Call of Duty's Chat Censorship Backfired, Hyping The Finals
Last Updated: November 5, 2025
During the beta for Call of Duty: Modern Warfare II in late 2022, players diving into the action discovered a peculiar and telling restriction within the game's text chat. It wasn't profanity or slurs being blocked, but the name of a highly anticipated rival shooter: "The Finals." The attempt to suppress the name of a competitor sparked immediate community discussion and, ultimately, backfired spectacularly.
A Curious Case of Selective Censorship
As players flooded the Modern Warfare II beta servers, reports quickly surfaced on platforms like Reddit and Twitter. Gamers attempting to discuss Embark Studios' then-upcoming free-to-play shooter, The Finals, found their messages completely blocked. Typing "The Finals" or even "finals" into the in-game chat resulted in the phrase being replaced with asterisks.
What made the situation particularly noteworthy was the filter's laser focus. Our own testing at the time confirmed that while "The Finals" was a forbidden phrase, the names of other competitors were not. Call of Duty's longest-standing rival, "Battlefield," could be typed without issue. Even more telling, the name of Embark Studios' other announced title, "Arc Raiders," was also unaffected. This selective filtering led to widespread belief that publisher Activision was specifically targeting The Finals, a new IP that was already generating significant buzz within the FPS community.
The Competitive Landscape
The decision to block mentions of The Finals, while ignoring other major franchises, spoke to the perceived threat posed by the new title. Embark Studios was founded by veteran developers from DICE, the studio behind the Battlefield series, and their projects were being watched with keen interest.
At the time, The Finals was pitched as a fast-paced, team-based shooter set in a virtual combat game show, featuring unprecedented environmental destruction. This high-octane formula, combined with a free-to-play model, positioned it as a direct challenger to the arena-style gameplay that keeps Call of Duty's multiplayer ecosystem thriving.
Meanwhile, Embark's other project, Arc Raiders, has since pivoted from its initial co-op concept to become a sci-fi PvPvE extraction shooter, launching in early access in December 2023. But in 2022, it was the explosive, direct-action gameplay of The Finals that seemingly had Activision concerned.
The Streisand Effect in Full Force
The player response to the censorship was a mixture of amusement and criticism. Many saw it as a petty, anti-consumer move by a dominant market leader feeling insecure about a newcomer. The discovery inadvertently created a textbook example of the Streisand effect, where the attempt to suppress information only makes it more widely known.
Threads discussing the censorship exploded, filled with players who were previously unaware of The Finals now expressing keen interest in checking it out precisely because of the controversy. Embark Studios even responded playfully on Twitter, stating, "We've been advised to 'keep a low profile' on this one," cementing their position in the community's eyes.
Activision's heavy-handed tactic to prevent word-of-mouth marketing within its own game had failed; it was now actively promoting its competitor for free.
A Prophetic Failure
Looking back, the incident was more than just a momentary controversy; it was a prelude to a real shift in the shooter landscape. The Finals went on to hold wildly successful open betas in 2023 before a surprise launch during The Game Awards in December 2023. It became an instant hit, lauded for its innovative destruction mechanics and chaotic fun, and established itself as a legitimate competitor in the free-to-play market.
Activision's attempt to make The Finals a forbidden phrase within its beta lobbies now seems comically short-sighted. The effort to stifle a rival's name only amplified its hype, contributing to the rise of a game that now directly competes for the time and attention of the Call of Duty player base. It remains a powerful lesson in how trying to control the conversation can cause a publisher to lose it entirely.