Call of Duty: Black Ops II Xbox 360
User Score
4.5 out of 10

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 1671 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 642 out of 1671
  2. Mixed: 175 out of 1671
  3. Negative: 854 out of 1671

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. DonMega
    Nov 18, 2012
    1
    Boring game, couldn't finish it because I was falling asleep. Same game every year, same characters, very similar story, outdated graphics. The only cod I ever liked was the first Modern Warfare (cod 4). It was original at the time and a huge jump, this is literally and so blatantly a money grab it's not even funny. At least I did not waste money on this joke of a game. I can tell you that I'm not even looking forward to any more COD in the future.… Expand
  2. PowZee
    Nov 17, 2012
    10
    This time around I believe Treyarch has come out of the shadows of Infinity Ward. They deserve great COD fan respect and the highest accolades ever for the well thought out fine tuning they have brought us with COD Black Ops II. It is incredibly fun to play, most especially the multiplayer. It's the best COD multiplayer experience to date and one big reason why is the refinement of the perk system and the emphasis on teamwork and it's relation to gaining xp, scoring higher, and winning matches. This makes the objective based mp games better than ever. The realistic graphics beautifully go beyond what I thought was possible for the Xbox 360 to handle. Splendid job Treyarch!… Expand
  3. seuche
    Nov 13, 2012
    0
    this game is so dull and without any atmosphere. it is probably the most terrible and unrealistic shooter i have ever played. sometimes i felt like i was in a b-movie of dolph lundgren and in some moments i expected cuck norris to come around the corner and kill all enemies with a roundhouse kick. it wouldnt had made a diffrence to the atmosphere in this piece of junk.
  4. Sinan454
    Nov 13, 2012
    8
    :D Best Call of Duty game is Modern Warfare 1... forget everything else. They have to make their old World War games and a new Modern Warfare 1. Those games were normal Call of Duty games. You have to be superfast in their new series, kill superfast, move superfast and play in close corners. The first Call of Duty games and the first Modern Warfare were special.
  5. AOLfloppydisk
    Dec 11, 2012
    1
    I will start by saying I'm one of the people that doesn't partake in the annual map add-ons that Activision calls "Full Games" I still play World at War and Black Ops 1. I don't understand why a franchise that sells this much can't afford to do some real R&D and develop an excellent game through and through.

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

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

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

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

    Luckily, I didn't buy this game, I borrowed from my brother and had it for a few weeks. He to was disappointed and traded it in the second he got it back from me to get Far Cry 3 (Puts this game to shame). I know there's a lot to be said with the Cod and Halo series, but at least the Halo's aren't every single year, if your not going to change anything give us a break in between at least...    … Expand
  6. TheJeffness
    Nov 16, 2012
    7
    I was excited to try this after a lot of publications said it was way different than the past COD games, which I got bored with after modern warfare 2. Sadly this is only partly true. The single player game has improve quite a lot, but the multiplayer/zombies stays essentially the same. First the story is a ton better....I was actually constantly looking forward to the next part of the story. There is a huge amount of suspense built throughout the game because you know that **** is about to hit the fan with a America's drone force attacking itself. I usually dont like stories that jump around, but this works very well. Each level is completely different, varied, and in a different location...and you dont get lost within the timeline. It is cool how it allows you to make "Choices", but this feels like it wasnt built from the ground up....rather it was thrown in afterword because the different way of doing things seems tacked on. Some have said there is an open world element to the game....THIS IS NOT TRUE AT ALL...by open world they must mean a field surrounded invisible walls and only 2 routes to take. This is not open world and actually makes the game worse. Scripted sequences have always made the COD games stand out for action movie-like breathtaking sequences....but I think its time to move on. Yes, some of the scripted sequences within gameplay make for great parts, but many times it feels like my skill/shooting/moving abilities dont even matter because things are just flying by so fast and it feels that I would have survived, lets say a chase scene where you are shooting from the back of a truck , without even firing a bullet. Also for a scripted game, I dont understand why there are sometimes unlimited respawning enemies....I will be at a part in the game where I am constantly killing bad dudes, and they just keep coming, because I am unaware that I am supposed to move forwards....This especially gets annoying when you spend time killing an unknown number of buddies, decide to move up, than a random grenade lands at your feet or your hit by a mortar. The random deaths in this game from random greades really pisses me off, The multplayer is disappointing. The pick 10 feature is the only good new feature. Everyone has heard the arguments about why COD multplayer sucks now, so I will just list a few brief complaints... 1. There is no concept of a "front line" in this game....you will be facing a direction or moving in a direction for 15 seconds, and then suddenly someone has spawned behind your team and kills you with you not even knowing they are there. I know this cuts down on camping, but there must be better ways...I shouldnt have to keep looking behind at an area I just cleared.. FLANKING SHOULD BE A TEAM STRATEGY, not a spawning coincidence 2. First to be seen dies....there is really no point in aiming at heads because all the guns fire 100 bullets a second, and have no recoil....many people dont know that in console games there is a slight auto-aim in shooter games when your cursor gets close to a target. This is fine in games like Halo where you have time to dodge or take cover, but a slight auto aim with 1000 shots per seconds, 2 hit deaths, and shots going thru all walls, makes this game just plain stupid. ALL YOU DO IS SEE SOMEONE, SHOOT, AND IF YOU HAVE A FASTER FIRING GUN...YOU WIN! I realize that this game takes fast reaction time and reflex time, but I dont have that accuracy with my thumb...with a mouse I do, so it makes it so little teens with no IQ who only play COD ever have a chance of winning. You cant outsmart them because there is no way or time to....they see you first, you die, and they are probably behind you spawning in an area you just were in. It would be nice if there was any difference in the guns like in counter-strike GO....I mean I suck at that game on consoles because I dont have an accurate thumb from only playing COD all day, but I am amazing on PC...but atleast in that game there is actual RECOIL with the guns, and certain ways to shoot them...In this game you just aim in general direction and hold down bullet. I will admit that the multiplayer is addicting and a bit fun, but no other game makes me so angry. Its fun for awhile, but if I play multiplayer for more than an hour I am depressed and angry as ****....Battlefield 3, halo, counter-strike I would be having fun after an hour.. Overall. If you like modern warfare and black ops story, you will like this games single player a lot. Best story/characters/suspense/variation yet. If you hated most the other games single player story.characters then there is actually a chance you will like this. I you dont like call of duty multiplayer. you wont like this. If you like COD multiplayer, you will like this. Story = 9.2 Graphics = 6.3 multiplayer = 6.5 Replay = 8 Sound = 7.5 Originality = 6… Expand
  7. TomComics
    Nov 15, 2012
    8
    Treyarch returns to the Call of Duty franchise with the sequel to Black Ops. Black Ops II offers a brand new challenging campaign Treyarch tried to make different than others by including "Strike Force Missions", which means that whatever your actions occur, such as if you die in the game, will effect how the game will end. While Strike Force missions may sound promising, they do not always make the game as fun and can be annoying, and the campaign is overall solid. Multiplayer as always returns and feels the same as always only with futuristic weapons, but at least Treyarch is doing a better job and listening to the community for ways to better the game. Zombies is back and better than ever. TranZit was well done and everytime I play I learn something new and fun. Treyarch really put effort into hearing the fans calls out from the community for the best Zombies gameplay. The Nuketown Zombies map is decent, but nothing to get really hyped for. Overall, Black Ops II is a better game than the original, (but the graphics should have improved so much more!) offering a solid campaign with its weak moments, a same feeling multiplayer only with new maps and a more futuristic setting, and a much better and extremely fun Zombies mode,… Expand
  8. Bosniak
    Nov 15, 2012
    10
    -Best Cod Campaign ever
    -Best Multiplayer since Cod 4
    -Multiple Zombie Modes
    -dogs are back
    -4 player split screen zombies
    -score streaks are awesome
    -balls
  9. PlayerReview
    Nov 14, 2012
    5
    It used to be Infinity Ward would make a CoD title and update the assets (CoD1,2,MW1,MW2). Then, while they worked on the next "real" iteration, Treyarch (started doing the original CoD expansion packs) would make a filler (CoD3,WaW,BO) and they would use IW's assets and add some crazy innovation (like vehicles in CoD3 and zombies in WaW). Unfortunately, the founders of Infinity Ward (Camp and Zampanella) left the project/were fired (insubordination) before MW3 was done and half of their employees left with them to form Respawn Entertainment. The Infinity Ward that was left was just a shell of the company it had been, which is why they brought in other developers to finish MW3 (Treyarch included (primarily for the MP aspect)). Respawn Entertainment, Infinity Ward and Activision have basically spent the last several years just suing each other left and right over the IP (royalties, rights to make new games, competition). Bottom line is that Treyarch is still doing what they've always done, but they flounder without the assets/tools (game engine/graphics/mechanics) that the franchise founders created for them. Treyarch doesn't know how to make new tools, so they have had to use the same ones over and over since MW2 (many would say MW1).

    And... that's why we can't have nice things.    … Expand
  10. MeltedFab5
    Nov 19, 2012
    9
    I will jump to the point. This game is fun to play. That is my truest test. I knew when, after a full afternoon of playing, every time I went to set controller down I kept saying "maybe just one more round, this game was a hit. I do not condone the way this game is basically the same format COD has been promoting for years, that being said, this is the most fun COD game I have ever played. It feels balanced, there are tons of huge maps so you don't feel like other players are right on top of you and there are plenty of perks and gamemodes that de-emphasize camping and balance out gameplay. I love all the unlockables and I love the look and feel of the weapons. If you are going to play COD or Halo, this is the game to play. I still greatly prefer Battlefield but this is a different game with different objectives. Treyarch has surpassed Infinity Ward where it really matters...fun. ANyone can pick this up and start unleashing deathstreaks. Skilled players will be able to do much more and dominate in there own way and in their favorite modes, but this game has something for everyone and is really fun to play and I have not been able to say that since World at War or maybe the first Modern Warfare. It would be nice to expand this world into larger settings with vehicles and a cover mechanic, but this is the next step forward and will give us all plenty to do until the next gen. I am not ignoring the obvious faults and still complain like anyone at how frequently I get shot in the back or when an enemy spawns right behind me, but my complaints are few compared to the moments of joy when I scored a triple kill or defused a bomb with only seconds left on the clock. I have really only reviewed the multiplayer because that is all I play, I tried the campaign and it seemed okay, a little wonky with the collision detection on the shooting and skill didn't seem to matter much, but combined with the multiplayer and zombies, Treyarch has given us all plenty of bang for the buck. This and AC3 should be the only games you need...and Battlefield 3, let's not forget the king.… Expand
  11. senogad
    Nov 22, 2012
    8
    ...I really wanted this to be good, I was hoping more black ops was my favorite COD and I wanted to get the same experience I did from black ops with black ops 2 but no, the maps are terrible, hundreds of glitches, bad sound and it takes the game forever to start without freezing. Also, many fans such as myself pre-ordered the game to obtain what they called "nuke town 2025 24/7" but no they cant even get that right, they lied and only put it on for 2 days but don't worry, to make it up to us they made a gamemode calles "chaos mosh pit" so we can play nuketown but in order to play it we have to play through all the other terrible maps so thanks for deceiving all your fans. treyarch get your game fixed!… Expand
  12. pourya-ahmadian
    Nov 13, 2012
    9
    campaign is awesome and amazing,missions are same new and old,new guns are so handy and useful while the old ones are lovely still.new protagonists are believable and strong side with strong new enemies.story rounds you so many ways.sounds design is high and superb while graphic parts are a little better(we do not play COD for high-graphic,it is for smooth gameplay).
    multiplayer is so-so     to me,zombie mode is good to me still.
    new structures in MP-mode make the game better for players whom new on COD.
    one thing only bother me and that is the way you must replay the missions.i do not like new way,i prefere the old one.    … Expand
  13. TheLivingVirus
    Nov 17, 2012
    9
    First thing: I bet 1000 bucks that not even the half of all the red reviewers have even played Black Ops 2 and still write that there is nothing new or changed compared to MW2. I played MW3 and Battlefield 3 last year and enjoyed both of them equally. I cant get all the hate on Black Ops 2.
    Everyone shouted out for innovations and new ideas and Treyarch delivered them. A non-linear storym    ode, all-new zombies, completely overhauled multiplayer with new perk- and prestige system and still everyone says that there is nothing new.
    The graphics are not really uptodate but they are far better than in every other CoD with new lightning effects. Why would you need a new engine anyway? Was there such a huge difference beetween the Frostbite 1 and Frostbite 2 engine except the advertisment for new bashing material on CoD? No! The graphics of Battlefield 3 on the consoles were horrible and even MW3 delivered a smoother (if it was better is a matter of opinion) experience with 60 FPS. But MW3 didnt made ANYTHING new. Nothing. It made it even worse with support killstreaks and stuff like this and got ratings way higher than Black Ops 2.

    Black Ops 2 is way more than a simple Call of Duty. Its the (last) try of a great development team to make the Call of Duty franchise fresh and feel good again. MW3 was a shame in playability online with all the Akimbo and Assassin noobs but Black Ops 2 made good with its multiplayer to be fair. The connection may not be the best everytime but its not that bad. Like in every game you have good and bad rounds.

    All I can say is that most of the haters here are just BF fanboys. This ratings should all go to Modern Warfare 3 and even the press bashes on Black Ops 2 for not being original what I cant understand. Its doing the best job possible on making a shooter feel fresh and Treyarch gets spitted in the face like this? I can see Modern Warfare 4 in the future with the same sh**play like Modern Warfare 3 and it will get 90+ again from everyone because it makes everything better and has nice Coop. That's a joke such as all the 0.0 ratings. They don't make any sense at all. If you played (and I mean not only 2 matches online and the first three missions in the story) Black Ops 2 you know that it just can't get 0.0. In my eyes Treyarch did an amazing job on make Call of Duty feel fresh. After disappointments this year like Medal of Honor or some other mediocre games I can just say that Black Ops 2 is with Dishonored and XCOM one of my Game of the Year. Period.    … Expand
  14. Cupcakeboy14
    Nov 14, 2012
    10
    The is the best of the Call of duty Games in the franchise. Brilliant story line the best multiplayer around. Zombies is also another nice edition offering some of the best maps so far as well as the new transit mode. Overall this is an epic game that deserves praise for changing the series more than the any other call of duty games apart from Call of duty 4.
  15. KevowOfRice
    Nov 13, 2012
    3
    $1,000,000 says a Russian Leader/Warlord dies in the end or "will" die in the end. As far as the trailer and game-play. Its graphics could of been made better by an Indie game developer. Activision is just farming this franchise quickly and messy. The only thing they were lucky is getting people addicted to zombies, that's the only thing I think they nailed down that players will want in the on-coming games. Multiplayer will always be the same and I think that they took some features from Ghost Recon: Future Soldier such as some of the scopes.

    Campaign and Multiplayer receive a 0.1, and the addictive Zombies gameplay brings it up to "3"    … Collapse
  16. APOLLO_SOL
    Nov 19, 2012
    0
    It is unfortunate that such a great series has fallen from grace with the same lackluster BANG that Call of Duty Modern Warfare and Modern Warfare 2 has hit us with. I will explain to you the stale formula: 1. A new Call of Duty: (whatever) is released 2. The critics love it and the users hate everything it stands for 3. Fanboys and Sheeple buy it anyway 4. Profits are past expectations and sales are AMAZING
    5. A new Call of Duty: (whatever) is added to the production line
    6. The cycle continues...

    I can no longer see myself supporting Activisions Call of Duty series... and that is sad. MW2; I'm coming back baby!    … Expand
  17. alex82101
    Apr 15, 2013
    9
    This game is getting bad reviews because of tryhard nerds that don't get their swarm killstreak every game. Or people that get owned and simply can't acknowledge the fact that someone else is better than them. Let me tell you one thing. This game is fun and good time. The campaign was very good too but the multiplayer is what really shines. Its a lot of fun and the graphics are very polished. Don't forget that this game has zombies too! There is a lot of stuff you can do in this game and its just an amazing product! People say this game is repetitive but thats totally ok with this game! Its a classical shooter franchise! What were you people expecting? This game is going to be the same if you like it or not.… Expand
  18. EV3RLiGHT
    Apr 16, 2013
    1
    To summarise the whole game: it is weakest, most repetitive shooter to date. I don't even know why people invest to this franchise, but it is certainly not improving anything. The game contains an awful network of under-aged players, it is lacking visual aesthetics, it's poor story makes me want to puke, there is no destructible environment, too much DLC and the list goes on and on. It is sad when such franchise gets compared to Arma or Battlefield franchises, since it's the most pathetic copy paste game the developers made money on. So stop bloody buying it!… Expand
  19. UndiyingPickle
    Mar 27, 2013
    2
    Generic and repetitive gameplay, awful campaign mode and nonsensical zombie mode make black ops 2 a game that didn't need to be release.
    So let's start by the campaign the whole six hour campaign is playing through different sections of just shooting dumb and suicidal AI that not do anything more than just be annoying then watch a non interesting not necessary cutscene and that pretty muc    h is all that there is.
    For multiplayer you have your basic game modes (tdm, dm, dom etc...) the new game modes are not innovative at all and are just game modes from different games plastered into this game every weapon feels exactly the same aside from the way they fire, (full auto or bust fire or semi automatic) i find myself sleeping after playing for a while.
    At last zombies is just... awful... the new so called zombie campaign is just the same survival mode but with a different name the stages feel exactly the same and is just not fun.
    the only reason why this game is getting a two and not a one or even a 0 is just because the graphics are decent and the campaign even if they are terrible have different endings and choices.
    In conclusion i wouldn't buy this game at all is completely skippable it doesn't innovate in absolutely anything and most of the copy paste ideas are just badly performed, DO NOT BUY THIS GAME.    … Expand
  20. FelixGuzman117
    Apr 25, 2013
    8
    This game is a great game some people have there thoughts about it because they have made the game that it takes more bullets to kill an enemy but that is not a negative aspect the reason why is because it opens the window to more completive gaming And I really like the fact that they have added zombie new zombie game modes Because that content is what everybody has been waiting for The graphics are a bit out dated if you compare them to halo 4 because blacktops 2 is using the same engine that blacktops 1 used But all and all it is a great game If you like previous games you well like this one… Expand
  21. comacoma
    Nov 15, 2012
    9
    Haters gonna hate, but it's the best CoD up to date, and so it's the best Single-Player and Co-op FPS EVER. Non-linear, explosive roller-coaster with choices that matter. Too bad there is only one zombies map, but it'd be fixed obviously. Maybe has some flaws in MP but there is no competition anyway - BF3 is different game (not to mention boring sp/coop) which sucked at gunplay, and just release MoH simply flopped. At least Activision don't want my money for free unlocks. And here we are, people whine about engine and other incompetent stuff. You know, I can imagine PC gamers whine about dated visuals, but x360 crowd with 8yo hardware? Get over yourself.… Expand
  22. The_Gooser
    Nov 15, 2012
    5
    If you are a long time fan of the Call of Duty franchise I would advise you to stay away, Call of Duty has not been the same since Modern Warfare 2, and Black Ops 2 is a just another turd dropped in the toilet of FPS turds.

    Black Ops 2 is a giant mess of a game, not much has changed, and the things that were changed have very little impact on the actual gameplay/setting. Black Ops 2 bo    asts future warfare, yet I am still able to make a class based around knifing people and end up on the top of the leaderboards. The weapons have not changed much, there is very little recoil, the differences between an LMG and SMG is next to none. The best way to describe this game is if Medal of Honor and Black Ops had rough sex and this is bastard child of that one night stand. The token unlock system is nice, I enjoy sacrificing certain things for more perks, but none of that matters, because there is very little difference between the weapons. From what I have seen, once people reach a certain level, everyone choose the Microwaver thingy, and camps in a corner. I remember this game touting the fact that it is anti-camper, have you seen the blackest night shadows in the broad daylight levels, you are practically invisible. The maps are way too big, not enough players to fill the maps, and the game modes are tired/old. The achievement system compared to MW3's achievement system is like comparing a mongoloid to Einstein. Play this game if you enjoy looking at or making emblems of chick's buttholes, because that is all the craze with the kids these days.… Expand
  23. Bosefus123
    Nov 28, 2012
    5
    The single player campaign was average at best, no real memorable moments and it felt extremely short.

    The multiplayer is the least innovative cod in the series, but it offers some refreshing changes like the new pick 10 loadout system, scorestreaks and league play ranking, but don't expect to be blown away by it. The maps are poorly designed with head glitch spots at every corner and w    indows for people to camp in everywhere which makes it frustrating to run around, plus the maps are really small and tight. The guns are very balanced and every one is usable unlike Black ops 1.

    They only offer one new game mode Hardpoint which is a crappy version of headquarters. Every other game is either slightly refined or not touched.

    Overall an average game that will not wow you, especially if you've been playing cod for years now.    … Expand
  24. KSP2011
    Nov 18, 2012
    9
    People voting this down are probably just watching videos on youtube and basing their reviews on that, like the typical Call of Duty hating trolls. Black Ops 2 is an amazing game. Multiplayer is refreshing with the Pick 10 system, Zombies TranZit is genius and The Campaign is amazing. I will be the first to admit that the Modern Warfare series is stale and outdated, but the Treyarch series is always original, engrossing and addictive. If Battlefield sold as much as Call of Duty, would you hate that franchise too? My gut instinct is yes. Success brings haters. But thank god the non-trolls out number the trolls by roughly 220:50. Check the sales, compare it to the hating trolls giving it 1' and 2's. I rest my case.… Expand
  25. RexReqz
    Nov 14, 2012
    6
    I love CoD I've been a fan for so long that was very eager to get a copy of Black Ops 2 and jump in to a great game yet I was wrong. Let's start off with the campaign. It now has a branching storyline unlike previous CoD games where it was very linear. This adds to some of the thrall to keep playing and see where the story can end up. It is a good story but some parts just don't add up or keep me involved to caring what happens to Mason or Woods. I think I've become jaded to the suspense and the massive amounts of f bombs thrown around. This story could've been better if you would have stopped making me jump around characters so damn much. The other addition to the campaign is strike force. Strike force is a bad rendition of an RTS game. Now I played the game on Veteran because I believe it adds to the depth of a game unfortunately Strike Force mainly the mission FOB Spectre is impossible to beat. The AI can not adequately seek cover and be as good as the player therefore they get eliminated fast. There were times when the group that I had picked would not follow my orders or the way points that I would set up. Strike Force can be a great add but I prefer as a separate part of the game much like Zombies. The campaign could've been great but too much stuff and not very well done. The Avenged Sevenfold crap was the worst part. Crappy music for a crappy ending. Now let's get to the multiplayer. Crap. Yup that sums it up. Crap. The weapons all sound the same. See for yourself same damn POP POP sound. The weapons lack power and seem to have the same damage regardless of stats. The shotgun and sniper rifle are still 1 hit or 2 hits. Point system isn't something I cared for. The perks are varied but in the end the gameplay makes it forgettable. The maps are poorly designed and are filled and I mean FILLED with pigeon coops. I just can't describe how everything does not work well. The frantic pace of previous CoD's where you were able to rush and do well because the game worked but this game works against you. The multiplayer was supposed to be rooting out camping but low and behold this game has more camping than I have ever seen. It could be maybe because of the scorestreaks? Nothing works. It isn't fun. It's more of a chore to play. I love a good multiplayer but this multiplayer just was unable to keep me playing. I have yet to play Zombie mode since it doesn't interest me. I'd give it an 5 mainly because the multiplayer is a big let down but I'm giving it a 6 because Zombies might just be good. Just a big let down. Remove the Black Ops title and add another one because this doesn't do justice an even better game.… Expand
  26. Loldude12
    Dec 6, 2012
    1
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. After having a go at this game, I was begging for it not to as a major flop as Modern Warfare 3, unfortunately, it is and it will, no matter what. The good things about the game is that zombies are back and it fun, grief and tranzit make useful features of the game, and that's it! Now we can resume to the negatives, the campaign is a joke, now I have been a victim of some very crappy games with a humiliating plot line, I can now forgive some of these games, the way to get an ending is very confusing, 5 endings in total to give you an alternative. SPOILER ALERT!!!!!!!! I will rant on the best ending, first of all, we do not have a clarified idea of why Karma is now famous, secondly, Farid could've been shot in the arm or leg while taking the bullet, so that pretty much was confusing, and the very stupid twists involved, it's good and all that the Mason's reunite, but there was a major lack of substance involved. Now I will go with the multiplayer, where can I start? The guns are very overpowered, hackers are still there, but 'action' is being put in force, my Nuketown map is not there, even though I unfortunately wasted my hard saved money to test the game and bought it BRAND NEW! The pick 10 needs to be cleaned up, as they need to balance the guns to make it a stress free game. Now, the zombies. Although I said I enjoyed the mode, it needs improvements, the AI are brain-dead just like in campaign, some guns are underpowered and need to be improved and the maps are too small to be roaming in, either way if you opened or not opened all of the doors. Overall, it is a flawed game which needs to have a major improvement to keep up with shooters such as Halo 4, Medal of Honor, Battlefield and Borderlands.… Expand
  27. CyberEagle_1x
    Nov 16, 2012
    6
    I have seen the haters say it
  28. LibertyLocked
    Mar 25, 2013
    7
    I was never a COD fan but I have to say that COD is never a bad game. People hate it just because Activision is abusing the same shooter stuff. To be honest, I don't really like this game and I only play zombies. Most people hate it because they spent (and they are going to spend) $60 on a shooter game that looks ALMOST the same as the game the bought last year. But hey, the problem is not about the game itself. Imagine if it's the first time you play this game. The graphics is awesome and the game runs at 60 FPS which is amazing. The multiplayer is intense and fun (in the beginning). The zombie mode is the best and very addictive. I wish Activision could release COD games every 2 or 3 years instead of 1, because people will get bored really fast.… Expand
  29. Riflenator1234
    Nov 13, 2012
    9
    This game does not deserve the user rating it currently has. Don't listen to the user reviews. They are simply a bunch of angry nerds (I use the term nerd loosely.) that were going to rage no matter how good the game was and haven't actually played the game. This game is very enjoyable and is certainly an improvement upon last year's MW3.
  30. Sergeant_MarkIV
    Feb 18, 2013
    3
    The first Black Ops was great, this one doesn't. Predictable campaign, lack of memorable moments, online noobtobing, zombies mode is not as fun as in Black Ops 1, unmemorable soundtrack,... Makes you think that Infinity Ward made this game. The new features such as optional missions and alternative mission incomes are the only things that makes me not rate it a 0/10.
  31. LethalThreat
    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
  32. InboardPG
    Nov 24, 2012
    2
    This will be an entirely multiplayer-based review! I can't believe I spend 60 bucks on this pile of garbage. Lag returns in the game, worse than ever. I don't remember having this much lag since using Internet Explorer on a Windows XP. Hit detection is just as worse, you can literally be shot around walls! The weapons are all crap except all the SMG's are all overpowered. The maps are for campers and headglitchers. Killstreaks are overpowered ONCE AGAIN. (eg. Hunter killer drone, A.G.R, Lighting Strike, etc.) The graphics are crap, not so surprising for a 7 year old engine. Zombies is only fun with friends, because solo play is impossible. This game is also very noob-friendly. (MMS, Target Finder, RC-XD, No recoil weapons) I can't stress this enough, this game is garbage. The only good thing in this trash can is the campaign. Good story, good explosions, but you don't really know the enemy you are up against.… Expand
  33. VelocityGamer
    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
  34. SOUR_11b
    Nov 18, 2012
    10
    greatest shooting game ever created in the history of the world!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  35. Dog4life
    Nov 13, 2012
    1
    Same game , different year. Same dull and repetitive gameplay, singleplayer is on the rails with scripted events as usual.
    Multiplayer is repetitive as hell, 0 skill, 95% automaim . Great game for monkeys.
  36. yune2
    Nov 23, 2012
    0
    A big hollow nothing pretending to be something new inside a plastic case of graphics and color. What else can I say? I was sorely dissapointed by the lack of anything new, as I have been since Modern Warfare 2.
  37. solid666
    Nov 28, 2012
    3
    Besides a decent solo campaign and a moderately entertaining zombie mode the MP is a fail in my eyes. After experiencing what re building a games engine can do (Frostbite 2 for BF3) i am bored to death of COD and will wait out any new iteration of the game until they do something different. I can't play longer than 30 min online without getting bored(that will happen after playing with the same mechanics over and over for 5 years). Not a blockbuster game, not an innovative game, not even better than it's predecessors and fail at what they once dominated, MP. R.I.P for now COD.… Expand
  38. Auritone
    Apr 22, 2013
    4
    Ah, the Call of Duty franchise… What can be said about it which hasn’t been said so many times by so many people? It’s seems to be a franchise which continues to divide the waters of gamers: You either love it or hate it. There really doesn’t seem to be any middle ground on this one.
    So where do I personally stand?
    My problem with this particular FPS franchise lies very much with the dev     the developer, Treyarch, the overprotecting parents of game developers. Treyarch seems to live in constant fear of relinquishing some of their control of the game to the player, leading to one of the most scripted and linear shooter franchises on the market, at least up to this point. One notable thing about Black Ops 2 is that there are attempts from Treyarch to give more control to the player, but then it seems like they regretted their decision and pulls the players right back where they want them.
    One notable example of this is in Afghanistan where you have to stop a Russian assault with heavy armour, helicopters and infantry while on horseback. This initially seems like opening up for a bigger area with more freedom of movement and ways to take out the tanks and helicopters. However, this turns out just to be show, because in fact the whole stage isn’t as big as it would have you believe, there are really no options as to how to approach taking out the tanks and helicopters, and if you try to stray just a little bit, you are without warning killed off for going off the map.
    It seems like Treyarch tried a more open level design, but then thought better of it, making the player feel like a dog who just got a longer leash. Surprised by this it starts to run to stretch its legs only to get pulled back with a neck breaking jerk.
    Another attempt are a couple of tactical Strike Missions, which try to blend some real-time strategy into the franchise as well as giving the single player campaign a multiplayer “feel”. Now, this would have been a welcomed addition if it had been executed better than it actually is.
    The problem is twofold: First of all the strategy is extremely simplistic, leaving you with only four different squads at your command, and only being able to tell them where they to go using a quite useless overhead tactical map which I never used. You can then jump into any individual squad member and control it, whether a soldier, a gun turret, a rolling gun turret, or a small, slow walking tank. And this leads to the second problem: The AI. You get more out of just going commando on the enemy and try to do the tasks yourself, than rely on the orders given to your squads, as they will be killed off faster than a sloth on the MI5. On several occasions I have also seen squads taking the longest, and most enemy infested route possible to the destination I had set for them, resulting in them getting massacred in seconds.
    These strike missions are fortunately optional, but they are still frustrating to play.
    Other than that there really is nothing new in the single player campaign which, as usual for the franchise, is as short as ever and plays out more like a Michael Bay movie than anything else, though the cutscenes and set-pieces are as spectacular as ever.
    What really gets to me with this franchise is Treyarch’s reluctance to let go of the player’s hand. At one point you are on the side of a cliff, swinging on a line with you buddy using "high-tech gloves of the future" to stick to the side. Now, rather than actually letting the players do it on their own and actually climb around on a cliff surface, the whole thing is done with a tedious quick-time event.
    The following section which sees you gliding over mountains could have been a lot of fun, if it weren’t for the fact that it might as well have been set in a tunnel, as straying even a few meters too far from Treyarch’s very short leash will result in a restart.
    It's the same story with the "stealth". As usual you are left blindly playing "follow the leader", failure to do so results in you being discovered even if in cover.
    And that’s really my whole problem with the franchise and Black Ops 2. There are so many things which could have been so cool if you were just allowed to actually DO it.
    I like just a minimum of freedom and a minimum of control in my games and this franchise gives me neither.
    It treats the player like a little child learning how to cross a street, and never ever at any time does it let go of the player’s hand, squeezing it to a point of stopping blood circulation.
    That said, the multiplayer is still quite solid (if you liked it before) with a new league feature and other additions. The Zombies are back, but this time they are actually the most boring and quite ugly part of the game
    So other than the Strike Missions, Black Ops 2 is very much business as usual.
    If you like the franchise you won’t be disappointed, and if you like me don’t see what all the fuss is about… well, you still won’t.    … Expand
  39. vintagegamer16
    Apr 19, 2013
    4
    is this a call of duty game? yes. does it play like call of duty yes! is that a bad thing? well.....in my and many others opinion...YES!! they have been using the same formula since modern warfare 1! now yes of course they have added extremly minor new features, yes i get that. the only thing this game is truly good for honestly is its zombies mode.
  40. mikediesel11
    Nov 25, 2012
    9
    Treyarch did not change the gameplay but they changed the way the game is played.

    It's clear that there are a lot of fanboys on this site. I recommend looking at peoples review history. Anybody that gives this game a 1 or 2 has another agenda other than reviewing the game. I read users that completely contradict each other. My review: Treyarch is the king of making maps balanced a    nd interesting. IMO MW3 had the most boring maps. The gameplay is a mix between Black ops and MW3 and just as solid s ever. One of my few gripes with the gameplay itself is that the pistols and shotguns tend to be a little overpowered (a pistol shouldnt out duel an assault rifle). Treyarch did not change the gameplay but they changed the way the game is played. The pick 10 system where you can mix and match the tools you want for battle is simple to use but addicting to make the perfect loadout. They make it so you want to play the objective. Treyarch has put so much thought into perks and counters to each perk. They nailed it. The game is very fast paced at first but you will quickly get the hang of it. In MW3 there were constant non stop killstreaks and air support overhead. you really need to earn your score streaks in this game.

    Zombies is more fun than ever. My only gripe with zombies is in the Tranzit mode. You get objectives through in game narrative which I have a hard time paying attention to when im getting attacked by hordes of zombies. The single player has also changed. your decisions actually effect the outcome of the game and offers re-playability. I have not finished the campaign yet but so far so good. This is my favorite CoD to date and a fantastic game. The game is similar to past games but Treyarch has sent the game in a new direction. In case you were wondering this is the order of my favorite CoD games since CoD4 (from favorite to least favorite) :

    Black ops 2, Black ops, Modern Warfare, MW3, world at War, MW2    … Expand
  41. Phenom557
    Nov 15, 2012
    4
    I will start by saying this, Call of Duty:Black Ops II is not a terrible game. Its just as polished if not more so then the previous titles. Slight improvements in game play mechanics and zombie mode(s) don't go un-noticed. I've been a Call of Duty fan since the start (I'm talking the original COD and all its expansions on PC) but only a fool can play this game and say its ANYTHING more then MORE OF THE SAME!!. Nothing about the game stood out, nothing revolutionary and nothing mind blowing. The dated graphics engine is absolutely showing its age and cant hold up to gorgeous titles like Halo 4 or even BF3. I finished the campaign in about 6 hours and the multiplayer sadly did absolutely nothing for me, The level designs are un-imaginative and even the "futuristic" weapons lack the punch I was looking for. All in all Call of Duty Black Ops II is the solid 60fps shooter we've come to expect but nothing more. Sadly the back to back COD releases have taken their toll on most of the veteran gaming community leaving us all craving for something new.… Expand
  42. PapaShroom
    Nov 24, 2012
    5
    For starters lemme say I'm a huge fan of COD and have always loved the multiplayer gameplay....well almost. Now secondly Activision is full of greedy corporate scum making a billion + in a holiday season isnt enough for these greedy scum sucking vultures they have to come up with new ways to suck the money out of the consumer and until we stop allowing this they will continue to do things such as! Lying their money grubbing asses off by getting us to preorder BO2 in order to get Nuketown 2025 then 6 days later taking it away from us. Then instead of doing what was right and putting it back into the Nuketown 2025 24/7 they put it in the regular rotation. Activision you are SCUM you are whats wrong with gaming. Now for my review. Scorestreaks SUCK not a whole lot of difference besides giving people a reason to go with cheesy tactics and camping but regardless just bring back killstreaks. But overall this is by far the weakest of any of the COD's. The hit detection is absolutely terrible in this game, they also need to nerf knife runners immediately mainly due to the fact their run speed is so great its causing their hit boxes to lag behind them. They've totally wasted assault rifles in this game they've put to much emphasis on rate of fire and hip firing in an attempt to increase the overall "speed" of the game. I average around 17 kills a game with an assault rifle and aiming down site in a 1v1 fire fight but with an smg hip firing I'm in the upper 20's. The games lack of guns sucks and Im not a fan of the 10 piece only system. MW & MW2 remain the highlight of the COD series.… Expand
  43. Infrnlmajsty
    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!
  44. SmartApps
    Nov 14, 2012
    4
    I like the game, but it is really showing its age. It would have been really cool to have all these new features with a new game engine, one that really pushes the hardware to the max. After Battlefield 3 and Halo 4, its really hard to go back and play a game like this. Just cause I'm playing the game a lot right now doesn't mean its the greatest thing ever. Activision needs to stop looking at numbers and sales and realize that this is not the best effort they could make.… Expand
  45. RighteousSteel
    Nov 28, 2012
    1
    Campaign was boring, couldn't even get myself to finish it. The multiplayer has actually degraded over the years. I can say with a clear conscience that 90% of the players use submachine guns due to their ungodly ability to kill you nearly instantaneously without any consideration for accuracy (lazer sights) or ammo (extended magazine). I played this game for about 3 weeks, and I cannot waste any more time playing it. I've playing this series since CoD 4, and I can say with all certainty that this series is dead. Don't waste your time or money on this game. Go buy Dishonored, Halo 4, Far Cry 3, or some other title that is infinitely better than this garbage. Oh yeah, and season pass? Seriously? Is $60 once a year for the same ole garbage not enough? I'm done.… Expand
  46. kotwr424
    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
  47. Kratos502
    Nov 13, 2012
    9
    I am so sick of hearing people whine about COD games! Why do people say they waited in line and were so excited about the game, then say oh it's just the same old crap and its boring and the AI sucks and blah blah. It's COD people! you know what you're getting before you even buy the game, so dont **** about how you just wasted $60, trolls!!! It still remains one of the best FPS in history and a great online multiplayer experience. If you don't like what's popular simply because it's popular, then go listen to your underground techno music and leave us be.… Expand
  48. BeAwesomeOne
    Apr 26, 2013
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Gosh, I hate this game. Never mind the fact that this is same game as the other games and have same multiplayer like other games from this franchise (only with different HUD), my biggest problem is that this game shouldn't be a sequel! I mean sure, you play as Mason half of the game but the other half is a futuristic FPS. WHAT THIS HAS TO DO WITH FIRST BLACK OPS?! To be fair, future part of this game has some pretty good features such as camouflage, sticky gloves, that let you climb a rock mountain and sky diving section. Sadly this happen only one or two time in this game. Anyway I don't understand a point of playing both Mason's campaign and future campaign, if Black Ops 2 only contains a Mason's campaign then that's will be fine. Only resemblance in future in BO2 is Woods... that's it!

    In other words this game will be better if they focus mostly about Mason storyline rather than on future soldiers one. If Activision wants to make a futuristic FPS in Call Of Duty, that's fine. But please don't put Black Ops name on it. Called it, I don't know, Futuristic War or something.    … Expand
  49. denvise
    Nov 13, 2012
    2
    This franchise has not changed it fundamentals ever, just same old every year.
    Even as they make billions they spend nothing to improve the games, graphics are old, sound is bad, gameplay is just broken in today's market. 2012
    My last COD ever, fool me once...
  50. Ormegasm
    Nov 16, 2012
    5
    This game has zombies in it.......................................................................................................................5/10
  51. f___yocouch
    Nov 14, 2012
    10
    "No differences," people who haven't played this game will say that. Single-player has at least three different endings (that I know of), it involves choices, not many, but it tries to change the linear feeling of ALL fps games. The campaign also INTRODUCED strike force missions, I have to admit it was poorly executed, in my opinion, but it introduces strategy to the campaign of COD. The campaign allows you to choose your own gun for each mission, small detail, but it helps. Yes, if you are a marathon video game player, the game does get boring, but all games do. Zombies also changed a lot, no need to go into that area, mostly because I haven't played zombies a whole bunch: multiple pack-a-punch uses, the work bench thing, other stuff. Multi-player introduces a new "Pick-ten" system (weapon loadout), a new sensitivity system, a different feel (for me), Pointstreaks, camping "restrictions," etc. The sounds are magnificent, they also help throw you into the game, I loved the colors of the game, I feel like they did a good job. Graphics aren't the best, but the game runs at an average of 60 frames per second, so don't complain; by the way who cares about graphics, I grew up with crappy graphics for games, so I see that the game play is what matters; for my experience to this point, I find the game to be amazing, one of the best COD's, I don't want to say "since COD 4" because that just makes me sound like a kid who has never played COD before, even though I played all since COD 2. If you are on the edge to buy it, go to amazon and wait for used games to pop up, they are usually at an extremely lowered price, I find that it is worth spending $60 on it, it is a fun game, the campaign, the multiplayer..... and the zombies (fingers crossed.) People mostly rate 0's because they haven't played the game, they just want to troll, so if you want a better and more honest review, go to youtube and watch "First Impression" videos from some commentators, and find the good and bad things in the game.… Expand
  52. plotlesviolence
    Mar 15, 2013
    6
    This game is fun. Basically every criticism I've heard about it is true (i.e., doesn't innovate, is the same game as CoD4, etc., 100% linear). But it's fun. The linear CoD design has solved my biggest pet peeve from pre-1990s games: not knowing where to go next and feeling like I'm wasting my time. Before, I would just look up a walkthrough, but the objective marker just keeps me immersed in the game. Aside from the sandbox shooters, all the competitors copy CoD because it works. Also, it's a pretty, polished game with lots of spectacle.
    So why not a higher score? Because it doesn't innovate and it is more like an expansion pack to CoD4 than the 5th sequel. The new stuff (a pseudo-rts mode and a cool see-through-walls scope) is pretty minor, and I probably won't be replaying the single-player mode ever again. Also, while I really liked the revenge-driven plot of Modern Warfare 3, the plot of BlOps 2 doesn't really do anything for me. So I'd say slightly above average. Worth playing once if you like the linear FPS genre, but not something I'd stake my reputation recommending to my friends.    … Expand
  53. Gilgamesh
    Nov 16, 2012
    9
    MW3 is the easily one that should take the beating out of these two as it catered to the mindless auto aim twits. Black Ops 2 brings an actually interesting Campaign and much improved visuals. Granted some of the maps look similar to previous maps but it's a multiplayer game and why fix something that ain't broke. Sad that many people consider it a bad game instead of seeing it for what it is... an solid improvement over BO1. Simply put... anyone who gives this a 0 or 1 is not someone who's reviews are worth reading. You can't beat a game down simply because you expected something you didn't get instead of looking at the quality of what it is.… Expand
  54. CynicalJohnson
    Nov 14, 2012
    4
    The most boring piece of **** that I've ever played. I've only played it for a few hours and I already want my money back. It's just the same crap every year.
  55. TheCrtic1
    Dec 6, 2012
    1
    Call of Duty Black Ops II is just **** in a box its somewhat incomplete having 10+ updates in the past 2 months to fix glitches and such and the campaign has a bad plot that it feels like it was ignored by treyarch and the gameplay is completely broken with little to none improvements.
  56. DanKageakaTK
    Nov 15, 2012
    2
    It is beyond me how we still have people who buy Call of Duty. It s the same thing it always is. The only thing i keep hearing in Trey Arcs case is that the game has zombies. So what? To any body that buys this game over many other great zombie games I say shame. If trey arc wants zombies, make a real zombie game, not a gimmick inside of a war shooter. Back to Call of Duty. Nothing changes to the point where I want to spend another 60 bucks. Id rather wait for much better FPS games like Far Cry 3 or just play current great FPS games like Crysis 2 or Borderlands 2. Sequals that took what was good about the first game and then multiplied it to make it its own without ruining what made them great. Call of Duty is just been played out.

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

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

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

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

    Bottom line. Buy it, dont buy it. I dont care. I know where I stand.    … Expand
  57. AliGSix
    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
  58. GoldenBoyReview
    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
  59. ncstatemike
    Mar 12, 2013
    0
    What the actual Am I supposed to take this game seriously? I have to say, it was incredibly entertaining laughing at the ridiculous campaign for six hours. Go play Far Cry.
  60. optimusprime69
    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
  61. XKid232
    Feb 15, 2013
    6
    BO2 isn't one of the best COD out there but it'll do. The really only good thing about BO2 is Zombie mode. It is way more fun than the original but still has a challenge to it. I personally think they shouldn't make the zombies too hard until round 30 though. I perfer the first BO over BO2 because of many reasons also. The campaign is ok and the multiplayer could've been a whole lot better. In mutiplayer there is a very small selection of guns and most of them are overpowered. The perks are ok but a lot of them seem to be part of the same categorey. The camos are very unrealistic. The maps were disappointing. Most of them were just crap they put together and make it seem amazing. There are only 2 maps i liked on this game. The rest are boring and have no point. But other than that this game gets a 6 mainly because of zombie mode.… Expand
  62. Caged_Sephiroth
    Feb 17, 2013
    4
    Basically the same as every other Call of Duty game, but half of it is set in the future. Too samey for me to give anything more than a 5. But I have to knock a point off for the fact it has been dumbed down to the point where anyone with half a brain can finish Veteran mode. Enjoyable for a few hours, but it's nothing you haven't played before. Developers are milking fans for all they're worth.
  63. Shadownerd45
    Apr 5, 2013
    0
    I played this game at a friends house. The lag was unbearable, The guns were extremely unbalanced. You feel like you are shooting a water pistol against the BFG 9000 from Doom. The maps are all the same and offer almost no places to use a sniper rifle other than quick-scoping. The killstreaks are bland and seem to be the same, The UAV needs more kills to support your team than a remote control car with C4 on it. The final straw was that Treyarch LIED to you. They offered a pre-order bonus of Nuketown 2025 with it's own exclusive playlist, Then they took it down. If i EVER drop money for a game before it is released then i want to enjoy the bonus i got. My final verdict is that this game is a money grab. BACON camo? REALLY? They charge overpriced DLC for maps that look the same and useless micro-transactions. My ranking is DO NOT EVER BUY THIS GAME. COD HAS FALLEN AND THIS IS WHY.… Expand
  64. Hybridizm
    May 9, 2013
    6
    Basically once again, Recycled goods? First off I'll start by explaining that I do not hate the CoD franchise in anyway, in fact I was a severe lover of the original games and of course that one particular game that set the bar for all FPS games in the future Call of Duty 4 Modern Warfare.

    CoD4 easily took at least 25 days of my life away from me, I couldn't put it down at all. The si    mple feeling of gaining two helicopters (7 Killstreak) in one TDM just made you feel like rambo. I remember actually being credited for my performances sometimes, back in the good old days when party chat didn't kill the social aspect of gaming. I enjoyed every mode on that game, for it's simple mechanics and challenging multiplayer.

    Now though? CoD has become nothing more that constant cycle of well yes Recycling. All the new games in the series really add is more killstreak variations, new guns (some old) and new maps. It's because of this, I couldn't find any enjoyment out of reaching max prestige and consistently playing even after that. I would state the single player isn't all that bad but who really buys CoD for the single player? The only reason I've ever bought the latest installments of the franchise is due to friends wanting me to get it, so I'll sit there at the midnight release each year with my pals hoping, just hoping that the next release will hit my gamer heart so hard that I will want to grind the hell out of hitting max prestige again. Sadly none have done this, and I think I will definitely be giving the next game a miss.

    I will however state that regardless of the creativity the game lacks, it's still a fun shooter. Of course it can be frustrating but what FPS isn't. It's worth getting just to shoot a few peeps, but don't expect anything special out of it. I think I will defo be sticking to Battlefield from now on.    … Expand
  65. HawkeyeWii
    Apr 19, 2013
    0
    Very weak game. If this game isn't showing signs that Call of Duty is misses a step then I don't know what is. It adds absolutely nothing new. This is no exaggeration. I would rather play Pong or E.T for Atari than this garbage!
  66. Iamthejuan
    May 6, 2013
    5
    MW3 and all BF games these BO games

    I am a shooter fan. I don't care about COD versus BF, I want both to be good. The people making these black ops games should go work for resident evil team (since they can't make a good zombie game), and stop trying to make PvP shooters. The only good part about this or BO 1 is the mini-game, and this is supposed to be a warfare simulator not freakin    g Resident Evil.

    It is really bad for new players; the matchmaking does not separate the games by rank, only the teams. Which means if you are level 5 and you are in a game with 10 other max level players, you are going to be highly outgunned no matter what team you are on. The only people who ever use their mic's are 10 year old boys. All around poor playerbase, with very little focus on teamwork. The only way to get a good group with microphones is to be in a clan (or is it klan?), and they expect unrealistic level of dedication from people who play video games in their limited spare time between work and college courses.    … Expand
  67. 1234
    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
  68. adcoy
    Nov 24, 2012
    9
    This is a fantastic game. After the trash that was shoveled last year with MW3 this is a welcome return to the fantastic multiplayer action known from the COD series. I've talked with many fellow gamers who have played many COD titles and hated MW3 like I did. Sales for Blops 2 are down 20% probably because so many people were burned by MW3 and they are gun shy to get it. If you love fps multiplayer. GET THIS GAME. I've played all the big FPS's since 2000 and this game is one of the best I've ever played. It's different but as good as BF3, it's better then MOH warfighter, it's better then Blops 1, and it makes MW3 feel like a first gen xbox release. The pick 10 system is fantastic, the weapons are great, and unlike MW3 you can actually use an assault rifle and not feel like your character is pulling his assault rifle up through cold honey.… Expand
  69. Mark10
    Nov 13, 2012
    0
    When is everyone going to get it in their heads that this is just another rehash washed out Call of Duty game? One day, Activision is gonna ditch supporting the series just like they did with the Guitar Hero series and they'll be looking for another game to leech on for money.
  70. DicePlayer
    Nov 15, 2012
    0
    A miserable excuse for a sequel let alone a full game. This is more like a overly priced DLC expansion pack. Completely no innovation compared to other games this year. It's campaign is repetitive and suffers from the same world war military shooter "been there done that" shooter syndrome. It's Multiplayer is no different, a copy and pasted rushed Modern warfare 3 multiplayer with the slightest tweaks that leave this game with completely nothing new to offer but a dent in your wallet for the same 'copy and pasted' non-innovative online experience that leaves us bored and swapping game disc's almost immediately after playing this re-hashed 'expansion pack'. A certain waste of my money and will be trading this game in on my next stop to my local Game shop.… Expand
  71. ronswanson
    Nov 15, 2012
    8
    I am scoring this game an 8, on paper its the best COD game yet but my comments are comparing this game to MW2 and Black Ops. The key adjustments to note are that this is the most balanced COD game yet, with the least overpowered weapons / tech which many people considered game breaking. However, this also makes it underwhelming for those who were used to the overpowered features of MW2 and Blops (im looking at you TAR and dual shotguns). The weapons especially feel very similar to each other with very little individuality, you will feel comfortable with every weapon you use, this sadly takes out the desire to make a specific gun your own. In terms of Maps, they are fantastic. Many of them are very symmetrical and easy to navigate similar to MW2, however, they lack to control points and sightlines of MW2. This means that you will not rake up easy kill streaks by controlling certain high activity zones like you could with MW2. Again, this makes it very balanced for all players, with very few main focal points to go to, the 1v1 confrontations are not as predictable as MW2 and you will be kept on your toes. In terms of things that BLOPS 2 undeniably does better, its the graphics and gameplay scenarios in single player and sci-fi tech in general. While the campaign is still riddled with hand holding events and setpieces, they are done very well and are the most engaging since COD4. Overall this is a great game if you want your MP experience balanced and fair. But as someone who took the liberty of those overpowered elements in MW2 and Black Ops, the level playing field of Black Ops 2 comes across as a little underwhelming.… Expand
  72. letterse7en
    Nov 14, 2012
    4
    I'm glad I rented it first. The game really isn't that good. I'm not a COD hater. I used to love this franchise, but it just isn't the same...or actually that is the problem, it is the same. Same old same old. So they set it in the future, but the overall experience is just the same old thing and I just couldn't get into it this time. I got bored right away and this is going back to RedBox tomorrow. Infinity Ward and Treyarch both need to sit down together with Activision and figure out how to innovate and breathe new life into the COD franchise. Nothing they've done over the last 2 years has felt innovative. Its like lipstick on a pig. Come up with a new graphics engine, come up with some new ideas and figure out how to get that spark back. I really want to like COD again, but this is not the one that will get me back into it. Everything just feels tired and old. I know that some will point out that the futuristic technology is what sets this one apart. But you now what this feels like? BO2 just feels like that hot actress that everyone couldn't stop talking about 10 years ago, but now she's old, tired, washed up and raiding your medicine cabinet for prescription pain killers, but if she'd just invest some money in an extreme makeover and get herself checked into rehab, she could shine once again.… Expand
  73. zpoc
    Nov 14, 2012
    10
    a welcome evolution to the hyper-popular franchise - and the best COD since the first modern warfare. complaining about the graphics in a COD game has become a de-facto passtime every november, but to my eyes black ops 2 is a gorgeous game, especially in 3D. treyarch have polished the visuals, while still maintaining the essential-to-COD 60 frames per second the game demands. the only stumbling point are the non-required strikeforce missions, that attempt to blend rts with fps and mostly fail. thankfully they're still interesting, and props to the developer for trying something new.

    the multiplayer's class overhaul is perhaps the most interesting change. a system called 'pick 10' is implemented, that lets you mix and match your perks and loadout with a greater degree of precision than ever before.

    and the singleplayer campaign, which follows the same rhythm as past iterations of the game, is bolstered by the new near-future setting and larger, wider and more detailed levels. its also considerably longer than MW3's campaign - at least 30%, if not 50%. add to that the much loved, and expanded upon, zombie mode and i can't quite fathom how anyone could be disappointed in this game (though i'm sure there will be legions that are, more out of spite at something so 'mainstream' than legitimate criticism).    … Expand
  74. markbrown89
    Dec 5, 2012
    2
    I think ZOMBIES is RUINED ! same old crap, This is meant to be skill and region matching, Nearly all lobbys im in they level 40+, im lvl 23! AND none of 85% of matches are with GERMANY, FRANCE, USA, NETHERLANDS & f******* NORWAY! Just gaurenteed to spoil the game! WHY WHY WHY
  75. Arkamedius
    Nov 16, 2012
    0
    Same COD... I am no fan boy and I have or had purchased the entire COD franchise, really after playing this intensely over the past couple of days I can honestly say I am so tired of the same graphics, there is no production really required for them to publish this over and over again. All they need to do is think of a name slap a half assed campaign in and copy the multi player over and charge another 60 bucks for it.
    I am tired of this... so tired, I thought this game might be the turning point but it seems that they just stick to the same game over and over again, slap a number on the end and advertise the **** out of the game. This will be my last COD (unless they actually go from square 1 and rebuild). Really there are other games out there being made by actual Production companies that are worth money where as this should be included in a cereal box.    … Expand
  76. HausmanPrime
    Nov 14, 2012
    4
    I buy these games for one reason and one reason alone and that is multiplayer. While i can appreciate the steps Treyarch as made to bring in change to the facist regime that is COD the multiplayer falls short in almost every way, maps are crap, guns arent fun and the overall feel of the gameplay is just very off. I have been an advocate for the series since COD4 but my patience is wearing thin. STOP coming out with one every year take a break and bring us a COD we deserve, not the one we need right now....… Expand
  77. GamingSince87
    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. EchoLimaKilo
    Nov 17, 2012
    8
    Gotta admit, this game took me by surprise. I had previously written off the CoD franchise in favor of Battlefield for it's vehicles & many different & new modes of game play & variety. Black Ops II is so different from the other CoD's that its gotten me hooked again. The campaign is no better or worse than Warfighter's & as a matter of fact, I think I enjoyed Warfighter more. But the Multiplayer in Black Ops II has so much more to offer its worth every penny you'll pay. My only gripes are the limited selection of weapons & for Chrissakes, beefup the gunfire sound effects. I shouldn't be able to hear someone in the game trying to explain something to me when I'm discharging my weapon. Battlefield's sound is far superior. The revamped score streak as opposed to kill streak makes the game a bit more fun for those of us that aren't dead-eye sights & aimers....

    You should buy this game. Nice job Treyarch!    … Expand
  79. CameoCream
    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
  80. ps3sucks
    Nov 16, 2012
    7
    i am a halo fan boy who hates cod but since everyone on my friends list has this, i bought it to amd heres an honest review.
    Multiplayer: 7/10 not that good its like all old cods but its improving and its fun
    Zombies: 10/10 Fun and amazing u will have a blast on tranzit
    Campaign: not played yet (will update when played)
    so you see you guys Bo2 isnt that bad.... zombies is amazing
  81. tenow
    Nov 13, 2012
    9
    First good COD in years. Campaign had a great story and actually made me care. Great gameplay. All the good stuff. Only downside is strategy missions. I really didn't like controls and AI in them.
  82. Xmayne
    Dec 5, 2012
    9
    I just find it hilarious how many people say the obligatory: "same as last year, adds nothing new, blah blah blah." It's just SUCH an exaggeration and only tells me that you didn't really play the game. That's NOT an effective review. You CANNOT just say "it's the same as before" and be done, because that's not technically true. Black Ops 2 actually added and changed a lot more than MW3 did. The campaign was good fun and had interesting missions. I enjoyed it. The multiplayer is fun, tried something new with the pick 10 system, and the UI is a big improvement over the crappy one MW3 had. The game is overall fun and enjoyable. There are so many people who just dislike COD because it's a bandwagon mentality and therefore their judgement is severely clouded. That tends to happen with certain games and it's REALLY a shame.… Expand
  83. SloppyJoe11
    Nov 16, 2012
    10
    First I want to say that the game has only been out for 3 days and people are saying that this is the worst COD yet? They are complaining about connection problems? The game is going to be hard to deal with at first, 1 million copies were sold on launch days so the servers are packed. This is the same problem that happened with MW3. Give it a week or two. In my opinion I think this is the best of the COD series. I think it is really diverse from the other COD games. People are pissed because they have to do some work for a change in the game. Not just go around and get kill so you can level up faster. This game is more team based not rush and hope you get a lot of kills by the end of the game so you can level up a bunch. So for all the haters calm down and wait for a few patches and wait for them to fix up on the servers. The game is great or they would not have made $500 million. If you don't like the game go sell it or give it to someone that doesn't have it and your problems will go away. Don't just complain and say that the game sucks and that its the worst one. People put a lot of time and money into this game give them some credit where it is due.… Expand
  84. Meruco
    Nov 15, 2012
    9
    I can't understand negative critics because BLOPS 2 is just another COD. Of course it is. One of the better. Maybe the best just according to the different kind of games in one: not only zombies, the best zombies with its awsome new tranzit, multiplayer, of course, wich is better now because you can play in your league, boots, split screen, ..... BLOPS 1 was the best COD on 2010 and BLOPS 2 is the same staff, but improved. I found what I thought I'd find.… Expand
  85. RobYes92
    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
  86. Turk15
    Nov 14, 2012
    10
    I usually try to write a detailed review...however this will be purely to boost overall user rating (uphill battle).
    This game to me is an outlet to gaming with friends pure and simple. It doesnt need to be revolutionary or industry changing. It only need to provide me with a fleshed out multiplayer experience. I respect and understand Activisions Business Model. You can tell time and ene    rgy went into this game. trolls be trolls and its cool to hate whats cool....society is a real peach :)… Expand
  87. Maxson
    Nov 14, 2012
    0
    I don't know how people rate this game 10/10, 9/10, or even 8/10. The campaign of this game was kinda weak, and like all CoD games, its very short. Just because they think adding bunch of explosions in one screen would make this game awesome...lol no...Multiplayer...oh man...the reason buy this game is multiplayer. The online of this game is basically the same sh!t as the other titles..similar perks and all. They might have added a few new additions like some new tech into the game multiplayer but still it feels the same. This game deserves 5 or lower out of 10. Its not worth the 60$ people...your basically buying the same game except with a new story and new toys added to your online experience. You guys please open your minds and face the fact that this game is not worth it. PS: Only positive thing about this game is zombie.… Expand
  88. ThatDENCHreview
    Nov 14, 2012
    6
    The game is not horrible however it is disgustingly overrated and it really annoys me that all the kids scream and shout about it every year i mean go to a lobby there is a bunch of 11 yr olds going on about how cool they are for playing a "big boy game" and then ign bum-lick it each year there are tons of talented studios out there the creators of darksiders and light box our undesevedly losing money

    DENCH OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!    … Expand
  89. BelgianTofu
    Nov 16, 2012
    0
    Same old same old year in and year out. This series is a blatant exploitation of adolescent hormones. It's popular for the same reasons a certain young Canadian pop star is. Complete Rubbish!
  90. TannerIsGod
    Nov 20, 2012
    10
    Best game of the series to date. Multiplayer is king.. graphics are awe-inspiringly gorgeous ... the game just abounds with class. I can't wait to see what these guys do on the next generation.
  91. NoX81
    Nov 23, 2012
    5
    The Call Of Duty series of games polarize opinion these days, when we got Modern Warfare it changed FPS multilayer standards massively bringing on board a whole new generation of fans, people who never played the first 3 were well on board after its genre defining success. While the series has stuck rigidly to its scripted, shooting gallery single player since the first game its the multi-player changes of MW1 that really brought the series to the top of its tree. That was 2007, since then we've had 4 more COD games and according to many its the lack of change in the series that has brought the recent negativity around the series which started getting very noticeable with the MW3 release. Well i didn't buy MW3, the last one i had was Black Ops 1, my favourite of them all was World At War and i have to say that overall this is nothing new.

    Firstly the campaign, yes it offers choices which are cool as they affect the ending, good idea. However the narrative, the actual missions themselves, for me its all so boring now. The story flicks between the 80's and 2025 and after few missions you really dont know why your doing anything or where you are. You just shoot hordes or re-spawning grunts until you pass a 'trigger' which progresses the action. Its uninspired and tedious, i was doing all this in COD1and i found it difficult to motivate myself to persist with it and its plethora of clichés and stereotypes.

    The new Strike missions are supposed to introduce a limited 'strategy' element to the single player. You command some squads of troops, some drones etc. and can control from a command view. The big problem is that the AI of your forces is so bad that the only way to succeed is to personally take control of troops and basically do the job yourself, which means you just end up doing what you were doing in the main story missions but with no recognisable characters or reasons to care, and they were lacking enough in the first place.

    Graphics and sound design is the same as before really, maybe a slight improvement but nothing to write home about, its good enough but i cant help but think its about time they introduced a significantly better graphics engine and stopped recycling the same textures and animations throughout every game.

    The multi-player suite returns with zombies bolted on again. Zombies is improved with some new content, game modes and equipment which breathes some new life into it, but it does not retain the appeal it had when it was a completley new feature, it doesn't feel that they innovated enough to me. They have tried to improve it no doubt but its not as exciting as it was, largely due to the fact its nothing new. Its functional and fun though and can still be a good blast with friends.

    As for the multi-player? Well its COD's bread and butter right? Its not evolved much at all.The introduction of the ten point system is good but hardly warrants the buy alone, score streaks over kill-streaks? Not really a big change, you still need to stay alive as with a kill-streak so same principles.

    The action is fast paced as usual, reliant on fast-twitch reactions more than tactics. Still no destructible environments or vehicles. Same game modes bar hard point which is a poor version of headquarters for me. Domination is the most fun but overall its all the same stuff as before, same animations, same graphics, same game. League play is a nice addition for those willing to invest the time and not addicted to unlocks and levelling up.

    Having really enjoyed the open environments and more warfare like BF3 multi-player i cant help but feel restricted and confined by COD (and i'm a fan of both series), they really need to freshen it up, it feels recycled and cheap. It wouldn't be overly harsh to say its BLOPS1 with a map pack, weapons pack, few new game modes and a little bit of polish. If you want more of the same then you wont go wrong, if you were looking for further evolution in the COD series the you'll need a time machine, the year 2007 and MW1 because that's where it remains.

    Disappointing. 5/10    … Expand
  92. Brosephyoung
    Nov 27, 2012
    9
    I am shocked so many people have left negative reviews for this awesome game. I have been playing the COD series since the second one and have watched the series turn into what it is today. The one thing i have always liked about COD is the style of online play and how they have not changed the feel of multiplayer. I like that i can expect the sequels to be the same, its what i look forward to because it is so great and they have no need to change that. I played Battlefield 3 online, that game was fun and good, but after about 30min of online play i found myself craving for MW3 because multiplayer feels better and cant compare to COD series. I feel this game deserves allot more credit and less criticism. If they stopped making the COD series people would freak out, thats how good it is and BO2 is no different.… Expand
  93. TonyArnold2
    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
  94. YSJgamer
    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
  95. captainkane
    Apr 2, 2013
    6
    I’ve played a lot of shooters, but not a COD game until now. I haven’t missed much. The game offers a forgettable campaign that is more interactive movie than shooter. The story is convoluted and sloppy. It's essentially an on rails shooter with equal parts gameplay and cinematics. For us older gamers who appreciated the heydays of ID and Valve, this is a dreadful combination. Is the expeexpeexpectation that shooters involve tons of shooting asking too much? Treyarch added RTS elements called Strikeforce missions to the series. Unfortunately, they’re half-baked additions that detract from the experience. Completing the missions affects the ending, but the ending is chaotic either way. If you want an engaging campaign, look elsewhere. Who am I kidding? COD games are known for their multiplayer experiences. The zombie mode is disappointing. The maps are cramped and dull. The zombies are dull. The gameplay is dull. It’s just plain dull. If you want zombies, pick up Left for Dead 2. The Left for Dead series sets the gold standard for zombie games and has an active online community. After all the hype surrounding the zombie mode, I’m left scratching my head asking myself: Why is this so popular? Perhaps I’m missing something. BO 2’s zombie mode demonstrates why Valve games have such long self-lives.The regular multiplayer is appreciably better. The game performs admirably on Xbox with smooth and swift action. That is the hallmark of COD games: performance. That being said, there is little innovation. The graphics are noticeably dated and almost cartoonish. The “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” mentality of Activision is hard to justify after playing this game. It’s just another twitch finger multiplayer. The customization system is OK, but most upgrades feel useless. Also, footsteps are inaudible. Being stabbed in the back feels cheap because you literally never hear it coming. The multiplayer maps are tiny which negatively impacts gameplay. The result is an overabundance of SMG users. These guns possess absurd short to mid-range stopping power. Hip firing SMG's easily clears out rooms full of baddies. There is also an overabundance of quick scoping. Players running around with sniper rifles getting quick, close-range kills is just ridiculous. The scorestreak system is flawed as it only rewards the top 10-20% of players with the best bonuses. Since scorestreaks can be carried thru multiple rounds they are spammed during tiebreakers. The argument that the COD multiplayer is an unrealistic arcade shooter certainly applies here. You can snipe with SMG’s and get kills on the run with sniper rifles. All that said, once you master the game, it can be fun. Thankfully, combat training allows players to hone their skills without affecting their much revered stats. You can still rank up and unlock attachments for your weapons, but the round bonuses are reduced by half. The online community for COD is massive. Lobbies are always full for all game modes. If you have a fast internet connection, change your settings to only connect with players with an equally fast or faster connection. This can significantly reduce lag and bullet warping. However, the COD community is a bittersweet asset. It’s brimming with sore losers who love nothing more than to pester players for violating the “rules”. Camping and “noob toobing” are apparently grave offenses and merit harassment and name calling against those engaging in such reprehensible behaviors. Using an LMG with a target finder is also deplorable and deserves racist and homophobic taunts. The amount of harassment and name calling I’ve experienced in Black Ops 2 is unrivalled on any Xbox game I’ve play. It's nasty at times. What’s saddening is that children are just as nasty as adults. I blame parents for this. Still, Xbox and Activision do poor jobs enforcing the Code of Conduct that everyone agrees to. The general consensus in a BO 2 lobby: Reporting someone brings zero results. The notion that Xbox’s reporting system is broken fosters this behavior. Considering Xbox Live Gold is a paid service, they should do a better job censuring players. Black Ops 2 does a lot of things, but it doesn’t do anything well. The campaign is awful. The multiplayer unbalanced. And the zombie mode is just plain overhyped. Ghost Recon Future Soldier didn't receive the hype and is a excels as shooter. But Future Soldier is tough because it involves heavy tactics and teamwork which turns most players off. COD games are popular because the games are technically easy to play. This is unfortunate because there are much better games out there which are left cowering in the shadow of a subpar, overhyped behemoth.… Expand
  96. XxNightvHawkxX
    Mar 16, 2013
    7
    Its okay........ It isn't bad by any means. It is certainly better than the first Black Ops. Treyarch actually tried this time around. Treyarch actually could have made something great, but unfortunately, Activision demands that a CoD game must come out every year. Had this game been in development for 3 years, it would have been a really good game.

    But yes, I agree, it is the same as     the other CoDs.… Expand
  97. Gerblanski
    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
  98. oliathsg
    Nov 17, 2012
    0
    Just no. This is it. This is clearly the year that Game Critics are revealed to be the crooked bribe taking losers they really are. Just look at the users scores and how out of touch the critics scores are. This game is a blight on the COD franchise. Its just gone beyond a joke - its like Treyarch weren't even trying to come up with anything remotely grounded in reality. From gunfights on horseback to some very uncomfortable attempt at an RTS thrown into the middle of the game... this is just an all round no thankyou.

    The graphics are also cartoonish and horrendous compared to the last Black Ops.

    Granted that the multiplayer is fun for a short while - but it does NOTHING new whatsoever and once the initial buzz has worn off the player numbers will fall like flies.

    This is the first COD I have hated to the core.    … Expand
  99. mafiaalexpt
    Nov 15, 2012
    1
    I Put the Game in Xbox360, and i installed, the menus are bad, i play the entire campaign and is ok , the multiplayer the same that the others cod´s, the campaign zombies is the best , but a game AAA with a campaign ok is not good, this game is a flop and the worst cod in 5 years.
  100. pfcWintergreen
    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
Page:

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
83 out of 100

Generally favorable reviews - based on 73 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 67 out of 73
  2. Mixed: 6 out of 73
  3. Negative: 0 out of 73
  1. Xbox World Australia
    Jan 22, 2013
    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.
    Read full review
  2. X360 Magazine UK
    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. DailyGame
    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.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »