User Score
4.9

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 774 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. Dec 29, 2012
    0
    Unbalanced multiplayer, mediocre campaign, and overall terrible community. Activision really should've spent more time creating this, especially when it's such a "high-profile AAA" game.
  2. Nov 13, 2012
    7
    It's easy to see who the trolls are here giving "0"'s. Just check their profile and you can see that they apparently bought this game for 3 different systems and gave them all a "0". If you hate CoD so much. Stop buying it. Activition makes a lot of money with this franchise and they will continue to do so until people stop buying the game. They don't care how much you hate the game, as long as you buy it. So next year, don't buy it, and let the people who do buy it, rate the game. Expand
  3. Dec 15, 2012
    7
    Singleplayer was pretty good interesting ending choice but still good. The multiple endings leaved much to be desired but it still worked. While somehow I believe most players hated the mode where you change between individual units, I actually found it a refreshing change. The slight changes to multiplayer were good too. IMO there is no way this game could score less than a 6/10 but there are always going to be haters and as they say haters gonna hate. Voice acting and cinematics A+ as you would expect from this title. Expand
  4. Nov 18, 2012
    7
    Due to the fact that the online multiplayer is incredibly broken and very hard to tolerate as of this moment. I will skip reviewing that and focus on the single player campaign. For the most part the campaign is EXTREMELY easy. There is barely any challenge even to playing BO2 on veteran I think it took me around 4-5 hours to complete and only had to continue a handful of times... IT IS 100% casual friendly unfortunately. It is full of scripted scenes and what not but the game does provide an interesting way of going about the missions. You have multiple choices for different outcomes within the game so there is actually a reason now to replay the campaign. Choosing an option may trigger a different scripted scene in the game and change the way some parts can be played. Prior to this call of duty I think the only game that had any form of choice would be World at War with either Sgt. Roebuck or that other dude dying (can't remember his name!). Aside from all this I believe Treyarch's call of duty's keep getting better while Infinity Ward's keep getting more and more dumbed down to the point where they are just boring. Call of Duty 4 was their peak - they're done give it up. This is a far superior installment to Modern Warfare 3 - aside from the freezing and multiple bugs I would say it is one of the more fun FPS I've played. I enjoyed the campaign and enjoyed the futuristic guns and different style of weapons. This is not a complete rip off of Ghost Recon FS or Halo, it does do it's own things and it is it's own game and that should be praised. I would score it higher but due to the bugs and, god I don't know how this happens, but LAG? In single player? I cannot just bring myself to give it an 8 9 or 10. It's good, it's playable, it's enjoyable but it has it's share of problems. I can finally put away Boringfield 3 and enjoy a decent call of duty after the issues are hopefully fixed with this game. On a side note: I'm glad Treyarch only made a few tweaks to their old formula - it would be a shame to see Call of Duty go down the Socom route and die when there are barely any other shooters these days that are as enjoyable as a Call of Duty. Expand
  5. Nov 27, 2012
    9
    I am a fan of Battlefield 3 and Gotham City imposterT.his is actually the great Call of Duty game. I played CoD 1 , Blops, and MW3. I love the map design in this game. I like the little tweak they made. I don't understand all the complaints. I actually feel like I am using my brain to play, unlike mw3.
  6. Nov 18, 2012
    9
    Campaign is solid. Zombies are as overrated as ever. But the multiplayer returns with an added zest. The graphics have been bumped up from Black ops 1 , which is lucky as they were a jerky mess before. The games fluidity now matches it's IW brother but has less game breaking killstreaks and weapons. The pick ten points system is a stroke of genius and the maps are much more ergonomic than Infinity wards ugly high walled prisons. I was an Infinity Ward fan right up until the release of mw3. I loved ( and still do ) COD 4 and MW2 , but the control has well and truly passed to Treyarch. Infinity Ward the ball is in your court. Try and match this! Expand
  7. Nov 17, 2012
    3
    First, I'm going to review the single player campaign. The story is, well, it's a Call of Duty game. So without spoiling anything, the story is your generic bad guy out there, US forces must go stop him, blah. The better things this time around is that you can customize your loadout for each mission. The introduction of "Strike Force" Missions is a feeble attempt at spicing up the single player campaign. You basically control a few turrets, one robot mech, and two squads of "SEALS". I put "SEALS" in quotation marks because these SEALs are worse in combat than a bunch of preteens playing paintball. Unless you're manually controlling a unit, they will do nothing but die. On Veteran mode, it is literally impossible to win a strike force mission. Having the unit you control die in less than 5 seconds becomes frustrating after it's happened for the 50th time, just so you can lose the mission.

    Onto multiplayer, for the PS3 version, four things may happen. One, you can't play because you get an error message saying can't connect to servers or something along those lines. Two, you can't play because two minutes or so into the game, you get "Connection Interrupted" and get kicked out of the lobby. Three, you can't play because despite having high speed Internet, for some reason you always get a red 1-bar lag-tastic connection. Four, you play perfectly fine, but still you lose one on one gun fights, despite the fact that you're aiming down sight, get the first few bullets on target, behind high cover, and having every single possible tactical advantage, but this far into the Call of Duty series I think we've all come to know this game as being 40% luck, 59% connection, and 1% skill.

    I gave this game one point for having a mediocre campaign (with a few near pointless gimmicks thrown in there), for having zombies mode, and for letting me play for about two minutes of every multiplayer match before kicking me out due to "Connection Interrupted". And yes I do have my search preferences set to "best".
    Expand
  8. Sep 18, 2013
    2
    Where Rockstar's Grand Theft Auto series keeps improving and revolutionising the open-world genre with hot new releases, Activision's Call of Duty franchise has shunned and abandoned the shooter games by releasing mediocre after mediocre games that spawned from a once good series starting with Modern Warfare.

    Everything in the game feels lacklustre and I can't believe the critics giving
    the game a 9/10 or a 8/10, guess they just like the same crap every year with slightly better graphics. Shooting mechanics have improved and so has the story but that doesn't save 3 hours of boring campaign missions, terrible net code and lack of fidelity that makes everything feel disjointed. If you're gonna come back from Black Ops 1, you gotta bring your best. Not this unpolished, lazy mess of a game! Expand
  9. Nov 13, 2012
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. You knew it, we all knew it, even they knew it!! Haha finally even the fanboys admit it, COD is dead. Those of us who have had the games from the very first , who can remember the pc cod 2 and its glorious entrance and even MW before that got horribly messed up in Mw2- the glory days are over. COD I salute you- but like that old warhorse you loved it's time to lead it down the path to the barn and put your gun to your shoulder, say your last goodbye, and with something like sorrow out the barrel to its head and put it out of its misery. Thanks for everything cod, it's a shame you didn't go out in style. This game is the cenotaph, the ugly reminder of what should never have been, surpassed by so many and now consigned to mediocrity. For those of you who bought it, for shame- you surely saw Bo and realised that unless you were 12 with ADHD this game was nothing like its predecessor? Surely you saw the signs. Thank god I didn't pay for it, what a fitting reminder of how the mighty can fall. Sleep well now cod, and god bless. Xx Expand
  10. Nov 13, 2012
    4
    Look at my review history. Am I someone who jumps on a bandwagon in any way? Look at my review of mw3, and by the way, BO1 was mt favorite COD. BO2 is a compete waste of my money and it makes me happy mw3 was so poorly recieved. Granted, I've only played it for 1 night. But, the campaign is as most basic as possible, and the multiplayer is so steriotyplical that I amost knew what was going to happen next based on a game I played 5 years ago, and that game is blah blah blah. I let mw3 slide even though I knew it was the same as usual but I can't let this slide because now I have to sell this and accept a $30 dollar loss because I didn't listen to a !,000,000,000,000 other gamers. Expand
  11. Jan 31, 2013
    6
    I was looking forward to Black Ops II because of the single player campaign. The new story choices, sci-fi overtones and the new tactical RTS elements looked intriguing. Unfortunately, the campaign turned out to be lackluster. Sure, there was the odd occasional mission that was special (such as the one where you body glide off a cliff) but it was mostly just linear shooting galleries. It was a far cry from the fun of Modern Warfare 2's highpoint. The new RTS missions are also laughably simplistic. They just don't seem to work very well. The multiplayer is solid but unspectacular. The best part of the suite is the fact that you're rarely overwhelmed by scorestreak attacks. There's nothing more frustrating than being relentlessly hounded by helicopters for the duration of an entire match! Sadly, the maps are too small and boxed in. This negates any real strategy and results in a reflex heavy twitch-shooter where players dart about like they're competing in a marathon. Basically speaking, Call of Duty: Black Ops II has sank from promising to disappointing. Expand
  12. Nov 22, 2012
    9
    I got mine on the day it came out. I knew going into it all I would be playing is the multiplayer as I don't like zombies or the story. The last call of duty story was lame and never made it past the first 2 hours. Same with this one was boring. I like playing Batman Arkum City and the story on this was does not even compare. However the multiplayer is fantastic. A lot of the same but different. Better guns, maps and equipment. I love playing the multiplayer with my friends. Expand
  13. Nov 13, 2012
    2
    this game is not fun. i personally don't care i am not buying any more call of duty games. this is the final straw MW3 then this. this is absolute horse crap. the graphics are so bad that i feel like it is the same as the original modern warfare. i loved the original black ops too. the gameplay is about as bad as MW3's with no good new features. and the multiplayer is buggy laggy and just impossible to deal with. being randomly disconnected is a pain. then if you try and play in a group it doesn't work because you can't join lobbies for some reason. i don't think this game should have the privilege of being released. it's not fun to play and is just plain bad. im going to return this tomorrow. this is where i draw the line. Expand
  14. Nov 19, 2012
    1
    Black Ops sucked ass. Black Ops 2 also sucks ass. Every time that Treyarch gets a game they screw it up. Infinity Ward don't get it perfect by any means, but COD4 is still the best of the bunch. This game will always sell well but for the next game I.W. really need to pull their socks up and give us something new and different.
  15. Nov 18, 2012
    8
    It irks me to see all the dumb asses giving this game a zero. And then you look at all of the reviews they have given, and they are always a zero. Why bother? What are you achieving? you just look like a ****
    Anyway.... being someone who has actually played the game (unlike the aforementioned toss bags), I have to say I find it highly entertaining. I knew what I was buying into because...
    shock horror, I read about the game before buying it. And.... shock horror again... I enjoy the COD style games. If you have brought a COD game in the past and disliked it, why would you buy another one? Are you just stupid?

    It's not the most ground breaking game out there, but if you like the COD style of game play then this is your type of game. Hours of fun to be had in the multi player, the the pick 10 system is great to play around with.

    Can't wait to unlock more of the equipment to play around with.

    Get over it whiners and haters.
    Expand
  16. Dec 8, 2012
    2
    I was expecting some improvement in the multiplayer. Nope. After playing Halo I, thought MW2's multiplayer was bad because of lag. Now I see that MW2 handles the best of the entire COD series. Treyarch/Black Ops has always been worse...from World at War, Black Ops and now Black Ops 2. They've done nothing to improve the way their system handles network lag and hit detection. The game is an exercise in frustration. Time to sell the game and buy a cinder block for me to beat my head against, I'll get a similar level of enjoyment and have $50. Expand
  17. Nov 13, 2012
    9
    PPl, please, COD is a multiplier francise, dont buy for campaign or zombies (though zombies is generally good). I played multiplayer last night until i was level 18. The gameplay is the same as MW2, MW3, and Black ops mixed in. Blops 1 was my favorite and this is a nice refresh. Overall its the same gameplay as usual. I dont understand why people want to fix something that isnt broken, if you want something different buy battlefield 3. I also didnt try nuketown 2025 yet, but Ill assume if its the same map as before, I will spend countless hours on nuketown with new killstreaks and better graphics and faster gameplay as compared to blops1. On to review points:

    Similar to other MWs/blops: Fast Gameplay, similar graphics to MW3 though slightly more blurry to me, great framerate, You have to earn tokens at each level to unlock new stuff and also have to acheive a level to unlock certain equipment

    Differences: . You can only carry 10 total items on you, including perks and attachments to weapons. This makes things more strategic, do you want light weight and hardline, or do you want a concussion grenade or two. I really enjoyed this as you need to plan for maps and gameplay style. Perks also dont seem to be as dominating (cant see how to get unlimited running or hardline pro). When getting points in mulitplayer for killstreak rewards you get 100 for each direct kill, 10 for each time your teamates kill a guy when you have an AUV up, 25/50 or others based on assits, and killstreak reward kills give you points but not always a lot. This makes it more challanging that MW3 and getting 4 kills, then a missle strike, then a couple more and a gunship, requires much more careful play to get as many kills as in blops1/MW3. In Blops 1 I rule with ak74, rapid fire, unlimited sprinting, and everything else doesnt matter. In Blops 2 things are a bit different as the perks and load out stops you from making an all around domination character. If you want all around great character you will lose your grenades and flashbangs to use more perks to "run and gun more".

    There are also more attachments to guns, and around 22 killstreaks, which are similar and new at the same time. I was using the quadracopter, which I liked, airstrikes are standard but you can choose 3 locations, and I also got a grenade laucher that I took out about 5 guys with, also unllike blops 1 when you die you can reuse your deployed killstreak reward (like the minigun in blops1 which you would lose if you died), I also got some guided drone, throw it in the air and when it finds someone its an instant kill.

    Mics for the guy you killed send you what they say when they die, hahaha, I was having fun last night at the people wondering how they died. Most people last night were levels 1-20, and one guy who was 37...no idea how that happened.

    Anyway all in all I rate it a 9 for not fixing something that isnt broken, while adding a few new features to an existing great game style.
    Expand
  18. Dec 6, 2012
    0
    The campaign is 6.5/10. The Multiplayer is - 6.5/10. Spawn killing, lag switching, team killing, boosting, aimbots (yes, there are, deniers), lag so horrendous that even the best connection runs 1-2 seconds behind everyone else. You'd think that a company that just made ONE BILLION DOLLARS in 15 days off of this, PLUS the BILLIONS off of the last several, that they'd care enough to fix it: NOPE, they already have your money.

    "HA HA" - Nelson
    Expand
  19. Nov 13, 2012
    1
    This time COD has shipped with an insurmountable number of bugs in both singleplayer and multiplayer. I have had to restart my playstation numerous times due to freezes and have had to deal with disconnects/lag with common occurrence. All the "new additions" are overhyped and do not even impact gameplay greatly along with the "futuristic" setting. To be honest we need to stop buying this yearly cash grab it's not getting better that's for sure Expand
  20. Jul 7, 2013
    7
    I have to give it to Treyarch, they seem to make the more bearable versions of this highly iterative franchise. This year Black Ops II admittedly has a better campaign than its predecessors. The choice element is a little fresh but isn't implemented all that well, but the missions were fun enough to keep me advancing, even if I did end up tiring of the story. The multiplayer is as slick as ever, but it really doesn't add all that much. Zombies is perhaps innovated most in this title, but it still feels a little weary with age. Its a good game, but Activision should really pack their bags now and leave on this one, because even though this game is decent, it is not going to save this franchise from an inevitable end. Expand
  21. Apr 7, 2013
    8
    I do not like campaign mode of all COD games: but this is not a problem. So far I've spent more than 100 hours on this game and I've played offline 30 minutes the day my DSL was down. Multiplayer is fine: maps are well designed and allows different combat style graphic is clear and it allows to see distant enemies well enough to hit them good weapon choice ad smart experience system
    logo customization
    different game mode
    chat work well enough

    Multiplayer is not perfect
    with over than 600.000 players online sometimes ther's too much lag
    sometimes you can be kicked off a play without any reason
    the world league is only Base and not veteran

    It worth the money they ask ?

    It depends IF you like multiplayer YES

    Ps.
    Campaign mode it remembers me old laser disc games...
    Expand
  22. Jul 15, 2013
    8
    Okay, here's yet another Call of Duty game. If you've played every CoD game from CoD4, you know what to expect. Only this time, the game is set mostly in the future.

    Let's look at the single-player campaign. To be honest, you have to give credit to Treyarch for trying something new with the campaign structure. What you do will affect what path you take and how the story turns out. It's
    nice to take a break away from the linear campaign structure, as what was done in the past. The story was quite ok.

    Zombie mode. They actually have done SOME improvements, but why do we need a storyline here?

    Multiplayer: Here is what people care about the most. I like the idea that you can prestige your weapons once you max out your level. Other than that, it's really the same Call of Duty multiplayer from the past games, except that it's in the future. It should be noted that there are parts of the singleplayer that is set in the 1980s. Why can't we have that in the multiplayer? You know a mode set in the future and a mode set in the past? That would be something.

    Overall: The only surprise you should expect from BO2 is the non-linear single-player structure. Multiplayer is quite the same. It's still fun, though. BO2 does NOT suck, but if you're expecting a totally revamped CoD, you'll be disappointed.

    P.S. Wake up, IW and Treyarch. This is the same engine used for five years. Give us a new engine already! Small lighting changes don't cut it.
    Expand
  23. Nov 15, 2012
    9
    Call of Duty: Black Ops, possibly the best Treyarch Call of Duty has created a sequel. Is it good? Yes, the changes and gameplay are amazing. But what did I miss? Oh that's right, the idiotic trolls giving the game a 0. It's apparent at how many idiots there are, and possibly a good number of those who will vote my review down because I'm not playing their game, but enough about that. Black Ops 2 has a great campaign mode writen by David Goyer who helped write the Dark Knight. The storyline is clever although not the standout if the game. The game sees even brighter light with the Multiplayer. It's as good as it's ever been and added some new designs for good measure. The zombie mode, seemed like a flop due to the dissaperence of the original characters, but, zombies changed to much it makes it all worth it. Tranzit is the highlight of zombies, showing off the new made "Greenrun" and a whole new direction for Call of Duty. This is as good as the original Black Ops which I gave an 8/10. Well done, Treyarch. Expand
  24. Jan 29, 2013
    4
    BLACK OPS 2 ZOMBIES ONLY REVIEW. Having played World at War and Black Ops 1, I can say that the zombies mode in this game has definitely lost its touch. Sure, it's improved in the sense that there are now more modes: TranZit - where you travel between the different maps via a bus - and Grief - a competitive game mode where two teams compete for score, but still killing zombies. The maps aren't great either. Sure, they're designed around the TranZit mode but that is mainly, from my perspective, for little kids that want to over-complicate a simple mini-game. The classic style zombies is still present though. The three areas for the survival mode each have different resources. The first area, for example, just has a mystery box and 4 wall weapons, like the original Nacht der Untoten. It should also be noted that one can now change the starting round, whether there are dogs and whether it's headshots only, as well as the option to turn down the difficulty. Despite these additions, the actual fun has declined. You kill over 200 zombies before you even get to double figures on the round counter, yet there is little satisfaction. The weapons aren't satisfying to use due to the lack of recoil perhaps. Or maybe the zombies don't die as quickly. Whatever it is, something is definitely missing. In my opinion, Shi No Numa, Der Riese and Kino der Toten had the perfect balance between complexity of the map and complexity of progression. Everything was simple. You didn't have to go through a million different rituals and easter eggs just to upgrade a gun or even access the mystery box. Yet, they weren't too simple where there was no scope for strategy or variation. In Black Ops II, the problem is that it's gone too far yet again, just like the DLC maps for Black ops 1.
    //TLDR; if you're buying Black Ops 2 for the zombies, be aware that it's nowhere near as fun as World at War and the focus has been shifted away from zombies being a mini-game towards it being a more complete horde mode; which falls short of even Modern Warfare 3 or Gears of War 3's survival modes.
    Expand
  25. Nov 15, 2012
    2
    One of the biggest draws for Black Ops 2, zombies, has been completely and utterly ruined. Tranzit is horrible... If you're only going to buy Black Ops 2 for zombies, then don't because you will be sorely disappointed.
  26. Nov 13, 2012
    0
    This game is just awful. I really wanted to get into it, but I just couldn't. It's the same tired formula they used in black ops, and it's even less enjoyable than mw3. The single player campaign is awful, the game gives you auto-aim, so you don't even have to try when playing, and it still uses the same engine it's been using for so many years now. Call of Duty has essentially been turned into a medicore cash cow over the years, shame. Expand
  27. Nov 13, 2012
    0
    This is the worst game i have ever played, why did they ruin this series!!!!!!! I used to like it, MW3 was bad so i though this will be bettter but it wasn't, i'm sad, i i used to like this game series but now i hate, i really hate it with a passion, this game is bad, stop lying to yourselfs and go buy a real game.
  28. Dec 4, 2012
    3
    While no game deserves a 0 as a score this game definitely does not deserve a 10. Single player basically comes down to more of the same old formula Activision has forced these development companies to work with. The AI is laughable at best, but every one knows the Call of Duty franchise has never had the best coding for AI. The story line in general is 5 hours long and is really bland, unimaginative, and well, more of the same. They try to deviate from becoming a linear corridor shooter by supposedly providing player with options but they don't truly affects the game. The ending on the other hand might. Which is suppose to add re playability to the first person campaign, but there's really no reason to play over the same campaign for just a different ending. Multiplayer, this is the are where this game should shine but it seems the MP portion of this game feels a lot similar to that of MW3 and of course Black Ops. Small scaled maps with tons of areas to camp. Basically comes down to which ever team can camp the middle ground the best wins the game. The rest is just protecting the same corner through out the game with occasionally moving 3-6 feet away from your old camp spot to corner camp in a different spot. There are no need to watch your back as certain equipment and streaks do that for your. The game is slow paced and also suffers from the same old bad hit detection. While it does some what fix old issues like knifing people from miles away, it does at times glitch and can cause your character to launch at another player. Kill streaks seem re-hashed but with an added "futuristic" approach. There's always lag and horrible host selection, the spawn points are mediocre at best, but what can one expect from such small maps that are crammed with buildings to make them seem "big." The leveling system online has been set to keep players from playing. While it gives players who have been playing the game longest the upper hand with over powered weaponry and the best perks. The new set up is suppose to force players into playing the objective, that is not the case. The way the maps are set up actually encourage players to whore kill streaks and never actually go for any objective. Word of advice, try to level as fast as you can to get ghost perk, it's a uav whore type of game. Zombies: This is where this game shines. It's somewhat new but refreshing at the same time reminds me a bit of Left for Dead. Which is great fun to be honest. If this game was just a zombie installment I would definitely recommend this game. Other wise, save yourself some money and just rent this game or save up for MW5 or BLOPS 4; Skip a generation or two just like any one in their right mind would with Fifa games. Expand
  29. Nov 14, 2012
    0
    I will give this a 0 just because i cant put it in minus figures biggest pile of rubbish ive ever played and i didnt think things could get any worse than mw3
  30. Nov 18, 2012
    7
    Black Ops 2 is for me the best CoD game since CoD4, it's a different take on the formula which proves that good things can still be done with CoD. Don't get me wrong though, just buying this game for the multiplayer wouldn't be the smartest thing to do, the singleplayer really needs to be played. You really see that the singleplayer has gotten more effort this time around with multiple endings depending on your actions throughout the game. The story is pretty good this time around, with a good villain that seals the deal, some plot elements weren't as explored as I would have liked to, but still an enjoyable ride. Still, the zombies mode is improved but still pretty familiar, as is the multiplayer itself. It's ironic that for me, the singleplayer is what sells the game, considering that CoD today is famous for its multiplayer. I give this game a 7/10, for making a valid effort, being fun but still being kinda familiar. Expand
Metascore
83

Generally favorable reviews - based on 21 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 18 out of 21
  2. Negative: 0 out of 21
  1. Jan 12, 2013
    80
    One of the most complete, albeit shaky, packages the series has ever seen. [Issue#226, p.68]
  2. Jan 3, 2013
    90
    While the campaign length is fairly standard of past iterations of the series, it's worth multiple playthroughs and the multiplayer offers endless hours of fun and enjoyment; whether it's slaying zombies or facing off against other players in a wide range of multiplayer modes with an endless number of loadout combinations.
  3. Dec 23, 2012
    78
    Worth checking out for online and the sci-fi novelty value alone. [Jan 2013, p.95]