CoD: Black Ops another FPS with a short single player campaign :( :( :(

November 10, 2010

although the game has gotten a 9.0/10.0 on Gamespot and the review says the single player campaign is quite intense and thrilling among other things its only 6 hours long......

i just hope Crysis 2 doesnt follow these FPSes and have a good long campaign.......

Most recent blog posts from Sohail Saleem...

Final Fantasy XIII rox!!!!!!!!!!!!

Crysis 2 = a major disappointment.....

oh January 25th where are u??????

Most recent blog posts from Sohail Saleem...
Final Fantasy XIII rox!!!!!!!!!!!! Crysis 2 = a major disappointment..... oh January 25th where are u??????

Feedback

JANUS2 - November 10, 2010 (08:48 AM)
6 hours sounds good to me. Any longer and I start to lose interest.

SamildanachEmrys - November 10, 2010 (11:50 AM)
Yeah, I finished it in six and a half hours, and I'm usually quite slow with FPS games. I know we probably don't want a thirty hour campaign in a shooter (I've drifted away from Far Cry 2 more than once thanks to its length), but six is a bit brief. I'd say about twelve would suit me.

Suskie - November 10, 2010 (11:51 AM)
I haven't played much of the single-player yet. That's either because I've gotten so caught up in the multiplayer or because what I've played of the campaign hasn't impressed me in the slightest. Can't tell.

CouchPotato - November 10, 2010 (12:39 PM)
Can you actually save everywhere in this game ? The last 'pure' FPS i played was Rainbow Six: Vegas on PC, and it only has auto-save. And finishing a combat sequence was not really that satisfying in that game, so ... .

blood-omen - November 11, 2010 (07:43 AM)
yeah....12 hours seems like a good length for a FPS.....

Masters - November 11, 2010 (08:19 AM)
The multiplayer on this gives me the distinct impression that I'm playing on a battlefield of little plastic toy soldiers.

Masters - November 11, 2010 (08:25 AM)
Yup, it does.

blood-omen - November 11, 2010 (09:50 AM)
wat does it matter whether u can save anywhere or not.....FPSes have become quite easy these days even on the Hard difficulty setting.....

joseph_valencia - November 11, 2010 (07:43 PM)
I don't see what's wrong with six hours. Don't people replay games anymore?

blood-omen - November 12, 2010 (07:37 AM)
at least i dont replay games....who has the time.....and why would i wanna replay a game which has the same ending......i can understand playing Alpha Protocol, Fallout or Bioshock again but not Call of Duty.....

sometimes i dont even play the complete game the 1st time around

honestgamer - November 12, 2010 (10:59 AM)
I think that a lot of the people who are most likely to complain that a game isn't long enough are the same people who aren't likely to finish playing the short game that they are complaining about. They just hear from others how short it is. I'm of the mind that developers need to spend more time making sure that their games are fun to play and less time padding them with content that I won't want to play through a second time just to increase the amount of time it takes to get through the game that first time. In the case of Call of Duty: Black Ops, it didn't really feel like there was a lot of filler. Unfortunately, there were some parts that I really didn't enjoy and those would likely prevent me from playing through the game again... but I think that in general the length of campaign mode in Call of Duty games is pretty close to perfect.

zigfried - November 12, 2010 (07:46 PM)
A six-hour campaign is terrible.

That's under the assumption that it's not worth playing again. Otherwise it would be 12 hours. Or 18. Or 24......

//Zig

blood-omen - November 13, 2010 (03:11 AM)
will start playing it today and find out what the 6 hour campaign is all about....wohoooooooooooo

SamildanachEmrys - November 13, 2010 (10:30 AM)
honestgamer:
I'm of the mind that developers need to spend more time making sure that their games are fun to play and less time padding them with content that I won't want to play through a second time just to increase the amount of time it takes to get through the game that first time.

That's a fair point. I played Lost Odyssey during the summer, and although it took me an impressive 85 hours to finish, I felt various sections were included just to pad it out. I'd have preferred it to be half as long, with the filler removed. Games like Morrowind/Oblivion and Fallout 3 can soak up dozens of hours of gameplay without getting old, but Lost Odyssey seemed like it was just preventing me getting to the end. It was stalling.

Anyway, my point is that I agree with you to an extent. I don't want filler, and a short but enjoyable game is preferable to a long but tediously padded one. Certainly Black Ops felt tight and streamlined, but I can't help thinking that a game shouldn't be easily completed in one sitting.

Having said that, we all know that the online multiplayer is the emphasis of the Call of Duty series these days. Maybe we should look at Black Ops as a multiplayer game with added single player content.

Feedback
	JANUS2 - November 10, 2010 (08:48 AM) 6 hours sounds good to me. Any longer and I start to lose interest.
	SamildanachEmrys - November 10, 2010 (11:50 AM) Yeah, I finished it in six and a half hours, and I'm usually quite slow with FPS games. I know we probably don't want a thirty hour campaign in a shooter (I've drifted away from Far Cry 2 more than once thanks to its length), but six is a bit brief. I'd say about twelve would suit me.
	Suskie - November 10, 2010 (11:51 AM) I haven't played much of the single-player yet. That's either because I've gotten so caught up in the multiplayer or because what I've played of the campaign hasn't impressed me in the slightest. Can't tell.
	CouchPotato - November 10, 2010 (12:39 PM) Can you actually save everywhere in this game ? The last 'pure' FPS i played was Rainbow Six: Vegas on PC, and it only has auto-save. And finishing a combat sequence was not really that satisfying in that game, so ... .
	blood-omen - November 11, 2010 (07:43 AM) yeah....12 hours seems like a good length for a FPS.....
	Masters - November 11, 2010 (08:19 AM) The multiplayer on this gives me the distinct impression that I'm playing on a battlefield of little plastic toy soldiers.
	Masters - November 11, 2010 (08:25 AM) Yup, it does.
	blood-omen - November 11, 2010 (09:50 AM) wat does it matter whether u can save anywhere or not.....FPSes have become quite easy these days even on the Hard difficulty setting.....
	joseph_valencia - November 11, 2010 (07:43 PM) I don't see what's wrong with six hours. Don't people replay games anymore?
	blood-omen - November 12, 2010 (07:37 AM) at least i dont replay games....who has the time.....and why would i wanna replay a game which has the same ending......i can understand playing Alpha Protocol, Fallout or Bioshock again but not Call of Duty..... sometimes i dont even play the complete game the 1st time around
	honestgamer - November 12, 2010 (10:59 AM) I think that a lot of the people who are most likely to complain that a game isn't long enough are the same people who aren't likely to finish playing the short game that they are complaining about. They just hear from others how short it is. I'm of the mind that developers need to spend more time making sure that their games are fun to play and less time padding them with content that I won't want to play through a second time just to increase the amount of time it takes to get through the game that first time. In the case of Call of Duty: Black Ops, it didn't really feel like there was a lot of filler. Unfortunately, there were some parts that I really didn't enjoy and those would likely prevent me from playing through the game again... but I think that in general the length of campaign mode in Call of Duty games is pretty close to perfect.
	zigfried - November 12, 2010 (07:46 PM) A six-hour campaign is terrible. That's under the assumption that it's not worth playing again. Otherwise it would be 12 hours. Or 18. Or 24...... //Zig
	blood-omen - November 13, 2010 (03:11 AM) will start playing it today and find out what the 6 hour campaign is all about....wohoooooooooooo
	SamildanachEmrys - November 13, 2010 (10:30 AM) honestgamer: I'm of the mind that developers need to spend more time making sure that their games are fun to play and less time padding them with content that I won't want to play through a second time just to increase the amount of time it takes to get through the game that first time. That's a fair point. I played Lost Odyssey during the summer, and although it took me an impressive 85 hours to finish, I felt various sections were included just to pad it out. I'd have preferred it to be half as long, with the filler removed. Games like Morrowind/Oblivion and Fallout 3 can soak up dozens of hours of gameplay without getting old, but Lost Odyssey seemed like it was just preventing me getting to the end. It was stalling. Anyway, my point is that I agree with you to an extent. I don't want filler, and a short but enjoyable game is preferable to a long but tediously padded one. Certainly Black Ops felt tight and streamlined, but I can't help thinking that a game shouldn't be easily completed in one sitting. Having said that, we all know that the online multiplayer is the emphasis of the Call of Duty series these days. Maybe we should look at Black Ops as a multiplayer game with added single player content.

© 1998-2024 HonestGamers
None of the material contained within this site may be reproduced in any conceivable fashion without permission from the author(s) of said material. This site is not sponsored or endorsed by Nintendo, Sega, Sony, Microsoft, or any other such party. Opinions expressed on this site do not necessarily represent the opinion of site staff or sponsors.