User Score
6.0

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1299 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 Collapse
  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.
  31. Nov 11, 2010
    0
    Poor Sound, Bad Graphics awfully Buggy and laggy. On PC this game is shockingly bad. Taking it back for a refund. Activision should be ashamed.

    Many of the good reviews are I think for xstations and wiiboxes. Of course it will probably seem better on those since the graphics are locked in and its doubtless less buggy.
  32. Dec 14, 2010
    3
    The reviewers obviously just see the cod logo and say ten. if any of them spent more than 10 minutes on they game they would realise how broken it is. it is nigh on impossible to play more than one game in a row in the same lobby and pretty difficult just to get into a game. once in a game you then get to the real heart of the problems. if you manage to get into the game without being kicked out you will soon find yourself killed instantly by an impossible to avoid claymore or camped by someone sat in a corner with a motion sensor covering an objective. all this is ignoring the awful graphics as i am a big believer that aslong as the gameplay is sound graphics don't matter but to say they are sub MW2 is an understatement. from what is one of the biggest games of the year i find this a great dissapointment. Between the small frag friendly maps and the awful RC-XD i find it hard to continue playing this game. But the game does have a few game changing features one of which is the split screen multiplayer which keeps me from going back to MW2 the far superior game. aswell as the split screen we get wager matches which while i do not see them as better than normal game modes are a nice distraction. finally the theater mode is good as it allows you to save any of those wow moments. Expand
  33. Nov 8, 2011
    7
    Okay. "Call of duty: Black Ops" is a game in a situation called "Nothing Ventured, Nothing Gained". It's like copying MW2 into another CD and selling it back, except that it has different titles and more **** graphics. The zombies are the only stand-alone con that makes me play this game with my friends. Either than that, I'm ready to sell this ****
  34. Nov 9, 2010
    9
    Call of duty black ops is a great game, after ordering it from amazon it arrived just before i had to go to work but as soon as i got home I played it a lot the multiplayer is great as always the single player is not great but not bad either and it is worth playing the campaign but the multiplayer is the best part.
  35. Nov 9, 2010
    10
    Black Ops is amazing! The campaign story is meh, but with zombie mode, and extremely great graphics, im surprised with these users! Go Black Ops!! :-)
  36. Nov 9, 2010
    10
    Wow, Ngoing must have a cut down fetish, he's downed every version of Black Ops ps3/360/pc. I doubt he bought all three as he rated them each 0 and rated kane and lynch higher!!!! LMAO! This is a great buy and will definetly hold you until next years big hit. Sounds like some of the Medal of Honor crybabies didn't get what they wanted and are trying to bring down the COD franchise's ratings. Treyarch gives you more for this year and leaves you wanting more for the years to come. Thanks for thinking of the fans guys and keep on truckin'! Expand
  37. Feb 15, 2011
    6
    Every year their is Call of Duty game, and now its beginning to show. Im bored of the same gameplay and graphics engine, I want something new. It was new in Call of Duty 4. Fair enough the single player cinematic but again its only 6 hours long, as seen in the past 6 games. The multiplayer is just not as good as World at War or Modern Warfare 2, its not compelling. I think a Call of Duty game every year is too much. A Expand
  38. Nov 9, 2010
    8
    So far so good! The graphics aren't as good as Modern Warfare but the gameplay is definitely fun and very customizable!!! Wish Treyarch and Infinity ward would Co-op a game and share eachothers secrets.
  39. Nov 10, 2010
    8
    Hey let's face it, a lot of people have an axe to grind against either Treyarch or the Call of Duty franchise for reasons nobody can explain. I found this to be a fun first person shooter. Was it as ground breaking as the first Modern Warfare? Not in the least. Is it buggy and the worst game ever? Not even close. They've revamped the multiplayer mode, increased the zombies and actually created a campaign mode that doesn't stink. That alone is an accomplishment. It doesn't deserve a 9 or 10, but it's a solid 8. If you're a COD fan you won't be disappointed. If you're looking for a videogame that's going to transcend the genre and become art, look elsewhere, like at a book maybe. Expand
  40. Nov 11, 2010
    6
    Same old, same old. A real snore-fest. I know! lets stopping buying this old dog and get some new, fresh innovative games on to the market! Seriously this IP has fully run its course at this point. The same old gameplay and mechanics. Its just so bloomin boring now. How about an open world CoD type game, or one that got some RPG elements in the single player. Anything just to move away from this oh so very tired old formula. Expand
  41. Nov 10, 2010
    4
    Campaign pretty good: 7 out of 10
    Multi player: 2 out of 10 i was expecting a lot more i just feel like i own this game already. (MW2) 60 bucks to play MW2 again?...
    zombie mode is a sweet addition though
  42. Nov 10, 2010
    0
    It's another call of duty game, save your money and put it toward something good. The graphics look like a N64 game. The game play is terrible being a call of duty game that was pretty much a given. The on-line is still completely broken and cheaters are everywhere. This is a complete waste of money and I truly feel sorry for anyone who wastes there money on such a poorly developed game.
  43. Nov 10, 2010
    0
    My main complaint is Graphics. Why release a new game in the series when it actually looks a lot worse than the last installment? Treyarch failed to deliever good looking game. I just played CoD4 and it actually looks better than this game. And I'm not even talking about MW2. Just look at those gun models! They look cheap, the same as WaW! Not recommending that game to anyone.
  44. Nov 11, 2010
    4
    I remember my first Call of Duty experience, fighting in the pacific, thinking "Wow, its really unique how these Japanese forces rush you so aggressively." Then as the years wen't by, I realized that this wasn't a unique take on island warfare but simply how every single AI in COD games operates.

    Then I played MW2, and fell in love. You felt free to act, and on veteran, the game was
    still challenging. The worlds were large, and the enemies didn't re-spawn to infinity. This allowed you to actually be creative in your strategy, instead of tunneling. You could fall back, flank, snipe, or rush. Level design facilitated all strategies and the AI responded. Some levels set up better for different strategies, but the important thing is that it felt organic. When players died, they felt they could do something different--that they had control.

    A majority of the positive reviews for this game focus on its numerous improvement over other Treyarch offerings, which is a valid statment. The graphics, story, voice acting, and music are a step up, as well as the addition of some "cool moments," and extras like Zombies. However, there are serious problems that get brushed over. I feel like multilayer issues have been covered. So this review will tackle single player.

    On easier difficulties, it does seem fluid. The fundamental problems only express themselves at the more difficult settings. This is largely due to the fact that Treyarch uses infinite enemy spawns to compensate for poor, predictable level design and sub-par AI. Eventually you realize that besides a few "cool" roller-coaster moments type moments--fun but there's only one track, most of the game consists of a long corridor or enclosed "box" with predictably placed pieces of cover. Yes, you are in a box. Even though there are things going on outside the "box" and the graphics seemingly connect them, you cannot interact with them. Visually its a large world; in practice it's claustrophobic. Enemies advance mindlessly in single file from the back of the cover to your position, eventually charging recklessly from the last piece of cover. To "kill" them you need to toss smoke grenades, sprint past some imaginary line, and hunker down. If you get unlucky and get shot in the face, prepare to live the last 5 minutes of your life over and over again.

    Lets be frank--in the early versions of the game, this was a necessity because of inherent technical limitations. The "box" existed because large interactive environments weren't possible. The endless spawns were needed because AI was terrible. It was necessary to have smoke grenades because these other compensations made certain configurations of enemies and cover frustrating. Purists might say "This is Call of Duty," but how many other games get bad marks for refusing to innovate from their predecessors?

    In Black-Ops it feels like you just got unlucky playing the exact same interaction over and over again in the only way possible to play it. More specifically, it feels like you are forced to engage in the same interaction, requiring the same strategy with the same probability of success again and again. You are bound to get unlucky and die, even doing the right thing. When you do, unpredictable load points reward you with the with the same set of identical interactions and identical solutions.

    Throw smoke and run into it seems like a poor mechanic after a while. In IW games you throw smoke to get a tactical advantage, get a way, or provide temporary cover to move to a new position. In Treyarch games, you do it because its the best way to stop infinite spawns. The former feels immersive, the latter feels like band-aid for poor game design.

    Halo got a lot of crap for repeated area designs, but at least there were multiple ways to attack each situation. As Bungie put it, it was the same â
    Expand
  45. Nov 11, 2010
    3
    What the hell happened to this game! It used to be greatness on a disc now itâ
  46. Nov 13, 2010
    1
    ................................more of same......... single player sucks, Multiplayer sucks, graphics sucks, Treyarch sucks...................................
  47. Nov 13, 2010
    10
    This may be the best Call of Duty in the series with probably the best story in the Single player campaign off the rest of the series and a highly enjoyable multiplayer that will keep you busy for weeks.
  48. Nov 14, 2010
    3
    Im really disapointed but at the same time i feel sorry for treyarch considering they have had some big shoes to fill against infinity ward but starting with the good stuff the online experience is very good different and most of the maps are decent and being able to buy your perks and guns through cp is agood idea too. Now the bad stuff... the campaign was average a good story but the same epic feel i get when i play modern warfare 2 and cod4 their was something more special about the feeling when you play with soap cpt price etc. u feel more inrolled with the game, at lot of first person shooting with very very little vechile control included which is the right to go with call of duty unfortunately treyarch included a lot of vechile controlled missions which i hated. There was tooo many way to many epic moments in black ops and i felt as though the game was doing most of those moments for me especially the ending and i was feeling more and more like i just wante to know the ending and thats it. whereas MW2 their was an objective the whole way and 1 twist in Sheppard turning againt you i was building more and more excitement towards the endand the ending itself in MW2 was really well done with nikoli and price expertly leading onto mw3. I think and really hope that infinity ward make the next mw3 because they know best. Expand
  49. Nov 14, 2010
    9
    I felt the need to review this game because its low user score of 6.2. It's a great game, it's much more balanced then modern warfare 2, and much more multiplayer friendly. People complain about the spawning, and I have only spawned in front of an enemy 2 times, and i've played a good 10 hours so far. Guns are very balanced except for snipers, they seem extremely useless because most of the maps aren't designed for sniping. It does look a tad worse then MW2 in some aspectsbut it still looks great. It captured what made mw2 multiplayer so addictive and didn't use what made world at war multiplayer so crappy. Multiplayer is a heck of alot of fun but i have a few simple gripes... Wager matches are an amazing addition to the call of duty formula and are my favorite modes, especially gun game. But you can't play wager matches on split screen mode. What's up with that? You also can't play with bots when you have 3-4 player split screen. That's extremely dumb since wager matches are awesome and should be split screen playable. It's addicting and extremely well made. Anybody who says its garbage hasn't played it, or is terrible at it. Expand
  50. Jan 31, 2011
    4
    With a single-player campaign that, thanks to the frequency of cut-scenes and barely-interactive "action", Black Ops hardly qualifies as a videogame, and certainly represents a retrograde step even from the original Call of Duty. With a confused multiplayer suffering from featuritis and a lack of variety or coherence in its maps this is an inferior deathmatch experience to Modern Warfare or Modern Warfare 2, though the wager matches, particular One in the Chamber and Sticks and Stones add some interest. If this isn't the final nail in the coffin for the franchise, then they've at least measured-up the corpse. Expand
  51. Nov 24, 2010
    9
    It's a much better game than Modern Warfare 2, but it doesn't really feel as fresh as it probably should. The new additions Treyarch made don't really help the gameplay much, and seeing as most people have played MW2 to death, there's really no reason for anyone other than hardcore COD fans to buy Black Ops.
  52. Nov 14, 2010
    6
    I hope everyone enjoys broke ass servers, laughable spawning, and a cliche campaign. If so your in the right place. If not you'll probably stop playing the campaign at Khe Sahn. When you quit to multiplayer you'll try to connect with your pals but oh no we can't all get in a game together. Next you'll be by yourself in a game. Maybe I'll snipe you'll say. Nope, says treyarch we nerfed sniping cause nuke boosters along with other **** **** about it. How about a shotgun, Oh please! Pros: map balance, emblem customization, rc car killstreak, crossbow, prison break mission, and dead ops arcade. Expand
  53. Nov 13, 2010
    1
    I'm gettin tired of these contrived, senseless, and empty, new Call of Duty games since 2008. Black Ops is a lot worse than MW2. The game is just as unbalanced as ever, no character development, trying to put the JFK conspiracy. I don't have much to say on this this because the game is so small its not funny. It offers nothing new to shooters and this game just comes to show that Kotic will just eventually kill this once good franchise into dog **** Black Ops is so just... It's better World at War, but that's not sayin much. Call of Duty is just done. Long live a good franchise that once existed. My guess, we'll never see it ever again thanks to games such as Call of Duty: Black Ops. Expand
  54. Nov 9, 2010
    9
    A fair BO review. peppered with a little rant...
    The game is a great installment in the series well placed title. The shooting seems to be a lot better then in MW2, while there are still Ntubes they don't seem to carry the same power as they did in Mw2. The maps were well designed, i found myself saying this map needs either more people or less places to hide but it didn't feel as large
    as Fuel did. I have to make note of the fact i do not like hearing Ice Cubes voice in BO, it threw me off and it just doesn't sit right. Nothing against Ice Cube but really why him.
    Single player campaign is nice very fluid it doesn't feel like a patched story like Halo reach. That really is the only fair comparison to Halo (not that i liked/disliked the game) but they are two very different style of shooters and should not be compared on any other merits but story. It would have been nice to see zip-lines in the multi-player campaign (yes i know hindsight and all that, and give em an inch a mile and what not). I will admit i am a little biased as i thought MW2 was a great game. As for lag i did notice a number of people skipping around which was disappointing, the map chooser seemed to favor the same maps in the game lobby i was in. I do like the new voting system(which reminded me of Halo reach) another honest moment i don't like that there are pieced of this game which reminded me of Halo. I also like the system of purchasing items and upgrades very innovative feature.

    RANT: i think the worst thing about this game is the lame community you still have the same whiners who cry in your ear about every little thing. People voicing their ill content with being shot or dieing a certain way. As an original gamer i don't really care if you like how you died keep it to yourself. And the arguing over VC is often what makes me quit playing a game like this its a first person shooter play the game taunt whatever but if i wanted to hear crying i would wake my kids up. I would love for this game to have a higher rating just to keep the babies out. CONCLUSION: if you liked MW2 you'll love this game its all the fun of MW2 with new maps, new avatar look and features, new ways to murder the guy/girl ( to be fair) who keeps whining in your ear about how good he/she but how everyone else is cheating and thats why he/she keeps dieing. I'm giving it a 9 because its only a game it will not meet my HIGH expectations but it has come closer then any other game on the market and out of all the ones i have tried of late its the best ( i have tried a lot).
    Expand
  55. Nov 9, 2010
    8
    When compared to MW2, the campaign mode in Black Ops chews MW2's up and spits it out. Graphics are similar to MW2's graphics, there is not much difference. Black Ops adds nice new weapons such as RC Detonators and Flamethrowers to mix up the action, and multiplayer maps are very interesting, albeit some are extremely small. that you often find you are on a kill streak, or a death streak, considering how the game often will respawn you in a spot that can get you immediately picked off without warning. Another major issue with multiplayer are the servers, which disconnect very frequently and disrupt gameplay. And frequently is about maybe once per every other game or so. This was written after only a single day live, so that issue may change in due time. For now though, the game gets an 8, server problems holding it back from any higher. Expand
  56. Nov 28, 2010
    0
    I played this game for a couple of hours........incedible letdown.....same old same old......graphics are actually WORSE than MW2......rinse repeat.....UGH!....Battlefield Bad Company 2 craps all over this......
  57. Nov 17, 2010
    3
    This game sucks. Seriously. I returned it within 2 days. NOT FUN. Back to medal of honor, or Halo reach for me. This is a big step back for the franchise. DUMB!
  58. Nov 16, 2010
    7
    It's hilarious how many people give this game a zero. Really? C'mon. If you want to find where the whiners throwing temper tantrums are located, check the user reviews on any Call of Duty game. A zero represents an absolutely unplayable game in which the disk would be best used as a coaster. This game in now way resembles an uncompleted game. Despite it being more of the same, this is a game you won't want to miss. Expand
  59. Nov 9, 2010
    8
    A cross between cod4 and waw online, dont expect a mw2 game, graphics are not as smooth as mw2, gameplay is very good, i think some of the features in here should of been in mw2. This is a treyarc game and i hated them for world at war which in my opinion was pants so i have always stuck by infinity ward but sadly that original team is no more due to greedy CEO's. Not played single player yet, as someone else has stated it'll be the more you play the better your upgrades Expand
  60. Nov 9, 2010
    10
    This game is awesome and has a lot of new customization options, wager matches, theater mode, combat training, zombis, split screen online... definatly this is the game of the year!
  61. Nov 10, 2010
    9
    In the multiplayer aspect, which is what nearly all Call of Duty players play the most, Call of Duty: Black Ops does not disappoint. For those who were disappointed with Modern Warfare 2, do not let that stop you from trying out this game. It seems like one of Treyarch's biggest goals with Black Ops was to succeed where Modern Warfare 2 failed, and they certainly pulled it off in that respect. There is a wide variety of weapons and weapon attachments, including some brand new ones, equipment, and either new or improved perks. The weapons are less "overpowered" than many fans of the series saw Black Ops' predecessor to be, and there are also less "random deaths". And on top of that, there are new "wager match" game modes where you can put your COD Points (in-game currency) on the line in order to win more currency. These modes are extremely adrenaline-pumping and fun.

    In short, if you liked or loved the Call of Duty series before Modern Warfare 2 or if you still loved it when Modern Warfare 2 was released, you will most certainly consider this to be the best Call of Duty game to date.
    Expand
  62. Nov 11, 2010
    0
    Graohics and game play are early 2000. The game is totally abysmal when compared to such titles as crysis and mafia ii. It feels as if the game reviewing industry sold out its reader base. I have no other explanations for the rave reviews it got from such sites as GameSpot. Watch out - don't waste your money on this title.
  63. Nov 14, 2010
    3
    really enjoyed the single player, i would advise anybody who likes cod to rent it and play the single player, but they ruined the multiplayer, its not even close to as mw2 or cod4, its just like waw but slightly updated. the snipers are almost usless, the maps are shocking in general. even zombies isnt as good as in waw. this is the last treyarch cod i buy.
  64. Nov 15, 2010
    0
    Now, my rating has dropped to zero! I decided to give it the benefit as a good campaign mode game... I'm sorry folks but if you release a game... make sure it's finished. Yeah, I'm sure to hear "it's just your copy. Exchange it for a new one." Really? you think people should have to settle for that? I have a few friends that have had problems with this game. My original review was about issues I had with multiplayer. I can't even finish campaign mode now!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gzyJpMhXQc
    Expand
  65. Nov 14, 2010
    10
    I personally love this game. it is very similar to Modern Warfare 2, but its way deeper and has way more extras. Zombie mode is amazing with 2 new huge maps and one arcade zombie map similar to geometry wars. The multiplayer is great. The maps are fun and there is a lot more customization than there was in MW2. The addition of a currency sytem to buy attachments, guns, perks, and cosmetic upgrades adds to the multiplayer experience making it deeper than any previous CoDs. I love the addition of the ability to play Xbox live with one guest(like in halo and l4d2). In my opinion, this game is way better than Modern warfare 2 in every way. Expand
  66. Nov 15, 2010
    10
    metacritic needs captcha, most of the bad user reviews are the same word for word. they are computer generated accounts from a rival company. everything about this game is solid, you just need a good gaming computer ,not a 2 dollar piece of ****
  67. Dec 16, 2010
    7
    I'm disappointed, to say the least. World at War is by far, to this day, my favorite Call of Duty game EVER. I thought Call of Duty 3 was a good game, too. Accordingly, I had high expectations for Treyarch. I can't say I hate Black Ops, because I don't, I just don't LOVE it. First off, let's start with the perks - The Campaign blew me away. I thought it would be a Modern Warfare 2-style thing with a little more stealth and set in the 60`s. Hey, I wouldn't have had a problem with that, Modern Warfare 2's Campaign was great for me. Black Ops blew that out of the water... It was amazing. I'm not the most skilled player out there, Regular is about where I'm at. Every CoD game prior to this bored me at some point and just seemed too hard... Never did this happen in Black Ops. Treyarch's story is amazing, and I'd buy "Black Ops 2" or whatever just to see what else happens to Mason and Hudson and everyone... I actually felt attached to the characters this time. Next - Zombies. Kino Der Toten is one of the best Zombie Maps out there, better than the amazing Der Riese, which, until now, was my favorite map. Dempsy, Nikolai, Takeo and Richtofen are hilarious, and they can make an impossible situation to overcome all the brighter. Plus, I've never had so much fun slaughtering zombies as a Presidential Aid... Ever! "Five" is another great map in Zombies where you play as JFK, Robert McNamara, Richard Nixon and Fidel Castro as you hold off hordes of the undead in the Pentagon. How that makes any sense, I don't know. Just go with it. Split-screen System Link and XBL is also a great feature, even if it is only 2 players - my brother and I both have our own Xbox and Black Ops, so we're never short of players for a zombie match. The game's graphics are good, but not great - Reach's outshine them by a long shot, but Black Ops, like W@W, has very realistic gore in it, which Reach lacks. Now for the negatives... Multiplayer. Most people only play Call of Duty anymore for the online Multiplayer. You guys, back off, Black Ops's MP is awful. The maps are basically just a bunch of corridors and a few back alleys with windows to give people a "sniping perch." FAIL. Fifteen feet isn't nearly enough room to merit a sniper rifle use... heck, an MP5K would work better. Speaking of that, SMG`s seem to dominate the maps due to the lack of space. Snipers, as said before, out of the picture. LMG`s need a little room to use... The Stoner 63 is the only one worth using AT ALL, but you can't get that until you've bought all of the other LMG`s that you'll likely never use. AR`s are still useful, and Shotguns, primaries again, are actually usable to the same degree of effectiveness as, say, the M60 (LMG). All the weapons shoot a lot better than MW2's, though, so on the only good maps, Jungle and Array, it's actually fun to use them - heck, you can even snipe on these maps! I'd like to complain about the unlock system, though - I love the emblem creator and the fact that you can buy any perk you want at any time, saves me a lot of crap. But I no longer feel encouraged to use a weapon a lot so I can unlock all the attachments. In MW2, I'd stick with the M4 or whatever until I'd gotten everything, except Extended Mags (too hard for me lol) and the Shotgun (I loathe Noob Tubes, I only managed to unlock the shotgun for my absolute FAVORITE guns). Now, you buy each gun for 2000 CoD points, and then any attachment for 1000 - Suppressors are 2000, and Noob Tubes are 3000. Then you're finished. I don't want to waste my CoD points trying out different attachments. MW2 MADE you use them to get XP and more attachments. I now LOVE the ACOG Scope on the ACR - I never would've used that if the Thermal Scope hadn't been involved. There's no motivation here. I didn't realize that I liked the M16 with an ACOG Scope until just recently, whereas I'd have used it the instant I got it to get that Thermal (Infrared, in BO) Scope.

    Final thoughts - Good Game. Campaign gets 8.25/10 (Due to shortness). Zombies gets 10/10, and Multiplayer gets 3.5/10, terrible, save for that rare match on Array where I can crawl up onto the radio tower and snipe for a while.
    Expand
  68. Jul 10, 2011
    6
    Single player is forgettable and fails to suck you into it's plot. Multiplayer is what people actually buy the game for and it still lacks in everything. Lag issues, awful respawn points at times, but I will say this though: The multiplayer is certainly better than MW2...although no CoD games compare to CoD4.
  69. Nov 10, 2010
    10
    Ha, I find it totally hilarious how people say that the reviews are bribed because they aren't good at the game. They do bad, get angry, and then smash the industry for giving the game good reviews. That's what the angry do these days, write bad reviews (such as ebay, this website, amazon, RT). Well guess what, I would probably give this game a 9, but that would be biased as I HAVE NOT FINISHED THE GAME YET!!! And I bet most people who did put reviews haven't finished it either. The people saying the video game industry is corrupt are basically talking about themselves. Expand
  70. Nov 10, 2010
    10
    AMAZING GAME. This is what modern warfare 2 wanted to be, a great game all around. The single player is nothing short of heart stopping, the multiplayer is at least 10 times better than mw2 and i still have no idea how you people dont like this game!
  71. Mar 23, 2011
    6
    Call of Duty Black Ops doesn't do much to advance the series or change up the 'winning formula' that Call of Duty 4 established. Developed by Treyarch, they have once again made only refinements to the multi-player experience. The removal of juggernaut and stopping power perks is a good idea, as well as toning the kill-streaks down. But there's still some questionable decisions. RC-XD and second chance being the main negatives of the multi-player experience. Luckily, there are lobbies to avoid the nuisance of the aforementioned perks. The ability to go split-screen online is a massive bonus, and the 2 zombie maps included are good for a few hours. The campaign was poor and although slightly longer than Modern Warfare 2, it was boring and generic **** and with no ability to play the game any differently to the millions who have likely played it. Nonetheless, the content including multi-player and zombies, including the top-down Dead Ops, are all decent but fail to break any new ground for the series. Expand
  72. Nov 15, 2010
    10
    This is definitely a great game. i am espescially surprised at how well Treyarch did with the campaign. it was one og the funnest that i have played in years. and multiplayer as always, is amazing. i also like the new zombie mode.
  73. Nov 15, 2010
    5
    the best call of duty game to date. treyarch made a great game, keep it up guys. for me this lived up to all the hype. and the wager games are incredible.
  74. Nov 14, 2010
    10
    This is a fantastic addition to the Call of Duty Franchise, The Story is Excellent, Multi-player is addictive, and Zombies is awesome! BUT I must warn you, this game can be so frustrating. So if you have a short temper, or a good throwing arm, I'd be careful playing on a expensive TV...
  75. Nov 14, 2010
    10
    This review section shows what happens when a piece of entertainment gets popular. Whether it's Call of Duty, The Dark Knight, Avatar, or LOST, there are always haters. These people hate things that get popular and want their voices to be heard so that they can influence other people to hate it. They will come back and literally give an unhelpful vote to every review that doesn't agree with them. Whether this userscore is 0.0 or 10.0, this game will sell despite your opinion. I'm sure Treyarch is very concerned with Metacritic's user score. If this game was never hyped it's userscore would be much higher. As you can see, Cod 4 has a very high user score because it wasn't hyped much, but as time goes on more haters join. Another explanation is the inferior Battlefield fans, who always try to make it clear that everyone is missing out, except for Battlefield players. I also love all of the "These reviewers must get paid by Activision" statements. Yeah, maybe Activision is paying reviewers but do you know what is more likely? Maybe the Cod games are just good games, did you ever think of that? I would bet at least half of the Cod nation has never even looked at a review for these games. Cod games are known for their great graphics, sound, and gun mechanics. For these 3 alone a single score should never be under a 6.0. Um, I'm going to go play Black Ops now... Expand
  76. Nov 9, 2010
    8
    Let me preface this by saying that I was not a fan of COD:MW2. I felt that perks in that game stole the show. However COD:BO has pushed away my frustrations and welcomed me back with open arms into a legitimately good game. The multiplayer is the prime selling point of the title, and the system of purchases is fairly well fleshed out. It's a slight disappointment that they decided to mix in rank AND credits for weapon customization, but ultimately it forces you as a player to make a smart decision about the direction you want to go. The king of the maps is most certainly Nuketown with its great vintage feel and tight map. The standee bodies only add to the effect. My primary concern with multiplayer is bullet penetration. It feels as though practically every surface can be easily penetrated to the point that cover can feel relatively useless. Camping remains an issue, but the maps themselves don't tend to lend to a horrific amount of easy spots to hole up, and this results in a great shift away from said issue. It's difficult to discuss the campaign without spoiling, but suffice it to say that it is an enjoyable romp and the best of the COD franchise. Zombie mode is every bit as tight and crazy as you remember and will create all the whooping and hollering you'd anticipate. While the game has flaws in its hitbox detection and penetration, there's nothing gamebreaking. But alas the game itself does not necessarily break new ground, it only polishes the floor to a nice sheen. That's good enough for me. 8.5/10 Expand
  77. Apr 19, 2011
    0
    This is without a doubt just a game to get money, hardly any changes apart from time from previous games, same engine, same graphics, same gameplay and its absoloute rubbish!
  78. Nov 10, 2010
    10
    Based on the multiplayer only, this game is a no-brainer for fans of FPS games. Why are you even reading this? You know it's good. And, I hate to say it, Infinity Ward fanboys, but Treyarch makes better maps. My only gripe is that the matchmaking system still suffers from the same problems as before. Why is it still so hard to get into a game when I play with more than three friends? Getting kicked back to the menu repeatedly is not what I'd call fun! Expand
  79. Nov 14, 2010
    10
    This is by far the best COD that has been released. The new COD points available is an excellent upgrade to the series
  80. Dec 29, 2010
    9
    Half-way through the story I was thinking this game is SO repetitive but then at the end I couldn't beleive it. The story line was amazing and it all came together at the end so well. I am not a fan of zombies but I still think that havning a few friends round playing it and blaming them for what went wrong is hilarious. The Dead Ops arcade was fun for a while too.

    The multiplayer at
    the start I didnt like the maps but when I got used to the guns, maps and perks I realy started to enjoy the game. There is some overpowered and overused weapons and getting pro perks can be VERY annoying. E.G Sharing Care Packages with people to get Hardline Pro. Noob Tubers are basically away except a few C4 Spammers but every game I think needs some controversy. Still alot of campers but after all it is a Call Of Duty game.

    Overall I think It is a great game and people just don't like it because it says Treyarch on the packaging. IMO if it said Infinity Ward people would love it!
    Expand
  81. Nov 9, 2010
    6
    Newb tubes still exist and are at least as powerful as in MW2 if not more. If you played the game Time Shift you have played Black Ops. They are the same game at the core. BO add the usual MW2 to stuff like awards etc. It really seem like reheated left overs. Okay the shooting is much better. It seems we have wall hackers already. I got shoot by two different players who came around a maze of walls with just too much certainty to take me out. The only explanation is they were wall hacking. Well i like the game but i was really surprised to see that it is very similar to Time Shift. BO even has the cross bow that was in time shift. One of the best parts of the game is the structure in which you can buy attachments with earned money in the game. The awards system has always been Call of Duty's strong point and adding money to this just takes it to another level. So you decide if you'll get it or not. I think i'll keep until the hackers become unbearable. The other very important point is that the games does not seem to lag at all. The choice of game engine they used was a good one although we do sacrifice some eye candy. It is at least as good looking as MW2 but even more cartoonish. I'll take it just as long as it does not lag like in MW2. BO still sends the server out where someone in the game has to be host. Which is okay just as long as the game does not lag. Man what is up with the Critics reviews? Did they all get paid off? Also i can guarantee you they are not experienced gamers just paid political pundits. Sincerely, Expand
  82. Nov 9, 2010
    10
    If you enjoyed Modern Warfare 2, you WILL enjoy this game. I defy anyone that had fun with MW2 MP, to not like this. They have fixed numerous "problems" that existed in MW2, like boosting (no tactical insertion in FFA), no Quickscoping, and no Commando perk to get stabbed from 25 feet away.
  83. Nov 9, 2010
    10
    Awesome game! I don't understand all the haters? The graphics and voice acting is amazing. I loved the story, yes it's a little different but entertaining and well done. The multi-player credit system is brilliant and the customization options are incredible. I'm not even talking about the Zombie mode which is super. Wonderful game if you're a COD or shooter fan.
  84. Nov 9, 2010
    9
    I don't get all the negative user reviews. Clunky controls? Its the same setup modern warfare 2 had. Bad graphics? Graphics are amazing. The campaign is great and so is the nazi zombies. The only reason I did not give it a ten is that it requires you to be online for the combat training. I can't get online so I would have loved to play with bots on the map. Anyway, best call of duty yet.
  85. Nov 11, 2010
    10
    I've played Call of Duty religiously online since Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. In fact Call of Duty is what caused me to start playing console games again. I've purchased and played every one that has been released since then and enjoyed them all. However, out of all the previous editions of Call of Duty, the ones made by Treyarch have traditionally been awful. Call of Duty 3 was horrible, and World at War wasn't as good as Call of Duty 4.

    Then Modern Warfare 2 came out. Gamers were in awe with mega killstreaks, tons of unlockables, Modern Warfare 2 seemed absolutely unable to be topped. However, slowly, in game glitches were found. Very, very annoying in game glitches. And what really made me angry about it was that it took Infinity Ward so long to patch these glitches. Leaderboards were hacked. People played game types such as Headquarters or Domination just to get kills and not actually play the game type so their kill/death spreads would go up. Modern Warfare 2 slowly transformed to people doing one of three things.
    1)Quick Scoping (which is way easier than no-scoping)
    2)Noob Tubing with Danger Close and Scavenger
    3)Running around with Commando Pro and Marathon
    These three things, not to mention all the Javelin and 1887 problems just made Modern Warfare 2 unbearable to play online. Not only was it horrible, the game was also hacked countless times by people who wanted to get to 10th prestige without actually earning it.

    I had lost all faith in Call of Duty, and now Treyarch was making one. I thought that the end of Call of Duty had come, and we'd never see the game again after Modern Warfare 2.

    But then Treyarch started showing videos of the multiplayer. No more Stopping Power, no more Danger Close, and I thought to myself, well that seems pretty cool. And then the big one, no more Commando or Quick Scoping. I thought it was brilliant! Modern Warfare 2 just had so many things that made the game unbalanced and unplayable after a while.

    And then Black Ops came out, and now even the Leaderboards have been changed to rank you based on how you play as opposed to just camping and getting kills! As far as a multiplayer game goes, it's brilliant, the best one since Call of Duty 4 in balancing and fun! The fact that you have to earn the money to buy things is also brilliant and new.

    They brought back the Skorpion and AK-74, and made Shotguns primary weapons again, like they always should have been. I mean what's the point in having a pistol as a secondary when you had the choice of a shotgun instead?

    Modern Warfare 2's campaign was also awful. Treyarch has made a very, very good campaign that is quite possibly the best in the entire Call of Duty series, but I'll not spoil anything.

    Also zombies are back, which was one of my favorite things about World at War.

    So far, this game has been outstanding. So unless you're one of those kids who has a modded XBOX and thrives off of hacking leaderboards, go out and buy this game, you won't regret it.

    Thank you Treyarch for actually listening to gamers when making this game.
    Expand
  86. ALL
    Nov 13, 2010
    10
    This game could have been a lot better. All the LMG's have way too much recoil, even with a grip on. The spawn points in multiplayer are awful, and that's if you can even get in a game with your group. With a group of 5 or more it takes at least 6 attempts, or you can wait and sit in the room while it tells you that it's searching for one more player to balance teams. Once it does find one player, after waiting 10+ minutes, it will tell you that it needs 2 more to balance teams. The lack of online co-op campaign was a real let down. The Zombies matches are ok, but more of a gimmick. The graphics for the multiplayer are not anywhere near what Infinity Ward has ever offered. I'll be trading this back in in a week or two. Treyarch should stick to what it knows best, producing dated Tony Hawk games. Expand
  87. Nov 13, 2010
    8
    I think it's quite interesting that most of the people that have given this game a negative review have also given MW2 the same treatment. Why on earth would you buy or play a game based upon a game series you clearly hate? Unless you're getting paid to review it... oh wait you're not. Listen I'm no Fanboy but if you're going to review a game please use constructive criticism. No game deserves a '0' a 1 maybe. Expand
  88. Nov 15, 2010
    9
    As a stand alone game, though part of a series, this is easily 9 or 10.

    It has redundancies, just like the madden series, but as a stand alone edition, it is a work of art.
  89. Nov 15, 2010
    9
    This is a very good game, I had my doubts but Treyarch pulled it off. The single player was amazing multiplayer was fun (not to mention the lack of hacking) and the COD point system was brilliant. Yea the were some problems like the server randomly d/cing on me every now and then but these kind of things are easily fixed. Thank god no more Nuke, Thank god no more quick scoping. Im glad I went and bought this game. FYI MW2 had problems when it first came out too no game is perfect. Expand
  90. Nov 24, 2010
    9
    not since Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare have we seen a game this wholehearted and fulfilling. Campaign was excellent, introduced to the story in media res, we are taken through Alex Masons last few missions before we learn where he is being detained. Excellent story arc and bridging. The Coop Survival mode (Zombies!) is better than it was in World at War. If you didn't already realize, I am saying that it's only rival is Halo Reach's Firefight, and only just barely. The multiplayer is fun, and balanced to what I have seen. The only downside is the terrible lag, and constant host migration. At least it's faster. Expand
  91. Nov 25, 2010
    9
    Great game but the formula is getting old. I love the fact they have put so much content into this game compared MW2 which I left cheated into buying because of the hype (got bored after 3 weeks), but this game have really got me back into series. I love the 3D modeling it's very well done (Normal Maps are insane close up). But again the downfall is the fact the game still feels like the game from 4 years ago and it needs to be refreshed fast. I'm not calling this the 3rd strike but if they want hardcore to carry on they better to do something big in the next game. =] Expand
  92. Nov 23, 2010
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Many of my friends and various critics are raving about this jewel encrusted gift from the heavens, COD Black Ops; because of their rave review I went out and spent 60$ on this game. Put it in the Xbox and was immediately blown away by the fantastic opening cut scene and neat menu, selected my difficulty and began my experience. I though the whole interrogation thing was pretty cool, even though it was exactly like the one in Black for the PS2 some years ago, and began playing the first mission. Liked it at first and close up the graphics in the "cut scenes" were pretty good. Then I walked out of the bar and began shooting. that is when I noticed the terrible visuals. After about 30ft everything just blends together and becomes one massive blob of brown. I failed that mission a few times because I shot civilians instead of soldiers because I couldn't tell the difference; the visuals are that muddy. The weapon sounds also don't sound very good either. Whatever I thought, a bit of a sacrifice for good game play right? Wrong. After shooting a large number of endlessly re-spawning enemies, which all look identical by the way, I got to an alley with a car. I thought, "Wow please don't tell me I have to drive that?" remembering all the terrible driving sections in Treyarch's previous COD titles. Sure enough I have to drive it that was terrible, however, you smash through a road block which was pretty good but I missed most of the awesomeness of the situation because the screen fades and they yank you back to the stupid interrogation which just reiterates plot points that we all got hours ago. This wouldn't be so bad, but it seems, especially in the beginning of the game, they do this during every awesome moment of game play. After some more cut scenes I'm in prison with Reznov, and fighting my way past many Russian prison guards, that again, look all the same. This mission annoyed me. At one point a hallway opens up with a room at the end with enemies in, it turn out this is where they all endlessly re-spawn. if you walk down it it fails you. Not fair considering it never warns you or anything. It does this a few times in the game. It fails the mission for no reason, just because you didn't do something that the game never explained or because you walked down a hallway.
    So you escape and so begins the rather preposterous, linear and samey, story of Mason. You skip about time and every location on the globe killing everything you see, mostly Russians. The missions are very gimmicky and would only be appealing if you don't have a brain and are easily distracted by action cinema cliches. Missions involve you following a linear path doing the same thing again and again, fighting of waves of re-spawning enemies. Also, all of the characters confuse swearing for wit. More F-Bombs are dropped in the first minute of game play than in all COD games combines. The campaign isn't terrible, but it isn't anything new or exciting. It is a little longer than MW2s campaign but not nearly as good. Now as I'm explaining this to me friends the insist to me that the campaign isn't that good. They say to me, "Well hey yeah multiplayer makes up for it though." "It is the best in any COD game." I question why I should pay 60$ for a game that is only have good, but they convinced me to try it,
    Multiplayer is even worse. Let's start with the Zombie modes. Zombies had always been fun. Now it isn't. The maps are so huge, dark and confusing that it isn't fun. It is just frustrating. the characters and their voices are still as annoying as in WAW. Voice acting in this game is generally not very good, just so annoying. Now online multiplayer. the first thing I noticed was the extremely confusing menu. It has so many options and information hidden in so many menus that it makes Microsoft Access look fun and inviting. So I get into a game and the next thing I notice is the lame controls. The sticks respond even slower than in single player. Also, the maps are all horrible. Terrible lay outs and spawns coupled with the graphical issue make spotting enemies nearly impossible. There are very few good perks, weapons do no damage, especially early level ones. Not to mention they all have the same rear iron sight, that is on backwards, and the fact that half them weren't even invented yet. What really makes multiplayer unplayable is the lag and connections. It takes ages to find a game and when it does it usually lags so bad that you can't move or it just kicks you or someone in your party out of the game. Not fun. Unlocks are dumb as well. Why should I have to unlock game modes and buy guns and attachments that I already unlocked? So if you are stupid enough to wast all your money on a gun that isn't very good you're stuck with it. Kill streaks are even more game breaking than in MW2 . So to sum everything up, a very overpriced, over hyped, generic FPS. Not bad not good.
    Expand
  93. Dec 26, 2010
    6
    Ok, some of these review scores are ridiculous, im seeing 0's? There are much much worse games out there than Black Ops. I agree its not as good as MW2 by any stretch of the imagination, but that doesn't mean its a bad game. Treyarch introduced some cool new feature like the customisation, and theatre mode, some credit has to be given to Treyarch for introducing theatre to the series. While Treyarch got some things wrong they got some things right that Modern Warfare 2 did not. The Assist points are fairer, killstreaks (no nukes and kills from killstreaks do not count towads awards) etc. Dissapointed with the campaign but thats only compared to other COD games, as mentioned before there are much much worse games out there than this. This is an honest opinion and a fair score in my opinion. Expand
  94. Apr 9, 2011
    4
    Sound design and visuals are simply bad, and there is nothing realy new here. The single player campaign is short, and you dont realy feel strongly about the characters or the storyline.
  95. Nov 11, 2010
    8
    Ah, franchise annualization. Black Ops' campaign is just as satisfying as Modern Warfare 2's - you won't be doing as many interesting things, but it is longer, self-contained, and more cogent. There's a Zombie Mode and a top-down shooter thrown in for good measure, but neither are as fun as MW2's Spec Ops Mode. The multiplayer feels lacking - from levels 16 to 29 (6 hours of play-time) I didn't change a single loadout - so while I was unlocking items in MW2 for months, I had experienced 80% of the items in multiplayer within a few hours. The guns have much more recoil to boot, so mid- to long-range combat is more of a dice roll than with Infinity Ward's last game. Black Ops is a good game, but not as necessary a purchase as Modern Warfare 2 was. Expand
  96. Nov 10, 2010
    7
    What did Treyarch do with all the Hardcore modes? Also, why do I have to wait until level 19 to play Hardcore? I know it's only 19 levels, but playing on Hardcore on previous CoD installments has made me accustomed to that style of play. So I play 19 levels (screaming "!#$@ Core!" countless times) and unlock Hardcore just to find out there are only 3 modes: S&D, Team Deathmatch and FFA. WTF? Where's HQ? No Ricochet modes in Hardcore at all? I give it a 7 because it's great fun (like most CoD games) and the soundtrack is awesome (reminds me of Dynasty Warriors). I also like the purchasing of attachments so you don't have to sift through a pile of **** just to get the one you want. All in all it's a great game so far I just hope to God they add more Hardcore modes. Expand
  97. Nov 12, 2010
    10
    Great and deep, well put together and unique, on the other hand it is more COD and not much is to different. So dont expect a new revelation as apposed to a build on a great pre exsisting franchise. The single player is a little hyper active, almost to the point of stressful. At one point I drove a motorcycle through a prison camp shooting people wiht a shot gun then hijacked a truck only to dive from said truck onto a moving train! Yeah a little much... But online definately worth the money. Expand
  98. Nov 10, 2010
    9
    Easily my favorite Call of Duty, definitely after the lack of depth in MW2, the graphics are a bit of a step back I think from MW2, but in no way interfere with the game.
  99. Nov 12, 2010
    2
    I've never been a CoD fan. I wanted to try this one out, and compare it to the 'bEsT gAmE eVaR' Modern Warfare 2. Multiplayer plays exactly like it, but sadly worse. I could never find a match with my friends, I had to search myself and it still took minutes to find a match. Maps are fine, still a wonderful camping site. Zombies is still fun, but gets old VERY fast. Don't make us unlock the last few maps, thats just stupid. So what I'm trying to say here is that it is just a rehash of MW2, but with zombies. Expand
  100. Nov 12, 2010
    10
    Call of Duty Black Ops has a rich and fun campaign. It is a step in the right direction from the prior COD series. Most of the low scores for this game result from multiplayer. The multiplayer is actually excellent and more difficult than the line up my kill streaks and nuke way. It is actually more frustrating for good COD players but better for novice and intermediate players since you will not get hammered with Pavelows and Tactical Nukes and Stopping Power Perks. Nazi Zombies is unbelievable and is very fun to play in multiplayer mode. Give this game a fair chance and you will love it! Expand
  101. Nov 9, 2010
    0
    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 Collapse
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!