User Score
4.6

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 2043 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Nov 13, 2012
    10
    This crying about COD got me buying COD games. Thanks. Bought BO2 and love it. Do me a favor, complain some more about the next game. I get to buy another great game and listen to you cry with envy.
  2. Nov 13, 2012
    0
    Activision wont be able to keep this up forever. People are realizing that this series has degenerated into a yearly rehashing of old gameplay and graphics. The worst part is that I will probably end up buying it like everyone else, just to see if it's any better than the last piece of crap they released.
  3. Nov 13, 2012
    10
    People, don't listen to all the COD haters, this is by far the best COD game yet, with improvements in every single aspect. The graphics are great and the zombies and multiplayer mode are better than ever. The campaign is espescially great, with the abilities to change the story outcome with choice. If you liked past games you'll love this. Anyone giving this a 0/10 is just hating for the sake of hating. Expand
  4. Nov 13, 2012
    9
    Every user on here is absolutely ridiculous. The game is amazing and you are all just a bunch of pissed off Halo fanboys who are upset because your community got executed with the release of this game. While the graphics haven't changed from the previous Black Ops (which is the only reason this game doesn't get a 10/10) the Multiplayer experience is by far the best I have seen since CoD4 or Modern Warfare 2. The Pick 10 System works perfectly to make sure every class you pick isn't atrociously overpowered unless you give up equipment/weapon slots for Wildcards. The maps are small, but not as small as Shipment or Rust from Cod4 and Modern Warfare 2 respectively, the maps make for great, fast paced gameplay across the entire game and it's not a 10 minute camp-out. Halo fanboys need to stop hating because they don't know what it's like to have to shoot less that a full clip into someone to kill them. Expand
  5. Nov 13, 2012
    6
    I gave this game a 6 because it's just not worth the 60 bucks, the campaign is moderate the multiplayer really hasn't changed. The one thing I'll give this game is zombies is fun. But frankly, the multiplayers really no different from MW3 and the campaign is decent but very short and brief. The whole RPG aspect is cool with the choosing of who lives who dies. But it still feels too scripted and way to short for me to really care who I let die. Zombies is fun but, just not worth 60 bucks for a good zombie experience and a short and moderate campaign. This game's better then MW3 so at least cod's heading in the right direction. Expand
  6. Nov 13, 2012
    0
    Game is boring just like I was expecting. Went to my friends house to at least give it a try. Gameplay is boring. Graphics look exactly the same as Black Ops. Multiplayer is unbalanced. I have no clue how reviewers are saying the killstreaks are balanced. It actually seems worse than mw3. Do yourself the favor and don't buy the game. Buy Assassins Creed 3 or any game for that matter instead.
  7. Nov 13, 2012
    7
    Pros:
    Multiplayer is still fun, gameplay is addictive, there are tons of stats to view and improve upon, maps are decent, new kill streak point system is solid

    Cons:
    Still feels like an expansion pack rather than a whole new game
    Graphics aren't the greatest
  8. Nov 13, 2012
    9
    Some seriously delusional people giving user reviews here. I personally really enjoy Black Ops 2. The campaign isn't the strongest, but it's far from the weakest in the COD series. The Zombies and multiplayer more than justify the retail price. You'll be playing this for months, I know I will.
  9. Nov 13, 2012
    0
    Game play: 2007
    Graphics: Sega Genesis
    Sound effects: think cheap made in China fireworks
    Whats new: you lost 60 bucks

    I feel bad for those who bought this game merely to play with their friends. Those who felt socially obligated to buy the game hopefully can take it back and use the money for a better game like Halo 4.
  10. Nov 13, 2012
    0
    Terrible game, I mean seriously spaghetti nearly flew out of my pockets with how boring the "future" is. It's the exact same thing as the other game, and to top it off my copy had MASS EFFECT **** 2 DISK INSTEAD OF THE 2ND BLACK OPS! WHAT THE **** You don't understand how rustled my jimmies were. Overall its a lame B-movie plot with stupid "future" **** with the same killstreaks you always get. And trust me, I don't think this game has a lower user score for a reason, 3.9 is way too high of a score I would've given this piece of **** You can only buy the SAME **** GAME so much until you **** snap. Expand
  11. Nov 14, 2012
    0
    I feel it important to say first and foremost that i have never enjoyed the multiplayer of COD. The spawning is stupid, the fighting erratic and importantly the variety non existent. What mildly intelligent person actually cares about the relentless barrage of trophies and medals which remain as completely useless mementos locked away in the dark quarters of your console. Receiving a trophy does not make a game fun. Playing the game should be all the fun needed. COD is not fun. I started up the single player campaign to be blown away by the complete lack of 3D during cinematics. To clarify i have just finished AC3 in 3D and the 3D was awesome, the game, so so. Then the game finally started, thought id get my kill on. Instead i was left feeling sick by the poorly programmed 3D in the game. OK, i'll play without 3D then (dissapointing since 3D games are few and far between). I thought maybe i would stop feeling sick now. I was wrong. The urge to bring up breakfast, lunch and possibly dinner from the night before was simply to great. You see i am a sympathetic vomiter, i see vomit, i vomit. What was being served up on my beautiful 1080P 63" 3D TV was indeed vomit. The graphics are worse than bad. I can hear all you braindead fanboys now, "it runs at 60fps...how can it be bad when so many people buy it?..." Well first of all, in case you hadnt noticed, nobody cares about 60fps, as long as it can hold a steady frame rate of say 30fps and not stutter it is perfectly acceptable even imperceptible, ie BF3 which incidentally craps all over CODBO1 & 2. "Why do so many people buy it?" Easy. People are idiots! One need only walk down the street and witness a slew of teenage boys wearing their little sisters jeans with hair that must having taken all morning to style to understand this. More evidence you ask. Look at those that sit atop society in any region of the world, they are always a minority, why you ask again. Because people are overwhelmingly idiots. Back to COD. I am not a hater, honestly i want all games to be fun. I've been gaming for like 25 years, i do not discriminate. So where did my CODBO2 story end?? I was so disillusioned with gaming after just 10 mins of CODBO2 ( I know your thinking, "well you didn't even play it, you missed the options and story line blah blah blah zombies blah blah") I didn't and wont miss anything. If i want to be bored and have options that lead to different endings i'll read one of my old chose your own adventure novels. If i want zombies I'll watch The Walking Dead (which is awesome BTW). So... I digress. After attempting to play and ending up heaving in the toilet i was depressed. I thought to myself i cant wait until the end of the month for Far Cry 3 or more importantly the end of the year for more expansions for BF3. I need to have my new found hatred of games quashed. Now i must tell you that i have never owned an XBOX always PC games and Playstations. I did the only thing i could. I bought a XBOX and Halo 4 and whilst is very far from the greatest game ive played, it has all but erased the sour taste left by CODBO2. Shame on you Treyarch for dishing up such a pile of steaming hot turd when you have the resources and fan base to do something truly revolutionary. Shame on you, you masses of idiots out there who will buy and love this game for no apparent reason other than you liked the one before it and before that and so on. Shame on you professional critics for giving this game such a high score. I have never posted anything online before, not a blog, not a tweet nothing. This game has brought out the entitled **** in me that so many of you had embraced so long ago. I feel that what i have to say is important enough that the world need access it. Shame on you CODBO2 for making me an internet posting geek who thinks that people care what i have to say. Please stop buying this dribble. Please start thinking for yourselves. I gave it a zero because im sure i played this already...in the '80's. Expand
  12. Nov 13, 2012
    10
    By far the best COD in the series. From a multiplayer standpoint (Domination and Kill Confirmed). This game has improved graphics, sound, and an overall polish I haven't really seen in a COD game. This is the one that is truly fun and exciting to play. Unfortunately MetaCritic is being pounded by the trolls. I will say I have played many FPS shooters Battlefield 3, MOH, all of the CODs this is a very well put together game. All games have their strong and weak points but from a COD standpoint this puts the shame on MW3. Very pleased with my purchase... haven't been this excited about a COD game since MW2. If you like any of the COD games and enjoy multiplayer this is a game to have in your library. Expand
  13. Nov 13, 2012
    0
    MW3 was a huge disappointment. Guns with no recoil and ridiculous shooting power, lag, pathetic split screen...you all know.

    BLACK OPS 2 - WTF Activision?! Maps are MICROSCOPIC. I get shot in the back every 5 seconds because of CRAP SPAWNS. BORING multiplayer.....I love BO1, it's my #2, but this is a disgrace. Guns kill instantly no matter what range you're at. I'm going back to W@W. bye.
  14. Nov 14, 2012
    4
    There are two ways to review a game such as Call of Duty, which is what I feel leads to the polarising effect thats often seen within the reviews. One way is to review the game solely on its own merits, its story, graphics, gameplay, controls and taking no other part of the franchise into consideration. In this regard, Black Ops 2, like so many other Cod games, delivers with slick controls, fast paced addictive multiplayer, class customization and all the other hallmarks of a quality product. The campaign is still more of an add on, with the majority of the focus being placed upon multiplayer, and still retains the tradiontional linea, "clear a room move on" style of level design, interspersed with set pieces and vehicle sections. New steps have been taken with the addition of multiple endings based upon your choices, however this feature fails to actually add anything to the experience, at most just dragging you into a second playthrough if your curious about the different consequences of your actions. Top down RTS style side missions have also been added, yet the implementation here is poor, hampered by the AI being used by the soldiers and almost forcing you to take direct control over your forces if you want to progress, thankfully though these are options and can be avoided if you find them not to your tastes. The game therefore seems like a decent product, a polished, professional piece of AAA game design, but there is of course one other thing to consider.

    The second way to review the game, and the one that overall I will be taking, is to look at it as part of the franchise as a whole. This sadly is where the game falls down. All of the points I've made thus far are valid, but the problem comes when you compare it to the other Call of Duty games, and realise that this is the exact same formulae that they perfected years ago. Set pieces, chases and other action sequences where you are basically forced to watch, your control reduced to panning the camera or what are essentially quick time events, still take you out of the action and reduce you to more of a bystander than an active participant. Missions are still linear, you clear a room of bad guys, move to the next one, rinse and repeat. The multiplayer may be fast paced and hectic, but its also once again the exact same format that has been served up for the last few years now, a few new game types are not the kind of innovation that should be expected when you reach this stage of a franchise. The maps are cramped, designed for solo players in mind and reinforcing the general veiw that this is in no way a team game. The new score streak system differs very little from the previous kill streaks, in some cases being even more unbalanced. One also has to question the logic behind rewarding the leading players with even more powerful and deadly weapons and abilites and further increasing their lead instead of providing these benefits to the losing team to enable them to close the gap and keep the game close, competitive and exciting. Its all designed around the unrealistic one man army approach taken in these games, which is what cultivates the negative attitudes of many of its online players, and whilst their behaviour is no fault of the games, activision, infinity ward and treyarch have never taken any great pains to make the online a more enjoyable, balanced or even fair place for its more reasonable players.

    Call of Duty is guaranteed to sell, regardless of the changes they make, so you have to ask why the developers dont try something new, it feels more as if they churn out these almost identical clones out of either laziness or an actual inability to create something new. The changes, as seen here with the RTS segments, are poorly implemented and they make never have enough of an impact to drastically change the core experience, always altering the periferal, inconsequential things rather than risk any potential backlash for changing the game. After all who wants to be the guy that killed "the best selling franchise in gaming history"? The thing is, you cant kill it, year after year people will buy it, so take the chance, innovate, change it up. If people preffered the old version, they can play that game, if they want a new experience, give it to them. Black Ops 2 works as a game, its a great example of one, but it fails as part of a franchise, because yet again it brings very little to the table that the previous games have not already covered. If you want a good, solid, slick modern FPS, go play Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare or your preference from the heap of sequels it has. Just dont think this is going to be anything you havent seen before.
    Expand
  15. Nov 27, 2012
    0
    I gave this game a medium rating when I first played it since it was a step up from MW3. I am now giving it a zero after playing it for a couple of weeks. In an effort to make a balanced game, Treyarch has gone through and muted everything fun about this once great series. The guns are blanned and boring, the perks do very little to improve the experience, the graphics are the same as MW1. BO1 was original. Money/Wager system, exciting weapons, weekly assignments. All gone. And their lag comp system makes %70 of the games unplayable. Really disappointing effort, if you can call it an effort at all. Expand
  16. Nov 14, 2012
    10
    This Game deserves a 9 over 10 but because of all the improper, false, unrealistic, nooby made reviews i hade to give it a 10 to boost the overall all score. Black ops 2 is by far the second best call of duty since Call of duty 4: modern warfare. Single player offers so much as well as the multiplayer. Zombie mode has modes in them which gives it a much more lasting appeal. The game gives so much variety and fun. I undoubtedly recommend this game to any True FPS Fan. This Game Is truly what the fans asked for and Treyarch has given it to us. I was always an infinity ward fan but since West and Zampella left Mw3 sucked and Mw2 was a nice arcade style shooter But To Date COD4 Is still and most probably be The best call of duty in the series (especially on pc cuz of the mods:P) Expand
  17. Nov 14, 2012
    10
    If you want a to se scores of serious reviewers, and not trolls like these that gives **** rating despite the fact that they haven't even played the game. Watch all the mixed/positive user reviews that is from the score

    7-8.

    All the rating below are made by trolls that constantly says that they have played the game but not.
  18. Nov 14, 2012
    0
    id give it less the 0 if i could. save your money if you've bought any of the last 4 COD games then you already have this. I feel bad for all the suckers who keep buying these games at full price. I've been playing for 4 hours at my buddy's (who is a sucker) and theirs nothing even worth talking about. actually zombies are sort of fun. they should just make a zombie game and charge $20. all we are is dollar signs to them. im fed up.

    former COD fanboy
    Expand
  19. Nov 14, 2012
    4
    I was excited to pick this game up after reading some reviews by critics. They made it sound like a lot had changed in this new cod game. After spending 60 dollars and playing the game, i realize these critics must have been paid to write all those good reviews. The games campaign is still the same on rails garbage that holds your hand through the entire game. Still has stupid enemy's that just run out in the open are just stand in one place and shoot. Its just a boring tin can shooter like all the other cod games. I know most people buy this for multiplayer, but I still would like to play a good fps campaign. The multiplayer is the same, so you will either love it or hate it. Expand
  20. Nov 14, 2012
    2
    Ok let me get with this. First campaign was all right but some parts were dull. Multiplayer same, repetitive, unbalanced. Zombies the only good thing there. Audio shooting was horrible. Graphics I really don't care and besides if CoD games had the best Graphics but everything else was crap would you buy it? That's exactly what i think about it.
  21. Nov 14, 2012
    0
    i think people are being too harsh about the graphics and sounds. i think they are vastly superior to mwf3. my issues have to do with treyarch and activision themselves. they were very mysterious and tight lipped about what was to be in the game and what wasn't. but based on the numerous reports i read prior to the game, i feel absolutely duped. drop zone was to remain in the game...not true. quickscoping would remain..i've yet to be quickscoped and in previous games that happened all the time. there was supposed to be a way to play sniperless games..not true. this game was supposed to reward objective oriented players. what a joke that is. they take away the support streaks and the rewards for playing the objectives is much less than in mwf but the risk is greater. case in point, hardpoint which appears to be drop zone is actually more like team defender. as long as you hold a point you get a 25 percent increase to the kills you make. well, in team defender it was 100 percent. so the objective is 1/4 as rewarding now (in regards to personal points).camping was supposed to be almost eliminated due to changes. you'd have to be on the move to be invisible from uav with the right perks. well, try keeping a uav in the air. it's usually there for about 3 seconds. so in turn, camping is every bit as rampant as ever. i think it's actually a bigger problem now. i'm an objective oriented player and i'll never be the slayer some are. i have zero reason to ever play this again. there simply isn't a mode on here that i can't swap for a more rewarding mode on mwf3. to me, treyarch either deliberately leaked bad info or allowed bad info out there. a clear cut explanation of what would be in and out of the game would have fixed that. it very much shows that they were scared some people would stay away if they were truthful. i'll never spend another penny on another treyarch or activision product. the game looks very good and sounds good. i think the aiming is much simpler and less jerky than mwf3. it is smooth that way and plays well. but i don't understand why they create maps where there simply aren't many jumps. in most mwf3 maps there are numerous spots where you have to know the game and have to discover ways to get up on things and sometimes get an advantage. treyarch does so little of that. that's actually a lot of the appeal, knowing the game and knowing little secrets. with how treyarch designs their maps it's like 2 teams playing paintball in a frickin hallway. the terrain needs to be somewhat interactive. but there is very little of that in comparison. i like the idea of league play but i'm not going to waste my time seeing how good or bad i am at a lousy game. i can't even force myself to play this stupid game anymore. there are a lot of good things with it. if you are a good non sniper slayer type that has little intention to play the objective, this is the game for you. but as it is at this very moment i have no intention to waste another moment playing this crap. Expand
  22. 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
  23. Nov 14, 2012
    10
    Hi guys. I want to shed a ray of light in this otherwise sea of red. I don't know why there are so many negative reviews, but they all seem extremely suspect to me with very generic comments. I think this game is getting trolled by people who simply enjoy hating on Call of Duty. It's a computer game guys - have fun!

    Frankly, Treyarch should be given an award for creating such an
    incredible, complete and well-rounded gaming experience. I'm not a huge fan of single-player campaigns but this was awesome. Zombies is an incredible game within itself. Finally, multiplayer is the most fun experience you'll have online provided you can let go of your ego and just have a blast - especially with friends. If you're the type of guy to buy an online shooter and give up after five minutes because you got a negative K/D ratio then stay away from this game. It'll take time to learn but once it clicks, like I said this will be the most fun you'll have in any game online.

    I'm a hardcore BF3 fanboy and I still love that game. I also enjoyed MW3 to a lesser extent. Black Ops 2 however is a step up from all previous CoDs and well worth the investment of ANY fps fan. It's an arcade shooter with fast non-stop action in beautiful 60 frames-per-second (and you'd be surprised what an awesome difference that makes). When I say fast, I mean the whole experience - You can wait a few minutes to get into a Halo 4 match online and even Battlefield takes a while to load, but with Blops 2 you can be in a match within thirty seconds of loading the game.

    If you're not going to give this game a proper chance, then don't even bother picking it up. But if you're looking to have an extremely exciting, fun and incredible online experience and you're willing to stick it through to max level, pick this up and I guarantee you'll love it!
    Expand
  24. Nov 14, 2012
    2
    One of the worst shooters I have ever played. The game feels so old now and just boring as hell considering I have played the game in various iterations since 2007 with Modern Warfare. This game is abysmal and after reading the scores from all the gaming site and mags I realize that Activision are still playing for high reviews and milking it's customers all the way to the bank.

    Don't
    buy this game, it's not worth your money, unless you have a simple mind and like playing the same game, year in, year out with no changes at all. Expand
  25. Nov 14, 2012
    9
    If there were no other Call of Duty games, gamers would be raving about Black Ops II. DONT LISTEN TO ANYONE WHO GIVES THIS GAME A score of 0. They either wanted BOII to be completely different than all previous Call of Duty games or they're just people who complain about everything in life.
  26. Nov 14, 2012
    10
    I believe that Call Of Duty Black ops 2 is the best Call Of Duty to date especially the mechanics. i especially like the new class system and who can forget the zombies. I think zombies is absolute flawless because they have really reinvented the mode and it has worked well
  27. Nov 14, 2012
    5
    The graphics are ATROCIOUS, even on maximum settings on PC. Gun sounds are mediocre at best.
    singleplayer campaign is uninspired. Zombie mode seems a little more enjoyable. Can't comment on multiplayer, although the map aesthetics seem improved compared to previous call of duty titles.
    Overall nothing to write home about. A new engine is desperately needed for the series to continue, to
    enable both better graphics and new gameplay depths. Expand
  28. Nov 14, 2012
    1
    I would like to say that this game is a decently made game; if it were still CoD 2... or Maybe CoD 3. The fact that this franchise has made SOOO MUCH MONEY!!! and yet almost none goes back into developing a better game. I rented this game, and was not impressed at all. I did a little comparison and put CoD BO on, and let my wife play it. I then let her play BO2. I then asked her if I could go buy BO2 after she played BO, her reply was "It really seems like the same game." I then agreed and decided it was not worth the 60 bucks. In my opinion this game is nothing more than a simple map pack with some minor changes they could issued through a patch for BO. It is by no means worth 60 dollars, I might look into it when the price comes down to about 20-30 US $. Expand
  29. Nov 14, 2012
    1
    My Son and I purchased the Hardened edition and were so looking forward to it. It is a let down, the game play is too simular to Ghost Recon, and the maps might as well have been issued as map pack for Black Ops 1. I find the whole feel of this greatly dissapointing and feel I have totally waisted my money. My Son, after just 20 minutes, "Dad, its crap". Sorry. But if you know the previous maps you can even work out where they have just re-skinned them too. Look for launch forinstance, or Ait Plane wreck in COD 2, diverse examples of copied mapping. Collapse
  30. Nov 14, 2012
    1
    sever not availble for the last two days cant play online at all
    weak story and the online play that i have played was a clone of the other games
    the yearly update is getting old and every year the get it for the one new thing they add but this is the last time cod. has went the way of tony hawk and gutiar hero
  31. Nov 14, 2012
    10
    What game are you people playing? I cannot believe all the negative reviews, I think people just enjoy bashing COD, Activision and anything to do with it. As an employee, I have a little bias towards ATVI, however I still play the games with the same amountof skepticism.

    Anyway, the game plays great. Graphics are fluid, sounds have been improved, Zombies has more depth, Multiplayer
    is consistent, and the campaign has been boosted 10 fold. I really don't get how HALO 4 had better reviews? You want same ol' same ol', go buy Halo, and stop trying to jump around in COD, it just gets you shot below the belt. Expand
  32. Nov 14, 2012
    10
    I am giving this a ten only to counteract all of the unfair zeroes this game is getting from fanboys. The game really deserves an 8, primarily because you can only make so many changes to a tried and true formula before it stagnates, which is very close to happening with the current generation of Call of Duty games.

    I have been playing the franchise since Modern Warfare and have only
    skipped MW3 since then. After playing Battlefield 3 since it was released I welcome the fast paced insanity that is COD multiplayer. The multiplayer has been tweaked and balanced better than any COD game since Modern Warfare. The level design is awesome with tons of great routes to run and few spots for campers to do their thing. The pick ten system for create a class is an awesome remedy to the overpowered load outs of yore. The changes to zombies is also a change I welcome with open arms. By the end of Black Ops 2's life cycle the zombie mode was starting to get a little too diluted for my liking and had drifted too far from the original gameplay that captured all of us in WAW. Overall, the game has only been out for just over a day and it is ludicrous that someone would log on to metacritic and give this game a zero. It devalues this website's credibility and the reviewer's past, current and future activity on this website. The bottom line is that Treyarch really put forth the time and effort to create a great game and continue Call of Duty's reputation as one of the top dogs of modern shooters. Expand
  33. Nov 14, 2012
    10
    Can't believe all of the zeros. I'm writing this review based on the multiplayer alone. Its great. Everything I love about cod multi player plus the inclusion of new modes , the new pick 10 system new weapons perks and score streak instead of killstreak (so players will actually help in objective based games instead of trying to rack up a high kd ratio) are all awesome. I'm guessing most of these zero ratings have not purchased nor played the game and claim its the same old cod. Its not. And whatever happened to the saying if it aint broke don't fix it. The game looks great, handles great injects new life into a franchise that was getting stale with the last installment. I'm just waiting for the inevitable exclusion of a campaign and the cod franchise to give people what they really want and thats more multiplayer. Way more. Expand
  34. Nov 14, 2012
    3
    OK let's get the Pros out of the way. Additions and improvements to the Zombies mode is fantastic. The game looks better than Blops 1. I don't touch single player but I'm sure it's more of the same ol' Point A to Point B. The Cons. Multiplayer maps are mostly narrow corridors. Gone are the days of pulling up your sights. Instead grab a sub machine gun and spray 'n pray from the hip. Takes lone wolfing to the extreme. The maps themselves just feel like a jumbled mess, like Treyarch thought they were doing some DLC for MW3. The spawn system. In older CoD games, there would be a defined location that you would spawn and was pretty good about not spawning you 10 feet away from where you just died. Not the case. I routinely respawn close to where I died next to a camper, then have to figure out a way to go around. Sniping. If I get killed one more time from a sniper bullet to my toe or the surrounding air next to me I will flip my lid. If I had never played a CoD game before I may enjoy this. Thinking that the game was supposed to be like this. But I've played for a long time. MW2 and Blops 1 were the best games in the series. Blops II however is just plain garbage. That's my rant and I'm stickin' to it. Expand
  35. Dec 5, 2012
    5
    the probleme with cod is that they keep trying to perfect their original product (cod4) rather then make a new one...most of the changes that they make from 1 cod to another is put a new skin on top of it and fix what the community didint like in the other one,basicly a patch... each time they tweek the product for what the community asks for it still manages to make the game worse and feals almost no different to previous ones. R.I.P cod just like guitar hero and tony hawk. **** U ACTIVISION Expand
  36. Nov 14, 2012
    10
    GOOD REVIEW: All these user reviews are ridiculous, this is a great game. All these countless comments saying "Bad campaign, bad zombies, bad multiplayer" truly are just hating on the series. Call of Duty games feel the same, that's a given! Want a new game that doesn't play like a CoD game? Buy Warfighter and see how satisfied you are. The game flourishes off of its simplistic controls and addicting gameplay, why mess with the secret formula? The multiplayer in my opinion is most comparable (gun play wise) to CoD 4. The hit boxes are much cleaner, so kills are quick, but shots have to be on target. People say its the same old game, this is far from the truth. The multiplayer is built from the ground up (obviously keeping the same feel and inevitable game modes/menus and such). No longer is it just another game where guns my look different but play the same (EX: Famas [MW2] Type 95 [MW3]). There is plenty of variety, from a burst fire-high cyclic rate SMGs, to LMGs that steady during sustained fire, to guns with different trigger sensitivity, to 4 burst and 2 burst assault rifles. The game has changed. Maps are colorful and through playing can remind you of maps from every CoD game. The entire multiplayer menu system is revamped and awesome, the Pick 10 changes gameplay drastically. Single player is what you would expect with any CoD game (frankly who buys CoD for single player?) . Zombies is awesome, playing a game of TranZit you could leave and join session with your friends, and the gameplay is addicting. But what it all comes down to is the multiplayer. It's impossible to give it a true review on 2 days, just look how the tone of MW3 changed after release, but from what I have seen, and after playing every CoD game since Finest Hour I can tell you if you are a CoD fan, or a video game fan in general, then you won't be disappointed. I feel like people want to hate CoD, that's what these user reviews are. It's embarrassing, we buy the game, we play it, if you can't tell me the countless hours you will spend on this game isn't worth even 5/10 from your angry mind then you don't know what a good video game is. I made this account just so people would know the truth, don't listen to these spammers playing devils advocate, they are just pissing and moaning a classic rant about the repetitiveness of a series. I'm pretty positive we all saw this coming, the formula doesn't change, and it shouldn't. I want CoD to feel like CoD and in that respect this game succeeds in holding true to its name, but breaking more barriers then let's say, MW3. If you want a game with engaging multiplayer you will have a hard time putting down, a singles later campaign not afraid to take risks, and a zombies mode destined to keep you up till 3 am dead-bolted to the screen then this is a game you should get. But don't take it from me, take it from some of the other user reviews who's history show them copy and pasting the same review to different games.. Talk about in depth Expand
  37. Nov 16, 2012
    9
    this is my 2nd review, and now i realize that this game has its flaws, and has its high points. i like this game, rent it before buying because your opinion could be different than mine or any other metacritic user.
  38. Nov 14, 2012
    9
    The ones that put a 0 for this game are the ones that used to be on top in the other games before and now they start to die more. that is because more and more people are getting better and learning how to play, the only bad thing about this game would be sometimes the spawn sucks and I get killed from behind. It is frustrating at first but you have to get the hang of it. I slowly got better after playing starting with a .5k/d to a .9 in quite a few games. It takes time to get used to. And dont complain, you bought the game so enjoy it, Treyarch put so much work into this game so give them credit. Just have fun Expand
  39. Nov 14, 2012
    3
    Garbage. Same re-packed gameplay. Graphics are very, very disappointing for the latest game released this year. Multiplayer identical in almost every way. 'Ohhh new guns!'..... I wanted to like this game, I really did. Laughable campaign with 9,000 stupid AI that you mindlessly murder map after map until you make it to the checkpoints and suddenly become impervious to gunfire.. Better game than Black Ops I. Zombie maps have a somewhat new face and idea and are fun, but still confusing, which I suppose is part of the intrigue(I made it past lvl 50 on most of the last Zombie maps as to show I'm not a complete n0ob). Graphics still suck and zombies still act the exact same as the last game. Exact same. Music and sound is even the same. I would like this game a lot if it was the first CoD I played, but since it is JUST LIKE the first CoD game I played, I'm pretty bored and I can't believe people are paying $60 for another map pack and weapon re-skin in such record breaking numbers. Are we just mindless sheep? I love how we are eating up this garbage. If they make another game with this same engine and the same graphics, I fear it will make CoD a self parody(if it hasn't already). Treyarch and the rest of the CoD producers are laughing all the way to the bank with this one. And the last one. And the one before that.

    Gets a 3 because a 0 is stupid. There IS content here and there is even new content, just not enough to justify a new game.
    Expand
  40. Nov 14, 2012
    9
    This is my very first review. Ever. I just wanted to put this out here, though:

    I sincerely cannot believe the ignorance of people and their views on Call of Duty. Call of Duty: Black Ops II is great. Much improved upon in nearly every way (except for possibly the campaign). I never played the campaigns much, and I have not played a Call of Duty for the campaign since Modern Warfare 2.
    I played through the first Black Ops title, and it was one of the more enjoyable ones for me.

    But, let's get real here-- who actually plays Call of Duty solely for the campaign? There are probably a small amount that, in all actuality, do just that, but the core elements of Call of Duty all revolve around the smooth, fast-paced gameplay that has been dominating our logged hours of online play.

    I just don't understand what it is people want. It's like they want Call of Duty to not be Call of Duty anymore. They want some kind of radical change that just isn't what it is known for. Call of Duty is Call of Duty. It's all about gunfire and an individual's skill with the various weapon types. It doesn't have vehicles, it doesn't have destructible environments (though I would personally not be opposed to that), and, as much as you hate it or not, it's ALL about the running and gunning of the arcade shooter. That's what it has always been, and that is what it still is today with Black Ops II.

    Now, in terms of online play, I believe that it is the best, most balanced and fine-tuned we have yet to see from Activision and the two differentiable development teams (I personally prefer Treyarch over InfinityWard. Just look at Modern Warfare 3). I will admit that, right now, there are some overpowered aspects, ie the laser sight and longbarrel attatchments hooked on to your SMG of choice. But all of the guns are so powerful right now, you really can't go too wrong with any of them. It has the same fast pace and smooth, responsive gameplay all true Call of Duty fans know and love. Maps are new and refreshing, and there are quite a lot for on-disc content as of now. It has essentially remained itself while also tweaking the formula via Create a Class and the Pick 10 system, the branching storyline in the single-player campaign, the change from kill to score-based streaks.

    Don't let all these negative reviews bog you down. It really is a great shooter, and it always has been. Those people that gave this game solely for its "lack of innovation" are not true fans of the franchise's core system that has been proven to work and sell millions every year. I will admit, I am not a fan of the annual release schedule and the lack of time that is often put into these games, but with a gaming-goliath like Call of Duty, how could you blame Activision for milking it?

    I really do think it is a Call of Duty above all others this generation. If you're a tried and true fan of the series and the insanely addictive gameplay, you will be pleasantly surprised at how balanced and fair the game is. The hit detection is SUPERB, by the way. If you like Call of Duty at all, you just can't go wrong with this. Let the haters hate, and let the sheep follow their shepherds. I guess it's popular to hate and criticize something as globally dominating as Call of Duty. It's easy to hate it for what you want it to be, but Call of Duty is... Call of Duty.

    Maybe for all of you nay-sayers out there that are just hating so hard on CoD right now, the innovation will come with the new tech and systems soon to arrive. Maybe it will, maybe it won't. But, either way, Call of Duty will remain what it has always been. So I give this game a 9 out of 10 for remaining true to its roots while making some pretty significant changes. Peace, interwebz
    Expand
  41. Nov 14, 2012
    10
    Black Ops 2 is a good game period. Everyone is judging it on being the same as the older versions. If this rating system was to be this way any sports game should all have a 1. Assassins Creed 3 should have like a 2. Halo should have a 1 as well. If you dont like Black Ops 2 then thats fine but you should have more of a reason than that its like the other games in the franchise. If you insist on comparing them, you shouldnt compare it to Modern Warfare because they are from complete different developers. If anything you can compare it to WAW and BLOPS, its a pretty good game. You can tell that Treyarch tries to make a great game and and overall the suceed. Expand
  42. Nov 14, 2012
    10
    Wow, I guess we now know where all the COD haters congregate. A user score hovering around 4.2 is complete and utter BS. This game is through and through fantastic. To all those saying that nothing has changed, what rock have you been hiding under? With the implementation of the Pick 10 system and scorestreaks this completely changes the game going forward. Those are only two of the many changes that the franchise needed and made. I'm giving this a 10 out of 10 not to skew the ratings but rather because it deserves that rating. This is the best fps game on XBOX 360 (right there with Halo 4) that we are going to get. Expand
  43. Nov 14, 2012
    1
    I'm extremely disappointed in this game. Treyarch wanted to get rid of the thing a lot of people complained (Ghost) about in the previous Black Ops, that they completely ruined the game. UAV is instantly unlocked while Ghost is unlocked at lvl 55, coupled with the fact that you still appear on radar even with ghost unless your are sprinting makes any kind of stealth play impossible. They wanted to get rid of campers by splitting up the original ghost perk into 3 separate perks, but people still are gonna camp. Now te campers are just going to know exactly when your coming in so there going to be ready. How does this make any sense to anybody? The way the game plays right now is pretty much a giant split screen and everyone is screen looking because UAVs are being used so much that people are constantly on the radar, so people are always going to know if your coming around the corner. I've always played a run-n-gun stealth class in every recent cod game, now I can't do that because there really is no more stealth class. So now I'm force to play a horrible play style of running around like a idiot and just spraying at people hoping I my connection is better so I get the kill. Sounds like fun right?!? Thank you Treyarch for having me waste my money on your horrible game, and thank you because I'll never be buying another COD game ever... Expand
  44. Nov 14, 2012
    0
    This game is worse than the first black ops mwf is were it's at black ops controls are jerky and not smooth like mwf. Black ops is unrealistic. They made it harder to earn kill streak packages it's just a horrible game all around wish I could get my money back
  45. Nov 14, 2012
    4
    The dirty little secret of the Call of Duty series is that the original creators left Infinity Ward to start Respawn Entertainment, and with them they took the intelligence and innovative spirit of the series. What was left were the bones of a great series left to be recast by two back to back developers who would futilely attempt to revamp the series again and again. The last great Call of Duty was Modern Warfare 2, and since them fans have been slowly exposed to a dying series that will eventually be a parody of itself. The core of Black Ops 2 multiplayer is broken because it doesn't not deal with fundamental aspects of fun and gameplay. The maps are chicken scratch attempts at creating an adrenaline fueled rat maze with no sense of intelligent direction. The spawns are absolutely horrid: spawn can often be a throw of the dice to see whether you manage to live or die. Finally, the lag in this game is still at a lower level than the MW1 and MW2 variations, the lag still puts you into that situations where you thought you had the jump on a guy, but the killcam reveals that you didn't even pull up your gun. Without addressing these core issues, the series is slowly withering away its hardcore fans, and eventually the rest of the community will start to catch on. Treyarch is a shady mom and pop used car sales lot who will praise the paint, but refuse to fix the engine.

    If the gun classes were balanced, the online gameplay fixed, and the maps completely redesigned with strong team deathmatch gameplay I would be inclined to give this game at least an 8 or a 9.
    Expand
  46. Nov 29, 2012
    7
    Update since I gave the game a 5 within the first few days. The campaign is great and with the ending changing depending on your choices, it actually adds replay value, unlike previous COD games. Zombies is fun for a while but the maps grow old after a while but it is still a very fun mode. Zombies will probably be better once they release more maps and perks. Multiplayer is a combination of MW3 and Black Ops. If you liked either multiplayer, BO2 multiplayer may grow on you. The pick 10 system is great since you won't see two people with identical classes. The system adds great variety and constantly makes you adapt your classes. This game does however have one major flaw: the players. In pretty much every game I go into, people camp on the second floor of a vertical building with either bouncing betties or shock charges (immobilizes you). The people who don't camp in buildings run around the map with all stealth perks or shotguns which both become extremely annoying until it becomes available to you. There are very few players who just play the game normally without using the most overpowered setups. This takes away all the fun for me in multiplayer. If anyone gives this game a ten they are lying because COD has a long way to go before it becomes perfect. While this game is fun for the first few hours, it just won't last. However, I still find it better than MW3. Expand
  47. Nov 14, 2012
    0
    A copy and paste job, cheap lazy money grabbing offering, this franchise deserves more and gamers even more. What is achieved in this, could have been a £ 15.00 DLC update.
  48. Nov 14, 2012
    5
    It's so frustrating. I was a huge COD fan since the original and have seen the series lifted off and took hold of gamers around the world. I enjoyed BO1 although I was greatly disappointed in MW3. I was so excited to get Black ops 2. I had heard all of the changes that were being made and implemented and then closer to release I read reviews giving it high praise. Well what happened? I'm not sure what happened to so many of the improvements they were supposedly making it into this game. There's not a whole lot changed from past CODs. Each year I've spent 60$ on the game and another 60& on dlc a d I can honestly say this has finally changed me. Especially with Halo 4 just coming out and being so good all around. The campaign is ok but the graphics and showing their age and the story is kind of cheesy. They tried to implement some strategy into the campaign but it fails miserably. Multiplayer is the same as its been. Really nothing new here. I was hoping for more. Just very unbalanced and I was not impressed with the maps. IMO this could have been dlc for black ops honestly. Zombies has changed and implemented some great things but the problem is its unfinished. You'll have to wait for future dlc to open the world up more and I'm tired of not getting everything I'm paying for when I buy a game. If you want give it to me later for free but don't charge more for something we should have received day 1. People can say how I'm a COD hater but I always loved the franchise which is why I'm so disappointed in this and last years game. People can also say how amazing this game is but I just don't understand that unless your 12 and are just trying to look cool with your friends at lunchtime. It's the same old same old and I'm tired of supporting this. Paying 120$ a year for the game and dlc is a joke when there is no innovation from our $. Just slap a 2 on the box or next year they will say how they are changing everything and going to move the series forward and they'll slap a 4 on that box too. I can say that with so many new games coming out in the next couple weeks and great games like halo 4 which have recently been released, why waste another moment playing the same game you played 2 years ago. It's not horrible. It's just not good. I guess I've fallen into that saying what's the definition of insanity...because I keep buying the same thing year after year expecting different results but never get any. Buy this when its 10$ or rent it and see for yourself but Save your money for something better. Expand
  49. Nov 14, 2012
    9
    Wow, so many Zer0es, the game is so bad that it deserves a 0. I don't love COD but i at least thinks it deserves higher than a 4. Changing the formula to a game that is very repetitive takes guts. They should at least get a 5 for effort. (plus an extra 4 for all the haters out there)
  50. Nov 14, 2012
    10
    Decent story and a good multiplayer!!! People just hate cause they don't like the COD franchise . You don't need to give a game 0 cause you are on the hate train!!!!!!!!
  51. Nov 14, 2012
    1
    I wasn't expecting much, but I expected too much. The graphics would have been good, for 3 years ago. The campaign is weak like always and the Multiplayer is nothing new. Even the zombies, the one reason I had faith has been ruined. Tranzit is fun, but that's all there really is. Nobody in there right mind could possibly like this game.
  52. Nov 14, 2012
    0
    Treyarch, congrats. You've officially embedded yourself in my mind as horrible at game making. Many people here are complaining about the lack of change, but I disagree. I hate the changes they've made. For this review I'll be talking about the multiplayer part of the game.

    And it sucks. Sniping is absolutely impossible. The guns scope in incredibly slow and awkwardly. It's honestly so
    frustrating. The killstreaks in this game blow. You randomly die from being electrocuted or somehow explode. The game overall is very dark color wise which makes spotting enemies nearly impossible. Lastly, the create a class system is just plain stupid. So many perks are made into attachments and it's impossible to get a class that really fits your needs without making serious cuts.

    Honestly, I want more of the same. I want the old CoD 4 back. Not with these stupid "advancements",
    Expand
  53. Nov 14, 2012
    9
    I love these idiots that review this game and most likely haven't even bought it. Don't listen to these morons that give this game a zero... I even saw someone complain about noob-tubing when that hasn't been an issue since MW2. It's absurd Overall its a great game. they added new things to the multiplayer like new class system and plenty of new modes and maps. They also changed around the way killstreaks work and of course added new ones. Defiantly check it out its a great addition to the series and don't listen do these idiots reviewing this game and giving it a zero for BS reasons. Expand
  54. Nov 14, 2012
    3
    As a COD fan who picked this up at midnight. I'm very disappointed. The point system in multiplayer isn't bad, but the streaks are just blah. The strikeforce missions are a complete failure, and almost impossible without playing it as one of the characters. They take me completely out of the game. Zombies well, what happened??? All of the fun of playing is lost, and now it's just boring. This was the only reason I could get my girlfriend to play the game, and its completely broken. All of the maps follow the same cookie cutter form of each other. There's always 3 routes - left, right, middle. And they are made to be chaotic instead of strategic. Sniper rifles are almost useless for sniping. I really wish I had played the game more before I redeemed my 4000 points for a season pass.

    I've never bothered to create an account on MetaCritic, but after a few days of playing this game, I needed to express my disappointment. If this is your first COD game, go ahead and buy it. But if this isn't, and you haven't bought it yet, pass. It just feels like a half completed game.
    Expand
  55. Nov 23, 2012
    9
    What is wrong with you people? this game is Great! Sure its not perfect but it is FAR better then the last Black Ops and almost better then MW3.... The game looks great the sound and sound effects are awesome not to mention the control is flawless. No there is nothing ground breaking about this game but they did manage to get everything wright. There are not to many games that can claim that. I have been playing games since Pong, that's right 30+ years exp. I say this games a HIT and a must have for any COD fan! Expand
  56. Nov 14, 2012
    8
    Ok Ok, this game has its downsides, I won't deny that. The campaign wasn't as "personal" as many thought it would be. The graphics/ game engine is a bit old and outdated. There still were tons of set pieces during the campaign and the "expanded choose your path" campaign that was so heavily advertised didn't branch out into any extra levels. But you got to look at the big picture here. The multiplayer element is back in full bloom and thats what most people play. I can't say exactly why, but the feel of the multiplayer reminds me of mw2's, and it got me hooked unlike the first blops and modern warfare 3. Almost every single map is fun to play, and the guns are varied enough for most of them to be able to stand out on their own. Zombies continue to expand with the new tranzit mode, and also a grief mode, to add onto the original survival game mode that has still not gone stale. The campaign itself showed signs of improvement, with the both non linear and strike force missions(which were quite fun tbh). Both are rather weak, but still shows signs that the franchise is headed into the right direction. So overall, though it's not the perfect game and it didn't really deliver on all of its expectations(which is why i think everybody is giving it a bad rep), it still is a good overall game with lots of replay value (awesome multiplayer and zombie modes). Expand
  57. Nov 16, 2012
    10
    The hate for this game is based strictly because it has "Call of Duty" in the title, the game is a step in the right direction don't let the negatives fool you. First, the campaign which was written by David Goyer (writer of TDK trilogy) and it's easily the best to date. Multiplayer is better than ever with more customization than ever, you'll have a blast. Lastly (the reason alot of internet users buy this) zombies, I'll be honest this is why I gave this a 10 because it's just too awesome this time around. Expand
  58. Nov 14, 2012
    4
    Boring! MP is complete garbage,zombies is the same and the campaign is meh at best. I have been a huge fan of the series but now i'm done! The fun factor doesn't exist in this game.
  59. Nov 15, 2012
    9
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This game combines the best of black ops modern warfare 2 and 3 as well as a new look to the series, good class system so as to bet puntos.Treyacht streak for risking and renew the series and they went well, I give it a 10 if tubiera dedicated servers. Expand
  60. Nov 15, 2012
    1
    the real score and the real quality of this game is around 4. But I give 1 against treyach and activision mentality. well, regarding the quality of the game, what I can say is : the game is outdated with indecent graphycs a boring story, stupid characters and a sp campaign structured on stupid, fast ride and mindless mission on rails that lasts 5 hours. If you are searching for a solid fps well structured in single player campaign, with an open world or sandbox missions or freeroaming DON'T BUY COD Blackops2, DON'T waste your money or rent it for a day and wait for farcry3 release or go out and buy the best fps yet available of this year: borderlands 2. The single player campiagn is only an excuse to sell this game at 60 bucks, but in reality the lenght is like a dlc of the previous Cod:black ops. Cod: Blops2 is only for fanboys multiplayer addicted, but warning because the multiplayer mode isn't perfect and has actually connection issues. Expand
  61. Nov 25, 2012
    9
    black ops 2 is awesome just to let every konw treyrach had pacth update's for the mulitplayer a long list of thing's there fixing for xbox360 ps3 and the pc it well take time to fix all of this but in the mean time just hold on and wate till there down
  62. Nov 15, 2012
    2
    Oh look, it's THIS game again. Wee, Call of Duty 4! We're having fun! The 6th DLC- I'M SORRY I MEAN BRAND NEW CALL OF DUTY has been released. Boy oh boy, where the hell do we begin with this stinker. Same boring story, same boring guns, same boring graphics (come on you'd think with record breaking sales they'd at least upgrade the graphics engine but nope, same old sepia toned goodness to please my eyes). Here we have the deadbeat devs pulling what capcom did back in the late 80s and early 90s with megaman. Annual release? Don't mind if I do (except classic megaman was actually fun). Now don't get me wrong, Call of Duty 4 was actually a pretty fun game, but when all you do is just release these games that hardly qualify as a CoD4 DLC, let alone a new game, your customers are going to be upset with the extremely obvious stagnation of the series except brain dead children (WHICH IS WHAT THESE GAMES ARE TARGETED TO WHOOPS). Do yourself a favor, and pick up Call of Duty 4 for 5 bucks in your local hicksville wal-mart bargain bin and don't spend 60 dollars for really the same exact thing. If you're new to the whole Call of Duty shindig, stay away from it like the Chernobyl disaster site, or lock yourself in a hot tar kettle until your soul is relinquished to the sphincter of hell where you'll find the developers for these terrible terrible mistakes at work. Expand
  63. Nov 15, 2012
    7
    I don't normally do this kind of thing but I'm sick and tired of reading reviews that say "The graphics are outdated". Obviously from little children who pay $60 for a game that looks pretty, same kids who would say games from past generations of consoles (NES, SNES, PS2, N64, etc) are bad because of the graphics . I haven't played the Campaign or Zombies yet, but the Multiplayer is fun, just like it always is. Thats what a game should be rated on. Yes, there are campers, try-hards, and these elite super players that come on here and own every other game, but who cares, its just a game. I'm no expert MLG gamer, I didn't stand in line for hours in the rain like all of those other losers just to think I'm the first one who has the game, and I'm not a fan boy. I just like to play Call of Duty with my friends as a social thing and I think thats what separates the men from the boys. If you don't like it because its "the same old thing every year" then you're the idiot who paid the money for it. The people who generally gave the review a good score are the people who like the CoD games for what they always are, and what they probably always will be. Expand
  64. Nov 15, 2012
    2
    Wow could they beat this dead horse anymore. This is by the far the worst in the series. They just keep pumping them out. The Story makes no sense and the game play is just more of the same. I'm done buying this crap. MW is now dead to me and BLOPS is beyond dead. I think we need to face facts MW is dead my friends.
  65. Nov 15, 2012
    9
    This game really surprised me. It's so good to see that the makers didn't sit over the old formula and still work to find new ways to put people on the battlefield and still feel like it's something they didn't pass before. The campaign has a good story, with a high mature level of violence,with a very convincing storytelling that, even with all the future stuff, can make we recognize the nature of the environment. Multiplayer rocks as always and the zombie mode is even larger than before. Enjoying every moment with friends! Expand
  66. Nov 15, 2012
    1
    I'm a 34 y/o guy that is a huge of shooters but if you think this is an improvement, you are nucking futs! The graphics are terrible and they borrowed the color scheme from Serious Sam. Multiplayer is king these days and the pick 10 system does not redefine this title. The levels are small, easily campable and just plain dull and boring. I give it 1 for how smooth it feels but could not shake the feeling like I was getting killed when I clearly had the upper hand in gun battles. I've already lost interest here after 2 days of trying to give it a chance. I hate HALO but i'm trading in BO2 in for it today. Expand
  67. Nov 15, 2012
    10
    Black ops 2 is probably the best cod I have ever played. I dont understand why little kids and rage quitters are talking complete b.s. about this game. You suck so get over it. The story is flat out awesome and that doesn't even include the multiplayer. Online is great and zombies has gone to a new level! All hardcore cod fans need to play this game.
  68. Nov 29, 2012
    5
    At the end of it all I was left feeling sorely disappointed with Black Ops II, but I went into it knowing this would probably be the outcome. Compared to WaW and Black Ops 1 in terms of story I get the feeling Treyarch just didn
  69. Nov 15, 2012
    0
    WOW, what a terrible game!
    Why do we allow this franchise to continue. Please stop supporting this game. THANK god I tried it for free. Call of Duty has been the same exact game since COD2.
    Gamers deserve better than this, a high price tag for absolute trash.
  70. Nov 17, 2012
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This is one of the best games ever made I love this game because it is always fun and the graphics are extremely realistic It's AWESOME!!!!!!!! AND COOL!!!!!!! Expand
  71. Dec 3, 2012
    2
    Zombie mode is alright. Campaign is boring. Multiplayer sucks. Treyarch fix the spawn system on this busted game. I'm tired of spawning right in front of the enemy team.
  72. 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
  73. Nov 16, 2012
    8
    It is a really solid COD game. The campaign was really good and not like any other COD game before. Zombies are awesome! The multiplayer could be better, but it is still pretty solid. Many won't agree with me on this, but this is probably the best COD game ever! However, it is still a COD game, same engine, pretty much same graphics etc. Especially the multiplayer still plays the same, which is not exactly a bad thing (for me anyway) and most importantly, the online community is huge!
    I'm really enjoying this game...It's impossible to give this game a negative rating, should be a 6 at the lowest!
    Expand
  74. Nov 16, 2012
    3
    Starting in the Campaign. It had a good story line but It offered no challenge on Veteran, I was finished with it in 3 hours. Next is Multiplayer. Maps are horribly designed, head glitches are ridiculous, too easy to die on core, when you shoot someone half the time its not even the person, and all around horrible experience. The only this that brought my score from a 0 to a 3 is Zombies. I believe this new zombie idea is awesome. There maps added together though don't seem as big as they were talking. Tranzit is about as comparable as any other HUGE zombie map but is not actually HUGE. I want an expansive map that i can roam around and find something i haven't found before. Ranking of CoD 1. CoD 4, CoD WaW, CoD MW3, Cod BO, CoD MW2, CoD BO 2 THIS GAME DOES NOT DESERVE A 10!!!! Expand
  75. Nov 16, 2012
    9
    Some people must be looking for a earth shattering new experience. We all know it's not going to be so stop getting your hopes up. Not ground breaking, but great none the less. I like the MW series much better, but definitely some great additions to the game all around. The new "pick 10 system" is awesome. I like the new attachments like the enemy finder and stuff. It's fun, and that's what I score on. Expand
  76. Nov 16, 2012
    9
    The game is honestly a lot of fun. The graphics look a little outdated; but the engine runs smooth at 60 fps. As good as Medal of Honor and BF3 looks, it sometimes drops as low as 15 fps. In comparison, I'd prefer consistency over the "wow factor. "The gameplay is crisp and the new format for score-streaks and weapon load-outs provide a new value to the game.
  77. Nov 16, 2012
    2
    Worst game to date . Graphics are terrible . It's embarrising to think I support crap like this. With all the money they make they should get better graphics. I'd rather play a game on ps2 cause that's what it looks like .
  78. Nov 16, 2012
    6
    Black Ops 2. 1) The campaign is pointlessly gory. Why do we need to watch people's heads getting cut off and listening to women getting raped? Who with a right mind takes pleasure in that?
    2) Multiplayer is boring. Some new killstreaks, guns maps but in the end its CoD MW3 and Black Ops in one.
    3) Cod is lost. The game designers are stupid. They are trying to do their best to make this
    game good, but in the end its even worse.
    The only thing that stops me from hating this game is zombies. I love zombies and always will, If I will ever buy another Call Of Duty game it will be a zombies only game.
    Oh by the way the ending is even worse than Prometheus.
    Expand
  79. Nov 16, 2012
    7
    Since the first time I played MW3 I did not see anything amazing, but with BO2 it was very different.
    For me this game is awesome. The zombies are fun, multiplayer has a much better cheek, graphics really good, by far the best CoD ever made. Many people are complaining because they don't want play this franchise, they're annoyed with it. I recommend that these guys try another franchise,
    play the same game a lot is boring. Expand
  80. Nov 16, 2012
    10
    I actually think this game is much different and more enjoyable online. The smaller maps make it an all out war. Its not always about graphics people. In my opinion the game feels really sharp and the frame rate on the ps3 is amazing. It deserves an 8 but people were unfairly grading it expecting something different.
  81. Nov 16, 2012
    8
    Black ops 2 tells an outstanding story and has very fun multiplayer modes. zombies is back and is better then ever and the new pick ten system in multiplayer is also very cool
  82. Nov 16, 2012
    4
    The whole point of Call of Duty is the online. That's pretty much why it's bought anymore. The only problem is that Treyarch can't overcome the fact that Call of Duty online is always poorly done. I've been playing Call of Duty games online since COD2. Black Ops 2's online is terrible. It just is. They implement lag compensation that punishes good connections and rewards bad. The submachine guns, like in every CoD, are obscenely overpowered to the point the other types are useless. They put in a new tactical grenade called the shock charge. For some reason, they felt the need to make it combine every feature of every grenade: can't move, does some damage, blinds you, and can be set in a spot to be triggered by passer-by. Probably the biggest problem is the map design. Every map leans towards the people who play Call of Duty by sitting in one spot where you're almost unkillable. Windows, random sandbags, boxes, upper floor buildings, etc. are all spots where only the tip of your head is able to be seen, while you can see everything, and they are literally at every corner. All-in-all, the online is dumbed down some more to appeal to the people who are no good at games in general. Expand
  83. Nov 16, 2012
    8
    First of all, lets get this straight. The people who are giving this game negative reviews while claiming this is the "same old COD" are dead wrong. I am not claiming this game is perfect, by any means, but calling the people at Treyarch "lazy" because they feel like they shipped a copy of any of the previous COD games need to play BLOPS 2 for longer than an hour to actually realize how different it really is. Starting with the campaign: I'll get this out right now, I enjoyed the Black Ops 1 story better, granted I've only played BLOPS 2 once so far but that is just how I feel right now. That's not to say BLOPS 2 isn't enjoyable, though. Unlike every other COD campaign, Treyarch decided to make this one less linear and scripted and actual gives the player choices throughout the game. Some of these are choose to kill or spare another character, while others are a little more subtle. After each mission, you get a screen that highlights all the choices made and shows how your story has progressed so far based on your decisions. No other COD has given the player the ability to write their own story as they are playing. There are also optional "strike-force" missions, which is a simple RTS style game, where you command troops from an aircraft up above. While this won't necessarily blow you away, its good to see something different. Another campaign feature is the ability to choose your loadout before each mission, although I never used this feature much because I didn't know which gun would be good for the missions I hadn't played yet. As I mentioned earlier this game isn't perfect and one thing I disliked about this campaign was the lack of variety in the missions. In previous COD games, they were able to break up the run and gunning with slow stealthy missions or sniper missions, but those weren't included in the game. I personally would have preferred having a couple of these missions to break up the fighting off hordes of enemies style. Multiplayer has also seen lots of changes. First and foremost, I felt Black Ops 1 had the worst lag compensation in any COD game and way too many times I found myself not getting credit for hits where the enemy was clearly in my sights on my screen, but when looking at the host's view, I was about a foot away from actually hitting him. This led to very frustrating situations, where actually getting a kill was out of your control. Treyarch did a great job with the netcode this time and hit detection and lag compensation are leaps and bounds better than its predecessor, which makes the games much more enjoyable. The create-a-class system has drastically changed too, with Treyarch implementing a "pick 10" system. Basically this means you can choose from up to 10 items for your loadout with little restrictions on what you can actually use. You can go as far as having a class with 6 perks and only a combat knife to a class with your primary having three attachments, but having no equipment. This leads to a lot of creative options that fits your style of play. One thing about multiplayer that I haven't found too great is the map variety. While, one strong point of the maps is they have a ton of detail to them all in order to convey what they want to show, like a destroyed part of Los Angeles (Aftermath) looks like it actually just got bombed, they all seem very bland and repetitive. While Black Ops 1 did a good job of having maps that were noticeably different, like having a couple of snow maps to one that has a live rocket go off to one at a firing range, BLOPS 2 maps all seem to center around buildings. Every map has buildings as its main focus and I have yet to find a map that I can say I really look forward to playing at, although in my defense I have only played a few hours and am still getting used to the map layouts. Treyarch easily could have made a carbon copy of any of its previous games and still gotten the same amount of money, but Treyarch really made a conscience effort to make a different type of game. I respect peoples opinion, but for the people who gave this game a 0 and claimed its the same COD really have not played it long enough to make a fair judgement. While I'm not saying this game is perfect, its certainly has some flaws, I'm really happy to see Treyarch make an effort to produce something different and for that, I believe this game earns an 8. Expand
  84. 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!
  85. Nov 16, 2012
    1
    all that was good has been taken away,to be replaced by very weak components,the actual MP gameplay is good,let down with a poor perks system,ugly playercards,a league play system that can put you in leagues you've no hope in,weapons aren't great,although attachments are an improvement,quick scoping and lag make a return,it doesn't have that addictive feel,that makes you play more,to get that next unlockable item,challenges don't pull you in either,it could have been so much more,they were so hell bent on change,they never stopped to think if they should Expand
  86. Nov 16, 2012
    8
    I really thought this game was a good change from the last. The branches story line and decisions that affect the game is a cool touch. The new Zombie modes are killer!
  87. Nov 16, 2012
    5
    As far as the campaign is concerned, the game fared better than I thought it would. There were some nuances, and although the story line was linear and predictable, the game play was decent. I give the campaign an 8. My problem is with the multiplier game play. The controls are clunky, the guns are generic and the registry is terrible. Don't even bother using a suppressor, you won't get a kill. The spawn system is an absolute abortion. I die and spawn right in front of an enemy player. This happened twice in a row several times. Guns sights (including the ACOG) are an embarrassment. The multiplier just seems unfinished. There are too many kill streaks. The maps are boring and allow for too much camping. Knife kills register from 5 feet away. I give the multiplier a 2/10. The zombie aspect of the game may very well be the only saving grace. Its innovative and pretty darn fun. If not for the zombies this game would get a 2 or a 3. Zombies gets an 8/10. Save your money and don't buy this game. Might as well stick with the other CoD games. They're all the same anyways. Expand
  88. Nov 16, 2012
    0
    Easily the worst call of duty game to date. The campaign is meh. The story is boring and dull. But we all know no one cares about the story, people only care about multiplayer. And some how they managed to ruin that. Black ops was the best call of duty right next to call of duty 4. But they made it a modern warfare clone. There is no enjoyment in the multiplayer and it is full of bull **** moments that make the player rage. The connection issues are also a big downside, every game I've been in I constantly keep getting connection interrupted error and I know it's not from my side because every other game I play I don't get this. And earlier today I was playing and doing some what good and then all of a sudden a host migration and it kicks me out of the game and brings me to the main menu while every one else in the game is still playing. Over all the game is bad they did a terrible job and it is the worst call of duty. Expand
  89. Nov 16, 2012
    5
    Though I was a bit let down by MW2 and 3, Blops1 was a great change of pace, not as gimmicky. I was hoping for a similar experience from Blops2. Campaign seemed well written but poorly executed, the Strike Force missions were a pain and the AI useless. Just broke what was left of the story's tempo. Multiplayer feels alot like MW3. The expanded create a class has a good deal of potential but the weapons feel off and the maps a bit of a cluster f*ck. It feels like Treyarch tried to amp the game up a little too much and failed to deliver on the hype. Haven't played zombies enough to say much about that, but overall I was pretty disappointed. Expand
  90. Nov 16, 2012
    0
    This is one of the worst games I've played in recent times. Not only one of the worst but also the most overrated game ever. There is nothing good about this game. This game is bad. Nothing subjective about it, it's objectively bad. Every game is the same, not to mention each game is terrible so that's a double negative. If you played any other Call of Duty game, there's no point in buying this because you've already played it. Do not get it, it's glitchy, stupid and boring. Expand
  91. Nov 16, 2012
    7
    To be quickly honest, I intended to purchase COD: Black Ops 2 mainly for the zombie gameplay. I loved the previous installments' zombie levels. The campaign continues on from the first COD, but it was difficult to understand the plot at first. It was only several missions in that I understood what was happening. The back and forth of the past and future felt off at times. The levels were diverse, but I had a huge issue with the strike force missions; forget commanding your teams from the bird's eye view. You literally have to win the battle yourself, the AI is so horrible.

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

    The multiplayer point system for your loadout is really awesome. It adds a large benefit for broader customization. Player card editing is back but doesn't seem to provide as much as the first COD installment. The list of weapons is also a good size, allowing you to choose from many types, but the perks are still all too similar and seem to be limited. It would be great to have a larger list for even more customization.
    Expand
  92. Nov 16, 2012
    0
    I give this a 0. I can not believe I paid 60 bucks for this. The animation is horrible, the voice acting is C rate at best, and story line is meh, the weapons choices not so great. Multiplayer really sucks, unless you live in your parents basement and drink monster all day, I like realism, this is far from it. A lot of the characters words are no lined up with there speech, and by the way, the graphics look the same as they did in 2009/2010. I am happy to say that this is the last COD game I will by, from now on battlefield and Medal of Honor games only for me, they are way better!

    I also think someone should sue these people for providing a product full of errors for this price, did they test anything in this before releasing it? NOOO!!!!

    This is on the PC for me.
    Expand
  93. 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
  94. Nov 17, 2012
    2
    The campaign was terrible, which was what I expected. The multiplayer was terrible, which was what I expected.

    I WAS however looking forward to zombies, with Treyarch's promise of a whole plate of maps, and its own campaign.

    Unfortunately they didn't seem to want to follow through with that promise, as there is absolutely no campaign to speak of, a sickingly boring 'easter egg', and
    only ONE zombie map, not including the day one DLC.

    This is ass.
    Expand
  95. Nov 17, 2012
    0
    I've got so many problems with this game I don't know where to start.

    Campaign. I've played up to the mission where you are leading an assault on horseback against helicopters. Are you serious? What is this crap? Multiplayer. This is the worst FPS multiplayer I have ever played. The guns are too easy to use, all that is gonna happen is you are going to explode multiple times. The
    snipers aren't worth using, the maps are too cluttered that you'd be more surprised to not die whenever you turn a corner. And zombies. What the hell did Treyarch do to zombies? This isn't fun. Go into the fog, and you get attacked by zombie monkey things that climb on your head like the Jockey from Left 4 Dead 2 and claw you until you die. Expand
  96. Nov 17, 2012
    7
    After MW3, I bought black ops 2 with the ideal that I might actually just end up playing the single player and selling it back after i'd been killed 100 times in one game in the online multiplayer. After sinking days and days of playtime online on COD4, and WaW. And having sunk about 2 days into MW2 and MW3 online player and frankly hated it, i had no idea what to expect for BLOPS 2 (I thought BLOPS 1 was a great game). However, the online multiplayer on BLOPS 2 in all honesty saves the game. But first the story mode: It would be too harsh to say the story mode was a complete disaster, but really, it comes nowhere close to any of the other call of duties. There are no 'stand out missions'. The strike force missions and clunky and hard to use, and it lacks real emotion and a good soundtrack which in my opinion has made some of the games like COD4 and Waw whose sountracks cement those good moments of gameplay into your mind forever. I'd give the single player 4/10, 2 of those points coming for the impressive cutscenes preceeding the missions, some of the cinematics really are good but dont let that shadow the missions which really lack any substance. As for zombies, im underwhelmed, the maps are bad, with fire all over the floor so you can be running away from zombies and suddenly find yourself downed because you stood over a crack with flames coming out, which span the entirity of the map. But i guess you should decide for yourself. The muliplayer? It was average for me until i found the FAL DSW, its a great gun, and has the old school, classic, 3-shot body kill that was in COD4 and hasnt reutrnined since, I think no cod games will be good again until default damage is 3 hit kill, all of the round ending kill cams are of a filthy, over used, SMG probably with a silencer spraying about 15 bullets around the general area of someone without any real precision. But for Me the multi player, if cod 4 was 9.9/10 ( my opinion) black ops to is around the 8/8.5 mark. Expand
  97. Nov 17, 2012
    10
    I've been incredibly critical of the Call of Duty franchise in the past but BO2 is a massive step in the right direction.

    But after the pitiful attempt last year with MW3, the only way was up, right? Treyarch have tweaked the mechanics of the game to the point whereby it has become the best of what it can possibly be. Now I understand it may not be everyones cup of tea, but those
    individuals need to ask themselves a serious question. And that questions is, if they no longer enjoy the core mechanics and the gameplay then why do they continue to purchase CoD and waste their money annually? Call of Duty is Call of Duty. It has ALWAYS been Call of Duty and it will ALWAYS BE Call of Duty. Like it for what it is, not for what you want it to be because guess what, if developers retract too much from what it is, then it becomes something different. It becomes something other than Call of Duty. I can't understand why it doesn't register with people the fact that Madden never changes from year to year, why NBA games never change from year to year or why Hockey games never change from year to year but have no qualms about negatively mentioning a CoD game. What exactly do these people want Call of Duty to be? I'm not sure but it definitely isn't Call of Duty. Take the sports games I mentioned, players throwing a ball around a green pitch, or players bouncing a ball around a court or skaters passing a pug around an ice-rink - what should the developers do to these games....perhaps throw in dinosaurs and wizards? Of course not, that would be absurd. So why not use the same logic to Call of Duty?

    I think the negative peoples' gripe is not with the developers of the franchise, it's with themselves. The people acting negatively or showing CoD in a bad light are not frustrated with Treyarch for the game they made. The problem with them, is that they refuse to see that BO2 as well as CoD's that went before it - is not a NEW game. It is nothing new. We have to realise (as I am fully aware of when I hand my money over every 12 months) that we are not buying a brand new game. What we're purchasing is an updated version of mechanics that work. BO2 is not a new game and MW3 certainly wasn't a new game. We've been playing these games for the last five years minimum. This is what Call of Duty is and it's high time people realised it.

    If they feel bored after the fact that they've played this game for the last five years, perhaps it's time to move on?! There is a whole world of video games out there and perhaps now, having received all you're going to get out of Call of Duty as a franchise, would be better accommodated in new companies products. BO2 is a welcomed evolution of a lagging series. MW3 as far as I'm concerned was such a wasted year in the franchises history that anything that isn't MW3 should be applauded and celebrated.
    Expand
  98. Nov 17, 2012
    2
    I imagine this game as a ''face-palm'' of the gaming industry world. What a failure. I don't see how any can enjoy this; it's literally the same thing as all other games with improved graphics and a couple of new, mainly aesthetic features. Why are we throwing money at something so terrible? We're only encouraging it.
  99. Nov 17, 2012
    3
    I will openly admit that I haven't bought a CoD game since MW2 and haven't truly played one since BO due to the lack of innovation in the games I was spending $60 every year on, but I read and watched the previews about the new game modes and changes to multiplayer and decided that maybe this will bring back the fun of the CoD. I am sad to say that I was wrong.

    While the game does offer
    slight innovation with new Zombies modes, the addition of Pick 10, and a branching storyline, I couldn't help but feeling like I just paid $60 for a DLC. It's still the classic CoD formula which is always not good or bad, but it sure does get old. An excellent marketing strategy nonetheless for appealing to casual gamers, but it leaves hardcore gamers questioning: when will the edge-of-seat, nail-biting, adrenaline pumping feeling come back?

    The branching storyline campaign was what really appealed to me getting the game, but following the overly paid detail to the action of the story never made me care about how the storyline branched (and I will not give a name, but how did he survive after that?). Overall, CoD fans, casual gamers, and 12-year-olds that shouldn't be playing the game anyway will love the simplistic additions to the run-and-gun gameplay. They're on the right track with the innovation process, but the lack of depth leaves many holes in their attempt.
    Expand
  100. Nov 17, 2012
    7
    If you have friends to pay with, you don't have to worry about whether this game is worth buying. Because of course it is. It adds enough to warrant as a new game, but BARELY enough. Regardless, it's still unabridged, pure stupid fun.
  101. Nov 14, 2012
    0
    My Son and I purchased the Hardened edition and were so looking forward to it. It is a let down, the game play is too simular to Ghost Recon, and the maps might as well have been issued as map pack for Black Ops 1. I find the whole feel of this greatly dissapointing and feel I have totally waisted my money. My Son, after just 20 minutes, "Dad, its crap". Sorry. But if you know the previous maps you can even work out where they have just re-skinned them too. Look for launch forinstance, or Ait Plane wreck in COD 2, diverse examples of copied mapping. Collapse
Metascore
83

Generally favorable reviews - based on 73 Critics

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