Activision president Rob Kostich has revealed that Call of Duty games set in the modern day and future are easier to approach than World War games or other historical settings. Although there’s a healthy appetite for shooters set in history, Kostich says they offer less flexibility in terms of weapons and gameplay.
Call of Duty games maintain a “somewhat realistic tone”
In a lengthy interview with GamesBeat, Kostich said that it’s important for Call of Duty games to maintain some semblance of realism. Going back to eras like World War I and II means developers are limited in what they can do in terms of weapons and gameplay.
“I think ultimately for us, the weapons are a hugely important part of the Call of Duty game,” Kostich said. “Once you get into the modern era, you have a lot more flexibility. You get in the future a little bit, there’s even more flexibility with what you can do with weapons.”
That said, Kostich acknowledged that 2017’s Sledgehammer-developed Call of Duty: WWII did “really, really well” but added that Modern Warfare and Black Ops franchises are “really popular,” too. “It’s a balance, I think most importantly, that we feel like we actually need to provide good differentiated experiences,” Kostich concluded.