User Score
4.5

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 1997 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 17, 2012
    7
    Well-fleshed out campaign: granted it is completely unrealistic and off the wall. The graphics sincerely need an overhaul, its now lacking in that department critically. The guns feel nice when shot. The MP as of now, in my experiences, is just shy of a train wreck. The lag even on 360 is atrocious, the maps are decent enough...when the spawns actually flip and its not both teams on the same side. The worst part of the MP is the hit detection, it is awful, you feel you should have won a gun fight but some how become insta-dead. People were complaining about Warfighter, this is worse, and they out in the theater mode again so you can watch yourself have crosshairs right on a guy and not even get a marker. Its bad. I feel they spent too much time on Zombies, that part is great, its new and different but not completely away from what made it popular. Overall this game is good at best, maybe if they fix the online MP problems it will be decent. Expand
  2. Jan 9, 2013
    2
    There's a common misconception going on that just because a game breaks sales records; it's a good game. The only reason COD Waste of Money 2 made any sales is because of the hype it generated prior to its release. It's just that all the 12 year old fan boys can't see it. I think they should just make a really **** COD this year, kill the series and be done with it. Why waste time on another one if all you're ever going to do is lie about how great it and then get other people to lie for you? I mean, an 83 over all from critics? Seriously? So if I made a game about me taking a **** in a different toilet every week and paid the right people then I'd get a high score too? The critics who gave this game any score above 60 should be ashamed of themselves. You want to know what the most frustrating thing is? You stupid ass users who review the game like a bunch of tit sucking fan-boys expecting us to feel the same way and shooting us down from a dizzying height when we don't. Seriously: **** you guys. If I say this game is **** then it's my opinion, go take your drool and **** stained diapers somewhere else. Okay, done ranting about that. Back to COD! or rather, never again back to COD. Not until they A) Make a game with a compelling story that doesn't feel like it was written for 5 year olds, B) Actually upgrade the graphics (Battlefield 3 still looks better after 2 years. **** sakes guys) and C) Not have the pretentious micro-penis it requires to actually charge more than the average first person shooter for a sub-par game. Bye. Expand
  3. Nov 14, 2012
    3
    This title jumps past the previous black ops game in many ways but fell short in a few. The graphics are much better but the texture quality and overall look of the terrain still leaves a huge gap between treyarch and infinity ward whos had better looking faces facial animation and texture usage all the way back to the scene in mw2 where your scaling the icy cliff. Therefore you always feel like youre playing an older cod game. Second is there custom icon.there are far fewer options in this than in the first black ops. Not to mention a lack of weapons to pick from. They greatly improved the eeapon addons however. The target scope and quick aim forgrip are a few solid examples. All the maps feel small and full of close quarters corridor fighting and with the poor spawn system thats been with all call of duty games it makes those shots from behind in an area surrounded by teamates all the more annoying. None of the maps are in my opinion memorable such as crash terminal ambush or firing range which is another downside to the entire black ops series. No maps pop out and make you crave them.

    Pros-better graphics than the first black ops
    -no death streaks
    -more useful weapon attachments
    -good variation of game modes for normal core

    Cons-textures and graphics look far older than okder cod titles made by infinityward
    -small gun selection
    -less icon customization options
    -no larger maps open alot of corner dodging
    -poor spawn system putting you steps away from an enemy.
    Expand
  4. Mar 15, 2013
    6
    This game is fun. Basically every criticism I've heard about it is true (i.e., doesn't innovate, is the same game as CoD4, etc., 100% linear). But it's fun. The linear CoD design has solved my biggest pet peeve from pre-1990s games: not knowing where to go next and feeling like I'm wasting my time. Before, I would just look up a walkthrough, but the objective marker just keeps me immersed in the game. Aside from the sandbox shooters, all the competitors copy CoD because it works. Also, it's a pretty, polished game with lots of spectacle.
    So why not a higher score? Because it doesn't innovate and it is more like an expansion pack to CoD4 than the 5th sequel. The new stuff (a pseudo-rts mode and a cool see-through-walls scope) is pretty minor, and I probably won't be replaying the single-player mode ever again. Also, while I really liked the revenge-driven plot of Modern Warfare 3, the plot of BlOps 2 doesn't really do anything for me. So I'd say slightly above average. Worth playing once if you like the linear FPS genre, but not something I'd stake my reputation recommending to my friends.
    Expand
  5. Dec 11, 2012
    1
    I will start by saying I'm one of the people that doesn't partake in the annual map add-ons that Activision calls "Full Games" I still play World at War and Black Ops 1. I don't understand why a franchise that sells this much can't afford to do some real R&D and develop an excellent game through and through.

    I tried playing the campaign it just had a more stale feeling to it than any of
    the other CoD's I've ever played, unexciting, I played half way through before I was so bored I couldn't take anymore, I've never been too much into the Multiplayer so I can't comment on that.

    The only positive side I can mention is the Zombie mode but even that's a mixed bag, on one hand it's fun and interesting, although I'd like it better if those annoying flying babies could be turned off so exploring between areas was fun and strategic, but no, your stuck in these tiny areas.

    The Zombie mode now requires friends to get anywhere, running around by yourself good luck with that not as fun as BO1 and WaW Zombie modes in my opinion, hopefully there DLC will breathe more light into the Zombie mode. They really didn't innovate anything here, and those parts where you command units and tell them where to go etc, feels worthless and thrown in as a last minute attempt to be "Different" which failed miserably.

    I am done with the CoD series until they seriously do some work on it, these games have become bland and stale. So I will sum it up two stars only cause the Zombie mode is kind of fun (only when you have good people to play with) but the rest of this is a add-on with the CoD name slapped onto it.

    Luckily, I didn't buy this game, I borrowed from my brother and had it for a few weeks. He to was disappointed and traded it in the second he got it back from me to get Far Cry 3 (Puts this game to shame). I know there's a lot to be said with the Cod and Halo series, but at least the Halo's aren't every single year, if your not going to change anything give us a break in between at least...
    Expand
  6. Nov 16, 2012
    7
    CALL OF DOODIE: CRAP OPS 2. People get suckered into spending $60 every November for the same game w/minor changes; it's too bad the COD franchise milks people for sales every year. Name a company that's gonna turn down the opportunity for multi million dollar sales every single year though. That said, it's understandable that another installment releases every single year. What I don't understand is why so many people feel compelled to spend $60 on it again and again and again. I shoud point out that I'm not one of the stupid, immature peope on here who submit reviews on games just to give them undeserving scores of "0" in order to pull their score down. The "reviewers" who are doing that should be banned from Metacritic because they're just ruining the site. If games like this deserve a "0" then what the does a truly bad game deserve to get? I think this game deserves a "7." The graphics are great. The campaign is epic and the game boasts lots of multiplayer modes. Zombies is still there too. The reason I only give it a 7 is because it doesn't do anything that previously released COD games haven't already done. It's simply another $60 rehash. My recommendation to fellow gamers is to STICK WITH INFINITY WARD. They're the true creators and developers of COD. Treyarch sucks in comparison because their games are plagued with glitches and they try too hard to make their games "over the top." Also, while on the subject of comparisons, Infinity Ward's "Special Ops" is way more impressive than Treyarch's "Zombies." Modern Warfare 4 will be out in November next year so there's no good reason to waste $60 on BO2. Get Halo 4 since it's a breath of fresher air, enjoy the DLC you likely already invested in for MW3, and look forward to MW4 kicking BO2's ass in a matter of months. :) Expand
  7. Dec 26, 2012
    6
    I wanna start off honestly. COD Blacops 2 is a DECENT game. It is in the top percentile of games to come out this year. That being said, it would have made a fantastic 10/10 dlc for black ops 1. I honestly cannot tell how the graphics havent changed in years. Shouldn't a graphic update not be too much to ask for? Love the new hunter killer in multiplayer, but camping and constant rocket launchers stuffed down your throat has ruined decent multiplayer yet again. This is not the fault of the company that created the game, but rather apparently the type of player this game draws in. *spolier alert* Finally in campaign is (once again) a scene where you kill someone with a knife and pistol. It is sad, because other wise this campaign was actually (at least in my mind) slightly better than mw3. The music, as always in cod, sucked. With all of this being said, if cod releases another game with such a lack of creativity or at least a HUGE graphics update, I will not buy another cod game. This was their last freebee. Expand
  8. Nov 22, 2012
    7
    I think there are a few fan boys rearing their heads again, 0, really ? look we all know what we were going to get here, just like the poor cousin battlefield series and its 2 min single player campaign. Pretty much what I expected really, and now people are up in arms about it, seriously !! It's a fun free for all shooter and I love the zombies all ways have, me and a few mates get online and blast away at those zombies,we brought cod 2 just for that. Yeah more of the same....so what !! Get over yourselves and go play the Wii !! Expand
  9. Feb 16, 2013
    5
    Campaign is decent in comparison to other CoDs but still pretty mediocre. Multiplayer maps are also mediocre, and the game has some serious technical problems. The weapon balance is excellent, however, but in typical Treyarch fashion, there is very little variety among the weapons. Generally not enough recoil on them either. Zombies is actually a lot worse than it was in WaW and BO, but still playable. The game is decent overall, but it lacks in innovation and change, as we have come to expect from Call of Duty titles. Overall, very meh. Expand
  10. Dec 9, 2012
    7
    A game that shouldn't be getting as many negative reviews as it has been getting from the users , Black Ops 2 delivers what I was expecting from the campaign with a few surprises. I really loved the fact for once in the CoD series you get to have choices that will alter the ending! You can also choose on what missions you get to do that will also change the story line. The story line itself is action-packed and great! The gameplay is generally the same, but that's expected for most FPS games (for me at least). Although the campaign was great, the multiplayer was still the same as the modern warfare and above. Although I like the fact that it has 'score-streaks' instead of kill-streaks ( I don't know that was in MW3 as well, didn't play the multiplayer since i was disappointing with it in general). But I still have fun with it nevertheless. The guns in multiplayer are somewhat off-balanced, being that the SMGs are the superior weapons in multiplayer (like it has been since mw2) but it is not too bad (although the mp7 is a bit too good). Plenty of gamemodes to choose from.

    Zombie Mode though is great! It is improved and a bit more polished from Black Ops 1. It has 1 additional perk called Tombstone (wanna learn about it? Google it.) And of there is a good amount of weapons to choose from with few being worthless. Although there is one thing that disappointed me a a bit. The lack of maps on there. There is technically 4 maps ( Tranzit, Farm, Town, and Nuketown) but it only feels like their is 2 maps. Farm and Town can be played on Tranzit ( which is just basically one huge map) and Nuketown is only obtainable at the moment for Hardened Edition, Deluxe Edition, and the Care Package (The Collectors Edition). I know I could of payed gotten them easily, but I'am not spending 20$ extra dollars on a game for just one map and a few crappy other additions. But overall I'am still pleased with Zombie mode.
    Expand
  11. Nov 23, 2012
    7
    Finally. A major change in the series for the first time since Call of duty 4. That sentence alone restored hype to this game for me and many others.

    After the huge failure and frustration MW3 was, thousands of people gave up on cod, hell nearly even me. But then Treyarch randomly comes out of nowhere and announces some big changes, and people got excited. Not only is Black ops 2 in the
    near future with brand new technology. Campaign

    I first thing I played was campaign. It's great, a lot better than MW3's. However, it's still not the best cod campaign. I LOVED the create a class and challenge system. It added so much replay value. There are also choices throughout the story. The choices are fewer than I imagined, which disappointed me, but they have a pretty big impact on the story and it's ending. The campaign, like the others, is a blast. It's full of action and there's a twist at every turn, and it's VERY fun to play. You'll be utilizing a lot of vehicles such as a jeep, a VTOL jet, a chopper gunner, and much more. And a lot of it isn't just on rails either. You get to fully drive it through a pretty big world, not just one path, and it provides a fresh experience that is overdue. My favorite part was when you're playing as a spider robot, and you had to use strategy to maneuver throughout the vents and find a good route, and it's very cool and unexpected.

    The story is good, but there is still so many unexplained things and plotholes, and cheesy lines. I expected a bit more from the story, and it's probably the most unrealistic one to date, but it's still good. There are a few unneeded scenes like main characters getting brutally tortured and killed in front of you, like they're just minor characters, and unnecessary twists or moments.

    Menendez is a good villain, but I barely felt any pity or empathy for him, which is what the writers tried to achieved, but failed. I just hated him even more.

    They put a TON of work into the campaign, with great pre-rendered cutscenes that took a lot of work to probably do, and with all the custom animations instead of re-using others like in the MW games. Strike force missions are great, although a little confusing at first, and offer up a hugely new experience that I liked, but didn't love. The story is also surprisingly long, being as long as Cod 4. The story is also very violent, sometimes unnecessarily violent. Some deaths are just brutal and aren't needed. One interrogation that happens in the story involves someone stabbing a knife through his hand and watching him suffer, and although the guy you're interrogating is a huge jerk, it's still kind of unneeded. And some characters and plot elements could've been expanded upon, especially one character in general (you'll see who I mean).

    Zombies

    A lot of people just buy call of duty for the zombies, and it's obvious why. It's addicting as hell. Zombies in this game is fun, but not as good as the last two games. You can play tranzit, which is fun at first, exploring and finding out the huge amount of easter eggs, but once you've figured out how to do everything, it gets boring, and it's pretty damn hard. You can finally customize zombies and even change difficulty, but the only thing i've noticed is that slightly more power-ups spawn on easy. You also have that one option for tranzit, which dissapointed me. There also aren't very many guns you can get from the box, in fact a lot are from the first black ops.

    Survival is classic survival on one of the maps in tranzit. Every map except one is terrible, containing no pack a punch and limited guns. One map has all the guns, perks, and a pack a punch, but it's still small as hell and gets boring.

    Grief is survival but with two teams, and it could even end up as 8v8. It's a fun change, but it would've been SOOOOO COOOLL on tranzit, but it's only for survival.

    Multiplayer

    Some argue that the multiplayer has been the same since cod 4. And it basically is. Want to know why? It's call of duty. Call of duty 4. CALL OF DUTY Black ops 2. Get it? If you changed in, not only would nobody buy it, but it wouldn't be call of duty anymore.

    Multiplayer overall is good. The maps are a definite improvement from MW3, although they still aren't amazing, mostly because they are very small, even the larger maps, so SMG's dominate. Lag compensation is still there, but it isn't as bad as when black ops 1 came out, or MW3, which is good. It's still very annoying and it breaks the gameplay, but it's not too bad and i'm sure they'll make it better like they did in Black Ops 1.

    The pick 10 system is awesome. It adds so much customizability and it's just awesome. I love all the different combinations you can do with it, and it allows me to play more like how I want to play.

    Overall Black ops 2 is a good game. It didn't meet my expectations, but it's a definite improvement over MW3, and it offers some change.
    Expand
  12. Nov 20, 2012
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I started the campaign and the cut-scenes looked decent, but damn the graphics were horrible for the introductory mission! I always disliked how simple, small and fake the vehicles look in CoD games. The graphics are neat in other places but still look outdated, reminded me of Black Mesa source in mission 2. They haven't improved anything much, even with the new post futuristic setting its all terrorist this terrorist that. The multiplayer is more of the same, still remains imblalanced with bugs everywhere, and worst how Nuketown was removed and now only available in special occasions, incredibly unsatisfied. Expand
  13. Nov 28, 2012
    0
    This game has the worst campaign ending. The multiplayer is the same **** **** The only thing good this game has is the zombies. Mass effect 3 has a better ending!!!!
  14. Nov 13, 2012
    3
    As a regular player of the original Black Ops I had hoped to enjoy almost every aspect of COD Black Ops II (with the exception of Zombies) but now that I have actually played the sequel I can only say what a massive disappointment it is.
    I bought this game at midnight and queued for an hour and a half to get it on release.
    When I got home and first loaded the disc I was greeted with a
    mandatory update - 24 Mb - hardly a good start and increasingly common these days. Then came the Nuke-Town DLC - 125 MB - and when that was done I had the chore of setting the graphics / sound / safe zone options. Half an hour since the disc went in and I haven't actually fired a shot yet.
    When I did actually get to play I selected multiplayer first - and a quick look at the leader-boards revealed that some people at the top of the leader-boards have had nearly two (2) days game-time played already!! That's game-time folks - not time that they've actually owned the game but time spent playing BEFORE the game was officially released.
    When I did get into my first multiplayer game I had to select my weapons from the default classes - and no weapons were familiar favourates. It seems that 'just to be seen to be a bit different' all default weapons have to be ones I was unfamiliar with. Oh well it was getting late so just get on with it.
    Although the graphics looked very 'cartoony' I was impressed by the effort that went into the way the game looked - a lot of it seemed very graphically simular to MW2 and 3 though. When playing I did seem to be dying too easily and taking too many shots to kill people though - a nasty sign that lag compensation has reared its ugly head again. I am on a 56 mbs (15 ms ping) fibre connection so someone on a 2 mbs landline will own my ass because Trayarch seem to not understand or care how fast internet connections actually put the person with the fast connection at a massive disadvantage or that the faster your connection and the lower your ping the more clients will try to join your host and those clients will be further away so will lag more and your ping will be artificially increased to 'make it fair' for slower clients at your expense AND IT DOESN'T WORK.. grmbl.
    The Pick 10 system doesn't work either - it annoys me and restricts load-outs and I spent too much time compromising on stuff I couldn't have rather than picking the stuff I could have. I did miss the option to buy new stuff using the money from challenges/kills/contracts from Black Ops I. The contracts and option to buy should never have been removed as this again brings this new game closer to to MW3 - just the same way that all the good weapons are only available late in the Presige ladder it will encourage people not to bother Prestiging so again Trayarch got it wrong. By now I was yearning to just play a good game and realising that it wasn't going to happen.
    I played the Single Player mode the next morning - in 3D and in Regular difficulty. Very impressed with the cut-scenes which oozed quality. However, the game itself was a joke. I was surrounded by a huge number of enemies only to be getting slight grazes by their weapons and gunships, seemingly superhuman in the face of impossible odds. My AK-47 worked in a way that was massively different to the multiplayer game in that it mowed down wave after wave of enemies. Disappointed in yet another COD let-down, I ended the game.
    This will sell in millions. It doesn't deserve to.
    Expand
  15. Nov 13, 2012
    3
    Multiplayer was what I was looking forward to, yet the graphics are cartoonish. Difficult to know when you've killed an opponent at long distance. Non-intuitive Create a class section. Not worth commenting further. waste of money.
  16. Nov 27, 2012
    0
    I gave this game a medium rating when I first played it since it was a step up from MW3. I am now giving it a zero after playing it for a couple of weeks. In an effort to make a balanced game, Treyarch has gone through and muted everything fun about this once great series. The guns are blanned and boring, the perks do very little to improve the experience, the graphics are the same as MW1. BO1 was original. Money/Wager system, exciting weapons, weekly assignments. All gone. And their lag comp system makes %70 of the games unplayable. Really disappointing effort, if you can call it an effort at all. Expand
  17. Nov 14, 2012
    4
    I was excited to pick this game up after reading some reviews by critics. They made it sound like a lot had changed in this new cod game. After spending 60 dollars and playing the game, i realize these critics must have been paid to write all those good reviews. The games campaign is still the same on rails garbage that holds your hand through the entire game. Still has stupid enemy's that just run out in the open are just stand in one place and shoot. Its just a boring tin can shooter like all the other cod games. I know most people buy this for multiplayer, but I still would like to play a good fps campaign. The multiplayer is the same, so you will either love it or hate it. Expand
  18. Nov 14, 2012
    1
    My Son and I purchased the Hardened edition and were so looking forward to it. It is a let down, the game play is too simular to Ghost Recon, and the maps might as well have been issued as map pack for Black Ops 1. I find the whole feel of this greatly dissapointing and feel I have totally waisted my money. My Son, after just 20 minutes, "Dad, its crap". Sorry. But if you know the previous maps you can even work out where they have just re-skinned them too. Look for launch forinstance, or Ait Plane wreck in COD 2, diverse examples of copied mapping. Expand
  19. Nov 29, 2012
    7
    Update since I gave the game a 5 within the first few days. The campaign is great and with the ending changing depending on your choices, it actually adds replay value, unlike previous COD games. Zombies is fun for a while but the maps grow old after a while but it is still a very fun mode. Zombies will probably be better once they release more maps and perks. Multiplayer is a combination of MW3 and Black Ops. If you liked either multiplayer, BO2 multiplayer may grow on you. The pick 10 system is great since you won't see two people with identical classes. The system adds great variety and constantly makes you adapt your classes. This game does however have one major flaw: the players. In pretty much every game I go into, people camp on the second floor of a vertical building with either bouncing betties or shock charges (immobilizes you). The people who don't camp in buildings run around the map with all stealth perks or shotguns which both become extremely annoying until it becomes available to you. There are very few players who just play the game normally without using the most overpowered setups. This takes away all the fun for me in multiplayer. If anyone gives this game a ten they are lying because COD has a long way to go before it becomes perfect. While this game is fun for the first few hours, it just won't last. However, I still find it better than MW3. Expand
  20. Nov 23, 2012
    9
    What is wrong with you people? this game is Great! Sure its not perfect but it is FAR better then the last Black Ops and almost better then MW3.... The game looks great the sound and sound effects are awesome not to mention the control is flawless. No there is nothing ground breaking about this game but they did manage to get everything wright. There are not to many games that can claim that. I have been playing games since Pong, that's right 30+ years exp. I say this games a HIT and a must have for any COD fan! Expand
  21. Nov 14, 2012
    8
    Ok Ok, this game has its downsides, I won't deny that. The campaign wasn't as "personal" as many thought it would be. The graphics/ game engine is a bit old and outdated. There still were tons of set pieces during the campaign and the "expanded choose your path" campaign that was so heavily advertised didn't branch out into any extra levels. But you got to look at the big picture here. The multiplayer element is back in full bloom and thats what most people play. I can't say exactly why, but the feel of the multiplayer reminds me of mw2's, and it got me hooked unlike the first blops and modern warfare 3. Almost every single map is fun to play, and the guns are varied enough for most of them to be able to stand out on their own. Zombies continue to expand with the new tranzit mode, and also a grief mode, to add onto the original survival game mode that has still not gone stale. The campaign itself showed signs of improvement, with the both non linear and strike force missions(which were quite fun tbh). Both are rather weak, but still shows signs that the franchise is headed into the right direction. So overall, though it's not the perfect game and it didn't really deliver on all of its expectations(which is why i think everybody is giving it a bad rep), it still is a good overall game with lots of replay value (awesome multiplayer and zombie modes). Expand
  22. Nov 15, 2012
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This game combines the best of black ops modern warfare 2 and 3 as well as a new look to the series, good class system so as to bet puntos.Treyacht streak for risking and renew the series and they went well, I give it a 10 if tubiera dedicated servers. Expand
  23. Nov 25, 2012
    9
    black ops 2 is awesome just to let every konw treyrach had pacth update's for the mulitplayer a long list of thing's there fixing for xbox360 ps3 and the pc it well take time to fix all of this but in the mean time just hold on and wate till there down
  24. Nov 29, 2012
    5
    At the end of it all I was left feeling sorely disappointed with Black Ops II, but I went into it knowing this would probably be the outcome. Compared to WaW and Black Ops 1 in terms of story I get the feeling Treyarch just didn
  25. Nov 15, 2012
    2
    It is beyond me how we still have people who buy Call of Duty. It s the same thing it always is. The only thing i keep hearing in Trey Arcs case is that the game has zombies. So what? To any body that buys this game over many other great zombie games I say shame. If trey arc wants zombies, make a real zombie game, not a gimmick inside of a war shooter. Back to Call of Duty. Nothing changes to the point where I want to spend another 60 bucks. Id rather wait for much better FPS games like Far Cry 3 or just play current great FPS games like Crysis 2 or Borderlands 2. Sequals that took what was good about the first game and then multiplied it to make it its own without ruining what made them great. Call of Duty is just been played out.

    I do however give the publisher activision much respect in the fact that they keep producing the same game year after year and get millions to buy it.

    "Its cause its great. People wouldnt buy it if it sucked."

    Good point. To that I say take out single player. See if people will buy it it if its only online. They would.

    The whole basis of my opinion is that they dont know how to make an engaging story.

    Bottom line. Buy it, dont buy it. I dont care. I know where I stand.
    Expand
  26. Nov 16, 2012
    3
    Starting in the Campaign. It had a good story line but It offered no challenge on Veteran, I was finished with it in 3 hours. Next is Multiplayer. Maps are horribly designed, head glitches are ridiculous, too easy to die on core, when you shoot someone half the time its not even the person, and all around horrible experience. The only this that brought my score from a 0 to a 3 is Zombies. I believe this new zombie idea is awesome. There maps added together though don't seem as big as they were talking. Tranzit is about as comparable as any other HUGE zombie map but is not actually HUGE. I want an expansive map that i can roam around and find something i haven't found before. Ranking of CoD 1. CoD 4, CoD WaW, CoD MW3, Cod BO, CoD MW2, CoD BO 2 THIS GAME DOES NOT DESERVE A 10!!!! Expand
  27. Nov 16, 2012
    2
    Worst game to date . Graphics are terrible . It's embarrising to think I support crap like this. With all the money they make they should get better graphics. I'd rather play a game on ps2 cause that's what it looks like .
  28. Nov 16, 2012
    6
    Black Ops 2. 1) The campaign is pointlessly gory. Why do we need to watch people's heads getting cut off and listening to women getting raped? Who with a right mind takes pleasure in that?
    2) Multiplayer is boring. Some new killstreaks, guns maps but in the end its CoD MW3 and Black Ops in one.
    3) Cod is lost. The game designers are stupid. They are trying to do their best to make this
    game good, but in the end its even worse.
    The only thing that stops me from hating this game is zombies. I love zombies and always will, If I will ever buy another Call Of Duty game it will be a zombies only game.
    Oh by the way the ending is even worse than Prometheus.
    Expand
  29. Nov 16, 2012
    4
    The whole point of Call of Duty is the online. That's pretty much why it's bought anymore. The only problem is that Treyarch can't overcome the fact that Call of Duty online is always poorly done. I've been playing Call of Duty games online since COD2. Black Ops 2's online is terrible. It just is. They implement lag compensation that punishes good connections and rewards bad. The submachine guns, like in every CoD, are obscenely overpowered to the point the other types are useless. They put in a new tactical grenade called the shock charge. For some reason, they felt the need to make it combine every feature of every grenade: can't move, does some damage, blinds you, and can be set in a spot to be triggered by passer-by. Probably the biggest problem is the map design. Every map leans towards the people who play Call of Duty by sitting in one spot where you're almost unkillable. Windows, random sandbags, boxes, upper floor buildings, etc. are all spots where only the tip of your head is able to be seen, while you can see everything, and they are literally at every corner. All-in-all, the online is dumbed down some more to appeal to the people who are no good at games in general. Expand
  30. Nov 16, 2012
    0
    Same old same old year in and year out. This series is a blatant exploitation of adolescent hormones. It's popular for the same reasons a certain young Canadian pop star is. Complete Rubbish!
  31. Nov 16, 2012
    8
    I really thought this game was a good change from the last. The branches story line and decisions that affect the game is a cool touch. The new Zombie modes are killer!
  32. Nov 16, 2012
    7
    To be quickly honest, I intended to purchase COD: Black Ops 2 mainly for the zombie gameplay. I loved the previous installments' zombie levels. The campaign continues on from the first COD, but it was difficult to understand the plot at first. It was only several missions in that I understood what was happening. The back and forth of the past and future felt off at times. The levels were diverse, but I had a huge issue with the strike force missions; forget commanding your teams from the bird's eye view. You literally have to win the battle yourself, the AI is so horrible.

    I had a huge problem with the character script of Admiral Briggs. In nearly every sequence, you'd hear him swear and/or over dramatize certain phrases. "Swears like a Sailor" is excruciatingly put to the test, even coming from someone who swears too often.

    The multiplayer point system for your loadout is really awesome. It adds a large benefit for broader customization. Player card editing is back but doesn't seem to provide as much as the first COD installment. The list of weapons is also a good size, allowing you to choose from many types, but the perks are still all too similar and seem to be limited. It would be great to have a larger list for even more customization.
    Expand
  33. Nov 16, 2012
    7
    I was excited to try this after a lot of publications said it was way different than the past COD games, which I got bored with after modern warfare 2. Sadly this is only partly true. The single player game has improve quite a lot, but the multiplayer/zombies stays essentially the same. First the story is a ton better....I was actually constantly looking forward to the next part of the story. There is a huge amount of suspense built throughout the game because you know that **** is about to hit the fan with a America's drone force attacking itself. I usually dont like stories that jump around, but this works very well. Each level is completely different, varied, and in a different location...and you dont get lost within the timeline. It is cool how it allows you to make "Choices", but this feels like it wasnt built from the ground up....rather it was thrown in afterword because the different way of doing things seems tacked on. Some have said there is an open world element to the game....THIS IS NOT TRUE AT ALL...by open world they must mean a field surrounded invisible walls and only 2 routes to take. This is not open world and actually makes the game worse. Scripted sequences have always made the COD games stand out for action movie-like breathtaking sequences....but I think its time to move on. Yes, some of the scripted sequences within gameplay make for great parts, but many times it feels like my skill/shooting/moving abilities dont even matter because things are just flying by so fast and it feels that I would have survived, lets say a chase scene where you are shooting from the back of a truck , without even firing a bullet. Also for a scripted game, I dont understand why there are sometimes unlimited respawning enemies....I will be at a part in the game where I am constantly killing bad dudes, and they just keep coming, because I am unaware that I am supposed to move forwards....This especially gets annoying when you spend time killing an unknown number of buddies, decide to move up, than a random grenade lands at your feet or your hit by a mortar. The random deaths in this game from random greades really pisses me off, The multplayer is disappointing. The pick 10 feature is the only good new feature. Everyone has heard the arguments about why COD multplayer sucks now, so I will just list a few brief complaints... 1. There is no concept of a "front line" in this game....you will be facing a direction or moving in a direction for 15 seconds, and then suddenly someone has spawned behind your team and kills you with you not even knowing they are there. I know this cuts down on camping, but there must be better ways...I shouldnt have to keep looking behind at an area I just cleared.. FLANKING SHOULD BE A TEAM STRATEGY, not a spawning coincidence 2. First to be seen dies....there is really no point in aiming at heads because all the guns fire 100 bullets a second, and have no recoil....many people dont know that in console games there is a slight auto-aim in shooter games when your cursor gets close to a target. This is fine in games like Halo where you have time to dodge or take cover, but a slight auto aim with 1000 shots per seconds, 2 hit deaths, and shots going thru all walls, makes this game just plain stupid. ALL YOU DO IS SEE SOMEONE, SHOOT, AND IF YOU HAVE A FASTER FIRING GUN...YOU WIN! I realize that this game takes fast reaction time and reflex time, but I dont have that accuracy with my thumb...with a mouse I do, so it makes it so little teens with no IQ who only play COD ever have a chance of winning. You cant outsmart them because there is no way or time to....they see you first, you die, and they are probably behind you spawning in an area you just were in. It would be nice if there was any difference in the guns like in counter-strike GO....I mean I suck at that game on consoles because I dont have an accurate thumb from only playing COD all day, but I am amazing on PC...but atleast in that game there is actual RECOIL with the guns, and certain ways to shoot them...In this game you just aim in general direction and hold down bullet. I will admit that the multiplayer is addicting and a bit fun, but no other game makes me so angry. Its fun for awhile, but if I play multiplayer for more than an hour I am depressed and angry as ****....Battlefield 3, halo, counter-strike I would be having fun after an hour.. Overall. If you like modern warfare and black ops story, you will like this games single player a lot. Best story/characters/suspense/variation yet. If you hated most the other games single player story.characters then there is actually a chance you will like this. I you dont like call of duty multiplayer. you wont like this. If you like COD multiplayer, you will like this. Story = 9.2 Graphics = 6.3 multiplayer = 6.5 Replay = 8 Sound = 7.5 Originality = 6 Expand
  34. Nov 17, 2012
    7
    After MW3, I bought black ops 2 with the ideal that I might actually just end up playing the single player and selling it back after i'd been killed 100 times in one game in the online multiplayer. After sinking days and days of playtime online on COD4, and WaW. And having sunk about 2 days into MW2 and MW3 online player and frankly hated it, i had no idea what to expect for BLOPS 2 (I thought BLOPS 1 was a great game). However, the online multiplayer on BLOPS 2 in all honesty saves the game. But first the story mode: It would be too harsh to say the story mode was a complete disaster, but really, it comes nowhere close to any of the other call of duties. There are no 'stand out missions'. The strike force missions and clunky and hard to use, and it lacks real emotion and a good soundtrack which in my opinion has made some of the games like COD4 and Waw whose sountracks cement those good moments of gameplay into your mind forever. I'd give the single player 4/10, 2 of those points coming for the impressive cutscenes preceeding the missions, some of the cinematics really are good but dont let that shadow the missions which really lack any substance. As for zombies, im underwhelmed, the maps are bad, with fire all over the floor so you can be running away from zombies and suddenly find yourself downed because you stood over a crack with flames coming out, which span the entirity of the map. But i guess you should decide for yourself. The muliplayer? It was average for me until i found the FAL DSW, its a great gun, and has the old school, classic, 3-shot body kill that was in COD4 and hasnt reutrnined since, I think no cod games will be good again until default damage is 3 hit kill, all of the round ending kill cams are of a filthy, over used, SMG probably with a silencer spraying about 15 bullets around the general area of someone without any real precision. But for Me the multi player, if cod 4 was 9.9/10 ( my opinion) black ops to is around the 8/8.5 mark. Expand
  35. Nov 17, 2012
    7
    If you have friends to pay with, you don't have to worry about whether this game is worth buying. Because of course it is. It adds enough to warrant as a new game, but BARELY enough. Regardless, it's still unabridged, pure stupid fun.
  36. Nov 17, 2012
    4
    Black ops 2 has lost its touch! black ops 1 multiplayer was all about, tactics, less crowded maps, proper gameplay, fun and its fair... Black ops 2 copies what modern warfare is! which isn't the trade mark of black ops! black ops 2 mutiplayer has no balance, all weapons are super powered even hand guns, I always loved black ops 1 I never played Modern Warfare Multiplayer coz its too crowded and poor gameplay, no tactics just shoot and kill and sadly to say so is black ops 2! Expand
  37. Dec 27, 2012
    0
    This game is a joke. The online gameplay is just not fun and it is the same thing every year. Call of duty is just going to die out if they keep doing this. But yet people get caught in there scam of buying this game. So people be prepared to get the same game next year. wast of my money. I'm trading this game in for something different.
  38. Nov 19, 2012
    7
    The game is good in most of its parts, the multiplayer is solid if you don't mind the occasional loud mouth. not much has changed but the score streaks is interesting everything you do earns points and those point go to unlocking you reward to unleash, you don't lose all you progress when you die but if your half way to your second streak an die you lose it all. the single player tires to make your decisions seem like they matter, when they only sort of alter outcomes, I guess in a attempt to make you want to play through again. The villain is very bondish and tragic and there are some weak plot points that I just wont go into all in all the story was adequate but I expected a futurist endeavor but what you get is flash backs thrown in there for flash backs sake. Then the poorly done strike force missions that just arent as polished as everything else trying something new is good when it works and strike force barely works, when you team often stands there and gets shot, rarely takes cover or provides cover, you find yourself taking control just to get things done it seems that they tried for a rts feel only to get a poor mans version of ghost recon. this company needs to make sure they bring there A-game as they know people will be dropping money on this but because they failed to ensure the quality of this new addition, this is something that should have been in multiplayer were poorly done a.i. wouldn't have been an issue. maybe in the next tryarch COD they will fix this or completely omit it. chances are you gunning for a new mp to shoot your friend in and considering that you'll end up buying this or halo 4 but buying a game just for a mp that is almost exactly the same as its predecessors you might as well save your money and keep playing whatever version of cod you already have. Expand
  39. Nov 19, 2012
    6
    Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 does everything that the earlier installments did, sure, but it does it better. The pick ten system works and gives you tough choices. Score streaks feels good and probably implemented for the more casual player that couldn't rack up enough kills to earn them in previous titles. Certain guns can feel overpowered, but will probably be balanced over time. Graphics are good enough, but could be better. Zombies is a bit confusing, me and my friend fired it up and were confused of what was what. Transit is a nice little side campaign, but confusing as well. You're suppose to grab these parts to build things, but the game doesn't do a good enough job telling you what to do. I believe if the characters you play as, talked about what to do (much like Left 4 Dead), it would clear a lot up. The main issue here, is the multiplayer. Lag Compensation is back and harder than ever, it seems. In this day and age, there should be dedicated servers. As much money as Activision makes on this franchise, there could very well be dedicated servers. I have pretty good internet, but have to suffer because of it. Again, probably for the casual player who refuses to upgrade their internet, because they don't game too much (have a friend like that). If lag compensation was not apparent in this, it would make a better online experience and it would have gotten a bit higher of a score. But as it stands, it makes online a very frustrating part of the important part of the package. You want to give the gamer a 60 frame per second experience, but when lag hinders your precious 60 fps, what's the point? Next Call of Duty? get rid of lag compensation, change up the formula a bit more, as it does get a bit stale, different engine, dedicated servers. Expand
  40. Nov 19, 2012
    9
    One of the best FPS ever. The history is very well told and has its epic moments. We have secondary missions and choices that affect the history. The characters have charisma. The graphics are very good, they are improved, but its the same engine. The multiplayer is the same too, maps and weapons new. The zombie mode is bigger and better, and its very, very fun. You can play it in 3D, you have just to put the glasses; no 3D TV necessary. Expand
  41. Nov 19, 2012
    7
    The campaign is rubbish. There's really no other way to describe it. Each iteration of the series just gets more and more scripted until finally in BlackOps2 you are now just a bot with a controller. You are on rails, any deviation from the script equals death. Come on, I understand invisible walls and unaccessible areas but this game goes too far. Want to drag out a battle and find new ways to defeat the enemies? No, you will die inexplicably until you finish the scene. Cutscenes take longer than the gunfights. Story is incomprehensible. The focus of the battles are now simply to get you from cutscene to cutscene as quickly as possible.Typical CoD death and respawn into grenade or deadly fire so you can find yourself spawned into a rage inducing situation if you die at the wrong moment. Shameful. This is not a campaign it is a movie in which you play your part and hit your marks or die. No fun. All sizzle and no steak.

    The guns feel good, though. No complaints there. Probably feel and act as good as any game since MW2. Gadgets are gimmicky but sorta cool. The battles are decent when you can finally fight if you aren't bludgeoned into following the script. Very short, though. Your soldier will still be stymied by the odd milk crate or clump of bushes and must be in horrible physical conditioning because he can't run more than fifty feet without grinding to a wheezing trot. Enemies still key on you even when there are ten allies around you. Friendly AI feels marginally better than past games but they're still absolutely useless. That's okay because we all know they are only there to provide new weapons and ammo as we play, no change from any CoD ever. You can still knock off a friendly to get his gun.

    The Command & Control portion left me perplexed so not going to say much one way or the other. If that's your thing then maybe you'll enjoy it. MP seems okay from my end. No big complaints. Seems you can be competitive right off the bat. The token system for perks/guns/attachments seems rather complicated. On the other hand the token system may do well in encouraging balance simply because there are so many choices it may take a bit to discover the "One True Loadout". Maps are okay. Need to play it more before I get a true feel but so far haven't been victimized by too many revenge spawns. That's an improvement over the last two CoD's I played.
    Expand
  42. Nov 20, 2012
    0
    i was prestige 3 level 41 before i jumped ship. i really gave the game a chance. was third prestige when everyone hadnt even completed the first one. everything is wrong about this game. sound is dreadful blury and **** noob friendly with no recoil whatsoever and the worse thing is the lag. i am the kind of player who does always a 30-5 score in ffa. in this game no matter what i play call it team deathmatch kill conformed or free for all i was doing scores like 2 kills and 30 deaths 9 out of 10 times. it is not just laggy, you are 2 seconds behindtheenmy at least. i just put back mw3, i was playing with 2 bars and it felt magical compared to this abomination. i am already selling it and never trusting treyarch again. this game is **** and they need to get punished. they did some small good things but the lag is the main flaw. and they do not aknowledge it, they stick their heads in the sand to avoid the problem. enough is enough. back to mw3. all i wish is cod 4 was not hacked id be playing it all day long Expand
  43. Nov 20, 2012
    0
    #BringbackNuketown24/7 is the general gist of my review. Acitivison lies to us and uses a bait and switch tactic to get us to preorder the game. Everyone under was the assumption that the map would be forever because it said "We will never close".I have never seen a company treat its customers so poorly in my entire life. And when we took to the official forums to protest activision banned most of the forum accounts. Class move activision. It really shows how much you care for customers Expand
  44. Nov 20, 2012
    5
    Well... Today, I thought I'd go out and purchase Black Ops 2 instead of Xcom. After a couple of hours, I have realised that was a mistake. I'll write this in 3 parts, Campaign, Zombies and Multiplayer.

    Campaign: From what I've played (which admittedly isn't a lot) I am relatively impressed with the way Treyarch have handled this part of the game. I don't know the story so I can't
    really comment on that so far but I like having the ability to choose which weapons I want to use before a mission begins. I like being able to pick numerous attachments and I'm sure I'll go back to the missions when I have unlocked every thing to play it with a different style. Graphically, it's Call of Duty, a bit more polished than before, but once again nothing ground breaking. I'd give the campaign over all a 7/10, the story all ready seems a bit muddled, the load out options are cool and the maps seem good but I'll reserve judgement.

    Zombies: Map-wise and gameplay-wise this is the best part of the game. It just sucks that Tranzit is less of a story mode and more of a glorified survival. Treyarch could have done so much more here. They could have give players custom classes to start out with, they could have made each area much bigger and they could have added a level and unlock system. It had so much more potential but to be honest, it fell short but is still good fun to play. Survival hasn't really changed, it's still fun with friends, Grief adds something new and is also fun and Tranzit, although lacking, is definitely the best mode. It's just a shame they skimped on it being more of a 'story.' I'd give Zombies a 7/10. Certain areas like Tranzit had much more potential but fell short. Still extremely fun to play though.

    Multiplayer: Wow... what can I say here.... I'm not a bad player by any means. In fact, across all the previous CoDs, I have generally had a K/D always over 2. I always try to help my team win by going for objectives, I play as many different modes as possible and I usually do well with my wingman. This game however has massively irritated me on these aspects so far. Firstly, other players. Maybe it's just me, but when I shoot at other players, I have masses of recoil on my weapon. I have turned target assist off because, well, it's douchey to lock on the your opponents, but honestly, every time I die (and it has been stupid amounts today) it is from some guy who has literally no recoil, who locked on to me as soon as I came around a corner and they always seem to kill me with 2 bullets on my screen when they themselves take 4. The create a class system is a pain in the arse. It seems like they are skimping on points purposely to make it that you screw yourself in one way or another. Why does picking a wild card take a slot and then the option you choose take another? That's just stupid. The wild card and the choice should be one point! The maps and spawns are absolutely terrible. Numerous times I have spawned and two seconds later either been shot in the back/hit my a hunter missile/blown up by a grenade/shot by a helicopter etc etc etc. Sort it out! Where the hell is the 5 second spawn protection?? It is amazing how much it can put someone off when they can't even spawn without dying. Certain weapons are once again not balanced, matchmaking is, to be blunt, disgustingly bad. I've had the game 20 minutes, I'm level 4, why the **** am I being put AGAINST prestige 3 clans when my team is full of people my rank? It's awful. Not aiming to get kills is so God damn annoying, drop shotting is back in full force and just everything falls flat. Higher ranked people blatantly have a massive advantage over the lower ranks and it just pushes them away. If they want to fix this, they have a lot on their hands. I'll be generous and give it a 4/10. The create a class system looks good, but doesn't give enough, a few maps look good, the weapons look and sound good, challenges are there but feel pointless and emblem maker is back (****ing annoying when you unlock stuff for it though.) The multiplayer itself is just a mess of spawn kills, what feels like the enemies have no recoil on their weapons, cover seems to work for them but not me, lower ranks aren't matched with other lower ranks and the higher ranks have such an advantage it hurts. Some weapons are over powered and Target Assist should be turned off for EVERYONE. Even writing this out it feels like I should give it a 3/10 because it isn't ENJOYABLE.

    That's my opinions anyway. Thanks for reading.
    Expand
  45. Nov 21, 2012
    5
    I had high hopes for treach to make this series better, I loved MW1+2 and BLOPS 1 was meh. They tried on the SP side with strike missions but that was not enough I do not think to be ground breaking. The MP has a few new additions like MMS and shied deploy but most of it is the same as MW3 and this was hugely disappointing for me since I never liked MW3, any of it. I Tried to play zombies it has been about 4-5 days aver i have installed and it still will not work freezing and crashing every 5 minutes.

    Overall this game is OK, but nothing incredible.
    Expand
  46. Nov 21, 2012
    8
    I have played ALL the COD as I rank them. COD 4 MW GREAT, WaW ok, MW2 WHACK, BO GREAT, MW3 I am going to stop playing COD games, BO2 AWESOME! People will would hate ALL the COD because of MW2 or 3, say that ALL the COD games are the same or say the phrase MAKE A NEW ENGINE. Well let me "objectively" give my opinion. Let talk lag. Lag and camping is here to stay. Can't do much and about the lag (its in every game) but you can be smart about the camping. Lag is in every game but its very weird when it comes to any COD series. Why? My guess is because of the frame rate. Pushing out 60 frames is no easy task for sure, but even more so when running games online. The current gen systems don't have the bandwidth to push such visuals and mask them appropriately so thats why COD game lag is way more annoying than other game, it would leave you to believe their is none (super smooth 60 frames while you shoot but die by one bullet. It's just WAY harder to mask the lag in COD than Halo 4 because of the 60 frames. When games like BF3, Halo 4, Gears all run at a smooth 29-34 frames of animation its easier for current gen consoles to run them. But with all that said I to say this despite all of the felt complaint in the community BO2 lag is by far the best in all CODs after COD 4. For me, for me. I can still pop in Halo 4 and the game plays seeming plays flawless compared to any COD game but its the gameplay in BO2 that keeps me coming back. Believe it or not BUT now there is a "grind" learning curve w/ BO2. Yes a COD game has a grind and learning curve. SMGs are killer at close (which they should) as are Shotguns (balanced and very hard to use, they could a slight buff). You will rarely lose a "CLOSE RANGED" SMG battle against a "naked" Assault Riffle (wrong or no attachments). In other COD games this was a coin flip depending on who is host. Now the LMGs are FUN and very USEFUL. In what COD game this is true other than BO2? Assault Riffles kinda suck, UNTIL YOU GRIND THEM OUT. Example, the M8A1 sucked, Its a 4 round burst Assault that was ONLY good at mid range. But as I was on my grind learning the maps and using this gun, I unlocked the suppressor, fore grip, and fire select attachments. Now this gun is SO BEAST. Who knows what other gems are out there in this game. First COD with a TON of depth... Can't say the same for snipers. The only weapon class that is OP because of QSing and Toe killing. (Quick Scoping and I can shoot you in the toe and kill you). Now onto camping. COD games before BO2 Ghost was super OP NOW WAY TO COUNTER IT. But now Ghost is sooo underwhelming that most people just dont use it or know how to. (It only works WHILE MOVING) Great design choice IMO. But to balance this the map (although some are VERY annoying) have a ton of COVER spots. Not so much head glitching but more cover like. Most Def head glitching it still in the game unfortunately... But the maps have a even HIGHER learning curve than the weapons do. Its soooo much to talk about in the MP of this game, and I didnt even mention the Campaign which has Multiple endings and Zombies mode. The people who are saying this is the same game is either still BUTT hurt or just haven't played this game yet... Great game not perfect but a Great one! Expand
  47. Nov 21, 2012
    0
    i call it waste of money!!!!!! even MOH warfighter multiplayer looks better than this **** my 680 lightnings were in sleep mode...looks like the old half life games...pweh
  48. Nov 21, 2012
    1
    this game wasnt really that as good as people say it is. it is the same thing as all of the other call of duty games. if they wanted to kill zombies they can play resident evil games or left 4 dead games. so i feel this name needs to get tweaked in order for it to be ranked higher than it is.
  49. Nov 21, 2012
    6
    The campaign seemed to need more, and quite more. Multiplayer felt a lot better than bo1 but it still had this sort of not fair type of game play at parts. Just one day try the riot shield and find out how dumb the riot shield mechanics are. Meanwhile zombies mode has improved ten fold with tanzit being ridiculously fun and challenging, the guns were a treat to use especially the lmgs and the new way to open doors and turn on the power by collecting parts is great. grief mode(8 player 4v4 mode) coulda used some more work its not that it wasnt fun its thatit was eerily quiet during the match and there were hardly any zombies so it seemed boring and, when my team won...nothing felt accomplished it was dull and disapointing that i didn't get this "WOOO YEAH WE DID!!!" feeling when we won. in summary multiplayer get a " i kinda like this" from me, campaign get a "needs work", and zombies gets an "awesome" but it genuinely was not worth $60 maybe if it was $40 but no $60. either way its up to u now whether to buy it or not Expand
  50. Nov 21, 2012
    0
    Same engine, same multiplayer, worse campaign, even zombies is repetitive. There is absolutely no upside, especially with the marvel that is Halo 4. Sorry treyarch, but its 2012, not 2007. Change it up for once.
  51. Nov 22, 2012
    6
    Singleplayer - Cant brush the arcade shooter feel (Feels like time crisis). I kill 100 people per level. Awesome. Do rate the create a class at the start of each level, and why does my offsider look like a soldier who should be marching in Mardi Gras.

    Multiplayer - Too complicated, UAV overkill, over powered scorestreaks (Lightning Strike, Hellstorm), Boring guns and maps.

    I remember
    playing mw and mw2 and loving how each gun was different but fun to use, dont enjoy any of these weapons. the maps a forgettable im still to find a crash, makin, favela quality of map. Also, why are is all the cool stuff unlocked at the high levels (scar, m8, ghost.) Lag compensation is homo also. All these games were built off modern warfare's success. But none of them have ever got to that level again. Black Ops 2 is an alright game has a cool story that doesnt have the means to be given justice. I kind of want to play this story with battlefield mechanics and less mass slaughtering of the enemy. Expand
  52. Nov 22, 2012
    1
    Same game as any other Call of Duty after COD 4, adds absolutely nothing new. Campaign fells like a boring B-movie. What a huge disappointment and a waste of money.
  53. Nov 22, 2012
    8
    I like the multiplayer, there you go I said it. Being a long time FPS player (I started with Doom 2 on the PC). I enjoy this game. It's an arcade filled shooter of pure madness, which for me is fine. The weapon unlock system... It's addictive. I'm not going to lie. I do get a kick out of unlocking loads of items.

    Depth wise? The game has depth and plenty of content. Loads of different
    multiplayer modes. And very many different types of weapons with different play-styles. There's really nothing not to like except maybe the reason that the game is easy to play. Automatic weapons are overpowered and dominate. But I have seen skilled players dominate with other weapons such as snipers rifles also. The only downside to this product is the fact that Activision won't stop recycling the COD4 engine. I'm running this game maxed out at 180 FPS. The second issue I believe are the maps, some of them are random and make no sense. Too many buildings and corners which clutter and are confusing for the player memorize. They just don't seem that well made.

    All in all good game. Worth the money? For content yes, for the fact that the game runs on the same engine as the last four or whatever installments, then no.
    Expand
  54. Nov 23, 2012
    9
    Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 is the direct sequel to Call of Duty: Black ops. The game takes place in 2025 as warfare has only become more complicated yet so sophisticated. Campaign plot: David Mason/Section along with Harper attempt to uncover and prevent the plot Menendez has to attack America. To do this they also look into the past by questioning Frank Woods' involvement within the life of Menendez. The plot can also be changed by certain actions the player makes, and the success of Strike Force missions throughout the campaign that give the player the oppurtunity to pick and choose their soldier/machine they want to control in order to complete the objective. Zombies plot: After Rictofen blew up the Earth, it is in an apocalyptic state where 4 survivors travel by bus or foot to different locations in order to survive. Players can also create weapons by improvising random objects into a contraption. Multiplayer: The pick 10 system allows players to choose any 10 loadout items including wildcards in order to create their class to their own custom standards. Also League play allows all items to be unlocked as players compete towards the top of their skill tree as determined by their wins and lossess. Combat training allows players from levels 1-10 to include bots as opponents and thereafter to earn half of the xp a player would originally achieve. Party Games are free for all game modes based off of wager matches from Call of Duty: Black Ops, whereas players get only 1/10 XP they would normally accquire. If you own an early copy you will have access to the Nuketown 2025 map and the Double XP Launch Weekend. In my opinion: Every Call of Duty gamer should give this game a chance to its foresight of the future of warfare, its addictive multiplayer, and the wave surviving zombie mode. Those new to Call of Duty should experience Call Of Duty: World at War, and then Call of Duty: Black Ops before experiencing this game. Collapse
  55. Nov 24, 2012
    9
    Black Ops 2 is a very enjoyable game that is fun with friends and on your own. The single player is better than ever and offers more reason's to replay than previous titles through leader boards and challenges. It also allows for more player choice with custom loadouts as well as presenting the player with choices which can change aspects of the games story. However, some of the strike force missions included in the single player, though completely optional, are one of the games weak points. Multiplayer is better than ever with well designed maps, new game modes and the pick ten system which makes it easier for players to create loadouts that fit their play style. Zombies is still a solid game mode. The addition of custom games, Tranzit and grief mode give the player more to do in zombies than ever. So it's a shame people who haven't even played the game or have only played multiplayer rate the game a zero, putting people off in my opinion one of the best call of duty game's ever released. Whats more annoying about those rating it a zero is that they usually mention something they like about the game, so it's even more stupid when they rate it a zero. Expand
  56. Jan 22, 2014
    8
    This game is not as good as what much of the critics are saying, but it's not as bad as what most of the users here on Metacritic are saying, this game does not deserve tens but it shouldn't be given twos or zeroes either it is not realistic.

    The single player is the best so far in COD, it is not linear in the sense, you can do things, it tells a far richer story, and has a lot more
    replay value since you can choose what to do, the outcomes and what happens are also determined by your faults; there are outcomes where you don't deliberately chose what to do, but where you fail this or unsuccessfully do that for example unsuccessfully spying on Menendez.. It is good that they put Black Ops 2 in the near future, 2025, with future technology, and warfare being defined by robotics and futuristic tech. Strike Force is good, playing RTS like missions, you must play them for the better of the campaign story and what happens. The single is easily one of the best in this generation and it isn't short either. It is hard for me to explain the story though.

    As for the multiplayer, having bot support for all game modes (but not Search & Destroy and fun stuff such as Gun Game) is an improvement, to me it is, they don't really get big score streaks since they rarely live long enough but they are smart.

    As for improvements, you have the "pick 10" thing for your class, which allows more robust customization. There is new Hardpoint mode, the maps are great, more than 1 attachment, proper local bot support and overall the multiplayer is good and so far the best of all COD games, but there is a side of bad things such as you don't buy weapon attachments no more, and instead, being like the crappy Modern Warfare multiplayer where you have to use your gun overtime to get attachments; attachments requiring higher and higher weapon progress, introduced in MW3, terrible change, much rather the buy gun parts than than having to use the gun lots and waiting to get what I want on it.

    More importantly, pathetic weapon variety, the single player has loads of guns, but in the multiplayer, only a few, there is only 9 Assault Rifles, 6 SMG's, 4 Shotguns, 4 Sniper Rifles and 4 Light Machine Guns and that's it. One old and big issue is that this game still counts as a loss for quitting a game and it still puts you on games in progress much of the time which annoys me a lot, because I (every other player as well) am mostly being put on losing team in the middle of a game because the players on the team had quit, it does put me off at times as it is really annoying. Overall, I would play the multiplayer sometimes, but it's not great.

    Zombies is really good, but without DLC, all what you get is TranZit which is boring, Town, and Farm which has no pack a punch, and a cool versus mode which is for Turned. Zombies is really good, but is ruined by this one big issue: few good weapons with the weapon box, with the mystery box you are mostly getting bad stuff and there is awfully few good guns, just MTAR, M8A1, the auto Shotgun, Type 25, HAMR, RPD and the Ray Gun.

    Every game I play I spend much of the time trying to get good guns from it and I'm pretty sure you have this problem as well.

    If Black Ops 2 was set in the 1960's, '70's and '80's, it would have ruined it and mark another big step back for Call of Duty. Treyarch will definitely take COD further into the future, I think the next game should take place in it the year 2083, I like that, future weapons, and much more future fiction. Bigger and dynamic maps and other things we want. I would also like drones (Dragonfire like things for example), CLAWs and similar things to be used in the multiplayer, not as a streak reward, but as things that would appear in the games as they go by.

    I'm giving giving Black Ops 2 an eight because of the campaign, that's where this game is really good and worth getting for single player.
    Expand
  57. Nov 26, 2012
    3
    As someone [once a huge fan] who has played this franchise since the beginning, it's very disappointing to see what this franchise has become, especially with it's latest entry. Black Ops 2 is nothing short of absolutely terrible. The campaign doesn't even feel like a Call of Duty game and is just downright boring. Everything from it's level design to the story itself is so mediocre that it feels completely half-assed and like they brainstormed a ton of bad ideas and scrambled them all together in this game. Zombies returns with almost nothing done to improve upon itself. Multiplayer has seen certain improvements again. With all the proficiencies and weapon related perks all becoming attachments. The ghost perk has been nerfed. And the new "pick 10" create-a-class system giving some new customization and options but at more of a cost then ever before. But all this is overshadowed by absolutely terrible netcode, expecially the part of it which is commonly referred to as the lag compensation; which puts those players with the fastest internet at a huge disadvantage by only letting them see game events of the past. A problem that has become progressively worse each title released with no fix. Do not buy this game. At most, rent it first. Expand
  58. Nov 27, 2012
    0
    Another COD with new maps for multiplayer selling for 60.00. The only Derps that give this game a 10 are the Fanboys that for some reason think this game is so awesome. Newsflash none of been awesome since COD 4 and MW2. Hate to break it to you.
  59. Nov 27, 2012
    9
    I am shocked so many people have left negative reviews for this awesome game. I have been playing the COD series since the second one and have watched the series turn into what it is today. The one thing i have always liked about COD is the style of online play and how they have not changed the feel of multiplayer. I like that i can expect the sequels to be the same, its what i look forward to because it is so great and they have no need to change that. I played Battlefield 3 online, that game was fun and good, but after about 30min of online play i found myself craving for MW3 because multiplayer feels better and cant compare to COD series. I feel this game deserves allot more credit and less criticism. If they stopped making the COD series people would freak out, thats how good it is and BO2 is no different. Expand
  60. Nov 27, 2012
    6
    Call of Duty: Black Ops II is an awesome shooter,with good graphics,great story and an awsome and fun gameplay in its campaign,same with the online mode and zombie mode,which received a great improvement.But not everything is perfect in this game,you may find some lag on multiplayer and some bugs in the campaign,but nothing that will make your game experience bad.
    If you're looking for a
    fun shooter,this will be your best choice,specially if you're already a fan of the Call Of Duty series. Expand
  61. Jan 25, 2013
    2
    Wait for a price drop---The critic reviews are off by a mile (as in most cases). The single player campaign is not well written, the challenges for each stage are not available as you are playing through the stage (you need to keep track on your own). The multiplayer is its only redeeming feature, however, its nearly identical to the first black ops (which is fine)..
  62. Nov 30, 2012
    1
    Campaign and zombies are just "ok" in this game. They are fun while they last, but get very old quickly. Multi-player is a lost cause at this point (on XBOX at least, not sure about other platforms). Spawns, lag, hit detection, and community have ruined what could have been a fun game. Recommend NOT buying this game.
  63. Dec 2, 2012
    7
    It is good to see that call of duty is finally different. The guns are amazing the audio is brilliant. I feel that zombies is good, however it needs to improve, which hopefully will come in future DLCs.
  64. Dec 2, 2012
    8
    The single-player has new and intuitive features, like the strike missions and different story paths. The plot however is not as good as the first Black Ops. The attempts at multiplayer balancing are a welcome change, but the multiplayer is still not as good as Modern Warfare 1, 2, or 3.
  65. Dec 4, 2012
    8
    Well, Black Ops 2 is a good game besides the fact that it has terrible lag, I can never connect to anyone in game because of my NAT type. But I love zombies and I like multiplayer somewhat but its not all that goo,d assault rifles are the worst on Black Ops 2, but the Sub Machine guns like the Skorpion, the Vector, etc are all good. My best K/D ratio is from using SMG's. Add me if you want on my PS3 account, my psn is inf3cted-_-TMAN Expand
  66. Dec 4, 2012
    6
    COD 4 was one of the best xbox 360 multiplayer game made. ever since then runoffs of the same style have been made such as MW2, MW3, BO1, BO2. after one month of playing either of these games mentioned, the guns become weaker based on helping out the noob campers, killstreaks are overkill once again encourages camping and the maps are poorly made. People need to realize that just because the game has COD in the title doesnt automatically make it a 9 or a 10. If you are a true COD player from the start then dont buy this game because u will only get frustrated and angry Expand
  67. Dec 5, 2012
    8
    What can I say that hasn't already been said... You either LOVE CoD, or you HATE it. (As of the time of this review 440 Positive reviews, 607 Negative, and only 80 Mixed... so yeah, love it, or hate it) Personally I have a lot of fun with it. I REALLY enjoy the new way of setting up classes... and I also like what they did with the "Ghost" perk (Making it so you are not ALWAYS hidden... but only when your moving. This helps reduce campers) There is still ways this game can get better... (I still occasionally run into a quick scope-er or a drop shot-er) but, to be honest, I have ran into very many... and that's been a nice surprise. But for the people on here to give this game a 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6 score is just silly. Its a solid game and a fine addition to the CoD lineup. If your looking for REVOLUTIONARY game play... this isn't it. To me it speaks volumes though that a game like Halo 4 can be out (and in most peoples opinions it is a better game) but I keep getting pulled back into the multi player of CoD and ignoring Halo 4. So like I said, if your expecting something NEW or REVOLUTIONARY or DIFFERENT... this isn't gonna be for you. If you want a SOLID game that adds slight changes to a formula that works, then this is your game. Expand
  68. Dec 7, 2012
    0
    This game has the worse lag of any call of duty. The graphics and audio still do not compare to any other A+ title. Call of duty is too hyped. I payed 80$ for this in the deluxe edition 'cause my friends bragged and told me to buy it. This game has buggy campaign bad voice acting lots of graphical issues such as see through items and see limbs through walls. COD is the same BS every year but I think it just gets worse it is such a hyped series and the tit that has been milked so much should hopefully come dry and people won't trick me into buying this garbage ever again. Expand
  69. Dec 7, 2012
    5
    I want to like this game... As much as I hate to jump on the "It's the same thing over and over", they really didn't change enough to make it new. Even after the new era, the "pick ten", etc... Once you get in a game and start shooting, it feels like I'm playing every single COD game since MW1. Sorry, Treyarch, I've wasted enough time on the call of duty franchise for more ultra-fast paced arcade garbage whilst pre-teen testosterone junkies scream mom jokes at me. There's a time for every franchise to die... or at least take a long break. This is that time. Expand
  70. Mar 25, 2013
    5
    It's not bad but the Over-popular and overrated Black oops 2 doesn't give the entertainment awesome video games need. Fans(or should I say lunatics) will not be pleased.
  71. Dec 9, 2012
    0
    The gameplay of this game of 2007 :( The game has no originality The developer of the game does not care about our faces and this is his I give it a 0 out of 10
  72. Dec 9, 2012
    7
    Now, i only give this game this high a rating because of how much they improved it from what a mess Infinity Ward. The zombies is top notch and definitely the #1 reason to buy this game. The multiplayer is addicting, but not necessarily good. The top complaint is the campers and drop shooters that stop the fun of a joke-around multiplayer. The lag is signification improved and the sounds are amazing, but the accuracy of hip fire is ridiculous to the point of not funny to ruin just that much more. Don't even get me started on the spawns. The campaign is o.k. not quite as flawed as you'ed expect, but good have been so great, but just a strewn about story line a bit hastily put together. This is a addictive game though, and at least a bit enjoyable Expand
  73. Dec 12, 2012
    1
    So I bought it two weeks ago and think I've played it enough times to get a good feel for this game... this game is absolutely full of, well, what's a good word for it; injustice.. This game is poor for so many reasons; I'll list a few:

    - The lag is unbelievable, I've run a 4 bar maybe once or twice in the two weeks I've had it, and I've never been in a lobby where everyone has a 4
    bar... this results in you putting ten bullets into a guy or blasting his face with a shotgun and then you fall over dead.. You watch the kill cam and apparently you never fired a single shot..

    - The guns are so illogically unfair.. as per usual, the sub-machine guns are overpowered beyond belief, and the thing is they're randomly inconsistent; you can get two hit markers from long range and kill a guy or get 5 hit markers from close range and they'll just shoot you once and you'll die.. Completely unrealistic... the pistols are way too powerful as well, the concept that a revolver can deliver a one shot kill but a high powered assault rifle can't is just beyond illogical. The sniper have no recoil at all, they're ridiculous. In short, the weapons are completely terrible.

    - You have to unlock attachments for you gun... this mean that any gun that's worth it's salt with a few attachments is going to lead you on a miserable experience to actually unlock them.

    - The equipment is bogus. For instance, the bouncy Betty is just an absolute garbage piece of equipment. I think I've been killed by my own bouncing betty more than I've gotten kills with it; for instance, you throw it down and then some guy runs right over it and it doesn't set off and you're like "?!?!!?" so then you decide, "well, better chase him down and kill him" and then all of the sudden the thing goes off and kills you as you pass it trying to chase him down. It's just beyond aggravating...

    - Heat seeking grenades; just like in the first black ops but even worse, If someone throws a grenade near you it will roll at you no matter what... it will hop up stairs and roll up hills at you just to make sure you get killed...

    - Terrible maps.... the maps are just as convoluted and camp-promoting as MW3, just completely f.u.b.a.r. setups and people will literally just sit in corners all day and just wait for you.. - The target finder; this could be the most ridiculous attachment in the game... people will just slap this no-talent thing on, find a nice place to pitch a tent, and just wreak havoc on you all game and you cant do anything about it. It's beyond unfair...

    - Knifing... they couldn't get this right if they tried; knifing is so far from being realistic that I don't even know why I'm typing this, you already know knifing will always be terrible... basically you need to walk up the person, shake their hand, buy 'em a drink pull out the knife, put it to their neck and ask permission to kill them.. that's how hard knifing is in this game, I mean the commando knife lunge has been cut down but anyone who is used to black ops 1 is going to out of luck when they swing the knife and just can't get a kill...

    - Spawns are absolute nonsense, there is nothing better than spawning, getting killed, spawning, getting killed, spawning, getting killed...

    So basically this is how a multiplayer match will go
    Expand
  74. Dec 14, 2012
    8
    Black ops 2 is in my opinion the best and most well rounded installment of the COD series. The campaign is not just a glorified action story with stupid characters and explosions, (Dont be stupid there is still explosions) It has insanely good voice acting that is full of emotion and one of the best villains of any videogame (Besides Vaas from FC3) The multiplayer is as expected but still loads of fun and Treyarch's new take on zombies is refreshing and challenging. There are obviously still flaws like the horribly thought out probation system, and extremely bad knifing, but these are sure not to stop you from having a blast. In short, Black Ops 2 is fresh and new enough to garner your attention so go and get it. Expand
  75. Dec 15, 2012
    9
    (This review is purely about multi-player)+ {I had to add this note: While reading through other user reviews I noticed that many of them were written almost immediately after the game's release and are extremely subjective scores. Anyone who gives BO2 a red rating is obviously biased or trying to aim so low as to balance the overall ratings in their warped opinion. Compare the critic/user ratings}. If you are expecting a totally different game than the previous titles, find a new series. Having said that, it is as different as can be while still maintaining the addictive fps gameplay that it is known for. The futuristic setting helped the developers out with more unique and original content. The maps are different enough to keep you from being bored. The guns have very unique styles compared to the previous releases and many of them are completely new. What is most surprising about BO2 is how balanced the weapons and equipment are. Considering that you choose your loadout from a point based system, the variations seem infinite. I have been logging in 10+ days on each COD since MW4 and can honestly say that this is the most balanced, tight, expansive one yet. Expand
  76. Apr 15, 2013
    9
    This game is getting bad reviews because of tryhard nerds that don't get their swarm killstreak every game. Or people that get owned and simply can't acknowledge the fact that someone else is better than them. Let me tell you one thing. This game is fun and good time. The campaign was very good too but the multiplayer is what really shines. Its a lot of fun and the graphics are very polished. Don't forget that this game has zombies too! There is a lot of stuff you can do in this game and its just an amazing product! People say this game is repetitive but thats totally ok with this game! Its a classical shooter franchise! What were you people expecting? This game is going to be the same if you like it or not. Expand
  77. Dec 18, 2012
    5
    Black Ops 2 is a good game, but it is spoiled by a sloppy online experience. Without giving anything away, the campaign mode has an engaging storyline that continues from the first Black Ops and gives you several ways of ending the story based on decisions you make. It could have been a little longer, but it's not bad.

    The zombie mode is fun, I particularly like how they give you many
    things to do in the new TranZit mode. It really refreshes the whole zombies game mode and keeps your mind off of the impending fate of being eaten alive.

    The multiplayer, however, feels very uninspired and rushed. First off, it seems as if the whole online experience was created by someone that despised being killed by someone he/she did not see. Ghost has been rendered useless in this game and you must run'n'gun to live. If you are hiding and say, waiting to plant a bomb, the enemy can still see you on radar with a UAV, even if you have ghost equipped. So, you MUST expose yourself and always keep moving to have a shot at not being seen on radar. Combine that with being able to see through walls and it's a very crude way to eliminate stealth and force players to run around even if they're not comfortable. It always feels like someone is coming up right behind you no matter where you are. It gets frustrating very quickly.

    The weapons are lacking a soul. I can remember my favorite gun on most any shooter I have ever played. There is always a gun that becomes someones' favorite, but it's not on this game. Every gun feels the same. Same look, same feel while shooting, especially with the lack of recoil on most weapons, even the machine guns. Nothing sticks out, there is no learning curve. You simply just pick one and go and that makes it a very cold experience.

    There are many useless weapons. They seem to be adding weapons just to say there's more of them. There is no point in the ballistic knife or the Millimeter Scanner. The shock charge is just a fancy concussion grenade. All that and more is designed to cater to children and jiggle something shiny in their faces.

    The biggest thing they can do right now is to slow the game down. It is just too fast. And the maps are too small to accommodate all the speed. You can probably run from one end of the map to the other in under 15 seconds, and it makes every map a big headache especially on the more active game modes like domination. I often find myself shooting at superhuman blurs that are running across the screen without even touching them once.

    Just go back to World At War and see how slow and calm the game was when moving around. Much calmer, much more enjoyable game with spacious map design.

    Black Ops 2 has tried very hard to eliminate stealth or "campers", in this game and it has just turned into a big mess. After a while you'll just be glad that the game is over, even if you lost. Because you'll finally be able to take an aspirin.
    Expand
  78. Dec 19, 2012
    7
    Black Ops 2 is in no way a perfect game. Better than MW2? Yes. Better than MW3? Of course. Does it get too much hate? Heck yes. This whole game was hated before it even existed. They have tried to make the campaign interesting this year, but it is still buggy and unappealing, at least until you get to the future sections, which aren't for a while. But you would be a fool to buy this game for that. The Multiplayer really stepped up this year, adding new scorestreaks and league play. The zombie mode has also been improved, allowing for you to travel to different locations around a huge map. Although, that's pretty much where the new stuff ends. It is a massive improvement over MW3 and is a great game to play with friends. I would recommend this to you, but chances are, you already bought it. Expand
  79. Dec 28, 2012
    3
    I've tried defending call of duty in the past but I can't do it anymore. I know it's trendy to hate, but I'm jumping on the bandwagon. This game is complete bollocks. I cannot understand why critics are raving about it. The 'new features' I've heard so much about are limited and stale. The new strike force missions are incredibly bland and difficult to play. Good on them for at least trying, but they failed. The whole branching story lines that everyone's getting a boner about is nothing new at all. You make one choice or another and it effects the ending. Big deal. The multiplayer is the exact same as any other, with slightly deeper customization. Again, nothing ground breaking. Finally zombies is kind of fun with friends, but it's not enough to save the game as a whole. I'm finally sick of each cod installment, pumped out year after year with little to no changes. Can't do it anymore guys. Won't be buying the next one, inevitably modern warfare 4. Expand
  80. Dec 21, 2012
    6
    Call of Duty games, regardless of their quality or originality will always sell well. The online gameplay is great and that is what most people will buy this game for. The game itself has an okay story and the zombies gameplay is fairly good. I enjoyed this game, but in truth it is the same as the Call of Duty games that have been available prior to this games release. It doesn't exactly reinvent the wheel, but it's fun. Expand
  81. Dec 23, 2012
    0
    The only thing that surprised me about this game was that it actually managed to be worse than MW3, which I thought was impossible. Other than that it really is just Black Ops 1 with new guns and maps, and a few features that are stolen from other first-person shooters. The real problem with the new CoD games is that they are making the maps so terrible. It feels like I am walking around on a Mario Kart race track. Modern Warfare 2, although very unbalanced, had some of the greatest maps in gaming history, plus a great modern feel that was lost in MW3. Anyways, Black Ops 2 is not worth the money if you already own any Call of Duty games, and anyone who thinks that BO2 is "new" because it has a new setting is just falling into Activision's trap. Expand
  82. Dec 24, 2012
    7
    This one is kinda a catch 22. On one side it is one of the better ones. The prestige mode is done better, zombies is WAY better imo(i actually enjoy it a lot this time around) and for the most part hit detection is great, probably one of the better ones. On the other side lag comp is horrid, bad idea. I noticed it takes a lot longer for migrating host and causes games to fail a decent amount. Of course spawning is done bad again. I mean I can't even guess how many times I spawned to die instantly or walk 1 ft and die. In Blops2 defense tho that is almost all cod games.
    All in all definitely a good buy.
    Expand
  83. Dec 27, 2012
    6
    I own every Call of Duty. Love all of them to.

    Except this one. This isn't the Call of Duty I fell in love with in 07'.

    This is crap. Pure drivel. I will be playing Modern Warfare 3 instead.
  84. Dec 28, 2012
    8
    It's normally easy to review a CoD game. Yes! Easy! The Campaign is regular as always, the Multiplayer is repetitive and the Zombies mode is as Multiplayer, the same thing. Black Ops II was that normal CoD when it came out. Oh, wait! It wasn't. Outstanding reviews were like "Oh my gosh! it's the best FPS ever! Play it!" Hummm. Should I? I mean, FarCry 3 and Borderlands 2 are in the market, is it really the best? NO! But it was great anyway. The Campaign was the best thing. The player's choice implementation (Maybe something that Infinity Ward should copy after the awful, AWFUL MW3) was a smart choice, and the 9 endings give enough reasons to play the campaign mode again, and we have lots of interesting characters although the story seems to vanish as soon we are given a gun and told to shoot. They COULD mix some story in the war scenes but, guess what? They didn't. Oh, CoD! Almost perfect! Naughty boy isn't getting nothing this christmas. Well, he is getting something, I mean, It's the most best-selling game in the world right now. So let's say they will just get MILLIONS of dollars this christmas. Multiplayer? Let's confirm that CoD wouldn't be CoD without the Multiplayer. Why? BECAUSE IT'S THE SAME THING EVERY YEAR!!!!!!!! Yes, new killstreaks have a role in the "new stuff" the game has, yay! But the multiplayer sistem is the one we all know since World at War. A repetitive though addictive online game mode. Come on! Admit it! You love the CoD multiplayer, but with Borderlands 2 for the same price, I would look for other options. And the Zombies, well, that's another good thing. We have options to play online of course, but with bigger maps, more helpful killstreaks and game modes, Zombies is the best in all the CoD attempts to make something fabulous. I dare to say it's much better executed that the campaign (And the campaign was really good). But let's get a little bit Hipster and state that CoD shouldn't be as mainstream as it is, and less advertised games are winning the race that CoD tries to win in terms of quality every year. Yes, in money they are bosses, but the other FPS have a wider and more original variety of game modes. I think that dividing the game in three sections (Campaign, Multiplayer and Zombies), I would rate it this way:
    Campaign: Great story, lots of endings and choices the player can make during the game. Charismatic Characters. Some minor mechainc flaws and no-story at all in the actual gameplay. 9
    Multiplayer: Same thing. New Killstreaks, nothing innovative though. 6
    Zombies: Great maps, game modes and gameplay. One of the best things the game has to offer, a 9.5
    As a result, Black Ops II gets a well and enough-deserved 8.
    Expand
  85. Dec 30, 2012
    0
    Im sure i played this game already but it was called something else. Black ops I, that was it. 0/10 for refusing to do anything original or even upgrade the engine after all these years. COD will surely go the way of guitar hero if they do not improve soon. Market saturation boys, its a horrible thing.
  86. Dec 31, 2012
    4
    This game is so lame and tired, the graphics are dated, it's just not fun any more! Maps are so small, spawns are terrible, sound effects are muddy. Now get to work making a game for the next platform! HINT: Maps need to be larger with more vertical variety (terrain or buildings), spawns need to be more varied and spread out, graphics need to have more texture and make maps with interesting settings that combine all aspects of terrain and construction, kick sound in when you go into a factory, etc., have things moving, hell put innocent people in that takes points off your team when you kill em, just do something better than this! Expand
  87. Jan 1, 2013
    5
    I'm going to be fair. You can only review in 3 different scores imo.
    Zombies: 7.510 They really screwed this one up.
    Multiplayer. 6.5/10 Same old crap with new maps, that are worse. All the bad things from BO1 mixed with MW3.
    Campaign: 4/10 Nice try, but it's still a piece of s***
  88. Jan 1, 2013
    5
    Another year another CoD. Black ops 2 was Treyarch's attempt to breathe new life into the franchise. Did they succeed? in a word, no. That's not to say the game didn't introduce some new concepts to the franchise, the introduction of player choice in the campaign is an example, or the pick 10 system in muliplayer, or Tanzit for zombies. Lets start with the singleplayer, you follow Alex Mason, son of David Mason from the original. Your mission is to stop a terrorist my the name of Raoul Menendez. You learn about Menendez's history through story time with Woods. Treyarch has tried to make a villain who you can sympathize, and relate too. This succeeded to some extent, Menendez was easily the best character in the game, i felt i could relate to him, but not sympathize for him, as he is still better off than a lot of other people. He is also a complete prick, which ended up making him more unlikable. Player choice is cool, and at times can greatly impact the story, but i felt it could have been better, many of the choices are optional objectives that have little impact on the story. I think this is a solid addition, but requires a longer, bigger and better campaign to have its potential fully realized. Then there is strike force, an attempt at RTS style gameplay, and to say the least it is **** there is no tactical element to it, you still pretty much do everything yourself, and it is immensely frustrating. Strike force however does alter the slightly alter the course of the story, so there is some value in it.Overall the story is boring, i didn't have a sense of purpose, or urgency. Thankfully this changes around the 2/3rd mark, and it became quite enjoyable. The graphics have had a minor tweak with facial capture technology, which makes the game look a lot better then it previously did, sadly i can't bring myself to award the game points for this, as the tech has been around for a few years now, and the graphics are still quite mediocre. The muliplayer is still the same, and is what you would expect, it has ridiculous killstreaks, OP guns, terrible spawning, and little variety for maps. The pick 10 system however is awesome, it allows for much more customization and creativity in loadouts, and is a solid addition to the game. Lastly, Zombies. Zombies has reinvented itself with Tranzit, you get on a bus and travel to multiple areas, while scavenging the area for equipment to build items to help you survive. This is a very cool mode, but does suffer, there are still bullet sponge enemies, the map also looks very unappealing, with very poor, dark, and muddy visuals. There is also a vs mode for zombies, where you try to stay alive while hindering other players, this can be quite fun, but could have been more inventive. Overall Black ops 2 is a 5/10, and i can't recommend this game. I think its time for CoD to take a break for a couple of years, and reinvent itself on the next gen consoles with a brand new engine built from the ground up. Expand
  89. Jan 2, 2013
    5
    As many will tell you, it's not as good as its predecessors, and because in general call of duty hasn't been making any notable improvements since Call of Duty 4. There are a few new features in campaign, that help, but don't exactly make it fun. The multiplayer is not as good as other Call of Duty Games. It does however still work better than a vast array of cruddy shooters that come out each year, so it's not the best, but its still better than many, thus a 5. Expand
  90. Jan 3, 2013
    4
    Call of duty: Black ops 2 takes the action to the future. however it still feels like i'm playing a game in the past.
    Firstly the campaign is like always, just there so they can make the game. they really don't put any effort into the game. all they are looking to get out is the multiplayer and the zombies. So multiplayer is as always, the same spray and pray. however they do add a point
    system instead of a kill streak which makes it more objective run this time, this is not good though because you find yourself being bombed every couple of minutes. Zombies was ruined in every way possible. they took the the simple fun and turned it into a mess of building turbines and being downed in one hit due to the poor knifing system, its ridiculous.

    Would i play this or any other cod? yes. any other game? no
    Expand
  91. Jan 3, 2013
    8
    focusing mostly on the single-player: i love it. why? i think it is down to the alternative endings that are available, 3 infact and the decisions that are made throughout. but i do have to say that not much is added elsewhere. A solid purchase.
  92. Jan 3, 2013
    6
    Plenty of money went into this game, that much is evident. But is it any good ? Well ' sort of'. I buy CoD for the single player campaigns firstly and multiplayer second, so for you it might depend on what you want out of the game. Treyarch seem to have maxed out the capabilities of their aging engine and code in an obvious attempt to one-up Infinity Ward in wow-power and over-the-top sequences. For all it's glitz and glamour though, I felt pretty tapped-out by the end of the campaign. The studio seems hell bent on creating a bigger ' the whole world in in the frying pan' feel than even MW3 and it's just too cliche now to really give a care what countries are under attack, again at the whim of another madman with his own private army. Yawn. The original BO had some style going for it in its cold-war era missions, tech and intrigue. The sequel, sadly, includes a few more missions that take place in cold war hotspots that serve only to provide a weak basis for the events that take place in the near future. There are few short clips of Reagan giving speeches and intelligence reports being inked out to give you that 'black-ops' feel, but all that takes a back seat because Treyarch seems to want the player to see what their take on 'modern warfare' is - high-tech gizmos and weapons with a wide assortment of attachments, being used to perform wild stunts on small, bullet-filled battlefields. Once the story no longer rests on the actions of Woods, Mason and Hudson (I miss Ed Harris' voice), it very quickly turns into a 'stop the nutjob madman and his private army before he screws the whole planet' affair. Yawn. Few shooter stories carry unique scripts, but this one is held together by a very, very tired plot line and characters that belong in a Uwe Bol movie.

    Is it pretty ? Sure. Exciting ? In parts. Is this proof that you can't get a top-shelf title simply by throwing money at it ? Absolutely. It will fill a few hours of your time off-line and likely a bunch more online, but the unique things about it's predecessor are missing and in its place you'll find a big pile of glitter and a bunch of actors that could have been put to better use. Micheal Rooker and Tony Todd are great to hear though.

    Keep trying Treyarch.
    Expand
  93. Jan 3, 2013
    2
    What a **** game. The target finder ruined multiplayer, and that's just the start. Target finder lets u sit in a corner and it will spot any enemies for you... litteraly sit in the corner of the map, i have done it maney times. Works great.. Also, the averege age of the ppl who play this game is 8 years old. Considering these guys have no lives they sit there for 10 hours a day and play multiplayer. You have no chance against them, unless u get rid of ur life and start playing this 10 hours a day like them.. You die very fast in zombies, so i don't even bother playing that anymore. Two hits is enough to kill you, and a zombie usually does 2 hits with both hands. If they had not added juggernaut they might as well not made zombies. Also, considering your playing with 10 year olds, they often tend to quit between games, which is rly annoying. The same goes for multiplayer, which is why they constantly add ppl in the middle of a multiplayer match, which is also verry anoying. Stop wasting your money on cod, go play halo like all the big kids. Expand
  94. Jan 6, 2013
    4
    The single player on this game is absolutely top notch, as are all of the other CoD's campaigns are. But the multiplayer on this particular game, is one of the worst multiplayer experiences i have ever been in. Its crummy, boring and it ALWAYS feels as though you are dying first even after shooting first, and after trading it in 2 weeks after i purchased it, i am NOT regretting getting rid of it, as it is the worst CoD in the whole of the series. Expand
  95. Jan 16, 2013
    1
    horrible game loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool
  96. Jan 16, 2013
    8
    I'm surprised that by most reviews i'm seeing that people are just saying it's too "repetitive" or it adds absolutely nothing compared to the other Call of Duty games. It's a shooter, most shooters get repetitive since the point is to kill a long with specific objectives. First of all, I am no Call of Duty fanboy that protects every game in the franchise. I hate most of the games in the series, but I find that Treyarch is really listening to the community and made a good move with what they did in Black Ops 2. First of all, it's more futuristic rather than that old generic World War setting. I found the campaign's story-line to be quite nice, but I did wish the storyline was more in depth, instead it's mostly covered by being more action oriented. The strike-force missions were also fun since it adds more of a sandbox style which also changes the campaign depending if you win or loose the mission. You have different options to complete a task within the campaign which can also alter the ending of the whole story-line. I felt that Treyarch did well with the campaign and overall has quite a bit replayability. Now to Zombies. I was skeptical with zombies at first because it seemed quite annoying with the fire and such, but I found myself wasting hours of my time seeing how high of a round I can get to. The new gamemode that was introduced named Tranzit is an amazing gamemode that has a huge map and is loaded with easter eggs. The first DLC for Black Ops 2 named Revolution will add even more to zombies by adding the ability to play as a zombie a long with a new map named Die Rise. Overall i'm impressed with zombies and i'm the other 3 DLC packs will improve zombies even further. Now to the meat and bone of Black Ops 2, the multiplayer. Treyarch really did amp up the multiplayer and made it more interesting with their pick 10 class system which allows you to pick 10 items of your choosing ranging from weapons to just perks and a knife. It adds more diversity and allows the player to have more control over what they bring into the battlefield. There are a few things I dislike about the multiplayer. The guns I feel need more time to be balanced which i'm sure Treyarch will work on since they stated their going to be making more balancing attempts so over time it will be better. While yes the maps are small as usual, I don't find the need for bigger maps because there are times that I even have trouble finding people within the map. 8-16 players is fine for the current size of the maps, although within future Call of Duty games I hope for there to be more players and larger maps supported. Currently the main issue is the lag. Since Black Ops 2 uses Peer to Peer hosting, it isn't as well as I thought it would be, Now I usually don't have trouble with lag, but I hate when i'm doing well and I get disconnected. Other than that, it's not too bad. Also, as a bonus Call of Duty ELITE is free for Black Ops 2 which is even better .Overall I find Black Ops 2 a very good game and is one of the best Call of Duty games within the whole franchise. Treyarch is listening and is trying their best to make the game more interesting and fun. I definitely plan on getting all 4 DLC packs and I can't wait to see what Treyarch does next compared to how Infinity Ward failed at MW3 which is like MW2.5. Overall i give it a 8/10. Only thing holding it back is the lag issues. Expand
  97. Jan 16, 2013
    9
    An improvement over the recent Call of Duty games of late, though starting to lag behind the fresher competitors out there. The base mechanics are pretty much the same as the last few entries, but implemented for a better experience. The campaign is a step forward with added challenges, branching outcomes, and somewhat less cluttered than Black Ops, along with a more fleshed out villain in Menendes. If the previous games pissed you off at the single dimensional character traits of an evil villain, with the western powers as being overly heroic, then this will be a good enough story for the fans, with much more balanced perspectives. Still, not nearly as impressive as say Spec Ops:The line.

    Multiplayer is a bit different to the last few entries, with a pick 10 system put in instead of the create a class. Instead of selecting between preset tiers, you pick out whatever you fancy to fill in the 10 slots, be it weapon attachments, perks, or equipment. Its not as flawed as my first impressions went, and each slot is valuable to your class.
    Once you jump in, the game has issues. Maps are somewhat cluttered, and a downgrade from the likes of MW2, but a mile better than MW3. Killstreaks can be dominant, especially the higher ones, but they rarely make you rage quit, and are not dealbreaking. Spawns have the same CoD problems, and staying still even for a second can often get you killed.
    That all said though, its still a great experience, and there is that addictive quality of the games that keeps you back for more.

    An improvement in every way over MW3, and a few tads better than Black Ops. The engine may be old, but the game has the hallmarks of a dev team that wanted to try something different to a series stuck in old ways. Heres hoping they can get a next gen experience for their next title
    Expand
  98. May 4, 2013
    3
    Well, where do I start. As a player of the first cod, i had loved the series and the improving gameplay. That is, till Cod MW 1. i mean, it is also great, but as the new cod games go on, the improvements had slowed down to a crawl. The new cod games keep the same gameplay, barely to nothing new, and very minor improvements. COD Black Ops has the same style of gameplay as COD MW 1, Black Ops 2 is same as MW 2. The games became so lazy with the improvement job, they just paint over the last game. But even with the same stuff over and over again, then why does people just keep buying these games? Out side repeat gameplay, the story is still a little lack luster, but i like the part when COD Black Ops 2 tried to be lest liner by giving more then 1 ending. But honesty, don't buy this game. Every one smart sticks with at least MW2, because they are not really missing out on much. Expand
  99. Jan 17, 2013
    0
    This Cod is the worst cod ever made the theater sucks it never records.You die so quick even if try to cover yourself. I will never buy any other black ops game! cant wait for infinity ward to come back
  100. Jan 17, 2013
    8
    It's not a bad game. I've been playing it for quite a bit by now, and it's actually a breath of fresh air for the entire Call of Duty franchise. Mulitplayer still has some issues but Treyarch did a pretty good job of balancing it this time around. Zombies is fun as always, and for the first time ever, I actually enjoyed the RPG/Campaign. It could still use some work but I think it's a point in the right direction for this franchise. :D Expand
  101. Nov 23, 2012
    0
    Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 is the direct sequel to Call of Duty: Black ops. The game takes place in 2025 as warfare has only become more complicated yet so sophisticated. Campaign plot: David Mason/Section along with Harper attempt to uncover and prevent the plot Menendez has to attack America. To do this they also look into the past by questioning Frank Woods' involvement within the life of Menendez. The plot can also be changed by certain actions the player makes, and the success of Strike Force missions throughout the campaign that give the player the oppurtunity to pick and choose their soldier/machine they want to control in order to complete the objective. Zombies plot: After Rictofen blew up the Earth, it is in an apocalyptic state where 4 survivors travel by bus or foot to different locations in order to survive. Players can also create weapons by improvising random objects into a contraption. Multiplayer: The pick 10 system allows players to choose any 10 loadout items including wildcards in order to create their class to their own custom standards. Also League play allows all items to be unlocked as players compete towards the top of their skill tree as determined by their wins and lossess. Combat training allows players from levels 1-10 to include bots as opponents and thereafter to earn half of the xp a player would originally achieve. Party Games are free for all game modes based off of wager matches from Call of Duty: Black Ops, whereas players get only 1/10 XP they would normally accquire. If you own an early copy you will have access to the Nuketown 2025 map and the Double XP Launch Weekend. In my opinion: Every Call of Duty gamer should give this game a chance to its foresight of the future of warfare, its addictive multiplayer, and the wave surviving zombie mode. Those new to Call of Duty should experience Call Of Duty: World at War, and then Call of Duty: Black Ops before experiencing this game. Collapse
Metascore
83

Generally favorable reviews - based on 73 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 67 out of 73
  2. Negative: 0 out of 73
  1. 80
    This is not to say it's a bad game, it's just not different enough from previous Call of Duty titles. The story isn't memorable, the maps and weapons aren't any different to what we've previously experienced, the gameplay is near identical to previous games, and when it's not identical it falls flat and fails to impress.
  2. Jan 19, 2013
    80
    It's fun, and an indication that Treyarch is willing to explore ideas that Infinity Ward has thus far ignored. [Issue#93, p.74]
  3. Jan 7, 2013
    95
    If the original Black Ops was Treyarch's coming-out party, then Black Ops 2 is the studio's affirmation that their COD expertise was no flash in the pan. If you're one of the 16 people who hasn't played this gem yet, go buy it now. Conversely, if you're among those who bought the game but hasn't ventured into the single-player campaign (yes, it happens), there's a great narrative and divergent gameplay awaiting your experimentation, so check it out.