480°

Black Ops 4 is Better Off Without a Single-Player Campaign

Author Writes "For the first time Call of Duty: Black Ops 4 doesn't include a single player campaign, but the game certainly doesn't suffer for it."

Read Full Story >>
twinfinite.net
2047d ago Replies(9)
Jinger2047d ago

They replaced it with more content in my eyes. More MP and zombie maps at launch than previous entries and they included a BR mode which is something extremely new for CoD with 100 players on a large map and vehicles. Plus there is still a story in the game, just not a traditional campaign.

UCForce2047d ago

You mean those are tutorials mission. Single Player is COD stable for decade and it should never remove. This is just money grabbing and I know many publishers would “love” to abuse it. People want a proper single player mode, not this crap.

gangsta_red2047d ago (Edited 2047d ago )

@UCForce

"Single Player is COD stable for decade and it should never remove."

Hardly anyone played CoD for it's single player story. There are no single player tournaments, updates or DLC to add to it's story, unlike the MP which for most COD games are still being played this day. The SP for CoD was useless and the devs could spend their time crafting a much better MP experience for the many users who play it for just that.

"People want a proper single player mode, not this crap."

Who? Wasn't it like less than 9% that actually played the COD sp portion? I've been hearing for years that CoD is the same copy and paste crap, that it's killing other games chances of success and now people are mad because there's no single player campaign in CoD? Stop it, go play another SP game if you want but stop crying about a SP game that most CoD fans hardly cared about.

I keep hearing about tacked on MP, but who wants a tacked on SP too?

Godmars2902047d ago (Edited 2047d ago )

" Plus there is still a story in the game, just not a traditional campaign."

Something just there apposed to anything that might engage players. Those take work. Creativity.

"Hardly anyone played CoD for it's single player story."

Because any real narrative value has removed with each succeeding entry.

cell9892047d ago

Some extra maps does not equal campaign

UCForce2047d ago (Edited 2047d ago )

@gangsta_red Really ? COD SP was and will always stable in COD franchise. It is important just as MP. I knew I get disagree from left and right. You twisted my word and it’s shameful really. I stopped playing Rainbow Six Siege because it feel boring and hollow. I guess you don’t want to respect the legacy of it and want to erase it out of existence.

2047d ago
AnubisG2046d ago

@gangsta_red

I keep hearing this idiotic excuse that only 20% of CoD players completed the story. Let's look at this in context. CoDWWII sold 12 million copies. So that means 2.5 million people completed the campain. Thay is not a small number. Also, the most sought after activity in Destiny is the raid. The latest raid has been completed by less than 1% of people. So should they take it out? If they do, people would be very upset.

So how about we as gamers stop justifying that corporate idiocy that only a minority completed the sp mode so it's ok not to have it. You have to be an idiot to think that it's ok to get less for the same $.

Lostbytes2046d ago

I don't play zombies...i don't play BR. One is Horde the other free for all -- I stopped playing horde modes a few years back. They are never challenging enough, And i never have liked any Free for all mode. So for me they stripped enough out of COD to not warrant a purchase. First COD in 10 years i'm skipping. Just because YOU see more value ,does not mean it holds the same value for others.

Jinger2046d ago

@Anibus
Actually it's only 9% of people who completed the BLOPS 3 campaign, But in that 9% (A little over 2mil players) who bought the game ONLY for the SP? I bet that number shrinks down to less than 4% of people who buy it only for campaign, probably less. So you're looking at a tiny fraction of their player base here, and with them taking it out and focusing on more of the content that 96% of the playerbase plays the most, they are selling pretty damn well breaking digital records over Destiny and CoD WWII.

@Lostbytes
So you still play the MP though, right? The mode I'm sure you spend 99% of your time in after you're done with the 4-6 hour forgettable campaign.

rainslacker2046d ago (Edited 2046d ago )

Surely one could take the available trophy data across the platforms, and see how many people played past games primarily for the SP campaign, or played it about the same as the MP game. Aren't the MP trophies tiered to give a reasonable approximation of how much time they spent playing the MP?

About the only real deviation in the statistics would come from not knowing the percentages of people who wanted both, or brought it primarily for the SP, but still partook in the MP quite a bit, even if it wasn't their primary reason for playing the game.

I don't care to do the work myself, as it would require more research into the individual trophies, and I don't really care that much, but obviously, the data is there for Activision to know how many sales they'd lose for the people who brought the game primarily for the SP campaign. With today's tracking of trophy percentages right on the platform, it should be easy enough to do more than just make hyperbolic statements about it.

So, for my own hyperbole....didn't they just have one of their weakest retail launches for the series in a very long time? I'd think the SP people may be more prone to buying retail, since it's possible they may not have good internet, which is why they may not play the MP as much.

That thrown in there, without knowing the actual numbers, or even the numbers from digital which apparently are strong, its hard to extrapolate any kind of conclusion on just how much of an effect it had on sales, or if its really that important.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 2046d ago
gangsta_red2047d ago

It actually has the same content, plus more modes.

2047d ago
zackeroniii2047d ago

I'm sure you have a blast with just overwatch and rainbow six siege though right?

But let's just hate cause you know...call of duty...so cool you guys are

AspiringProGenji2047d ago

Never played Rainbow 6

And It’s been a year since I last touched Overwatch

Razmiran2047d ago

Well, since you bought overwatch then I guess that you are okay with full priced multiplayer games after all

AspiringProGenji2047d ago (Edited 2047d ago )

No I am not okay with that. My bro game shared Overwatch with me on console ans I did buy the game on PC laterr, but on PC iir’a still $40 so for an MP only game that’s fair

fathertime44642046d ago

Hell even battlefield 5 is getting a campaign mode with mp and a battle royal mode.
So if dice could do this I'm hard pressed to believe that tryarch couldn't

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2046d ago
daBUSHwhaka2047d ago

Don't mind no single player but the price needs to be adjusted...

DarkVoyager2047d ago

Should’ve been $40 or even F2P like Fortnite.

aconnellan2047d ago

*major triple-A game that cost millions of dollars to make, releases to 9/10 scores across the board*

“Doesn’t have single player? Should have been FTP”

Lol get outta here. No one’s saying that God Of War should have been cheaper because it doesn’t have multiplayer, so why the double standard?

Such a small percentage of people play COD single player anyway, and it’s multiplayer always gets more praise, so why aren’t they allowed to cut the single player and put that time towards perfecting the multi?

mkis0072047d ago

Acconnellan.

God of war doesnt have microtransactions to keep the money flowing.

A great single player game is way more difficult to develop than multiplayer arenas...

Ragthorn2047d ago

If someone can explain to me how a game needs to be price adjusted for missing a single-player component, then I would really like to hear it. I am not trying to say I don't want one or do not like single-player stuff, I just genuinely want to see why people see this. From what I see, singleplayer games (e.g., upcoming Sekiro which I am extremely excited for) should be price adjusted for not having any multiplayer at all like the previous Soulsborne games. I don't personally see eye to eye on this, so now what I say is that just because a certain part is eliminated does not mean the price should change NECESSARILY. Obviously if it is like Fortnite or Overwatch, then it should either be F2P or charged less. Treyarch even said that the single-player team worked exclusively on Blackout (Battle Royale for CoD). This does not mean that any less resources or effort was put into the game. This is how I see it anyway, I just don't see how people think the game should be lowered in price. HOWEVER, I do wish I could buy Blackout by itself for a reduced price and possibly buy the other parts as "modules" per se. That might be an interesting development for the PC versions at least.

2046d ago
rainslacker2046d ago

Games aren't typically priced based on the amount, or quality of the content. There are some instances where they're cheaper because they're cheaper to make, but games are priced at what the publisher feels they'll sell for. History has shown that more often than not, games will sell for that price, and that they wouldn't necessarily sell better if they were cheaper. Even if they sold better at say $50 instead of $60, they'd still have to sell 17% more copies at a lower cost, and that may not happen, so they'd end up losing money.

The pricing of games is where it's at mostly across the board, because of this notion that if a game isn't priced at the $60 norm for a AAA title, then it's somehow less of a game. It's a psychological thing among the consumer.

Jinger2047d ago

Then Spidey and GoW and all SP only games should be adjusted as well.

UCForce2047d ago

That’s a different story and it’s depend. Spider Man and God Of War have production value that worth 60$.

AspiringProGenji2047d ago

Neither of those games had MP to begin with and dropped it for not reason, so bad example

TheDriz2047d ago

Agree with you 100% its funny how everyone ignores the other side of the coin lol. NO SINGLE PLAYER!!!! No multiplayer could easily be complained about for a ton of games as well. Lets all complain instead of being productive humans.

gangsta_red2047d ago

@ucforce
"Spider Man and God Of War have production value that worth 60$."

And this CoD doesn't?

@progenji
So because SP isn't in the game it should cost less? Even though new modes and the Zombie campaign are added? How does that make any sense?

GoW and SM are perfect examples if you want to use the OP's logic.

2047d ago
Poopmist2046d ago

Yeah they aren't worth $60 imo. Imma wait for $25. $1 per hour at a minimum of entertainment with a game is my rule.

rainslacker2046d ago (Edited 2046d ago )

I'm not saying you believe what you say, as you're showing the absurdity of the OP, but I want to expand on the topic.

$60 is the expected price for both SP and MP games with the amount of content they have. Even if they have less content, or lower quality content.

In this case, people are assuming that because there is less content than there was before at the same price, that it isn't worth as much. I feel that is a logical argument on the surface, as they've removed content to what people have come to expect. However, it also ignores any and all real market conditions, and what these games are valued at by the people actually buying them.

Any number of games release with less content. RDR2 is going to be a huge game. If we went solely on content, we could say that that game should be twice the price. But that's not how the market works.

If people really wanted to fight for this lower costs based on dev costs thing, they should extend that to markets of scale. Where a game that sells much more, should sell for less, because this type of thinking assumes that the publishers will be happy with a set amount for return on investment, and anything after that is just a bonus. But that's not how things really work.

Jinger2046d ago

@Rainslacker

No I don't actually believe that Spidey and GoW should be adjusted. I was just using it as a reverse argument to his baseless comment. I am fine with a game being full price with SP or MP ONLY as long as that package includes enough content that I deem worthy of full price.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 2046d ago
2047d ago Replies(1)
Thomaticus2046d ago

They can keep the price the same, but I think we should have gotten more MP maps at launch.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2046d ago
PhoenixUp2047d ago

I’d still prefer a single player mode

Nothing you say can convince me otherwise

TheDriz2047d ago

Closed mindedness for the win!

2047d ago
AnubisG2046d ago (Edited 2046d ago )

Closed mindedness and personal preference is not the same thing you child.

If you are ok to spend the same amount of money for less content, that's your own personal preference.

TheDriz2046d ago

And name calling too! Golly you guys sure are great lol. So angry over video game articles

Eidolon2047d ago

Who wouldn't, or a cheaper game. I think it's mostly just hate over COD and the publishers/developers decisions. Guarantee, just like the 3% of people who buy COD and beat the SP. this outrage is mostly from people who weren't even going to buy the game, or have never even played COD SP. Prove me wrong.

2047d ago
RealtorMDandDC2046d ago

I've purchased every COD except this one due to principle. I'm one of the minorities that played every single player campaign. I also played MP and was always pretty good. The fact that COD went MP only at full price ++ and micro-transactions is unacceptable to me. Most games that follow this model is FREE.

Eidolon2046d ago (Edited 2046d ago )

Overwatch isn't free. Why can't COD charge full price? Only Fornite's Battle Royale is free, without Trophies/Achievements, and the equivalent zombie portion costs $40+, less on sale of course, after a year. So isn't it unfair that Overwatch is still $30+ after 2+ years. Battlefront 1 didn't even get this much hate. The hate is coming from the fact that COD had SP previously. But you know what, only a very small percent of the buyers actually play the SP. Watch, the sales aren't going to be that much worse, if at all, probably better.

AnubisG2046d ago

I have been buying CoD every single year since the first one. I always playe the campaign and maybe a little mp but not likely. This year I did not buy because no sp campaign. If there was an sp campaign I would have.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2046d ago
Vegamyster2047d ago

I want one too but i can't say I'm shocked, apparently only 4% of people who owned BO3 completed the campaign which is shockingly low compared to the other games in the series.

Eidolon2047d ago

No one gave a shit that Overwatch is a MP only experience launched at $60 on console with MUCH less content than COD BLOPS 4, no one bats an eye because it's Blizzard. Treyarch maybe wants to stray away from SP, since MP is the bread and butter of COD and only a very small percentage of people actually play the SP portion, yet people are making a huge fuss over it because COD was once a great SP franchise, developers changes, and times are chaning, get over yourself.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2046d ago
aaronlif102047d ago

Of course it is! Could you imagine how much better COD 4 would have been if it had scrapped the campaign?! They totally ruined that game by including a single player campaign. Games like this should cater only to the multiplayer demographic. Especially if it means less work for them. Money is the most important thing anyway, and as they predicted, everyone would eat this game up regardless of whether they included a single player campaign. I suppose I am happy for them. Just a little background for everyone who emboldened the developers to continue this practice, this game was originally going to have a single player mode. They were working on both a battle royal mode and the campaign. They decided they couldn't finish the campaign in time and so they scrapped it completely. Every previous COD game in recent history has included multiplayer content. It has always been in addition to the core game. They scrapped the core game, threw together some extremely half assed battle royal map made entirely from old recycled multiplayer maps, and sold to the public what would normally have been bonus content to the core game, but for full price. That is exactly what happened. And they knew they could do this and still sell well. The gaming media played their role by making it seem like this was some bold and logical decision. It wasn't. It was a matter of them not being able to finish what they started and selling it with a core complement of the game being discarded as a result. You all want single player campaign games to disappear? Great. Bioshock, halo, half life, MW4...lets just forget any single player games and only cater to multiplayer. I may have supported this game if I didn't know the backstory to what unfolded behind the scenes. But I'm not supporting what they did here. Don't act like this was done to be bold or fresh. It wasn't.

TheDriz2047d ago

Tell me what other knowledge you have about developing games. You seem to know it all.

2047d ago
Show all comments (156)
290°

Cancelled Call of Duty Game "NX1" Gameplay Footage, Black Ops 4 "War" Mode" Surface

A cancelled Call of Duty game titled "NX1" had footage surface online, along with a Black Ops 4 unreleased mode called "War."

RaidenBlack116d ago

looks like the OG Infinite Warfare

Profchaos115d ago

Yeah it does look good wonder why it was canned

EvertonFC115d ago

Probably a proper game with no MT and they didn't see any profits 😂🤣

Name Last Name115d ago

That Neversoft logo took me back to Tony Hawk days. Sad to see this cancellation led to the studio closure.

Juancho51115d ago

It’s always sad to see great concepts destroyed so deep into development. They obviously had a lot of ideas and aren’t happy about it. Now withe layoffs even more videos like this will surface soon.

Show all comments (8)
70°

Call of Duty: Black Ops 4 - Cancelled Campaign Details Leak, Four Years Later

Details of the cancelled campaign from Call of Duty: Black Ops 4 – the only game in the franchise without a dedicated single-player mode – have been leaked after four years.

370°

Xbox Fans Call Out 'Activision's Greed' Over Call Of Duty Digital Prices

This week's Deals with Gold selection on Xbox has rubbed certain Xbox fans the wrong way, as several Call of Duty titles are still ludicrously priced - despite being discounted by up to 67% off over the next few days.

Read Full Story >>
purexbox.com
VersusDMC993d ago

How is 20 dollars for X360 call of duty games "ludicrously" overpriced?

And with Activision's lawer bills skyrocketing at the moment you are not going to be seeing deep discounts for a bit.

Chevalier993d ago

Pretty sure that's the sale off that's 60% off. After the sale ends that 360 game is still listed at $49.99, right not its $19.99 because the 60% off.

VersusDMC992d ago

I guess they can wait for the next sale then.

SullysCigar992d ago

It's nice to see the Xbox community stand up for themselves though. That's been needed for a long time.

InUrFoxHole992d ago

For a long time? Its the reason xbox is killing it this gen.

senorfartcushion992d ago

Lawsuits don’t cost billions, they’re ALWAYS going to be fine for money.

They could stack their bills on the ground and fill half the continent of Africa at this point.

RaiderNation992d ago

Because Xbox fans are so used to playing games on the Xbox EBT subscription service, the idea of paying anything for a game seems ludicrous to them.

MadLad992d ago (Edited 992d ago )

You pay for the service.

Do you have Amazon Video?
Hulu?
Netflix?

It's a subscription service. Not a charity. You're literally going at people over the idea of using a pro consumer service, and that's the real joke here.

thorstein992d ago

When records were sold, they were eventually replaced by tapes, which cost less to manufacture, but more to buy. Then CDs came along and were cheaper to manufacture, but cost more at retail. Digital, of course, is the cheapest yet, but billion dollar corporations want to charge the same.

And no, that money is not going to the person sitting in the chair actually making the game.

It is pure and utter greed from people who don't need any more money.

InUrFoxHole992d ago

Lol calm down Bobby. You crapped on thus franchise.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 992d ago
autobotdan992d ago (Edited 992d ago )

"Many have also noted how the multiplayer in several of these titles is either dead or filled with hackers, meaning players are paying a hefty sum for a short campaign and potentially some zombie modes."

With these clear truths the decades older COD games should be permanently 19.99 regular price and sale prices 7.99 minimum

autobotdan992d ago

Typo sale prices 2.99 minimum and 9.99 maximum. Older COD tiles seven years old or older should never be over 20 dollars regular price

senorfartcushion992d ago

I have paid less than 3 dollars for some AAA PS4 games, old 360 CoD games should not be $20

FanboysKiller992d ago

Any fps game runs by the quirk engine follows this logic
Eat
Sleep
Die instantly
Repeat
As if the main purpose of the game more of "repeat" than the actual gameplay experience , any noob in this game will tell you his mind stucked in repeating the sequence number of deaths than the gameplay itself , what a complete pile of #.

EvertonFC992d ago

It's why I don't play cod anymore, my 45yr old hands can't compete with these kids 😂 🤣
1 kill to every 10 deaths is not fun

John_McClane992d ago

Don't let that stop you if you enjoy the game, it's actually pretty good for hand/eye coordination.

lipton101992d ago

Try Escape from Tarkov. It forces you to slow down and think. I’m not a fan of the ADD speed of CoD

Father__Merrin992d ago

All the back compat titles are cheap listing when you scroll through them u till you come to black ops it's a complete rip off

Rhythmattic992d ago (Edited 992d ago )

Well... Don't buy it..... Is it really that hard to comprehend?
Everything else you choose to purchase with your hard earned cash , so should games be held to the same reasoning....
Just don't give em the cash....

Entitlement that's bizarre, from the publisher and from the consumer.... Thats pretty fkd up if you think about it...

GhostofHorizon992d ago

It's hilarious that some people don't see this as an option.

MadLad992d ago

Bananas now cost $30 a pound. There's no good reason for it, but if you want bananas, there you go.

You don't have to buy them.

It's about their constant greed when handling the franchise. Nobody has to buy anything, but when a company doesn't follow corporate norms when selling their product; overpricing their old wares just because they can, the consumer is allowed to call that out.

GhostofHorizon992d ago

Consumer can call them out, but I think they are going about it the wrong way.

The reason they get away with everything they do is simply because they can. They can charge $20 for a skin pack because people will gladly buy it. There is plenty of competition for FPS games, it's not like it's a niche market.

I know it's easier to blame and demand better from Activision than people that keep buying these overpriced items. If they weren't being bought, Activision would lower the price though. People like to pretend to take the high road but wouldn't you rather sell the banana for $30 than $3 if people are willing to buy it?

franwex992d ago

@therealtedcruz

I think there’s a virus destroying the banana and may even go extinct. So maybe that’s why.

I think it’s happen before too.

MadLad991d ago

A small subset buys those skins and whatnot. Most players don't. The "whale" mindset is pretty accurate across the board, where there's a small handful who buy a lot, and most who don't buy any. Either way, that means they're imposed on the majority either way.

That's different from overpricing your game though. Activision easily makes their money off every release, then milks it until the next release, then throws it away. They never put significant sales on even a release from several cycles ago. Whether it sells or not.

And I mean, yeah; if I were a business, I'd probably want to make as much money as possible.
But I'm not a business; I'm a consumer, thus I find many businesses to be complete assholes.

Rhythmattic986d ago

And people are still blaming the high prices but suggest they're still wiling to buy it... Not too smart are you peoples....

Its a non regulated pricing structure, sure , many play by the status-quo , but to actually complain by complaining, instead of standing your ground and not buying it, by buying it , you are the reason its happening....

Idiots, Idiots everywhere.... What? So those that are complaining don't want to pay the money, but cant do without it?

FFS. Entitlement level 5000...
Drink some cement and harden the Fk up!

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 986d ago
Sitdown992d ago

The article and title isn't saying that people are buying it, its simply saying that they are calling them out for greed. I guess you had a problem with people calling out Microsoft for trying to increase the price of Live, and don't understand how voicing concern led to them backing away from the decision.

Teflon02992d ago

People need to put that energy into Nintendo's Pricing over Activisions tbh. They're focused on the wrong things

Rhythmattic986d ago (Edited 986d ago )

Greed? Ok... Dont buy it and prove that by being greedy , they got it wrong... Not that hard to understand is it?
To Add... I haven't bought Cod since MW2.... Because of these exact practices.... Fact.

Show all comments (54)