This won't be confusing at ALL. That said, I like what they're doing business wise. Free updates, cross play, etc.

Wondering if this is them FINALLY turning CoD into a "Games as a Service" product like they should have done years ago.

Can't wait for MW2 and 3 over the next few years hahaha

https://www.ign.com/articles/2019/05/30/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-yes-a-reboot-not-modern-warfare-4-announced

You know things are circling the drain badly when you use the same name for a 3rd time.

I'm not quite sure why they would reboot it this way. Surely not enough time has passed where we need to go back to "gritty" military shooters. Is this a reaction to the "boots on the ground" calls for blood when Infinite Warfare was announced? (which incidentally had one of the best CoD single player campaigns in years)

@humanity: I'm sure that's part of it. Another part, which judging by the related article here, seems to just be that this is what the devs are interested in making.

They have a story they want to tell, they have a passion for the characters of the MW series but didn't see a good way to continue it. So rather than try to force a cohesive sequel, they are wiping everything and starting from scratch.

Amusing naming scheme, but I suppose that didn't really affect my enjoyment of God of War either. I'll pick up a great looking shooter campaign to play from a sale eventually, probably.

More like Call of Duty: Post-Modern Warfare amiright?

Thank you. I'm here all week.

Obligatory shoutout to one of the best GB segments.

Seriously, though, my interest is more piqued than I expected it to be. It doesn't actually look real stupid. I actually could be down for another "gritty" shooter in theory. However, they fooled me with WWII, which I bought and then barely played because the series has gone so far in the hypermobility direction. I'm done with the twitch shooter stuff where everyone zooms around hipfiring SMGs. If this game is just another reskin like that was instead of going back to the actual semi-realistic pace/style of the old MW games, I'm out. I will say it looks awful pretty.

@notnert427: Did you try the Call of Duty 4 remaster? I'm not sure we'll ever see a return to the slower paced CoD games just by how every instalment has trained the playerbase to react and play to play so much more aggressively than 10 years ago when we were all still figuring it out.
That re-release was effectively the same game, but it just didn't feel right and I really think it's mainly because of how people play CoD now versus how they played a decade ago.

But anyways, I'm a broken man and am basically ride or die with Call of Duty until some serious shit turns me away so I'm as "excited" as I am when any new one gets revealed. Cross play could be cool but it worries me with how it'll sort PC players because in an ideal world I never want to be matched with them as a console player, and lets not even start on the hacking that persists on PC. The "brand new" engine sounds great on paper but I guess it's something I need to see with my own eyes.

They probably thought 'well, if God of War can do it... we can too!' Eh, I don't really care. It seems fine from what the trailer showed. The MW trilogy is my favorite COD so hopefully, this is good. I didn't like WWII, so much so it's the first COD campaign I didn't beat, and I didn't even buy last years Black Ops (not a fan of only multiplayer games). This'll probably just be called 2019's Modern Warfare, similar to how Doom from 2016 is called Doom 2016 from everyone so people don't get confused.

I got Medal of Honor vibes from the trailer and how Infinity Ward have described the game. Which I guess makes sense in a weird way since that was a reboot that tried to be a more gritty COD4. I know COD copied MOH and it's all just one big snake eating it's own tail, I just find it hard to be excited by it. Same with COD WWII. It's all so damn safe and desperate.

No, I kinda blackballed it because Activision initially bundling what was basically the current Respawn team's work to try and boost sales of whatever new CoD that was was all kinds of shitty towards both the consumer and their former dev team. I have, however, moved to the Battlefield series and have enjoyed both I and V, due in part to being slower-paced like the old MW games were.

And yeah, it feels way different now from the current CoDs. It's why WWII was such a bummer for me, because that fast pace just felt really "off" given both the setting and what I wanted it to be. For CoD fans that have stuck with the series, I'm sure that wasn't an issue and likely a preference since the series has become so much of a twitch shooter in recent years. I get why they don't want to alienate their fanbase to please the few like me who actually prefer the slower pace, but it's also my biggest concern for this reboot.

I imagine they're hoping to pull in some folks like me with some nostalgia for the MW games and simultaneously are planning on keeping the playstyle of current CoDs to please the series regulars, but I'm going to likely want this game to play in ways it won't.

@therealturk: The same game title in the same setting from 12 years ago? More like Call of Duty: Forever Warfare!

They just dropped the 4? That's awesome.

Modern W4rfare, dammit.

Looks cool. However, I don't know if it is buy-it-on-release cool.

I, for one, cannot wait to see what Call of Duty 16: Modern Warfare 4 brings to the table. Re-Perks?

I just came to say : just finished the campgine and it was excellent. Very very good shooter camping by any standards.