no one cares about FPS campaigns anymore

I only buy shootersif they have greatsingle player. Coincidently, I don't buy many shooters. =/

jeffwulf

I play the story mode first. Gives me good practice and I like getting my moneys worth.

For most shooters it's all I play, I don't really play the multiplayer in most shooters.soulitane

Buying Crysis 2 for the campaign, hatersgonnahate

bulletstorm was an awesome change of pace i loved it...i dont think ive actually had that many laughs in a shooter before(ur my favorite robot pal)...but for most shooters that are comin out now...the campaign is over in a blink of an eye...my bro bought me mw2...the day i got it..not a few hours later...my bro asked me where i was in the campaign...i was on the last level...hes like...well tahts 60usd well spent...i think the reason most people ignore the campaigns of these games is cause they are only 4-6 hours long anymore...with few exceptions...and the real play time of these games is in the mp...and thats where most people are worried about balance and glitches and stuff

You guys on here are a different case, ask people you know whether or not they finished campaign in Halo or Call of Duty. Most of the time I get, "No one plays campaign anymore."

We know Crysis is all about SP so i'm looking forward for Crysis 2 SP

I care about the SP portions...but not enough to buy them most of the time. Thank God for rentals. ;)

I like multiplayer, but nothing beats a well done campaign. I wish devs would put bots in multiplayer, seeing how they half ass campaigns(a certain amount of them) and multiplayer isn't that hard to do you would think it'll be a standard. It should be next gen, a.i. will get smarter, no excuses. Not to mention, communities don't last forever...At least you can play by self when the community is dead, devs are just lazy or don't have the money, talent, etc.

I played Killzone 2, Perfect Dark, Battlefield 2, etc., more than a lot of games thanks to bots. I'm not going to buy another 60 bucks FPS ever again, only 50 and less.

There are games with bots though.

I'm a SP man.

The COD campaigns are great.

I mainly get shooters for the SP. If its MP only or campaign is too short and/or weak I'll tend to pass.
If I want some MP action I'm not going to spend 60+$ Ill just go play Urban Terror or Alen Arena or Warsow or some other free MP shooter

Then you must not had met me because I care about campaigns in FPSs, it's normally what I play 1st.

mitu123

Wait up, Duke Nukem Forever is coming.

I play. I care.

Single player? I never even knew Killzone, Call of Duty and Halo had single player campaigns.

it almost seems completely irrelevant now.

people will praise an FPS game for its multiplayer and completely ignore how weak the campaign is (like in the case of black ops or ODST)

people will bash, pan, and nitpck an FPS game for its multiplayer (or lack thereof) and comepletely ignore the amazing singleplayer campaign (like bulletstorm, killzone 2, resistance 2, MW2). crysis 2 and KZ3 seem to be the latest victims of attacks based on this mentality.

so does the campaign just not matter anymore? is multiplayer the only reason why FPS games exist?

arbitor365

Single player? I never even knew Killzone, Call of Duty and Halo had single player campaigns.

Brickz187

The way I see it a good story will always trump good multiplayer. Even if not everyone likes the story as long as it makes me feel some sort of emotion and I'm not just going through it mindlessly. I suppose in my case medal of honor is a good example is was gutted at the end of that (as short as it was). There were missions were I was like holy s**t this mission is un winnable and the character is going to die. The killzone 2 story is an example of one I felt like I was just mindlessly going through although I thought it was an ok story nothing memorable. Hoping KZ 3 makes me care more because I just got that.

The only campaigns I have liked recently are Crysis (1), ArmA 2, Medal of Honor: Airborne (never understood the hate that game got), and Star Wars: Republic Commando. All of those games except ArmA 2 sacrificed multiplayer features to make the sp awesome, and it was worth it. I probably played Crysis singleplayer 75-100 hours and it really never gets boring, especially with unending mods.

ironic since kz3 campaign is absolutely garbage and sucks

HailedJohnDman

A good single player campaign is crucial to me. Besides the fact that I simply enjoy a good single player campaign, it's a chance to prepare for the multiplayer by getting the feel for the controls and gaming environment before jumping in to the fire.

Wait up, Duke Nukem Forever is coming.

speedfog

The single-player portion of a game is very important to me! For example, I don't generally praise Battlefield: Bad Company 2 like many others, due to its lackluster campaign. Multi-player wise, the game excells, though :).

I care alot, especially in coop. Also i´ll get Crysis2 just to play it´s campaign.

I care alot, especially in coop. Also i´ll get Crysis2 just to play it´s campaign.

PAL360

Yeah, I'm really looking forward to the campaign :).

I care about Bioshock Infinite and BF3 SP's very much....

actually i just play the campaigns. cant stand FPS's kind multiplayer, too repetitive for me

Amazing campaign? Resistance 2? Killzone 2? Modern Warfare 2?

Explain please?

Silverbond

Amazing campaign? Resistance 2? Killzone 2? Modern Warfare 2?

Explain please?

Silverbond

my thoughts exactly. and then he said that ODST had a bad campaign:lol:

not true, thats what i care about the most!

Single player matters more for me now as i've yet to come across an MP FPS that can beat QL and CSS and every FPS now seems to be obsessed with emulating CoD's horrible MP.markop2003

I would argue CoD has created two of the worse and best steps forwards in multiplayer FPS's.. The best feature will be that of perks.. Perks are a ingenious way of customization in making a unique gameplay experience outside of twitch mechanics or weapon load out.. The worse would be overpowered killstreaks.. Pretty much anything beyond killstreak of 5 in the CoD's games lead to absurd killstreaks that give inflated killscores..

[QUOTE="markop2003"]Single player matters more for me now as i've yet to come across an MP FPS that can beat QL and CSS and every FPS now seems to be obsessed with emulating CoD's horrible MP.sSubZerOo

I would argue CoD has created two of the worse and best steps forwards in multiplayer FPS's.. The best feature will be that of perks.. Perks are a ingenious way of customization in making a unique gameplay experience outside of twitch mechanics or weapon load out.. The worse would be overpowered killstreaks.. Pretty much anything beyond killstreak of 5 in the CoD's games lead to absurd killstreaks that give inflated killscores..

no. the perk system is incredibly hard to do well in the way its being done now, as there are always 2 or 3 or more overpowered perks and perk combos. Now, if there were only 1 perk per class, and not 3, it would be much more balanced.

SP is all I care about. MP is a nice diversion until my next SP game. That is all.

.....and yet an overwhelming majority of people in this thread have stated otherwise. Naive generalizations FTL.