Call of Duty: Black Ops 4

[Tobal]

There isn't a large margin between the single player and mp trophies when you look at it, the Ps4 was 35% with single player complete and 37% reaching prestige the 1st time which i would say is smart indicator of long term MP players. BR mode could swing it, but they've shown nothing of how it works yet and it's up against this years battlefield, Free Fortnite and PuBg on xbox/pc so i wouldn't say it's in the bag.

[Digfox]

The Battle Royale feels like it's easy to dismiss, but it rests on the mind with this game because mechanically it's bound to be so much more refined than some of the other titles out there.

FTFY

Epic are still a technical powerhouse. Fortnite is leagues above stuff like PUBG. Even if Epic did fall on slightly harder times pre-Fortnite BR, they didn't lose that technical nous.

As controversial as this is likely to be it makes sense. Single Player campaigns are extremely intensive to make, so this way they can reduce the content (and likely costs) and still sell the game for as a full price $100+ riddled with MTX and DLC premium experience.

EDIT: Just watching Angry Joe's reaction on YT and reading EG. Both mentions this is COD going the way of Rainbow six and Overwatch with Specialists in MP. Which will be more MTX BS to sell you.

[Neon Ignition]

Fortnite is definitely technically superior to PUBG but at the current time still the weaker game. There's a pace and flow to Battle Royale that makes it work. PUBG overcame its technical shortcomings by nailing that flow, whereas I feel Fortnite did it by making the game free and beating PUBG to console. CoD has the sway to batter both but I'm mindful that the gameplay of CoD isn't suited to that flow so they have to really hit the mark on it. No SP will cost them sales, it's a small percentage but we know there's a playerbase for the series that are only interested in the SP in CoD and one the scale the series sells that's millions lost. I'm going to throw this out there, I think if they nail the Battle Royale element then sales for BO4 could uptick on BO3 and WWII but I don't think this will come close to being a series peak as I don't think the mode is that big a deal by itself. The mistake many companies have made recently is to look at PUBG/Fortnite and think their success has born a new genre when really they're just a multiplayer mode. It's reflected by PUBG's slowly falling playerbase as people have bought it but don't necessarily stick with it. When CoD and BF4 etc regularly feature it as standard you're likely going to see games dedicated to it die off quickly. Given how many players buy CoD already for MP I imagine the uptick will only be a few million, the same they may lose for axing SP.

[MartyG]

Fortnite (free) vs Black Ops 4 with no single player (£55).

I know which I'm buying this year

Replacing the single player with battle royale isn't a substitution, it's a downgrade.

[Digfox]

Fortnite is definitely technically superior to PUBG but at the current time still the weaker game. There's a pace and flow to Battle Royale that makes it work. PUBG overcame its technical shortcomings by nailing that flow, whereas I feel Fortnite did it by making the game free and beating PUBG to console. CoD has the sway to batter both but I'm mindful that the gameplay of CoD isn't suited to that flow so they have to really hit the mark on it. No SP will cost them sales, it's a small percentage but we know there's a playerbase for the series that are only interested in the SP in CoD and one the scale the series sells that's millions lost. I'm going to throw this out there, I think if they nail the Battle Royale element then sales for BO4 could uptick on BO3 and WWII but I don't think this will come close to being a series peak as I don't think the mode is that big a deal by itself. The mistake many companies have made recently is to look at PUBG/Fortnite and think their success has born a new genre when really they're just a multiplayer mode. It's reflected by PUBG's slowly falling playerbase as people have bought it but don't necessarily stick with it. When CoD and BF4 etc regularly feature it as standard you're likely going to see games dedicated to it die off quickly. Given how many players buy CoD already for MP I imagine the uptick will only be a few million, the same they may lose for axing SP.

I think that's harsh on Fortnite. EPIC are still a technical powerhouse. And I think that with the BR game they nailed the implementation and have created the most fun, unique, wide appealing game that has rocketed off the BR craze. Even when Save the World first came out you could see how technically competent their platform was. And I think this enabled them to quickly 'retool' it for BR. Things like how they were able to move to 60fps reaffirm that.

Re: COD I think it will lose some sales from some SP'ers, but equally should have cost less and may attract some new PVP fans. I wouldn't be surprised if some people pick it up only to be shocked on Xmas morning when they find there is no SP campaign.

With [MENTION=42]MartyG[/MENTION] on this. Activision have little reason not to go f2p now. Of course this game will only have 12-months of support so it's not really a 'live service'.

[Neon Ignition]

I reckon they'll stick with the Season Pass. Though it leaves them behind the competition on this front CoD players have shown they're happy to throw Loot Box, Microtransaction money at them and still pay for the maps. Somehow they've avoided the scorn others have faced though I do feel like it'd serve the community better if they dropped it and held off a game release next year in favour of longer support for BO4. Instead of a Map Pack per quarter they'd just need a map per month.

The main saving grace of BO4 not having a single player is that BO3's was so appalling

[Digfox]

Of course. It's going to be multi-tier versions, pre-order bonuses, season pass, DLC with MTX lootboxes and perhaps paid for operators....sorry, specialists. And with IW2 or something coming along 12-months later. And it will probably make them billions. Even more as they abandon Steam on PC and start selling on Blizzard's client.

The last COD game I purchased was MW3 towards the end of the 360's life (and even that was a stretch) to see the end of the trilogy story arc. At that point I realised PVP wasn't for me anymore. So I can't personally comment on how good or bad the recent entries were. To me it was always tin-can alley, run towards to invisible line to trigger next sequence and some neat vehicle section thrown in. A short lived diversion that wasn't particularly worth it, with that year's map pack for MW's ground breaking MP.

That's a bit harsh isn't it?

[Neon Ignition]

Not really and I still play them

From a multiplayer perspective they've definitely gone down the run and gun route and it's shame given the frequency and studio split could easily accommodate entries that vary more than just the visual setting. They've still missed that the MW remaster is still a better experience because it's a little bit slower requiring a little more strategic thought put into it.

As for post MW3 I'd say it's been:

Black Ops 2 - Average single player, good multiplayer
Ghosts - Average single player, poor multiplayer
Advanced Warfare - Average single player, average multiplayer
Black Ops 3 - Very poor single player, average multiplayer
Infinite Warfare - Good single player, poor/average multiplayer
WWII - Poor single player, average/good multiplayer

[Family Fry]

Here’s my right out there prediction, the new ****, Single Player DLC.
Makes perfect sense, a lot of people buy and trade games, which we know publisher hate because hey want you to own the game forever, or until the next title launches. Generally you finish single player and trade it in, so what they do is flip reverse it, make it a multiplayer only title but with the “option” to add a single player via DLC, DLC you can’t trade in when you finish it.
Also this works well with sales or second hand sales as you can buy the game on the cheap or pre-owned to play single layer buy your having to buy it separately.
It’s all nightmare fuel but could totally see it happening.

[nonny]

COD has been rubbish in both single player and multi since black ops. Getting on the BR bandwagon might convince die hards is still relevant but having passed on it last year I see no reason why this is worth picking up.

Boring in the extreme.

[Tobal]

As for post MW3 I'd say it's been:

Black Ops 2 - Average single player, good multiplayer
Ghosts - Average single player, poor multiplayer
Advanced Warfare - Average single player, average multiplayer
Black Ops 3 - Very poor single player, average multiplayer
Infinite Warfare - Good single player, poor/average multiplayer
WWII - Poor single player, average/good multiplayer

A man of good taste, i agree with with your verdict on all the games.

[dvdx2]

I couldn’t keep up with the speed of the last multiplayer COD. It felt like it someone had pressed a x2 fast forward button. Link that with the usual hardcore brigade online and it made it a genuinely unpleasant experience.

[jim g]

I will play it to death and still moan about lag, such is my way :-)

[teddymeow]

I only play the SP so I guess I've saved some money.

[Neon Ignition]

https://www.dexerto.com/call-of-duty/new-leaks-suggest-call-of-duty-black-ops-4-will-feature-free-dlc-and-zombies-season-pass

Rumour emerges that Black Ops 4 will finally see multiplayer maps go free with 1-2 maps released per month. There will still be a Season Pass but this will be for Zombie maps and content.