Forums - Gaming Discussion - Black Ops 4 Is Setting A Dangerous Precedent

CuCabeludo said:

Who the hell cares about CoD campaign? Most players don't even touch it, just play MP.

Read the thread. Several people care.
Most =/= All.

BlackBeauty said:
No one cares about the campaign.

False.

Besides, Call of Duty directly competes with Battlefield... Guess who gets a purchase from me and who doesn't? ;)



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Around the Network

Well, we already have Overwatch and Battlefront without single. EA and Activision - worst enemy of every true gamers.

And this idea is really strange. Main competitor - Battlefield, better than CoD in almost every aspects. Graphics, shooting mechanic, destructible environment, war machines. Only single campaign was better in CoD.

Last edited by Kemono - on 18 May 2018

It's one of the few times I see a game name and don't want to see anything else about it, would make me worry if it caught on, I'm not sure I could handle playing Final Fantasy IIIIIIIIIIIIIII



Fancy hearing me on an amateur podcast with friends gushing over one of my favourite games? https://youtu.be/1I7JfMMxhf8

alternine said:

So they cut out the single player campaign for a cash grab Battle Royale mode that will be riddled with microtransactions Im sure. If BO4 sells well, it sends a message to the industry. A bad one. 

 

How do you think this will play out? Sound off.

Of course it will be riddled with microtransactions and pay to win BS of all sorts plus maybe new dirty tricks. It's Activision that we are talking about here, one of the evil 4 (EA, Activision, Ubisoft, Konami).

So don't expect consumer friendly behaviors from these companies ever again, only by totally mass boycotting those publishers can people hope for change and well, the Star Wars Battlefront debacle showed that people (Whales) kept buying and paying whatever. I heard they made a crap load of money off microtransactions and they recently announced that these GaaS models are here to stay, regardless of prosecution in some European countries.

For the time being I don't really care since the games I love are not impacted, all the generic mass games like COD, Battlefront, GTA, Shadow of Mordor, Tom Clancy etc are not games I care about even if they had never been sullied by lootboxes and the likes. As long as my Dark Souls, The Last of Us, God of War, The Witness, Bloodborne etc sort of games are clean I don't really care. Well I'd love to care but it's not like my caring will make people get wiser. Your asses are owned by the evil 4 and your games are beyond saving, sorry and good luck.



It's a dying franchise anyway. Let them fuck it up for all I care. It'll just speed things up that were already set in motion.



Around the Network
Ganoncrotch said:
It's one of the few times I see a game name and don't want to see anything else about it, would make me worry if it caught on, I'm not sure I could handle playing Final Fantasy IIIIIIIIIIIIIII

Gotta give you props for actually counting out each and every key stroke. Impressive lol.



It sends a message that some gamers simply prefer multiplayer experiences than the tired scripted AI formula which for a shooter - makes little sense given where technology is at.

I welcome and prefer multiplayer gaming. Single player games are mostly dead to me.



Seventizz said:
It sends a message that some gamers simply prefer multiplayer experiences than the tired scripted AI formula which for a shooter - makes little sense given where technology is at.

I welcome and prefer multiplayer gaming. Single player games are mostly dead to me.

Regarding Single Player Games vs Multiplayer games, I am the absolute opposite of you it seems.

Multiplayer games are nothing more than a redundant social experiment to me. If I felt the need to interact through a game with other people I'd get a board game like Chess and I would play it with people being actually in front of me. Mutliplayer online is nothing more than an extension of this paradigm.

Whereas Single Player video gaming is intrinsically speaking original and logic. Playing against the computer is a challenge specific to this day and age of electronics and computers, you don't need an actual person if you are challenged by an AI and if sociability is what you seek then you play against people that are actually in front of you. But playing on a machine online against people is nothing more than an extension of the social gaming activity paradigm of past generations. It's a choice I guess but not mine.

I can't even say that multiplayer games are dead to me since they were never alive to begin with.



AlfredoTurkey said:
Ganoncrotch said:
It's one of the few times I see a game name and don't want to see anything else about it, would make me worry if it caught on, I'm not sure I could handle playing Final Fantasy IIIIIIIIIIIIIII

Gotta give you props for actually counting out each and every key stroke. Impressive lol.

Hey, I could have been talking about FFIIIIIIIIIIIII-2 or the FFIIIIIII-R you don't know!



Fancy hearing me on an amateur podcast with friends gushing over one of my favourite games? https://youtu.be/1I7JfMMxhf8

Well, i won't be playing it. The campaign mode, is all that i play.