Average User Score: 4.8Nov 18, 2012this is a review for the campaign only as I haven't had the chance yet to try out the multiplayer.
Graphics: I realize that it is an olderthis is a review for the campaign only as I haven't had the chance yet to try out the multiplayer.
Graphics: I realize that it is an older engine but the game still looks great and easily on par with warfigher but not with BF3. The lighting, clarity and detail in the foliage in the jungle type areas is great. the indoor environments though are pretty basic. overall, i give the graphics an eight. i suppose Infinity ward or the publisher? is waitng for the next generation consoles before they develop a new engine. the Guns: this is arguably the most important part of any first person shooter. The guns were a big let down. gunfire seems muted and lacked punch. In addition, the guns all sound very similar to eachother. the first black ops had much better sound. these days warfighter carries the torch for realistc gun sounds with ghost recon close behind. Only two of the modern weapons were really innovative namely the flechette gun and one of the sniper rifles that could penetrate through walls The one standout feature of this game was the new overhead tactical viewpoint for one modern set where you could control individual men or machines. I hope they turn this type of warfare into a stand alone strategy game. It worked incredibly well.
The biggest let down is that none of the missions seemed very black ops. they are more like missions you would expect the marines to do. Black ops missions should rely on a bit of stealth (ghost recon), silenced weapons, and special goggles with night vision, infiltration, assasination.
further, I think the story back arc to the 80's was uncessary. they should have kept the story confined to the modern era. It was uncessary to tie the current events into what happened in Afghanistan for instance or Africa for that matter.
The weakest part of the game was the story. the main villian was completely unbelievable. This was a perfect opportunity to set up China as the main protaganist. they could have used teh korean or vietnam wars as backdrops if they really wanted to provide some context to the future events. Further, chinese soliders would actually have advanced and interesting weaponry to provide some sort of challenge. It is totally unbelievable that a former drug runner would turn into a terrorist and be able to finance technological innovations for weaponry and software which be capable of challenging established governments. His background and so called rise to power was really boring too. Not as boring as the warfighter drama with that guy's wife and kid, but pretty close.
My harshest criticism for the game though it lacked what I call an "air of reality" which some shooters achieve. It's that feeling that the people on the screen could be actual soldiers out there, doing this incredible sh#t and you feel a part of that. the first modern warfare had heaps and heaps of that feeling. even modern warfare 3 had it to a certain extent.
this game did not have it at all. It's like it was missing its shooter mojo or something. Warfighter did a much better job with shooter mojo than this in the campaign, even though the campaign itself wasn't as good. So, in summary, the game had one brilliant moment with respect to the tactical view and control system. that was ingenious. Otherwise, the game was pretty average. I'm looking forward to the multiplayer to see how it compares with warfighter. to my mind warfighter, with the exception of BF3, has the best multiplayer going at the moment. Cheers,… Expand
Average User Score: 3.2Jul 1, 2012This is a great FPS. The single player game is relatively long and has amazing content including realistic seeming war zones and special opsThis is a great FPS. The single player game is relatively long and has amazing content including realistic seeming war zones and special ops sections which are fun to play through multiple times. The multiplayer is Call of Duty. What did you expect all you reviewers giving it 5 and below? Most of the multiplayer maps are interesting visually. The weapons and upgrades are well done but I still don't think the guns sound realistic. Every FPS developer should learn from Ubisoft when it comes to making realistic gun sounds. Take the M4 in this game for instance. What the f is that all about???? It sounds like a mix between a 50 caliber machine gun and some sort of heavy cannon on a gun ship. Yo, it's an assault rifle so that means, like all assault rifles, it should sound like a friggin RIFLE!!. Anyways, giving this game a score below 6 is just silly unless you are comparing it to Black Ops. By the way, Black ops is still not a perfect game because the single player campaign's story idiotic. An escape from a Russian gulag?? Why? Fighting Germans?? Why not just leave the thing in Vietnam? Anyways, youv'e got to take into account the dogdy FPS shooters out there before giving this game a zero or something like that. There is so much good content with just the spec ops and single player campaign. The spec ops section is better than anything out there currently I think. Even better than BF3.… Expand
Average User Score: 7.1Jul 1, 2012This is great new DLC content for skyrim. For some reason, RPG's in the past have been very conservative when it came to producing dragonsThis is great new DLC content for skyrim. For some reason, RPG's in the past have been very conservative when it came to producing dragons in adventures. Perhaps the game engines couldn't handle them. Then, along comes Skyrim with a zillion dragons but falls short because these dragons are very bland and weak. I mean, come on, dragons should be bright colors and wicked spells, evil minds (none of this philosophical bs), and actually be very tough to kill. How can a cave bear be more dangerous to fight than a dragon!!?? Anayways, Skryim is still pretty awesome and this new DLC does a much better job of vampires than dragons. The creators seem to understand the vampire mythos better. The quests are pretty interesting with creepy settings which is a must for an RPG. There is still the goofy thing going on though as with all these elder scrolls games. They are all kinda goofy as compared to Dragon Age Origins or Dark Souls. The main drawback to this DLC is that you seem to spend a lot of time walking compared to the main game. Also, vampires should have new spells to attack you with which are illusion based. maybe this comes later in the game. anyways, peace.… Expand
Average User Score: 8.2Jul 1, 2012This game has a great story based on the "Heart of Darkness." The graphics for the characters and weapons are pretty good but theThis game has a great story based on the "Heart of Darkness." The graphics for the characters and weapons are pretty good but the environments are very bland without too much texture or shadow effects. It was clearly meant to run smoothly on the current generation of consoles. The game is a third person shooter and the cover mechanics work well. But, any shooter is about the guns and this is where the game really is dissappointing. The guns sound very tinny and not even close to real life weapons. You know how people make fun of shooter games by saying: "Pew pew" and so forth. These guns actually sound like that!! Ha ha. It draws away from any immersive feel you were supposed to get. It may be worth a play through for the story but as a rental only. Check out Ghost Recon Future Soldier if you like this type of game. Ubisoft knows how to make this type of game.… Expand