With the latest Call of Duty installment being released at midnight last night I was looking forward to getting my hands on a copy and getting down to the dirty business of complaining about how they focused on the multiplayer and left us single player gamers with a short campaign and not much else to do.
This however isn’t the case since my copy isn’t here so I’m left with no ability to judge the campaign or any of the new Zombies features, or even the offline multiplayer which they greatly improved through a patch in Black Ops by adding bots which turned It into a kind of Call Of Duty Black Ops come Counter Strike bundle, I liked it because it meant all the things people were talking about in multiplayer maps I got to experience instead of just sitting with no idea if it was good or not because I hate online gaming (if you couldn’t tell).
The problem facing the game now though is because I’ve had to wait to get my hands on it and there is so much hype on the internet about it that if it turns out the campaign is shorter than Modern Warfare (a campaign so short they even added an arcade mode encouraging you to play through from start to finish in one go to get the highest score) then I’m going to be apocalyptically angry at all the hype it gets. My theory is that a game should not have to rely on its multiplayer to pull it through unless the developers are going to provide us all with a permanent internet connection to play it with. Until that moment a game must stand up with its single player features alone. Old Call Of Duty games managed to do it so why can’t modern games?
All that aside I am looking forwards to getting into the game again, JamesMC and I just managed to get all the level in Modern Warfare 3’s Survival mode to a perfect pattern so not wanting to ruin that we need to move onto the next Call of Duty. So until my copy shows up I’m going to sit here and try avoid reading anything more about Black Ops II, that way I can reserve judgment of it till I’ve played through it myself.