Ops 3 as I earned a lot of the weapons they added post-release just by playing the game (I never spent any money on supply drops). Sure, there are some weapons that I missed and will likely never actually earn, but I'm okay with that. My problem here is that these are upgrades to base-game weapons, not gimmicky add-on ones like the Banshii or MX-Garand and I fear this will lead to some really irritating balance issues.

I watched most of the live stream this morning and I have to say, I didn't really get the collective internet's negativity. I thought what they showed looked really good with interesting weapon variations and unique traits. I'm very lttp on BO3 but I like it pretty well and even enjoy the specialist system which it looks like they're continuing with and expanding upon. It's weird I went from wondering how I was going to play all these MP shooters to saying 'nah I'll just stick to COD'. TF2 felt sluggish and boring. BF1 looks pretty but I don't like the gameplay and cant stop wishing it was Bad Company 3 instead. So I think I'll jump in with IW and switch to MWR when I want a more boots-on-the-ground old school feel.

@jjbsterling: Could you explain what "pulling an Advanced Warfare" means? I played a decent amount of Advanced Warfare, but have been out the loop with Call of Duty for a while now.

When the game was first released, you could find different weapon variants in supply drops, and you could get supply drops from just playing the game. After a while, they made it so you could unlock variants in paid supply drops. Variants typically reduced one stat, while boosting another. An example might be raising fire rate while lowering accuracy, or raising damage while lowering fire rate. The problem was there were three or four weapon variants that outclassed every other weapon in the game. If you were lucky enough to have one drop, or you paid money for supply drops until you unlocked one, you would have a massive advantage in every gun battle.

Think if the best PVP weapons in Destiny could be unlocked randomly in paid loot crates, and you can get a good idea how messed up this was.

This is why people are looking at the new system and saying "yeah, but there's going to be a way to pay to unlock Infinite Warfare weapon variants, isn't there?" It's better that we can just make the weapons we want, but just how much salvage that will cost, and just how much they'll push people towards buying crates will remain to be seen. That question likely won't be answered until at least a month or two after launch, but there's no way supply drops won't be coming back in some form.

Yeah, if you played three matches and never earned a Titan, you probably only played in on the first weekend. It's a shame you didn't get more time with the game.

I played both weekends, ended up hitting both level caps, and really enjoyed myself during the second weekend. The Titans are weaker because of the new battery system. If players work together, pilots can steal batteries from enemy Titans, and give them to teammate Titans. This gives them a temporary shield that doesn't recharge, but acts and extra health. Once I understood that point, I ended up really liking the new system.

With Titanfall 1, the situation was "someone is on my Titan, I need to get out and shoot him, or he's going to destroy my Titan in about 20 seconds." In Titanfall 2, it's become "someone is on my Titan, I'm going to lose a chunk of Titan health, and then I need to quickly find and kill that guy before he gets away with my battery."

I think the new system is so much better, because it allows you to stay in your Titan without the need to waste one of your perks on the anti-rodeo electric smoke. Once the fight is over, and it's safe to do so, you can then climb out of your Titan and take your battery back.

I don't know what shooter I will go with this year. They all seem very similar (aside from BF1) but have enough differences to make the decision a little daunting. I think what they showed so far looks good; I haven't had a problem with the sc-fi bent shooters are taking these days. I just don't know if a competitive FPS game is really what I want right now. I've played multiple styles of these games every year for a while now and I feel like I might just pick up the Destiny collection and play some co-op FPS with friends instead.

I could see enjoying this and COD 4 multiplayer together. But that price tag is steep when you factor in the season pass for map packs to stay up to date. Especially if a portion of the season pass is going to a zombies mode I will never play.

Dunno about IW yet. The singleplayer looks cool with the space combat added, but the multiplayer is a bit of mixed bag it seems. Great that they're bringing back the BO3 movement, but the recharge on the boost seems slower and the maps seem way less movement orientated as well. Think it might end up like your typical Infinity Ward camp fest CoD after all. And then you get that whole weapon crafting system which just screams supply drop system to me.

And the remaster... well... CoD4 multiplayer was always garbage and the singleplayer is now largely outdated, so that was never interesting.

This actually looks really, really good. I haven't picked up a COD game since Black Ops 2, but this just might be the one that does it for me. The amount of content alone is pretty crazy when you think about it, even more so than earlier years. You can say what you want about COD games, but they're never lacking for content.

I'm much more interested in this than the reskinned Battlefield 4 they're putting out later this year, and I'm not quite sure about Titfanfall 2. I do play a lot of Destiny, so it would be nice to play something more fast paced for a while as well.

Well, you are certainly allowed to have your own opinion. COD4 is probably one of the best and most important multiplayer game ever made, but hey, to each their own.

@bojackhorseman: I will not dismiss the importance of CoD4, especially for console shooters. But popularising or introducing certain mechanics doesn't mean it's actually good. The killstreaks were boring (yea free kills ZZZzzz type one), perks unbalanced and annoying, weapons were unbalanced (a handful were straight up better than the rest) and while some maps were good, it also had some real stinkers you would never want see in a mapcycle (so the all 16 maps thing is not good news). And the gameplay was just boring too. No real interesting recoil and spread mechanics combined with high damage = very passive gameplay. Games like Black Ops 2 are better in every single way when you want a slower paced CoD with fluff. And if you want one without it: CoD2. And if you want something faster paced: Black Ops 3.

A new lick of paint will not make CoD4 relevant or great again. It needs fundemental gameplay changes for it be great, both single- and multiplayer, but other CoD's already did that anyway.

@gundogan: in retrospect, especially compared to modern shooters COD4 had issues sure, but at the time of release it was downright revolutionary. I'm not one of the people super excited about a remaster over a new game which I think is silly, but you are downplaying how good Modern Warfare was at the time in a ridiculous way.

So less content would be better? I don't get it. Anyway, I respectfully disagree with just about anything you said. I still think it's one of the best games ever made. It had a great story with a lot of cool set pieces, and the multiplayer introduced some terrific new ideas to the fold. I liked killstreaks and perks and of course some weapons are going to be better than others, that's why you want to get them. As long as it's not one weapon that's better than all the rest, that's fine.

And lastly, you're getting a whole game for free (that a lot of people want) in addition to the base game you are already buying. Seems weird to paint that as a bad thing.

@humanity: No I'm not. The game was at the time a step down from CoD2. Yes, it introduced some new things to a lot players and it was a massive succes which makes this game important, but the new mechanics were implemented so poorly on top of an already weak base.

- Perks are a cool idea for variation, but things like matyrdom were annoying and dumb in the wrong way. Frag x3 made objective gamemodes unplayable. And the whole game resolved of course around stopping power.

- Killstreaks were always a bad idea (free extra kills when already doing well is not a good mechanic and hey they are sort of moving away from that these days), and CoD4 they're limited in choice and not very interesting.

- The weapons are boring and unbalanced. The G36 for example is a slightly worse copy of the M4, so why ever pick that one? And the same can be said about the MP5 vs AK47u, MP44 vs AK47, M21 vs .50cal. And the weapons have no interesting recoil or spread. The weapons just bounce around in small area at random when you shoot. Combine that with high damage and high rate of fire and you have a very boring and passive game.

- The game suffered from the typical singleplayer levels in multiplayer syndrome. This made 50% of the maps plain bad and unbalanced. Good thing you had custom servers on the PC so you would never have to play them.

These are complaints people had at launch and there're games at the time that did things better in terms of base gameplay, older CoD titles included. The 'new' things did not make this game better, but actually worse in some ways.

Yes, there was also promod for PC which removed some of the crap, but then you just have a lesser version of Counter-Strike. At least the WW2 CoD's had some redeeming value compared to counter strike then for being WW2 instead of modern military.

@bojackhorseman: The problem will be that the bad maps will be in the map rotation with a real chance that you cannot skip them because you have to choose from 2 bad ones. Even with 10 you would get some bad ones in the rotation, but the chance would be lower. And this remaster costs around $20 I guess since you need to pay $80 for the IW version that includes it. Or straight up $80 if you don't want IW.

@gundogan: Oh, I thought it was just included in every copy of the game. My bad. Anway, to me it sounds like you just have a vendetta. Literally every good thing about COD4 is bad in your eyes, and the very same things the game is lauded for are the stuff you're tearing it down for. Again, it's you're opinion and that's fine and I respect that, but it's hard for me to take you seriously when you call COD4 a step down from COD2.

Man, what's with the lack of pc beta's lately?

The multiplayer is actually looking a lot like Black Ops 3. If I were you, I'd wait and hear what Black Ops 3 players think of the beta. If you don't care about the campaign--Black Ops 3 had a horrible campaign, IMO--going with the older game might save some money. I'm optimistic about IW, but a few things do worry me. Something as simple as too much auto-aim when quick scoping could completely ruin this game, so I'm very happy they announced a beta.

COD map packs are some of the worst values in gaming, IMO. In addition to charging you for modes you will never play, COD map packs split the community, and normally people who care enough to buy the maps are the better players. That leads to a harder time getting your streaks, as you'll be dying much more often. Even worse, with Black Ops 3, there's no way to disable or even delete the map packs once you've purchased them. The download is part of the standard game update. For many players, this actually led to people with the maps wanting to join friends who didn't have the maps, so they could play against less-skilled players again.

It's a horrible, horrible system. Titanfall 2's free map DLC is going to make this look like a joke. Although much like Mass Effect 3 multiplayer, if they'll be adding free content, there's going to be some way they make money off players who continue to play the game. We just have no idea what that will involve with Titanfall 2 yet. With Infinite Warfare, we at least have several game's worth of DLC and supply drop updates that allow us to speculate.

On another note, for anyone interested, here are all the perks in the new game:

I think for Titanfall 2 they basically said that every time a beta comes out on PC, it gets data-mined to hell and people figure out everything about the game. I'm guessing that's the reason for other games doing it too.

Now THIS is a Call of Duty game!

Interestingly enough, it's not that I'm looking forward to going back to COD4 again, I'm looking forward to playing COD4 seriously for the first time ever. COD style multiplayer gameplay never clicked with me until the original Black Ops. I played COD4, finished the campaign, but never could play very much multiplayer without feeling overwhelmed by the action. I never did learn the maps, or how to properly play the game.

Because of this, the $80 Infinite Warfare + COD4 Remastered package could end up being a very attractive proposition for me.

@spaceinsomniac: So do we know if they're making any balance changes to the game? Or is it just a better looking version of the game that came out in 2007? I think they've suckered me into buying the $80 version.

For better or worse, it's the exact same game. I think that's probably the best way to go with this project. If they removed martyrdom or 3X frag grenades from the game, they might make some people happy, but what do they replace them with? If they don't replace them, then the game has fewer perks.

Same for stopping power and juggernaut. They were wise to remove them from later games, but the balance of some of the weapons kind of requires them in this game. And again, if they did remove them, what would they replace them with? Whatever changes they made, they would upset people, and they'd have to deal with accusations that they ruined a classic.

They added some nice-looking weapon inspect animations, and they added medals that pop up when you get a double kill and such. Other than that, it's the same COD4 as you remember.