User Score
4.5 out of 10

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 1665 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this game

  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Feb 6, 2013
    8
    This game is fairly standard in the CoD franchise, not my favorite one either. But the things that made the franchise popular with the general public are still here: smooth graphics, fast gun play and lots of kill-streaks (score-streaks). If you didn't like the series before, you probably still won't, and if you loved the series, this game won't let you down. Side-note: Still unsure how I feel about the new layout for zombies, it is an interesting step, but it would be better with some solid instructions. Expand
  2. Feb 5, 2013
    4
    this game kind sucks now. dont get me wrong I will still play it. Whenever I want to play a spray and kill type game. BO2 has become so reptitive, its starting to get boring. The single player missions were so short because Tryarch was just concentrated on the multiplayer. There is really nothing to it just be the first person to pull the trigger and you got yourself a kill. I still like playing it, but its time for a new way to play the game if that makes sense. Expand
  3. Feb 5, 2013
    8
    CALL OF DUTY SO HARD i actually like this game better then most call of duty but tranzit sucks which is why i bought the game the multiplayer is actually really good though and the story is way good the villain is also one of the best this year i actually really like this game but MW3 THAT GAME IS
  4. Feb 4, 2013
    1
    This game is the same thing as all the other Call of duties, but with different graphics. Maybe if they added new stuff it would get something better than a 4.4 as its score. However despite all that i did like the zombies, but not enough to bring the score up any.
  5. Jan 31, 2013
    8
    This game is Call of Duty Black Ops II. This is the 7th Call of Duty game released since 2006, when Call of Duty 2 was released.
    Since Modern Warfare 2 was released, the franchise has appeared rather stale in terms of its core gameplay.
    There are reasons for this.
    1. Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 was the first Call of Duty game to sell millions, i mean the big millions.
    2. Since millio
    ns still purchase the iterations every year, they have not seen the need to change drastically.
    3. This falls on the obvious concept of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". They just broke the multiplayer a few times.
    4. If you hit the jackpot that early on, isn't it a good thing?
    5. You wan't to play a BAD military FPS, go play the re-booted Medal of Honor titles. They are abysmal.
    6. Wouldn't you want the guns to feel the same? If an AK-47 feels different in one game than another, wouldn't that be a reason to complain?
    7. The console generation has existed far longer than it should have, which is why we have these yearly iterations with barely any graphical improvements.
    8. Games aren't all about graphics, jeez, MW2 still looks good.

    You're idiots for expecting such drastic changes for a series that has been doing what it has for so long.
    Call of Duty 2 to 3 had a step up. Then there was a massive step up to Call of Duty 4. This started the ball rolling on the iterations as the key improvements had been made to keep the series on a respectable level.
    Modern Warfare 2 was the clincher, and that was only 3 years ago.

    In summary, Black Ops II is still the solid FPS we've come to expect over the last 3/4 years, but with this console generation coming to an end, and hopefully Treyarch, working on the iteration for 2014, that'll be enough time to benefit from the new system.

    If to be expected, Faux Infinity Ward will be working on CoD for 2013, it may be a poor system starter, but, we'll never know.

    Except trolls. They can see into the future. Ahh, trolls.

    Also, if your'e so pissed by Activision and the Call of Duty Series, VOTE WITH YOU'RE WALLETS. Activision doesn't read
    Expand
  6. Jan 29, 2013
    9
    Like any big Call of Duty fan, I was excited when Black Ops 2 was announced. When November 13, 2012 came and I put the disc into my Xbox tray, I was ecstatic! After a few months of playing Black Ops 2 the game is slightly above average for a Call of Duty game. The Campaign is probably the best since Modern Warfare 2 and the choices you make during the campaign do affect the ending which I find awesome. Zombies has also improved like the new perk Tombstone which saves your money and your weapons you achieved when a Zombie kills you. Also Zombies keeps most of the old perks and weapons like Juggernog, self-revive, Ray gun, etc. Last what most people care most about Call of Duty the Multiplayer. Multiplayer improved in the guns, graphics, and the new pick 10 system. Now the bad things about Black Ops 2. Lets start with the Lag. The Lag in Black Ops 2 is nothing more than horrendous! I usually find myself lagging out almost every game and I have very good connection. Another problem is the maps. You thought Modern Warfare 3 and the infamous Downturn was bad, Downturn is better than MOST of the maps in Black Ops 2! How do you make a map worse than DOWNTURN! Last the game at certain points feel very repetitive like the campaign and the multiplayer. It's pretty much the same Call of duty game we the fans expect. Looking at the user reviews for Black Ops 2, the game might have its issues that we all hate so much, but Black Ops 2 remains one of the better than most of the FPS out there. Black ops 2 is sometimes flaud but not enough to bring the rating to a 5 or 6. It's 7 or 8 at best. Expand
  7. Jan 29, 2013
    9
    This game is a nice change in CoD franchise, most the people giving it real low scores are talking about the campaign, who plays campaigns anymore? I will tell you who the garbage gamers. The multiplayer is spot on and fun to play, the only people who generally diss it are baddies with .65 K/D ratios who rage quit because they are once again garbage gamers!
  8. Jan 28, 2013
    10
    Pwrfect campaign the multiplayer it so good the zombies its so nice too but when call of duty will change this old engine to the cod series it will have to be change
  9. Jan 28, 2013
    1
    I lost my money The graphics are awful the story is horrile and idiot, withouth a good meaning...
    I think this game was for Ps2 or gameboy when I was playing...
    Horrible, negative
    The multiplayer is just annoying with many abilities in advantage for the players who unloked the good weapons and powers... but in compare to the campaign is better
    I would have buy a random game instead of this
  10. Jan 28, 2013
    7
    i must say this is nearly has good as MW2, the changes with the campaign are great how ever the new tactical mode need to be updated the CPU are so basic that they can not shoot through a fence or hole. the multi player is still the same with all the modes that we love from black ops. but the main reason i like this game is because of how much they have improve the campaign has some of you decisions change the story Expand
  11. Jan 28, 2013
    5
    Same old Same old. I was really dubious when it came to buying Call of Duty Black Ops 2 and I wish I hadn't the campaign and zombies are decent and the graphics are good but lets be honest everybody buys call of duty for the multiplayer . Call of Duty started go downhill in my opinion after Modern Warfare 2. Call of duty 4 and World at War are the originals and the best because they are so basic and pay attention to detail. Expand
  12. Jan 27, 2013
    2
    The entire game is a mix of poorly designed maps and no-recoil non-skill **** killstreaks and weapons. I've played all the CoD's and i honestly think this game is worse than MW3.
  13. Jan 26, 2013
    6
    The campaign story is one of the best COD has recently offered. The one glaring (and frankly, unforgivable) flaw is with the Strike Force missions. If you are not planning on playing on the harder difficulties, they really are not that big of an issue, albeit poorly executed with respect to controls and friendly AI. On the harder settings, these become a gigantic nuisance due to the terrible friendly AI. The multiplayer is also good, and I think I enjoy it more than the BO1. Overall, above average game that could have been great. Expand
  14. Jan 26, 2013
    2
    While this is still a unpolished mess of a game. It's still not as bad as MW3 and I can really see the Pants-On-Head-Retarded staff at Treyarch really tried their best to make the best game they could. Too bad a good percent of the world brought the game New and gave activision money for this abomination.
  15. Jan 26, 2013
    0
    I got the Hardened Edition and the season pass. I really gave black ops 2 almost 100 hrs of my life, until I said screw it and threw the game in the trash. . . after I destroyed the disc. The graphics are awesome! The weapons are awesome! the perks are good! zombies is boring! the single player is good. Yet i purchased black ops 2 for the multiplayer. after years of trying I can say that COD multiplayer is not fun!!! Black Ops 2 has the same crap from all the other COD games online. Campers everywhere! Teams locking down the maps with snipers! Mercenary Mosh pit being hacked by teams! Constant host migration! I'm completely done with this COD FPS crap! I'm not spending hours of my precious gaming time with black ops 2, 3, 4, whatever! Gaming is suppose to be fun, not an exercise in frustration! Expand
  16. 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)..
  17. Jan 24, 2013
    3
    Same-old, same-old from Treyarch. I couldn't play the campaign for more than 30 minutes. It was same strung-along junk. You defend a person or area for a certain amount of time until the next part of the setpiece begins. Or you shoot endless waves of enemies until you reach a magical room or area where it stops. The story itself is pretty bland and still the typical "bad guy wants to destroy the world." Multiplayer is, as always, a bright(er) spot. Generally unchanged although the "Pick 10" system is nice for truly customizing your layout. I wish they would have kept the different scorestreaks from Modern Warfare. I can rarely get the really huge runs in order to get dogs, VTOL, etc. so it would be cool if there were the streaks that didnt reset after you die, etc. Other than that, not really worth the money. Expand
  18. Jan 22, 2013
    5
    If Black Ops II were the first COD game you've ever played, then it'll probably be pretty good, but right now, it's pretty boring. I mean, it is fun when you play it with friends, but the gameplay is pretty dry. Although, the campaign is pretty good, the mutliplayer isn't. Zombies is pretty fun though. I would like to see more effort in making the game solid, as I believe the COD makers are just depending too heavily on the popularity of their series that they stop catering to the community's wishes. Expand
  19. Jan 22, 2013
    1
    Well, what can you really say about this damn series?... Not much, they have such a simple and effective cash grabbing formula for these games every year. All they do is make sure they show how "new" and "improved" their next game is, and hype it to oblivion. But when you get the game, you realize it is nothing new, and they just sucked your wallet dry. I also have to mention that the developers cannot take criticism, and will hold comments for approval just to make sure the no one says anything bad about their precious game. They probably masturbate to a picture of David Vonderhaar everyday. Expand
  20. Jan 21, 2013
    7
    As a game by itself, Black Ops 2 is a pretty good game. However, with all the other repetitive shooters, this isn't anything new. The multiplayer is okay, but the only really redeeming feature is Zombie mode.
  21. Jan 19, 2013
    7
    Another year, another COD release. This has been the tradition set by the franchise for many years now. I honestly thought BO2 was going to be another quick cash grab but in all reality, it really isn't. This game vastly improves on The previous releases MW3 and BO1. The Campaign is done well in BO2, the setting, game-play and choice system all work well together to create a familiar yet different feel to the game. Zombies is a good addition to the package but feels lacking in comparison to the previous zombie modes in BO1 ans WAW. Multiplayer has been improved in some areas and worsened in others. The class set up has been improved however the Spawning, Hit detection and gun balance need to be improved. Over all this game is good, it improves upon previous releases and provides a fun experience. Whether you love Call of Duty or just come here to give the game a "0" , you cant deny that this game is an improvement on the series. Expand
  22. Jan 18, 2013
    7
    Treyarch has managed to come out of its shell from the release of CoD:Blops 2. now after looking through all the controversial bullish that is given stating that its like all the others there's nothing different. (keep in mind a developer can only go so far under the arms of a publisher [especially in a "triple A franchise"]). after peeling all that off you have a game that has a large amount of potential that strikes very hard key selling points. The stellar campaign given felt a lot (not completely though,) different. It gave players a little more freedom and choice throughout the game as well as a slight sense of emotional awareness within the choices they made as a character. From mission load screens to in-game non-avoidable choices. These things made me fall in love with the sometimes drooling campaign. Zombies of course makes its large return and greater than ever, with new maps and a long sought after theater mode. This combined with 4v4 chaos in grief mode ends up resulting in countless hours of play time (not including future DLC and modes). Of course as every CoD game has been in the past the multiplayer is EXTREMELY addictive, but repetitive in its level system. But to fix this Treyarch has added several things to keep the players busy and happy longer. With the inclusion of a "league mode" which allows for PvP action within certain skill levels makes any and every gamer feel like a professional in there own world while enjoying the game. Theater mode also returns as expected and feels a little easier to use and less task heavy. The greatest thing that makes the games multiplayer fall short is its poorly created and managed servers. this results in a lag compensation and the case where in the right game mode the winner (9 times out of ten) is the host. This makes the newest installment of CoD:Blops 2 a game that i would buy in a heart beat but with a lack of polish and finesse in certain cases Expand
  23. 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
  24. 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
  25. Jan 16, 2013
    10
    For as long as I can remember, I was one of the many detractors of the Call of Duty series, even though I never played a single installment. There was just something about Activision
  26. Jan 16, 2013
    8
    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
  27. 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
  28. Jan 16, 2013
    3
    Quite potentially the best CoD after a long time!...That's not saying much, unfortunately. I made the major mistake of purchasing this game. however, I'm not jumping on the hate bandwagon. I've played the game up to level 52, played the campaign, and multiplayer, and after all of this time, I think it's time I give it a fair review.
    Call of Duty: Black Ops II, is the newest installment in
    the call of duty series. However, it's not at all a new game. It does not DESERVE the title, "New game". It is the exact same engine from every other cod since cod 4, and the guns are also the same. They may look different, but it's still not different at all. Exact same. Just different stats. The balance is awful, and sad. It's incredibly unfortunate. The series lasted decently for a while. CoD 4 and 5 were good. But that's it. The classics were too. But the series since has taken a drop. nothing to see here. Don't even waste your time. Expand
  29. Jan 16, 2013
    4
    Thanks to its yearly release schedule (six games in six years!) I personally now find it impossible to muster any sort of enthusiasm for new Call of Duty games. To be fair to developers Treyarch they have made more of an effort than usual to make changes to the well-trodden path walked by these titles but everything, from the scripted events during the campaign to the online multiplayer, that was once so fresh and new to console owners has all been done before. Black Ops 2 provides exactly what everyone would have expected and sales suggest plenty of people are still willing to buy each new version but I for one have no interest in purchasing new games in a series year on year when the formula was already virtually perfected back in 2007 with the first Modern Warfare. Expand
  30. Jan 16, 2013
    10
    Title: Call of Duty Black Ops 2 Platform: XBOX360

    Rating: 18 Characters as settings: Black ops2 is set in the cold war in 1986 to 1989 and also in the cold war 2 in 2025. The protagonist of Black Ops Alex Mason returns as the protagonist in the cold war which leads to the primary antagonist, Raul Menendez a Nicaraguan narco-terrorist and leader of Cordis Die. In the 2025 section of th
    e story, features Alex Mason Expand
  31. Jan 16, 2013
    1
    horrible game loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool
  32. Jan 15, 2013
    5
    Well what can be said that has not been said 50,000 times over?? I gave the the original Black Ops a 9 because I thought it brought a nice change of pace to the franchise. I tried oh so hard to like this game, I even managed to prestige once before I gave up in utter disappointment with what I saw. Campaign wise, some of your actions do have a degree of effect on the story (although by how much is up to you as it seemed to effect the game story only slightly for me). But alas, like most recent triple A COD titles the characters are weak and I felt no connection to any of them. The classic COD AI is back out in force wreaking havoc on the enemy's concrete pillars and plaster walls all the while screaming at you to do anything and everything in between. The Strike Force missions were a nice attempt but ultimately fell short due to bad AI and RTS commands. That's it, I wont bother ripping on the campaign anymore because lets be honest; who in their right mind buys a COD game for the single player?
    As for multiplayer, it is fun at first but the fun rapidly dissipates after the first few hours of play. The maps are OK if uninspiring, but I could never shake off the feeling of claustrophobia that plagued me as I was playing. The god awful respawns and the cramped CQC style of the maps essentially forces you into lugging around high-rate-of-fire smgs or the dreaded Remington wherever you go. Snipers and LMG users are like black sheep in this game with one making an appearance every now and then and shocking the COD community. There are some perks and equipment that are clearly better than others (C4, Bouncing Bettys, that-god-**** ghost perk) While others such as Hard Wired, Awareness, and claymores lie completely unused (at least in my experience). I could go on, and on and on about the class imbalances and such, but I know this will fall mostly on deaf ears at this point. Once again the stagnat mulitiplayer leveling system and just boring unchanged gameplay leaves much to be desired.
    The Zombies mode however is the one and only saving grace this game has and it is very enjoyable when you have friends or a good group. I played i,t no lie for seven straight hours on Tranzit and Green Run and it helped soften the blow somewhat about blowing three Andrew Jacksons on this game.
    In my closing argument I want to make it clear that I love COD, I played the original COD on my PC way back in the early 2000's and had great memories playing it. I agree completely that COD4, MW2, BOPS1, was the zenith period for COD but sadly as this game and another (made by IW which shall forever remain namless...) has shown me that the glory day are long gone now. I appreciate Treyarch for trying something new and trying to innovate, but c' mon guys lets be serious here you and IW and especially Activision, are trying to revive a hero that has been dead for eight years now and no amount of "updating" or "improvements" will fix that. No its time to wipe the slate clean and start over fresh with new ideas and innovations. Better yet, we should avoid this game and invest money into games and companies like From Softwares Dark Souls or Planetside 2 or Blacklight. These companies at least give a crap about their fans and customers. But knowing activision, you have a better chance of winning the lottery in Texas than you do at Activision actually changing. So in summary..........
    0/10 for graphics hey activision last time I checked it was 2012/2013 not 2005.
    Campaign: 1.5/10 ( I know this is irrelevant it just makes me feel better!)
    Multiplayer: 2/10 minus an additional point to avenge by PC brothers and sisters for the appalling lack of dedicated servers. Fight on people!
    Zombies brings this game to a 5 because I like it and its actually fun.
    Shame on you Activision for ruining another good video game franchise. Looks like its back to Dark Souls for me.
    Expand
  33. Jan 14, 2013
    4
    A fun game at times but the multiplayer is nothing new and gets boring after a day or two. The campaign is a bit entertaining but the only time you get to use new gadgets is normally once and is to just get to the next objective. If you're lucky you'll get 20 seconds with your new gadget. Anyway, bad campaign and a bad multiplayer. The Zombies mode is alright but soon gets boring seeing as there is basically only one map. Expand
  34. Jan 13, 2013
    5
    Well there doesn't seem to be a review section for the PC version of this game so I will write one here.
    I have played this game since release date. For starters as was promised to PC players Dedicated servers, a lie.
    We have the same old P2P network offered to us in MW3 and MW2. Big falling point for a PC game.
    Low traffic this system works adequately but not well, High traffic the lag
    is unbelievable as is evident on any weekend.
    Treyarch really lost my respect with this release but the game sells well and I guess that is all that matters to them.
    Multiplayer gets a 6/10 would have scored maybe 2 points higher if we had Dedicated Servers.

    Zombies is riddled with very weird glitches, anyone travelling on the bus will know what I am talking about. A zombie 10-15 feet away on the bus can hit you, zombies can come through totally boarded up windows.
    Then there is the totally inexplicable random player glitches, like getting pulled off into the fog by an unseen force. Weapons totally disappearing amongst other glitches to numerous to mention.
    I respect they tried to incorporate new characters into the game but boy do I miss Nikolai and the boys from Black Ops.
    Zombies 5.5/10

    Overall a huge disappointment. 5/10 Overall Score
    Chances of me buying any DLC's with the game as is Zero!
    Give us dedicated servers for PC, to have any chances of gaining any respect from the PC gaming community.
    Expand
  35. Jan 11, 2013
    6
    To begin, I have played all the COD games since COD4. I have broken down my review into PROS and CONS to show what works and what doesn't. PROS: 1) Campaign is pretty good and has a cool mix of missions from the 1980's and the near future. 2) Graphics improved over BLOPS 1. 3) Great sound - guns sound louder and more powerful. 4) Redone Nuketown for multiplayer and zombies! 5) Create-a-class system lets you really customize your class to your liking.

    CONS:
    1) Multiplayer maps are pretty limited and none really stand out.
    2) Zombies just feel unfinished - it is 1 big map with multiple locations, but none of the locations are memorable. New characters are annoying and boring.
    3) Still haven't fixed Zombie matchmaking, hard to find a good group in a timely manner.
    4) No guns feel all that great. Almost all the guns play almost the same way and the unique weapons from BLOPS 1 were nerfed, meaning there is no reason to use them.
    5) Scorestreak system means well, but the exciting scorestreaks are fairly unobtainable unless you are an amazing player or get one in a care package.

    As much as I loved BLOPS 1, and how excited I was for this game, I found myself pretty disappointing with how BLOPS 2 turned out. Zombies was a big selling point to me, but it just feels lackluster. MP is the same as ever, but there is no excitement to it like in BLOPS 1. I find myself being more frustrated with this game and even though it works well, I would trade it in if I hadn't bought the season pass.
    Expand
  36. Jan 10, 2013
    10
    people need to stop stayin that b-ops 2 sucks. The game is freakin awsome. From the awsome graphics, to the (in my opinion) more solid gameplay. There are some maps to be loved, even though there is a tedios one that i tend to even leave the lobby for ( cough cough, express, ) it is an extremily exeptional game that all fans of the series should enjoy. There also is one thing that i should mention abought zombies... i dindnt like it as much as i did in the first black ops. I personally am not eally a zombies fan in the first place, but the only map i really enjoyed was transit. Anyway this is a great game so get it . Expand
  37. 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
  38. Jan 8, 2013
    0
    Honestly, CODBLOPS is the downfall of modern gaming. Now you have to play this to be considered a "true gamer," and that's a pretty terrible president to be set. The same game comes out every year with a different skin and, like Madden and NBA, everyone just laps it right up. This is the game everyone looks at when they look at gamers as a whole and I find that repugnant. The only thing that could make this situation worse is if EA published it. Expand
  39. Jan 7, 2013
    2
    The multiplayer in this game is easily the worst of the series. Here's what I like the Pick 10 is great, guns are balanced, perks aren't overpowered, and the scorestreak system rewards objective game play. You may be thinking this is sounding like the best Cod ever, but you would be sadly mistaken. The net code punishes good connections, and also the host by delaying their game state on the server. This means to enemy players you will appear unresponsive as they gun you down on their screen, even though on your screen you will appear to have been killed by bullets behind cover. This also means moving players will sometimes not even appear on your screen before they kill you. More often you will see the player only to be killed by what on your screen is a single bullet, but may have been an entire clip on his. Even if it's a bad player and his aim is bad enough that you survive the initial view delay, due to client side hit detection and the delay that is still present you will be firing at a location the enemy is no longer at causing either no hit markers or ones that don't actually register as damage. The hosting situation is growing worse as those with better connections are quitting the game in droves. The ones that do stay either dashboard ending the game for everyone, or passing host around like a hot potato causing host migration after migration.
    If you haven't bought it yet, I advise you to wait as Treyarch has been ignoring the issue and a large growing number of dissatisfied customers.
    Expand
  40. Jan 7, 2013
    4
    This is the third review I've written. I've had to tweak it some as I played the game more and more. Simply put, this is only a story extension from Black Ops. There is no evolution of gameplay, nothing fresh or imaginative. The biggest step forward has to be the Zombies gametype, where there's more than just the straight-up exhibition approach of pick a level, fight the zombies (rinse & repeat). But the multiplayer, where the game is supposed to take its biggest strides, falls completely flat. For me, this comes for a number of reasons: bad weapon balancing, poor killstreaks, no dedicated servers (and their player-host approach doesn't do well most of the time), poor hit detection (including the impossible feat that is the headshot, for whatever reason this game rarely rewards the player with a headshot when the head is all that is showing!), uninteresting perks, the list goes on but those are the ones I can think of immediately. This game will be fun and compelling if you've barely touched Call of Duty in the past, but just like Modern Warfare 3, the franchise shows its age in all aspects of the game (especially the graphics department). One has to wonder where Treyarch and Infinity Ward are with hiring creative minds to bring the franchise into interesting and fun waters. Quite honestly, it might be time to let this franchise die out and start fresh. If I could put it in to one sentence, I'd describe Call of Duty Black Ops 2 as tiresome, boring, and overly recycled - to the point that it makes me want to never play the game every time I conclude a playing session. Sadly, people are rewarding the development and production teams on this game by playing it (with online populations in the 500,000s at times). Honestly, play MW3 as it has better killstreak rewards and a much better weapon selection. Play Black Ops only if you covet campaign and the zombie survival mode, because the story is okay (just okay, nothing more) and zombies is the only real challenge Black Ops carries anymore. I'd venture to recommend Halo 4 over Black Ops 2 simply because it feels like Halo but has incorporated popular trends in multiplayer gaming that never existed in the earlier games of the franchise. Expand
  41. Jan 6, 2013
    6
    The only thing about Black Ops 2 worth buying is zombies... Level 26 if anyone is wondering.
    Played like 5 mins of single player and had to stop playing multiplayer because it is so terrible to play....

    /Inserts MW3 disc
  42. 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
  43. Jan 5, 2013
    3
    How many times a year can they release the same, generic FPS game for $60? This only goes to show that if you build up enough hype, people will buy any old crap. I think it's safe to say that if you want value for money these days, stay away from the big publishers like Activision and EA...
  44. 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
  45. 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
  46. 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.
  47. 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
  48. 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
  49. Jan 2, 2013
    6
    Another year, another Call of Duty game. The multiplayer is still the laggy mess it was last year, the SMG's and Shotguns are the overpowered guns this time, the graphics are still the same low res textures we saw last year.

    The campaign choices were nothing more than take path A,B or C and character deaths had little (or no) impact on the overall story. (Despite them hyping this up to
    the max)

    I will praise the strike force missions and Zombies mode. As they are the only thing keeping the game from getting a lower score.
    Expand
  50. Jan 2, 2013
    5
    Campaign was fine, Zombies is great... and then you see the multiplayer..... awful multiplayer i swear you can shoot someone 30 times and they shoot you once and bam your dead. Obviously something is wrong i dont know if it has to do with lag or what but it needs fixed and unless you just like zombies and playing the campaign 300 times dont buy the game... bought it for 25 dollars and it still is hardly worth it Expand
  51. 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
  52. 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***
  53. 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
  54. Dec 30, 2012
    5
    I received this game as a gift for christmas, so I think that has tempered my review a little. I have also recently finished playing Modern Warefare 2. Firstly the good about COD BOPs2: Graphics are excellent; computer AI isnt bad at all and is challenging; sound effects etc were noticeably good - I was able to tell locations of enemies more easily than other FPS in the past. The maps are fairly detailed too.

    The Bad: Where to start: Annoyingly long and numerous story animations, with quicktime events inserted every now and then, just to make sure you havent stopped watching. I had problems getting stuck in scenery and even falling through it while parachute landing. At one point I was fighting a whole group of people with guns, all dressed exactly the same. Its like someone cloned a single hillbilly a bunch of times and handed them guns. In MW2 there was a "Survival mode" which was great for getting to know a map, and honing your skills. No sign of anything like that in this game. Instead you get some terrible zombie survival game. The controls are different enough to MW2 to be annoying and the cause of many a death ingame. There is very little in the way of introduction to the various game modes, etc. It seems there is a BIG assumption that only existing fans are going to play this game. It also suffers with Consolitis. Pointless loading screens (that dont even hint at being loading screens), the aforementioned control issues, among others. The RTS style missions are awful. Being in Australia, the pings are AWFUL for multiplayer, and I find it nearly pointless playing online when so many obviously have a jump on me. Which leads me to the other major problem, there seems to be little else to do in the game. In other words they have relied so heavily on the online multiplayer they seem to have forgotten those of us that really dont like multiplayer online games. In short - if its a gift, then its worth the price you paid
    Expand
  55. 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.
  56. Dec 29, 2012
    3
    I am SO glad i did not pay for this game. YES! I went and instead i rent it. I AM GLAD I DID. Saved money. This game is an ABOMINATION. The Graphics are as good as a Free-To-Play Shooter on PC, they are WAY OUT-DATED, ALOT of graphical Bugs, the Campaign Story is absolutely HORRIBLE. The Gameplay is ordinary at best. Nothing fresh, nothing new. The same crap Activision tried to sell to Kids each year. The Multiplayer is SO MUCH uncomplete, it's even more horrible. This game is like an Add-On Pack (Or Map Pack) for Call of Duty: Black Ops, i do not know why Treyarch are called Game Developpers, because they are horrible. Want Ideas on Good Shooter Games? Go check out Far Cry 3, Battlefield 3, Rainbow Six: Patriots (Coming in 2013) and even better... Wait for Battlefield 4. DO NOT BUY THIS PIECE OF CRAP SOFTWARE, you've been warned. COD is NOT what it USED TO BE anymore. Expand
  57. Dec 29, 2012
    4
    I use to be a fan of Call of Duty games, but now they have just gone down hill. I beat Call of Duty: Black Ops II within four hours, this was probably the shortest Call of Duty game, or any game that I have ever played. I also couldn't even follow the story line, it was all over the place and confusing. I didn't bother with multiplayer, I figure it'd be the same as any other CoD multiplayer. Don't bother listening to the journalists, this game is not intense, nor the best. If you're looking for a good Call of Duty game, go back to the first ones, that's all I can say. Expand
  58. Dec 29, 2012
    0
    Unbalanced multiplayer, mediocre campaign, and overall terrible community. Activision really should've spent more time creating this, especially when it's such a "high-profile AAA" game.
  59. Dec 29, 2012
    4
    Where to start on this one? The campaign of this game is fun with different endings depending on your choices but regardless of that it doesn't have a story that tempts you into playing the campaign for more than an hour at a time. And after you finish the campaign you'll have no desire to play it again.
    If you play games purely singleplayer then there are far superior games on the market
    .
    Zombie mode is disappointing, there isn't much variation between the maps or combat situations and it gets boring to fight off the same horde of exactly the same zombies for longer than 15 minutes.
    Multiplayer however is where this game disappoints the most.
    The maps are the worst i've encountered in any Call of Duty game, with head glitching and camping spots galore. On top of that there's not much room in the maps for flanking the enemy without getting taken out by headglitchers armed with shock charges and bouncing betty's. And since the killstreaks are now more difficult to get, people camp even more trying to get a stealth chopper in the air.
    The spawn system is horribly random, too often you will find yourself scratching your head wondering why you spawned right in front of your enemy or why you spawned at the enemies flag in the domination game mode.
    The lag compensation system however is where this game truly falls flat on it's face, this was also a problem in MW3 from time to time but it was more rare than in Black Ops 2. Way too often will you shoot a guy full of bullets only to have him turn on you and kill you almost instantly. Every Call of Duty game on console had lag compensation but in this game it's completely screwed. Activision makes hundreds of millions of dollars annually with this franchise, you'd think it wouldn't be a big effort to host dedicated servers for this game..
    The gun balance in the game also lacks, well balance.. The SMG's are the way to go, they easily overpower most if not every other weapon in the game at almost all ranges.
    And yes, it still has the Quake 4 graphics engine with some modifications..
    Combine all this and you have a very lackluster game. I can't believe Treyarch developed a game for two years only to come up with this over hyped disappointment of a video game.
    Not only that, this game does not feel like Black Ops at all, it feels like a modded Modern Warfare game. Black Ops 1 was a superior title, not only in gameplay but also when it comes to originality and general atmosphere of the game, you put up with it's flaws because it was fun to play.
    This game however, is not. Why critics give this game such a high score is beyond me, because Black Ops 2 runs the franchise further into the ground instead of giving it a breath of fresh air. Steer clear of this one people, you will lament wasting your money on this.
    Expand
  60. Dec 29, 2012
    5
    Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 is the net Cod by Activision, so is it the next great Cod? No it is not! Campaign was good but boring story and Strike missions, god Strike missions were pointless and annoyin g and made me give the campaign a 5/10. But the campaign had some cool stuff like flying a jet and the first campaign were you have to make who lives or who dies. Multiplayer is by far the worst thing in Cod BO 2. Nice new create a class system but terrible maps and still unbalanced witch now I have giving up all hope about the multiplayer coming back as it was in Cod 4 and WaW. Zombies I got to admit was amazing and I never had so much fun with zombies since WaW. The new tranzet mode is awesome and survival is great on 3 different maps, but grief is an okay mode but i just dont see the point in playing it. Overall, bad campaign, terrible multiplayer, amazing zombies. Call of Duty: Back Ops 2 5.3/10 Expand
  61. DME
    Dec 28, 2012
    9
    Yes, it's similar to past Call of Duty games. But what do you expect... disco dancing and magic abilities? The [[CAMPAIGN]] provides varied gameplay with some really cool surprises such as flying a fighter jet and fighting enemies with cloaking abilities. The story is narrated much better than the original Black Ops and the villain character was 'painted' very well. By the end of the game, you really want that guy dead. The branching storylines are a fresh addition but do very little to affect the gameplay. The choices you make only really seem to affect cutscenes and dialogue. There's also optional Strike Force missions, which are basically tower defense games in their nature. They are hit and miss. While they can be fun, the A.I. is awful and controls are very difficult to learn. Moving on to the [[MULTIPLAYER]]. Maps are designed very well and offer playstyles of all sorts. The maps are much smaller in comparison to previous COD games, which some may not like. The new Create-A-Class system is genius. I would hate to see future COD games trash this idea. Scorestreaks are a much needed improvement over the past killstreaks system. Everything in general just feels incredibly balanced. There's also a new handful of gadgets such as electric mines, a PDA, and a sight that allows you to see enemies through walls (not overpowered, so don't worry). The perks aren't changed much, except for the fact that Ghost got downgraded (thank you, Treyarch) and you no longer need to acquire "pro' versions. You can level up weapons like in MW3, but this time you get to keep their ranks after prestiging. There's also plenty of other subtle improvements that really make the game more enjoyable. Panic-Knifing is near impossible now. But to make up for that, you have access to a Combat Knife that you have to draw before using, but it has longer range and much better accuracy. The new "unlock tokens" system is surprisingly better than the original Black Ops's currency system. Anyway, if there's anything negative to say about the multiplayer, it would be this: Spawn system is worse than ever. Expect lots of spawn-trapping and killing. That's really it. Some people would attack this game because of it's "Lag Compensation" (a misleading term) but those people don't have any idea what they're talking about. There's literally no possible way to just do away with lag, because everyone plays with different internet. You can't fix that. So stop complaining. Moving on to [[ZOMBIES]]... The zombies mode made some drastic changes that will do its best to confuse the crap out of you when you first start it up. The new menu is definitely not friendly to new Black Ops 2 players. The survival maps are incredibly small when compared to that of the original Black Ops, but to compensate, you have two new game modes. Grief mode is a fun 4v4 competitive zombie game that actually gives reason to play online. It's unfortunate, however, that besides knifing other players, there's not a lot of interactivity. It just feels like an 8-player clutter-fest. Tranzit is a very cool mode in which you use a bus to travel to different locations on a huge map. There's lots of hidden secrets in it making it the best zombies mode to play. But after I've played it enough, I can't help but wish they would bring back the large Survival maps. In [[CONCLUSION]], Black Ops 2 is (in my opinion) the best and most complete Call of Duty game yet. Besides a few issues here and there, it's widely improved and more enjoyable than ever. Rather than focusing on making drastic changes, Treyarch focused on making tons of smaller changes that really ended up making a huge difference. Expand
  62. 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
  63. 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
  64. Dec 27, 2012
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Another year and all is the same with the Call of Duty franchise and I eventually gave up and rented it. 9 games now how the infamous "Call of Duty" title and this one is by far the worst. Campaign wise, the story is a very poor follow on from the half decent Black Ops. With the "past and future" story completely dominating the game which makes the flow of the game just fall apart. The level layout, objectives and story progress are literally the same as of the previous 5 games. Maybe next year we will get a bit of variety? The only real change to this game is the stolen aspects from other games that treyarch have tried to bind with this game, but failing to make it work. The futuristic aspect of this game is clearly taken from that of the crisis series and abilities are just a rip off of the ever more popular halo series. It is nice that treyarch are trying but their QA team needs to step in and stop such creations. The whole feel of the games just isn't the feel that Call of Duty once had (Call of Duty 4). The multiplayer aspect is certainly nothing new. The EXACT same feel, the EXACT same flow, the EXACT same server quality, the EXACT same unbalancing and the same poorly designed maps. This games multiplayer actually got me asking the question "why is Call of Duty so popular?". The reason I came up with, slap this title on any other game and it will sell just as well. People see those 3 infamous words and immediately want in. Pre-teens nag their parents for these games to fit in with the crows (despite the 18 certificate), Teenagers want the game for an easy game to yell abuse and annoyances down the microphone. Adults buy the game because of its annual tradition and the gaming season. These are the only reasons I feel that keeps the CoD title alive. The one redeeming feature I thought would help this game is the infamous zombies. Loved by many since world at war and by far the greatest part of the Call of Duty series. However, even this falls short. Zombies is about endurance and having fun. So why have treyarch started interpreting stories into this. Sure, It can be fun to search and unlock the story but it is just not necessary. Keep zombies the fast paced endurance game it once was. I can safely say I am glad I didn't pay full retail for this game. Even the £8 i paid for rental is too much of a loss. I could have bought a lovely pair of socks and be more satisfied (and have some change for a snack). Call of Duty, you are kept alive by the bandwagon that your name of created. Expand
  65. Dec 27, 2012
    6
    this isnt as bad as i thought it was going to be ! , however it could have been alot better feels that the makers got lazy in some areas. there are some terrible map creation , the graphics are nowhere near up to standard of most games, the spawn system is awful, and it still takes the piss sometimes to kill somebody but the gameplay is decent , the score streaks and 10 token system for weapon customisation is unique and makes it more interesting and more of a challenge. overall its not too bad all depends what your in to . Expand
  66. 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.
  67. 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.
  68. 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
  69. 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
  70. Dec 23, 2012
    0
    By far the worst Call of Duty game I've ever played, and by far the worst campaign I've ever played in my entire life. After 3 levels I quit because the story is simply pathetic, it tries too much to be dramatic for no apparent reason apart from the sake of being dramatic. The story is linear like every other Call of Duty game, but is simply just so god awfully stupid. I bought this game knowing the campaign was going to be terrible...... but I never thought it would be this bad. It would have been more entertaining to eat the disc than play the campaign, it is simply - horrible.

    If you enjoy a horrible campaign with pointless drama, a terrible story line, and a cliche CoD storyline and gameplay, then this is the game for you.
    Expand
  71. 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
  72. Dec 23, 2012
    2
    Good God, this game is just awful. These Call of Duty campaigns used to quite fun fun and exciting diversions, but this is just steaming pile of cowdung. Just an ugly, mean-spirited, pointless story full of idiots shooting at other idiots. Did I mention the violence is mean-spirited and nasty? It is. And the game even looks like it's five years old at times visually. When I think about the thrilling WWII campaigns that started this CoD series, and this godawful mess I just played through now, I don't know what it says about where we're at. And these games sell bajillions now. Way more than other games. People, man. Not the game we want, but probably the game we deserve. Expand
  73. Dec 22, 2012
    0
    Absolutely horrible game, due mainly to developers. The iconic "multiplayer" (yes I put it in quotation marks) is completely aggravating. Lag issues, team death match works on certain days. Nuke town map was available 24/7 for everyone who pre-ordered the game, after a week hey changed it to whoever bough the season pass. Serious crooks, not only do they doop everyone. But in return they want more money to do whatever they want to do, so filthy rich that they could care less what the players think or want. Or could care less if the player even exists. The only thing this game is meant to do is to literally steal your money and make you feel stupid for having it in you system. Expand
  74. Dec 22, 2012
    3
    Remeber CoD4?? Well if you don't or haven't played it I'm truly sorry. Black Ops 2 brings with it the same things made famous by MW2 with a twist Killstreaks are now scorestreaks nice addition to the game makes things more rewarding to players that go for the objective. Next the weapon selection is by far the best improvement to this game and the series this is however where the Pro's of BO2 MP end. MP is plagued, it makes me yearn for MW2 again. SMG's are the flavor of this game as are 3 Pistols that are overpowered to a large degree. Now why are these overpowered well the recoil on some isn't there okay its the future I get it that, but this is MP level playing field needs to be present currently there damage is to great it needs to be less. Another issue that would help this is the atrocious hitboxe's used in this game, Ever year it gets worse and worse to make lesser players better and make great players greater and more frustrated by the bullet that truly missed you in the killcam but hit you in-game. Quick scoping is still present although not as prevalent thus far It does however need to go fast pace has taken over realism something CoD4 did fairly well to a degree. Lastly my biggest complaint is when a 9mm smg bullet goes through a wall but my .30 cal cannot..........or when I get shot through a metal cargo trailer but can't shoot through a haybarrel. These things add to one at times Fun but utimately frustrating experience that we've come to love and hate about CoD series. I however truly miss the glory days of CoD4 and CoD:UO where things worked properly......before the console generation of xbox live ruined a once great series. Expand
  75. Dec 22, 2012
    1
    This is probaby the worst iteration of COD. The Single player is a throw away and has added nothing to the series. MP the main reason to buy the game and it has the most problems of any COD. Its fundamentally broken since the online experience is nearly unplayable. All the issues with lag means you instantly die with one bullet, while you can unload a full clip into them and hit air.
  76. 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
  77. Dec 21, 2012
    7
    Didn't play the campaign. Tried the multiplayer online and after being used to the carnage of BF3, it just didn't do it for me. The ONLY saving grace for me on this one was the Zombies. The zombies transit level is fun to do even if it is pretty repetitive.
  78. Dec 20, 2012
    2
    I would pay at least $40 for the zombie mode. The extra $10 that they ask of me for the inclusion of multiplayer is not worth it. I love the zombie mode but the multiplayer has not appealed to me since World at War. They have removed all stealth and ambushing aspects of multiplayer and instead decided kill streaks and reaction time rule the game. Don't get me wrong, I can keep up and boasted a high 2.2 K/D ratio in the original Black Ops, but I was just bored. I felt that I did not have to think about what I was doing. I would just run, aim at the obvious locations and get quick kills, then continue moving; repeat. It made me feel like a machine. Zombie mode is excellent, and the additions they have made to it are game-changing. I just pray that the developers realize that these modes belong separate and dedicate a game solely to zombie mode. Expand
  79. 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
  80. Dec 19, 2012
    3
    Droll,soulless,lackluster,unimaginative, All of these words describe Black Ops 2. Call of Duty has once again beaten me into believing they can do something different.
  81. Dec 18, 2012
    0
    Might have been a good game, if this was 2007. The multiplayer is decent, but is pretty much the same as previous Call of Duty games. If you've played games like Halo 4, Borderlands 2, and Far Cry 3, this game looks laughable. The campaign is generic and has a basic story designed for simpletons. The zombies mode is fun, but there is only one map to play on, which means that if you don't like the TranZit map, you'll have to shell out $15 for whatever DLC they make. The survival maps are simply sections of TranZit, unfortunately. As usual, a few minor tweaks were made to multiplayer to convince people that it's new and different, but it's really not. It is just like every other Call of Duty and is now desperately falling behind other shooters. Expand
  82. Dec 18, 2012
    0
    This game is the worst Call of Duty I have ever played, next to Modern Warfare 2.
    Call of Duty BO2 takes us into the future of 2025, which was a terrible move on the franchise. The game absolutely has no value at all, other than zombies, which is the only reason i didn't rate this POS game a 0/10. The campaign is OK , Trey-arch games are known for their campaigns. It was boring a had no s
    ignificant value at all. The multi-player is the worst part of game. The new create-a-class system is horrible. It was a smart idea, at the time, until they released the stupid game. All the snipers and shotguns are overpowered and the rest of the guns are useless.
    Overall, The game is just like any other boring COD, offers a few unneeded changes to the game and just overall sucks. 2/10
    Expand
  83. 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 t
    hings 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
  84. Dec 18, 2012
    8
    Haters' gonna hate, but in the end there is a reason why COD tops the sale charts. This review is split into three sections, Campaign, Multiplayer and Zombies. CAMPAIGN: 6/10 - Ordinary: Treyarch presents are far more involved and interesting story than we have become accustomed to from the bland mission briefings that Infinity Ward continues to dish up. Old man Frank Woods, is particularly entertaining as he unleashes a deluge of profanity every time he opens his mouth. The in-game battle sequences are often cinematic and explosive but the gameplay itself is woeful. It just isn't fun. One entire mission is a pathetic stealth action attempt, no you don't fire your gun, no you don't choose your route; just follow your the set path and stop to wait for the drones to pass. At times like these the game cuts pretty close to the definition of the word 'boring!' ZOMBIES 4/10 - Weak: one word - disappointing. Transit is mind numbingly awful, Grief mode offers a brief reprise. Easily the worst Zombie instalment to date. MULTIPLAYER: 9/10 - Outstanding: After six years of online multiplayer, the experience has worn thin. However while I retired from the game as soon as I reached level 55, I can still appreciate that this is the best online multiplayer since MW2, the customisation has been simplified and reinvigorated with the new pick 10 system, the maps and guns are far more balanced then MW3, and support a wide range of play styles. COD's crowing jewel has always been its sharp controls and 60fps and the game is as smooth and responsive as ever. CLOSING THOUGHTS: If you don't like or are sick of COD then this game won't change your mind. If you like online shooters then what are you waiting for? There is one element of this game that deserves your attention: the online multiplayer. The Campaign and Zombies are weak and awful, respectively. Expand
  85. Dec 17, 2012
    0
    Im giving this game a zero because this franchise needs to simply die like right now it's destroying gaming as we speak. every studio wants their game to be like COD so they can just churn some cheap rehash every year and rake in billions. Example Resident evil 6 clearly said there is no place for survival horror
    in todays market. run and gun fps games all thnx to COD. another example MOH
    clearly a COD ripoff with it's newly found killstreak system it used to not be like that but now it is. even Halo 4 to a small extent have COD elements in it. Expand
  86. Dec 17, 2012
    1
    Absolute drivel. I can't believe I bought into this franchise again after MW3. This is a terrible incarnation, the time to kill is pretty much instant which little to no room for maneuverability. Boring! I miss BlOPs1 and MW2. Singleplayer not played.
  87. Dec 17, 2012
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This review is based on the multiplayer aspects of this game. The servers are horrendous. You will be migrating hosts much more frequently than any other COD game. The lag compensation is a joke. When two opposing players are fighting for a kill, you swear that you shot first and hit him 3 to 5 times. When you see the killcam, you only get one or two hits and the other guy gets off two or three shots on you and kills you instead. The maps are either too big, or way too small. Nuketown 2025 is a waste of development. It's the exact same layout as BO1. The spawning is ridiculous. Enemies spawn behind you so many times, or they spawn you in an enemies sights.

    The variety of weapons are pathetic. The gun stats in BO2 are awful. I'm an assault rifle guy, and I could barely tell any difference at all using the fully automatic assault rifles other than firing rate and accuracy. What kills me is that the last assault rifle you unlock has only average gun stats. When I work my tail off to level up, I should be rewarded with a gun that kicks butt, not a gun that has middle to below average stats. Pistols and SMGs are overpowered. Light machine guns are terrible, and take an eternity to reload. Shotguns have ridiculous range for some reason. Sniper rifles should be banned from any future COD games. Grenades/Semtex work well, but Crossbows are still as annoying as ever. I don't like the fact that you can't remove arrows or Semtex you get stuck with if you realize it just in time. You're able to throw back grenades other people send at you, so why aren't you able to do this? When it tells you "Stuck", it might as well say "Bye Bye". Finally, the tomahawk and knife melee. If you include weapons that cause instant death in a video game, the death better make sense! The tomahawk shouldn't be an instant kill if it just hits you, especially if it's been thrown from over 50 feet away. I'm not a game designer, but even I know how obnoxious that is. If it hits you in the head, I can understand. The knife melee, a simple knife swipe to a player shouldn't mean instant death. Maybe give him a few seconds after getting swiped to stay alive before dying. Also, when I do the knife melee on someone directly in front of me, it almost always misses. On killcams, the knife melee sometimes looks like it's missing the target, but hits anyway, which is complete BS.

    On to the Scorestreaks. Some of them are upgraded versions of what we already know. But, they got rid of the best part of BO1. I'm talking about if you didn't use your Killstreak reward before restarting a new Killstreak, it stacked up. I loved when I had 3 RC-XDs and used them all within a couple minutes. In this game, if you don't use your Scorestreak rewards and start a new one, you lose the rewards you previously had. Some Scorestreaks are extremely cheap, When a Lightning Strike Scorestreak is activated, you get no time at all to get to cover because the command lets you know almost right after the bombs drop. When a Napalm Strike killstreak is activated in BO1, you get a command and around 3 seconds to get to cover before it hits. In BO2, you're pretty much screwed when Lightning Strike is activated. Also, when Lightning Strike or Hellstorm Missiles are activated, sometimes even if you are indoors, it still kills you. Treyarch, you didn't program destructive environments in this game, so this shouldn't happen. The UAV has been severely nerfed, it's only up for barely 10 seconds, and is almost always destroyed by the opposition within about 5 seconds. The absolute worst Scorestreak is the attack dogs. Why is it when a dog jumps you it's instant death? Give the player a fighting chance when it jumps you to shake it off or knife melee it, but don't make it instant death. There are better options for Scorestreaks other than dogs. You know how in the loading screens, it says, "A well timed knife strike will kill an incoming attack dog"? With the knife melee almost useless now, it's nearly impossible.

    The Perks, along with the Custom Class system have been changed for the worse. They have introduced Wild Cards which you can use to double up on Perks 1, 2, and 3, add another attachment to your primary weapon, etc. This would have been great, but there's just one problem, you can only have 10 items in a class, and the Wild Cards count towards your 10 items. What kind of sense does that make? The Wild Card isn't an actual item you carry! Also, you can only carry one type of lethal/tactical equipment, which is a downgrade from all the other games before this. You were able to carry grenades and claymores/bouncing betties before, why change now? The only good thing they did is that the Ghost Perk can make you invisible from UAV only when you're moving now. Stop releasing these games every year, Activision. Spend more than a year of development on it to iron out the problems to make this an experience to remember, and not one to throw out the window.
    Expand
  88. Dec 16, 2012
    0
    Good: The game will load. Bad: Everything that follows from multiplayer, campaign, and zombies disappoints. I attempted over 3 weeks to reach activision. They kept not opening the call center because of the high call volume. Once I finally made it through, the questions pertaining to online play were insulting. I was informed the game has a lot of people and they were "surprised" by the amount of people playing. The rest was my being told my fiberoptic internet was to blame. But being booted from lobbies because of connection errors wasn't bad enough. There is a new protocol for those that quit games and are penalized by waiting in lobby for 5 minutes or more. So the result was their server boots you and then you get penalized because of their stability problems. Bullet lag is about 5-10 times what it was in MW3. Also, hit detection is not present. 3-5 shots with a sniper rifle as a headshot and then getting killed is frustrating. Or worse, you pull the trigger and the sniper rifle doesn't even fire. I attempted to give the game a month to be fixed and I ended up getting my reseller to give a full refund because of the numerous issues and documentation where Activision even said to go get a refund. Result: I did get my refund and will pass on Activision titles from now on. Don't be their unsuspecting pray and waste $60 on a title that doesn't deliver a fraction of what it promises. Zombies is fun for about an hour, then it gets old. Campaign also fails to hold the player attention. Halo 4 has a great story and the multiplayer is fun. I like COD multiplayer better, but it's too unreliable or unstable.

    When i closed my ticket for support with Activision and informed their rude rep that I got a refund I was notified that my account was banned. I'm not sure if this was a punishment or not, but I find this is more of an accomplishment. Selling customers bad product is never acceptable.
    Expand
  89. 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
  90. 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
  91. Dec 13, 2012
    0
    All I can say is, OH MY GOD IT SUCKS SO BAD I'VE CRIED THE FIRST 5 MINS.

    There is absolutely no fun at all. I've played MW2 and Black OPS, it's really getting worst. Wish I didn't follow my friend and loose my money for something that don't deserve it. I mean, I could have help a kickstart project with the money instead of giving it to greedy monster corp. There is no excuse for the lac
    k of graphics quality, the small maps with no inspirations and the lack of "smooth" actions. If you're a fan of COD and keep saying "well, it always been like that" well guess what, little studio with no budget do better now. You've been kick in the nuts. Buy anything else like harry potter games or kinect games you'll have more fun. Eck ! Go outside see the light.

    Don't buy that **** whatever your fan COD friend says. Don't help them make money.
    Expand
  92. Dec 13, 2012
    3
    Horrible spawn system in multiplayer has ruined any chance at this game being good for me. I only play for the multiplayer and the spawning was tolerable in other games, but it is just abysmal in this one. There are some great new additions to multiplayer, but they are not enjoyable when you are spawning and getting shot in the back after taking 2 steps. I have always been a fan of Duty and the first one to step up and defend it, but this year's game is very disappointing for me. Hopefully these bugs can be worked out next year or in a future patch, until then, 3/10. Expand
  93. Dec 12, 2012
    9
    First Black Ops II, this is not the best game in the series, but it stands out a few new compared to its predecessor, what Black Ops. I do not compare to Modern Warfare 3, because it is not the developer. The highlights are: the zombie mode, the system class creation and maps, each with its own identity. The negatives are: small hideouts, the campaign is too Hollywood and the community, but 3arch tried to change a minimum it with the strengths, scorestreaks, and the sniper?! It seems Mw2 ... Expand
  94. 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
  95. Dec 12, 2012
    3
    Traded this piece in after a week. This game is horrendously unimagined. Every weapon feels like re-skinned version of something from a previous COD. Melee attack misses constantly. Constantly got shot behind hard cover. Graphics are god awful, especially the "lightning strike" score streak. Audio is poor. Maps are forgettable. Campaign story was weak, only highlight there was the array of armaments available. Zombie maps are okay, but not nearly as amusing as the prior installment. Expand
  96. 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
  97. Dec 11, 2012
    8
    I need to adjust my previous review where I was way to hyped about the game. The campaign is one of the best in the series, although it is still sort of weird as I got used to with Treyarch CoDs. It has 5+ endings, which is definitely awesome and utterly unexpected from a CoD. As for the multiplayer, this is a bit of a letdown. Sure, the new Create a Class system is well done and there has been some balancing, but the problem comes with a bit too unimaginative maps and absolutely WORST spawn system to be seen in CoD. Lets take the Aftermath map for example. It has only two fixed spawn points, each on one side of the map. WTF? You often wont be able to even run to safety before some guy shows up and shoots your head off. Zombies are great. The TranZit mode still has stuff to explore and I cant wait for the day I get my 4 team premade and do the "Tower of Babble" achievment. Grief mode is a bit less fascinating, but it can sure be a lot of fun, although prepare for LOOONG matches if the players are good. The old engine, no matter how well it is running, is aging. Graphics from up close look bad. There has been some improved lighting and facial animations, but generally it is the same as previous installment. Sound was never Treyarchs strength, but I can happily say, that the weapons are no longer some chinese fireworks. The multiplayer voiceover feels a bit weird, the same way I felt at Black Ops. If I should have my opinion on Treyarch, they should do their own franchise and leave Call of Duty to Infinity Ward. After all, they differ in many things (not gameplay-vise). I still have mixed feelings about this game and sometimes I just feel like this game is a 9/10 and sometimes it is a disappointing 7.5/10. If you are a fan of CoD and there sure are many (and many haters too, haha) you probably wont be disappointed. Expand
  98. Dec 11, 2012
    5
    Where to start?? I've bought every COD game since the original and I enjoyed them up until Black Ops. I like Black Ops but it got very boring quickly. Then we got MW3 with it's cramped maps and terrible campaign. Now we have Black Ops 2, or should I say Black Warfare 3.5. The campaign is a hand holding pile of trashy sh&te, the MP is a mish mash of all the things wrong with COD. The matchmaking is unbalanced, the weapons all feel the same, scopes make no difference to your guns and the maps are bland!
    I know I'm not the only one bored because our local Game told me they have had more Black Ops trade-ins than any game since it launched. It is time to put this drivel to bed and please don't bring it back next generation!!
    Expand
  99. Dec 10, 2012
    9
    What is the point of a Call of Duty game? To provide incredibly fast paced fun and excitement, of course. Flash back to the start of the series - beginning with Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare; A gripping game that offered a look at current day wars rather than the typical World War II setting that was the trend for the gritty, realistic shooters of the time. Fast Forward back to present day - We have, since the time of CoD4, seen 4 other installments in the Call of Duty franchise. And we can see that, also since CoD4, the series has progressed very little, if at all. Modern Warfare 2 and 3 are the two storyline sequels to CoD4 and they decide, expending on the gritty realism and genre defining ingenuity of their predecessor, to chuck out any ounce of innovation CoD4 had. CoD4's two sequels were less sequels and more of the same game with a little cleaner plain job. Infinity Ward has time, and time again, let it's fans down by releasing the same game over and over again. Luckily, the CoD franchise has two developers to make games for it, one of course is the aforementioned Infinity Ward, the other is Treyarch. Treyarch came into the CoD franchise with Call of Duty 3, a game that desperately attempted to emulate the feel of the two previous installments, only to fail miserable and be a waste of everyone's money. Then, after CoD4, they got a second chance with their release of World at War. WaW kept to the same WWII story that previous shooters have maintained since the early 90's but unlike those shooters it brought CoD4's new and face paced multiplayer format to the table. While the execution was not as nice as CoD4's it was still enjoyable and the story was one of the best WWII stories to date. It also added the game mode that would come to define Treyarch - Zombies. Zombies was exciting, new, and, best of all, fun. It was a game mode the Call of Duty franchise needed to keep fresh. When Treyarch did their next game, Black Ops, they kept the zombies mode and fast paced multiplayer but added a number of new game modes, re-hauled the class creation, and added combat training which gave a new way to play with friends at a party. What I am trying to say is that Treyarch, unlike Infinity Ward, actually likes to come up with new and enjoyable additions to the Call of Duty series in order to make the games more exciting and rewarding for the long time players. In the brand new installment to the series Treyarch brings their innovations to a new level, adding a new look to the series as well as new Zombie modes and options, another re-haul to the class creation system, and even more fun game modes - this time mixing them into the campaign as well. Treyarch also seems to have a much better knack for storytelling than Infinity Ward because, after CoD4, Treyarch has done nothing but ruin every ounce of promise they built into the Modern Warfare story-line. Treyarch has shown that they can still come up with interesting ways of playing with the old dog that is Call of Duty. They have tightened everything from the controls to the graphics and it all just feels a lot cleaner and more thought out. If you are a fan of Call of Duty games' multiplayer format than there is plenty for you to love in Black Ops II and the game is sure to provide you with the most entertainment from a Call of Duty game since CoD4. Expand
  100. 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
Metascore

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.