I'm not going to go on a rant about Call of Duty or Battlefield or whatever, it's a question I wondered when both franchises exploded when they went into the modern warfare genre. I remember when earlier in the 2000s, World War 2 shooters (and strategy games) were the shit when it came to shooters and was like the modern war shooters today, big cash cows, big critical successes (for that time), and big fanbase. I was one of those big fans and I have to admit, I still love playing WW2 games. However, I was feeling the oversaturation of the market of WW2 games and when modern warfare stuff was being introduced, WW2 was forgotten and left because it felt too used, a horse long dead. Too many bad WW2 games were released and companies seemed to have it in their heads to start releasing them almost next to each other so there was no time to let them develop on their own before the next big game came around.

What I wonder is when the modern warfare genre will face the same thing. I mean, we're seeing the same things being done with this genre, too many modern warfare games that bloat the market, game companies demanding sequels with very small development times which makes each game seem the same, and a lingering criticism of too much "modern warfare" games. The only thing different so far is that the revenues from the genre are not reflecting of what happened to WW2 games in the end.

So I guess my question is, how much steam does the modern warfare game have to you before it joins the WW2 genre in being a genre that gamers are bored with and want to move away from? What exactly needs to happen before this cycle ends? What should replace it?