User Score
6.0

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1305 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 10, 2010
    4
    Meh. Stuck on Rebirth Island in a loop. Standing behind the Russki he says I've been spotted and he just stands there and I'm looking around trying to see who spotted me, and trying to figure where all of the bullets are coming from.

    If I don't hit the marks that the developers say I should I die. I REALLY hate having to play a level over and over, and over, and over, from the start
    because I didn't jump fast enough, or read the BS directions about hitting X to deploy the parachute. BO is more frustrating than fun. Once I complete it I won't be replaying the campaign, and since I don't have Gold Live multi player is out. If the Zombies game sucks I'll be selling it back to Gamestop. Expand
  2. Nov 9, 2010
    10
    This is by far the most complete and deep gaming experience in history. The balance in the multi-player maps and weapons will be imitated and praised for years to come. This is the BEST game ever.
  3. Mar 26, 2011
    6
    I'm a little disappointed that the Call of Duty franchise has hit a point in the series' history where any subpar developer can slap the words "Call of Duty" on the front cover and it will become the most successful selling game of all time. Yes, Black Ops is still an excellent game, but I'm giving it a 6 because the game had a ridiculous amount of hype and yet, it delivered absolutely nothing new or inspiring to the table. As another user critic said, the game is doing nothing except receive a piggy back ride from Modern Warfare 2. If Black Ops and Modern Warfare 2 switched release dates, MW2 would be the best selling game of all time. You could not tell the difference between which game was released first. The only reason that Black Ops is as successful as it is, is because of one reason: it is more new. I am not exaggerating this when I say it. It is not superior in any way, but rather actually a degrade in many aspects. To start, the graphics are literally the exact same. And in some cases, it somehow manages to be worse. I have absolutely no idea how, and I still have don't have an answer to this day, other than the engine is worse the MW2's. On the topic, since the engine is different, the entire feel of the game isn't as smooth as MW2 feels. I can't describe it too well, it just feels clunkier, and the hit detection is worse. The single player is very good, despite having another extremely short campaign. You can complete the campaign on Normal difficulty in probably 3 hours tops, so if you don't have online, I highly urge you to not buy this game. The storyline of the campaign is very original in my opinion, and the ending was very well-written. Despite this, it was a little anti-climatic, as I'm used to a pulsating thrill-ride the last ten minutes of a standard Call of Duty campaign. Voice-acting was extremely well-done, and there's some recognizable names behind the acting such as Ice Cube that really deliver an astounding performance. Some of the missions are a little cliche, a mere, "Been there, done that" feeling that you have already experienced this in other installments. Moving on to multiplayer, this is where I feel that I was disappointed the most. Sure, Black Ops has their original Nazi Zombies, but let's be honest, would you really pay $60 for just that? It's fun for awhile, but not enough to warrant a purchase alone. The multiplayer maps online are merely a host of mediocre maps that are nothing memorable. They involve a lot of camping spots and chokepoints that enemy players are constantly hovering around. Also, because so many of them are not as largescale as MW2's maps, sniping essentially goes out the window. On the topic of snipers, they themselves are worthless weapons in comparison to any assault rifle, and it is not uncommon to be called a noob for using one. The weapons are unbalanced, and everyone uses either the FAMAS or the AK74u, which is to be expected, since both of these guns are far superior to the others. The sound quality has actually become worse than on MW2, and the killstreaks available to you are boring or borrowed from MW2. One example is the Chopper Gunner; sound familiar? Amidst this darkness are some great new addions, however, such as the ability to customize your own personal emblem. Also, the addition of contracts is a rather cool idea, and some new game modes such as One in the Chamber are a blast to play. Overall, there are some great additions to Black Ops, but they don't add up to much. And they certainly don't add up to an entire purchase of a brand new game that feels, looks, and plays like MW2. If you have your copy of MW2 stlll, it would be best if you stuck with that. If not, I guess Black Ops would be a worthy purchase since that's what everyone else plays. Expand
  4. Nov 10, 2010
    1
    Quick look at the review: Conclusion: Wish i had not purchased this, it certainly shouldn't cost $60 and it was a big let down Pro: Story line was engaging Cons: A quick summary if you dont want to read below: Graphics are the same but run worse (ya i don't get it either, go figure) Shorter than the first, took me 4 hours 20 minutes to beat on Hardened collecting all but 2 pieces of intel.
    Multiplayer is buggy and laggy, constant kicks, crashes, disconnects make it close to unplayable.
    for $60 you get a poorly made expansion that will let you down.

    Now I'll explain it a bit more for those who want to know my reasoning

    The graphics of the game are the same as the first, It looks the same, nothing new, if anything i almost feel like they pushed the bar even less. Really no moments that are visually stunning. Given that somehow they've managed to make it run less efficiently. During my setup for single player graphics i experienced instense lag, my screen would flash yellow and i had to lower the settings down on AA AASA. At this point the game still had moments of extreme choppiness though i could play with the settings further because of the poorly done menu. Every mutliplayer game i've joined has people lagging out or crashing because of graphical issues. I run a Nvidia 480GTX, Quad-core Intel, 8GB of ram and I STILL get lag in this game (yes i have the latest drivers). The game play is the roughly the same as the first but it feels less fluid, the AI does nothing but get in the way the entire time, you basically feel like your just running through a movie and only you down know the script. You end up having to kill everything you see as your AI squad members really dont do anything except follow their scripts. In this game they've simply reused what they had and spent even less time on making it feel "epic" and even less time on the menu system of the game which at this point its so PC unfriendly that it makes me want to cry.

    The list of complaints tends to drag on but over all the fact that this was a $59.99 for an even shorter game than the first, using the same engine, same everything is really just criminal. I regret spending my $60 for something that should have been in the $30 price range as an expansion.

    To the Critic's that have reviewed this. Did you even play Modern Warfare 2? How can people even suggest that this "tops" that? You had to crawl through a trench under heavy machine gun fire in front of the WHITE HOUSE in the first one, nuclear war, defending the homeland they managed to hit every button to get people to connect with their game. The story of this game is a giant flash back, that has nothing to do with us, and lets just say the ending was a joke.
    Expand
  5. Nov 10, 2010
    3
    I'm sorry I bought this game. I've never been a big fan of the campaign but I have always loved the multiplayer of the COD franchise. But I felt this multiplayer lacks when compared to the previous titles. The graphics look worse than MW2, and the game play is EXACTLY the same. They added a few new killstreaks and call it a NEW game? The maps are small and boring, and I refuse to pay 800-1200 Microsoft points to get new maps when they come out. Overall I wish I could have my 60 bucks back. I hate when major titles change developers, it ruined the Final Fantasy series and now the COD series. Bottom line.... Black Ops effin' lame. Expand
  6. May 15, 2011
    1
    Most people buy this game for the online play. The truth is that Black Ops is a failure for multiplayer use.
    Lobbies are never synchronized....leaving huge gaps in aiming and target hit markers. Often times you can be killed without ever having actually been in view of the enemy. The spawns are horrible. Enemy players can sit where you will spawn in front of them, allowing them to shoot
    you without a chance of even getting one step taken. Poor design and a waste of money. I will NEVER buy a Treyarch game again. Expand
  7. Nov 9, 2010
    10
    Simply put, Call of Duty: Black Ops is a thrilling and phenomenal ride. This may be the best of the franchise. The single player experience (like it's predecessor) is sharp, immersing, and thrilling. Each cut scene makes the prospect of taking a break near impossible. As for multiplayer, fans of the franchise will blown away. Prepare to spend hours of your life on the hunt. If you are a fan of gaming this is an experience you must have. I'm sure all of the fans that waited in hour long lines for the 12:01am release of this game on Nov. 9th played well into the early morning. A masterpiece that you must add to your collection!â Expand
  8. Nov 9, 2010
    10
    With a much improved campaign, expansive zombie mode and a deeply enriched multiplayer, Call of Duty: Black Ops not only delivers as an excellent addition to the series, but maybe the best among the other CoD games.
  9. Nov 28, 2010
    5
    PROS--Intense and Involving Campaign, with a well-done story; little details on guns are cool; new setting for campaign(not WWII or MW) CONS--Graphics are worse than MW2; not much new multiplayer stuff (more of the same); maps are not well done; Zombies has not changed at all; lack of support for offline play; Lags and bugs online; level system AND CoD points dont go well together. OVERALL: If you want more of the same, then buy it. Otherwise, you should buy it when it is 30 bucks, cause that's how much it is worth. Expand
  10. Nov 10, 2010
    2
    This game is pathetic. I'd say it was a let down but I didn't expect much. The only reason I play COD is because it's ally m friends play for weeks after it comes out. I hate that the COD franchise is the flagship of gaming. It' such a disgrace and i miss the days when good games were what brought people to gaming. Not this junk that gets spit out in front of it that is always the same game with new skin and a new title. I mean look at halo. In every sinlge one of their new games, they made leaps and bounds and pushed their limits. Even someone who doesn't like halo has to admit that the games are very different from one another and the graphics are at least always upgraded from the previous installment, unlike this game. Don't waste your money. I don'tlike anything in the cod franchise other than number 2, but if you really want a copy of black ops, just take a sharpy, write black ops on the cover of your modern warfare 2 case, and scratch the disc a little so it doesn't run as smooth. And bam, you just got your very own copy of black ops for free.

    Whole franchise is whack as hell.
    Expand
  11. Nov 13, 2010
    10
    I don't understand why so many people are complaining about this game. The multilayer is more balanced than in any installment in call of duty. They got rid of stopping power, martyrdom, danger close, and juggernaut. For that reason alone this title is better than MW2.
  12. Nov 13, 2010
    10
    Best Call of Duty up until now, A well balanced multiplayer , superb sound effective, appealing graphics and specially the ton of content this game packs makes any Call of Duty fan dreams come truth.
  13. Nov 9, 2010
    0
    This doesn't surprise me, since I saw it coming for a long time. Long story short: Black Ops is practically the same thing as MW2. I hated MW2. So, why should I be surprised?
  14. Nov 9, 2010
    10
    This game is AMAZING. Graphics, Music, Gameplay, Voice Acting - all perfect. The multiplayer is as challenging and rewarding as ever, though it may seem a bit jarring considering certain changes (to perks for example). The story mode is a rush, with barely any break in the action. The constantly changing set pieces keep a fast pace while jumping between classic Vietnam to slightly more modern scenery. Its unfortunate that Call of Duty haters are too stubborn to pick up a copy of Black Ops and embrace it for what it is. 10/10 Expand
  15. Nov 9, 2010
    10
    I detect battlefield fanboys in these reviews. a 0 without any reasoning to back it up? Disregard these reviews, I think it's best to go with the critics in these ones.

    Even the ones that do provide explanation don't seem to understand how a rating system works... mediocre=/=0
  16. Nov 9, 2010
    10
    While the single player campaign is as short as you would expect from a COD game, there is almost too much else on the disc that simply shadows it. For example, zombies have returned for some fun with friends but the MP experience as a whole is spot on with new and tweaked perks, kill streaks, and weapon selections. Removing One Man Army and Stopping Power were probably some of the smartest moves that Treyarch did for this release. The option to buy the upgrades you want allow the casual gamer to enjoy all that the game has to offer. With all the content, getting the game for $60 is the best bargain since The Orange Box. While it likely won't win the fans of Halo that have dedicated their lives to getting the perfect armor set-up in Reach, this will grab the attention of anyone who has the skill to play a game that polishes and nearly perfects the game play type that millions love. One can also expect some health DLC down the road since this title has so much attention. This one is a must for the library. Expand
  17. Nov 10, 2010
    3
    Single player is horrible with same generic linear gameplay trying to tell a strory, but it falls in horrible ai and lazily scripted event with not even close ot enough triggers to make gameplay fluent and ai teammates to feel real. This is which breaks the flow of the game and cant really get into it no matter how hard i try. Same problems still exist to every cod game after COD2. Teammates keep emptying clips at visible opponents without actually killing anything until player finds the trigger which gets the teammates to move forward.

    Multiplayer is very normal cod quality though making snipers unusable makes the game faster which is better in arcade shooter like this. The new game modes are fun but not enough to merit buying this if you already own mw1, bc2 or even mw2.
    Expand
  18. Nov 10, 2010
    3
    All this game feels like is that Treyarch is getting a piggy back ride from Infinity Ward. The game still feels of the old eras like World At War and it still feels like they have taken everything from infinity ward and added in a few more things here and there, personalized it and called it a game. When in reality, they add remote controlled toy cars, guided rockets, flame throwers and more unbalancing, unrealistic items to the game. In my opinion the design in these games and even the graphics seem somewhat... Stale. Treyarch has gone way down in my expectations and I won't be buying a game from them, and yes even if it has a very successful name above it like 'Call of Duty'... Over hyped, overrated and took way too much credit where simple indie developers deserve better. Expand
  19. Nov 27, 2010
    2
    Total waste of money. Just like they added new maps and crappier skins to MW2. Stick with MW2 and save your money. They should ditch Treyarch, they are killing the series softly.
  20. Nov 9, 2010
    10
    Metacritic....excellent site but when it comes to gaming ,just throw the users reviews out the window!

    Typical spoilers who only post zero to bring the score down....get a life,you morons.

    Have the decency to score accordingly like the movies user reviews.

    Stop ruining it for everyone else !!!
  21. Nov 10, 2010
    3
    It is hard to know where to start with this game, due to it's massive failings and the new things it brings to the Call of Duty franchise.

    Graphically it is not even as detailed as Call of Duty 4, with chunky objects not smooth ones, washed out colours, really blurred textures. In fact the only models that have anywhere near enough detail are the guns and the players, everything else
    (explosions, cars, walls, crates, buildings) should look far better than they do. I would compare it's graphics to COD 3, another one of Treyarch's feeble creations.

    To constantly see people saying how good the graphics are leads me to believe that the reviewers/general people, have never played COD4 or COD MW2. To say the graphics compare to Modern Warfare 2 is near blasphemy, and also incredibly ignorant. (My earliest COD purchase. Black Ops was my first title in the COD series developed by Treyarch, however I have played COD 3, 5 and obviously own Black Ops.) Looking back at COD 2, the graphics there are almost on par with Black Ops, at least online that is. However Let's be realistic, how many people seriously bought Black Ops for the campaign mode?

    The Music in Black Ops is suitably atmospheric, however it never captures the mood anywhere near a similar level to Modern Warfare 1 and 2, such as the epic finales of both games. As such it never renders any real level of connection with the character, unaided by the fact that the voice of the main character (Mason) was clearly done by Sam Worthington i.e. Jake Sully (Avatar), Marcus Wright (Terminator Salvation), Perseus (Clash of the Titans). This makes the game feel fake, and whilst the voice acting itself is good, the whole lot never meshes together fluidly, so you feel that you are an observer, nothing more.

    Now comes the really disheartening part. As if the poor multiplayer graphics were bad enough, the game engine lends the title no favours. The aiming system online is poor. There is almost no response as to whether you are aiming at someone, movement feels clunky and jerky, aiming is not the best experience either, and neither is the damage calculation. Suffice to say that if you have taken any damage whatsoever, falling off a ledge more than your character model's height, pretty much results in instant death. The melee system hits almost 100% of the time, whether the other person was actually aiming at you or not, and the response time between pulling the trigger and the gun firing is very noticeable.

    It feels like the game engine was also ripped straight from COD 3, and is so unrefined as to cause my Xbox to actually have to slow down. I have never had this problem on any other Call of Duty game I have ever played. Modern Warfare 2 runs flawlessly on my machine even after hours of play, whereas 10 minutes of Black Ops causes my Xbox to struggle even when there is no lag and I have a 4 bar connection. This is a major blow to the Call of Duty series, as Infinity Ward pride themselves in remaking the game each time they bring a new title out. Call of Duty 2 was well received and was one of the best FPS on Xbox for a long time. Call of Duty 3 barely even got mentioned, as it is basically the ugly sister: an unpolished, unfinished, unmotivated attempt at taking what Infinity Ward created and effectively cutting and pasting with a few lack lustre additions that negatively affect the game.

    Conversely, Treyarch have consistently shown that they can take a ready made and highly refined game engine and produce a sub par end product. Read: COD 3, COD World at War, and now COD Black Ops. Everything that Modern Warfare 2 brought, Black Ops seems to have removed. Highly detailed graphics, Smooth running game engine, innovation and addition to the famous multiplayer Call of Duty experience, taking the best of COD 4, and improving on it. Except Infinity Ward made a whole new game engine for MW2, they didn't copy the COD 4 engine, unlike Treyarch, who did copy it for World at War and managed to produce a low quality product from something that originally was done so well.

    Black Ops does bring new ideas to the Multiplayer area, such as the COD currency to buy perks, weapons, emblems, camoflagues etc. This could be refined slightly more, however as it is a new addition to the COD franchise, I will not be to picky about it, as it does work, and it is useful to stop everyone having the best weapons possible.

    This however does not make up for s seriously lacking game. Single player is good for about 2 hours, and multiplayer is fine for however long it goes on being repetitive until you become bored. Should still be at the drawing board, not as a fully released title, especially not in the COD franchise. Treyarch continuing what they probably always will do....
    Expand
  22. Nov 14, 2010
    8
    I really don't understand why so many people are giving this game a zero. I think that people are just stretching the truth to make the game seem worse than it actually is because they have something against Activision and Treyarch. It's not the perfect game - graphics are a bit dated, some parts on MP are a little buggy, but I've played worse. Namely, MW2.

    Let me explain. MW2's single
    player was extremely addictive, if a bit short, but I played through it at least three times. The multiplayer, however, was broken. Campers and boosters everywhere, quickscoping was rampant, and you had squeakers trash talking you every time you played something that wasn't vanilla TDM. So, I traded it in and waited for Black Ops to come out.

    The single player in Black Ops, while I haven't finished it, has its good and bad points. The cut-scenes are incredible and the story immersing, but there's no introduction. I found that kind of weird. Also, I'm stuck on a mission where the instructions seem to be misleading - but I put that down to my lack of prowess at video games in general.

    So far, I've spent most of my time in Multiplayer. I had to say, I wasn't expecting much after MW2 and it's horrendous multiplayer feature. The matchmaking system didn't inspire much confidence either - I don't seem to be able to get a 4 bar connection in any games that I've played, while I had 4 bars every time in MW2. My major gripe is the broken matchmaking system, particularly in Wager Matches actually. Despite there being 15k people in Gun Game, it takes on average 5 minutes for me to join a game. Sticks and Stones isn't much better, and Sharpshooter is incredibly broken. I don't think I've actually played a game of Sharpshooter where it didn't switch to a random game mode afterward. One In The Chamber seems to be the only game mode that's perfect. Speaking of Wager Matches, I like the CoD points idea. It adds a dimension to the game - do I save up and get this gun, or do I spend it as soon as I unlock this one?

    This, however, presents another problem. I played this game at launch and since most people still had the crappy guns you start off with, so I didn't notice this issue at first. However, once people unlock the AK74u and the FAMAS, the starter guns become completely obsolete. People who play 24h a day to get the best guns will have an advantage over people who play 2h a week at best, like me. The guns you have until about level 14 aren't balanced with the rest of the guns. I almost gave up the game because the Enfield, the MP5K and the Skorpion prove absolutely useless. Once you get there, though, the guns are well balanced, and each serves its own distinctive purpose. It takes forever to level up to get to the good stuff, so if you stick with it you will be rewarded.

    Moving on. I like that Black Ops is less of a "twitch shooter" than MW2 was. The game doesn't center round the knife because it can be beaten very easily. Grenade Launchers have been nerfed in several ways, including the price, the blast radius and the fact that Warlord (BO's version of Bling) doesn't work if you equip a grenade launcher. Quickscoping is nearly impossible to do now - good news for everyone over the age of 12. Camping spots are fewer and farther between, and, with the exception of a few maps, camping doesn't really help you. The nuke has been taken out, which is a plus. The Chopper Gunner and the Gunship don't stack on to your killstreak, and they are less powerful now. Because of all of these combined, I feel less like, "C'mon, gotta get my Harrier... FFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUU I DIED" and more like "Oh cool, I got a Helicopter." when you get killstreaks. I could go on all day about what I like, frankly, but there's not enough room here.

    In short, I feel that Black Ops has taken everything good about MW2, and filtered out the annoyances. If you liked MW2, you'll love this. If you didn't, however, don't buy it, and stop writing zero-rated reviews full of fluff on how you prefer Battlefield, Medal of Honor, etc - go play that, instead of complaining.
    Expand
  23. Nov 24, 2010
    7
    This isn't a bad game, but it isn't anything new. The single player didn't engage me at all and I had no idea or interest in whatever the plot was supposed to be about. Kill a Russian or something, just like every other game ever made. There are ridiculous moments in it and too many uses of "cool factor" slowmos that are more cliche than cool. As well, there are times when infinite numbers of enemies rush trenches in mind-boggling simplicity that makes the entire game feel fake. The multiplayer is essentially the same as MW2 -- if you've played that, you played this. It's okay, but I dislike the maps. They're murky looking and not as fun to play in. All of the things that have frustrated me about MW2 are now compiled with all of the things that frustrated me about WaW and it's not enough to keep me playing. Expand
  24. Nov 9, 2010
    9
    This is a great game, i did not like World at War, but treyarch has definetly cleaned up. the campain is amazing the multiplayer is just as good, zombies are back and its the best looking call of duty to date, the reason i i dont give it a 10 though is because its just missing that chemistry between character and story line or somthing that i cant very well put my finger on, but that the Modern warfares possess that make you wanna say "OH SH*T:D" isnt here but, by golly its a darn good game Expand
  25. Nov 14, 2010
    10
    I can't put my controller down, the awesomeness got a hold of me. Single player and multiplayer is just the best i've seen of any fps nuff said; good job IF!!
  26. Mar 13, 2011
    6
    I am a big fan of the franchise and have played all the games. Its just seems all the good work done by Infinity Ward making the best shooters ever in the Modern Warfare games, are undone each year by Treyarch and their 'attempts'. World at War was disapointting and so is Black Ops. The campaign has decent action, but is so linear and the same throughout. I would love a different pacing in missions instead of the same old routine in killing enemy after enemy running towards you between an objective down a corridor. Zombies is just the same as in World at War, nothing new. Multiplayer can be fun, but also make you feel suicidal. LAG LAG LAG. Its a good job they put wager matches in because this is the only mode thats keeps me playing, they are a lot of fun. My advice, stick to Modern Warfare 2. Expand
  27. Nov 9, 2010
    10
    Game is fantastic. You will not be disappointed as a call of duty fan. Both the single player and the multiplayer have fixed everything we have complained about in the previous instillation. Though the graphics sometimes are not up to par to the previous game, the over the top game play, new additions to multiplayer, and fantastic new modes deliver a game we have been dying for.
  28. Nov 11, 2010
    0
    ALLLLLLLLLL HYPE.


    Farmer ate sucks , graphics far inferior than MW2 that came out a year ago, MP lacks excitement and oooomph, don't even get started on the sound effects, they're horrible , explosions go off with just a generic pop, you barely hear people shooting from 10 feet from you , on a big map you you never get to hear anything unless you're shooting, chopper gunner can be right
    on top of you killing you and you don't hear anything!!! I would not **** as much if the game was at least fluid , but it controls clunky and just like WAW!! They just used the same mechanics with new guns that's all! And since they used the same graphics engine from more than 2 years ago and they tried to add more detail they ended up making everything blurry it looks almost like you're playing in standard definition TV and also as a result causing the game's frame rate to constantly drop giving you a headache if you play too long. This is coming from a guy that has played previous installments to death and was very much looking forward to this one. I'm so angry and disappointED . I mean Activision should have the funds to make a graphics engine from the ground up and could have made the game run and look at least as smooth as MW2. Now we're stuck with a mediocre COD game until who knows!!!!! Expand
  29. Nov 10, 2010
    1
    Wow all I can say is that the single player in Black Ops is a huge disappointment. I agree that the story is good and I enjoy the fact that the main character is re-living the memories of what happened. But that is where is kind of ends for me. The graphics are not good and I am being gentle with that description. The collision detection is horrendous. I don't know how many times I have been stuck to the wall, a brick on the ground, or one of my own idiot partners. The constant spawning of enemies and grenade spamming is ridiculous. I would like for a little more reality when I am in a situation and people keep showing up from out of nowhere. Tossing smoke grenades is absolutely useless. I have been killed every single time I have tried to employ the strategy of using a smoke grenade to clear a room or hallway. It is as though the enemies have heat vision. I can't vouch for any part of the multiplayer as that is not my bag but I can tell you that Treyarch really lacks the know how when it comes to making a great single player experience. I had these same exact issues with WaW. I really do not recommend playing the single player. The 4 hours it took to play through Medal of Honor was more fun than this piece of garbage. Expand
  30. Nov 11, 2010
    0
    Yet another dissapointment hyped up pile of yack. Really (although it won't happen) we need to boycott these rubbish developers and stop buying thier sub par graphics and gamplay. As already mentioned it's like playing a game from 6 years ago with glitchy textures to boot, waste of money.
Metascore
87

Generally favorable reviews - based on 89 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 83 out of 89
  2. Negative: 0 out of 89
  1. A short campaign which is never spectacular and never very clever, but always solid enough. [Feb 2011, p.99]
  2. Jan 18, 2011
    70
    By dint of obstinacy, Treyarch delivers probably its best with Black Ops Call of Duty to date - but probably not the best in the saga.
  3. Jan 16, 2011
    90
    There are more highlights in the first two missions of Black Ops, then in Medal of Honor. The requirements of Treyarch seemed to be better, than in the past few years. They made an interesting setting. In addition, there's a nice zombie mode and an overwhelming multiplayer. No doubt, this is Treyarchs best Call of Duty ever!