While there seems to be a fair amount of positive chatter surrounding Call of Duty: Black Ops 4, the lack of a single player campaign remains a point of contention for some. An action packed story has been part of the Call of Duty franchise for years, so to see the latest game ditch the mode entirely was irksome for many fans.
In Game Informer's latest video interview regarding the game, design director David Vonderhaar and co-studio head Dan Bunting are put on the spot to answer the question: where's the campaign? Bunting responds by making the point that a game in development can change a lot as it moves forward. "The game that we are making has evolved over time, and that's just a part of development," Bunting said. "I can't even remember a single game that we've made that hasn't had a dramatic change in the prototyping stage, because that's what prototyping is for."
He continues: "We started this game with a very big ambition. And that big ambition was that we were gonna make a game that was entirely built around social gameplay experiences, because that's what we feel we're most passionate about in the studio."
Give the video a watch and see what you make of their answers. Are you disappointed in the lack of a campaign, or do you think Treyarch made the right call? Don't forget to deploy your parachute in the comments below.
[source youtube.com]
Comments 36
It's still pretty disappointing to me. I know hardly anyone plays these solely for the campaigns, but I've loved all the Black Ops campaigns so far. III was so trippy and different, but I really enjoyed it.
I wouldn't mind it if they called it something else, hell, they could call it turd warfare for all I care. But if you're calling it Black Ops 4, then I'd like to see another campaign about intrigue, espionage, and psychological issues. And that line about their games changing drastically during prototyping... somehow with it being Call of Duty we're talking about I kind of doubt that.
STFU, Treyarch. You're just being lazy...
Mmhmm. Because Battlefield still has decent single player even though it smashes COD MP. I’d love to back to COD2. Such a great game. I want back days of the campaigns being critically acclaimed. It used to make COD game of the year contenders. Guess when that stopped happening.
I still remember CoD4's campaign very fondly. What a cracking game that was.
@Quintumply Really glad they remastered it, and I wish they had continued doing that. I'd love remasters of World at War and Black Ops 1.
I know most people don't care about the campaign, but I do. I've been playing them since the first one back in 2003 on pc and have always been looking forward to the next one. However, considering their previous attempt with BLOPS3, it might actually be for the best.
@jFug C'mon, man. Just because they're going in a direction you don't like doesn't mean they're not working hard on the game.
no thank, not waste money on Multiplayer game like this game. i stopped buy COD games since i bought Advanced Warfare
I love all these different terms used to describe always online or service games.
honestly i still think that they saw the Fortnite Money train and decided to hop on board that
but the thing is a single player campaign is important for a lot of players including myself so i won't be buying this
Its probably the right business decision sure. Most of cods player base is online. But as someone who doesnt like repeatedly being killed online and doesnt have the time to invest in getting considerably better, i have no interest in the game. It sounds pretty fun but i guarentee it will be forgotten about in 24 months while people still eulogise about cod 2 and modern warfare years after their releases. Those games are remembered for their story, not the online component.
And im still knarked they chose to call this blops 4 despite not continuing the story. Sounds like - from the article - a sp mode was conceived initially, but then fortnite money won the day and it got chopped.
Nope this is not for me. But how about this. Fancy a war game this year? You wont find me playing CoD or even Battlefield. Instead i will be playing valkria chronicles 4. A title far more deserving of my time, respect and money
I think the br mode on this will be so highly rated the game will probably go on to be a cod all time best seller.
Which in other words means "We decided to stitch up all our longterm fans and focus on those to blow their hard earned wage on map packs and micro transactions for this Cod :1.5" rubbish because with no campaign how the hell can it be called a sequel!
They're probably lying. Other than the fact call of duty is the same game every year, I think they found their Cash cow and they're going all in on microtransactions. Doesn't bother me because I haven't played a single one, but screw Activision.
@Grim-Tuesday Yes Call of Duty is the same thing every year. Let's see. For 3 years we had CoD in the future with advanced movement and jetpacks and such. Last year we had boots on the ground and the setting takes place during WWII. This year it's a squad based game play set in the near future where holding points seem to be the main focus on game play.
Yep it's the same game every year, of course I guess they all look the same to someone like you who opens their mouth before looking into things.
I’ve purchased every single COD game ever made, this will be the first one I don’t buy. I’m on the fence above it Battlefield about as well, the vignettes they did in Battlefield 1 just didn’t didn’t resonate with me.
Not for me this year. No campaign is a deal breaker that's the main thing I'm interested in. MP is a bonus personally.
Never bought COD for the campaign so I really couldn't care less
I love it when gamers say "I don't care for the campaign" yet they play it anyway everytime a cod or BF game has come out. The end of the day a campaign is extra content for a game that's supposedly triple a and cost £60. To be paying £60 just for online is a joke even if the map maybe free it's still doesn't cut the fact the game is a shadow of its former self.
Ok i hate the forced sociale, Battle Royale, no singleplayer FFS Treyarch. 😢
@Giygas_95 I loved the first one. The second not so great the 3rd was so bad i could not even finish it. 😑
@Flaming_Kaiser I love all of them though 2 is slightly my least favorite. I just loved how dark and weird 3 was. I didn't mind the franchise doing something completely weird and off the wall just once, and I loved how trippy some of the later missions got. The DNI abilities also made the combat feel a bit fresher. They're really fun to combine with your gunplay. All that said, I understand why people don't like 3.
@Giygas_95 Does it get better after the first mission i just hate it that much. The BO2 was so ugly on the PS3 i thought my TV was broken. But i loved the the 1st one brilliant singleplayer and fantastic multiplayer but then again i loved MW3. 😜
@Flaming_Kaiser If you didn't play past the first mission (and I don't blame you), that's why you didn't like it. The first mission is boring since you're basically playing an action movie where almost everything is scripted. Though that could be said of a lot of CoD games, the missions after the first one open up a bit and allow you to do things more you own way with multiple lanes through larger areas, and you also get a chip implant that basically makes you a walking computer. You can unlock lots of abilities for it like making enemy exo suits attack the enemies wearing them, make enemy robots explode, turn invisible for a little while, hack and take control of drones, and a lot of other abilities. The story also becomes easily the weirdest in the franchise.
Well, then it's not for me, I'm only in it for the single player.
I’m disappointed they didn’t take it further and completely break down the entire game so that I could pick and choose exactly what I want. 25 for modes, 12 for individual maps, 10 for characters, 7 for guns, 5 for perks and 4 for cosmetics.
Actually I really loved to be surprised. So instead of picking, keep those prices mentioned above but make that mode loot boxes, map loot boxes, character loot boxes, etc.
Just in case this went over your head, I am being an intelligent donkey.
It's fine if they don't want to put a campaign in it this year, but I'd expect the game to cost less to make up for the content it's lacking.
@Tasuki It's the same game every year.
Seems a logical choice to me. The campaigns take a LOT of resources to develop, and pretty much the only one to get widespread positive acclaim was CoD4. The vast majority of sales come from interest in the multiplayer, so dedicate more time and money to that instead.
No single player campaign no buy. I'm sure this fan base will eat up next yrs then this one will be left to rot.
@Grim-Tuesday I love the explanation you put in your rebuttal. Oh wait...
@Jaz007 My explanation is very simple. Call of duty is the same game every year. The one time they changed it then people threw a fit, but they just added futuristic equipment and double jump. It still looked like call of duty and this one hasn't changed.
The black ops 3 campaign was a nonsensical nightmare, I think they just couldn't piece something together without starting over. Its kind of sad because black ops 2 was excellent.
I despise the words 'social media' So now 'social gameplay' to feels me with dread Thank GOD for SONY's developers who will make AMAZING single player games
Activision have seen Fortnite with how much they're making and want to replicate it, they've upset a lot of people who do play the single player (including myself) but they're only bothered about the here and now and what the trend is. Without a single player campaign it's not for me and quite a few others but I'm also someone who won't buy COD or BF until it's around 20 quid or less as I only play the campaign. In stark contrast to some of the smaller/indie games, day 1 for Guacamelle 2 and I enjoyed Rime enough on plus to go buy a physical copy, both of those games leave out the BS the AAA games industry seems to have in it like lootboxes and microtransactions, they just give you the game.
Focus on "social gameplay experiences" - what a lot of old guff. It's just a focus on making a bigger profit.
And that is absolutely FINE. Go for your lives Activision. It's a private company, not a service provider or an artist. They don't owe us jack. As I was reading in another article on PSQ, there is simply more investment and less return on campaign content than on multiplayer. I accept that.
There is no "spirit of the series" that they must stick with. It's a brand name applied to a game. They happen to have released almost the same game each time previously which built up our expectation, but it's their name to do what they want with. This year they're doubling down on the multiplayer dollars and trying to expand the appeal of that.
I won't be buying this game though, and I bought the previous three. Such is life. I didn't but the first Titanfall, but I did get the second one.
Tap here to load 36 comments
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...