FANDOM


This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Call of Duty: Black Ops III article.
This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.

  • Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes at the end of your post (~~~~).
  • Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
  • New to Call of Duty Wiki? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.
Article policies
  • No opinionated research for articles
  • Have a neutral point of view
  • Verifiability

SnapchatEdit

Why has nobody included the fact that Treyarch is promoting the game via Snapchat? —Unsigned comment was added by 108.247.117.10

It depends. I wouldn't know it since I don't have a Snapchat. Second, is there anything significantly important they're posting there that they haven't done so on their own site, Twitter, FB, or Youtube? If so, then it would be worth adding. Just tell us it is on this talk page, since BOIII is currently locked. bionicle__unity_duty_destiny_by_cyberpictures-d6p3li2.pngLegos-Rule-15 Talk 16:09, April 12, 2015 (UTC)
There really hasn't been anything except for some cryptic messages (which haven't appeared for a couple of days) and the name "Dr. Salim". However, GKNOVA6 really didn't give any details of the game, yet there's a page for that. I think we should at least mention the Snapchat stuff though. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 18:00, April 12, 2015 (UTC)
I've added to info on the Snapchat stuff. Capt. MillerTalk 05:23, April 28, 2015 (UTC)

IconsEdit

We really should add the real world icon on this page soon. Maybe the zombies one too because wasn't it confirmed? Intel model BOIIRoachTheIntelCollector Talk  16:00, April 24, 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure if zombies has been technically confirmed yet... Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 20:29, April 24, 2015 (UTC)
Aaannnnd... it's confirmed. bionicle__unity_duty_destiny_by_cyberpictures-d6p3li2.pngLegos-Rule-15 Talk 04:15, April 25, 2015 (UTC)
Zombies was confirmed back in like February anyway. KUDLq.png 22:16, April 26, 2015 (UTC)

Last-gen Ports Edit

There's talk of Black Ops III being brought to last-gen. While I highly doubt it, it's something to think about.
Source: http://charlieintel.com/2015/04/27/dutch-retailer-lists-call-of-duty-black-ops-3-for-xbox-360-and-ps3/ Omnipedia Logo No Text BO3 exacri 15:16, April 27, 2015 (UTC)

Are there any other instances of this? Capt. MillerTalk 11:57, April 30, 2015 (UTC)

Plot? Meta Perspecitive? (Meta Perspective = like: you find out that everything was a dream; or the first mission was the last ... or ... you know what I mean ... I hope) Edit

I was here like one week ago; and the plot was still very short. Now I wanted to ask if the writers of this small plot realy played the right game (whole campaign is a flashback or something like that?!), but it looks the page has been updated. Luckily.

Still I wonder myself what's up with the pictures that one sees during the "new worlds" mission in which Taylor is seen for a few secondparts, were he is pulled back by two other guys.

Has the game something like a meta perspective?

And how does the player's soldier survived anyway the story - he/she was nearly committing suicide in the last mission. Was the DNI-Simulation started before the player's soldier was able to fire the weapon?

82.83.56.19 23:28, November 23, 2015 (UTC)

Found some easter eggs in the "Life" pre-mission report

http://www.mediafire.com/view/3348ov1ldar5vlp/life.txt

93.173.132.62 20:02, November 26, 2015 (UTC)

Prometheus Candidate Edit

Has anyone noticed the extra soldiers mentioned in the Candidates category?

"Taylor,J, Accepted, Active

Hall,S, Accepted, Active

Kantor,D, Rejected,Notes: Psych profile incompatible. 

Osman,P Accepted,Deceased, Notes: SURGICAL COMPLICATIONS. (Player?)

MASON,C, Rejected, Physical condition non-viable. (um)

Maretti,P,Accepted,Active, Notes: Post-surgical psyhcological complications."

Carcal.T,Accepted,Deceased,Notes: SURGICAL COMPLICATIONS. (Player?)

Diaz.S,Accepted,Active

Xenosthesweg (talk) 20:07, December 26, 2015 (UTC)Xenos

It is entirely possible that Osman and Carcal are the Male and Female Player characters, in either order. We would need first names to determine which is which, and there is no time either is referred to as either in game, so... just a theory of my own. SteveHeist (talk) 18:04, January 12, 2016 (UTC)
Too bad =( Xenosthesweg (talk) 19:38, January 12, 2016 (UTC)

Alternate theory: "Life" mission is a REAL mission taking place from Taylor's point of viewEdit

I'm getting a lot of resistance to putting up my theory that the "Life" mission is in fact a real mission, just being told from Taylor's point of view AFTER the New World mission (in which Player dies). Note that I am just putting my theory as an alternate theory to the pre-existing theory that is already all over this Wiki (the theory that "Life" is just a dream mission, Kane and Hendricks do not die in reality, etc). In no way am I stating that the pre-existing theory is false and my theory is objectively true.

I'd argue that my theory seems far more probable than the pre-existing Wiki theory, since it is heavily implied in the game that Kane met Taylor in the hospital (she leaves her scarf for him, which Taylor wears in Mission 1), NOT the now deceased Player character. And Kane mentions the hospital visit in the beginning of the Life mission. It seems to me the writers intentionally put this dialogue in the game as a clue to hint that you are in fact back in reality.

At the end of day, however, I see no legitimate reason to completely disqualify my theory from being on the Wiki when the pre-existing theory is also a theory itself. There's no way to confirm the pre-existing theory that "Life" is just a dream of a dying Player character. Therefore, it's a theory as well. Why is the pre-existing theory valid and any other competiting theory invalid? This game is so full of intentionally mysterious elements that I think there needs to be room for more than one theory about the game's story.

I would love to see a story theory page on this Wiki somewhere that is open to multiple explanations, not just the pre-existing theory that "Life" is just a dream.


73.166.98.248 23:47, January 3, 2016 (UTC)

"my theory" There you go, that's all the reason why it'll never be on the mainspace of the wiki: fan theories are not allowed on the wiki mainspace. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 03:18, January 4, 2016 (UTC)
A fan theory is already on the Wiki mainspace. The idea that the "Life" mission is just a dream is itself a fan theory but is presented as fact on the main page. Why? If you want to disregard all theories and just objectively describe the game's events, that's fine. But that's not what the Wiki mainspace is doing right now. 50.175.144.118 03:54, January 5, 2016 (UTC)

Amazing theory. The Life... pre-mission text indicates of a real mission in Zürich that Taylor went on, to hunt down Fierro(not sure who). I think there needs to be a place for this. At least some parts of the mission were real. 37.26.149.174 06:15, January 4, 2016 (UTC)xenos

Actually, it doesn't. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk)
I don't know. It says "Corvus. Hendricks. Kane. Zurich. Diaz. Hall. Maretti. Cairo. Stone. Ramirez. Conrad. Fierro. Singapore. Taylor. Taylor. Taylor."
It mentions it... as if all of these characters were in Zurich for a mission. I have absolutely no idea though.
Xenosthesweg (talk) 13:56, January 4, 2016 (UTC)xenos
Another thing I don't understand... is the "Dragovich,Kravchenko,Steiner,These men must die" phrase inside the journal. Xenosthesweg (talk) 13:59, January 4, 2016 (UTC)xenos
    Aiming toward the above, the Dragovich line simply references Black Ops One. SteveHeist (talk) 14:58, January 4, 2016 (UTC)
Of course, but.. I think it has something to do with the storyline.
Nice catch, xeno. I didn't even notice the "Zurich" mention in the Life pre-mission text. I'm 73.166.98.248 by the way. To me it makes little sense that the writers would have 10 out of 11 missions be recreations of real missions (with just the names/faces moved around), just to end the game on a totally fake dream. And the Corvus story was mixed into many missions. So why would the final mission just be totally fake? It's possible but not certain.
My theory is that Taylor never mentions Corvus in any of his reports because to do so would've caused the CIA/WASF authorities to arrest or execute him (and Hendricks?) to stop the spread of the virus. 50.175.144.118 04:12, January 5, 2016 (UTC)
Exactly. Why would the Protagonist's DNI would just stop using Taylor's memories there, and create a complete storyline by itself that would be used in Life?
Xenosthesweg (talk) 17:40, January 12, 2016 (UTC)
By the way,I'm 85.250.194.188, the one that added the easter eggs in the pre-mission text. =)
Xenosthesweg (talk) 17:45, January 12, 2016 (UTC)==Possible codes in Life pre-mission journal==

There are some codes in the Life pre-mission journal. I tried multiple things. Vigenere,Caesar.. even the BO1 cipher. 7-15-1, 2-19-7-25, 6-13-6, 7-15-14-0. Xenosthesweg (talk) 10:39, January 13, 2016 (UTC)


"Life" is a real mission; there is absolutely no doubt about it. Unfortunately most people have interpenetrated the entire storyline as merely a "dying dream" that happens within the Player's DNI. While I can understand why someone would come to that conclusion, the pre-mission texts are just the icing on the cake when it comes to understanding the entire plot.
I shan't explain everything on this page (because there is a lot to explain), but I wrote an analysis of the game here that you can read. This is my own interpretation that may not be 100% accurate, but I am satisfied with my general understanding of the plot. The "dying dream" theory leaves too many plot holes and is just plain wrong. Executioner Menu Icon BOIIAugFC Talk Page 18:35, January 12, 2016 (UTC)
What. The. F**K. My entire perspective changed in a matter of minutes o-o Xenosthesweg (talk) 19:52, January 12, 2016 (UTC)
But still,I think "I didn't kill those people" is about Taylor being controlled by Corvus... I'm pretty sure he killed enough peeps at that point. Xenosthesweg (talk) 19:57, January 12, 2016 (UTC)

Theroy not supported Edit

i dont think that we should change the articles to reflect on the "talor was possed by the player" theory. while its plausible, we should only go with what the game says what happend. unless it is stated otherwise by activision, the entire game was indeed a dying dream. TheAwesomeHyperon (talk) 08:21, January 26, 2016 (UTC)

When does the game state it's a dying dream? There wouldn't be an alternate theory if the current one was concrete. There exists more evidence to support the other theory than the dying dream one, and Activision or Treyarch are unlikely to comment. However, there is a forum on the matter where your opinion is better voiced than here. 09:41, January 26, 2016 (UTC)
While I agree with you Sam, no matter how concrete a theory on a story is, there'll always be an alternate theory as to what it's about. Just because an alternate theory exists doesn't mean that the current one isn't correct. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 16:05, January 26, 2016 (UTC)
That is true, but in the case of Black Ops 3, the alternate theory can't be shot down by any concrete facts in the game. Much like the theory of Ghost not being dead more or less gets hinted at by IW in MW3, and I think it was more or less confirmed during the rise to Ghosts. Similar with Woods where the terminal confirmed he was alive in Hotel Hanoi, which would dispel any KIA stuff. Issue we have here is that the game never outright gives a concrete answer to the dying dream theory. I mean, Aug's theory is of course still just a theory, but it manages to get slightly more concrete evidence than the dying dream theory. To be partly honest, since the dying dream theory was made a YouTube user, I also partly feel some people may be bias to that theory due to the fact it's a YouTuber. 16:15, January 26, 2016 (UTC)
I think the AUG theory (as I have come to refer to it as) makes more sense in the grand scheme of things. It would explain the Taylor as Player scene during "Life", however, there is one slight discrepency that I would like to acknowledge.
What if the Player never existed, but was a delusion by Corvus to distract Taylor's thoughts while Taylor was controlled by Corvus? In this case, the entire battle is between Taylor and the "firewalls" Corvus built to keep him distracted. This explains why the Player calls himself Taylor at the end as well. I am NOT saying AUG's is wrong, I am just saying that there is a possibility it is not ALL right. It does, however, make more sense than the "dying dream" theory. SteveHeist (talk) 16:33, January 26, 2016 (UTC)
The only flaw with that is the premission texts state that the Player was real, but passed away after the first level. Conqueror of all Zombies (talk) 16:53, January 26, 2016 (UTC)
So how do you explain the first level in the game? Also, Corvus can only use existing information, it can't make up new information. 16:54, January 26, 2016 (UTC)
Well, I have only played through the campaign once, so my theories may have obvious holes in them. I forgot about New World, and didn't know that bit about Corvus. SteveHeist (talk) 18:06, January 26, 2016 (UTC)