The Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare reviews are in, and it’s a mixed batch. Some are praising this latest addition to the long-running franchise, and others (especially among the public) are calling it the worst thing they’ve ever seen.
Call of Duty has been around since 2003, having spent most of a decade releasing new versions of historic wars. Gamers have been addicted to it enough that all other shooters have been considered CoD clones. Its quality and playability, and especially the multiplayer aspect, have ensured that the series will live on for probably another decade.
GameSpot praised Infinite Warfare, saying that its single-player campaign manages to outshine its competitive multiplayer. Leaving Earth for the first time, it’s clear that Activision and Infinity Ward are looking to reinvent the game and give it a fresh new perspective.
— Gaming Trend (@GamingTrend) November 4, 2016
The story behind this entry is that Earth is running low on supplies and the colonization of other planets has become a necessity. However, there is a group called the Settlement Defense Front which appears to be blockading efforts to continue, while racing to do so themselves on other planets. Basically, the SDF are intergalactic pirates bent on making Earth depend on them for survival.
Protagonist Nick Reyes is suddenly put in charge of a team attempting to stop the SDF’s efforts, and his vulnerability is made clear. He isn’t ready to be in charge, but he wasn’t given that choice.
The forward momentum of the narrative feels more natural than before, not rushed, but inspiring a sense of urgency in the player. Even the side missions are enjoyable, though the takedown animations seem lacking for variety.
— Erik Kain (@erikkain) November 4, 2016
Time doesn’t see the game in such a positive light, giving Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare a 50 out of 100. This means it’s only average, not a complete waste of time and money.
It may be that Matt Peckham, the author of the review, is simply tired of shooters being released around this time of year, citing the newest Gears of War, Titanfall, and Battlefield as being among the guilty. He states that even though Infinite Warfare appears to be eschewing the Earth-bound settings, it’s just a bunch of things we’ve seen before with a touch of science fiction, thrown in with a predictable plot.
Technically, it is about war, and war rarely ever changes its story.
— Leon Hurley (@LeonHurley) November 4, 2016
Main villain Rear Admiral Salen Kotch appears from time to time in propaganda videos to deliver inspirational phrases to his subordinates, making him feel a bit too much like a running meme. Said subordinates are basically painted as little more than bullet and bomb fodder, never questioning their orders or showing any level of intelligence.
Time adds that aside from this been-there-done-that shell of a plotline, the visuals are amazing enough to possibly make you forget you’ve done it all before.
EGM Now states that there was a lot of pressure on Infinity Ward to break the franchise free of the unfortunate reputation from their previous efforts (Ghosts), and the public has much higher expectations. It seems they failed, as Infinite Warfare doesn’t try hard enough to revive the franchise like the remaster of Modern Warfare did.
Some of the more refreshing additions is one where you use stealth to sneak up on an enemy spacecraft in one of your own to infiltrate it, and another where you’re fighting off enemies in the void of space as you attempt to reach your destination.
With new ideas thrown in alongside a formulaic plot, it seems the Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare reviews mostly agree that it’s not worth getting involved in this war.
What do you think? Is it worth fighting this war?
[Featured Image by Activision]