Generally favorable reviews - based on 89 Critics What's this?

User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1320 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
  • Summary: Treyarch is developing the next installment in the Call of Duty franchise, rumored to be set during the Cold War.
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 83 out of 89
  2. Negative: 0 out of 89
  1. Dec 16, 2010
    There are few video games released this year that you simply cannot miss, Call of Duty: Black Ops is one of them.
  2. 95
    Quotation forthcoming.
  3. Dec 10, 2010
    Treyarch have done a fine job with Black Ops. Not only does the game retain its Call of Duty aesthetic appeal, and pushes all of the series strengths seemingly as far as they can go, but now other aspects of the game are also to this high standard.
  4. Jan 16, 2011
    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!
  5. Dec 16, 2010
    Black Ops is a solid addition to the Call of Duty franchise that really puts Treyarch on the map. You won't get anything original out of it, but if you liked what came before, then you will have a blast.
  6. Dec 10, 2010
    Treyarch really brought their "A" game here with Call of Duty: Black Ops.
  7. Dec 16, 2010
    There are games that deserve to be relegated to the bargain bin, or played when there's simply nothing else on the shelf. This is one of them. It's not broken, it's just bad.

See all 89 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Nov 9, 2010
    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. Expand
  2. Apr 26, 2013
    this was biggest surprise of 2011 for me. this game was best story by far. woods and resnov are great supportive actors. mutiplayer was fun but its not really my thing. Expand
  3. Nov 10, 2010
    What can i say that the others haven't already? I've been playing all of the cod's for years and this one keeps me coming back for more just like the others did. Love the customization, the theater mode is incredible, and the zombies kick ass as usual. If you don't like zombies, don't complain about it to us. We zombie lovers don't want to hear your whining asses cry about it one more second. We pure fps shooter fans know that this game is quality, and that's all that matters. Yes, the graphics are a little dated, but they are still more than acceptable by this gamer. Buy it with a smile on your face knowing it's money well invested in countless hours of vicious gameplay. My GOTY selection for sure. Expand
  4. Nov 22, 2010
    I couldn't help but be very excited for this game because it was so well marketed and the expectation was that it would be better than modern warfare. Needless to say there was a big let down. The campain was good, but felt forced, with no real new ideas. I had hoped that it would be more of a solo mission without your team members which usually only add to the mass confusion when trying to shoot your way to safety. The game is called black ops but it never really felt like Black ops. Theres still a ways to go before Call of Duty will get character development right, and a truly engulfed story line.

    That being said, I do think that the multiplayer experience is a improvement. The perks are more even, the maps are better with numerous entry ways into every building, customization is great, stats/leaderboards are well thought out, and the new free for all game modes are fun (but you cannot gain xp, only cod points).

    As for Zombies I could'nt be bothered, I miss the spec ops, which was my favorite feature for Modern Warfare 2. Overall: Campain - 6 Multiplayer - 9
  5. Nov 22, 2011
    Never Bothered with Single player, whats the point. They are all too short and usually suck anyway. Having played Modern Warfare and MW2 I thought I would pick this up... Graphically, It should have been a $15 XBOX LIVE download title. HUGE step in the wrong direction. Lots of cool options keep the multiplayer fun. Small maps keep the combat fast, but you are always in range of someone camping on the other side of the map. I was very disappointed when I bought it after hearing from friends and family how awesome it was, traded it in with in the 2nd week. I went back to playing the previous Battlefield. Maybe it could have been fun if I had never played a previous CoD game in the past, but like i said it looked awful and i felt like i had got shafted paying for an obviously dated add on to possibly an original xbox or ps2 game Expand
  6. Nov 11, 2010
    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
  7. Nov 17, 2010
    I cannot believe many of these reviews for Black Ops. Treyarch must be paying you for putting up such B*&& S&^% for such a Lousy, yes Lousy game. I was really looking forwards to this game coming out, what an unbelievable disappointment !! . I tried to like it but its so poorly made, so in the garbage it went. Modern Warfare 2 still tops this god awful piece of crap ten times over. If your a real first person shooter gamer, no more needs to be said. Save your money. â Expand

See all 504 User Reviews

Related Articles

  1. Metacritic Users Pick the Best of 2010

    Metacritic Users Pick the Best of 2010 Image
    Published: January 10, 2011
    Our users have spoken, the votes have been tallied, and we have your picks for the best of 2010 in movies, games, TV, and music. Don't expect another victory for Kanye West or The Social Network; Metacritic users had something else in mind.