غير مصنف

Games Inbox: How much do you spend on free-to-play games?

 


RE: Dreamdog. Speak for yourself, mate. I enjoy single-player campaigns in Battlefield/Call Of Duty games and don’t play multiplayer at all, not even once for a try on most of the games. I wouldn’t even install the data if an option was available.

I didn’t buy Black Ops 4 despite being a Zombies fan but did buy Battlefield V. I like single-player games. I don’t buy games for online play and there’s many like me out there. I don’t however think they should replace multiplayer to accommodate something else I do like. Let them all co-exist.

This antiquated rhetoric that people don’t play the single-player campaigns is pure hyperbole. Have a good look at Trophy-tracking sites, you’ll see more people get a Trophy in the campaign over the easiest multiplayer one, ergo they must be at the very least trying it. I don’t even load multiplayer up and haven’t since Black Ops 1. As for battle royale, I don’t personally know anyone that wanted another one to add to the four or five already on the go that none of us play (one mate plays H1Z1 and that’s about it). I do however know many that enjoy a campaign.

What’s wrong with a single player campaign and a battle royale? Cater to everyone. Instead of using an excuse that tacking on an easily developed battle royale mode means they can’t develop a campaign too. We all know the reason they’ve prioritised one over the other. The campaigns don’t bring in sweet, sweet moolah from people buying hats and capes. For £60 per game they should be developing both, then this argument would never come up.

It’s bad enough Battlefield copied Call Of Duty in its smaller maps, run and gun gameplay, etc. and lost what made Battlefield the superior choice, without DICE copying them again to drop single-player too. Do so and it’s one less game I’ll be buying annually.
Lost Sock





Source link

اظهر المزيد