Well the PS4 beta has finished and the Xbox One version will be up and running from Wednesday 26th August.
Overall it has been good fun and the gameplay has improved over the last six days.
I found the paintshop and tinkered with that and tried out as many weapons as I could and found a weapon in each category that I liked.
So over all there was a kind of comfort in knowing that the multiplayer game is ok. Over the week new perimeters were set enabling new specialists to be unveiled and those that I unlocked I tried out with varying results but only time will tell which will suit the players.
Problems that were encountered up to the last game - players missing from the final scorecard and there is still a maths problem.
The maps are much the same as I have played since Modern Warfare 3 and the gameplay on the Black Ops 3 maps was very much Advanced Warfare with added wall running and underwater combat. I can only compare it to 'comfort zone' gaming. The point is that again there will be criticism that 'Black Ops 3' is another 'Titanfall' clone - but it isn't. I do wonder if this sits at the back of developers minds because they do fall short of a kind of commitment. Yes, these maps and the gameplay should follow in the steps of 'Titanfall'. What is the point of wall running when you can't boost to a higher point? The maps should be opened out to embrace both height and depth. So, too, should the environment for if a player can boost jump onto the roof of a low building then why not onto the low rocks enabling them to climb higher.
The counter-argument is that it would encourage campers - but then they will always find a place to lie down and wait and, therefore, it doesn't really matter.
Detractors will always cry out that 'Call Of Duty' is dead but without a total re-structuring of multiplayer gameplay and maps only the diehards (like me) will be struggling to find a match.
Still there was no hanging around waiting 'for 7 more players' (as in Advanced Warfare) with Black Ops 3. Looks like fun.