Top 5 Changes We’d Like to See in Warzone 3 (If It Exists)

Modern Warfare 3 is right on the horizon and as we grow closer to its release date, Activision has dropped teaser after teaser. With all the new information we have, there has yet to be an official announcement on whether Warzone 2.0 will become 3.0. And in that spirit, we wanted to share our wish list for Warzone 3 if it exists.

Mission Contracts

There are two generally good contracts. Bounty which marks an enemy squad and has your team hunt them across the map, and Most Wanted which marks yourself to the entire lobby for the chance to resurrect your dead squaddies.

The cash rewards for most contracts aren’t worth it, only the Safe Cracker mission justifies its completion for the monetary value. Intel contracts are a waste of time, only giving the squad an insight into the next circle location, sadly the map is so big that the information is very rarely useful and in most cases wastes more time than needed. Bounty and Most Wanted are on both ends of the scale of having an amazing start or a terrible one. So all in all, we have access to contracts that rarely impact the game in meaningful ways.

Changing these missions up to promote more player-player contact would be a welcome addition. Perhaps having 3-5 squads after the same high-value objective could spice the gameplay up, or simplify the easier missions such as the Intel contract, so it is worth the time investment. Warzone 3 has the opportunity to bring meaningful changes that can shape the games that we play. Perhaps a contract that rewards a Black Site Key, giving squads an alternative to assaulting a Stronghold can promote more points of contact between players. All we can do is hope Activision takes this unique take on the traditional formula to new heights.

Harmonious Gun Balance

Stay with me for a second. Activision has done a good job of balancing the weapons for Warzone 2, in some cases going even further beyond to disable certain attachments and weapons in the Ranked mode. But I should be able to pick any gun I want, right?

Well, in the most competitive sense, you can’t. Using the MX9 against a player with equal skill rocking the ISO 45 would send you to the Gulag. This happens daily. I have a soft spot for the BAS-P and despite it receiving some love, it still pales in comparison to the Lachmann Sub.

I reminisce about the days of old when the UMP45 was an amazing weapon, but even the goldy-oldy M16 never felt strictly ‘worse’. In today’s age, the M16 is a joke compared to other assault rifles. It has a terrible time-to-kill at any range, awful accuracy that bounces far too heavily for a burst weapon, and generally no points in which it excels. Despite the gunsmith, the customization options for each weapon have birthed a more skewed META. The best weapon is leagues and bounds ahead of the worst but that isn’t strictly the gunsmith’s fault, Activision can easily prop up the worst and knock down the best.

Yet Activision has so far favored a META rather than the old days when every gun was viable and each weapon had a similar time-to-kill. I wish to go back to those days, so that skill is emphasized on the player rather than their loadout.

Forgiving Gulag Wins

Winning the Gulag only to enter into a firefight with a squad rocking their loadouts is a frustrating experience.

The Gulag is a second chance at life for players, reinforcement flares and the buy station also allow squads to resurrect their teammates for a price. Fighting valiantly for the Gulag win rewards the player with nothing but a BAS-P and a prayer. As enemy squads are acquiring their loadouts, you are expected to win gunfights while being woefully undergeared. For Warzone 3, we propose a more balanced redeployment to give players a decent fighting chance. Spawning with a single fully upgraded weapon is a simple change, allowing Gulag winners to make their resurgence into the map with a higher chance of success.

For players who are playing the game perfectly, taking correct fights and rotating at the right times will not feel the change. It will only affect already decimated squads or uncoordinated players. The idea is to promote a better gameplay loop and let players enter the battlefield more prepared. The feeling of running from building to building only to find everything looted and no chance of grabbing enough cash to buy squaddies is gutting. This idea is to curb that bad taste.

Map Design

I cannot be the only one who has been gunned down by a team perched on the edge of the mountain, sniping and air-striking my squad.

The elevation is something we hope Activision does not recreate in its new map. To be clear, general elevation is fine, Vondel does an amazing job at capping the heights so even a well-position team doesn’t retain all the advantage. What we do not want to see is giant open plains at the bottom of a mountain slope, giving a mind-boggling advantage to any team that finds themselves at the higher elevations. A handful of boulders are not sufficient cover for the 100+ players running around Al Mazrah.

We hope to see a smaller map to be the main attraction of Warzone 3, something between Vondel and Al Mazrah with a scaled player count to go with it. The current map sports 150 player lobbies and it is complete chaos, but since Al Mazrah is so big, it warrants that number. A smaller map with a smaller player size would be a perfect start for Activision. We want to see more points of interest across a new map and many more natural objects covering sightlines across the plains. Trees, rocks, destroyed cars, downed choppers, anything to break the full minutes of sprinting without anywhere to hide.

It’s a frustrating experience to have nowhere to regroup, plate up, and reassess the squad’s plan. We want to avoid that gameplay in the future so that players aren’t punished for not grabbing instant high ground. Some open areas are fine Activision, just not 75% of the map…

Sound Design

The number of times I have encountered a situation that has cost me the game from lack of sound is astounding. It is a constant issue that crops up in every single game. An enemy blindsides me while being quieter than a church mouse. Then I watch the killcam and listen to the crisp audio and I suddenly want to play something else.

Let’s get something straight Activision. We do not need to hear the AC-130 flying above and we do not need to hear the leaves rustling in the trees, nor do not need to listen to the thunderous wind in our ears. What we do need to hear is the footsteps, players climbing ladders, players deploying their parachutes, reloading, plating up… the list goes on and on. But sadly, the problem stems from the game’s engine. And this is where the hope comes in. If Warzone 3 is built from the ground up, the sound design will be inherently different (for better or for worse…) but it will be a start.

As players, we can only hope that Activision is taking the steps necessary, whether it’s by redesigning the sound for Warzone 2 or with the creation of Warzone 3.0 and a new engine.

And there we have our Top 5 Changes We’d Like to See in Warzone 3 (If It Exists). Game Design isn’t a science, its an art and it can sometimes be a hard juggling act so all we can do is hold our breath and wait for more word from Activision. For more content on Warzone 2 and the upcoming MW3 be sure to explore the content below.