1. PQuinny

   9

   Call of Duty: Black Ops was a terrific game. It is a sequel to the 2008 game World at War and has much of the same character. Black Ops is based during the Cold War, and has many weapons to match the time period. It consists of three game play modes: Campaign, Multiplayer and Zombies. Campaign was comprised of a rich, well thought out plot, centering around Alex Mason. It has many good levels, and the graphics are excellent. The Multiplayer is very different from Call of Duty's previous game, Modern Warfare 2. Instead of leveling up and unlocking guns, you must buy them with the new COD Points. They also have many new weapons and attachments, like the crossbow. Zombies is great and is very enjoyable and it just never gets old. However, there were two downsides. One was that the AI is incredibly stupid. I mean seriously, you can't get much dumber. The other one I had was with a glitch in Combat Training, a new addition to the Call of Duty Multiplayer which allows you to practice the maps with the AI which you can play with a friend. When you start, it puts you (and your friend) on a different team. When I try and switch to the same team as my friend, it switches from the usual six players on a team to eight, meaning that the other team had seven originally. All in all, this game was very good and I would recommend it to anyone that enjoys shooter games or the Call of Duty series.… Expand

   • Helpful? 1 of 1 users said Yes.
2. Tylerhan2000

   8

   I used to be a great fan of the COD series, but however, even though the first few games where great titles, activision now just spits one out year after year as fast as they can to make profits, the overall gameplay hasnt changed much after an almost decade of the series, with insignificant things like zombies and currency thrown in every few titles to try to keep it fresh, Black ops itself has a short singleplayer with a more or less confusing story, and multiplayer gets boring extremely fast, I am now looking forward to the battlefield series where innovation and gameplay is key… Expand

   • Helpful? 1 of 1 users said Yes.
3. TheKerbinator

   7

   this is defintley the worst call of duty therss been both modern warfares looked good and the guns looked good they didnt have great campaogns but had amazing online play it was fast and frantic, cod 5 had a very good co-op campaign and zombies and the online was ok not great.
   Black ops has none of this campaogn is ok but once youve done it youve done it the zombies i dont like the maps and the online is shocking maps are bad the buying is pointless and the online gameplay is bad activision should stick with infity ward even if they are a bit dodgey… Expand

   • Helpful? 1 of 1 users said Yes.
4. M3chaGr4n

   4

   Hello there, I felt compelled to write my first review of a computer game after playing Black Ops, for reasons that will become clear. To set the scene I'm 29 and have been playing computer games since I was about 8, i love FPSes and all sorts of other genres but particular favourites are CoD, MOH, and the Battlefield series which I play on the Ps3 and PC. I was looking forward to Black Ops for a variety of reasons but mainly because I wondered how MW2 could be improved upon and I thought MW2 was pretty darn good. I held off buying MOH as I thought i'd go for the old favourite having played CoD on both systems since its' inception. I felt it right to try and wrtie an evenhanded review of this game in order to assist anyone wondering if they should fork out their hard earned cash for it. I forced myself to play to Level 19 so I could experience Hardcore mode (which was annoying to say the least to have to 'earn' that) and I played the single player campaign on veteran. I have played the game for 21 hours.
   
   Single Player: The graphics are atrocious. They remind me of some of the worst elements of the graphics on MW or perhaps earlier. There are various parts of the compaign that ...simply put....dont work. For instance in the cuban villa, a guard wrestles a 'baddie' over a railing. Hang on, go back, if i run in a little earlier they magically appear in front of me. In addition, I stab a guard hitting a man on the ground in the jailbreak, the man on the ground continues to flail around and then disappears. such obvious but joy-undermining flaws are abundant. Let it not be said the campaign story is not immersive if a little trite. What it fails to do is harness the basics, it does not feel like you are in a fight, it does not feel like you are firing real bullets and it does not feel like the enemy are clued up. In addition, whomever had the idea of your two buddies being bullet proof through a shower of bullets needs to check the definiton of 'realism'. How could this be fixed? I am not sure, but I would suggest that not having key characters indestructible would be a good start. Now I have to say, to be fair the guys at treyarch did get one important thing right: if you stand on a grenade your leg gets blown off. CORRECT. This type of realism is a blessing and something that should be echoed hereafter. Not since F.E.A.R have I felt that a programmer has attempted to harness 'gore' in such a way. That is something that all other FPSes so far fail to acknowledge or accomodate. However, if this is at the expense of the graphics, textures etc then perhaps it is too early, as in CoD:BO (sorry). Multiplayer: I guess that if i was 15 and loved to run around with an SMG spraying the crap out of people, or drive a tiny car that exploded this would be the game for me. Perhaps somewhere along the line I grew up (although my gf would beg to differ), or maybe CoD and in particular Treyarch didn't. What we have here is a lot of guff that will amaze the teenager in you, but for the old hands, will probably wear off in the first 6 hours of gameplay. This is of course, not an in-depth review (although some of the 'in-depth' reviews I have read should be more appropriately titled "What I Loved About CoD: BO, being as they appear to ride roughshod over the very obvious and 'epic' failings of the MP structure)., so I can only say the following. 1. The maps are tiny 2. The graphics are even worse (compare to BFBC2 for example) 3.The upgrade system is interesting but ultimately gloss 4.The modes are no different in essence to Mw or Mw2. There is nothing of substance here that could genuinely be called 'groundbreaking' or indeed 'new'. Add to those complaints the connectivity delays, the sudden closure of a server and reboot within another, the appalling sound, and the general lack of detail and what you have is a glossed up version of MW2 without any of the glorious detail or depth.Some other things that annoyed me:This cost me £39.00. not a fortune but relatively a lot of money, and what I feel like I purchased was MW2, that had been actually stripped down of its essential detail, to be replaced with gloss but no substance. It feels like a remake for a lower budget and it feels like a rip-off. The term 'expansion' springs to mind. I accept that the audience to which this game is sold is far more likely to be about 15 years of age and into the run-and-gun modes. I also accept that is where the money is, and that this game has its positives, but they appear to be so limited in imagination that I feel like I have stepped into 'Arcade CoD' and after 21 hours played I want to get right back out again. I had the night booked into my Ps3 to play online with some mates and at 20:30 I turned it off and came on here. That is how annoyingly bad, unimaginitive, and, it pains me to say. un-CoD like this game is. In summary? Save your money and avoid gushing reviews.… Expand

   • Helpful? 52 of 77 users said Yes.

See all 345 User Reviews