Call of Duty: Warzone 2 has been on the market for a few weeks now, and players are still debating whether the new battle royale is better than its predecessor. A clip from the old Warzone is now gaining a lot of attention on Reddit and is said to show why Warzone 2 is better.
Call of Duty has evolved into a service franchise over the past few years. It relies on a season system, regularly releases new, free content, and has established a strong free-to-play brand with Call of Duty: Warzone.
The first Warzone was supplied with new content for almost 2.5 years. It even benefited from the content of the premium CoDs that were released each year.
However, a line was drawn. The old Warzone was too broken, they simply did not plan for such long support. Warzone: Caldera still runs, but rather in maintenance mode.
Warzone 2 is supposed to make everything better – but is it achieving that? Since the release, there has been discussion, and particularly the movement is in focus. A clip on Reddit now proves to many players that Warzone 2 has the upper hand.
Are you currently playing Warzone 2 or planning to? Check out our short video:
CoD Warzone 2: Slower movement makes the difference
What kind of clip is this? The video shows nearly 30 seconds of gameplay from Warzone 1. It features a very chaotic gameplay scene where the displayed player takes down many opponents with their accelerated movement:
The thread creator titles the topic “The reason why Warzone 2 is better than Warzone 1”. Within less than 24 hours, the topic gathered 4,200 upvotes with a rating of 83% positive votes. In over 1,500 comments, players discuss whether the clip serves as proof.
What do the players say about it? In the first part of the discussion, players talk about when such movement actions were present in Warzone 1. Some see the integration of CoD Vanguard as the starting point (2021), while others already blame Black Ops Cold War (2020).
However, many commentators agree that Warzone is not a battle royale where such movement should exist.
Interestingly, user “kwaaaaaaaaa” states: “I believe that the idea ‘Movement is King’ in such a large-scale battle royale suppresses other important tactical aspects – rotation planning and the large map. It causes everyone to just play for kills.”
In his opinion, tactics and approach should be more important than movement – otherwise, a CoD battle royale would be nothing more than a large multiplayer map.
User “__Dave_” argues against this, saying that Warzone 1 effectively combined the components of tactics and movement. If one has strengths in close combat, like the player in the clip above, then one plans their rotation accordingly.
On the other hand, players with weaker movement can also plan for greater combat distances.
What are your thoughts on the subject? What weaknesses did the first Warzone have, and which strengths would you have liked to see in Warzone 2? Leave us a comment on the topic.
Perhaps you share the same view as MeinMMO author Mark Sellner. He is entirely guided by his gaming experience: I got annoyed and quit Warzone 1 after 10 minutes – But Warzone 2 is brilliant
