COD Black Ops 4 to lose campaign!
I knew that a battle royal mode was going to feature in the new Call of Duty, I had already made peace with the idea of Activision jumping on the battle royal band wagon. I knew it had to happen as free for alls featuring dozens of players is popular right now thanks to PUBG and Fortnite, COD has always been popular for it’s online multiplayer so I guess this was the natural evolution of things, you know alongside their single player campaign that is also featured in every COD title… wait what was that I just read, Black Ops 4 to not include a single player campaign…. ARE YOU KIDDING ME! Let’s back up for a second, one of the biggest draws people have to the series is being left out?? I know people love the online play and zombies (thank god that is staying at least!) but there are people out there who actually like single play FPS games.
The thing that makes this little revelation worse is that the new battle royal online mode is actually replacing the campaign, that’s right, they are ditching the single player campaign in favour of a damn battle royal. Like I said I knew this would be included, it is even rumoured that Red Dead Redemption 2 will feature one so naturally Call of Duty would too, but at the expense of something that has featured in every major Call of Duty title since its initial release in 2003. How on earth does Activision think this is a good idea? I have long thought that Call of Duty has had its day, I thought that perhaps a break for a year or two would help, not demolishing one of the main draws the series has!
Let’s think about this logically, yes many players get these games for the online multiplayer, but it is essentially the same year on year, what is the only real difference each instalment has? Its campaign. If Activision goes ahead with making Call of Duty all multiplayer, then there is absolutely no reason for a year on year release of a title, the single player campaigns are fundamental in giving a COD game its identity, not only that but it determines the theme, the technology and the weapons that will feature. If Activision wishes to jump on the multiplayer only bandwagon then great that means there should be a COD game every 2-3 years minimum instead of every year. I would like to point out however instalments such as Infinite Warfare had mediocre multiplayer but a great campaign! Without the campaign that game could have gone down as being one of the worst COD games ever, though I am sure they are still people that would put it at the bottom of the pile.
I understand the wanting of keeping up with competition when it comes to competitive multiplayer, honestly I do. I love multiplayer as much as the next gamer, that doesn’t mean I constantly want to be competing against other players, sometimes it’s nice to just kick back and relax with some single player instead.
If the rumours are true that the time constraint has featured in the decision making process here, then I would like to point out the 2 years it took Ubisoft to release Origins was fantastic, the quality was so much better, rather than rushing out another title. Activision should do the same, the campaign could be incredible with that amount of time spent on it, the multiplayer could be second to none. Instead they have opted to quite clearly rush the game out, to hell with the campaign many players actually enjoy. They are throwing away a critical component to the Call of Duty experience, a true shame. Ghosts is widely (correctly) seen as the series low point but I’d like to argue that Activision officially don’t know what to do with this series anymore and have thrown away one of my main reasons for buying it most years.
What do you think? Are you sad to see the campaign go or have Activision made the right decision?
Strange Girl Gaming 
I’m actually surprised that (if true) this hasn’t happened sooner. I’m not a CoD fan, and yeah, if I played these games I would only play single player (I actually have read that Black Ops is good in a crazy way) but I would wager that there’s stats out there for trophy/achievement percentages that verify that not a lot of people play the single player portion of these games and just jump straight online. I was thinking that for a lot of the 360/PS3 generation that I’m surprised Activision didn’t break up these games and sell them in parts.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Black ops was very good which is why I am so shocked they have chosen to make this move with a black ops game. You’d be quite surprised at the completion rate for the recent COD game, I think it was around 39% on Xbox one which is quite high. But I have no doubt the completion rate for the campaign has been low on the lesser received titles.
LikeLike
Fuck Call of Duty and their fad chasing ways, I ONLY play single player and so this… THIS is just another reason while I’ll never play a CoD game again!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Not going to buy it as I buy for the story.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If they are going to do that, then they should only charge half price or less. Black Ops storyline was actually pretty decent and I enjoyed it so for them to take it away in favor a battle royale is crazy. I already have Fortnite, I don’t need a realistic version…that’s what PUBG is for lol
LikeLiked by 1 person
I completely agree, if they want to cut out a chunk of the game then a chunk of the price should go too. I thought the black ops games had always had good campaigns so not including one for black ops 4 baffles me. Exactly! Those 2 games have the battle royale covered lol
LikeLike
This is almost as bad as when they said Halo Guardians had no split screen! I rent COD each year and play till I’ve finished the story and played some online. Rarely will I buy a COD game because the online side isn’t for me. What gets me in is good story and fun replay able zombies so ditching the story on Black Ops, usually the best of the line of stories is so disappointing
LikeLike
Black Ops 4 cutting out the campaign mode is very disappointing and a big mistake in my opinion. The campaign is the main reason I play a call of duty game
LikeLiked by 2 people
World at war is my favourite cod because of the amazing story mode that climaxes in an attack on the Reichstag. It introduced zombies and had decent online.
The best thing about infinite warfare was campaign.
I thought ww2 was their attempt at getting back to world at war quality but if what you say is true they’ve just flushed cod down the toilet.
I’m personally not a fan of battle royale online modes and think cod online has got it right as it is.
Thanks for informing me.
LikeLike
Just running through the trophies for Call of Duty WW2 and whilst based on the trophy percentage not many people do play the game for its campaign, I for one will miss it. Yes the campaign is normally silly, stupid and occasionally just awful not every game can have a Battle Royal mode. Maybe they could try a full campaign using Zombies instead?
LikeLiked by 2 people
I’ve always been one of those players that completes the campaign, I thought the WW2 was a true return to form for the campaign but they clearly didn’t want to capitalise on that. I agree, there are already plenty of battle royales out there, there is no need for them to appear in every shooter. Now that is a campaign I would be very interested in playing, who doesn’t love zombies! 🧟♀️
LikeLiked by 1 person
Whats the most frustrating to me the most is that Call of Duty already has a Battle Royale mode on Activision’s Call of Duty online (only available in China). That means that Activision or Treyarch isn’t putting any effort into the battle royale mode so there is no point to ditch the campaign if you don’t need to do anything for the battle royale.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If that’s the case what the hell are they playing at!? They don’t even need to work on the newest mode for the game so cutting out the campaign in favour of battle royale has become even more pointless.
LikeLike