About a week before the release of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4, I was invited by Activision to visit the headquarters of Infinity Ward (hereafter referred to as IW) in Los Angeles, where I experienced the full version of the game offline alongside many other media colleagues.
During the roughly three-day trip, I deeply experienced the single-player campaign, all multiplayer modes, and DMZ—I’ve placed my specific impressions in the adjacent review, so I won’t elaborate further here.
Specifically, during this trip, I also had the fortune to speak with several developers within IW. They were Chief Narrative Director Justin Harris, Associate Design Director Alex Norris, Multiplayer Creative Director Geoff Smith, and Technician Jack Hoppus.
Below is the transcript of the interview.
Q: First question, I hope you can give me a very simple answer—is this installment the conclusion of the entire new "Modern Warfare" storyline?
Justin:I have to say, this game will indeed conclude some storylines in a complete manner. But as for whether this is the end of the entire series, that remains to be seen.
Q: I don’t think that counts as an answer.
Justin:Decisions of this magnitude are not for us to make.
Q: Was Price’s sacrifice something you planned from the beginning? Or did you just follow the narrative rhythm and naturally arrive at this ending?
Justin:I think it’s the latter, because this is a very natural ending. You know, we’ve been with these characters through three titles. We were basically looking for a way—to give these characters an endpoint in an appropriate manner.
Q: So, what was the overall thinking behind crafting such a story ending? You know, in the old "Modern Warfare" stories, Price was the last survivor of Task Force 141, but now he isn't, and Ghost has become the final flag-bearer.
Justin:We essentially revisited the core question posed to players in the first rebooted Modern Warfare title from 2019—how far is a soldier willing to go to complete a mission? At what moment do you draw the line? And at what point do you personally cross that line?
We felt that returning to this question and providing a clearer answer was the way we wrapped up this storyline. As for whether this was what we had in mind back in 2019—I think we had plenty of time to see where this story could go. And this time, we felt it was a good opportunity to give some of these narrative threads a proper conclusion.
Q: Archer’s character arc in this installment doesn’t feel very complete; it ends quite abruptly. You know, I liked the deaths of General Shepherd and Makarov in the old series because you had multiple games to build up the story. The presentation was also excellent, with crazy chase scenes, and then you pulling that knife out of your chest and throwing it at General Shepherd. Finally, at the end of the old "Modern Warfare" series, you play as Captain Price hanging Makarov.
In this installment of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4, Makarov and Archer’s deaths feel very abrupt, with little buildup.
Justin:In the original Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 (2009), General Shepherd’s story was also fully presented within a single game. You see him starting to implement his plan early on, and then you see the consequences of that plan—finally, you think, “If only we could have stopped him earlier.”
So this time, when Archer started implementing his plan, we saw the beginning of it early on, and thus the protagonists intervened and stopped Everythinggj.
Alex:That’s the story we wanted to tell this time: because of the protagonists’ actions, Archer can no longer overturn the entire world. In previous Call of Duty stories, the writers focused on the villains, constantly detailing what the villains were doing to the world.
But I think this time we wanted to properly tell Price’s story—he is the focus of this installment.
You might feel that Archer died at an inappropriate time or too quickly, but actually, we wanted to focus on what Price went through. As Justin just said, Price kept crossing the line, eventually going so far that his own team was sent to deal with him.
For us, this was a very compelling story worth focusing on.
Q: Price is important, so he dies in the story. I want to know, from a narrative perspective, what exactly did you want to convey? Or rather, what did you want players to feel when playing as Price?
Alex:I think it’s more about that overall, grand experience. I want to shock them; I want them to feel satisfied; I want them to feel that this isn’t a movie watched from a spectator’s perspective, but something players are deeply involved in.
Justin:I think an important point is that players can feel the weight of choices from the story. Moreover, this will become a topic of ongoing discussion among players—won’t it? Players will repeatedly debate whether Price’s actions were justified. Did he go too far? I think everyone has to make that judgment for themselves.
Q: This generation’s single-player campaign features a dual-narrative structure, but the experience feels somewhat fragmented—from a designer’s perspective, what were the underlying design elements?
Justin:One thread, from the perspective of an ordinary soldier, shows the direct consequences of Price crossing the line. So, returning once again to that core question—the value of choice, how far is Price willing to push the底线 (bottom line)? As a player, you will know what the consequences of all this are—perhaps a disaster erupts in some corner Price never visited, caused by Price’s actions. You need to know, this is what we wanted to explore.
We also understand that making two narrative threads converge naturally without feeling forced is extremely difficult. This goes back to the question of “what design serves the narrative best,” right? As you’ve noticed, we can’t directly see the relationship between Price and that Korean squad, but these clues will eventually intersect at some point, and they will indeed have plenty of interactions with Ghost—I won’t go into details here.
Q: When writing the story, especially the part where Price keeps descending, did you repeatedly discuss how far he could go? Did you ever think, “Oh, this is too much, we need to pull him back a bit”—something like that?
Justin:Of course. Crafting the entire storyline was a continuous process of discussion. Many of our developers are fans of these characters, and many would say, “Hey, Price needs a grand sacrifice, like those of ancient Greek heroes.”
As you should know, different characters bring many different ideas. But one thing we’ve always paid close attention to is that Price himself says in the game that he won’t harm civilians. So, he still drew a line; he didn’t completely become an outlaw. But at certain plot points, it was indeed difficult for us to define whether Price had already become a villain.
This is something we’ve pondered over repeatedly.
Alex:There was a lot of debate within the studio about where exactly Price draws the line. You know, everyone has their own opinion. Throughout the development process, people kept coming to us saying, “I think this is too much”; or, “Hey, he hasn’t gone dark enough.”
Really, some people love seeing Price gradually descend into darkness. Others say, “This isn’t the Price I know.” Many treat Price like a treasure, unwilling to let him suffer even a scratch. But what I like is the dual parallel—on one side, the gradual descent into darkness, and on the other, the rising hero.
On one side is Price, and on the other is Park Hyun-jun.
Q: So, where does Ghost stand in this installment’s storyline? In the old "Modern Warfare," Ghost was Price’s loyal old comrade. But in the reboot, he has become an independent, distant character with his own ideas—what prompted this change?
Justin:I guess you mean that when you have a long comradeship with someone you trust, you shouldn’t turn against them so easily, right? That’s an interesting point, because we have several military consultants for this game, and we asked them this question—namely, if your brother-in-arms, whom you trained with, fought alongside, and would trust with your life, did Everythinggj Price did, and you received orders to bring them back, would you do it?
Most of them said absolutely yes.
They said they would accept this mission without hesitation, and it must be executed by them personally. Because if someone like Price sets this precedent, many people’s moral codes can never go back, right? So, I think Ghost’s actions towards Price were justified.
Ghost might say, “Hey, why did you go so far? Why did you cross that line without taking us with you?”
To some extent, I think Ghost also knows this is Price’s way of protecting them, to keep them from crossing that line as well, letting him bear the burden alone. But then again—when does this ever end? Moreover, two friends, two brothers turning against each other is a story that Call of Duty fans rarely see. I just thought, okay, give us more of that.
Therefore, I think this is something we thought about early on.
Alex:Even when we were working on the combat system and designing these different story nodes, opinions within our own team were divided—but we felt this plot design was particularly good and compelling, so we wanted to explore it.
Moreover, if someone had to bring him back, who else in Task Force 141 would be suitable? Task Force 141 would definitely want to handle this matter internally; you wouldn’t want to leave it to outsiders to mess up.
Q: Honestly, Price’s death shocked and confused me. He is an experienced veteran who has faced so many moral dilemmas and killed some innocents in opposing factions, but he has never betrayed his principles and loyalty. I feel he should have had a more reasonable ending—like retiring, or just disappearing. The ending of death feels too extreme... but I suppose this is also a consequence of his boundary-crossing actions.
Justin:I actually disagree; I think the death ending was designed very well. But both viewpoints have merit, and that’s exactly what we wanted—people arguing, debating, and thinking about it long after finishing the game.
Alex:Ultimately, that’s the point. We’re not here to give you a clear answer on whether Price was right or wrong; we’re here to make you feel the weight of those choices. Whether you agree with the ending or not, you’ve had the experience—that’s what matters most.
Q: After trying out multiplayer and DMZ, I noticed that the overall feel of climbing, sliding, and movement was quite good, with no stuttering when continuously vaulting over obstacles—what efforts did you make in this regard?
Geoff:We’re well aware that other games are getting faster and faster, and we didn’t want players returning to our game to feel that the overall movement flow was slow. So, we started looking for areas that felt awkward and went through all the different animations frame by frame.
It turned out that there were too many transition animations between walking, climbing through windows, and vaulting over cars. These animations would “click” or stutter when connecting. Then, we started thinking: why did we do this back then? I think the animators felt it added weight to the characters—you know, using hesitation to make it feel more realistic.
So, we removed those connecting pauses. Then, for every little detail, from climbing walls to vaulting, we shortened the animation times, resulting in the whole game feeling much smoother.
The speed hasn’t actually changed, but the overall movement experience in the game is better.
Q: Will network factors affect the feel of movement?
Geoff:We put a lot of effort into matchmaking based on ping, designing a special system called Anti Lag to ensure everyone is synchronized with each other, so the interaction experience isn’t too disparate. Our network programmers worked very hard to ensure the game experience is smooth—you know, like in fighting games, if they aren’t synchronized, you notice it immediately.
It’s the same on our end.
Q: Will this new movement system be ported to Call of Duty: Warzone, or will Warzone retain its own mobility system as before?
Geoff:Yes, I remember we previously announced that tactical sprint would be enabled by default in Call of Duty: Warzone. Because it fits well with the map scale, where you have to run long distances from engagement ranges. Of course, we will adjust all these improvements as needed to achieve the best results, suitable for both multiplayer and Call of Duty: Warzone.
So overall, from core multiplayer to Call of Duty: Warzone and then to DMZ, the movement experience will be as seamless as possible. Of course, there will be some minor adjustments here and there, but the overall feel for players switching between different modes will be largely consistent.
Jack:You know, the mobility feel in previous versions of Call of Duty: Warzone, standard multiplayer, and DMZ was quite different. However, we’ve now standardized the new movement system across the board. Actually, during the mid-to-late stages of DMZ development, we considered disabling tactical sprint, but you have to cross such vast open areas, right?
Without tactical sprint, wouldn’t DMZ just become a running simulator?
Geoff:Yes, so we kept tactical sprint in DMZ. Moreover, DMZ has items like energy drinks that can give you infinite stamina.
Q: We just tried out the "Proving Grounds" mode this morning, and it felt very interesting. This mode stitches together parts of three random maps to form a complete map. Would balancing be very difficult?
Geoff:That’s the beauty of the "Proving Grounds" mode—it’s always changing. You might have a couple of matches where you don’t like your loadout, or the random weapons you get aren’t to your liking. So you can just lay low, play dead, and then make up for it in the next round with different weapons.
The maps are the same.
During internal testing, we received feedback saying, “With this random design in Proving Grounds, how are players supposed to learn the maps?” But for us, you’re learning different map segments—so, if you learn one starting area, you’ve already mastered that part. Then, you start learning the middle sections. Eventually, it becomes about how they connect. Slowly, you begin to accumulate knowledge of each segment, and then how they combine.
Jack:Yes, after playing for a while, I actually found no issues. I even think that playing Proving Grounds for a long time helps with other modes, because Proving Grounds frequently switches sides. After playing for a while, you’re bound to find some tricks, like if you’ve played a certain part of the map and know there’s a small hole on the ground at the spawn point, you can run over, slide through it仰着 (on your back), and reach the opposite spawn point 10 seconds early, wiping out the entire enemy team.
It’s these little details. If you’ve played this part of the map about ten times, or seen someone else do it, you’ll think, “Next time I can use this too.” Then, you can use this trick in the future, gradually mastering these map segments.
Q: DMZ now has a perk tree, and players can also spend money to redeem operators killed in previous missions. What concept is this system based on? Will it make the game’s PvP more unstable?
Geoff:Yes, there are several different aspects. Each layer of the perk tree randomly selects three perks from a large pool. Players can freely choose the one they like from these three options. So, it’s not a fixed perk tree—you get a random roll each time.
We wanted each character to have a unique path, progressing through a unique perk tree. Of course, the total number of perks in the pool is limited, but we wanted these choices to be interesting. For example, “Oh, I picked this, so my character is like this; you picked that skill, I didn’t, so our characters will play differently.”
Then, you can also prestige. Once a character maxes out their level and fills the perk tree, you can start over. Each time you prestige, players lock in one perk, and you can lock in up to three. Each prestige allows you to re-roll, and you can keep rolling until you are satisfied with those three, since they are random. This is a long-term progression line.
Returning to what you just said, why does the rescue cost increase the longer an operator is missing? It’s because, if a player dies on average every three matches, how far can they progress in these perk trees? Hence, the MIA system, which allows players to rescue their characters. Once rescued, they can continue this journey—because there is so much content in the perk trees, and we don’t want players to be stuck with the same three perks every match.
Another point is that each character’s behavior record is tied to their account. So, you can have one account dedicated to killing players, another for hunting those players as a bounty hunter, and yet another just for looting supplies. Players are basically free to play however they want.
Q: What are the future update plans for the DMZ mode? Will there be a DMZ-exclusive season pass? Something like a Battle Pass.
Geoff:Battle Pass, right? Hmm, I don’t think we have plans for that at the moment. But in terms of content, we have a super cool map coming out. Anyway, we have a bunch of really good stuff waiting to go live.