Treyarch: Why Call of Duty Zombies isn't its own game

[PINNAZ]

Here is an article exert from Eurogamer who interviewed Jason Blundell who answers the question - "Why Call of Duty Zombies isn't its own game"

 

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2015-10-15-treyarch-why-call-of-duty-zombies-isnt-its-own-game

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/call-of-duty-dev-discusses-why-zombies-mode-isnt-a/1100-6431448/

 

Call of Duty's Zombies mode has grown from being a cool bonus to one of the best things - for some the best thing - about the first-person shooter series.

And for a few years now some have called for Activision to create a standalone Zombies game, the idea being that a bigger budget and more development time would result in a better experience.

 

But that seems unlikely when it comes to Treyarch's Call of Duty games at least. Treyarch, which kicked off Zombies with the launch of 2008's World at War, sounds keen on keeping Zombies a part of the Call of Duty package.

Why? Because players enjoy switching between all three modes in Call of Duty games: from campaign to multiplayer to Zombies, depending on their mood.

"We've got to cater for a lot of people," Jason Blundell, director of campaign and Zombies for Call of Duty: Black Ops 3, told Eurogamer.

"Sometimes you want to watch a movie and want to be engaged narratively on a concept. And then we have multiplayer - sometimes you just want to run around and have that high engagement experience. And sometimes you want to kill the undead - sometimes you want to play Zombies.

"We see by the numbers and how people engage with the game as a whole, people change that feeling. They'll move between the different modes."

Because of this, Black Ops 3 lets parties of players switch modes seamlessly - a first for the series.

"We've made a unified .exe for the first time, which means all three modes run from the same place," Blundell explained.

"So when you party up, you can move between each one. There's no unloading the .exe. In previous games you'd see it go to black and then it would come back up again. You can seamlessly move because now all three are online."

 

A large team within Treyarch (which is around 400 people) has worked on Zombies mode for Black Ops 3 for some time, Blundell said, creating a film noire-styled map bigger than any previous Zombies effort. Shadows of Evil stars Ron Perlman, Heather Graham, Neal McDonough and Jeff Goldblum.

The second Zombies map is called The Giant, a remake of the World at War map Der Riese.

For Blundell, the size and scope of Black Ops 3's Zombies maps counter the argument that a standalone experience would be bigger and better.

"While it's a lovely sentiment on the idea of breaking Zombies out into its own separate game, we see that people move between all three modes," Blundell continued.

"And we're always about giving as much content, as much value for money, as we possibly can. That's why we pack our disc with as many game modes as we have currently.

"What started as being very much a bonus mode in Zombies has now become a third pillar. We have this massive campaign now. We've got the juggernaut, which is multiplayer. And now for the first time Zombies has taken off as being a full-on experience.

"It's really about flexibility and variety of choice for the amount of people who buy our games."

 

So there you have it. Don't expect a Call of Duty Zombies game any time soon.

 

 

~ Blundell said, creating a film noire-styled map bigger than any previous Zombies effort.

(Though in context, he is probably referring to the work load size that went into Shadows of Evil)

 

[DaveLo07]

I can see the logic behind their thinking. I started out solely as a zombies player but over the years, have slowly gotten into the multiplayer side of things. What I initially enjoyed about zombies was the co-op aspect of the gameplay and working as a team which does apply to some multiplayer modes as well. I don’t play a lot of solo zombies, and have never completed a campaign on previous cod titles as I'd rather play online with friends but with the new co-op campaign it does feel like I will be getting 3 game experiences in 1. 

Time also plays a factor. I struggle to enjoy a zombies game unless I know I’ve got at least a couple of hours to spare, so multiplayer is a good game mode if I’ve got 20 minutes to kill. Just begs the question if there are no plans for a stand alone game, then why no backward compatibility?

 

[Boom115]

I read this yesterday definitely put a damper in my future zombie dreams, but I get it. Think about the ROI they get from the zombie players alone. Full DLC profit for a single map releases. You pay 120 buckets for 5 maps- minimal investment with a high return. Really solid strategy from a business perspective providing all specific parties with just a taste of content.  .

[Lenne]

I think that is just a nice way of saying: "Not enough people would buy it, we have all the data herp a derp trolololo."

But I can live with it.

[Spider3000]

I remember Nolan North saying this at one of his panels, last year I think. I don't really mind anyway. I like the 3-in-1 style they make. I honestly don't know how I'd feel about a solo Zombies game.

[Cheesegrater28]

I see no reason this couldn't happen. You could still have the game be 3 different parts. The only thing we would need is a campaign that takes players through a story that occurs separately but parallel with one setting of the Zombie story. Instead of cheesy Sci-FI future tech, fighting the same re skinned soldiers and occasional drones, or now terminator knock offs, that the three previous games tried with the same story line recycled, we could get a campaign that occurs during a zombie outbreak while still fighting soldiers and using experimental 935 tech. Now we're fighting soldiers from secret groups like 935 or the Flesh, zombies, and any other crazy 115 monsters like Nova crawlers or hell hounds. And you can set up boss fights which would be a welcome addition to a CoD campaign. 

I'd rather have one game every 3 years with a campaign, survival mode, and multiplayer all be zombie themed then have the same campaign year after year and knock off zombie survival modes mixed in. Cause that's the formula since BO2. Advanced Warfare's campaign would have been a good one if we hadn't already done worse versions of the same campaign in BO2 and Ghosts. 

[Spider3000]

I see no reason this couldn't happen. You could still have the game be 3 different parts. The only thing we would need is a campaign that takes players through a story that occurs separately but parallel with one setting of the Zombie story. Instead of cheesy Sci-FI future tech, fighting the same re skinned soldiers and occasional drones, or now terminator knock offs, that the three previous games tried with the same story line recycled, we could get a campaign that occurs during a zombie outbreak while still fighting soldiers and using experimental 935 tech. Now we're fighting soldiers from secret groups like 935 or the Flesh, zombies, and any other crazy 115 monsters like Nova crawlers or hell hounds. And you can set up boss fights which would be a welcome addition to a CoD campaign. 

Eh, I like the variety between each of the modes. Plus, I also enjoyed both of the Black Ops' Campaigns. A solo Zombies game isn't something I really want. It would depend completely on the way it is made.

[Cheesegrater28]

You could still have the same exact campaign elements. Corridor shooting, stealth missions that turn to shoot outs, a random vehicle down a path mission and then a vehicle or suit with rockets mission, and the constant falling on the ground or getting knocked out for a second and someone picking you up while you're dazed. But instead of having a near future setting with some antagonist with an army at his finger tips and the secret group we are apart of his all that stands in his way, it would be nice to play out a different story at least once in the new 3 year CoD cycle.

A zombie campaign could still have a main bad guy, but the world falling around us would be the main enemy and goal we are trying to stop. For instance, if the game was set up around the same time as Moon, we could be at the Area 51 base when the zombie outbreak first happened before the O4 got there or maybe some outside group attacked it and caused the outbreak. Fighting your way out of that and then having to survive the Moon nukes would be a nice beginning to the campaign. (Remember when Ghosts opening campaign was a dad telling his grown sons out in the woods about this awesome group of soldiers who were invincible) Then just trying to make it through the apocalypse while you and other soldiers try to somehow save yourselves or the world while it all crumbles would be nice then the usual stopping the one cliche bad guy who's angry and power hungry.

And you still could have the same core missions, but now add certain missions where in the middle of the level you get locked into a confined area and have to suddenly survive 20 rounds before you can move forward. And once you beat those missions, that map gets unlocked in the real Zombie mode much like the Farm or Bus Depot. These missions could happen because Richtofen starts to notice us and wants to stop us. We know he and Maxis talked to other groups. Not to mention the variety of enemies that can be added other than the regular soldiers we'd be fighting against. CoD always had nice control and mechaincs which makes its multiplayer so fun. Why not use those controls to take on some big interesting  challenging bosses during some missions.It be nice to have more variety to the story and missions than the past CoDs have had.

[The Clay Bird]

I don't mind there being no plans for a standalone zombies game, because i play a lot of multiplayer as well, but I really wish there was a way that activision could allow another studio or a branch of treyarch to continue the zombies DLC season beyond the 4 map packs.  With 3 studios in rotation now, it really blows to have to wait 3 years to get any new content for a lot of people's favorite game mode

[Shootinfish]

Interesting read

Asked me year ago do i want a standalone campaign i would jumped at the chance

Today though im happy with the format even though i dont play MP , im really looking forward to the campaign

In my humble opinon an openworld zombie type game would suit this better than trying to rehash into a fps campaign

Problem I see is finding a studio to do it

 

[Spider3000]

Interesting read

Asked me year ago do i want a standalone campaign i would jumped at the chance

Today though im happy with the format even though i dont play MP , im really looking forward to the campaign

In my humble opinon an openworld zombie type game would suit this better than trying to rehash into a fps campaign

Problem I see is finding a studio to do it

 

In the amount of years I've played Zombies, and the amount of type I've spent playing it, I've never once thought of an open-world Zombie game. I should really re-evaluate my life.

[Shootinfish]

I thought a open-world Zombie game a bit too much and tried to make one

About 8 months ago i downloaded unreal engine UDK and did some tutorials

Further down the line UE4 was released and i did the same and did some basic tutorials

I learnt a lot from this and now appreciate the skillset and people power you need to actually make a game even though it was a small insight

I also found out im also garbage at pretty much every thing to do with game development

You would be suprised the amount of people trying to build a zombie game on there own , and judging by the engine forum posts its been going on a long time and i havent seen any real success

"First stumbling block of many is the AI"

As open world zombie games go i only know of Dayz which was built from a mod not from scratch then concepted to a game

Never played it but has been recommended (im trying to game less study more otherwise i proberly would have)

Now i maybe wrong but i think most people who want a zombie campaign want a borderlands openworld with story style game with treyarch type movement engine and ai etc

But i go back to finding a studio the right size and quality to do this

Then there is the funding said studio

Doesnt seem likely at the momment lets hope for the future

 

[Spider3000]

Well, I'd definitely play it, if it ever came to fruition.

Good luck with it, in the future.

[Rissole25]

This is actually really interesting how they talk about the .exe's. In WaW & BO1, Zombies used the Campaign engine, and so was packaged in the main menu with the Campaign. BO2 it was said to use the Multiplayer engine, but it wasn't in the multiplayer menu, and also went to a black loading screen. So it was it's own .exe, but it was probably a modified Multiplayer one.

So now BO3 is just one whole .exe. This is great news, because it sounds like they've designed it with Zombies in mind this time. Zombies has usually been held back by being 2nd fiddle in the Campaign/MP engine, so we should get some great new mechanics to work with now.

[Shootinfish]

I agree really interesting there using one executable for all modes 

Still not sure how your going to tranverse to MP or zombies, though its been reported you can just fluidly move with your party from one mode to another from the safehouse

[Lenne]

One more thing I would like to say is this: Before we hope for a zombies only game, we should hopfe for the option to buy each zombie map on it's own.

As in without the mp maps.

[Spider3000]

One more thing I would like to say is this: Before we hope for a zombies only game, we should hopfe for the option to buy each zombie map on it's own.

As without the mp maps.

Completely agree. Back when Ghosts was current game, I used to love Extinction, but I absolutely hated the multiplayer. Every time a DLC pack would come out, I'd have to buy these other maps that I had literally no use for.

Saying that now, I'd probably still buy the DLC packs for Black Ops 3, since the Beta was pretty good haha. But to be given the choice is nice, especially for Zombie guys who essentially pay €15 for one Zombie map.

[Shootinfish]

I dont really play multiplayer and would prefer to just have the zombies maps

But i can see a issue

How do you price this so its fair and still provides the funds for development (and profit)

I can see there being additional costs also with the vendor (MS SONY Steam etc)

What im saying is it not just as simple as doing  a 50/50 (first figure in my head) split

Also they want players to play all modes so it makes sense to package the dlc together

How about if some way you could get zombie players on MP maps

Putting zombies on mp maps in custom games so you could setup a game where you have zombies spawn in like MP except ther health increases everytime you kill them so when they respawn they have a higher health level basicly the AW suvival but with zombies

I know this isnt a very good idea but i was trying to think of something that doesnt take a lot of resources and where you could reuse from the existing pool

Another idea (LOL) freerunning with a horde of zombies behind you equiped with only a knife,and you have to lead them though traps

 

 

 

 

[Lenne]

They sold Nuketown zombies on its own though.

So I could see them doing that at some point.

 

[Spider3000]

They sold Nuketown zombies on its own though.

So I could see them doing that at some point.

They'll more than likely do the same with The Giant. However, I wouldn't hold my breath for DLC Zombie Maps.

[Kill_All_Monkeys]

Seamless transition between the 3 modes while keeping the party intact is probably the best news I've heard about the game yet. I can't describe enough how annoying it was switching between multiplayer and zombies all the time in BO2 and having to put parties back together especially when some people have bunk connections and only certain people can host and oh my god was it irritating.

I think their main reasoning for having zombies bundled with mutliplayer stuff in DLC is to basically provide a more complete experience with the DLC to justify it's price. I've seen a lot of complaints about DLC over the years, a lot of which being it doesn't provide enough content across the board for a certain game and you're paying too much just to add on to one aspect of the game. Plus the truth is there is a great deal of people who play multiplayer and they far outnumber the zombie regulars. Also, while not completely, I think most zombie players still play multiplayer for a fair amount of time as well.

I truly wanted a standalone zombies game for the longest time but in recent years I kind of re-thought my position on that and while I think it would certainly be cool, there would be some issues with it and ultimately not as successful as many people would like it to be. It's fanbase is not as big as the multiplayer crowd so obviously they will want to appeal to the larger audience. Having a campaign would kind of get rid of one of the best aspects of zombies in my opinion too. Part of the allure to zombies is figuring out the story and while a campaign wouldn't necessarily answer everything, it would still take a lot of the fun out of it and there can only be so much discussion on whether or not we enjoyed it. Whatever the story may be, it's bound to be divisive too, for instance between people who would've wanted to follow the O4 or the people who wanted to follow an entirely new group set in the already established world (or maybe even a reboot). It's just something that as a whole experience I don't think it could please everybody, or even a majority.

Having a game that provides a solid fps campaign experience (which ones were good are up to you), a somewhat robust multiplayer and the ever mysterious and challenging zombies mode justifies it as a full game. Some people could argue that content is light in a cod game and I would argue back that just off the disk alone with no DLC I can and have put more hours into a cod game than critically acclaimed games like The Last of Us. This is the most corwd pleasing version of the game Activision can sell and I'm completely fine with that because I've happened to enjoy all 3 elements in the Black Ops games. That's my 2 cents on the subject.

[Cheesegrater28]

 

I truly wanted a standalone zombies game for the longest time but in recent years I kind of re-thought my position on that and while I think it would certainly be cool, there would be some issues with it and ultimately not as successful as many people would like it to be. It's fanbase is not as big as the multiplayer crowd so obviously they will want to appeal to the larger audience. Having a campaign would kind of get rid of one of the best aspects of zombies in my opinion too. Part of the allure to zombies is figuring out the story and while a campaign wouldn't necessarily answer everything, it would still take a lot of the fun out of it and there can only be so much discussion on whether or not we enjoyed it. Whatever the story may be, it's bound to be divisive too, for instance between people who would've wanted to follow the O4 or the people who wanted to follow an entirely new group set in the already established world (or maybe even a reboot). It's just something that as a whole experience I don't think it could please everybody, or even a majority.

 

There's no reason a Zombie CoD game couldn't still have the same exact MP mode. Only difference would be that its heavily zombie themed maps, weapons, killstreaks, and perks. BO3s MP looks like it has Star Wars force abilities, so including experimental weapons and gadgets from Zombies into MP wouldn't be a big stretch. And the MP sides could be 935 soldiers vs Majestic 12 soldiers or something like that. Even random customizable survivors vs bio hazard troops. Instead of dogs killstreak, we could unleash hellhounds or even sprinter zombies. The core of what MP mode could still be there so those fans would still get what they want.

And the campaign doesn't need to be about the story we've been discovering, but just a small part of a side story occurring during it. A campaign that evolved around the world BO2 set up. Let us play out the events of Broken Arrow, survive the Moon nukes, fight against the Flesh as they try to take cities over, and fend of zombies and 115 creatures while fighting soldiers. Basically create a stand alone campaign that doesn't ruin the story Zombie mode set up, but lets us play out something small that's been introduced in the background of the mode with little detail. 

[Spider3000]

You could still have the same exact campaign elements. Corridor shooting, stealth missions that turn to shoot outs, a random vehicle down a path mission and then a vehicle or suit with rockets mission, and the constant falling on the ground or getting knocked out for a second and someone picking you up while you're dazed. But instead of having a near future setting with some antagonist with an army at his finger tips and the secret group we are apart of his all that stands in his way, it would be nice to play out a different story at least once in the new 3 year CoD cycle.

A zombie campaign could still have a main bad guy, but the world falling around us would be the main enemy and goal we are trying to stop. For instance, if the game was set up around the same time as Moon, we could be at the Area 51 base when the zombie outbreak first happened before the O4 got there or maybe some outside group attacked it and caused the outbreak. Fighting your way out of that and then having to survive the Moon nukes would be a nice beginning to the campaign. (Remember when Ghosts opening campaign was a dad telling his grown sons out in the woods about this awesome group of soldiers who were invincible) Then just trying to make it through the apocalypse while you and other soldiers try to somehow save yourselves or the world while it all crumbles would be nice then the usual stopping the one cliche bad guy who's angry and power hungry.

And you still could have the same core missions, but now add certain missions where in the middle of the level you get locked into a confined area and have to suddenly survive 20 rounds before you can move forward. And once you beat those missions, that map gets unlocked in the real Zombie mode much like the Farm or Bus Depot. These missions could happen because Richtofen starts to notice us and wants to stop us. We know he and Maxis talked to other groups. Not to mention the variety of enemies that can be added other than the regular soldiers we'd be fighting against. CoD always had nice control and mechaincs which makes its multiplayer so fun. Why not use those controls to take on some big interesting  challenging bosses during some missions.It be nice to have more variety to the story and missions than the past CoDs have had.

I like having different modes. I like having Campaign, Multiplayer and Zombies. I like having three very distinctive modes (Campaign and Multiplayer less so, but still). I don't want to see a Campaign and Multiplayer that is based around Zombies, because that to me, is still Zombies.

[Cheesegrater28]

Fair enough. And I think that's the main reason they will never have a Zombie only game because zombies don't appeal to everyone so some wouldn't want the other two modes tainted by it.

My point is just that they could easily do a zombie only game and still have all 3 modes. There'd just be a common theme. I'd prefer that, being a zombie fan because not only do I love Treyarch zombies, but I'd also love for CoD campaigns to start to separate themselves again. With a new 3 year cycle, I'd love nothing more than to get a new CoD each year that actually felt like a new one. So if Treyarch doesn't want to go back to older settings like WW2 or Cold War because they are worried the tech isn't there for what they want to do in MP, I'd much rather they go the zombie direction. I'd prefer that over the near future setting we've been getting pounded with in the last 3 games. 

[Lenne]

I think their main reasoning for having zombies bundled with mutliplayer stuff in DLC is to basically provide a more complete experience with the DLC to justify it's price. I've seen a lot of complaints about DLC over the years, a lot of which being it doesn't provide enough content across the board for a certain game and you're paying too much just to add on to one aspect of the game. Plus the truth is there is a great deal of people who play multiplayer and they far outnumber the zombie regulars. Also, while not completely, I think most zombie players still play multiplayer for a fair amount of time as well.

I think having the option for the zombie fanatics to buy the zombie map on it's own for let's just say 5 bucks isn't hurting anyone.

Not everybody wants the complete package.