When us single-players run our mouths off about unnecessary multiplayer modes using up resources that would be better spent on the single-player, we fail to mention that the opposite is also true in some cases. Resources will be diverted from the multiplayer portion EAвЂ™s already on thin ice the last thing they need is heavier skates. If a publisher/developer has a track record of making lackluster games, even just in one specific genre, it can really damage their reputation. What if they end up publishing a good single-player FPS one day? Not as many people will trust them at that point and be willing to give them a chance. These are not things EA and DICE can afford to jeaporidize any further, and by carelessly serving gamers another вЂblehвЂ™ campaign, they could really end up hurting their public image. So, we have skepticism of the developer, skepticism of the publisher, and skepticism of the brand itself at risk here. If someone feels they wasted their money on a $60 game (more for you poor Aussie folks) when they could have bought something else, it really does make an impact. If you thought Mass Effect 3 and Dragon Age II were festering piles (as did many), then itвЂ™s likely youвЂ™ll be less excited about future Bioware projects and perhaps youвЂ™ll even promise not to buy them (as did many). The same is true of IPs themselves, however. IвЂ™m one of the many who scoff when I see RebellionвЂ™s logo appear on a box, or have second thoughts when I see Activision. People are incredibly skeptical when they see a publisher or developerвЂ™s logo on a game. ItвЂ™ll only serve to lessen the Battlefield brand and EA in the eyes of single-player gamers In fact, if anything, itвЂ™ll be harmful to both the overall game as well as EAвЂ™s image. IвЂ™m a supporter of GOOD, WELL-MADE single-player games, and I firmly believe that if DICE and EA decide to tack on another uninspired campaign to the inevitable Battlefield 4, featuring the same lack of time and effort, it wonвЂ™t do anyone any favors. Well, you see, IвЂ™m not necessarily a supporter of single-player games. Why would I want a game to purposefully exclude a single-player portion? After all, IвЂ™m the guy who scribbles writes for a site that is solely focused on single-player gaming. I know thatвЂ™s going to sound absolutely bananas coming from me. Perhaps Battlefield 4 shouldnвЂ™t even have a campaign. A tragic occurrence, for sure, but one that got me thinking: In fact, it probably wouldnвЂ™t be a great stretch to say that DICE had no interest in making a campaign and were forced by EA to shoehorn one in. LetвЂ™s face it, Battlefield has always been seen as primarily a multiplayer shooter anyway, so there was no real creative drive behind the campaign. ItвЂ™s not hard to see why this happened, since DICE likely rushed the campiagn in order for the game to come out close to MW3вЂ™s release.

Battlefield 4 third person view