
I’m not going to lie, until I got a load of the zombies mode, I wasn’t hugely excited to have Call of Duty: Black Ops II waiting for me to review. The Call of Duty series in general has a few problems, but the design director for Treyarch, David Vonderhaar, recently said something pretty revealing:
As popular as Call of Duty is, there are a lot of people who don’t play multiplayer. And quite frankly, this bugs the s*** out of us. They should all play multiplayer.
This says a lot about the series. When I reviewed Modern Warfare 3, a review I’m getting hate mail about to this day, I pointed out that the effort obviously went into the multiplayer, and it’s where the franchise’s heart is, certainly its wallet.
That said, Mr. Vonderhaar, if you’re reading? There are some pretty compelling arguments against everyone in the multiplayer pool.
Some Of Us Are Not Fun To Play Against
When it comes to video games, I’m a min-maxer, a munchkin, a stat hog, whatever you want to call it. I’m the guy who builds the most invincible character possible. I’m the guy who shoots you in the face with a sniper rifle from across the map and then lines up a second shot while you pound away at the dozens of layers of armor I’ve slapped on.
This doesn’t make me some sort of god at multiplayer: In fact, when I play multiplayer I get my ass handed to me a lot, generally by guys dedicated specifically to hunting down guys like me and killing them. But it does make me annoying to other players. I may not be “cheating”, per se, but they’ve got every reason to dislike my play style. And I’m not even going out of my way to be annoying. That’s practically an art form at this point.
There’s Still a Culture Problem
This has been beaten into the ground, but I will say that, if I feel some compelling need to have homophobic slurs hurled at me by a teenager (or grown man with the mentality of a teenager) I don’t know personally, I don’t need to pay Activision for that privilege.
Multiplayer Can Become a Second Job Too Easily
Again, this isn’t a profound insight, but part of the reason I’ve never had a World of Warcraft account is that I have a job, a fiancee, a dog, and other responsibilities, not to mention other hobbies. It’s already sometimes a task to fit the games I want to play into my schedule.
Now, balance that with being part of a team. I’ve long felt that multiplayer is really for two types of people: the vast majority who can’t get friends together in person to play a tabletop game and miss that sharing of games with people they’re close to. And the small minority of people who don’t understand that being required to show up at a certain place at a certain time on someone else’s orders is what we call a “day job”, and that we do not pay others for the privilege of a day job.
Granted, CoD’s culture isn’t nearly as demanding as, say, EVE Online. But I’ve never met anybody who wasn’t part of a multiplayer team in ANY game who didn’t get stressed out about it at some point. Thanks, no.
It’s Expensive
Let’s see here. So, I pay $60 for the game. And increasingly another $30 for a “season pass” so you can play on the DLC maps early with your group and to save over buying them individually. Let’s throw in another $10 for random DLC like weapons which you may need, or subscriptions.
So for one game, to play multiplayer properly and courteously to my other players, I am shelling out $100 minimum per game.
Hell. No. $60 is already a hell of a lot to ask for many, many games in terms of what you get. Frankly, $40 is far too much to ask for what should be an extra to a polished, detailed single-player campaign, which is still what most people pay for. Part of the reason Black Ops II is so exciting is that the Zombies mode looks like an honest to God single player game, as opposed to the extended multiplayer tutorial recent games throw at us. Yeah, it looks like a fratboy’s idea of Left 4 Dead but I’ll take it if for no other reason than it means I might play the game more than once.
If you want people to play exclusively multiplayer, developers, let’s stop screwing around: Go multiplayer only. Quite frankly, I don’t think you’d see much objection from most fans of many games with a multiplayer culture surrounding them. And the rest of us would be just that much happier.




I dislike the way CoD has become a multiplayer game not because I dont like the multiplayer aspect, but because the only reason they shoehorn in the single player campaign is to justify charging 60 bucks. Look at the prices for multiplayer only games. You’ll be hard pressed to find one over 40 bucks. CoD can charge the 60 for 5 hour single player game, and then all the other stuff you pointed out. Its a terrible trend, but like most gaming trends people dont care until its too late. Like DLC and pre order bonuses.
I think they’ve gotten to the point where they can just charge for the multiplayer. To be honest, I was taken by surprise to discover Zombies will be a full-fledged game.
I will say that I only buy CoD because of multiplayer. The single player campaigns have been atrocious since MW (which was, ironically, one of my all time favorite single player campaigns). The endlessly spawning enemy closets and the forced run and gun style of the newer CoD’s doesn’t suit my play style at all.
Ah, the season pass. A fresh, new way to fuck us in the ass with no vaseline.
It’s pretty blatantly an attempt to get people who buy used to give the developer some extra scratch. For me the problem is, the only games with successful season passes are already successful in and of themselves. Gearbox probably is not losing money on Borderlands 2, Treyarch will not lose money on Call of Duty, etc. Meanwhile something like Spec Ops: The Line may struggle.
Loved this article so hards. And it saddens me so much to see more and more developers pushing the multiplayer to a game harder than the actual single player experience. There are so many great games with great solo options (Spec Ops: The Line, Uncharted, Assassin’s Creed in my opinion) that scare me simply because future iterations will simply look to push and ride their multiplayer experiences for longevity and just lose their sense of story telling and experience that I tend to love. Eventually, it will just seem like the single player campaign will have been “shoehorned” into the game to extend your time with it.
I have never paid for DLC for a multiplayer game. It’s an option and you don’t have to do it and it doesn’t interfere with the multiplayer experience.
Every single game that has multiplayer that I’ve ever played has the ability to mute the other players. It’s not hard to do. Millions of gamers do it every day.
I enjoy multiplayer, even though I’m not remotely “good” by the standards of most gamers (my K/D ratio hovers around 1:1 in most shooters) because I get to play with my friends who are scattered across the country.
I dont play multiplayer aspects of games. Maybe its because Im anti-social, but its mostly the culture thing and the “camping” issue. Its a video game, not real life, you get a reset button and a second chance. Move around. The few times I played multiplayer I encountered players like Dan and it simply drove me away. I also hated keyboard warriors/e-thugs on the automotive forums I frequented 10 years ago, and I hate that they now have a microphone to yell shit. I know I can mute them, but I dont think I should have to. That type of behavior shouldnt be acceptable in this day and age anymore.
Id prefer that they separate the campaign and multiplayer games at this point. A team that wants to focus on story telling can do so, and you can dedicate a whole team to updates and keeping pace to deal with problems that come up.
As others have said mute is the greatest invention for people you don’t feel like bothering with. Also multiplayer is for anyone who wants to play – that includes any and all play styles just because you dont go 27-5 or 52-2 does not mean that you shouldn’t play. Hell, I knew a person a few years ago who would just camp in one spot determined not to die while killing trying to kill anyone coming close with a very slow trigger finger. Personally I find knifing to be much more entertaining in CoD than run ‘n gun since then I get to dodge dip duck dive dodge all the while watching as they (hopefully) spend all their bullets where I go in for the kill. So really saying your play style doesn’t work for that game speaks more to the time that you don’t want to spend on CoD than the multiplayer itself.
Know a few people who are on teams they enjoy it, yes like anything it can become a chore – so why are you spending your free time on a chore gotta have self awareness and be able to break something off eventually if it becomes too much of a time sink or not worth it.
Great post Dan. I agree with all points. I think if they separated them, you would get better quality on both sides. I can’t tell you how happy I was with Max Payne 3 because it was made to be a single player game. There was a multiplayer option, but the single player wasn’t tacked on like so many shooters are going these days. The only multiplayer game I bothered with was GTA 4 and that was a lot of fun. However the same issue is abound with people that can’t have a little respect for others and themselves. Mute or no, I was raised that you don’t talk to people any different than you would if they were face to face. When I relax at home I like to pretend we live in a civilized society. When I want to see otherwise I go out to the movie theatre or drive in traffic.
Fuck that guy. The only good reason to have multiplayer, or even a game counsel versus a gaming pc, is having a good split screen game for you and your friends to sit on couch and drink beer and play. And its not even an option on most games these days. Dead Island, for example, would have been perfect for a split screen game but for some reason it wasn’t included.
Borderlands 2 has the best drop in/drop out game structure I’ve ever seen. Just the other evening I was playing co-op with a friend in Chicago, when he called it a night all I had to do was hit start and and my brother jumped in and switched to split-screen and I didnt even have to leave my game. No fuss, no muss. That’s how to do co-op, just sayin.
Just out of curiosity, what sort of bandwidth does the average multiplayer game use? One of the reasons I’ve never played anything online is the fear of checking my meter and finding out I’ve gouged out a big part of my cap.
Dan, your play style would actually fit in quite well with games like Ghost Recon and Battlefield. There is a whole sub-set of players that like to be back-shooting, back stabbing, hard to find, ambushing douches. They’re called snipers, and you shouldn’t worry about pissing off other players by playing like that because in gaming environments like BF3 and Ghost Recon, its called “being effective”. You know how you can tell if an enemy sniper is being effective? If he’s successfully forcing you change tactics and pissing you off.
That’s where the competitive part of competitive multiplayer is, and if the game has solid design with checks and balances then your play style is literally part of the game design. And you would also be correct sir, in keeping an eye on your six o’clock because I would be going wookie hunting for snipers like you. But you are incorrect in thinking that playing against you isn’t fun.
Having a set time to get on with friends and play is just simple coordination and I think shares few differences with making sure to catch Sons of Anarchy or Breaking Bad at their respective showtimes. Watching TV doesn’t feel like a job and neither does rushing home to meet up with friends online for some friendly mayhem and to blow off steam after a long day of dealing with the general public.
In Battlefield 3 the majority of any in-game voip interactions are between me and the guys on my squad as we utilize varying amounts of teamwork and good old fashioned screwing around to enjoy the game and its environment.
There is very little of the usual “Eff you faggot, oh yeah well your mom sucks Russian mobster dick with caviar on top” going on in there. Instead its more along the lines of “hey jackass, you gonna revive me sometime today?” or “get back here with that tank bro, lets go get alpha”. I know the Call of Duty crowd can be a bit much, but I’ve also made friends on there that I still play with to this day and when I make new ones its usually guys just like me that can laugh at the little kids learning to swear as we just mute the little shits and carry on.
There will always be douchebags venting their lack of skill, crappy day or little-dick frustrations in some capacity, welcome to the Internet. Does that excuse it? Hell no, but it is what it is and there is almost always a means to mute those kind of assholes so interacting with them is not a requirement.
As far as price goes, I am totally in agreement. 60$ PLUS dlc sucks and it sucks egregiously when the single player experience is treated like an afterthought. If your gonna make a multiplayer centric game, then fucking make one. You want to make an epic single player experience then do that, but dont piss in my hand tell me it’s raining and don’t sacrifice one to the detriment of the other and charge me 60$ for the privilege because few games actually pull off both.
We are in the midst of a maelstrom of change in the gaming industry as technological advances make access to games easier than it has ever been, this is causing a sea-change in how publishers interact with their customers and audience. Call of Duty is the Bud Light Lime of gaming. Valve is the Stone Brewery of publishers. EA is still the “worst company in America”. But let me finish by saying that 1980′s me would shit himself if he saw the sheer amount of choices and access that gamers have today. So I cant bitch too hard.
Multiplayer gaming! The experience of having creepy ass come-ons and degrading slurs hurled at me all without having to leave the comfort of my own home! I hear the next peripheral for the PS will be able to reach out and grope me.
That’s the new TSA Simulator.
So hey… you come here often? ::heavybreathing::
the time sink is a huge problem for me, personally. i work 50+hours a week and don’t have the time to pour in like some high school/college kid does. and if i stay away from CoD for a month i play like ass. at least with BF3 i can compensate by running around with my defibrillator, but no matter what i feel like i’m waaaaaay behind new strategic and tactical trends. seriously, if these damn kids would get laid/molested by a creepy uncle i wouldn’t have such a hard time keeping pace.
You can play WOW casually. You just have to have some self restraint and understand its just a game. I would make the case that WOW isn’t any different then casually playing any other type of game.