Modern Warfare (2019) Review

A perfect way to do a reboot, and one of the best singleplayer shooters out there. Multiplayer is one of the weakest and most mediocre entries in the series, with fewer game modes, too many old maps, and a regressive killstreak system. Add to that constant crashing in the campaign and general bugginess while online. It's really only worth it for the campaign once it's a lot cheaper and the tech issues are sorted out.

Intro

Regarding the actual quality of the game, entirely disregard the "Thumbs Down" above. But for now, the review stands as a "Don't Recommend," purely due to technical issues related to the move to Steam. If you want to buy this game, either get it on Activision's own Battle.net launcher, or if you want it on Steam, wait until IW has fixed things. At the moment, a significant proportion of players can't even launch the campaign. I can, but it is very unstable. It's probably crashed for me over a dozen times, maybe two dozen, and I haven't even finished the campaign yet. If you're more interested in multiplayer, that is far more stable and I haven't had any crashes there so far. However, I'll keep this as a "Don't Recommend" until the tech issues get ironed out. But once they're fixed, I would wholeheartedly recommend this game.

Let me just say, I am someone who ordinarily despises needless reboots, selling familiar brand name for a quick cash cow. So very often in Hollywood, they are disasters and never were intended to be anything good in the first place.

I am also somebody who has played a TON of Call of Duty--I got CoD 2 (back from the WW2 era), CoD 4: aka the original Modern Warfare, the original MW2, MW3, Black Ops 1 and 2, and Advanced Warfare.

So I very easily could have been burned out on this series.

Yet, 2019's reboot of the Modern Warfare series is not only ironically a refreshing change of pace and excellent return to form, but it is a shining example of the PERFECT way to do a reboot, highlighting all the advantages and playing to the medium's strengths. Moreso, it's one of the best damn shooters on the market. It does for the Call of Duty series what Doom Eternal did for Doom.


To elaborate, Modern Warfare (2019), which I'll just refer to as MW '19 hereafter, is perfectly suited as a reboot rather than a sequel.

If you're familiar with the original MW trilogy, you'll know that the first game really was actually never intended to have sequels, and had a clear ending to its story. It also brought the then-WW2 series into the modern era, melding the series' immersive and historically authentic military shooter roots with the high polish of a Tom Clancy action movie--the cinematic quality of the campaign was quite notable and novel in 2007.

Modern Warfare 2 was born from the first game's success, and this game ended on a cliffhanger, so they could continue to make more money off of the inevitable Modern Warfare 3. However, these two sequels changed the direction of the series from a more grounded, "ripped from the headlines," action movie that was heavily inspired by current real world events, into a completely over-the-top, balls to the walls Michael Bay action movie with epic set piece moments, constant explosions, and a game more introduced in racking up the highest body count.

To be succinct, the first game had a more grounded approach, while the sequels were totally unrealistic and fully embraced the action movie vibe.

Campaign, Pt. 1 (Spoiler-Free)

So despite MW '19 technically being the fourth entry in the series, it's actually the only other game in all 20 (or however many there are) Call of Duty's, besides the original COD 4 to actually have a very grounded approach to its storytelling. In fact, the scenarios and events in this game feel even more shockingly real than what happened in COD 4. Without spoiling anything, MW '19 takes inspiration from a number of the terror attacks and famous events that really happened in the years between the original MW games and 2019, and the way these moments are depicted in scenes feels almost like you're walking around and participating in a news headline. Even the fictional events are treated in such a way that you feel this very easily could be reality.

In short, MW '19 is more of a spiritual sequel to the original MW than the actual MW 2 or 3 were.

Characters are also handled extremely well. The new characters; Alex, Farah, Harim, and Kyle; easily hold their own among the returning Captain Price, Nikolai, and Griggs. At least half of the screentime, if not more, allows the new characters to shine, and they really have personality and their bonding feels natural. There's a lot of complexity and depth to these characters as well; the writing errs more on the side Raul Menendez than Shepherd. Recasting Price was a difficult task; the original voice actor left big shoes to be filled, but the new actor absolutely lives up to the role. The new Griggs, on the other hand, doesn't quite have the same level of charisma as his original counterpart, but he and Nikolai are just side characters here.

The writing is a masterclass in "show, don't tell." The game deals with several profound themes and tough questions regarding the morality of warfare, terrorism, and where the line should be drawn. What is it okay for soldiers to do in the name of fighting terror? The most powerful message of the movie, however, is one none of the characters spell out themselves. It's one you the audience infer from the order the director chose to unveil the narrative in.

Finally, the campaign has a good mix between moments that harken back to similar ideas and moments found in the original trilogy, with plenty of new ones to keep things fresh. When reboots are done poorly, very often the writers will hit the audience over the head with, "Remember this?" moments that are as subtle as a sledgehammer.

Although I haven't played the new Modern Warfare II yet, it seems that this game might fall into this category--several of the levels they showcased in trailers look directly ripped near verbatim from levels in the old games such as the Oil Rig level in MW2, the Wet Work level in MW 1, and of course the famous Ghillie suit level in MW 1. Plaigiarised to the point of even recycling the exact same lines of dialogue.

Thankfully, MW '19 doesn't do any of that. When the game does have a similar moment to something done in the original games, it is usually very short, very subtle, and the game doesn't go out of its way to call attention to it. The attentive long time fan will notice it, and it helps this new game feel connected to the originals, like it is worthy of the name "Modern Warfare," but they aren't thrown in gratuitously for the sake of nostalgia.

Campaign, Pt. 2 (SPOILERS)

Since most video reviews I found online, including from professional journalists, seemed to entirely miss the proverbial elephant in the room; the writing on the wall; I wanted to explain the real significance of this game's story for those who have played it and might have missed it.

This is where we go into SPOILER TERRITORY.

Half-way through the movie, there's a scene where Hadir, one of our friendly, allied "freedom fighters" in the Middle East is discovered to be the one who stole and hid the horrible chemical weapons we've been searching for all along, using it as a last resort on the Russian invaders serving under General Barkov, giving them a taste of their own medicine.

His sister Farah is disgusted by sinking to the same lows of the enemy, but we pass out from the gas (though we are given gas masks), and then the movie gives us a flashback.

It's 20 years ago, and we see the events that shaped the course of Farah and Hadir's lives, from the first person view of Farah as a young child:

Foreign invaders, under General Barkov, blame her people for a terrorist attack on their unit, retaliating with horrific war crimes, slaying hundreds of civilians--women, children, even the dogs--as retribution.

Farah's mother's body is found lifeless under the rubble of bombed-out debris. Farah is alive but trapped. She calls out for help and is only just rescued by her father before the Russians deploy a poisonous gas throughout the area, killing everything. Her father races home, with his girl in his hands. Before he even has time to explain to his son, who had stayed at home, what has happened to his mother, a Russian soldier invades their home.

The father attempts to comply, but fearing for the safety of his children, decides to attack the soldier instead. He suffers fatal wounds in the struggle. Farah and Hadir manage to outwit and even kill the soldier, but their father doesn't make it.

Once the flashback level ends, the very next level shows us an eerily similar sequence of events, this time in the present and from the perspective of the soldiers, the invaders.

Now we are the British S.A.S., eager to make Al Qaeda and "The Wolf" (this game's Osama Bin Laden) pay for the horrific terrorist attack they orchestrated on Picadilly square in London. We're trying to find a location for this "Wolf" and the rogue Hadir who has apparently left Farah's freedom fighters and joined Al Qaeda.

To this end, we invade the home of suspected terrorists. We slowly and methodically work our way through the building. The men, fearing for the lives of their families, raise arms, only to be shot down by these foreign invaders (our soldiers). The children of these suspected terrorists undergo the same traumatic experience Farah and Hadir went through in the last mission, witnessing their parents be slaughtered in cold blood for reasons they can't understand.

In my view, this right here is the message of the fable the writers left for us. They never spelled it out and outright told us, chastising American foreign policy through some sanctimonious line of dialogue. They never got on a soap box.

Instead, they showed us two horrific scenes with the same story, set 20 years apart:

Foreign invaders destroy homes and families in their search for terrorists. The surviving children harbor hatred for said foreign invaders--and why wouldn't they--then they grow up and become the new generation of terrorists. It's a vicious cycle. There wouldn't be a Hadir planning a terrorist attack on Russian civilians today if there hadn't been a Russian war on terror in his country when he was a child. It begs the question: what resentment and drive to commit acts of terror are Price and Garrick sowing in their quest to take down the Wolf?

Of course, Russia is only the bad guy of the story because it's a big budget, Hollywood-style production, and anything politically controversial is bad business. But in this story, Russia arguably didn't do much differently from our own actions during the War on Terror in the 00s. That's the entire point. This isn't a critique of Russia. It's a critique of American foreign policy, and Russia is merely the stand-in for America.

Now, I'm not necessarily saying I agree or disagree with this opinion, that fighting terrorists creates them. I think there is some validity to the claim, and there's probably an equal validity in the need to keep terrorists at bay. The point isn't whether or not you agree with the claim. The point is that the way the writers made this claim is brilliant storytelling. It's a perfect example of showing, not telling. They never outright say what the moral of their story is, and yet it is the obvious inference we make from the way events unfold, from the way they chose to tell the narrative.

I'm honestly shocked so many people online seemed to miss this connection. It's absolutely brilliant writing, and I just wanted to explain this, in the hopes that perhaps more people can appreciate how well made the movie is.

Top Notch Presentation

On that note, let's talk about the new engine. Despite the name, MW '19 is actually a very forward looking game. Brand new engine--even the revamped IW engine of the AW days is completely thrown out. With this game, they started from scratch building a new engine from the ground up, and it really helps the game feel new.

The gun modeling, animations, and sound design are some of the absolute best in a shooter, like ever! The only close competition I can think of is Battlefield 4, from 2013. Speaking of BF 4, MW '19 actually took a great deal of inspiration from their competition at DICE. Many of the new sights and optics you can customize your guns were previously there in BF 4 but not in the COD series. Furthermore, we actually have some rudimentary level of destruction in the game! Granted, it's very little even compared to what Battlefield Bad Company 2 had back in 2010, but for the CoD series, having even some destructible environments, such as doors that can be torn apart by gunfire, is a step in the right direction!

Multiplayer, Pt. 1 (Game Modes)

Although the campaign is one of the best in the series, the multiplayer offering leaves much to be desired. Despite some major attempts at innovation, which largely pay off, the multiplayer is nevertheless lacking key features present in previous games, has way too many recycled ideas from the old games, and ultimately feels average to mediocre. There's no real reason to play this one, other than it has a large playerbase because it came out in the last 4 years.

Demolition.
Sabotage.
One in the Chamber.
Sticks and Stones.
Gun Game.
Global Thermonuclear War
Capture the Flag, an FPS staple since the days of Quake!

These are all game modes that were present in the older CoD's of the 360 era, yet missing here. Black Ops 1 and 2 even featured rudimentary bot support in private matches for some game modes.

One would expect with nearly a decade on from these earlier titles, that we would be growing and expanding upon what was there in the past, not lacking several of the features that used to be there!

In lieu of these classics is a mode called "Ground War," which is just a very barebones, watered down version of Conquest from Battlefield.

Once the novelty of CoD actually having playable vehicles in the multiplayer (and not just as a killstreak reward) wears off, you're left asking yourself,

"Why on earth would I ever want to boot up MW '19 to play Ground War?" I may as well just play Battlefield 3 or 4, which are so far better it's embarrassing. Hell, even Battlefield 2 from 2005 had a far deeper and more rewarding system for Conquest.

While I'm not complaining that Call of Duty is making baby steps in a good direction, they're just so far behind the competition that it's just pathetic to even attempt to clone it.

Consider just how much criticism and hate Battlefield V and 2042 got from Battlefield fans. If DICE had put out this "Ground War" mode and had the audacity to call it Conquest in a Battlefield game, it would without a doubt go down as the worst Battlefield ever, worse than even 2042, and the series would be absolutely over. That's how terrible this Ground War mode actually is. And the really sad part? Relative to the other modes, it's still one of the comparatively better modes that Modern Warfare has to offer.

Multiplayer, Pt. 2 (Maps)

While Infinity Ward couldn't keep all of the game modes present in the original games, they did succeed in recycling far too many old maps from the previous games, many of which were already the inspiration for several of the new maps! Here's a list:

Maps Recycled from CoD 4/MW 1:
Vacant
Backlot
Crash
Shipment
Pipeline
Killhouse
Broadcast

from MW 2:
Scrapyard
Rust

from MW3:
Hardhat

That's 10 maps I've already seen and played on loads of times! Sure, they get a visual update, and often a few details of map layout are changed, but it's still just recycled maps!

Then there's the maps that aren't literally recycled, but are still heavily inspired from levels in the old games:

Shoothouse? Looks like Shipment meets Killhouse
Stack? Looks like Killhouse meets Firing Range from Black Ops 1
King? Looks more like the original Killhouse than the actual Killhouse map in this game
Petrov Oil Rig? Looks just like Shipment
Speedball? Looks like one of the Black Ops 2 DLC maps
Gulag Showers? Ripped straight from the MW 2 Campaign/Spec Ops level
Boneyard? Taken from the MW 2 campaign/Spec Ops level
Azhir Cave? Looks like a modern Afghan from MW2

So that's like 18 maps that are either straight-up copies of old maps or new maps that feel very similar to old maps. Seriously, why do we need 6 maps that are all variations on Killhouse or Shipment? Two maps, which I might add, were already overplayed and done to death even in the old games!

That's not to say there aren't still plenty of genuinely new maps that are cool to play in, and most of these new maps do adopt an irregular style of level design, for better and worse, compared to the established structure present in past CoD's, but I'm still left feeling like there's too much looking back going on when it comes to maps. Maybe a couple of recycled maps might've been okay, but 10? 18? That's just excessive.

Furthermore, the game offers players no way of customizing which maps they want in rotation. You can choose which game modes to include or exclude, thankfully (although no playlist will mix and match Hardcore modes with regular modes unfortunately), but there is no way to exclude all the boring old maps. So not only am I cursed to continue playing the same Crash and Killhouse clones I bought this game to get away from, but I can't even choose to experience the new maps the game does offer!

The quality of the new maps is a mixed bag. The medium-sized maps designed for TDM, Domination, etc. are actually really good. "St. Petrograd" for e.g. is one of my favorites, both visually and in terms of gameplay. I like that many of the new maps take advantage of vertical level design, with multiple stories of buildings. Another great newcomer is "Atlas Superstore," which is pretty much Call of Duty set in a Home Depot warehouse. I like that you even get some maps set during the night forcing you to play with the night vision goggles on, which makes things interesting, but again, I very rarely encounter these maps. A couple of the maps are middling, but most of these new maps are really fun and good to play on.

However, the maps for the small-sized game modes of Gunfight and 1 v 1, are just horrendous. Atrium in particular is one of the worst maps I've ever had the misfortune of playing, but all of them are bad, because they give you minimal or even no cover, no flanking routes, just a wide open arena where you can easily get shot at. These arenas are absolutely tiny. The ONLY map on these modes that is actually fun is the famous Rust map from MW 2. In a twist of irony, Rust is actually fun for a change since the map was originally designed for 2 v 2, though playing it today it is always over-crowded with too many players in TDM servers. Rust offers plenty of flanking routes, cover, and height variation making it excellent for the small game modes. The new maps are abysmal by comparison.

Multiplayer, Pt. 3 (Killstreaks)

If ever you wanted to see how this series is regressing, just take a look at the killstreaks.

Ever since Black Ops 2 introduced the Pick 10 System for customizing loadouts and scorestreaks instead of killstreaks (which reward playing objectives too, not just getting kills), these systems had become mainstays because they are objectively superior.

Likewise, the "tactical nuke" reward at 25 kills in MW2 was initially cool, but quickly the devs realized it wasn't actually as fun a it sounds, because it just ends the map right there. So they changed it in MW3 to a MOAB, which kills everything on the map and has an EMP effect for a minute, and subsequent games kept it mechanically fairly similar to this. It's about the same as a nuke, but without having to end the map once somebody gets it.

Yet for some reason, MW '19 is regressing here. The customization is more old school, pre-pick 10, and the scorestreaks have gone back to killstreaks. Why?

You know, Advanced Warfare actually had so much customization that there was a whole second layer of customization for scorestreak rewards, where you could add all sort of additional bonuses to the rewards, but at the cost of a higher point requirement. The bonuses also contributed to your total of 13 in its similar Pick 13 system.

Going back to the killstreaks and nukes of MW2 days is not a "return to form," despite what the nostalgia-tinted goggles might tell some people. It's a regression, undoing the years of advancement we've seen since then.

Another reason why this is arguably one of the weakest multiplayer offerings in a Call of Duty game.

Multiplayer, Pt. 4 (What it does Right)

Despite these deficiencies in iconic and essential multiplayer modes, there are a lot of positives MW' 19 brings to the table.

The gunplay is excellent. Every gun, and every class of gun feels useful and capable of holding its own. Very often in CoD games, it is easy for machine guns and assault rifles to dominate all else, but in this title, any and every play style is welcome with its ups and downs. Due to the close quarters areas frequently found in the new style of maps, shotguns are actually not only viable but quite useful, which was almost never the case in the past. Semi-auto and even single-shot rifles such as the M14 EBR and a rifle that feels taken from a western are totally useful. Sure, the game has campers, but most times I'm not even that mad if somebody is camping, because campers are usually pretty easy to kill. They may get you unexpectedly one time, but if they're smart, they won't keep the same camp spot for too long. Otherwise, the killcams will give away their position to their victims, and it's pretty fun to get revenge on the camper that got you, hunting the hunter. The time to kill in this game just feels fine-tuned to perfection, and I feel that the core CoD gameplay here is some of the best its every been.

Additionally, this is the first Call of Duty since, well, the original Modern Warfare, to actually NOT have a season pass and ridiculously overpriced DLC that splits the playerbase. Everyone who buys this game will get access to all the maps in the game. Instead, Activision monetizes post-launch updates with micro-transactions that buy in-game currency which you can use to buy stupid cosmetics. Definitely the lesser of two evils. I will take this scummy mobile game practice any day over a season pass that locks off actual content people care about, like maps. Don't celebrate just yet, however, because they're still keeping all DLC at exorbitant prices for every prior title.

Customization and progression got a welcome overhaul. This is Call of Duty, you know the deal. You fight, you level up, you get new guns and sights, and you try out the new toys next time you play. Well this time, you get access to all 10 custom classes right from the start. You no longer need to have 0 life and play CoD for a million hours to get prestiged in order to have more than 5 measley classes. The amount of customization for weapons is also deeper than any previous system, allowing players to completely alter a gun any way they please to create their own ideal firearm. While this system didn't translate quite as well over to Vanguard, where the WW2 setting demands certain iconic guns look their familiar form, in a modern military setting, this freedom to customize works incredibly well.

On one final note, I want to give my 2 cents on Skill based matchmaking, the system where effectively you are queued up to fight other people of roughly your same skill level. This system gets a lot of flak on the internet, but personally I think it's great. I can't tell you how many times I have gone up against people ridiculously better than me in past CoD's, often with objectively better loadouts because they have higher levels, and I have just gotten outright destroyed. It's not fun to be destroyed and it's not fun if the enemy is so easy to destroy that you are given little challenge. I almost never last long enough in these games to even get the 3 killstreak for UAV Radar, and if my K/D is > 1, I'm on a good day. So to come to MW '19 and actually be topping the leaderboards for a change feels great. I'm actually facing other people where it feels like a more even playing field, and I'm actually able to get a couple of killstreaks for a change! So I love SBMM.

As you might expect of such a recent title, the playerbase is totally alive and well. The more popular modes will find matches instantly, but you can easily find a game relatively quickly in just about every game mode.

Ultimately, however, the multiplayer is a mixed experience.

The very-well polished gunplay, the fresh new map design, and the improvements to gun customization all make this a very fun, satisfying CoD to play, and you feel like you're getting a premium shooter experience.

However, in comparison to the other games in the series (of which there are so many) it's doubtful whether it really is worth checking out. The modes on offering are lacking, and the new modes are poor replacements for missing classics. Moreover, you've probably already played half the maps! Its primary advantage is that the playerbase is still active, for now, but that won't last forever.

Concluding Remarks

There is additionally a Spec Ops mode for co-op, much like in MW2 and 3, but I haven't played it yet, so I'll cover that once I have.

All-in-all, this is one of the best Call of Duty campaigns, and I would actually go as far as to say it's the best campaign of all the Modern Warfare entries. It's one of the top shooters on the market, in terms of gunplay and presentation, and is the perfect way to handle a reboot. Hollywood ought to take notice.

However, the multiplayer, which is the main game part of the package, is a mixed bag. Now, of course, if you've never played a CoD game before, nothing about the experience will disappoint you. It's the same polished formula that's always been there. If you are already familiar with the older games from the 360 era heyday, well then this game offers actually a lesser experience than what those games had, and with so many recycled maps, it doesn't quite feel like you're getting more new maps than you used to, even though there isn't a season pass anymore. The only real major change to multiplayer worth checking out is the new Gun Smith customization system, and even that isn't too revolutionary, particularly if you've played the recent Wolfenstein games since 2014's The New Order. Your money would be better spent buying Battlefield 4, which still has a huge playerbase like this game, but is lightyears better than what CoD's "Ground War" has to offer. Probably has more unique maps and just as deep of a customization system, if not more deep. And if you want the classic CoD experience, then just stick with that, because this game is a downgrade from the PS3 era, let alone the advanced movement of the PS4 era.

Then there's the serious technical issues currently plaguing the Steam version, which are hard to ignore. Even with everything installed, drivers up to date, all shaders installed, you can still expect the game to crash about 30-40 times before you beat the campaign. It's pretty infuriating. The crashing is just as prevalent in the Co-op Spec Ops mode where you fight bots like in the campaign.

Multiplayer is thankfully more stable, but it should be stable everywhere, not just the multiplayer.

Finally, you do need an online connection, even just to play the campaign. You cannot play the singleplayer offline, which is puzzling.

Final Score

Campaign: 10/10 Excellent

Multiplayer: 7/10 Average

Spec Ops: 5/10 Average

Total Score: 7 or 8/10 Above Average

Recommendation: Wait for technical issues to get sorted out and for the price to come down, then buy it for the campaign. Multiplayer is only worth it if you've never played any other Call of Duty multiplayer before and you want one that is populated. Even then, there's probably better choices out there for multiplayer.

[The Defective Butcher]

Why was this review made as a guide? Not hating, just confused. Solid review, though

[Rogue™]

This don't look like no guide.

[Aesthetic]

Fantastic review, I enjoyed reading this very much. As other people have commented the multiplayer is mostly fixed (as far as i can tell). You brought up some points in the campaign I had forgotten or didn't even pick up on, so thank you for talking about them!

[Division]

I had the feeling to buy this game early knowing that'd be risky to do but it is on sale and surprisingly I was able to play the game fine then problems occur as weeks go by so yeah.

[mei1212123]

fuck battlenet

[KenniS]

i hate the fact that IW doesn't give a shit about this game anymore i mean no more new modes or events as a new player to the game i had fun at first but now i don't and i'm not talking about campaign it's excellent but mutiplayer specially spec ops it's unplayable there's this glitch where u can't kill the enemies so u can't unlock the rewards of completing the spec ops misssions which contain many operators i hope they fix it soon this game deserves better