User Score
4.9

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 787 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 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
  2. 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
  3. Nov 18, 2012
    4
    At first, I gave this game a 7/10, but after spending a lot of time online this weekend, I can now say I was wrong. Sure the campaign is decent, and zombies is zombies, but right now multi-player is the most unbalanced in the series. The two major objective issues I have are lag compensation, and spawning

    As it stands, lag compensation favors players with poor internet, and also favor
    guns with high rate of fire (i.e. SMGs) since the lag compensation will likely make 60% of bullets you think hit, actually miss.

    The new spawn system was designed to avoid getting spawn camped... however the problem is now players will randomly spawn around you. It doesn't matter if your team locks down a corridor, or section of the map, the enemy will just appear right behind you since the game actively avoid forward spawns.

    Aside from those two problems, I have a personal problem with the map layouts... They are way to cluttered with obstacles. Therefore, shotguns and SMGs rule king. I have no problem with these guns, I just wish the 90% of the maps didn't favor them as I do enjoy AR's.

    It's sad to say that MW2 is still the best in series, and I'm sure many would still play it if it wasn't for all the hackers.
    Expand
  4. Jan 4, 2013
    4
    There are a lot of things to like about this game, but the negatives outweigh the positives. Let's start with the positives: the score-streak setup they implement in this game is awesome. In addition to getting kills, you are rewarded for playing the objective and being a team player. I am also glad to see that the support strike package from MW3 and death-streaks are NOT in this game, so no more free stealth bombers and EMPs, and no more last/final stand, second chance, or dead man's hand. The way they have divided up the perks is superb as well, with no single perk being overpowered. Similar to the perks in this game, you will find that the guns are well-balanced also.

    Unfortunately, even with these great features, the online multiplayer experience can be horrible at times. The lag compensation and hit detection in this game are worse than any of the three previous Call of Duty games (MW2, Black Ops 1, and MW3). It can be extremely frustrating to lose a gunfight to someone when, on your screen, you clearly should have come out on top. They have also taken away the ability to tie score-streaks to your custom classes, so if you find yourself struggling to win a gunfight due to lag or any other reason, you are stuck with the 3 score-streaks you chose and cannot switch to lower ones during a match. In addition to having horrible lag compensation and hit detection, the developers have implemented skill-based matchmaking, so even though the game has connection issues, players are not always placed in lobbies with the best ping. Often, players will be placed in games with worse connections in order to go up against players of similar skill level.

    TL;DR: the connection issues in this game have absolutely ruined it. Though they have implemented some nice new features, the online multiplayer experience can be utterly frustrating.
    Expand
  5. Dec 19, 2012
    4
    The maps are all garbage. The perks are all garbage. Gameplay is the same. Weapons and equipment are the same. Killstreaks are the same. Permanent lag. Keeps freezing, requiring me to restart my PS3 This game isn't as bad as MW3 but it's close. Black Ops 1 is still the best game in the series.
  6. Jun 19, 2013
    4
    Graphics amazing, but this just isn't my type of game. Hard to see who the enemy is, very chaotic while in play, no story in single play mode. Very hard for a person to me to get into. I may be minority, but just not my type of game
  7. Oct 26, 2013
    4
    i'm changing my score from 9 to 6. i used to like this game. but damn. i realise that this call of duty isn't that different from the last. it lacks innovation. let me say that again LACKS INNOVATION!
  8. Nov 15, 2012
    4
    Where to start....first of all I have played all the CoD games including the MW series. I still own all of them as I tend to keep "memorabilia". Have not played BO1 as a friend gave me his review and I decided not to try it out. This time though, coming from the disappointed experience (for me) of the latest Medal of Honor I was in desperate need of a new FPS also considering that less and less people are playing MW3 online.
    Anyway I went and bought BO2 and this is what I think:
    1) Single: personally I don't mind the jumping back and forth in time as I don't know the characters hence for me it is all new. I can understand people who have played the first BO not liking it. Difficulties are not too high and I would have liked a little less "help" witht he aiming, lots of time I found myself missing a shot on purpose just to see my enemy drop dead.
    2) Multiplayer: well for my taste not good as it goes against everything I like in a FPS game, meaning "think before you act". This game is a sheer quick run and shoot. Maps are pretty small and it gives also lots of (too many) opportunities for people to just camp (that is what most annoyed me in MoH).
    3) Overall Game: a) Graphics: personally they do look bad and dated. I mean after playing Battlefield 3 the bar has been set really high (another reason why I dislike MoH which even though uses the same engine as BF3 it been tuned down multiple notches). b) Sound: simple awful. I mean the "puff" the guns make when shooting is to my ears light year away from the sound of guns. And what about the comments you hear your character make when for instance you kill someone? Really? Who talks like that and why would you do that? Just a way to boost the ego of the player.
    c) Approach: in 2012 almost 2013 I would like to see more logic applied behind how things work. Starting from how guns respond when firing (e.g. sway). This is where MoH has done a good job even though they manage to mess it up in the single player going a bit too extreme. Also how the environment responds to bullets and explosion could be done better. Besides the usual vehicle blow up, windows smashing and plywood cracking there is little else.
    Final Comments: for me this game is ok to play if you can miss the 60 Euros (live in a Euro country) otherwise if you are torn between 2 games and you only got 60 euros I would say don't buy BO2.
    If the both franchises behind the COD title don't come up with serious changes in the game I don't think I will buy the next chapter. It's been a nice game but now the frustration I get out of it is greater than the pleasure.
    Whishes: my next FPS should be something like BF3 in terms of graphics and "logics" but without all those vehicles. Just keep it to a "foot" game and you will make me really really happy.
    Expand
  9. Nov 21, 2012
    4
    This is not a good game. Its the same graphics has Black Ops 1 which was outdated back at its release. The single player game is ok and the multiplayer is ok gameplay wise. Graphics its not a patch on MW3 and these games should be getting better. Only for the Zombies does this get a 4 in my eyes and im still undecided on that. Its big when you look at the different maps but then when you get to the locations there very small and this makes it a hard game when you add the fire. Still not sure about it but I expected much much better Expand
  10. Mar 5, 2013
    4
    Wow, I love MW2 and 3, never played MW1 or BO1, and this game is the suck. The maps never open up, they could have called this Corridor Shooter if the name wasn't already taken. Every map is 3 to 5 paths by 3 crosspaths with a round about in the middle. When it does open up they just pile up stuff to make it tighter and there are lots of dead zones on the maps you could go to and never see another player. If you don't get what I'm trying to convey it is this, there is no flow or joy to be had with these maps, only shooting someone that walks in front of you. MW3 maps seem brilliant in comparison, not counting the DC. Even the least liked map Downturn, would seem like an upgrade to this game. You also get to play every half decent map in BO2 twice in a row since the alternatives are garbage in comparison, so you are nonstop playing standoff, the one with the fountain, the boat and carrier. The weapons and mods are crap, no long range high damage pistols like the magnum, instead you get a short range shotgun pistol!?! The flash and concussion grenades are useless, they feel like the original Call of Duty. No portable radar just some lame radar grenades that don't do squat and last 10 seconds. All the good skills are in the third skill slot, so you have to waste your perk on it to have the necessary skills to dominate. The target finder ruins your skills in other games. The killstreaks are impossible to use unless you are amazing, even to use something like a UAV. It is hard to have a purpose in the game such as Assault, Recon, Defense, Sniper etc... Everybody is just a run and gunner.

    The Zombie game is incredibly stupid, this is a full game yet feels like a first person top down gun game you would download on your phone, minus the fun. The single player game is what all these games are 2 good moments surrounded by linear combat.

    All in all a complete disappointment for a modern FPS.
    Expand
  11. Feb 5, 2013
    4
    Black Ops 2 is a total disaster. The multiplayer is unbalanced and not addictive. The "zombies" is a mess, a complicated addition that used to be incredibly fun in the previous BO. And the single-player, while it has some worth additions, It's boring. And the graphics are outdated. Shortly, lets just say that It's the same game as the previous CODs. Unimpressed.
  12. Feb 13, 2013
    4
    Campaign is alright but nothing special. Multiplayer is complete garbage, often leaving me in disbelief of how I had just died. Hunter killers? Really? How the hell are we supposed to see that garbage coming? BO1 was good, but this game is complete garbage. Don't waste your time, money, or your longevity of your life (it will raise your blood pressure through the roof).
  13. lox
    Apr 29, 2013
    4
    I haven't even finished the campaign for Black Ops 2 due to the fact that it is god awfully boring and the multiplayer is fun for a few days but then it gets boring as hell as well. The hit detection is terrible, the spawn points aren't that great, and the maps are sub par, and full of head glitching and camping spots. In the end Black Ops 2 is fun for a little while but it gets boring and irritating very quickly. Expand
  14. May 25, 2013
    4
    I'm not much of a CoD fan, but always had fun playing the franchise and was really excited for BO2 after BO1. Turns out, my expectations were wrong on this one. The single-player is bland and the story is confusing 'cause you're in the future, but you play in the past, which makes no sense at all! The MP is fun, but it's extremely lags here and there, then after a while, I stopped playing it. Then there's the Zombie mode, which is hard to consider as "FUN", its slow, boring, and a huge waste of time! Out of all the CoD's Iv'e payed, this is the worst. Expand
  15. Jul 24, 2013
    4
    it was alright, i was moderately bored most of the time. I did like the arsenal that was available: http://www.airsplat.com/cod-black-ops.htm. i will say that It was pretty to look at
  16. Jan 16, 2014
    4
    This franchise has gone pretty stale. The story mode is unengaging and the graphics are not extraordinary. Zombie mode is just alright. The multiplayer is this game's only slight redemption, however it doesn't really offer anything different from previous COD releases. There are much better FPS games on the market. If you are a person that doesn't expect the least bit of depth in your games, are satisfied with "just another COD", and want a mildly entertaining run-and-gun multiplayer experience... you might like this. I however do not. Expand
  17. 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
  18. 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
  19. Nov 15, 2012
    3
    Jesus Christ. How did they managed to make this game look worth than MW2? I can't believe it is 2012 looking at this game graphics. I love how Critics said about MOH:WF that it was so scripted and you telling me Black OPS 2 is not? Really? Makes me feel like an idiot when I play single player. I knew that multiplayer is going to be pretty much the same and I bought this game to play with my kids via split screen. And I am so disappointed in that regard. When u play split screen graphics look even more worth. Come on. Make a freaking new engine greedy f......! I feel that I just trow away 60 bucks for no good reason. Go to hell Activision. U will not see any money from me coming ur way!!!! Expand
  20. Dec 9, 2012
    3
    More of the same, now with a futuristic skin. Im done with COD, ive been playing since COD1 and after 6 years of Activision Milking my pocket releasing the exact same game over and over again, i decided to give the franchise a last chance with blackops 2 and i ended up selling my copy. Whats really sad is that i'm not even disappointed, because i wasn't expecting much anyway. I was gonna give it a 2, gave it a 3 because at least is better than **** warfare 3 Expand
  21. Dec 10, 2012
    3
    First CoD game i've ever played, it's really fun. awesome design and gunplay/modes. having lots of fun...unfortunately it only lasted for about a week. I started to understand the game more and more, and became more frustrated at how bad the latency is ruining this game for everyone. no killcam is ever accurate to what is actually done on my side of the screen. a PDW looks like it kills me in 2 bullets, but on their killcam they already pumped me with 4 bullets around a corner they were already around before it showed on my screen. there's so many youtube videos expressing this with video footage examples! it's infuriating that a game that emphasizes so much on multiplayer and that they can't even get the online portion correct. they implemented a patch (1.04) to fix weapon balances and such, but everyone still uses the SMG's because they dominate close range and mid-range and sometimes kill long range, where's the shotguns ranges? oh sure 1-5 feet but how can i be successful with so much latency problems? it's killing the game for me and i won't be returning to the game until it is fixed, and I may re-write a better review to what it actually deserves... Expand
  22. Nov 19, 2012
    3
    First of all I used to be a COD fan (Bought prestige/Hardened editions)Got to prestige 10, etc. But Treyarch and activision ruined COD. Terrible 2005 graphics, they didn't even rey to improve on the contrary COD 4 looks better than this turd, laggy and mediocre online, smallest maps ever, auto aim, retarded AI, and worst of all tons of technicall flaws including the infamous Yelow Light inducing game frezzing on PS3. I didn't finish campaign mode out of fear of Killing my PS3. Treyarch should be fired because all the games they have developed aré Stinkers since Spiderman, even a "Noob" studio like Sledgehammer did a better job. Please bring Back Infinity Ward they had respect and love for the COD franchise. Expand
  23. Nov 18, 2012
    3
    Complete and utter garbage. Graphics have improved minimally, but it still feels like that colorless 2x2 box with a bunch of 6 years olds with ADHD screaming at each other that everyone knows and loves. The story has all the same plot twists, mechanics are still horrible (not changed from the last games) and they still do not have dedicated servers. This game lacks any modern features.
  24. Nov 15, 2012
    3
    Total disappointment. First of all, way to test guys. You can't even connect half the time and the multiplayer is a mess. Takes me several attempts to even log in to get online with it and then several more to get a game going. More to the point however - I was a big fan of Black Ops I and COD in general. I appreciate the variations and the distinctions that have come along with the MW versions and thought the Black Ops twist in BOI was great. This game however, BO2, is junk. Total junk. The inescapable streak rewards are ridiculous. Missiles just raining down from everywhere, bots and drones everywhere. Total junk. It's totally weak. My friends (who all have played mostly to top level prestige so they've logged serious hours on the past games) all think the same. This game scuks. Totally. We are going back to MW3 and BO1. Big thumbs down Treyarch and Activision. This thing is garbage. Expand
  25. Nov 16, 2012
    3
    This review is based on Multiplayer. In my experience, I played League, Core, Hardcore, and the Nuketown playlist along with one of the party games. I noticed that the more I try to think and deliberate with decision making in the game, my success rate goes down in a match. I had more success when I was paying attention to videos on my laptop and habitually moving the analog sticks and pulling trigger buttons lazily. In my opinion, this the equivalent to what's known as a "button-masher" in the fighting or beat-em-up genre (sometimes even 3rd person action adventure). It's fun with friends, but it is not very challenging to a someone who wants to approach a game with an independent mind. The guns might as well shoot out laser beams or magic spells because their is virtually no recoil. I mostly used the Skorpion EVO, m7, MTA, SCAR H, and Chicom CQB. In my opinion, the gunplay lacks the personality that MW3 had, but I did not put as many hours in BO2 as MW3. It is just my impressions. Last night I found myself playing the game I really felt disgusted and disappointed with the experience I was having. It did not provide any sense of accomplishment in gaining kills. I didn't feel as if I had earned success because of any ability that I possessed. The series seems to have changed from a game of survival (COD4 & WOW) to an arcade party (MW2) to, now, a digital playground of chaos and disruption. I mean, when you look at the game screen sometimes, you must ask yourself, "what is this really that is taking place place in front of me?" Is it entertainment or amusement or simply an unorganized mess?" That is referring to what appears on screen, not necessarily mechanics. The graphics have been polished and look a little more high-def compared to last year's MW3, but honestly, the characters and bright colors on the map are not very pleasing to the eye. I had a problem with some of BF3's dry-looking, stale, gray maps for console, but this is not the remedy. It's no wonder why they do live-action commercials with actors. I just want to suggest to people who play the game or are interested in playing it, what is it that you actually value in your gaming experience? Do you really find those values in this game? I think the direction that treyarch took was to streamline, and organize the arcade madness that took place in previous titles in the series and squeeze it into a mechanical series of outrageous battles, but it backfired on them, making this an all out boring, sequence of fast-paced animations and magical guns. I'm sorry if I offended any gamers on here, but I don't consider myself a gamer. I'm just looking for a good experience on a console and I did not find it here. Expand
  26. Nov 22, 2012
    3
    The only reason I am giving Black Ops II a 3 out of 10 is because I really enjoyed Campaign Mode AKA The Story. Everything else though seems to be a mess. The online multiplayer seems broken the extent that someone could tell me that it wasn't finished being developed and I would believe them. If you play online multiplayer be warned, you will not see things play out the same way your enemies do. The lag compensation system in this game will cause a slight delay for players with a fast internet connection to supposedly make things more even, IT DOES NOT. This system will allow an enemy that rounds a corner right in front of you to kill you before you can even pull the trigger. There are also times when you will empty most of your clip into the enemy only to have them turn around and put you down with one or two bullets. I've had matches where I have put 4 buckshot rounds into the enemy's face at point blank range only to get killed by their shotgun in 1 shot. If your internet connection is good don't be surprised if on kill confirmed you go 10K-30D+ because of this atrocious lag compensator that rewards players for having horrible internet connections. Most if not all of the people giving good reviews of this game have DSL or lower quality of internet connection guaranteed. I have been playing Call of Duty since World at War came out in 2008 and did well (2.0+ Kill death Ratio) at them until Modern Warfare 3 and this new creature that they have released. With this game I currently have a 0.88 KDR which I must say is horrible to say the least. I have decided that I will no longer buy any Activision/Blizzard/Treyarch/InfinityWard games as I have lost confidence in their ability to create a fair and unbiased product. Next November hit them where it really hurts. Their pocketbooks. Expand
  27. Dec 26, 2012
    3
    I bought this game after some work friends I was playing multiplayer with decided they´d jump into the next COD title. To put it clearly: This game is as bad as it gets. The single player campaign is awful, with an graphics engine as old as time itself, an even more stupid AI (I started the game in Hardened and could dance around the scenario before someone cared to shoot at me) and stupid objectives, that basically were WAY too easy to complete even in Hardened. I couldnt play it for longer than 15 minutes. The multiplayer part of the game is a little better, with a system that "kind of" works, but it is even more based on player reflexes than the previous COD titles. Not to mention the deaths coming from nowhere, thanks some issues still present on the game. The multiplayer part is a solid 5, and the single player a solid zero, hence my score of 3. Expand
  28. Jan 28, 2013
    3
    First of all, i must say that i had all the call of duty's so far, and i never gave a damn about single player, i always play the multiplayer for the online experience!!! i bought this game since day one but i couldn't play it for 2 days because it couldn't CONNECT to the online services! Great work treyarch, thank you! Only chuck norris was online those days! When the miracle happend and i connected thankfully i noticed some things that i didn't like! The knife didn't work properly like the other call of duty's, a lot of lagging, a GLINCH that give noobs access to master all the prestiges, which is inacceptable and the guns especially the smg's are super weapons, they can hit you from miles away! Ok i said, its a new game these problems will be fixed in a future update and it will work properly! There were a lots of updates since then but nothing was fixed, it getting even worst and worst! Not to mention that i have see the famous message ''call of duty : black ops 2 server is not available at this time'' every time there is double xp! So imagine how many times i couldn't play the game since its release! Just imagine! Don't fix treyarch any problem of the game, don't fix the servers, don't fix anything,just release a dlc and make it worst! Great idea! i'm wondering though, the new gun in dlc, the smg, who's smg is gonna be? Kratos smg? John Rambo's smg? Treyarch, this was the last time i bought a game with your name on, i would never gonna buy again! And i know that you don;t care about one customer, but please, don't dissolve the series! You are losing the average players! FIX THE SERVERS! Expand
  29. Mar 29, 2013
    3
    This game is a good mix between MW2 and Black Ops 1 as far as multiplayer is concerned. It has good guns, some great maps, and the pick 10 system is great. The only real downfalls of this game are the Zombies mode, which failed to deliver on its ambitious promises; its terrible Campaign, which is literally nothing to get excited about (it's only worth playing for trophies). Games like these are why the video game industry is becoming stagnant and this should be a cut off point for the series...for now. If a game has to rely on its multiplayer, it's obviously not good. We all need to think about that before we get suckered into buying another CoD game. Expand
  30. Oct 15, 2013
    3
    The typical, humdrum, repetitive game that people have somehow not come to expect over the almost ten years of the CoD franchise.

    The gameplay is exactly the same, and as many say: "If it isn't broken, don't fix it." However, the game has been broken for quite some time, and though it totes some fun to be had with a few friends, the sheer lack of support in terms of patching and the
    unbalanced nature of the game, make something that is apparently online focused seem like a joke.

    Each CoD is hyped with several exciting story trailers, and yet again, we are treated to a boring, Hollywood centric piece. And this is delivered in top class by the appalling writing of David S. Goyer, who's attempt at military propaganda is no better than someone who doesn't claim to be a writer.

    The fact that Trent Reznor has written the score, was something that got me half excited, but the material he has provided was nothing short of mediocre.

    Overall an appalling repetition of last years instalment. Steer clear of this one.
    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]