So, there’s a rumour doing the rounds right now that the newer Call of Duty game, mysterious names Black Ops 4, May not launch with a single player campaign. According to an insider source speaking to Polygon, Treyarch have been focussed so heavily on the multiplayer component that they haven’t had time to develop a single player story campaign.
This may not come as a huge surprise to many players. The series is better known for its multiplayer and zombies modes than it is for its campaigns these days. Having said that, I was partial to the occasional CoD campaign and wouldn’t buy a new entry in the series for a solely multiplayer experience. Maybe that’s just me though.
The fact there’s such a push on multiplayer ties in with a further rumour that they may be looking to include the mode de jour: Battle Royale. As a multiplayer mode in a fast paced game like Call of Duty, this is an interesting, though unsurprising, inclusion.
At any rate, a rumour is just a rumour until it’s proven true or otherwise, and the game is due for a proper reveal in May, so perhaps take this with a pinch of salt for the time being.
I Played The Game! 
I feel like this has been rumoured for several of the last few Call of Duties, and they always ended up putting a campaign in anyway. The campaign makes for better “trailer material” than single player, after all, thanks to its setpieces and cutscenes — though I feel like it would probably make sense for them to make a completely multiplayer experience at this point, as I know a significant proportion of yearly CoD buyers get it just for multiplayer. Why blow the budget on big actors and graphic assets players will see once, when you could either save money or invest more into that multiplayer experience?
Wouldn’t be surprised to see them attempting to ride the Battle Royale gravy train either, though I feel anyone coming into the game late and trying to topple the combo of PUBG and Fortnite is onto a losing battle from the start there.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I feel there’s stuff space for Battle Royale games, assuming they offer something unique. PUBG and Fortnite are quite different from each other, and The Darwin Project also has a unique spin. I don’t think anything will reach the same levels as those behemoths though.
In terms of CoD, I’m sure one of the older entries allowed you to buy (digitally) either the full game or just the multiplayer, which seems like a smart business model if you ask me. Honestly, going full multiplayer feels very much like moving closer to the “live service” model that’s all the rage these days.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It was… Black Ops 3, I think? That had a multiplayer-only edition for PS3 and Xbox 360, and the “full” game for PS4 and Xbone. I don’t know if they split up the digital release, but I do remember the physical release being multiplayer-only for PS3 and Xbox 360 because I was working at Game at the time and had to continually explain that to people! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yeah, I remember that happening too. I think Black Ops 2 on PC is the one I was thinking of. You could just buy a multiplayer pack if that’s all you wanted.
LikeLike
I’m one of the weird people who only plays the CoDs for the single-player, so I hope this is just a rumor. It’s a series that goes all-out on making very expensive, very polished single-player experiences that are only seen by a minority of purchasers, and I love ‘em – Infinite Warfare in particular was the best Gundam game ever. (Barring the lack of, you know, giant robots. Work with me.)
If they were going to drop the campaign from any of the CoD sub-series, though, BLOPS makes the most sense. Looking back through the current-gen entries, BLOPS3 has a barely 10% completion rate, at least on the PS4, while the last entries from the other two teams (Infinite Warfare, WW2) are in the 20-25% range.
Still, not a great trend. Hopefully they get enough pushback that it doesn’t actually come to pass.
LikeLiked by 2 people
I think the fact that the Black Ops plots started to get utterly bonkers is part of the reason why this is the sub franchise to drop it. Still, it is something I’d miss. What I noted was that this is “at launch”, so perhaps it will be added later? Knowing Activision though, the game will be full price and the single player campaign will be £25 DLC.
LikeLike
BLOPS3 is actually one of my favorite CoD campaigns, just because it’s such a weird sci-fi story. This is not a widely-held opinion. 🙂 but then I liked CoD3’s campaign too so I may just not be very picky.
I fear you are probably spot on with the “single-player campaign as post-launch DLC”, if we even get one this time ‘round.
LikeLiked by 1 person
How is COD not a dead franchise by now? Not including a single-player element is the best decision they can make because their single player is so incredibly tacked on that it makes so difference anymore. Everyone one wants the multiplayer…the bad multiplayer at that.
Treyarch don’t even need to try anymore. They just sit back and laugh.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’ll sell tons of copies regardless, but I do wonder how well the last couple of CoD games sold compared to the peak of the franchise’s popularity.
I will say I don’t mind the single player campaigns as a sort of “popcorn movie” experience, even more so if local co-op is included! Either way, I expect that a single player campaign will be released later down the line, likely as paid DLC…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Imagine….not including a story then adding it in as paid DLC, Treyarch would be eating alive by the gaming community but will somehow still sell more game coming out around that time.
Gaming has become a poor imitation of what it was, too many corporate commanders and less gamers these days. Publishers aren’t gamers and they never will be, they don’t see video games how we see video games and that’s what’s wrong with video games. If publishers cared more about quality of video games and less about pennie pinching to save a couple of quid on development then we might start to see progression again in video games.
I think games like God of War and more story focused games AAA titles are becoming less and less so when they do come out we all jump on them and devour them whole.
It’s a sad affair really.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sad perhaps, but it has opened the door to genuinely interested indie developers. The likes of Ninja Theory bringing out Hellblade speaks volumes about what can be accomplished with genuine passion and talent. The AAA market will always be there, but there’s always plenty of quality to be found elsewhere.
LikeLike
Considering how poorly written these scenarios tend to be, that might end up being for the best, though I wonder if it would be a wise decision in the long run. It would run the risk of the game having no reason to be revisited once everyone moves onto the next installment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
From that regard I suppose the smart business model would be that of Rainbow Six: Siege, although I don’t see that happening.
Whilst the campaigns aren’t great, I enjoy them when they include local co-op. I’m expecting a DLC campaign to be released after the fact, probably paid too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That’d be a good way to get me to never play one again.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hey! That sounds like a good move to me. More money left for quality indie titles.
LikeLike
If that is how they end up going this year, I will probably sit it out. Last year was the first time since CoD4MW that I haven’t bought a CoD game at launch and instead rented it to play the single player. I’ve not been big on CoD multiplayer since Advanced Warfare and with so many other options available (some of which are free), I just don’t see myself experiencing BlOps4.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I didn’t pick up Infinite Warfare or WW2 at all seeing as I’m pretty tired of the formula, but I am partial to the campaigns from time to time. I’m expecting it to be released down the line as paid DLC knowing Activision.
LikeLiked by 1 person