I mean. They gotta sell them bundels. The map add on and more. Their in the business of making money. But i agree. Is wack af. Seasons are way to go now
6:25 I felt the same way he did. First half of the campaign was cool, nail biting, had me thinking back to the trailer & what they gave us with the historical leaders & events. I thought we were gonna get something crazy for the second half of the game but for me it fell flat on its face.
NGL up until the Vorkuta mission I actually enjoyed the campaign but after Vorkuta there very clearly could’ve been at least 6-8 more missions but after it instead they decided to just cram it all into the final 2 missions we got in the final piece
I hate that campaign didn’t leave like one cliff hanger , they left every question unanswered. There’s a lot of stuff we don’t know or didn’t hear about
I recently watched a professional filmographer's commentary on the campaign, and he said that the plot is a standard spy thriller. The story and setpieces followed a classical order typical for the average Hollywood production. But it was a solid 8/10 (i expected that the last mission would be in the Capitol building) in my opinion.
The marketing made the campaign experience completely different. The hideout customization and secrets to uncover was literally so lackluster. You go to Woods talk about customization/upgrades and it's literally 1 thing in each category that pretty much could be done after the first mission. The ''secrets'' was literally a single puzzle with a couple of hackable hardware to open a safe for money that could be done immediately upon entering the hideout. These historical figures had no impact or relevance to the missions and overal story itself. They get mentioned by name, not even all of them, that's it. They tease so many plotpoints in the background story that never gets anwsered, just teased over and over again up to the very end of the campaign. They also marketed the way missions were replayable and approachable, stealth, guns blazing as if it had any sort of impact or changed the story in a way, but it literally didn't. The sequences where you can go stealth, most of the time you HAVE to go stealth and it's not even possible for the entire mission, cause right after the stealth sequence/area, you'll go guns blazing regardless. Wish CoD would 'least make a singleplayer game, because how cheesey and cliche their campaigns might be, I still enjoy playing them, however I did get dissapointed because I genuinly looked forward to the campaign this time.
Honestly, Black Ops 6 campaign was genuinely fun and enjoyable, from the start almost to finish(the final two missions felt like the devs ran out of time and had to rush things to an end). The mission design was miles ahead of the garbage IW and SHG just consistently produce. They actually last longer than five minutes and have memorable set pieces. They even did one "Open Combat Mission" and made it fun and not miserable. The story? Felt like some missed opportunities. I genuinely thought that after the "Emergence" mission, we were going to get some super soldier powers, hence why the mission was even called "Emergence" in the first place. I also thought that the brainwashing done from Pantheon would have resulted in a good ending/bad ending choice like in Cold War. Join Harrow and the Pantheon and attack DC with the Cradle or something like that. Obviously, non-canon like Cold War's Duga ending, but still there for player choice. Sadly, they somehow went two steps backward from CW.
I thought BO6 was good, not great. It feels like a game that deserves a direct sequel to tie in loose ends but if rumors are right, we’re getting a Black Ops game taking place in 2025, or technically currently day. Jane Harrow, the main antagonist of BO6 wasn’t even the leader of Pantheon I don’t think. Unless they do a really good job with season cinematics, this story might be done without a conclusion. Or maybe BO8 will be a sequel. Who knows.
After Black Ops 3, all they did was fill in the gaps in timelines: BO1 - 1960s BO2 - 1980s and 2025 BO3 - 2065 (WTF) BO4 - 2045 (prequel to BO3) BOCW - 1981 (direct sequel to BO1) BO6 - 1991 (direct sequel to BOCW and BO2 flashbacks) BO7* - 2035 (direct sequel to BO2) *Rumors says it'll be sequel to BO2, giving us David Mason once again.
@@MATRetroVideoGamingI think a remake of bo2's 2025 missions is more likely for bo7 as they have been ruled non-canon by Treyarch (probably due to large technology gap between bo2 and modern Modern Warfare games)
I don't think Pantheon has a leader. That ending where they showed the character behind the PC is just another one of Pantheon's members. Also the whole thing with ''A'' Mole in Panama was most likely just Pantheon and thus not having ''A'' mole. It's just a power struggle within the CIA due to the CIA existing out of CIA members and Pantheon members, whilst having access and power to the same things. They still work together (in)directly. I.E. Harrow telling Pantheon/CIA that the crew was at the mission where we see Clinton. -- Thus CIA members start searching for you, as well as Pantheon members (due to the same character that was at the end of the story being there, leading a group of CIA members).. Then later on it's purely Pantheon (military) members that we are forced to fight to escape the building.
Even Cold War side missions still had little content in them where you just kill one guy and take a picture of him and had little to no change in the story besides the ending. The side missions were just there to add more missions that cold war had little of.
I just don't understand what was the point with Cerberus in the early promo materials. They were introduced in first teasers like some kind of important faction of "truthseekers" that would play significant lore in the campaign. They even got neet logo! AND THEN CERBERUS NEVER MENTIONED AGAIN!
After the story I was left with more questions than answers tbh they had so much potential with where this game takes place like Raul Menendez what’s going on with him? N how the revelation of Harlow being the “mole” like I didn’t feel a connection to that at all then they try n throw her story on you rq like nah that ain’t enough
They should have made cameos in black ops 6 like Reznov, Mason, and even Bell which they had great opportunity's too put them as easter eggs but they completely just left those out and focus on Jane Harrow. They could have put a tape recording that Sev could find in Under the Radar telling what happened in Vorkuta after Alex's escape and whether Reznov did escape. Woods would visit Alex Masons Grave in a cinematic just to show both that hes dead in black ops 6 while still leaving it to speculations that he is alive for those who kept him alive in mutiple endings of black ops 2, and for Bell just mention him Alder instead of "lets not talk about it" cause it pisses me off when Woods keeps saying that Alder was one of the people he trusts who also kills another person he trusts after saving America from Perseus after telling Alder the location. I feel like they could clearly answer some parts of old characters to make their campaign more likeable but after a unclear plot and an unanswered ending and with no other lore protecting it, blacks op 6 campaign is below every black ops campaign except blacks op 3 and 4. I think the black ops 6 campaign is enjoyable but for those that are a fan of the black ops series will indeed be disappointed of it lacking many things that makes a black ops campaign good.
well treyarch make alex mason offcial cannon of alex mason fate in 1989 of him been shot in the head by woods an that why woods feel so sad that he kill his best friend
Okay I'm not going to bash the campaign too much because the casino mission, the Iraq mission and the mission you capture Jane was insanely fun. the zombie mission was cool but I think they over did it a little, maybe not have 4 bosses to fight and instead have 2 so it wouldn't feel so drawn out. The ending is what got me, it left so many questions and it didn't feel like you accomplished anything but stop one attack which doesn't matter because the pantheon and the cradle still exist, you didn't even cripple them lol
IMO I don’t think Harrow was the mole behind Mason’s death. Sure, she wanted the group out of the way for her plans, but I don’t think she wanted to kill them, until they were getting to close to her plans with the Cradle.
They should have made a cinematic of Woods visiting Alex's grave to confirm his death in black ops 6 while letting it play out as either hes dead or hes really alive. They instead focused on Harrows story and the abrupt ending just to show an ending of a continuation of the black ops 6 and leaving people to believe the only time we see Alex Mason is the guy at the end when in reality its just some random guy made to be a villian for next black ops. Really disappointed with the cameos of past characters even if its just a easter egg.
Well, this ambiguosity is still workable. I'm assuming Trey lied to us when they said Alex died, also in BOII when you shoot Alex as Frank you don't actually need to kill him.
I think the trailers we seen 5 months ago( with world leaders)was what they wanted to give us but, i think actual world leaders n countries disapproved of the game so they had to change half of the game ( story campaign)!! Just my opinion
I feel like this game was Treyarch and Raven trying to give us something different as the past 2 campaigns have been basically the same thing. The fact that some people are saying that it is worse than MW3 or Vanguard to very harsh. Yes it is very mid but it nice to have a change even if it was on most of us didn’t like. Let;s hope this continues into Warzone 4 and Multiplayer, so it doesn’t end up being boring like Warzone 2 and MW3 Multiplayer.
I do think that it was like a miss opportunity to follow what BO2 left off as for example, the whereabouts of Menendez, David dealing with the trauma, Woods trying to get by his injuries (which are kinda fresh in BO6), how did he ended up in a retirement home if in BO6 at his 60's he still got called by the CIA to do work? Adler was out because he was being hunted by pantheon but the thing is, the story of BO2 happens through various years and he could at least send or say something about it like hudson might be involved or that he isnt but someone here is or something. They could have easily follow all of that as Menendez is meant to become a powerhouse by next year (sure, it isnt canon anymore but still) so maybe they could have expanded upon that idea of him being part or a member of pantheon and then at the end he became the leader and that is why he is so powerful in the year 2025, idk, I still like the campaign but was a little disappointing to know that they didnt follow what BO2 left off.
They did the 1rst trailer about him with the "Look in the dark" and didn't put him in the game that was a wasted opportunity :/ But It was a good campaign not very good not bad. They should have answered some questions instead of not giving any answers at all. The ending was medium. That's the only issue.
they marketed the event we were all waiting for a mission of and they marketed the truth lies and went so "deep" yet story wasnt that much of a crazy twist like cold war was
I think they did it on purpose to add more content within the campaign like adding more story to it for warzone or a new cod game hopefully for new cod but who knows
While I don't expect a grounded story at the very least I expected it to be similar with BO1 and BO2 especially where you get to meet a lot of historical figures and they get to be very involved in the campaign like JFK, Mullah Rahmaan and Manuel Noriega, so on and so forth. We get to see Saddam, Clinton, Thatcher and a lot of these big figures in the trailer... somehow they just play it safe and avoided touching them. It's like MWII but better, definitely the best in the last three years but still... it's too safe for a story.
The trailer for the campaign had to be one of the coolest we’ve ever gotten. Bran, what would be your ranking of Campaign trailers for those that had them?
Man I don't know actually I would have to look at them again but I enjoyed this year's a lot... you know modern warfare 3 was cool to it made me think we were gonna get a awesome story and then again we didn't I'm not to sure
@@BranWolfYTYou’re right, we got the same thing in mwiii! How they made it seem as though Price was gonna ☠️, how they made Makarov feel like he was a threat to the whole world etc!
Honestly, after thinking, black ops 6 campaign for what it told you, it overstayed it's welcome. Modern Warfare 3 had at least the decency of being painfully short with how little it answered when it comes to the story.
I suppose that it was just a prequel to a 2025 call of duty black ops, and I guess it will answer most of our questions. But I also think it is going to be like black ops 2 and will be separated withc2 campaigns: 90s and 2030s. Who else thinks in that way?
I wouldn't say that they lied it's just how they probably told the story but also we have to realize this is a sequence of black Ops 2 only the Frank wood story of what happens after he got shot we have another Call of Duty Black Ops it's gonna be about David Mason story a direct sequel after Call of Duty black Ops 2 so maybe this pantheon group could be going further than we expected who know it might bleed in modern warfare 4 And other future call of duty game
For me, the campaign was fun, I don't think there was a bad mission, some better than others, of course, but each mission felt unique and I can get behind that, I mean, going into MWIII I thought the same, only to be give the exact same mission over and over again and although people might hate me here, BO6 does kind of reminded me of MWIII, in the way that the story ends, just as its getting juicy, of course, its a far better campaign than MWIII but it also felt a little robbed by the ending. But as my first Black Ops experience since BO3, I had fun, but the multiplayer kind of feels like a chore to go through, and I haven't played much of it. But regardless, I'm curious to see what the year brings and what next year's looks like since it's apparently another Black Op game, I was also told it had something to do with the Balkan War, not sure if that's accurate but could be interesting, hopefully they make a more concrete story rather than a story without a solid ending.
The music in recent games hasn't been very good or memorable I mean it seems that they don't care anymore world at war, Bo1, Bo2 and modern warfare had amazing soundtracks. (could be nit picking though)
The misleading marketing is on par with the bs that Halo 5: Guardians pulled. While Halo 5’s campaign sucks, BO6’s was great, but it was absolutely not what they were telling us what the game was going to be.
personally speaking, I definitely know we haven’t seen 100% the end of it in typical call of duty fashion. They might add a co-op mode to further the story as I did in modern warfare, and I guess, taking a page out of their marketing, how do we know they were telling the truth? If the truth lies, how do we know they weren’t lying to us? Also, the campaign was decent, but it didn’t leave how many key elements from the post-Cold War era that you know we were marketed we’re going to get now that might come on later, or we might never get to see it, but they are so many good messed opportunities they could’ve added, but I guess that’s the norm for now
I didnt see any marketing, but i was not a fan of zombies and how they try to connect campaign to its other game modes. And i didnt like the horror at all.. then again i quit cod, only coming back to try cold war and bo6 campaign. With a game running this long, i wish they got more creative with campaigns in a grounded way. Always feels like the mechanics were never in depth to feel too different. But i definitely dont think adding horror is the way forward
Imo, it’s refreshing and I like the story, but it was forgettable and had a TON of wasted potential. But, it’s a step in the right direction and the studio should be encouraged about that, but also deliver on the story all the way till the end. Maybe the next Black Ops game will learn from this one and be a better and more gritty story (I.E. a story set around the beginning of the war on terror). Story is like a 6.5/10 but has a lot of potential for future releases. I feel like it shouldn’t be criticized too much to the point where we have another COD Ghost scenario.
I feel like bo6 had a boring champaign it felt short, and the main character didn't even have a voice or personality and this missions we got did not reflect what was presented in the marketing materials. There's a lack of guns at launch ( beretta m9 , fn fal , 1911 and no ak47 , no revolver no cz scorpion and no 50 cal sniper) really makes the class set ups feel boring and lack luster .and it ended on a cliff hanger that left me with more questions than answers .It really feels like the human shield and omi movement were the only features that treyarch really cared about , there arnt alot of operators that fit the golf war vibe that the game was going for and the maps are kinda mid . The zombies is fun but not perfect like waw bo1 bo2 but it was good and as for salt edition it's kind of a joke
Are these complaint from the new gen or the OG's . Zombies was always in the overall storymode. It was build all the way from WAW. In bo1 it was heavy hint CIA was messing with nova 6 aka brother to zombies elemnt 115. Or made man verison u can say. Adding zombie works. Also mission was in highly secret lab. Ofc some fishy stuff is happening. Esepcially in BO World. Jimmy Z base zombies in story of bo or close too it. Where Jason B made more fanasty later on its life cycle.
Theory: What if Perseus, Raul Menendez, Khrushanko and possibly more worked with Pantheon. Reply down in the section if you think it's a dumb theory or an actual legit theory with evidence
Personally, this Campaign might genuinely be the best one in the entire franchise. I loved that it tried something new, I loved the spy theming, and the story overall. I understand why you took issue with the sort of deceptive marketing, but I thought it was great. It set up an expectation in my head, that yes, was accurate, but also hid away the other elements of the game that I loved, like the Sci-Fi parts, which really caught me by surprise in my play-through thanks to the marketing, which again, I loved. Obviously, deceptive marketing can go both ways. I completely understand what you’re saying, though. You wanted a grounded story, and the marketing made it seem that way, but the game didn’t really deliver that the majority of the time. Now, I don’t know about you, but I think they’ve set up a great post-launch story for this game, and I can’t wait to see what happens in it. I hope they do more Call of Duty games with this type of theming and Sci-Fi elements. Anyway, great video as always, mate.
@@spinoknight I didn’t mind the change up tbh I didn’t like the wet blanket campaign in mw2 and mw3 except a few missions I like seeing chaos but I really like how this cod actually felt new and polished and you play as a spy but not in deep enough for me
1:43 because Storyline gotten botched over time and slowly made zero since Edit: 4:26 and they can still get Lazy which is why Story overtime becomes meh to majority of the people (even more now with bo6)
well i knew they wouldn’t be major characters as bill clinton wasn’t president during 1991, it was George HW Bush. And had missions in Kuwait, i knew Saddam wouldn’t play a big role but again cuz of Desert Storm would be mentioned. Thatcher was prime minister in this time but only in relation because of Park being Mi6 and the part where you dress as Delta helping Park and the SAS. So obviously they’d put them in the trailer to symbolize 1991. Also no black ops story ever would be straightforward like Modern Warfare, they never made it straight forward in black ops.
Honestly I would of had them reveal that Weaver was the mole since he has major significance to the Black Ops story. Using him in Zombies is just a waste of his character.
@@BranWolfYT The thing it is with Weaver being the mole it could of just been a simple motive as in him feeling more loyal to his home country Russia rather than working for the CIA in the United States. It would of been a basic reason but more effective to the overall story.
@@BranWolfYT reason why he did not appear in black ops campaign because he was give better job to work under rickofen who was use weaver carvar dr crey an other one to get data on dark aether so he can v bring back his son an maybe his wife
Tbh I think the elements from different modes like warzone armor and zombies mashed together in campaign shows how assets are reused instead of creating new things for the campaign itself. It’s almost like they’re trying to squeeze every drop of usefulness they can out of something before tossing it aside. And the brainwashing thing reminds me of that one Jimmy Neutron meme where the teacher tells Jimmy he’s done the same thing again. We get it, Treyarch, you like brainwashing. Can we do something else, now? Meh campaign 5/10
Over promoted for a game half baked ,and zombies? In a campaign? it's going absolutely off key now ,need a realistic shooter that call of duty used to be that just doesn't scratch that itch anymore and I thought this game was gonna be the game changer ,I don't want be harsh coz the game looks good but they've ruined the finale by adding zombies or was that all in case's mind due to the gas 😊
Hey! I saw I made an appearance in the video. Thanks, man! And yeah, I can’t stand it when games hype up one thing in the marketing, but then never actually bring it up in the game. It’s like the dev team and marketing team never even talked. Some of the most frustrating things in BO6 for me have been: 1. The whole setup with politicians and lying. Like I said, the idea of Saddam Hussein being framed by Pantheon could have been such a cool way to flip history, where you actually meet him and hear his side of things. 2. Cerberus? What even is it? They slapped the logo everywhere, it was all over the promo material, and then it never actually shows up in the game or gets named. Is it supposed to be Pantheon? Or maybe the rogue black ops team we’re in? Either way, we’re in a team called “Rogue Black Ops,” not Cerberus. 3. The 90s and Gulf War focus. They mention coalition forces invading Iraq in that one mission where you’re chasing Gusev, but that’s literally it. They never expand on it at all, which is disappointing considering the setup. Feels like there was a lot of potential that just didn’t make it into the game because the marketing team did one thing and the dev/story team was not doing that at all and no one told anyone from other teams what they are doing.
Bro this was the whackest review ever. You tried but it didn’t work that good. You don’t understand the premise behind the “lies” and stories behind everything.
I honestly feel the abandoned the plot after emergence, like they wanted to wrap it up fast and give us crap for the seasonal story.
I agree I finished the last mission and I was like “is that it?”
I mean. They gotta sell them bundels. The map add on and more. Their in the business of making money. But i agree. Is wack af. Seasons are way to go now
@@jorge9142011”map add on” ok bro
6:25 I felt the same way he did. First half of the campaign was cool, nail biting, had me thinking back to the trailer & what they gave us with the historical leaders & events. I thought we were gonna get something crazy for the second half of the game but for me it fell flat on its face.
Yeah that's the feeling it was building into a really cool grounded campaign then bam craziness
NGL up until the Vorkuta mission I actually enjoyed the campaign but after Vorkuta there very clearly could’ve been at least 6-8 more missions but after it instead they decided to just cram it all into the final 2 missions we got in the final piece
I hate that campaign didn’t leave like one cliff hanger , they left every question unanswered. There’s a lot of stuff we don’t know or didn’t hear about
I recently watched a professional filmographer's commentary on the campaign, and he said that the plot is a standard spy thriller. The story and setpieces followed a classical order typical for the average Hollywood production. But it was a solid 8/10 (i expected that the last mission would be in the Capitol building) in my opinion.
You talking about Kai zammit?
@solidbhatt Watched it couple days ago, but it probably was him.
Same, I expected a final mission in the capitol but then the “two weeks later” happened
The marketing made the campaign experience completely different.
The hideout customization and secrets to uncover was literally so lackluster. You go to Woods talk about customization/upgrades and it's literally 1 thing in each category that pretty much could be done after the first mission.
The ''secrets'' was literally a single puzzle with a couple of hackable hardware to open a safe for money that could be done immediately upon entering the hideout.
These historical figures had no impact or relevance to the missions and overal story itself. They get mentioned by name, not even all of them, that's it.
They tease so many plotpoints in the background story that never gets anwsered, just teased over and over again up to the very end of the campaign.
They also marketed the way missions were replayable and approachable, stealth, guns blazing as if it had any sort of impact or changed the story in a way, but it literally didn't. The sequences where you can go stealth, most of the time you HAVE to go stealth and it's not even possible for the entire mission, cause right after the stealth sequence/area, you'll go guns blazing regardless.
Wish CoD would 'least make a singleplayer game, because how cheesey and cliche their campaigns might be, I still enjoy playing them, however I did get dissapointed because I genuinly looked forward to the campaign this time.
Honestly, Black Ops 6 campaign was genuinely fun and enjoyable, from the start almost to finish(the final two missions felt like the devs ran out of time and had to rush things to an end).
The mission design was miles ahead of the garbage IW and SHG just consistently produce. They actually last longer than five minutes and have memorable set pieces. They even did one "Open Combat Mission" and made it fun and not miserable.
The story? Felt like some missed opportunities. I genuinely thought that after the "Emergence" mission, we were going to get some super soldier powers, hence why the mission was even called "Emergence" in the first place. I also thought that the brainwashing done from Pantheon would have resulted in a good ending/bad ending choice like in Cold War. Join Harrow and the Pantheon and attack DC with the Cradle or something like that. Obviously, non-canon like Cold War's Duga ending, but still there for player choice. Sadly, they somehow went two steps backward from CW.
I thought BO6 was good, not great. It feels like a game that deserves a direct sequel to tie in loose ends but if rumors are right, we’re getting a Black Ops game taking place in 2025, or technically currently day.
Jane Harrow, the main antagonist of BO6 wasn’t even the leader of Pantheon I don’t think. Unless they do a really good job with season cinematics, this story might be done without a conclusion. Or maybe BO8 will be a sequel. Who knows.
After Black Ops 3, all they did was fill in the gaps in timelines:
BO1 - 1960s
BO2 - 1980s and 2025
BO3 - 2065 (WTF)
BO4 - 2045 (prequel to BO3)
BOCW - 1981 (direct sequel to BO1)
BO6 - 1991 (direct sequel to BOCW and BO2 flashbacks)
BO7* - 2035 (direct sequel to BO2)
*Rumors says it'll be sequel to BO2, giving us David Mason once again.
@@MATRetroVideoGamingI think a remake of bo2's 2025 missions is more likely for bo7 as they have been ruled non-canon by Treyarch (probably due to large technology gap between bo2 and modern Modern Warfare games)
@@babbabiamesser I hope you meant BO2 flashbacks, not future. There is big gap between 1991 and 2025, that's for sure.
I don't think Pantheon has a leader.
That ending where they showed the character behind the PC is just another one of Pantheon's members.
Also the whole thing with ''A'' Mole in Panama was most likely just Pantheon and thus not having ''A'' mole. It's just a power struggle within the CIA due to the CIA existing out of CIA members and Pantheon members, whilst having access and power to the same things. They still work together (in)directly. I.E. Harrow telling Pantheon/CIA that the crew was at the mission where we see Clinton. -- Thus CIA members start searching for you, as well as Pantheon members (due to the same character that was at the end of the story being there, leading a group of CIA members).. Then later on it's purely Pantheon (military) members that we are forced to fight to escape the building.
I liked the game. I do wish there were more side missions like Cold War had.
Even Cold War side missions still had little content in them where you just kill one guy and take a picture of him and had little to no change in the story besides the ending. The side missions were just there to add more missions that cold war had little of.
I just don't understand what was the point with Cerberus in the early promo materials. They were introduced in first teasers like some kind of important faction of "truthseekers" that would play significant lore in the campaign. They even got neet logo! AND THEN CERBERUS NEVER MENTIONED AGAIN!
Cerberus has a meaning on the logo
After the story I was left with more questions than answers tbh they had so much potential with where this game takes place like Raul Menendez what’s going on with him? N how the revelation of Harlow being the “mole” like I didn’t feel a connection to that at all then they try n throw her story on you rq like nah that ain’t enough
They should have made cameos in black ops 6 like Reznov, Mason, and even Bell which they had great opportunity's too put them as easter eggs but they completely just left those out and focus on Jane Harrow.
They could have put a tape recording that Sev could find in Under the Radar telling what happened in Vorkuta after Alex's escape and whether Reznov did escape. Woods would visit Alex Masons Grave in a cinematic just to show both that hes dead in black ops 6 while still leaving it to speculations that he is alive for those who kept him alive in mutiple endings of black ops 2, and for Bell just mention him Alder instead of "lets not talk about it" cause it pisses me off when Woods keeps saying that Alder was one of the people he trusts who also kills another person he trusts after saving America from Perseus after telling Alder the location.
I feel like they could clearly answer some parts of old characters to make their campaign more likeable but after a unclear plot and an unanswered ending and with no other lore protecting it, blacks op 6 campaign is below every black ops campaign except blacks op 3 and 4. I think the black ops 6 campaign is enjoyable but for those that are a fan of the black ops series will indeed be disappointed of it lacking many things that makes a black ops campaign good.
They showed Mason alive in the story recap trailer. If they choose to make him dead as the “official” ending it will be a terrible decision
well treyarch make alex mason offcial cannon of alex mason fate in 1989 of him been shot in the head by woods an that why woods feel so sad that he kill his best friend
Okay I'm not going to bash the campaign too much because the casino mission, the Iraq mission and the mission you capture Jane was insanely fun. the zombie mission was cool but I think they over did it a little, maybe not have 4 bosses to fight and instead have 2 so it wouldn't feel so drawn out. The ending is what got me, it left so many questions and it didn't feel like you accomplished anything but stop one attack which doesn't matter because the pantheon and the cradle still exist, you didn't even cripple them lol
Finaly someone talking about this
I feel the same way i thought we were gonna get a final answer on mason
I mean, the motto is literally the " The truth lies " so it's accurate.
IMO I don’t think Harrow was the mole behind Mason’s death. Sure, she wanted the group out of the way for her plans, but I don’t think she wanted to kill them, until they were getting to close to her plans with the Cradle.
Of course they did. If Alex died, where's his corpse?
Prestige unlock with an unmasked skin coming in the future
They should have made a cinematic of Woods visiting Alex's grave to confirm his death in black ops 6 while letting it play out as either hes dead or hes really alive. They instead focused on Harrows story and the abrupt ending just to show an ending of a continuation of the black ops 6 and leaving people to believe the only time we see Alex Mason is the guy at the end when in reality its just some random guy made to be a villian for next black ops. Really disappointed with the cameos of past characters even if its just a easter egg.
Well, this ambiguosity is still workable. I'm assuming Trey lied to us when they said Alex died, also in BOII when you shoot Alex as Frank you don't actually need to kill him.
@ their lying to you Awkwrd. Alex Mason been dead for over 30 years!
I think the trailers we seen 5 months ago( with world leaders)was what they wanted to give us but, i think actual world leaders n countries disapproved of the game so they had to change half of the game ( story campaign)!! Just my opinion
It’s true they got sued
Can’t really say they didn’t mention the UK since you do a whole mission with 22 SAS but overall I agree
I feel like this game was Treyarch and Raven trying to give us something different as the past 2 campaigns have been basically the same thing. The fact that some people are saying that it is worse than MW3 or Vanguard to very harsh. Yes it is very mid but it nice to have a change even if it was on most of us didn’t like. Let;s hope this continues into Warzone 4 and Multiplayer, so it doesn’t end up being boring like Warzone 2 and MW3 Multiplayer.
I do think that it was like a miss opportunity to follow what BO2 left off as for example, the whereabouts of Menendez, David dealing with the trauma, Woods trying to get by his injuries (which are kinda fresh in BO6), how did he ended up in a retirement home if in BO6 at his 60's he still got called by the CIA to do work? Adler was out because he was being hunted by pantheon but the thing is, the story of BO2 happens through various years and he could at least send or say something about it like hudson might be involved or that he isnt but someone here is or something.
They could have easily follow all of that as Menendez is meant to become a powerhouse by next year (sure, it isnt canon anymore but still) so maybe they could have expanded upon that idea of him being part or a member of pantheon and then at the end he became the leader and that is why he is so powerful in the year 2025, idk, I still like the campaign but was a little disappointing to know that they didnt follow what BO2 left off.
They’re 100% gonna reveal all of the answers, or tease them, on the last season of BO6 leading into BO7 (which is a sequel to BO2 2025).
They did the 1rst trailer about him with the "Look in the dark" and didn't put him in the game that was a wasted opportunity :/
But It was a good campaign not very good not bad. They should have answered some questions instead of not giving any answers at all. The ending was medium. That's the only issue.
@@dimox115x9 yeah I agree
I was disappointed it could have be better
Action sequence where good
I think the biggest mistake was not having the game open as you playing as Case with Troy in Panama.
@@ardenhagman2148 that would of been great
they marketed the event we were all waiting for a mission of and they marketed the truth lies and went so "deep" yet story wasnt that much of a crazy twist like cold war was
I think they did it on purpose to add more content within the campaign like adding more story to it for warzone or a new cod game hopefully for new cod but who knows
They should make it so that the campaign should go for all six seasons 🎉
@@jamesjefferson3250 I think they will
That would make the campaign matter and tell a better story
Funny thing is they're probably gonna continue the story through bo6 warzone on Avalon like they did back in mw19's warzone.
I thought the zombies were a bit much, it felt more like Resident Evil than Call of Duty
While I don't expect a grounded story at the very least I expected it to be similar with BO1 and BO2 especially where you get to meet a lot of historical figures and they get to be very involved in the campaign like JFK, Mullah Rahmaan and Manuel Noriega, so on and so forth. We get to see Saddam, Clinton, Thatcher and a lot of these big figures in the trailer... somehow they just play it safe and avoided touching them. It's like MWII but better, definitely the best in the last three years but still... it's too safe for a story.
Personally I enjoyed the campaign it was fun and felt like a classic 80’s action movie /horror/James bond with a bit of oceans 11 thrown in
The trailer for the campaign had to be one of the coolest we’ve ever gotten. Bran, what would be your ranking of Campaign trailers for those that had them?
Man I don't know actually I would have to look at them again but I enjoyed this year's a lot... you know modern warfare 3 was cool to it made me think we were gonna get a awesome story and then again we didn't I'm not to sure
@@BranWolfYTYou’re right, we got the same thing in mwiii! How they made it seem as though Price was gonna ☠️, how they made Makarov feel like he was a threat to the whole world etc!
@Sun-Warrior1911 yeah i was HYPED 🤣
You were fucking preaching from 0:00 to like 2:30 lol
Call of dut is crazy but yesh i think left out a couple of things
Yeah I agree it gets wild at times
Honestly, after thinking, black ops 6 campaign for what it told you, it overstayed it's welcome. Modern Warfare 3 had at least the decency of being painfully short with how little it answered when it comes to the story.
I suppose that it was just a prequel to a 2025 call of duty black ops, and I guess it will answer most of our questions. But I also think it is going to be like black ops 2 and will be separated withc2 campaigns: 90s and 2030s. Who else thinks in that way?
I wouldn't say that they lied it's just how they probably told the story but also we have to realize this is a sequence of black Ops 2 only the Frank wood story of what happens after he got shot we have another Call of Duty Black Ops it's gonna be about David Mason story a direct sequel after Call of Duty black Ops 2 so maybe this pantheon group could be going further than we expected who know it might bleed in modern warfare 4 And other future call of duty game
For me, the campaign was fun, I don't think there was a bad mission, some better than others, of course, but each mission felt unique and I can get behind that, I mean, going into MWIII I thought the same, only to be give the exact same mission over and over again and although people might hate me here, BO6 does kind of reminded me of MWIII, in the way that the story ends, just as its getting juicy, of course, its a far better campaign than MWIII but it also felt a little robbed by the ending. But as my first Black Ops experience since BO3, I had fun, but the multiplayer kind of feels like a chore to go through, and I haven't played much of it.
But regardless, I'm curious to see what the year brings and what next year's looks like since it's apparently another Black Op game, I was also told it had something to do with the Balkan War, not sure if that's accurate but could be interesting, hopefully they make a more concrete story rather than a story without a solid ending.
Best black ops was earlier, certain missions allowed you to set up drones and defenses. Just an opinion.
The music in recent games hasn't been very good or memorable I mean it seems that they don't care anymore world at war, Bo1, Bo2 and modern warfare had amazing soundtracks. (could be nit picking though)
The misleading marketing is on par with the bs that Halo 5: Guardians pulled.
While Halo 5’s campaign sucks, BO6’s was great, but it was absolutely not what they were telling us what the game was going to be.
Misled about the story direction yes definitely. Campaign was bad? No way, not a zombies guy and I loved the variety and memorable missions.
Call of duty zombies had four years of development before they stopped this is some what Call of Duty Zombies instead of Black Ops 6
personally speaking, I definitely know we haven’t seen 100% the end of it in typical call of duty fashion. They might add a co-op mode to further the story as I did in modern warfare, and I guess, taking a page out of their marketing, how do we know they were telling the truth? If the truth lies, how do we know they weren’t lying to us? Also, the campaign was decent, but it didn’t leave how many key elements from the post-Cold War era that you know we were marketed we’re going to get now that might come on later, or we might never get to see it, but they are so many good messed opportunities they could’ve added, but I guess that’s the norm for now
double that because they already co op mode it bo6 zombies
I didnt see any marketing, but i was not a fan of zombies and how they try to connect campaign to its other game modes.
And i didnt like the horror at all.. then again i quit cod, only coming back to try cold war and bo6 campaign.
With a game running this long, i wish they got more creative with campaigns in a grounded way. Always feels like the mechanics were never in depth to feel too different. But i definitely dont think adding horror is the way forward
Imo, it’s refreshing and I like the story, but it was forgettable and had a TON of wasted potential. But, it’s a step in the right direction and the studio should be encouraged about that, but also deliver on the story all the way till the end. Maybe the next Black Ops game will learn from this one and be a better and more gritty story (I.E. a story set around the beginning of the war on terror). Story is like a 6.5/10 but has a lot of potential for future releases. I feel like it shouldn’t be criticized too much to the point where we have another COD Ghost scenario.
Game felt more mission impossible than black ops to me
I feel like bo6 had a boring champaign it felt short, and the main character didn't even have a voice or personality and this missions we got did not reflect what was presented in the marketing materials. There's a lack of guns at launch ( beretta m9 , fn fal , 1911 and no ak47 , no revolver no cz scorpion and no 50 cal sniper) really makes the class set ups feel boring and lack luster .and it ended on a cliff hanger that left me with more questions than answers .It really feels like the human shield and omi movement were the only features that treyarch really cared about , there arnt alot of operators that fit the golf war vibe that the game was going for and the maps are kinda mid . The zombies is fun but not perfect like waw bo1 bo2 but it was good and as for salt edition it's kind of a joke
Are these complaint from the new gen or the OG's . Zombies was always in the overall storymode. It was build all the way from WAW. In bo1 it was heavy hint CIA was messing with nova 6 aka brother to zombies elemnt 115. Or made man verison u can say. Adding zombie works. Also mission was in highly secret lab. Ofc some fishy stuff is happening. Esepcially in BO World. Jimmy Z base zombies in story of bo or close too it. Where Jason B made more fanasty later on its life cycle.
It feels like such a nothing burger campaign
Theory: What if Perseus, Raul Menendez, Khrushanko and possibly more worked with Pantheon. Reply down in the section if you think it's a dumb theory or an actual legit theory with evidence
I Think CALL OF DUTY BLACK OPS 6 is Good and Amazing! The Campaign is Good, Multiplayer is Nice and Zombie is Amazing! CALL OF DUTY IS AWESOME!!!
Multiplayer is kicking my ass 🤣
@@BranWolfYTBranWolf I Don't Think Multiplayer Kicking You Ass. Multiplayer is Nice and Awesome! CALL OF DUTY BLACK OPS 6 is Good so far
Bad bot.
I think the campaing should end with Adler being the mole in the CIA and the main villan.
Personally, this Campaign might genuinely be the best one in the entire franchise. I loved that it tried something new, I loved the spy theming, and the story overall. I understand why you took issue with the sort of deceptive marketing, but I thought it was great. It set up an expectation in my head, that yes, was accurate, but also hid away the other elements of the game that I loved, like the Sci-Fi parts, which really caught me by surprise in my play-through thanks to the marketing, which again, I loved. Obviously, deceptive marketing can go both ways. I completely understand what you’re saying, though. You wanted a grounded story, and the marketing made it seem that way, but the game didn’t really deliver that the majority of the time. Now, I don’t know about you, but I think they’ve set up a great post-launch story for this game, and I can’t wait to see what happens in it. I hope they do more Call of Duty games with this type of theming and Sci-Fi elements. Anyway, great video as always, mate.
Thank you and yeah I think they set it up really well for post launch I'm atleast very excited to get real answers later on!
Bro how you forgot my name 3:26 😭
That's my FAULT
You good I’m trolling I made some random name some years ago
Game felt more mission impossible than black ops for me
@@spinoknight I didn’t mind the change up tbh I didn’t like the wet blanket campaign in mw2 and mw3 except a few missions I like seeing chaos but I really like how this cod actually felt new and polished and you play as a spy but not in deep enough for me
1:43 because Storyline gotten botched over time and slowly made zero since
Edit: 4:26 and they can still get Lazy which is why Story overtime becomes meh to majority of the people (even more now with bo6)
well i knew they wouldn’t be major characters as bill clinton wasn’t president during 1991, it was George HW Bush. And had missions in Kuwait, i knew Saddam wouldn’t play a big role but again cuz of Desert Storm would be mentioned. Thatcher was prime minister in this time but only in relation because of Park being Mi6 and the part where you dress as Delta helping Park and the SAS. So obviously they’d put them in the trailer to symbolize 1991. Also no black ops story ever would be straightforward like Modern Warfare, they never made it straight forward in black ops.
Honestly I would of had them reveal that Weaver was the mole since he has major significance to the Black Ops story. Using him in Zombies is just a waste of his character.
@@RevisedGames yeah they just pushed him over to zombies and never mentioned again in campaign
@@BranWolfYT The thing it is with Weaver being the mole it could of just been a simple motive as in him feeling more loyal to his home country Russia rather than working for the CIA in the United States. It would of been a basic reason but more effective to the overall story.
@@BranWolfYT reason why he did not appear in black ops campaign because he was give better job to work under rickofen who was use weaver carvar dr crey an other one to get data on dark aether so he can v bring back his son an maybe his wife
The horror approach makes a lot of money. And it was about time they canonize the zombies. I really liked it.
I'm glad you enjoyed it!
@@BranWolfYT Yeah! The last part was a bit weird, but I appreciate when teams take risks and step out of their comfort zone.
Tbh I think the elements from different modes like warzone armor and zombies mashed together in campaign shows how assets are reused instead of creating new things for the campaign itself. It’s almost like they’re trying to squeeze every drop of usefulness they can out of something before tossing it aside. And the brainwashing thing reminds me of that one Jimmy Neutron meme where the teacher tells Jimmy he’s done the same thing again. We get it, Treyarch, you like brainwashing. Can we do something else, now? Meh campaign 5/10
I give them credit for the grappling hook though. That was at least something new that isn’t used anywhere else (yet?)
@@AWolf-gq2vu i think grappling hook could be add to zombies at sompoint
Incredibly misled
Over promoted for a game half baked ,and zombies? In a campaign? it's going absolutely off key now ,need a realistic shooter that call of duty used to be that just doesn't scratch that itch anymore and I thought this game was gonna be the game changer ,I don't want be harsh coz the game looks good but they've ruined the finale by adding zombies or was that all in case's mind due to the gas 😊
case was super soldier an that gas was what was use to give him super soldier abilities
How did they manage to make such a shit story :( cold war was soo much better
Hey! I saw I made an appearance in the video. Thanks, man!
And yeah, I can’t stand it when games hype up one thing in the marketing, but then never actually bring it up in the game. It’s like the dev team and marketing team never even talked.
Some of the most frustrating things in BO6 for me have been:
1. The whole setup with politicians and lying. Like I said, the idea of Saddam Hussein being framed by Pantheon could have been such a cool way to flip history, where you actually meet him and hear his side of things.
2. Cerberus? What even is it? They slapped the logo everywhere, it was all over the promo material, and then it never actually shows up in the game or gets named. Is it supposed to be Pantheon? Or maybe the rogue black ops team we’re in? Either way, we’re in a team called “Rogue Black Ops,” not Cerberus.
3. The 90s and Gulf War focus. They mention coalition forces invading Iraq in that one mission where you’re chasing Gusev, but that’s literally it. They never expand on it at all, which is disappointing considering the setup.
Feels like there was a lot of potential that just didn’t make it into the game because the marketing team did one thing and the dev/story team was not doing that at all and no one told anyone from other teams what they are doing.
@Error-000 I appreciate your comments bro and yeah, there were some misses for me as well. I mean, it was fun, but the zombies thing killed my vibe 😅
2:05 bro can’t spell
😂😂😂😂😂shit and I used to work for a newspaper🥲
Bro this was the whackest review ever. You tried but it didn’t work that good. You don’t understand the premise behind the “lies” and stories behind everything.
🥲 this wasn't a review 🥲