Approvals 12/3 ▼
FTLmaster (3) - 2584d ago Cancel
rpcdrag0n (4) - 2585d ago Cancel
DimensionalSound (3) - 2585d ago Cancel
psycnarf (2) - 2585d ago Cancel
200°

I Was Wrong: Call Of Duty: Black Ops 4 Doesn't Need Single-Player To Succeed

Xbox Enthusiast: Despite initially being upset about the lack of single-player in the upcoming Call of Duty: Black Ops 4, after watching the reveal event, one writer is now convinced that the game doesn't need a single-player campaign to succeed. In fact, the wide variety of content packaged in can result in Call of Duty: Black Ops 4 being the most diverse, ambitious, and potentially best game in the franchise.

Read Full Story >>
xboxenthusiast.com
Create Report !X

Add Report

Reports

+ Updates (1)- Updates (1)

Updates

Changed from Pending to Approved
Community2584d ago
gammaray132585d ago (Edited 2585d ago )

no now you are wrong, it does need single player

DarkVoyager2585d ago (Edited 2585d ago )

“no now you are wrong, it does need single player”

No it doesn’t.

“REPORT SAYS MOST PLAYERS FINISH LESS THAN HALF OF A CALL OF DUTY CAMPAIGN”

“The lowest item in the table is 2015's Black Ops III averaging at 4%. This is juxtaposed by the highest entry, Call of Duty 3, averaging at 36%.”

“Across the board, most of the games studied sit between 20-30% story participation, with the Modern Warfare series faring particularly well until the latest entry, Infinite Warfare, which slumps to 16%.”

“Last year's Call of Duty: World War II was a return to form for the series, the fourth highest entry at 29%.”

“The report also compares the SPA per popular game series. Call of Duty is lower in the table at 22%, with rival series Battlefield at 28%”

“The Halo series also sits at 25%, revealing an overall conclusion that not many players are fully engaging with the entire single-player experience in multiplayer heavy titles.”

PUBG2584d ago

I wouldn't call 1/4 of all gamers who play CoD 'very few people'. If a CoD games sells 10 million copies, and 2.5 million end up playing the single player campaign, I would say that this is actually a fairly significant number of people. I know lots of people who consider the single player campaign of CoD to be part of the full package and a major part of the experience as a whole.

AnubisG2584d ago (Edited 2584d ago )

Oh, you are writing about all these statistics but you forgott to write down that on average only 26% or less reach Prestiege 1 on CoD online multiplayer. So should they get rid of that too because of "low participation numbers"?

You people who are for some reason totally against the campaign (it baffles my mind) and ok with the fact that it won't be in this one are absolutely delusional and complete brainless zombie fanboys who like to pick and choose from the statistics to further their misguided agenda.

So 20%-30% participation in Campaign is not enugh to keep it but 26% or less in online is perfectly fine. Look how misguided you all are and got played by Activision and Treyarch. You sheep.

rainslacker2584d ago (Edited 2584d ago )

The statistic that would really matter here is how many people buy it and actually play the SP campaign, but don't spend much time in the MP....or no time at all.

Also consider that completing a game, vs actually playing the game.

For any given game, 20-50% of people is about normal for how many complete it.

Also, 25% of players for the titles you mention is actually quite a large number of people.

Curious why people feel it's OK to remove what is part of a game. Because they include something else? Why not ask for both, or more?

DarkVoyager2584d ago (Edited 2584d ago )

“Curious why people feel it's OK to remove what is part of a game. Because they include something else? Why not ask for both, or more?“

I’d love to have the whole package.

Do we have any proof the team is large enough to pull off a campaign, full on multiplayer, and an entire Battle Royale mode? Seems like an awful lot to get right.

JackBNimble2584d ago

So because DarkVoyager doesn't care about single player campaign then no one does and the game doesn't need it, great logic.

Didn't EA do this with battlefront and get some back lash?

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2584d ago
jmc88882584d ago

Call of Duty became the beast it was, not because of single player, but because of multiplayer.

Everyone knows this deep down on some level. I first bought Call of Duty for the single player... that storming of the beaches of Normandy. Fun time.

But the game became something else. It became a multiplayer phenomenon. That's what sent sales stratospheric. That's their bread and butter and they know it.

Many people are for years have been paying 60-100 to buy a multiplayer only game to them because they won't touch the campaign. Some will, some will finish it. Some obviously love the campaign.

Still though, the franchised aged. Bled sales, but still highly profitable. There was word a single player campaign was canned because Activision or whatever higher ups didn't want a time travel story. So we don't know if it was an either/or and we don't know if the other two CoD developers plan to copy a no campaign structure in their next CoD games.

But people have to see the bigger picture. To many people single player has little to no value. Blackout on the other hand, by many of these people can be seen as added value.

Blackout also seems like it's CoD trying to be Battlefield. With vehicles, elevation (as in it's a huge 3D battlefield, not just stuff within 15 feet of ground level). If they ever feel the need to copy the Battlefield way, they've had some experience and have an engine at least somewhat capable of doing that.

Blackout also appeals to casuals and youngsters. It could get millions of more sales from this. Maybe not, but this could bring in 1-2-5 million more people just because of Blackout. It really could blow up like Fortnite.

People should ask themselves if Activision put out TWO versions.
1. Single player campaign, base multiplayer, and zombies for $60
2. Single player 'missions', multiplayer, free map dlc (as been rumored), blackout battle royale, base zombies for $60

Which one do people think would sell more? I think #2 by a landslide. That's the point. Or one of them.

But getting more casuals and youngsters into CoD is also a big deal. It keeps the brand going. If you want to sell a product twenty years from now you have to lay the groundwork NOW.

There's also a bigger angle. What happens with Fortnite. Anyone? What happens when a single player game tries to throw in lootboxes or buyable stuff? Anyone?

PUBG2584d ago

Don't try to make Blackout Battle Royal to be some stand alone feature, because at the end of the day it's just another multiplayer mode. Activision's marketing seems to be working pretty good on you, and that's what they're counting on.

PrinterMan2584d ago

I actually disagree. Some of us are not competitive enough to compete in the multi player because it's no fun just dying all the time. And please nobody say 'Just git gud' as some of us just can't. I am not that caliber of a pIayer. I buy almost all the COD's and never touch the multiplayer for this reason. Therefore, I will be one lost sale for Activision. Not saying right or wrong just the fact that I will not purchase the game for this reason.

jmc88882584d ago

With Fortnite, they rake in hundreds of millions a month. With Single player games, they get boycotted.

Thus single player is a medium where they can't extract more money out of. If they try, it can screw up their game and potentially franchise.

With a battle royale mode, they can create a lootbox or battlepass or cosmetic whatever system that brings in hundreds of millions of dollars while at the same time aligning the overall product to how the biggest portion of their audience is.

They followed the money. They also get to cut the huge costs with doing the campaign.

I feel bad for people who wanted a single player campaign, and I hope future versions at least offer an option. I think it would be smart for them to at least offer a campaign for $30 separately if they don't want to package it altogether.

Think about it folks. Activision/Blizzard made 3.6 BILLION dollars from lootboxes and the like in 2016 and 4 billion in 2017. That's the usual suspects + Candy Crush. It also was the MAJORITY of their revenue.

So they want people to buy the game and then have participants willing and avenues capable of making that in-game purchases a reality.

People may not like it, but BLOPS 4 might end up being Activision's most profitable version of the game.

Kumakai2584d ago (Edited 2584d ago )

So you’ve played it then? Just curious how you know. Surely it isn’t because of some self entitled haters making a scene on the internet without really trying it, right?

oasdada2584d ago

Says xboxenthusiast.. Go figure

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2584d ago
lociefer2585d ago

* Unbuckles belt* Boy you gunna learn today !

shuvam092584d ago

Lol!!!
Honestly though, why is this even called BO4 in the first place if there isn't a story to connect it to BO3???
That sounds kinda stupid...

FallenAngel19842585d ago

Of course not but the single player campaign was the only reason I played any game in the series so this entry has already lost me

gangsta_red2584d ago

Unfortunately it seems the sp campaign wasn't that popular among the majority of the millions of CoD fans.

I can definitely understand the decision to cut it.

Jrios3552584d ago

The truth is, Call of Duty doesn't sell for its story campaign, it sells for its multiplayer, and big numbers. I can see why they wouldn't want to invest time and money on a mode that a minority of people will play once or twice.

Teflon022584d ago

This is the first time I've ever heard anyone buy cod for the trash campaigns they've had since mw2. Well bo1 had a good one

MetalProxy2584d ago

Second time now. I only play story mode. So over that repetitive MP shit years ago.

rainslacker2584d ago

I've only played a few games in the franchise, and I only really play the campaign. I'll dabble in the MP, but don't spend much time in it.

FallenAngel19842584d ago

@ gang

Idk if Infinity Ward sand Sledgehammer will follow suit with this

@ Tef

I never said I bought CoD, I said I played CoD

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2584d ago
blacktiger2584d ago

It doesn't need a single player if it's going to charge us $30-40 dollars but for $100 GTFO OF HERE

Skankinruby2584d ago

Wether your right or not one thing is for sure they're not getting a penny from me. I've defended COD against all the haters the last few years but this is garbage.

Show all comments (45)
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."

Create Report !X

Add Report

Reports

+ Updates (1)- Updates (1)

Updates

Changed from Pending to Approved
Community506d ago
RaidenBlack506d ago

looks like the OG Infinite Warfare

Profchaos506d ago

Yeah it does look good wonder why it was canned

EvertonFC505d ago

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

Name Last Name505d ago

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

Juancho51505d 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.

Create Report !X

Add Report

Reports

+ Updates (1)- Updates (1)

Updates

Changed from Pending to Approved
Community1041d ago
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
Create Report !X

Add Report

Reports

+ Updates (1)- Updates (1)

Updates

Changed from Pending to Approved
Community1383d ago
VersusDMC1383d 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.

Chevalier1383d 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.

VersusDMC1383d ago

I guess they can wait for the next sale then.

SullysCigar1383d ago

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

InUrFoxHole1382d ago

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

senorfartcushion1383d 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.

RaiderNation1382d 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.

MadLad1382d ago (Edited 1382d 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.

thorstein1382d 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.

InUrFoxHole1382d ago

Lol calm down Bobby. You crapped on thus franchise.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 1382d ago
autobotdan1383d ago (Edited 1383d 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

autobotdan1383d 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

senorfartcushion1383d ago

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

FanboysKiller1383d 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 #.

EvertonFC1383d 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_McClane1382d ago

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

lipton1011382d 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__Merrin1383d 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

Rhythmattic1383d ago (Edited 1383d 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...

GhostofHorizon1382d ago

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

MadLad1382d 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.

GhostofHorizon1382d 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?

franwex1382d 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.

MadLad1382d 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.

Rhythmattic1376d 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 1376d ago
Sitdown1382d 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.

Teflon021382d ago

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

Rhythmattic1376d ago (Edited 1376d 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)