Average User Score: 7.4Nov 6, 2011I was certain this game would be a huge let down, after being completely addicted to CoD: MW2 for the past 18 months+. "There's no way it canI was certain this game would be a huge let down, after being completely addicted to CoD: MW2 for the past 18 months+. "There's no way it can run as smooth." "It can't have a better degree of customization." "It won't be as much fun." Wrong X3. The Singlepayer game is a bit shallow, and linear, granted. But the online multiplayer blows all other FPS military sims out of the water. Multiplayer maps are varied enough to keep both the run and gunner and the sniping camper entertained for months. Couple this with interesting game modes not found in other mil-FPS's and you have a recipe for game longevity that will make the $60 price tag seem like a bargain.
I loved MW2. I loved it. But the features and vastness of this title make MW2 seem two generations behind, not just two years.… Expand
Average User Score: 6.3Nov 14, 2010Graphics: Very Decent in my opinion. On par with MW2, textures and "build" of the spaces in the game were detailed and thought through.Graphics: Very Decent in my opinion. On par with MW2, textures and "build" of the spaces in the game were detailed and thought through. Sound: In a word; HORRIBLE. It seems to me that 3Arc decided to cut the budget in the sound department, and only record 2 sounds for every shotgun, grenade, assault rifle, claymore etc. Everything sounds the same. Game play:
Not great, not bad. In comparison to Modern Warfare 2 (which I thought was brilliant) they screwed up a few key elements. For one, when running then attempting to slouch into a prone position, instead, now you do a Superman jump and baseball slide an extra couple of body lengths from where you expected to be prone. Also, they changed the function of the d-pad to control more of the introduced elements, in a very annoying way. I team killed a few people when erroneously throwing semtex near them, instead of placing a claymore. Which brings me to...
While having a lot more to offer than previous titles in the way of customization, many of those features are useless in multiplayer. Worse, there is a lot of ambiguity amongst all the assault rifles and sub machine guns. Unless it's one of the 3-round burst weapons, or single shot, the differences between the automatic weapons are a split hair from one another. Sniper rifles are next to useless in multiplayer. Partially because none of them offer much advantage over their single-fire assault rifle counterparts. Partially because recoil and idle sway ruin any attempt for a refire or second hit. And partially because staying hidden and remote enough to make a scoped, slow weapon useful is impossible. Shotguns are too limited in range, and don't offer enough punch to make them effective in anything but urban maps in hardcore mode. For all of these faults, there should be some gaming worth playing in COD:BO multiplayer, but unfortunately it plays really, really badly. As evidenced in many a kill-cam, persons killed without being hit, knife thrusts that strike at shadows of enemies somehow getting the win. Of course this is all a product of lag, and poor connections, but its so pervasive in Black Ops that it infuriates and frustrates to no end. To this end, the game would have scored a full 3 or 4 points higher for me if more attention had been payed to making multiplayer sharp. At the end of the day, once you've beaten the campaign, and you want to play the other $50 of your $60 game, multiplayer is only worth about $6.50.… Expand