User Score
4.8

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 1428 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Nov 11, 2010
    2
    Basically the same SP as we are watching for the last 7 years.
    No story that you would feel for characters and narrow straight ahead 'shoot em all and plant a c4 here and there'.
    Basically the same graphics as we watch for last 7 years. Turning on bump, reflection and opacity levels for me is not a progress in graphics.. No dx10/11 in 2011?? and no destruction model??? Mp playing on a
    very solid machine on 5-30fps? Are you kidding me? And you want money for this?

    Please dudes at activison, take a copy of Bc2 and play it and think your position in gaming industry. Yeah you might say we are the best in recycling the same god damn thing and making billions, we are the champions, but is there no spark in you to create something that whole gaming world would just say wow, omg this is something out of this world, I can easily pay even 100$ for this?
    Expand
  2. Nov 11, 2010
    2
    OK...Just OK

    Maps are too deep and opponents disappear into the scenery. This makes for a boring camper heaven. I have played 100 games maybe half reach the max score as most of the players are just hiding. Very "glitchy" hard to aim or see the already impossibly tough to see hidden campers. Did Treyarch not learn anything from Infinity Ward? In MW2, at distance the opponents were not
    microscopic, they were big enough to still have a gunfight. Expand
  3. Nov 13, 2010
    2
    PROS:
    - lots of new content added for MP CONS:
    - story is for kids under 14 - one of the worst graphics of the history of video gaming ever created, period (and I got a good and fast PC) - textures, shadows+lights (in and outdoor) are failing very very badly, must be made by a complete beginner. - geometry of the surrounding reminds me of the playstation 2 times (in fact, I just
    checked and Black looks much greater tbh.) - worst scripting ever combined with the most stupid AI a programmer may come up with. (this includes things like teammate standing and waiting for you next to 3 NME solder while those solders do nothing about him, or teammates yelling about incoming tanks after all tanks are eliminated minutes ago, etc, etc got about a zillion examples) - sounds are from a average SNES shooter game (they must be!), some1 fires a shotgun next to your ears, and you hear a sneaky fart.
    - etc -etc -et................. the bottom line: its a cheap bad fps, and not a CALL OF DUTY game ------------------ Conclusion: Never trust game reviewing sites, and never buy a game without a trailer showing actual gameplay
    Expand
  4. Nov 13, 2010
    2
    As a fan of the COD series, this latest installment is nothing short of pathetic. The game is barely playable due to a bug they have yet to resolve. I'll never understand how these kind of games get released with so many bugs and no testing. We all spent our hard-earned money on an overpriced, non-functional game, and Activision will just laugh their asses off as they line their pockets with our cash. If it wasn't for the fact that my friends will be engrossed in this game for the next several months, I would have returned it without a second thought. Expand
  5. Nov 13, 2010
    2
    As you would expect a CoD game to me. Very similar weapons and mechanics only with a few more game breaking bugs and glitches.

    If you're a fan of the Run and Shoot instant spawn Death match type of game play the Call of Duty is so well known for, you will probably get more than a few hours of enjoyment. Just realize you're paying an extra $90 for what essentially should be a MW2 DLC pack,
    at best.

    It is also funny to note the communities response to the game verses the Critics response. I think a few too money are judging the game off of the hype and not the game play.
    Expand
  6. Nov 13, 2010
    2
    It is simple: do not buy this game until Treyarch fixes the gross technical errors that were overlooked in their testing process.

    As of now, you will only be spending your money on the single player component. The multiplayer server browser and friend support is completely broken, and the ranked servers frequently get glitched to the point of where your stats are not saved and
    wager/ranked matches can not be joined.

    It is simply an incomplete product, and false advertising on the part of Activision/Treyarch to say that this game has anything other than a mediocre single player component. It is a shame that game review websites have even considered giving this game good reviews.

    It is Modern Warfare: 2 with a different set of skins and more bugs.
    Expand
  7. Nov 15, 2010
    2
    This game is probably one of the biggest let downs of all time. I mean, not only did the multiplayer made me want to rip my hair out. But the game its self is complete **** The lag is unbelievable.
    1/10 = Multiplayer
    6/10 Zombies
    7/10 Campain
  8. Dec 20, 2010
    2
    I have had plenty of time to play this game, work with Activision support, Google varying ways to improve in-game performance and now I feel it fair to provide another review. Single Player: After logging over 280 hours of single player time on MW2 I can honestly say I have no desire to ever play this single player again. After roughly 8 hours of dealing with a poor story line and having my control taken away more times than I care to count, I only wish I could get those hours back but sadly it is not possible. Zombies: What 11 year old persuaded you to add this into the COD line? Really? I played about an hours worth and I was not impressed. I was bored and I am sure I will not play it again. Multi-Player: I have logged about 40 hours in Multi-player now and this does not include the 12-14 hours spent working with Activision support and modifying my .cfg file just to make the game playable. [Intel Quad Core - 6gb Ram - ATI Radeon HD 4350/4500-7mbps cable modem]
    In-game movement is spikey and unrealistic. The overall graphics are poor and even worse after I HAD to make changes to be able to play it. The sound is awful as you cannot tell where shots are fired from or hear footsteps well. I installed the game on two additional PC's which were far better than mine hoping it was my set-up. I was surprised when the game performed just as poorly.
    I do like the added wager matches, one in the chamber and the customizable avatar and weapons. Sadly they are all pointless when the game is below par. Activision truly went out of their way to build up the hype of this game to make us believe it was great when in fact it is no where near as good as MW2. I was so excited just knowing it would have dedicated servers so I could get away from all the steam issues and hackers but I find myself playing MW2 instead. I am truly disappointed in the way this game turned out. I feel as though I have been tricked and deceived. If I wanted a game this bad I would have just purchased HALO. Luckily I played it before and learned how bad it was before wasting my money. Overall the greatest PRO I can give is that I am bored with MW2 and have no desire to play Black Ops so I have lots of spare time to be productive and sleep! Thank you Activision as you have lost ALL confidence in me!
    **** Code Central must have received a HUGE donation from Activision to rate this at a 98 and move the Meta score up from 77 to and 82. Anything above a 75 is just political BS and should be ignored!
    Expand
  9. Nov 17, 2010
    2
    I feel somewhat thrown to the curb as a PC gamer by Black Ops. The game doesn't have multi-core CPU support which leads to choppy frame rate in multiplayer. Activision's solution? "Make sure you have no extra programs running in the background." I liked that they finally got some dedicated servers (although Gameservers.com has a total monopoly on dedicated server purchases) but found the lag worse than the COD:MW2 system of picking a player host! Overall, Treyarch took 60 of my dollars and doesn't care about fixing any of the problems because they've already made all their money. I wonder if any of the professional reviewers have even played the game for more than an hour with their ridiculously high ratings. Expand
  10. Nov 21, 2010
    2
    Sound! Sound! Sound!
    How many people out there are still playing their games through their pc-speaker. I haven't heard such bad sound effects since running Wolfenstein 3d through the pc-speaker of my 386. I complement Activision on their fantastic marketing hype. I, like many others, were duped, and expected a new and improved MW2, but Treyarch just wasn't able to deliver.
  11. Nov 24, 2010
    2
    2010 price for a 2008 game. Average graphics & poor performance with a short, poorly scripted campaign. Give this one a miss or wait until it has had several patches and is on sale.
  12. Feb 3, 2011
    2
    Activision, Give up already.
    I own this game, and i play it when im extremely bored, and no other time whatsoever.
    Zombies is really the only thing i play, because it is sort of innovative in a sense.
    And the only things that save this game from a 0 in my mind, is the beautiful scenery, Zombies, Wager Matches(Specifically Gun Game), and the storyline.
  13. Jan 8, 2011
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This game is unplayable if you're on a PC and there has been no response from the developers. lag, cheat and freeze of the game.... and graphic are poor that's a **** game !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Expand
  14. Ed1
    Dec 12, 2010
    2
    This game suffers from severe stuttering both in single and multiplayer. Aiming is therefore very hard and very frustrating, especially since we're talking about a 60 euro well-hyped game (reducing graphical options does not help, and for the record, my computer runs many other current games just fine).

    On the other hand I like the single player story and the Zombie mode. It's clear that
    the developers did try to make a great game, but they failed.

    I have returned my copy and got a refund.
    Expand
  15. Dec 17, 2010
    2
    One point I missed in my initial review is the disappointment at playability. Not that it lags, which is going to happen, being a network tech, I understand that networks are not perfect and there will be net congestion. But, being an avid gamer and seeing the far superior graphics of things such as Crysis, and having played all the games, seeing the crude graphics of the first MOH and COD games, it is most disappointing to see such little marked improvement in physics (railing where even the spaces between the bars block fire), and weapons that will, with all the same settings will punch through 6 inches of concrete but fail to penetrate thin sheet metal, or grenades that rebound back to the thrower off of thin air. Really guys, you folks making these games have been at this long enough that the only explanation is carelessness in production, I suspect rooted in a rush to market. Expand
  16. Dec 23, 2010
    2
    I want to know how much Activision and Treyarch paid some of these critics to rate this game so high? I have logged roughly 75 hours on the multi-player and I am convinced that I was misled and deceived into buying a mediocre quality game. I have a very nice quad core PC set up with a great video card and excellent cable modem connection. In-game play lacks on many levels. The graphics are poor and most of the maps have the same GRAY color scheme to them. The in game movement is awful because you cannot aim down site quickly and the spikey game play means by the time you shoot, the opponent has moved 4-6 feet from one side to another. The sound is probably the worst feature of all. It is impossible to tell where a shot was fired from which makes it more difficult to tell where the enemy is. Forget about hearing footsteps which is an important part of MW2 or any FPS game for that matter.
    I like the added features for modifying your character, reticle colors along with the wager matches and one in the chamber matches. Sadly they are useless when movement, game performance, graphics and sound are bad. There is not one single weapon which provides a true appeal factor. Once you level up and make purchases they provide you with SECRET weapons and even these weapons are of less quality than other weapons offered. I have to unload a magazine just to kill someone and with the low ammo supply (unless you have scavenger) you run out often and have to use enemy weapons. The new Ballistic Knife is terrible. The new Crossbow is cool but will get you killed if you are not careful. The China-Lake replaces the Tube and will always get you killed due to the delays in aiming and firing. You have to pull the trigger before you turn the corner and will typically die before it lands. For some reason, a knife still kills with one blow so the reality of shooting someone in the heart compared to a knifing, the knife still wins.
    Scavenger does not replenish grenade launchers or tubes. It only provides minimum ammo and special grenades and not flash bangs or claymores. Only one claymore is allowed at any given time. I am not a fan of grenade launchers but considering how many times you have to shoot someone, they are often the best way to kill and not be killed. The explosive range is very poor and is not consistent at all. I see people die who are further from the explosion where two more opponents may be closer and not die.
    I do not foresee the ability to patch these types of issues as they are part of the way the game was developed. Basically Treyarch has created a disappointing addition to the Call of Duty series and used very good marketing to deceive us into making a purchase many of us would not have made had we known how poor the overall game was. Single Player Campaign: I will never play this again as the story is bad, they take away your controls way too often, do not allow you to skip the BS story line, based on Cold-War and Vietnam era and lacking in excitement.
    Zombies: I still do not understand the reason for this add-on. I played it for 1.5 hours and will never play this again. It is boring and stupid. I have played COD MW2 for 958 hours on Multi-Player, 345 hours on Single Player Campaign and Special Ops and I have really enjoyed the majority of it. Although I have mastered every single level and have become bored with it, I can see me playing more MW2 long before I play this single player again.

    I do not recommend this game to anyone.
    Expand
  17. Jan 6, 2011
    2
    Who designed this? A monkey? The game is ugly, and uses horribly outdated sounds and visuals. It sounds like perfect dark for the n64. The maps are stupidly designed and failtastic. I have no idea why they even put a sniper rifle in. There is no quick-scoping and nowhere to snipe. Utterly DISGUSTING how obviously bribed the reviewers are.
  18. Jan 3, 2011
    2
    Great single player, but it is near 100% offset by the terrible mulitplayer. Just another stupid console game ported to PC. It has been over a month since the release of this game and although many of the bugs and glitches where patched, it still remains unplayable for some and will never compare to the previous Cod4 and its competition and PC friendliness. R.I.P. Cod4, I will never forget you
  19. Jan 7, 2011
    2
    It's hard to beat the greats (CoD4MW and WaW). CoDBO tried but remained true to new gen gaming and failed miserably.

    If you can look past the glitched, rehashed game play with substandard weapons and feel good (get points for sneezing you damn casual) then this game is perfect.

    Treyarch has completely lost my respect with this one. As an avid WaW fan with its amazing maps and
    interesting weapons, this game seems more like a indie production of MW2 (something I think even indie devs could do better).

    Do us all a favor, hang up the CoD cape.
    Expand
  20. Jan 20, 2011
    2
    A real poor game, since the graphics suck really and the engine is under developed. Really a lack of knowledge of the quake engine and/or lazy developers. I dont recommend this game to anyone, because competetively, this game has no potential! I level 1 lvl per game, too easy..

    The only score this game gets, is because there is really thought about the gameplay (weapons, options etc) the
    outcome just failed Expand
  21. Jan 23, 2011
    2
    It's fun while it lasts, but you'll play it for two weeks and then move on to the next game. Not worth the 60 bucks. This whole idea of the Call of Duty Series becoming a franchise is not looking good.
  22. Feb 4, 2011
    2
    For a game which we all looked forward to this is was and remains a serious let down. If you are one of the lucky people who can actually play the game without stuttering and general bad performance the single player story is pretty cool but let down but some extremely pathetic enemy & NPC AI - don't be surprised to walk right past an enemy who is standing next to a teammate doing absolutely nothing. The MP is well boring - there is no lobby to chat and you need to leave a server before you can build a class - which incidentally will reset itself more often than not. The AK47u is so over used it is like playing the same player over and over again. There is also no need to ADS as hip fire is so accurate that this is a noobs paradise. Heavy Camp mode (Hardcore) is more software due to no aiming required that this game simply fails. Have played this for about 2 month's and in all honesty me and all most of my steam friends list are all playing MW2 again, yeah MW2 is not perfect and has it's share of issues but it is seriously a better game. I do not recommend this game to anyone - rather buy it if it ever becomes really cheap as it will just waste your money and frustrate you. Expand
  23. Feb 19, 2011
    2
    Obviously the critics and the users played very different games.

    This game is not worth 60 dollars. I beat the campaign on hard mode in 4 hours total. I'm not even trying to say I'm that good, I died a lot. I mean A LOT, but we'll come back to that. The deaths didn't matter, my play time was still only 4 hours. This is woefully inadequate. I understand there's a zombie thing tacked onto
    the end, but that just strikes me as some lazy excuse to be able to say "See, look how much extra content we gave you!" It's not extra if the main event leaves me feeling cheated. As for my deaths they were very rarely from enemies and more often from scripted sequences that take more than one attempt to realize what the heck you are supposed to be doing. Your objectives are not always clearly explained, often the game relies on just putting a yellow target marker on whatever it is you're supposed to be doing, and doesn't explain it at all. Since the enemies are usually infinite you could mow them down all day and go nowhere. The friendly AI is useless and doesn't kill anything unless you move forward into often unsafe territory (and even then the friendly AI can walk within hand shaking distance of enemies without batting an eye). However, once they advance, magically enemies can't be behind you. However, if you expect them to cover you by killing a guy 5 feet from them, you are sadly mistaken. Y=MX+B... the game is absurdly linear, but tries to pretend like the world isn't. However, the developers thought it would make the game seem bigger if they made it more open. So instead of visible walls boxing you in, there are now invisible ones. Well they aren't walls so much as just you randomly dying if you stray more than 25 feet outside of the designated plot area. And I really mean that, there are missions where if you don't do X you die, not because someone is shooting you, or because something horrible and impending happens if you aren't fast enough, no it's just because the game developers couldn't think of a better deterent method to keep you on task.

    Eye candy? Yes the game looks great, and it runs well. A lot of people have complained about instability, but this isn't one of my gripes. The game didn't crash ones. It alt tabs just fine and this is running at 1680x1080 with 4x AA and high texture details on 3 year old hardware. However, about 1/6 of the game is cut sequences where you can't even really move, so while it does look pretty, I didn't pay 60 bucks to watch a poorly scripted movie.

    Ah the script... The plot is terrible. They make it intentionally obscure in the beginning, but rather than reveal bits and pieces along the way they just keep it obscure before making it completely obvious what has happened and treating it like you the player has just put the puzzle together.

    I haven't played the multiplayer, but honestly I didn't expect it to be better than CoD4's multiplayer, I only bought this to try out the single player and it wasn't worth close to 60 dollars. Maybe 15....
    Expand
  24. Feb 28, 2011
    2
    Call of Duty: Black Ops is by far the worst addition to the series so far, it lacks the smooth multiplayer gameplay featured in Modern Warfare 2 and the interesting and unique story of the campaign mode.

    With the campaign there are far too many cut scenes. Although the cut scenes have some nice effects and are quite well done i think they are a bit over done with the effects as the
    white flashes across the screen every two seconds give me a headache and it becomes very difficult to concentrate on the story when your having an epileptic fit from all the flashes.

    On the multiplayer mode it is a lot less balanced then on Modern Warfare 2 (MW2), on MW2 the default classes gave decent weapons to give new players a chance to get into the game, this is not the case with Black Ops as you start of with the most basic of weaponry giving you no chance against players who have been playing for a while longer and have unlocked better weaponry.

    As for graphics, MW2 had some pretty sweet graphics while Black Ops made no attempt to best those graphics, the graphics in Black Ops are similar to those seen in World at War, which weren't bad at the time World at War was released but for a game with such a hefty price tag and that came out 2 years later it's not very impressive.
    Expand
  25. Mar 7, 2011
    2
    Very little new in this game aside from the UI. Gameplay mechanics are the same as ever but the Treyarch engine seems to really really suck. This game doesn't even run properly on many systems that are way beyond the minimum system requirements, even on minimum settings. Many have asked for refunds and got them. Avoid, unless you know what you are in for. Overhyped rubbish.
  26. Mar 19, 2011
    2
    This has to be one of the worst PC games i've played, The game has been patched many times but still barely works on Windows 7, the audio stutters so much that it's nearly unplatable at times. What's worse is that before launch Treyarch appeared to be committed to the PC version. after launch, they still did not communicate with users and took forever to patch issues, even so, most patches ruin past progress they had made, making the game worse again.

    the game's content Single Player I cannot tell you, as the game does not allow me to play SP. As for Multiplayer, it feels very stale compared to COD4/MW2, the maps are badly designed, spawn points are terrible, and weapons are unbalanced.

    At least the game has dedicated servers, but that really makes little difference if you can't really play MP without issues.

    Game runs at a decent enough framerate on XP, but looks terrible.

    If you haven't bought this already, skip over and wait for Respawn's game or even MW3 (after reviews)
    Expand
  27. Mar 29, 2011
    2
    Call of Duty: Black Ops, while a good attempt at regaining fans lost by the previous game, falls short. The singleplayer story was enough to distract me for a few hours, but I can't recall any highly memorable scenes, so I'll be focusing on multiplayer and general playability. While the reintroduction of lean and dedicated servers is wonderful, the game is essentially unplayable for me. I average about 26 frames per second on any settings I choose, from all low and 800x600 resolution, to all high on my native 1680x1050, it seems to make no difference. This was a surprise to me, as I was able to run all the previous Call of Duty games at 60+ frames per second, in addition to Crysis (and recently, even the Crysis 2 demo) on medium-to-high settings. It has been more than 3 months since release and, in its current state, I do not see myself buying the DLC for a game I cannot enjoy. As for weapons, it seems that in an effort to combat modded controllers from consoles, firing a semi-auto weapon on PC may lock up and prevent you from firing. Many weapons share the same generic sights, which in my opinion should have been an attachment so everything didn't look cookie-cutter'd. For visual nitpicking/inaccuracies, the AK47 in the game uses the same magazine as the AKs74u, which doesn't make sense due to different caliber. The AK47 also seems to be no different than the Colt Commando other than "visual" recoil and slower reload speed, despite Commando having the same ammunition as the M16. The M16 and Commando in game use incorrectly sized magazines, and the M16 possibly uses incorrect firing mode. Two of the assault rifles in the game (if you've played it, you probably know which two I'm talking about) essentially out-class the entire submachine gun category. On a good note, the server browser is kinda nice and slick.
    Fun fact: I originally started this review at a 6, but it dropped and dropped the more I remembered and reviewed how it played. TL;DR?: Machine that can run Crysis on High, barely manages to run BlOps on Low. Unplayable. Weapons/Perks could use a little tweaking, visually and performance-wise.
    Expand
  28. Apr 21, 2011
    2
    Ran badly on my PC, multi player is boring, single player is dreadfully boring.
    Might of given this a good review if I wasn't spoiled by better games.
    Go play Half-Life 2 or Portal 2 or any game but this.
  29. Jun 21, 2011
    2
    I used to think that the game sucked because it ran like crap on my old PC. I have upgraded to a nice new up to date one and Call of Duty Black Ops is still a terrible game. The graphics are nothing special. Battlefield: Bad Company 2 trumps this game by far. (Yes I ran it on 1680x1050 16xAA etc etc...)

    The singleplayer is like every other console based shooter. Endless enemies and
    typical non-replayable scripted actions and events. The game is just a long movie where you do what you are told and kill lots and lots of enemies.
    Because of the scripted nature of the game enemies are invincible untill they have finished their cinematic entry into the battle. Friendly units will push and block you to get to their scripted locations for the next 'scene' of your game, and my favourite: Save points sometimes place your spawn in front of an enemy with a shotgun, while you have a gun with no ammo! =D.

    Personalisation of your guns and character in multiplayer are decent and I do like the global match recorder allowing you to film your games without needing 3rd party screencapture software. Though multiplayer as a whole is still pretty bad.

    Overall the game is bad. You can buy any indie shooter for like $10 and get the same thing out of it. No point buying a $90 game... and they had the audacity to release $20 of DLC... Talk about putting the Icing on the turd....
    Expand
  30. Apr 23, 2013
    2
    Same run of the mill game. Same sounds, same engine,, same weapons, simple level design, arbitrary recycled level-up system. Good for a mediocre spaz session, else trash it.
  31. Jul 26, 2011
    2
    The game isn't fitted to be called "Call Of Duty." Almost every mission is all about Americans, which is unlikely in the COD franchise. The singleplayer campaign is short, and two of its mission is unplayable.

    Forget about the multiplayer and zombies, the game lacks too many anticipation. And I class it more as a sci-fi game because of the whole Nova-6 conspiracy, which completely
    unlikely in the franchise all based to be realistic warfare. Expand
  32. Jul 30, 2011
    2
    I played this game, and it was SO **** AWESOME!!!! For about a minute. What the **** This isn't a game, it's **** Activision and Infinity Ward are pathetic.
  33. Jul 30, 2011
    2
    A complete **** Long live COD4. It's single-player campaign proves to be a slight stroke of ingenuity by the developers which kept me entertained for a few hours (less than 10 as it was unbearably short like most action FPS's) and the multiplayer...considering the lag, and simple reskins, absolutely 0 innovation in combat), I probably will never touch this abomination of a game ever again. Did I mention, no replayability at all? Expand
  34. Aug 20, 2011
    2
    Black ops by standard is a pretty piss poor game. I might have actually enjoyed it for more than ten minutes, if the game wasn't horribly cliche, linear, full of expected turns, full of your overanimated sequences and lacking the gameplay to keep me interested. having said that if they got past the pretty bad graphcis it would of made an excellent film but there is little for me to enjoy in such a ball of overpriced multiplayer hype, the only thing I remotely enjoyed was zombies mode, the rest of multiplayer is pretty boring and iniform with the rest of the franchise. all in all nowhere near as good as its brilliant predecessors' Expand
  35. Sep 4, 2011
    2
    the game was an epic disappointment. another desperate grab for money during a recession, the only reason it worked was because the prior titles in the series were good. very few features of the game came even close to setting it apart from the innundated market of FPS games, the only feature making people buy it being the fact that it had the title 'call of duty' on it, there is a reason people still play world at war and modern warfare 2 instead, and it isnt because they were all that great either, its because the graphics and gameplay of black ops sucked. i would probrably rank black ops to be middle of the line compared to games of the 2006-2007 era, definitely not worth half of the $60 that they are still charging for it almost a year after its release. i give it a 2, and thats just because i feel like being generous Expand
  36. Nov 15, 2011
    2
    This was the worst Call of Duty game for me and no, I am not talking stats wise. I experienced a lot of different gamecrashes, even tho my i3-540 should run the game flawless. Gamebalance wise, the game had a few OP guns that really annoyed me, this includes the FAMAS and the AK-74u, which I found to be noobguns. Also 3arc didn't dedicate themselves enough to the PC community.
  37. Jul 31, 2012
    2
    Another game that lacks everything but graphics. Don't buy this game It's a waste of money. It really sucks and it's controls on Pc are TERRIBLE!!! Don't buy it!!!
  38. Oct 17, 2013
    2
    Good god, avoid this like the plauge. This game relies too heavily on the multiplayer which bores me with repetitive crap that isn't fun in the slightest, and the missions on campaign (The campaign is supposed to be a highlight of a game, not the multiplayer, am I right?) Terrible AI frustrates you, lack of weapons and predictable story beats you up yet the missions were so long and boring! Ammo is little, health is ridiculous and the weapons are too OP! There are no goods in this game, people die in about 3 bullets hitting their LEG, and the fun factor is dumb. Too overrated. Expand
  39. Jan 1, 2014
    2
    The campaign was boring and really short; it was also not much of a challenge even on the higher difficulties. Zombies was okay, but for some reason I felt like I was playing MW2 again.
  40. Jun 19, 2011
    1
    I Dont like this game at all. it is boring, it lags on my computer but i have good internet and my specs are, Radeon 5750 amd phenom ii x4 840 and 4gb ddr3 1066 it shouldnt lag on that .its boring, buggy and should be called "call of duy: Crap Ops.
  41. Nov 10, 2010
    1
    Unplayable MP, stuttering like mad on C2D 3.0 with 4gb and 9800GTX card...even on lowest settings. Then there's lag issues, CTD problems....you get the picture. Stear clear from this junk until it's fixed.
  42. Feb 8, 2011
    1
    Don't buy this game, get MW2 instead. This game is bad in everything imaginable - Graphics, Plot, Optimization, Netcode. EVERYTHING. Singleplayer is WORST singleplayer in history of call of duty, game is written by incompetent coders, it will works slow on any configuration! While my machine is capable of running Crysis on good settings and MW2 maxed, i get 30 fps in Black Ops with almost everything turned off! Game is 100% cpu intensive, it does not uses your video card at all! AT ALL! I don't want to continue listing bad stuff, just save your money and nerves. Don't buy Black Ops! Expand
  43. Nov 11, 2010
    1
    This is not a PC game! This is a 60 â
  44. Nov 9, 2010
    1
    Actually it is nearly unplayable online, even if you have a 30ms Ping! The game lags and everybody has problems to hit the enemy. Its a shame that every COD fan wanted this game, because of the dedicated server and then its unplayable, because it lags much more, than MW2 did!

    A really bad start. If you want to buy it because of the Multiplayer, dont do it, unitl this problems are solved!
  45. Nov 10, 2010
    1
    This game blows in its current state. Treyarch/Activision have just released another top level game and made us $60 beta testers. There is no excuse for releasing a game in this state. So much lag, and that is even if you are able to get in the game unlike the black load screen many people are dealing with. This might be a great game several patches from now, but at the moment it is unplayable. I really question if they even bothered to test this at all before release, because with the current issues there is no way in hell this stuff would not have been noticed had it been tested. I guess all my ranting comes down to this for game companies, stop worrying about the quick cash grab and release a good game. If your game doesn't work, delay it and make it work then release it. Instead of us paying $60 to "play" this game, Activision should be paying us $60 to beta test their game, especially when Treyarch is doing the game and they're known to release garbage. The only reason I am giving this a 1 is I have a little hope that if they fix it, that it could be a decent game. Expand
  46. Nov 10, 2010
    1
    Very laggy online as others have said. Just not very much fun multiplayer. Maps are small. Haven't played single-player yet, but if it's anything like the multiplayer, I wish I hadn't bought it through Steam so I could get a refund.
  47. Nov 10, 2010
    1
    90% - what a joke, which game did these reviewers play????, go to Steam Forums if you want to hear about the issues this game has, lag, stuttering problems make the game unplayable. I cannot play without massive lagggg in multiplayer or single player. Top end rigs are also effected according Steam users. They did not release a PC beta of the game and it is obvious. Do not buy until something is resolved. For me COD4 is still the best. Expand
  48. Nov 10, 2010
    1
    If you have a high end PC with great graphics cards then stay away from this game. The PC version looks like something from 3-5 years ago even with all settings high even o 1920x1200 or more . The game is based around 5 year old console hardware running in 680x470 resolution. The game doesn't support stuff like eyefinity. I know great graphics doesn't make the game but the graphics is so bad it gets in the way. it makes BFB2 and MOH MP look fantastic. They not only look better than BlackOps but plays and sounds better too. $60 down the toilet. No idea why most critics love it. I guess it's same as MW2 where critics love it but most end players hate it.â Expand
  49. Nov 10, 2010
    1
    There is absolutely no way that the PC version was tested. My computer far exceeds the minimum requirements, but the game is an unplayable mess of problems at the moment. Activision's current response to widepsread problems is a claim that no on meets the minimum specs. The main campaign is a stuttering, crashing mess with an okay plot. Zombie mode is nothing new, but the special map with JFK, Nixon, Castro, and McNamara was funny. Multiplayer gamplay wise is pretty much the same MW2's, but suffers from a much smaller and unbalanced weapon count. Multiplayer at the moment is a godawful mess if bugs that will be impossible for Treyarch to ever fix. Whether it's getting a error that steam must be running to play the game when you're launching the damn game from steam, getting a connection error on a bot match you're playing by yourself, never having your proper name appear ingame, or just stuttering around the map getting killed by the magical 1% of people with no problems. Dedicated servers are provided ONLY by paying gameservers to host your server for you. I could not honestly recommend this game to anyone t the moment. Stay away for at least one year, and maybe by then Treyarch will have patched it to a barely playable state. The only thing stopping it from getting a 0 is the glorious voice acting in the zombie level with presidents. Expand
  50. Nov 11, 2010
    1
    Terrible game. Activsion needs slapped. First day = everyone using mp5k. Doesnt matter if you fire first because the lag kills you. The gun is OP. Whats with everyone having commando..come on you removed the perk instead you gave the ability to everyone by default! :(
  51. Nov 11, 2010
    1
    I bought this game for the multiplayer, however there are so many glitches in joining games, especially as a party. I'm getting dropped constantly and there is so much lag, I can't play competitively. Very disappointing.
  52. Nov 13, 2010
    1
    I find it unbelievable that they didn't even start the final release candidate for the game. Which i think (but can't be sure about) would make the problems obvious in less than five minutes. Or they did that and decided that it would be more convenient for them to release on time and fix it later (ignoring how bad impression this would cause to the early adopters). The game is at the moment unplayable. Expand
  53. Nov 13, 2010
    1
    The developers don't care for this version at all. Usually, the PC version of a game is this version, but Treyarch failed at that. Definitely a do-not-buy.
  54. Nov 15, 2010
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The solo mode is pathetic : stupid & really poor story, very strange end with the zombies. I did not find any major innovation in this game, it could be such a mod of Modern warfare 2. Expand
  55. Nov 18, 2010
    1
    Did the critics play this game? It is not very good, and the detail is awful. They have people using guns that did not exist until years after the historical events in the game. Come on, ACOG sites in 1962! Save your money and skip this game.
  56. Nov 17, 2010
    1
    The game is broken. Massive performance problems, Broken server browser, people complaining of lost levelling points, broken friends features. Can not recommend even if u have a decent PC.
  57. Nov 20, 2010
    1
    Practically unplayable. Every single mode and menu is glitchy and laggy. Either this game was never beta tested or it was and Treyarch released it as is. The only point garnered was for a very interesting single player story, even this tho was a test of patience as the game stutters non stop. Beyond stuttering and memory issues, Graphics wise this game is a disaster. As the release dates would lead you to believe Black Ops should be better than Modern Warfare 2 (MW2 was released a year and some months ago); it is not. Bad textures, terrible lighting and shadows coupled w/ a very crippled PC port will have you running this game with graphics mirroring a 800 x 600 resolution. Black Ops had its moment were everyone believed it to be the next great First Person Shooter, we passed that moment the day it was released Expand
  58. Nov 24, 2010
    1
    The game is nearly unplayable for many with extremely bad video stutters and lag. In my case the game was playable, if uninspired, and somewhat enjoyable until an error with my profile (stored online not locally) made it so I literally could not log into MP Servers. to date Ive been working with tech support for over 5 days have gotten no updates in 2 days (despite requests for updates) and the techs keep looking for an issue with my computer (despite me not being able to log in to a server from any computer on any network and my friends all being able to play their accounts from my computer). Activisions community manager is silent on the forums regarding the product and is giving the impression that Activision does not care about their customers. If the game had the bugs fixed, and their staff and techs seemed to actually care about customers and or fixings problems then the game would warrant a 5-6 score for being a somewhat enjoyable rehash of World at War with some uninspired changes. but with the amounts of game stopping bugs in both singleplay and multiplay that many customers have, coupled with the complete lack of response from the company regarding the issues the game doesn't deserve a score at all. At this point there is no game for thousands of customers, just a waste of $60usd that can not be played at all, or if they are lucky, can be played with bugs that make the enjoyment nil Expand
  59. Dec 1, 2010
    1
    This game does not deserve one sixteenth the hype it gets. The people at activision continue to rip off and rob 12-18 year olds blind. It is virtually the same game as MW2, for $60, what a rip off. The only reason why this new, despicable call of duty franchise is popular, is because it was released on a good platform during the right time. Despite all game play ideals and miserable healing (QUICK! ILL DUCK BEHIND THIS BARREL TO HEAL!) Nobody on the console side of the spectrum accurately judges the value of this pile of **** The BEST call of duty game by far was 2, but now they are on 8? The only reason they have survived is a pathetic shooter with a generation that does not recognize a good FPS. It is shameful to see where my generation is headed. If WE are going to lead the USA one day, we are truly screwed. I could talk about how the Xbox and stupid stuff like this is bringing down the fall of mankind, but this is a game review. BOTTOM LINE, IT SUCKS. COD4 and 2 where the best of all time, THIS IS A FLAMING PILE OF DOG **** ON YOUR FRONT PORCH. Expand
  60. Dec 4, 2010
    1
    This game is pathetic. Stupid single player campaign with a low story where every 2nd word is f***ing. I cant believe that Gary Oldman and Ed Harris gave their names and voices to a game like this.

    The MP for the PC is a joke. It is working every 3 days for a couple of hours. Not to mention that you need 200 bullets to kill somebody even if you aim for his head. I cant kill two people
    with the 20-round mag Skorpion without reloading. But you can apply a face paint what you cannot see. Logical. Finally the fact that made me to give ONE point is that there are 13 (!) guns in the game that didn't exist back at 1968. For example the WA2000 was designed in 1982 or the full auto CZ 75 in 1991. Treyarch didn't do the proper researches for a cold war-era game. This was the last COD game I purchased.

    Now I gotta go, the mates are waiting for me in the Medal of Honor multi....
    Expand
  61. Dec 4, 2010
    1
    I am starting to lose faith in game critics. Do NOT buy this game, it's full of technical problems lag being the worst. It makes the game unplayable. The PS3 version has half the features of the Xbox 360 and the PC version has half the features the PS3 version. Not to mention the dummied-down graphics on the PS3. Mind you, they all paid the same price for the game. Sounds like Treyarch sold out to Microsoft. The sad thing is it could have been a decent game. Expand
  62. Dec 13, 2010
    1
    What an awful game. The maps are small and no vehicles. Its a run and shoot game. This game is truly disappointing in the PC version. This game is unplayable if you're on a PC and there has been no response from the developers. Completely crap game. This is a 60 dollar beta, and nothing more.
  63. Dec 13, 2010
    1
    Absolutely unplayable garbage, was hyped to death and completely failed to deliver. I used to complain about modern warfare 2, but it is an absolute masterpiece compared to this. Seriously don't bother buying it, especially if you are planning on buying it for pc.
  64. Dec 28, 2010
    1
    (note, this is, in a way addressing Treyarc and JD) This game works fine.....as long as you play it on either a, a not so powerful but still gaming oriented computer on low-medium graphics or B, whatever $10,000 alienware computer that they tested it on, I mean come on, this game was NOT made for PC but they acted like it would be the best game you could possibly own. Sorry JD, I don't care if you don't play PC but you're killing us. You're patches don't help and this series lost people on MW2 and you're losing people too. Sure we don't have 200k people playing the game at any give time but you've made a LOT of money off us so we expect more bang for our buck and right now my "bang" is freezing and crashing and you don't care. You rolled out a patch that helps quick-scoping, but umm lets see it really doesn't matter if we zoom in somewhere else if by the time we zoom in the person is teleported by our lag to somewhere else Expand
  65. Mar 9, 2011
    1
    Terrible game, no matter what platform you play it on. Multiplayer is identical to MW2's. For some reason, and im not very sure why, i REALY hate the singleplayer. perhaps the lack of originality or how linear it is really breaks it. This game is just a money whore for treyarch and activision.
  66. Jan 12, 2011
    1
    An honest review would be to say that the game is not worth the cash. Looking at critic reviews is essentially a waste of time because they are paid to say swell things about the game. However Black ops for pc is absolutely broken, it has been designed very fast and made very scruffy. The graphics are the same as World at war and the engine hasn't been updated properly so a lot of the graphics are very shaggy or dull. Game play wise this game is pretty decent because COD has always had great single players, as for online it is an abomination. Even having the best Internet cannot overthrow how slow and terrible the servers are for this game. There are also rarely any updates and that leads to many hardware/compatibility issues. Zombies is a pretty decent aspect but lacks anything new, it's almost a copy pasted version of the COD world at war one just on different maps. Overall I would avoid buying this game until it is fixed, it's been three months since the release and is still a pain to play on the pc due to lags and constant errors. Spend your money on something better instead. Expand
  67. Jan 13, 2011
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Can't not agree with Smith and others. Game not so good as Mw2. It's not optimized for PS. graphic is worse than it was in mw2.
    I think only good thing is customization of guns and player.
    So if they would took mw2 + new story+ customization+ infinity ward team t would be so much better. Yea, zombies is cool but even there they screw up.
    And in SP it's look like they took old script's and just add it in new engine.
    So shame on you guys. U suxx
    Expand
  68. Feb 8, 2011
    1
    Waste of money!!! Poor graphics compared to MwF2...same type of mode games...nothing new...ah! and it doesnt work in the majority of PC´s dont buy it you will waste your money...i bought it and i never open it because it doesnt work and sound is terrible compared to other COD games...terrible sound, terrible graphics, low detail...very bad game
  69. Feb 13, 2011
    1
    Ok I will be as honest as I can be, I have played all of the Call Of Duty came (on the pc) and cod 1 was ground breaking cod 2 proved it was not a fluke and was even better, Modem Warfare 1 the next step forward and an excellent all round game.
    Then it wall went a bit pear shaped, Modem Warfare 2 was a bad clone of Modem Warfare 1, it was almost like they were trying too hard to write an
    exerting story.
    Anyway then came Call Of Duty Black Opps and oh dear they did it again, far too much time was spent on the story and not enough on the game play.
    In single player, you play for five minuets then watch a five minuet cut scene then play for five minuets and watch another five minuet cut scene, and the whole thing goes on and on in the same boring patten.
    At about half way through the game you start to skip the cut scene's which have obviously had more work on than the game its self and you totally lose any interest in the rather dull story and just want to finish the game.
    multi player is OK at best and that's being kind, the unlock system is straight out of battlefield 2 and the game play is heavily flawed in so many places with bad spawning, some very amateurish maps (I have seen better user made maps in counter strike ). Then there's the bad frame rate and the lag issues, all in all its a lazy effort and not worth your time or money.
    My advice is give this one a miss.
    Expand
  70. Feb 13, 2011
    1
    Ok I will be as honest as I can be, I have played all of the Call Of Duty came (on the pc) and cod 1 was ground breaking cod 2 proved it was not a fluke and was even better, Modem Warfare 1 the next step forward and an excellent all round game. Then it wall went a bit pear shaped, Modem Warfare 2 was a bad clone of Modem Warfare 1, it was almost like they were trying too hard to write an exerting story. Anyway then came Call Of Duty Black Opps and oh dear they did it again, far too much time was spent on the story and not enough on the game play. In single player, you play for five minuets then watch a five minuet cut scene then play for five minuets and watch another five minuet cut scene, and the whole thing goes on and on in the same boring patten. At about half way through the game you start to skip the cut scene's which have obviously had more work on than the game its self and you totally lose any interest in the rather dull story and just want to finish the game. multi player is OK at best and that's being kind, the unlock system is straight out of battlefield 2 and the game play is heavily flawed in so many places with bad spawning, some very amateurish maps (I have seen better user made maps in counter strike ). Then there's the bad frame rate and the lag issues, all in all its a lazy effort and not worth your time or money. My advice is give this one a miss Expand
  71. Mar 9, 2011
    1
    WHAT WHERE YOU THINKING... this is the worst 60 bux i ever spent... NOTHING changed with the graphics except anti aliasing is now 16x . MORE LAG THEN MW2 if you can believe that... this game is crap and significantly less fun than mw2. maps are shotty, guns are still oped as **** and the hipfire is... ****ing bull****...if you can heed my prayers... whatever is left of infinity ward SAVE OUR SOULS.â Expand
  72. Apr 11, 2011
    1
    Where to begin. I'm writing this review a few months after BO has been released(in a very unready state), and patched too many times to count. SP was a pain to go through as I couldn't skip videos, until they were done. Some levels involved the character just wandering empty halls. Unimpressed. I had high hopes for MP to save the game, but no dice. Maps get boring fast, gun customization makes no sense as some have attachments, and others don't, and some only have one. Very poorly thought out. Combat training against the AI is neat, and a nice change if you actually want to get a killstreak, and don't want to get ballistic knifed by every single MP person out there. That is until the AI starts wall hacking you. I had high hopes for the latest map pack that was released, until I found out Treyarch was charging $15 for it. Hardly fair after I've already shelled out $60 for a game. Even less fair when you hear a new COD is in the works. Maybe if the makers of COD actually got together and started to create updates of weapons or other items at AFFORDABLE prices, their series won't turn into the Rockband series with lackluster sales.

    Overall this game was a huge disappointment from day one. I don't know what drugs the 'critics' are smoking, or what game they played, but it's certainly not the same one as me.

    I'd say save your money and go buy another game, but most choices out there are made to make a buck, not to have replayability, so just save your money and go and enjoy some fresh air.
    Expand
  73. Jun 7, 2011
    1
    Half year later, the game still runs bad on the PC. Only good thing about the whole game? Single player, which might be the best on the call of duty series. Multi player, is nothing but boring and annoying, nothing new. World at War was something I enjoyed a little, but after MW2 I didn't really expect anything from the call of duty franchise, and I wasn't surprised.
  74. Jul 5, 2011
    1
    I can give Activision a 1 for tricking me in to taking it up the a$$ with this piece of sh!t game. This game sucked period, i hate to support companies like Activision there just in it for the money and don't care much about there quality of work.
  75. Sep 9, 2011
    1
    This is the epitome of why consoles are destroying the games of today. I started playing this a few months ago and stopped after the first level, I was that bored. Run, shoot, boring cinematic, run, shot, boring cinematic... there's not grit to the game. I started playing again today and again I'm so bored I'd rather not play. Battlefield II is better than this, 10x better. Man, they'd better bring something to the game with MW3 or they're going to lose a lot us us as fans. BAD BAD PORT. ANY PORT FROM CONSOLE SUCKS. Expand
  76. Jan 23, 2012
    1
    Having played all the Call of Duty series since their first release in 2003, right upto all versions of Black Ops, I cant say anything but that this was a huge disappointment. I did wait for a few months after its release to let the bugs surface and a few patches released. Id hate to see how it performed without all the patching, because even with the patches, its performance and environmental quality are mediocre at best. I couldnt help but feel like I was playing Medal of Honor combined with Soldier of Fortune II- not something I expect when playing an Activision COD product. All the gameplay modes are there for Solo, Multiplayer and a Zombie mode, but each one of them are about as appealing as going to the dentist. I can not recommend this game as a purchase to anyone. Expand
  77. Oct 25, 2011
    1
    Oh you KNOW the **** drill about Post-MW games. The multiplayer is basically the same stuff as MW2, only with a WIKKID AWSOM new currency system. The only fun part about this is is the zombies, which is still rehashed from WaW. Zombies is the only thing saving this game from a zero.
  78. Mar 10, 2012
    1
    just how bad can you make a game people?Honestly the worst experience i ever had with a modern shooter,the multiplayer was a total clusterfu**,every bloody server filled with little try hards camping in the corners but i dont blame them because the game was built for them,perfectly crap over powered weapons.No balance between any of the guns.Spawn rape totally enabled,over powered killstreaks and finally a piece of shi* campaign with no good story to it. Expand
  79. Apr 20, 2013
    1
    I played this game after 3 years it came out, so my version should be the final. If it is, then it's a joke. BTW I played it on the PC and only single campaign. They shouldn't bring this title to the PC, because it has the worst controls of all time, and there is competition on this field believe me. You reverse mouse axis, but if you drive the guided missiles, it reverses back... Why? There are some special missions where you have to use some special weapons or some targeting system. But these are always different buttons, like or How on earth they came up with an idea like this? Not just different buttons but they're spread all over the keyboard. And to top it all they won't work! I pressed them and they aren't working It would be a shame if it was a free game, but it isn't (although I got it for a budget price, but still not worth is). So it never crossed my mind to play it multi. Were there anybody back in 2010 who actually played this on the PC, and liked it. And now it has a 2nd run :)
    What were the developers doing when they created this game? Nobody tried it out before releasing? Stay as far from Treyarch games as possibly you can :)
    There are many more pathetic things but it just not worth my time :)
    I give it 1, because there were no bosses in it
    Expand
  80. Jul 24, 2012
    1
    This game is totally pointless. Singleplayer not too brilliant but have good moments. Multiplayer like all Call of Duty titles trying to do game as much annoying possible with constant behind back spawning and camping sutable game types.
  81. Jul 22, 2012
    1
    very linear game play, why did the critics like it so much? I could not even get close to finishing it. very linear game play, why did the critics like it so much? I could not even get close to finishing it.
  82. May 21, 2013
    1
    The only modern call of duty I've ever purchased and a huge mistake on my part. I couldn't even finish the campaign it was so "Michael Bay" ish. Obnoxious needless action over and over again coupled with a very poorly told story which was mediocre at best.

    Even the multiplayer is crap. I dabbled for a little while and found that there was a clear and dominant play style that was best
    for every cramped map this idiot game had to offer. The original call of duty had submachine guns, heavy machine guns, snipers, bolt action rifles, and semi autos that all had their place in the battle. Now the gunplay is assault rifles assault rifles assault rifles with your occasional variation of long rifles and submachine guns. Plus the idiot gimicks that reward you for kill streaks (just like real war! If only I'd known that when I was on duty). Expand
  83. Apr 25, 2014
    1
    Always the same **** SP sucks as always, MP ts based too much on chance. All you can do is increase the chance of doing well in MP if you are skilled, but you will still die too much because of all the **** running around with noobtubes and knifing everyone.
  84. Nov 27, 2013
    1
    This is a pice of crap right here. Its a liner non playable not fun pice of crap. Not worth your money. Its to liner the characters I don't give 2 for and the gun gameplay isn't that good buy Bioshock or anything but this pice of
  85. Nov 10, 2010
    0
    An unplayable port - SP and MP. It looks 3 years old but eats resources like Crysis 7. Severe audio stuttering, deadly lags, server problems, gameplay breaking frame-rate drops on gaming machines well above the recommended configuration, laughable hodgepodge story... If they cannot somehow patch this load of manure into playability, I would not recommend picking it up even from the bargain bin - where it will pretty soon land. Expand
  86. Nov 11, 2010
    0
    The game simply lacks fun. The singleplayer story is told through cutscenes. The only part you get in the game is playing with broken A.I's. Outdated graphics, and boring storyline.

    With the multiplayer, despite the obvious lies and bugs, it is overrated.
    A basic game with small maps and a few guns. With the exception of a few graphical customizations which don't change the game play at
    all.

    Wager matches would have been fun, if you could bet a decent amount and if cod points were useful in anything other than a new background for your playercard.

    With the zombie mode, you would be better off buying Left For Dead 2. The only reason it was added was to boost sales.
    Expand
  87. Nov 11, 2010
    0
    Lag in MP, slow performance, boring scripted SP, Steam exculsive, no LAN, no REAL DEDICATED SERVERS, nothing new expect the maps, lots of kids screaming around, I don't like this.

    Game should not be released unfinished and without beta testing for the balance. This is sh*t.
  88. Nov 12, 2010
    0
    If you are going to buy this game, remember something. When Starcraft 2 came out it costed the same money and it offered you a great lasting campaign and a level WCG multiplayer. When Civilization V came out it costed the same and it offered you insane depth and game mechanics out of this world.

    Now, this piece right here, costs EXACTLY the same, offering you HEADACHE, FRUSTRATION and a
    free dictionary of all the F*** words you know. Wanna buy it? Be my guest. Why dont you pay G. Newell more money, he cannot get enough to become a billionaire. ON YOUR TAB. Expand
  89. Nov 25, 2010
    0
    Don't buy this piece of broken code, it's a waste of money. Multi
    player part is unplayable, and I really mean unplayable. Single player
    part is... well, it's a CoD, which means you just have to press a
    button now and then and that's it.
  90. Jun 4, 2011
    0
    The devs did a horribe job with this game. The graphics are horrible so they can run on the consoles and it's an import from the console version. Very pathetic. I am not happy with Treyarch and Activsion and never do I intend to buy another COD game again. Not consider how boring the multiplayer is!
  91. Nov 15, 2010
    0
    Black Ops has a lot of potential to be a fun game. It's an improved MW2 from both single and multi-player standpoints. However, I have to give it a zero because the game was not ready for prime time. Three words define the gaming experience: lag, lag, and more lag (ok, it's 4 words). Even if they resolve the lag issue, I don't think the game will ever play smoothly on my PC as I have a core 2 duo E6850 (as per Activison my CPU satisfies the minimum requirements, but I doubt the game will ever play on less than quad-core PCs). Expand
  92. Nov 11, 2010
    0
    WOW...another epic fail...poor server connections...really crappy sound...seriously the ambient sound blends with the active sound (guns and explosions) to the point were it muffles it all...then there is the problem that the software was so unstable when you play online ..either you will crash the game or the server will crash.....wow next time use beta for debug .........Activision should just give the game away...because charging for this piece of crap should be theft!!!!!!!!!!! Expand
  93. Nov 10, 2010
    0
    Bugs and lag because they don't know how to program PC anymore just platform.
    I'm sorry but cod lost it's PC players already, just give up until you can get it right.
  94. Dec 23, 2010
    0
    Biggest Dissapointment and Waste of money of the year. On PC this game is UNPLAYABLE. Locks up every 15 - 30 min even on a really good PC. Lags constantly and if you can get a party together to play Nazi Zombies then go buy a Lottery Ticket because you have some incredible luck. Campaign is pretty lacking as well as it was beaten on Veteran in about 10 - 12 Hrs. They really screwed us pc gamers over pretty big time with this because if it was a console version we could at least get half our money back by selling it. No such luck here. Just an expensive paperweight. I have had betas that ran and looked better than this game does in its Retail version. Thanks for being another company that dumps on the end user. I will not be buying any future games from Treyarch and I suggest that you take your money and buy games from other developers that continue to fix things after a games release and not just twiiter about meaningless crap. Expand
  95. Nov 9, 2010
    0
    Stick with the Console versions because this is not a PC game. It's a port with one server provider, which is Gameservers. They are the worst servers to have. With Battlefield bad Company 2, those servers were plagued with server lag and horrible downtime.

    I couldn't imagine a popular game like COD Black Ops being able to run on those servers, and guess what? It was unplayable. If
    Multiplayer is the only reason why you want to play this game, then don't waste you money. Expand
  96. Nov 9, 2010
    0
    This game is truly disappointing in the PC version. It obviously is just a port from a console machine. Graphics below par, gameplay below par, shoddy multiplayer. Biggest disappointment of the year. Medal of Honor Tier 1 is far superior game and even that was lacking in comparison with BFC:2. This game would be a fantastic game had it been released 3-4 years ago. Terrible waste of money.
  97. Nov 9, 2010
    0
    This game is absolutely unplayable in multiplayer. Constant network problems on top of the terrible FPS issues (there is already a post on the Steam forums with around 200,000 views). Whenever a player comes into view, the game will hiccup and stutter on even the best systems. Activision brought down the Tryarch Forums because of the complaints, what does that tell you?

    How could they
    honestly not see the problems with this during testing? Expand
  98. Nov 9, 2010
    0
    This game is unplayable if you're on a PC and there has been no response from the developers. Releases like this spur on gaming piracy. Treyarch, I'll be illegally downloading your next release and seeding the torrent for the next 6 months. If Infinity Ward decides to come back and create another game, even if it's based off of a Jennifer Lopez movie, I'll take 2 copies for 80 bucks a piece.
  99. Nov 9, 2010
    0
    Single player in this game is truly horrible. The storyline looks like it was written by someone who was consuming LSD in large quantities by watching Rambo 3, Red Heat, and other similar trash action movies. Maps are badly designed, and railroaded even worse than they were in MW2. Graphics is dated even on highest settings. Overall gameplay is like MW2, except even more repetitive and boring.

    Don't even get me started on a handheld (!) minigun (!!) in a Soviet labor camp (!!!); flamethrower-wielding Viet Kong; and M4 carbine and ACOG sights in the hands of US troops in Nam. At least the previous installations tried to maintain some semblance of sanity... Oh, and guys? Can you please hire a couple Russians to do the voice-over next time? Whoever did it for this game, it sounds like the worst moments of Red Heat. For starters, It's VorkutA, not VorkUta, and the rest of it is way worse than that.
    Expand
  100. Nov 9, 2010
    0
    Even if you ignore the lazy and short SP where the game practically plays itself FOR you, you then still have a broken game besides that and all this at an outrageous price AND using the insidious Steam software. If this was a fiver, it might be worth giving a look. Right now? Don't kid yourself - if you call yourself a real gamer, move on.
Metascore
81

Generally favorable reviews - based on 29 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 29
  2. Negative: 0 out of 29
  1. Jan 29, 2011
    84
    Its duffer solo moments are masked by imaginative and visual whizz-band-fizz. [Jan 2011, p.100]
  2. Jan 26, 2011
    68
    This score will likely come as a shock to many, but this game suffers from pathetic frame rates at times, both on console and on PC.
  3. Jan 12, 2011
    91
    Black Ops is one of the best first person shooters this year, and is a obviously must have for any action fan. Intense, gory and quite brilliant, maybe it's not refreshing but at the same time its a stunning game.