Jedihunter4 said:
Call of duty black ops single player was a fun campagain an decently written, an that's one you you use as an example, so tbh i don't know what the hell your talking about? you want a FPS with a half arsed single player play the console version of battle field 2, that's half arsed, not attachment, nothing felt empty. People are too critical, in a FPS is two main criteria 1 fun shooting shit 2 some kl situations. everything eles is a bonus, in a FPS i want to shoot stuff, its in the genre name!
Black Ops was atrociously written without any real antagonist. The campaign is scripted to the point of absurdity, with much of the gameplay feeling like a glorified quicktime event. The "twist" ending undermines almost all the actions you took in the story, and the gun-waving, straight-faced patriotism was sickeningly overdone many times. It was too short, required very little player input, and for a game called "Black Ops" it had almost no stealth requirement.
Overall, if a company wants to build a Multiplayer game, build a fucking Multiplayer game. Don't divide your resources between a poorly designed single player and poorly designed Multiplayer. If you want to provide a single player experience for your offline audience, then make it worthwhile, not just an introduction to shooter mechanics for your multiplayer.
The problem comes from the act that most shooters that comes out today are built on a gimmick. MW2 had the gimmick of ultra-modern weaponry. BLOPS had the gimmick of being based in an era of secret wars and top-secret weaponry. Homefront was based on the gimmick of the N. Korea invasion scenario. These games wouldn't make sense without the single player campaign, so a half-assed single player needs to be introduced so the multiplayer makes some sense. Really, in a game like Homefront, the only reason for the single player to exist is so you can even comprehend why N. Korea is fighting America on American soil, and even then it is conveyed rather poorly.
We need a multiplayer narrative, a reason as to why were fighting. You cant just throw us in a combat scenario and expect us to follow direction without any support or motivation. Why would I want to fight as a N. Korean soldier in the Homefront multiplayer, whats my motivation?
This is why I'm looking forward to Brink, it looks to try and actually provide reason for the multiplayer conflict beyond "kill they ass dead" with the dynamic between the Security and Resistance. WoW does this well, with the single player questlines, environments and characters affirming your belief and resolve in that what you fight for. Modern Multiplayer focused games tend to rely too much on disconnect, which never really should count as a thing in a games favor.
