Random Number GodsRNG · Enemy Territory · Battlefield · D&D
Friday BF64 + Sunday D&D

Check the calendar. ET pubs running the new Frostbite rotation all week.

How the [COD] timeline should have went.

Permalink Preview Print COD
Samurai2014
Engineer
Members
37 posts 3 Nov 2019 joined
7 Sep 2026 at 14:52 #1

I remember the late MW19 days, when Cold War leaks were all over this place.

I remember news about CW being rushed, that the team only had 12 months to make a game, and Cold War's launch was HORRENDOUS (It redeemed itself and now for me its a Top 5 CoD but yeah)

CoD should have really stopped the yearly release there, with MW19/Warzone 1

The best ATVI could have done was this:

2019 - MW19 releases

2020 - Warzone releases and they should have made it the ONLY CoD release that year, delay Cold War to 2021, also serves as MW19 year 2 managed by Sledgehammer

2021 - Vanguard never exists at all, Cold War releases in 2021 with better launch content and maybe a different Warzone integration, maybe with the cancelled Ural Mountains map

2022 - Cold War year 2 managed by Sledgehammer, Treyarch moves to BO6 development

2023 - MWII releases, Warzone 2.0 still releases but WE DO NOT close Warzone 1 servers

2024 - MWII Year 2, Sledgehammer releases a paid DLC, full-fledged second campaign, MWZ and overhauled MP, literally what we now today as MWIII but inside MWII

2025 - Black Ops 6 releases with 1 extra year of development, the post-launch content drought that killed the game never happens

2026 - Sledgehammer takes over BO6 and releases the paid DLC, what we now today as BO7, BO6 becomes something similar to what BO2 was combining 90s and 2030s timelines, a better BO7 campaign could serve as BO6 consequences instead of the sloppy campaign we got instead

2027 - MWIII releases made by Infinity Ward, the game we know today as MW4 but with another number

What do you think about this? CoD would never be dead if we moved to a 2 year release

Samurai2014 - Map votes
Frostbite supremacy.

Deeifi
Covert Ops
Members
69 posts 15 Apr 2026 joined
7 Sep 2026 at 15:00 #2

This timeline would never happen because Sledgehammer refuses to be the secondary studio. And having two Warzone games co-existing just cannibalizes one or the other.

Deeifi - Comp flex
Put me where you need a body.

Samurai2014
Engineer
Members
37 posts 3 Nov 2019 joined
7 Sep 2026 at 15:06 #3

Warzone 1 doesn't really canibalizes anything as we already live with the past release becoming instantly obsolete

Just stop updating Warzone 1 and bring the new content to only Warzone 2.0, still don't understand why Activision closed its servers when they never did that to any other game

Samurai2014 - Map votes
Frostbite supremacy.

derskipie
Field Medic
Members
28 posts 31 Oct 2025 joined
7 Sep 2026 at 15:09 #4

It would be better quality I agree but for Activision this probably makes them more money.

derskipie - ET / smokes
Utility first.

Samurai2014
Engineer
Members
37 posts 3 Nov 2019 joined
7 Sep 2026 at 15:13 #5

Irl the yearly release and converting DLCs into full games may have brought better income for Activision, but at the cost of destroying the franchises' reputation and long-term sales, just look at MW4 rn

Having two years of MWII packed with content and overhauling its gameplay could have been ENORMOUS for CoD, the BO7 debacle never happens and we would be going crazy with MWIII (MW4 today) hype rn, while we enjoy BO6 year 2

Samurai2014 - Map votes
Frostbite supremacy.

Samurai2014
Engineer
Members
37 posts 3 Nov 2019 joined
7 Sep 2026 at 15:16 #6

Something to add: We wouldn't have the conversation about GTA VI destroying CoD, we would be chilling and playing BO6 year 2 on this day, not having to buy another CoD when GTA is on the corner, also the CoD vs Battlefield debate last year would have been INSANE if BO6 was a stronger game on launch, the marketing and hype it had irl was insane but if BO6 releases in 2025 it wouldn't be a "Battlefield destroys CoD" argument, CoD vs BF would have taken over the world

Samurai2014 - Map votes
Frostbite supremacy.

qintrxx
Covert Ops
Members
61 posts 22 Jun 2021 joined
7 Sep 2026 at 16:55 #7

MWII Year 2.....

qintrxx - Comp flex
Put me where you need a body.

CapitanMurasa
Engineer
Members
37 posts 2 Nov 2021 joined
7 Sep 2026 at 17:45 #8

Yea ideally we get second year support, it’d only improve that year's game to player feedback and craft an experience that’ll hold a healthier playerbase for longer. But this is activision.

CapitanMurasa - NA nights
I take the dead hours.

foxratao
Engineer
Members
40 posts 18 Sep 2020 joined
7 Sep 2026 at 18:00 #9

bo6 should have just been 7, but with more content because of the dual game development. so we’d just get bo7 with more content.

foxratao - Map votes
Frostbite supremacy.

Mypa_7
Covert Ops
Members
51 posts 2 Jan 2023 joined
7 Sep 2026 at 18:47 #10

this makes no sense, despite rushed times CW and MWIII are the best games of the modern era, there is no reason to force SHG into just supporting games and rewarding IW for doing nothing

Mypa_7 - Comp flex
Put me where you need a body.

Samurai2014
Engineer
Members
37 posts 3 Nov 2019 joined
7 Sep 2026 at 19:03 #11

If CW is that good (it is) imagine if it was BETTER

Same with MWIII, imagine paying just a fraction of the full price and even integrating it into an already complete game (like it or not) with the same overhauled gameplay and even a deeper merge of content than what Carry-forward ever did

Samurai2014 - Map votes
Frostbite supremacy.

Sign in to reply.