Another Call of Duty, surprise surprise. Now don’t get me wrong: I am a fan and defender of Activision's multi-million dollar franchise. But maybe it’s time the already separated fan base go their own ways.

Now, besides the blatant haters there is a small group of individuals who buy the game specifically for the single player campaign, and that's it. Then there are the people who buy it and jump straight into the multiplayer universe and never look back. And lastly, there are the individuals who do both and enjoy it without issue.

However, every year the same comments seem to arise. The campaign is too short, it’s not a single-player centric production and honestly, why do they even bother? Normally, I would just disagree and point out that Black Ops II was about as near an equivalent to Hollywood blockbuster action movies as I’ve ever seen in the gaming industry. But this time I am actually going to agree in terms of the campaign- why do they bother?

Wouldn’t everybody benefit if they launched two titles a year? One for single player and one for multiplayer…? They already have two studios doing both sides of the coin so why not just split the game in two? A: Double your profits (although possibly not) & B: give the people who don’t want to spend hard earned money on a relatively short campaign a full, completely in-depth experience with no multiplayer option. It would have a comprehensive trophy system excluding multiplayer awards, totally new characters and possibly a less predictable, entirely unique and even dare I say risky approach. And then, make the multiplayer version even more expansive, and maybe learn how to launch map packs on both systems at the same time ūüėČ

Now, this to me sounds like a fantastic idea. I would probably buy both or buy a Hardened Edition version with both discs. Would you buy Call of Duty if there was a version completely dedicated to storytelling that has a longer and more in-depth campaign? Better story, new characters etc.? Or would zero copies sell of the single player and billions of the multiplayer? Could this move hurt or even end Call of Duty? Just a thought.

Subscribe
Notify of
19 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
ulsterscot
ulsterscot
7 years ago

I prefer both on one purchase – I use the campaign for when I'm playing crappy online – but would still buy both if they split up

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
7 years ago

"…but would still buy both if they split up."

And that supports the idea, does it not?

bigrailer19
bigrailer19
7 years ago

Sounds like it.

manofchao5
manofchao5
7 years ago

it wouldn't work, their single player's story is fucking awful like cheap cheezy hollywood movies, BURN IT WITH FIRE<

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
7 years ago

I wouldn't buy either one, but I think the infringement of MP on SP is a problem and CoD is a great place to start splitting the two apart.

I'd buy more games that were a bit cheaper and just the single player rather than buying the whole package including a bunch of stuff I wish they had never bothered to add.

Gabriel013
Gabriel013
7 years ago

I completely agree, give me a quality single player any day and make it cheaper.

ulsterscot
ulsterscot
7 years ago

Yeah but then I gotta get up and change discs – did I mention I've gotten lazy in my dotage …

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
7 years ago

It'd have to be digital, that'd be cool though if they sold the discs still with the whole experience and broke em up online.

Akuma_
Akuma_
7 years ago

Not if you buy it on the Xbone.

Kryten1029a
Kryten1029a
7 years ago

I don't know that there are enough people interested enough in the single-player to make it worthwhile. You may have a fair number of people who play the campaign but how many of them showed up for multi and just dipped into the story because it was on the disk? Most of the people who buy these games do so to play against others; that's why the 360's timed exclusivity on map packs has rankled so badly.

bigrailer19
bigrailer19
7 years ago

Thats just not a good idea. I really dont see the point either. You buy the game and play how you want. Even though we can assume the mp guys dont play the campaign is pretty certain that those that only go for the campaign also play the mp. Keep it as one game.

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
7 years ago

Not that I'm arguing but if I were to do so I'd say that single player gamers get the short end of the stick a little more than what should be considered within reason with things the way they are.

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
7 years ago

The reason there is no single CoD online game is because they are waiting to find out how many times they can sell the same thing to you.

Akuma_
Akuma_
7 years ago

Considering the fact that League of Legends is the most played online game in history, it goes to prove that one single online game go last for a long time, and continue to attract new customers and keep the gameplay fresh.

That is with a MOBA game. It would be sooooo much easier to do it with an FPS.

It would supply a constant stream of revenue from the Online game, and then yearly or whatever releases for the single player game.


Last edited by Akuma_ on 5/24/2013 2:46:57 AM

Beamboom
Beamboom
7 years ago

Well, if they split the next Fallout up in two parts I'd probably buy them both but I'd still not call it a good idea.

Isn't this how the entire dime'n'nickle thing came to life, the idea of breaking a game up in smaller parts and sell them individually to make more money?

Kryten1029a
Kryten1029a
7 years ago

Are you thinking Bethesda might do what it did with Fallout 3 and New Vegas? Those were both huge games and you could easily sink 30+ hours into them if you were allowing by exploration and sidequests. Not bad value for money as you might well agree.

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
7 years ago

Yeah, but there's actually a benefit to this, as gamers of all types might be able to enjoy higher quality the whole way around, and they'd get precisely what they want.

No more campaign fans going, "oh, the developers just spent too much time and resources on multiplayer so the campaign had to suffer." With teams focusing exclusively on EITHER single-player or multiplayer, wouldn't the result be that much better for fans of each side?

There are people out there – believe it or not – who will never touch multiplayer because they just don't care about it. Same goes for multiplayer fans, of course.


Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 5/24/2013 11:12:55 AM

Beamboom
Beamboom
7 years ago

@Kryten, no I am not in my wildest imagination thinking they will split the game in two. I just used it as a theoretical example. ūüôā

@Ben, but will the separation actually give a better result? I never thought the COD campaigns were that bad to begin with, they were of the same length and had those typical same set-piece sequenced campaign comparable to similar games. I see the same production efforts put into those, who I see in other high profile shooters. I seriously believe they already are trying to make the best campaign they can.

And technically speaking there are no reasons *not* to include both in one game, since they both use the same engine and use much of the same code – even the same maps!

I don't think either part are missing out on much, and what does it hurt if you got *one* extra option in the main menu you never touch (being it "the "multiplayer" or the "campaign" button).
Had they split it, wouldn't the whole player base then instead whine about the pricing instead, demanding that they only pay half since it's half of what it used to be? I betcha they would.


Last edited by Beamboom on 5/25/2013 10:48:39 AM

___________
___________
7 years ago

pretty obvious why they wont do that, to create the campaign would cost 20,30,40 mill, plus the big budget of advertisement and such, and the simple matter of the fact is the SP only game would not sell enough to warrant its existence.
they would be much better of offering a split up version, instead of buying the game at 60 bucks for SP and MP, why not offer that, or a SP only version, or a MP only version but only for 30 bucks?
but then that would run into the same problem as above, albeit no where near as badly.