[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
This year marks the five year anniversary of Call of Duty: 4, which has become widely considered as the benchmark of the FPS genre and the Call of Duty franchise as a whole. Since Call of Duty 4's resounding success, the COD franchise has blown out of the water; breaking records in not only the gaming industry, but the entertainment industry too. Five years on however, it's no secret that the franchise has begun to lose its zest, and that more fans each year are finding it harder to tolerate the juggernaut releases that Activision are shoving down our throats. With each annual release drawing in more cash every year, a gap year is out of the question, so what does Call of Duty need in order to be revitalized?
As we progress each year, the developers try to bring something new to the multiplayer experience in order to progress the franchise into a fresher route; the most prominent examples can be pulled from the latest release into the franchise: Modern Warfare 3. With Modern Warfare 3, we seen Infinity Ward split up the killstreaks into two different directions: Assault and Support. This new system gifted players with the motive to contribute to their team whilst playing the objective; so for example if you got a kill, died and then got another two kills, you'd be awarded a UAV via the support package. For the more adventurous players, once you amounted fourteen points (kills) you'd be awarded a stealth bomber; regardless of how many deaths you get in-between. Whilst this idea seemed revolutionary pre-release, it quickly began to get on the nerves of the majority of MW3 players as the game progressed, as they were all tormented by what widely became known as 'UAV Spam'. With bad players being awarded UAVs and even advanced UAV's, many players were led to use the infamous perk Assassin on their classes in order to avoid the enemy team constantly knowing where they were. This immediately unsettled the balance of the game for more intelligent players, as UAV's and Advanced UAV's became essentially useless, and many players were left with almost all of their classes' 2nd tier slot being dedicated to the one perk. Whilst it can be argued that this was simply players shifting the balance of the game (as opposed to the game being unbalanced), it must be stressed that the developers must take their customers reactions into account.
So with that said, where can they find the perfect median? Well the most popular answer is to simply revert back to the classic '3-5-7' setup that we all came to love from Cod4 and Cod5. While this may be seen as a step backwards for the franchise, it's a step that must be taken in order to simplify the gameplay so fans can go back to depending on gun skill and not air support - after-all, it's a first person shooter; not an aerial battle. With Black Ops 2 rumored to be the title for this year, reverting back to this setup would be perfect, as Treyarch are known to stick to more old-fashioned warfare such as World War 2 and the cold war - where advanced air support wasn't as essential as it is within modern warfare. The removal of lethal air support and air support that can be attained regardless of your killstreak are both vital changed that must come in order to simplify the game down to its most basic, but popular level: player skill.
The Call of Duty franchise has gained the notoriety of having awful support from its developers once the game has been released, and it's something that must change so that the series can have any hope of moving forward. Once again, Modern Warfare 3 is a screaming example of bad post-release support, as four months on we're yet to see any real notable change to the game; the spawn logic is still terrible and lag compensation still plays a major role in the outcome of gun-on-gun battles. So if MW3 is a bad example of post-release support, what would be a good example? Well, if we're sticking to the Call of Duty franchise, it would have to be Black Ops. Whilst Black Ops was/is a highly scrutinized game, one thing that nobody can deny is that it had excellent (at least for a CoD game) support. Throughout 2011 the game received over eleven title updates and hot fixes addressing issues that fans brought up over online forums and social media outlets and each tweak always successfully addressed the issue at hand. This sort of support is what the franchise requires in order to install hope back in the hearts of its fans, as once in-game problems arise, they'll at least have faith to stick by the game and accept that the issue will be fixed ASAP.
The key to the aforementioned subjects is defiantly community interaction. To achieve the perfect balance within the game, the developers must converse with the 30+ million strong Call of Duty community, in order to get an accurate grip of what exactly they want. So how do you interact with such a massive crowd? Well, the most logical path to go down is to contact 'community leaders' such as large YouTube personalities and competitive ( MLG/EGL) players. These two groups of people could take on the role of being ambassadors of the Call of Duty community, as each one of them are part of niche, but vital communities; YouTubers appeal to the public community, who you'll generally find casually playing the game; whilst competitive players appeal to other highly skilled gamers who compete at the highest level for large cash prizes or simply for bragging right. This collaboration could potentially result in a plethora of new possibilities, as the game would be molded into a more appealing image that suited all communities.
One thing that everyone can't help but notice is that the series is sticking to the same plot: a tyrant upsets the balance of power and America goes marching in to save the day. In reality, that's not really what modern day war is about anymore, we all know the real motives of war... With that said, going down a more truthful path is perhaps not the best idea, as the sheer amount of controversy it would cause could be cataclysmic. One thing that can't happen again, is anything involving the Russians as the main enemy, as they're over saturated as the bad guys; Black ops used them as the main enemy, so too did the Modern Warfare trilogy - that's half of the Call of Duty franchise being dedicated to vilifying the Russians. So who should be the bad guys now? Excluding the middle east (which has also been done to death across the FPS board), the most plausible answer would either be the Chinese or the North Koreans - or both! Whilst China isn't exactly the most violent country, they have a massive population, so the thought of a full Chinese invasion would be terrifying! Furthermore, a collaboration of attacks from them and North Korea would be interesting to see in a game.
With the whole community assuming Black Ops 2 to be 2012's title, we probably won't see the aforementioned scenario take place; as it will presumably continue on with Russians being the opposition. An interesting spin on that would be to have you actually playing as the 'bad guys' for once, maybe players can finally assume the role of a bad-*** Russian mercenary who's given the ultimate mission: Killing the president of the USA. Some form of creativity like that would be nice to play with. Sure, it may be deemed slightly controversial, but the developers have to try and spice up the campaign; some of us are tired of being the hero!
Finally, above all else the franchise needs revolution. Remember how revolutionary Call of Duty 4 was? It changed not only a franchise, but a whole genre; five years on many games are still trying to emulate its near-perfection. Revolution isn't all about adding crazy features, the franchise has had a tainted past with attempting that, what it's more down to is simplifying and refining each and every feature. All of the above changes are the key to revolutionizing and breathing life back into a franchise that's starting to get stale; with great balance across the board and excellent post-release support, we could potentially see future Call of Duty titles rise up and be more than a price tag.
In conclusion, it's time for change, if it doesn't come within the next title or two, we'll end up seeing the series die. Whilst it may argued that they've already found the winning formula, as each year they sell more and more, it must be pointed out that most of this is down to previous reputation and hype. The backlash has already begun; Black Ops has already had upwards of 400 thousand players at a time on it while MW3 was out. In short, fans are losing faith - they want it back.
Source
