Originally posted by JmanghanCome the fuk on lol, CoD single player is and always has been shit. Sometimes they have ok (maybe even good) stories, but that doesn't make a game. They are corridor shooters with basic shooting gallery components, and they have never been the main draw for this series. If that's your idea of "excellent" single player, legit lol. The last time I enjoyed that shit was when I was a 15 year old watching Ghost and Roach get turned into a bonfire.
Thats bull, modern warfare had excellent campaigns, and CoD Classic had a pretty awesome campaign as well.
Originally posted by SmasandianI'm not comparing CoD to BF. I'm talking strictly in comparison with its prior entries, which almost always have boring campaigns stocked full of corridor shooting galleries and over the top, eye rolling set pieces. This game far out does them in multiplayer and zombies (which is the best fking thing CoD has ever had to offer, so I also disagree with your '2 more shitty zombies maps' comment too).
Ok, I do not agree at the slightest when its competitor is releasing a single player campaign, it's regular modes, and added battle royale for the same price.Do you honestly believe Activision decided to scrap SP for its Battle Royale mode? Sure ****ing chance. This game started in development in 2015 (most likely?) while battle royale didn't become uber popular until late last year. There is no ****ing way Blackout was a thought in Activision's mind until early this year. So.....I take it's not too difficult to shoehorn a Battle Royale mode into an existant multiplayer structure.
In the end, 5 more maps in MP, a shoehorned mode (even if its good) and 2 more shitty zombie maps does not equal the same type of content SP offers. Especially when other games are offering more content for same price.
Treyarch usually has a three year development cycle which ideally gives them a year for each of the three CoD aspects they work on (zombies, multiplayer, single player; Neither of us are developers, so I'm not going to act like I know how much time or resources are devoted to each, but neither do you). Maybe they just work on campaign and shoehorn it in the last year of development? With how trash the single player usually is, I wouldn't be surprised. Assuming it took them the same amount of time to make the phenomenal Blackout mode as it would a shit campaign makes it a pretty solid trade off. The developers agreed, which led to their choice to cut it.
BTW, as far as it's 'competitor' goes, BF has had shit campaigns for some time too. Even worse than CoDs, in fact. I'd trade BF1s stupid war stories or BF4s campaign for more multiplayer content in a heartbeat.