Call of Duty: Black Ops

 Xbox 360
User Score
6.7

Mixed or average reviews- based on 1770 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 966 out of 1770
  2. Mixed: 419 out of 1770
  3. Negative: 385 out of 1770
Buy Now
Buy on

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
view
per page
  1. Neelyry
    Nov 11, 2010
    5
    First off id like to say i have great high speed internet and never ever lag in any games. Except for this, lagged out of my second online game. This game has terrible servers, almost always making u lag no matter how much you pay for the internet per month. Everytime i turn this game on it makes me want to go back to medal of honor. That game never lags and was seriously underrated. MOHFirst off id like to say i have great high speed internet and never ever lag in any games. Except for this, lagged out of my second online game. This game has terrible servers, almost always making u lag no matter how much you pay for the internet per month. Everytime i turn this game on it makes me want to go back to medal of honor. That game never lags and was seriously underrated. MOH is the most realistic shooter, and so far from what ive seen it blows Black Ops out of the water. Rent MOH and tell me im wrong… Expand
  2. Jord68
    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.
  3. Berlitzexpert
    Nov 10, 2010
    5
    Hoorah! This game is gonna sell like gangbusters due to a great marketing campaign and franchise recognition. Sad, as this is just about the only positive thing I can say about this game. First off, it is not half the game "Medal of Honor" is, especially the single player. True, the plot might be intriguing, but the execution is laughable. Just by virtue of being a Treyarch game thatHoorah! This game is gonna sell like gangbusters due to a great marketing campaign and franchise recognition. Sad, as this is just about the only positive thing I can say about this game. First off, it is not half the game "Medal of Honor" is, especially the single player. True, the plot might be intriguing, but the execution is laughable. Just by virtue of being a Treyarch game that doesn't completely suck, this somehow translates into being on par with the best in the genre? Right...

    Going on, the color palette in "Black Ops" is horrendous, the graphics are generally bland and the scripting just as present as in every other title out there. However, this game gets away easy in reviews when it comes to this. Why? It's "Call of Duty".

    Aside from the visuals, the sound design is also mediocre. Listen to this next to "Medal of Honor" on a sound system (or heck; just your TV) and tell me which has the better sound mix. Hint: It is not "Black Ops". In fact, "Medal of Honor" has the best sound mix I have ever heard in a game. It is truly an acoustic marvel, and deserves to be heard.
    Adding insult to injury, a set of spastic, drugged-out-of-their-minds and pathetically acted scenes is what we get to tie everything together. "Black" did this in a much better way in 2006. On the Xbox and PS2, nonetheless.

    Also, many have made a point out of the ethical dilemma one faces when setting a FPS to a real world war. How the situation demands respect and thought. In this regard, in whatever way "Medal of Honor" failed to do so in regards to the current war in Afghanistan absolutely pales in comparison to the travesty Treyarch gives us here. JFK as a zombie-killer side-by-side with Castro? Now there is respect and historical accuracy for you! The Infinity Ward games, while being ridiculous at times, at least knew where to draw the line. Not so here. "Black Ops" is a dumb game by design and proud of it.

    In short:
    I will return "Black Ops" to my game retailer and get a title worth playing instead. "This years Biggest Disappointment"? Achievement unlocked.    … Expand
  4. InsaneMonkey
    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.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
  5. msucatch
    Nov 10, 2010
    5
    Audio sounds like MW2 playing out of speakers in a tub full of water.
    Graphics don't measure up to MW2.
    Campy remote control car and SR71.
    Gameplay is choppy/rigid/frustrating.
    Can't figure why all the critics say it's a 9 and all the gamers say it's a 6.5
  6. frizz
    Nov 11, 2010
    5
    This game does not live up to any of the hype or reviews. Outdated graphics and the unrealistic feeling make the game a bore and make you feel as though you've played it before (its just like world at war). Do yourself a favor and grab reach or MoH if your looking for a good fps.
  7. chotzy
    Nov 11, 2010
    5
    just way way to buggy i mean we pay full price for an unfinished product its like ordering a **** pizza with a slice missing. while i didnt like the camping and hacking in modern warfare 2 it did look better overall, i mean that home screen is a joke. its basiclly world at war but 20 years later same old engine same old **** you have to have A GOLD MEMBERSHIP AND INTERNET CONNECTION TOjust way way to buggy i mean we pay full price for an unfinished product its like ordering a **** pizza with a slice missing. while i didnt like the camping and hacking in modern warfare 2 it did look better overall, i mean that home screen is a joke. its basiclly world at war but 20 years later same old engine same old **** you have to have A GOLD MEMBERSHIP AND INTERNET CONNECTION TO PLAY AGAINST BOTS enough said… Expand
  8. Jools86
    Nov 11, 2010
    5
    Disappointing. I cant understand how the gameplay has got worse in the 2 years since they developed the wonderful World at War. There appear to be some obvious issues with gameplay in multiplayer. Crouching doesn't seem to work properly in Black Op, you have to depress the LEFT Thumb stick on Tactical a few times before a crouch is recognised. Also the Graphics are noticeable worse thanDisappointing. I cant understand how the gameplay has got worse in the 2 years since they developed the wonderful World at War. There appear to be some obvious issues with gameplay in multiplayer. Crouching doesn't seem to work properly in Black Op, you have to depress the LEFT Thumb stick on Tactical a few times before a crouch is recognised. Also the Graphics are noticeable worse than MW2. The movement of your team-mates are very jerky as well. Compared to MW2 Multiplayer, this is a noticeable step down.… Expand
  9. vfr00guy
    Nov 11, 2010
    5
    My opinion on Call of Duty, Black Ops (CoD:BO) is based on the fact that I play the Call of Duty series games on the Xbox 360 for the overall â
  10. Beorthric
    Nov 11, 2010
    5
    This brief review focuses on the single-player mode, as I have yet to properly tryout the multi-player. After all the hype, Iâ
  11. thunderCAT
    Nov 12, 2010
    5
    Exact same gameplay as the past three CoDs. Different looking weapons, s**t maps and spawn system. Zombies is okay, not much new since WaW. Single player campaign tries way too hard and I think it suffers for it. This game is meh at best.
  12. AJOwenXD
    Nov 23, 2010
    5
    At times this game can be quite fun when you are doing well online, but mainly quite tedious in the fact that online its always the same kind of deaths - killed by a camper - or killed after getting several hit markers. This is so frustrating! Sometimes it takes 3 shots with a shotgun even if it is about 3 yards away. Private matches are no way near as fun than on mw2 and so finally thisAt times this game can be quite fun when you are doing well online, but mainly quite tedious in the fact that online its always the same kind of deaths - killed by a camper - or killed after getting several hit markers. This is so frustrating! Sometimes it takes 3 shots with a shotgun even if it is about 3 yards away. Private matches are no way near as fun than on mw2 and so finally this game does not live up to mw2.… Expand
  13. williamwiggles
    Jul 29, 2011
    5
    williamwiggles
    Jul 29, 2011
    10
    This game just doesn't have the finesse that MW2 had. The only thing Black Ops really strikes as impressive is the Zombies game mode. While zombies remains really fun, Multiplayer and Campaign are a sad sight. More or less, I occasionally come to play zombies. But for other Call of Duty related purposes, stick to MW2 and wait for MW3.
  14. manofsin1975
    Nov 16, 2010
    5
    well what can i say, after being blown away with mw and wm2, i unfortunatley found black ops a big let down. the game is a mish mash of world at war, men of valour, moh rising sun and castle wolfenstine. u play between 1945 upto 1968. u are hearded along the game play, following some one else who never helps out when u need him. there are perfetic sequencies when u have to bord a boat orwell what can i say, after being blown away with mw and wm2, i unfortunatley found black ops a big let down. the game is a mish mash of world at war, men of valour, moh rising sun and castle wolfenstine. u play between 1945 upto 1968. u are hearded along the game play, following some one else who never helps out when u need him. there are perfetic sequencies when u have to bord a boat or similar. if u r going to get this game in the hope that u wil be useing the latest weapons u will be dissapointed. what made the first 2 games so good was the massive expanse of the platform and the reality of useing the wrong weapons but in black ops, u can throw umpteen grenades at a hind but it still wont be damaged bcos u have to fly it. the online stuff is more modern but the sounds seem very dumbed down and the the format of buying released weapons is very dull and frustrating. get it as a present, dont waist ur own money as u will go back to mod warfare in less than a week...… Expand
  15. nickWHAT
    Nov 22, 2010
    5
    Okay, so I'm gonna give this game a REAL review. As a longtime fan, I wasn't too excited to hear Treyarch was putting another CoD title out. I mean, I logged over ten days of play time on World at War, but I thought it was the nowhere near as good as Modern Warfare. And then Modern Warfare 2 came out, and blew my mind. It was a HUGE improvement over the mediocre WaW, and kept me in aOkay, so I'm gonna give this game a REAL review. As a longtime fan, I wasn't too excited to hear Treyarch was putting another CoD title out. I mean, I logged over ten days of play time on World at War, but I thought it was the nowhere near as good as Modern Warfare. And then Modern Warfare 2 came out, and blew my mind. It was a HUGE improvement over the mediocre WaW, and kept me in a trance for the better part of a year. So naturally, when I heard Treyarch was coming out with Black Ops, I was not sold. Of course, I bought it, just because all my friends do, and I like to keep up with the times. But I sure as hell was not gonna wait in line at midnight like every other person brainwashed to think this was a brand new CoD title coming out. Because let's face it, it's not. It's every other title before it, with a couple new features. In all, it has worse graphics than MW2, absolute disregard for sniper-friendly maps, a lackluster knifing system, and a horrible hosting system. Now don't get me wrong, it does have some improvements; The massive customization options, the wager matches, the in-game currency, and some of the new killstreaks are enjoyable, and make it easier to build the inevitable addiction that you undoubtedly will develop. So, all in all, I know I'll be playing it until the next installment by Infinity Ward, and yes, I am already addicted to it. But face it, just because you're addicted to something, doesn't make it good.… Expand
  16. RezzaDee
    Jul 27, 2011
    5
    Ok so most of the reviews are from trolls who started a "I hate call of duty" fan club although they still buy it every year. Anyway I hate EA more but activision are much more greedy. Now I prefer this single player campaign to all other cod games, but the multiplayer sucks mega balls. Campers, kids, noobs and the occasional Jesus on YouTube thinking the S.A.S are going to phone him upOk so most of the reviews are from trolls who started a "I hate call of duty" fan club although they still buy it every year. Anyway I hate EA more but activision are much more greedy. Now I prefer this single player campaign to all other cod games, but the multiplayer sucks mega balls. Campers, kids, noobs and the occasional Jesus on YouTube thinking the S.A.S are going to phone him up for help. Now zombie mode is cool but the maps are fail. Wager is cool but the maps are fail. Other then that online is fail.… Expand
  17. naytflix
    Dec 25, 2010
    5
    Overly anticipated let down of the year. Campaign is the only thing keeping me from giving this a zero......The online play was overly ambitious with the interesting wager matches and nice weapon customization, but that certainly doesn't cover up the bland gameplay, graphics, maps, guns, and killstreaks. The game is below mediocre and is popular because it has the "honor" of being brandedOverly anticipated let down of the year. Campaign is the only thing keeping me from giving this a zero......The online play was overly ambitious with the interesting wager matches and nice weapon customization, but that certainly doesn't cover up the bland gameplay, graphics, maps, guns, and killstreaks. The game is below mediocre and is popular because it has the "honor" of being branded as a Call Of Duty game.… Expand
  18. shadowstang
    Jan 8, 2011
    5
    Awesome game! Is what I thought at first , the more i played, the more I realized how much work it needs. After one day of multiplayer you will see they nailed it when they made COD Modern Warfare and they should have kept it that way. The game quickly turns into a HUGE campfest even if you team objective games like capture the flag. The grenade spamming is RIDICULOUS, you can be runningAwesome game! Is what I thought at first , the more i played, the more I realized how much work it needs. After one day of multiplayer you will see they nailed it when they made COD Modern Warfare and they should have kept it that way. The game quickly turns into a HUGE campfest even if you team objective games like capture the flag. The grenade spamming is RIDICULOUS, you can be running around in your own territory and BOOM! Which is fine, up until you see the kill cam and that grenade came from half way across a map from someone who just chucked it in the air. Dont even get me started with the spawn points, its almost like they didnt bother changing the spawn points between the free for all gameplay and the team gameplay, you would think you would be spawned in a safe zone near your team, right? Wrong. I have lost track of how many times I have spawned and gotten shot 2 seconds after and the kill cam shows about 5 enemies around me and my whole other team is on the other side of the map. Or my favorite is when you find a decent spot to actually snipe, and you place a claymore in the one spot they HAVE TO come in, lo and behold I get stabbed in the back (WTF?!) , the enemy just spawned there, claymore still sitting directly in front of the "one way in"..... Anyways you get the picture, one last thing, I think its ridiculous that a sniper rifle , when you are prone , has retarded amounts of recoil, when you can go full auto with an assault rifle and get almost no recoil?… Expand
  19. Nosidda89
    Mar 2, 2011
    5
    I can't understand why people love this game so much. In fact, this game is almost as overrated as World of Warcraft and Bioshock. Not saying Bioshock was bad, I was ok, but what was the big deal? I gave Bioshock a 7 out of 10, but that's for another day. Anyway, Call of Duty Black Ops seemed to show promise when people first saw it, even I was a little excited to try it out. Until I foundI can't understand why people love this game so much. In fact, this game is almost as overrated as World of Warcraft and Bioshock. Not saying Bioshock was bad, I was ok, but what was the big deal? I gave Bioshock a 7 out of 10, but that's for another day. Anyway, Call of Duty Black Ops seemed to show promise when people first saw it, even I was a little excited to try it out. Until I found out who developed the game. Freakin Treyarch, when they're the one's making a Call of Duty game, it's never a good sign. I decided to get it and try it anyway, but ended up trading it in literally days after I got it. It was boring, why was it boring? Because it's the exact same thing as any other Call of Duty game. There's nothing new here at all, not even the Zombie mode is new, that was available in World At War, which was also made by freakin Treyarch. If only Infinity Ward were the ones making every Call of Duty game, the series would be so much better, I spit at Activision for firing them. This company releases a new Call of Duty game every year, but they hardly make good upgrades with them, and most of the time, it's the same game that we had last time. The only Call of Duty games that were any kind of upgrade were the Modern Warfare games. Those are fun. But what about Black Ops? Again, same thing we've been playing for a long time, no upgrades other than earning credits to spend on weapon upgrades, but is that really worth paying $60 for, over just playing a Call of Duty you already have that's the same exact thing? The multiplayer is the same, the zombie mode is the same, and the campaign is just plain stupid. Worst shooter campaign I've ever seen. Now this doesn't mean that the game isn't enjoyable by some people. The multiplayer is fun for a while, but it's really not different from what you already have. Here's basically who this game is for, it is specifically made for hardcore fans of the series. It's like the Majora's Mask of Call of Duty, only huge fans will like it alot. As for those who are new to shooters, or those who like playing Call of Duty but are not real big fans of it, like me, this game is not for you. If you want to play a Call of Duty game, just play Call of Duty 4. It is much more entertaining than Black Ops, and unlike Black Ops Call of Duty 4 was a great game changer for the series. NEWS FLASH ACTIVISION: It's time for change! 5/10.… Expand
  20. BackwaterRifle
    Jan 28, 2011
    5
    Wait... Isn't this just the same as all the other call of duty's? The campaign is not worth playing, unless you wan't to be dissapointed. Multi Player is Multi Player which is just as poop as MW2. Zombies is the only thing that saves this game, but does not make worth 50 dollars. Why not pick up AC: Brotherhood, Halo:Reach, or an older title, such as Bioshock or Modern Warfare(the mostWait... Isn't this just the same as all the other call of duty's? The campaign is not worth playing, unless you wan't to be dissapointed. Multi Player is Multi Player which is just as poop as MW2. Zombies is the only thing that saves this game, but does not make worth 50 dollars. Why not pick up AC: Brotherhood, Halo:Reach, or an older title, such as Bioshock or Modern Warfare(the most respectible CoD), or even Fallout 3 game of the year addition. In other words, wait till this is on the clearence rack.… Expand
  21. GameInterpretor
    Oct 31, 2013
    5
    Story is great; perhaps the best Call of Duty stor.. oh wait MW3 came out. Still pretty good but the graphics are beyond horrendous on a count of the older version of an already dated engine. Multiplayer still does and always will be the worst.

    5 out of 10
  22. Sceptic
    Mar 26, 2011
    5
    'Allright then,who am I?'
    'American spec-ops?Check'
    'Who am I killing today?Zombies,Commies,Terrorists or Nazi's?'
    'Terrorists again?Ok,damn. I wanted Aliens this time,I'd show them who's boss'
    'Didn't i do this last year?I did?'
    Meh.
    Almost single handedly destroying the FPS.
  23. sweexmonxx
    Mar 13, 2011
    5
    Call of Duty Black Ops was one of my most wanted FPS games ever, until I bought the game, the whole game is absolutely rubbish.

    The story isn't great (not surprisingly), I won't spoil anything for any new comers to Black Ops or the Franchise but I will say you will be disappointed or if you don't care about the story then you shouldn't have any problem. (This game is nominated in BAFTA    Call of Duty Black Ops was one of my most wanted FPS games ever, until I bought the game, the whole game is absolutely rubbish.

    The story isn't great (not surprisingly), I won't spoil anything for any new comers to Black Ops or the Franchise but I will say you will be disappointed or if you don't care about the story then you shouldn't have any problem. (This game is nominated in BAFTA VGA for best story, how!?)
    The gameplay is mostly the same as the other past games but with a few tweaks to the gameplay which is very Minor.
    This game is also very intense, Lot's of explosions, grenades going off, your allies shouting. This isn't one of the best in the Series.

    The online mode is what really shines the most. The online is decent, new weapons, killstreaks, equipment and minor gameplay tweaks. But even the online play is not good, I feel it's just getting old and boring. But the best part of the game is zombies, a return from World at war, but it has a lack of maps to play on but with the New first strike adds an extra map but it's not enough.

    Call of Duty: Black Ops is kind of decent to play, I regret buying it but I do go back to play it and it may get better when more map packs are released. Not a must buy for new comers or even fans but try it.    … Expand
  24. Ixziga
    Mar 23, 2011
    5
    Frankly the singleplayer is just crap. Despite the several slightly different environments you get to play in everything looks and feels about the same because of gameplay that never evolves and a totally boring color palette that also never changes. I could care less if it's longer since it's just more time to not be having any fun at all. The multiplayer is good - in theory. What thatFrankly the singleplayer is just crap. Despite the several slightly different environments you get to play in everything looks and feels about the same because of gameplay that never evolves and a totally boring color palette that also never changes. I could care less if it's longer since it's just more time to not be having any fun at all. The multiplayer is good - in theory. What that theory doesn't include is HOST ADVANTAGE which I absolutely guarantee will haunt every match you ever play with instantaneous deaths, invulnerable enemies, and spawn camping - camping -camping. Camper friendly perks, guns, maps, everything. Balance? No one who honestly plays this game could possibly find it balanced. Zombies is a slightly redeeming quality if there were more than 2 maps and 1 that you have to burn and unnecessary $15 to get as DLC (not including the dead ops arcade which is fun but super limited). At this point you have to face the truth, which is that Activision is publishing CoD for money, not the buyer. If it wasn't for wasting money on so many of their games I wouldn't have known how this was possible, but here's the answer. Activision uses the following to get buyers - promising to deliver on past greatness (CoD 4) - Promising to fix problems - Establishing a forum for people to communicate to the developers But none of these things matter because - Activision refuses to release a new game for fear that they could alter what they view to be the golden formula - Actually building the game with problems so they can claim to have something to fix when it's time for another sequel - Activision's money lust has proven that they don't give a rat's ass about the community so have fun banging your head against a wall in the forums
    here's the fact, if you want Activision to start caring about their community, then you have the power to do so, it's called a boycott.
    when the next CoD comes out, you simply don't buy it because Activision is not delivering the goods promised. When Activision finally gets beat over the head by a lack of sales, then they'll get their ape-like brains to build a connection between profit and respecting the community. On the other hand, if you DO purchase the next CoD and it turns out the same way, then you're rewarding their behavior of **** the CoD franchise for profit. I want to see CoD return to it's former glory but that's just not happening under the lordship of the Activision pig.    … Expand
  25. bainsterdeluxe
    Mar 27, 2011
    5
    when I first heard about the premise behind this COD installment, I was very, VERY interested. I'm one for the cool conspiracy theory storyline. The undercover and subterfugal feeling that I got throughout playing was awesome, and I genuinely did enjoy the story, even though it was terribly short. Then I went online. Utter garbage. To this day, there always seems to be more of an onus onwhen I first heard about the premise behind this COD installment, I was very, VERY interested. I'm one for the cool conspiracy theory storyline. The undercover and subterfugal feeling that I got throughout playing was awesome, and I genuinely did enjoy the story, even though it was terribly short. Then I went online. Utter garbage. To this day, there always seems to be more of an onus on the multiplayer element, and still nothing has beaten COD4 for the fun and style, in my opinion. I have been attempting to play on veteran mode, having done the previous titles with some effort, but this one takes the mickey. I agree @ColdSpike, it is a shocking display for upping the difficulty of a game by simply throwing a thousand enemies at you, all of which are throwing grenades, and then changing the points where the game hits a checkpoint so they are too few and far between to bother with playing. The only thing saving this title is the actual storyline, which still could have done with more development...oh and zombies. Just for a laugh.… Expand
  26. greekaussie
    May 20, 2011
    5
    im speaking on behalf of the singleplayer game as that is what i mainly play on fps (i know, theres some of us out there that still do) Having played all cod games i have to say that technically this is pretty good. tight controls, pretty good graphics etc. but i have to say that i just got...well....bored halfway through the game. Maybe im getting over these shooters or ive just playedim speaking on behalf of the singleplayer game as that is what i mainly play on fps (i know, theres some of us out there that still do) Having played all cod games i have to say that technically this is pretty good. tight controls, pretty good graphics etc. but i have to say that i just got...well....bored halfway through the game. Maybe im getting over these shooters or ive just played too many but this game doesnt compel me to finish it. crysis 2 kept my attention alot better than this. and whats with all those inbetween interogation scenes? images flashing on the screen, dark room and an uninteresting angry character (matter of fact every ones angry in this game) make for some irritating cutscenes. best cods afor me still is 2 and 4.… Expand
  27. willmaster123
    Jun 5, 2011
    5
    Black Ops is not necessarily a horrible game, in fact it can be really fun sometimes, but there are some issues that are too bit to let this game be better. The first issue is the campaign, which clearly takes the idea of 'constant extreme action' from MW2 way too far. Every mission has slow motion that is so over the top it seems stupid, and they all have unbelievable events such asBlack Ops is not necessarily a horrible game, in fact it can be really fun sometimes, but there are some issues that are too bit to let this game be better. The first issue is the campaign, which clearly takes the idea of 'constant extreme action' from MW2 way too far. Every mission has slow motion that is so over the top it seems stupid, and they all have unbelievable events such as riding a motorcycle out of a building and then jumping onto a moving train at 100 mph, and while they look cool, they will make you say "Really Treyarch?" The story is confusing, but it is fairly good, especially by the end of the story where everything comes together, and it should be interesting to see how the MW series will link to this series, but one issue i have is with Reznov. The hardened and old WW2 character from World at War is back somehow, and his return simply screams that they only had him return as a stupid, cheesy story arch. However his story is still quite good, and also quite good for a shooters story. However the campaign gameplay suffers heavily, in the way that it simply is not fun. In this, even more so then the previous Call of Duty games, it is simply going around the next corner and shooting the same enemies, often with the same guns. It feels as if every mission is exactly the same, and it seems Treyarch thought they could bring in variety by adding 'explosions' and 'slow motion' almost everywhere, but it doesn't work. And of course, the horrible length of the game is simply too small to almost even call it a full campaign. Perhaps if they didn't have activision up their ass to make it an annual release, they would not have such issues and they would be able to actually work on a quality release. The multiplayer side is a different story however. It has issues of course, some very bad actually, but for the most part the new things that Treyarch brought were good. The wager matches are great fun, with games such as Gun Game and One in the Chamber, they are unique and even technically have a meaning. Their called Wager matches because you wage money, if you get onto the top 3 you get a new thing called 'CoD Points', which are important because their now used to buy almost everything equipment-wise after you unlock it. However the biggest issue, as it was in MW2, is the Multiplayer simply has too many balancing and camping issues. Its obvious that the maps support campers by having many little nooks and crannies where someone can hide and kill, and the balancing issues are, at this point, too severe. There are simply too many guns that are clearly better than all the other guns, and the fact that higher level characters get the guns first makes the game hard and unfair to the lower levels. The guns are all supposed to be equal, however they seemed to abandon that theory with Black Ops, and made guns such as the Famas and Commando so overpowered that they seem unstoppable. Also, the Killstreaks are ridiculous and beyond just overpowered. The guy with the highest amounts of kills can get things such as a radar map which shows the direction enemies are facing, or they can go into a Gatling gun which can kill everyone on the map twice, and even a nuke at 25 kills which ends the game, meaning the person with the most kills simply gets MORE kills because he has so many kills. Its all very disappointing from the series which produced Call of Duty 4, and its even more disturbing that even after MW2 had very similar issues, Treyarch did not listen. The graphics, for lack of a better word, need to be a bit redone. They do look good, and at some points fantastic, but there has been literally nothing done since MW2, and the things they could do now that far more graphically superior games have been coming out such as Crysis 2 and Witcher 2, are endless. Overall i give the game a 5, the campaign has a good story with a few faults, but quite bad gameplay, and the multiplayer is fun, but unfair, unbalanced, and ridiculous.… Expand
  28. cgareth
    May 23, 2011
    5
    What a shame. The opportunities to take this franchise further and to build on Modern Warfare have been wasted.

    As I understand it, Treyarch had no hand in the previous installment and the game feels as if they haven't even played it themselves - gone are the immersive and realistic sound FX (eg. feet on gravel/earth/concrete, the attention to detail in even the individual gunfire) and    What a shame. The opportunities to take this franchise further and to build on Modern Warfare have been wasted.

    As I understand it, Treyarch had no hand in the previous installment and the game feels as if they haven't even played it themselves - gone are the immersive and realistic sound FX (eg. feet on gravel/earth/concrete, the attention to detail in even the individual gunfire) and realistic player pov animations: the sounds are poor (footsteps sound as if you're walking in squeaky shoes, the gunfire is tinny and well, simply unrealistic) and it feels more like 'just a video game' than Modern Warfare.

    I spent a few days playing it before returning to and remaining with Modern Warfare.    … Expand
  29. SargeGO
    May 25, 2011
    5
    An okay game. While this is a step up from the rest of the Call of Duty games after 4, it still isn't that good. The story is still bad, it just has a better singleplayer experience that the rest.While I will give treyarch props for changing up the multilayer from Modern Warfare, it still isn't good multiplayer. Zombies also isn't as fun as it was in CoD WaW.
  30. huttjabbathe
    Jun 17, 2011
    5
    I found this game to be rather blah of a game. There really wasn't anything added to the CoD franchise with this game. It's pretty much the same as the games before it. And zombies? I mean really, what's so special about the zombie mode? I didn't much care for the zombie mode in World at War so why should I care now?
  31. DMuhny
    Jul 10, 2011
    5
    Decent game. Modern Warfare 2 was definitely better in my opinion. Both in gameplay and in graphics. Maps are good. Not a fan of Treyarch. They seem to have choppy gameplay, poor animations, and inferior weapons. They also like to satisfy kids with zombies all the time. Childish in my opinion.
  32. KingerSays
    Aug 17, 2011
    5
    Probably the worst COD game, but it still is enjoyable... If you ignore it's many flaws, such as the overuse of the perk "Ghost", some weapons being overpowered, and "Blop" shotting, caused by a flaw in the perk "Second Chance".
  33. MaxxSwan13
    Sep 15, 2011
    5
    It gets boring after a while. LOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO
  34. SkizDriz
    Oct 14, 2011
    5
    COD was a good game for the last decade. Now it is blatantly a regurgitated annual clone. It has no direction, it's plots are interchangeable and predictable. The campaign sports egregious graphical anomalies, such as helicopters that bounce like rubber balls when they hit the ground. Its a shame. Host advantage has completely ruined the multi-player aspect of this game. DedicatedCOD was a good game for the last decade. Now it is blatantly a regurgitated annual clone. It has no direction, it's plots are interchangeable and predictable. The campaign sports egregious graphical anomalies, such as helicopters that bounce like rubber balls when they hit the ground. Its a shame. Host advantage has completely ruined the multi-player aspect of this game. Dedicated servers are nowhere to be found, and though it is the most successful franchise ever it fails to deliver on this small piece of overhead. This game boils down to the same repetitive formula over and over, and its time is almost up. MW2 was better in every way, and after the IW scandal I won't be buying any further entrances into COD. I only got this game to play with my work friends but now we are moving to a more mature shooter that is due out very soon.

    Time to make a new game with dedicated servers? Doubt it. Burn in hell, COD.    … Expand
  35. Kanazawa
    Nov 24, 2011
    5
    Honestly at first all I did was compare this to MW2. I truly hated this game for quite a while. Eventually I actually went back to MW2, and could not stand it. I then realized this game is quite simply amazing. The graphics exceeded the predecessors, and so did the game play. I now compare MW3 to this one, and without a doubt the multiplayer in this game is still without a doubt better.Honestly at first all I did was compare this to MW2. I truly hated this game for quite a while. Eventually I actually went back to MW2, and could not stand it. I then realized this game is quite simply amazing. The graphics exceeded the predecessors, and so did the game play. I now compare MW3 to this one, and without a doubt the multiplayer in this game is still without a doubt better. This is honestly the best FPS I've ever played to this day.… Expand
  36. CaptainSalty
    Dec 2, 2011
    5
    Not the biggest fan of this game. I basically bought it for the Zombie mode in it, which is off the chain in my opinion. I enjoyed how the multiplayer was designed to encourage continued play and leveling up by having so many minor achievements that could earn you points as you played, but overall the multiplayer lobby system was such a failure that it is almost unplayable for me.Not the biggest fan of this game. I basically bought it for the Zombie mode in it, which is off the chain in my opinion. I enjoyed how the multiplayer was designed to encourage continued play and leveling up by having so many minor achievements that could earn you points as you played, but overall the multiplayer lobby system was such a failure that it is almost unplayable for me. Constantly getting kicked out of lobbies because the host could not be migrated is simply inexcusable. Same thing in the zombie mode multiplayer lobby, which is an even bigger problem, since sometimes you'll find the good fortune to find everyone else having a mic in your lobby, then you get kicked out and have to wade through all the other mic-less goofballs out there who seem to think that they can be Rambo and survive without communication with the rest of the group. Single Player campaign had a lot of "explosive" moments that fell short of any emotion or awe-inspiring feelings to me. I actually struggled to finish single player mode, and not because it was too difficult; it was too BORING!! I might be alone in this feeling, as most of my friends disagree with me on this, but there you have it. I recommend buying this game only if you are ready to shell out the extra 30+ dollars to download and play the zombie maps, which are very very fun to me, although I feel raped after looking back and seeing how much I payed for them all... Well, not really, but it's still a complete rip off, despite the fun that can be had from playing them. This game gets a 5 from me ONLY because of the zombie mode. Not worth the full retail price for the game; I wish I had waited until it cost less, about 30-40 dollars less to be more exact.… Expand
  37. C6ZR1
    Dec 7, 2011
    5
    The only thing that saves this game from complete failure is the Zombies mode. Treyarch developers are great at the whole "copy and paste" game. Come up with some more original ideas and then maybe you could be considered a good developer like your big brother IW was before they lost West and Zampella.
  38. SethRidgefire
    Nov 14, 2012
    5
    It all comes down to connection issues and lag comp. When the game plays well, it's incredibly fun. When it doesn't, it tests your frustration and temper during the wild inconsistencies due to being half a second behind other players. What you see and do on your screen doesn't seem to matter.

    Overall, they've taken the best parts of Black Ops and the worst parts of MW3 and combined them    It all comes down to connection issues and lag comp. When the game plays well, it's incredibly fun. When it doesn't, it tests your frustration and temper during the wild inconsistencies due to being half a second behind other players. What you see and do on your screen doesn't seem to matter.

    Overall, they've taken the best parts of Black Ops and the worst parts of MW3 and combined them into this game. Treyarch had the chance to really distance themselves and make a fresh superior game. This isn't it. But hell, at least it's better than MW3, but just barely.    … Expand
  39. TheJeffness
    Nov 16, 2012
    5
    I was excited to try this after a lot of publications said it was way different than the past COD games, which I got bored with after modern warfare 2.
    Sadly this is only partly true. The single player game has improve quite a lot, but the multiplayer/zombies stays essentially the same.
    First the story is a ton better....I was actually constantly looking forward to the next part of    I was excited to try this after a lot of publications said it was way different than the past COD games, which I got bored with after modern warfare 2.
    Sadly this is only partly true. The single player game has improve quite a lot, but the multiplayer/zombies stays essentially the same.

    First the story is a ton better....I was actually constantly looking forward to the next part of the story. There is a huge amount of suspense built throughout the game because you know that **** is about to hit the fan with a America's drone force attacking itself. I usually dont like stories that jump around, but this works very well. Each level is completely different, varied, and in a different location...and you dont get lost within the timeline. It is cool how it allows you to make "Choices", but this feels like it wasnt built from the ground up....rather it was thrown in afterword because the different way of doing things seems tacked on. Some have said there is an open world element to the game....THIS IS NOT TRUE AT ALL...by open world they must mean a field surrounded invisible walls and only 2 routes to take. This is not open world and actually makes the game worse. Scripted sequences have always made the COD games stand out for action movie-like breathtaking sequences....but I think its time to move on. Yes, some of the scripted sequences within gameplay make for great parts, but many times it feels like my skill/shooting/moving abilities dont even matter because things are just flying by so fast and it feels that I would have survived, lets say a chase scene where you are shooting from the back of a truck , without even firing a bullet. Also for a scripted game, I dont understand why there are sometimes unlimited respawning enemies....I will be at a part in the game where I am constantly killing bad dudes, and they just keep coming, because I am unaware that I am supposed to move forwards....This especially gets annoying when you spend time killing an unknown number of buddies, decide to move up, than a random grenade lands at your feet or your hit by a mortar. The random deaths in this game from random greades really pisses me off,

    The multplayer is disappointing. The pick 10 feature is the only good new feature. Everyone has heard the arguments about why COD multplayer sucks now, so I will just list a few brief complaints...
    1. There is no concept of a "front line" in this game....you will be facing a direction or moving in a direction for 15 seconds, and then suddenly someone has spawned behind your team and kills you with you not even knowing they are there. I know this cuts down on camping, but there must be better ways...I shouldnt have to keep looking behind at an area I just cleared.. FLANKING SHOULD BE A TEAM STRATEGY, not a spawning coincidence 2. First to be seen dies....there is really no point in aiming at heads because all the guns fire 100 bullets a second, and have no recoil....many people dont know that in console games there is a slight auto-aim in shooter games when your cursor gets close to a target. This is fine in games like Halo where you have time to dodge or take cover, but a slight auto aim with 1000 shots per seconds, 2 hit deaths, and shots going thru all walls, makes this game just plain stupid. ALL YOU DO IS SEE SOMEONE, SHOOT, AND IF YOU HAVE A FASTER FIRING GUN...YOU WIN! I realize that this game takes fast reaction time and reflex time, but I dont have that accuracy with my thumb...with a mouse I do, so it makes it so little teens with no IQ who only play COD ever have a chance of winning. You cant outsmart them because there is no way or time to....they see you first, you die, and they are probably behind you spawning in an area you just were in. It would be nice if there was any difference in the guns like in counter-strike GO....I mean I suck at that game on consoles because I dont have an accurate thumb from only playing COD all day, but I am amazing on PC...but atleast in that game there is actual RECOIL with the guns, and certain ways to shoot them...In this game you just aim in general direction and hold down bullet. I will admit that the multiplayer is addicting and a bit fun, but no other game makes me so angry. Its fun for awhile, but if I play multiplayer for more than an hour I am depressed and angry as ****....Battlefield 3, halo, counter-strike I would be having fun after an hour.. Overall. If you like modern warfare and black ops story, you will like this games single player a lot. Best story/characters/suspense/variation yet. If you hated most the other games single player story.characters then there is actually a chance you will like this. I you dont like call of duty multiplayer. you wont like this. If you like COD multiplayer, you will like this.

    Story = 9.2
    Graphics = 6.3
    multiplayer = 6.5
    Replay = 8
    Sound = 7.5
    Originality = 6    … Expand
  40. soldar
    Jun 26, 2020
    5
    Campaña entretenida pero no tanto para querer terminarla. El modo zombies es lo más entretenido. El multijugador es lo mejor del juego
  41. mustado
    Oct 21, 2022
    5
    não vale a pena jogar. É só mais um cod, entad doad daodew fffad fafdf nfff
  42. ColdSpike
    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    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
  43. polish57
    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
  44. reedissleeping
    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    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. Mandala
    Nov 12, 2010
    4
    ** -- >>> I wanted to clarify to people that take issue with others saying that the reviews are bribed / paid off, that the claims of bribed scores are CORRECT, and it isn't just ActiVision who do this.
    Review sites make revenue by having people visit their site, and if other sites are putting up the first reviews of the latest hot game, people will go to them instead. Game publishers buy    ** -- >>> I wanted to clarify to people that take issue with others saying that the reviews are bribed / paid off, that the claims of bribed scores are CORRECT, and it isn't just ActiVision who do this.
    Review sites make revenue by having people visit their site, and if other sites are putting up the first reviews of the latest hot game, people will go to them instead. Game publishers buy off high review scores by telling sites that they will receive an advanced copy of their game for review ahead of the retail release date ONLY IF the game receives a score of >80, or >90. They won't make this condition to all review sites, but they will to the popular ones, whose reviews will affect opinions the most.

    The incentives given for high scores also go beyond that. If a review site gives a score the publisher doesn't like, they won't receive an advance copy for future titles, putting that review site at a disadvantage to other sites that can review the game ahead of them - and when a site is blacklisted by a large publisher like ActiVision, that can mean a LOT of titles that will be missed. Call of Duty is ActiVision's biggest title, you can be damn that sure they've put more score manipulating muscle into this release than any other release has seen before it. This score manipulation regularly taints big-name games, and you should know to not trust review sites all that much, because their noses are often firmly up the arses of the companies whose games they depend on being able to review early to generate their site traffic for revenue. User feedback has become far more valuable that site reviews. However, a lot of simple users out there who don't have much game experience will assume that the game they're playing that got fifteen 100/100 scores is truly the best, and those don't-know-better easily manipulable people are the ones the score-doctoring tactics aim to influence.

    Metacritic, itself, has been lobbied by publishers to remove various negative scores from its site, to make games look like they were received better than they were. As far as I know, Metacritic has rebuffed all such lobbying.

    Now my review:
    I've played only the sp so far, and it's typical CoD boredom, for me. I hardly feel like I'm playing, and what I'm watching isn't very exciting, either. The graphics are bad, but hey, it's designed for ancient console hardware, and not contemporary PC hardware, so it's not very surprising. Frankly, I loathe the cheesy cliche Vietnam characters and lines, which now (if not already ages ago) seem like a bad parody of a bad parody. I have some un-ignorable performance issues, the same ones which many others are also experiencing, detailed on various forums (Steam forums, ActiVision forums, & others), despite having a robust PC. This game will satisfy the kiddies, who are wowed more by the constant scripted business of this rail-shooter than by involved and in-depth gameplay.    … Expand
  46. gratedjuice
    Nov 15, 2010
    4
    This game suffers from the been there done that syndrome. Cod Fans will shower it with praise and anyone searching for realistic combat will be left with a bad taste in their mouths. The game boasts Black ops in the name and falls flat on it's face when it attempts to deliver. This is an expansion pack not an actual game.
  47. Puffinparoxysm
    Nov 15, 2010
    4
    I have to give this game a 4 because the graphics suck. The audio sucks. And the multiplayer. Has to much crap going on. The guns are a joke and look like garbage. And sniper rifles are pointless in this game. And the worst thing is that online is laggy as hell. And campaign sucks with no depth
  48. WoundedPatriot
    Nov 16, 2010
    4
    COD BO stinks. The only thing that changes with these guys is the maps. The game is still a big, run around and shoot anything that moves game, which completely destroys any semblance of a real combat game. For those of us who only play occasionally, BO is a step backward. The introduction of gambling, what is all that about? And the statistics are laughable. For example, "PlayersCOD BO stinks. The only thing that changes with these guys is the maps. The game is still a big, run around and shoot anything that moves game, which completely destroys any semblance of a real combat game. For those of us who only play occasionally, BO is a step backward. The introduction of gambling, what is all that about? And the statistics are laughable. For example, "Players have run around the earth 83 times so far". Huh? Leveling up requires you to buy everything? Again, what the heck? I guess the game makers want you to buy the $19.99 book to figure out what the heck to do. Now the remote control car is kind of cool the first 10 times you get hit with it, or blow up an opposing player, BUT after that, "ZERO enjoyment".… Expand
  49. fireblaze
    Nov 16, 2010
    4
    The story had a good twist, but the gameplay was boring, visuals were just OK . The multiplayer was more of the same. I enjoyed Medal of Honor way more than this latest COD installment.
  50. podunk411
    Jul 17, 2011
    4
    At this point, I think COD Black Ops is mostly riding on Multiplayer. The single player campaign was a disgrace--I actually felt embarrassed for Treyarch--who designed that ? Didn't anyone from Treyarch actually play the solo campaign? Everyone I know who's played it has found right away all the silly loops you get stuck on, or the wonderful "Barrel of Fail" where what--I don't hit oneAt this point, I think COD Black Ops is mostly riding on Multiplayer. The single player campaign was a disgrace--I actually felt embarrassed for Treyarch--who designed that ? Didn't anyone from Treyarch actually play the solo campaign? Everyone I know who's played it has found right away all the silly loops you get stuck on, or the wonderful "Barrel of Fail" where what--I don't hit one button right and I'll never get past the level? That's a mistake, not real gameplay. And as most have pointed out, multiplayer is just a new skin of COD MW2 --except with maps that seem a little less thought out. I sure hope MW3 brings something new to the table b/c this is getting a little old especially for the $. Don't even get me started on the Expansion maps that cost a third of the game itself!… Expand
  51. DerKrieger
    Nov 23, 2010
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Many of my friends and various critics are raving about this jewel encrusted gift from the heavens, COD Black Ops; because of their rave review I went out and spent 60$ 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
  52. IILEO
    Nov 30, 2010
    4
    Another attempt from Treyarch to outdo Infinity ward's Modern Warfare series, another failure from Treyarch yet again. Ive played every Call of Duty and this instalment of the Call of Duty series left me disappointed. Why? Because trying to fix something that isnt broken seems to be what most big games companies think is a step forward in todays games market. It almost feels as if TreyarchAnother attempt from Treyarch to outdo Infinity ward's Modern Warfare series, another failure from Treyarch yet again. Ive played every Call of Duty and this instalment of the Call of Duty series left me disappointed. Why? Because trying to fix something that isnt broken seems to be what most big games companies think is a step forward in todays games market. It almost feels as if Treyarch have tried to be too different from previous titles. The campaign is still an over the top exciting story that flings you straight into the middle of an epic war (or in this case several) and lets you develop an attachment to the characters, only to have them predictably killed. This I can deal with, it's what the call of duty series has been good at, telling a great story. I have no quarrel with that. My frustration comes from other things such as the game mechanics. Heat seeking bullets are back, chasing you around corners and punishing you for the slightest glimpse of the enemy. Infinitely spawning enemies seem to be another needless mechanic to the game to make up for poor level design. The NPC's are completely redundant now and donâ… Expand
  53. holloway
    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 WarfareWith 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
  54. Schmidt
    Feb 8, 2011
    4
    The effort is obvious, and commendable. By recycling the same formula as usual, but adding a few new features, Treyarch have impressed the masses. But this is only filler, just like World at War, following the absolutely magnificent Modern Warfare 2 (possibly the best FPS I have ever played) and keeping the fans on their toes in preparation for the massively anticipated number 3. GraphicsThe effort is obvious, and commendable. By recycling the same formula as usual, but adding a few new features, Treyarch have impressed the masses. But this is only filler, just like World at War, following the absolutely magnificent Modern Warfare 2 (possibly the best FPS I have ever played) and keeping the fans on their toes in preparation for the massively anticipated number 3. Graphics are shameful for a modern game, as is the sound. The campaign is, although creative, quite uninvolving, and the multiplayer is extremely patchy, amateurish and tedious (the maps, too, are awful at times, although improvements have been made lately). It's a COD release, so that as a starter point obviously earns points, but Black Ops is hardly worth the attention of serious fans, despite going down a storm with 'pro gamers' who seem to think that running in circles and jumping up and down while aimlessly blasting poorly designed weapons is realistic, exciting and tactical. I'll take MW3 now, please!… Expand
  55. cancerouspete
    Mar 15, 2011
    4
    was fun up until the guns got nerfed, the host-match system sucked, and the lag made the game more painful to play everyday. I was thoroughly disappointed after all the hype. going back to MW2 was a breath of fresh air
  56. montana
    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.
  57. THE_COCONUT_MAN
    Apr 11, 2011
    4
    In my opinion the story campaign is about as clever as CoD is ever likely to be. Good to see Zombies return. My one major gripe being that the multiplayer side of the game is horrible, we can all complain about there being no dedicated servers, but this really makes an impact on the core part of gameplay, the shooting. Bullet registration is beyond a joke, it seems like half the time youIn my opinion the story campaign is about as clever as CoD is ever likely to be. Good to see Zombies return. My one major gripe being that the multiplayer side of the game is horrible, we can all complain about there being no dedicated servers, but this really makes an impact on the core part of gameplay, the shooting. Bullet registration is beyond a joke, it seems like half the time you are lucky to make your mark and even if you try and evade your enemy by running round a corner the bullets are likely to follow you. All in all story campaign, yes, Multiplayer no!… Expand
  58. Chrislake94
    Jun 4, 2011
    4
    Overrated guns are terrible, Online is terrible. You die too easily. People are dumbasses calling it "Best Call of Duty game" It's second to worst after World at War.
  59. island
    Aug 30, 2011
    4
    Boring gameplay, the charachers seem like homelesses, predictable acts but the worst thing is the multiplayer. Lots of cheaters and campers, suck at all
  60. ErosaScuderia
    Jul 9, 2011
    4
    The campaign is decent, and the Nazi Zombies game mode is very fun. But, as we all know, the multiplayer is where so many points are lost. The hit detection is a joke, where you can be aiming at somebody precisely, and the bullets don't seem to connect. What a joke. The knifing is a joke as well, where you don't even need to be facing the guy to counter him with the knife. You can runThe campaign is decent, and the Nazi Zombies game mode is very fun. But, as we all know, the multiplayer is where so many points are lost. The hit detection is a joke, where you can be aiming at somebody precisely, and the bullets don't seem to connect. What a joke. The knifing is a joke as well, where you don't even need to be facing the guy to counter him with the knife. You can run right past him, and he'll still hit you. It's absolutely ridiculous, and so stupid. The guns aren't really balanced well either. You can have guns that somewhat powerful, but some much kick and it will just not work at all. But then there are guns that have a ludicrous fire rate, no recoil, and a two-round kill (FAMAS, obviously). Like... What is that all about. It's also bloody boring where everybody just runs around with the damn thing too. It's hard to enjoy. Please, Treyarch, leave it to Infinity Ward to deliver us Call of Duty games where they have delivered us two decent CoD's in a row.… Expand
  61. fail4me
    Oct 3, 2011
    4
    This is the same COD you know and love, but thats a problem. To familiar multiplayer, weird and irritating campaign, but zombies can be pretty good. Treyarck made what could be a great game, a lame game.
  62. SolidLinkSnake4
    Nov 4, 2011
    4
    I made a new review , because I accidentally gave a 10 to this game when I meant to give this 4. It is the same Call of Duty and an interesting story. So the thing is rent it or not get it at all!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  63. iAGR
    Nov 16, 2011
    4
    For sure one of the worst Call of Duty -games released. I had my fun playing this game for a month and then I quit. Also, what's with the pointless amount of map-packs? And I don't understand why Treyarch tried to turn a Call of Duty -game into Battlefield. They took away the fun factor and tried to make it as realistic as possible. That just ruined the game! Although Theater Mode was aFor sure one of the worst Call of Duty -games released. I had my fun playing this game for a month and then I quit. Also, what's with the pointless amount of map-packs? And I don't understand why Treyarch tried to turn a Call of Duty -game into Battlefield. They took away the fun factor and tried to make it as realistic as possible. That just ruined the game! Although Theater Mode was a good invention.… Expand
  64. danski46
    Dec 26, 2011
    4
    Just bought this for £10 & what a waste of money, horrible gameplay , unimaginative ways of making the game hard (infinite enemy spawns, grenade spam etc) all meaning you cannot use your own strategy to beat it , I should have learned my lesson from waw... no more cod for me.
  65. XxNightvHawkxX
    Feb 24, 2013
    4
    I am someone who went straight from CoD 4 to Black Ops, and let me tell ya, this game is TERRIBLE.

    Call of Duty: Black Ops is VERY repetitive and takes no skill. The developers did not try at all to add variety to the game. It got so boring.
  66. Alan250
    Jan 27, 2011
    3
    Oh my... I'll write in short and simple lines what i think. This game is ugly and sucks. The campaign is the wrost of all, weapons as well, Multiplayer is simple Camper wars. The only thing cool here is zombies coop.
  67. Sideburn_Slayer
    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!
  68. ravenXII
    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.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
  69. Jestersheepy
    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 andAll 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
  70. r6ruffrider
    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 payI'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
  71. SlipshodDread
    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    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
  72. A_True_Gamer
    Nov 11, 2010
    3
    What the hell happened to this game! It used to be greatness on a disc now itâ
  73. mafls001
    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 theIm 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
  74. d3an
    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.
  75. yoitsmike92
    Nov 16, 2010
    3
    Not good. Compared to what Infinity Ward has done, Treyarch really shouldnt be making games like this anymore. The very first thing I noticed were the graphics, at the very least the should be identical to Modern Warfare 2, but theyre not. Theyre worse. Second thing was the sound, listen to how a napalm strike sounds and you'll think you're playing a side scroller on a playstation one. AndNot good. Compared to what Infinity Ward has done, Treyarch really shouldnt be making games like this anymore. The very first thing I noticed were the graphics, at the very least the should be identical to Modern Warfare 2, but theyre not. Theyre worse. Second thing was the sound, listen to how a napalm strike sounds and you'll think you're playing a side scroller on a playstation one. And lastly, what did they improve on? remote control cars? really? come on, i'm sick of every other call of duty sucking..… Expand
  76. BChlid
    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 beingThe 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
  77. CABLEBOX
    Feb 8, 2011
    3
    BLACK OP'S makes MW2 look very veryBLACK OP'S makes MW2 look very very good!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!… Expand
  78. nufrequency
    Nov 14, 2012
    3
    If you or your kid have been diagnosed with ADHD (Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder) or Kalnienk vision disorder this game is designed especially for YOU ! This is not the Black Ops game you were hoping for... This is Super Turbo Edition ! Treyarch came to the conclusion medium size maps are boring and not engaging enough.Play area has been shrinked significantly (on most of theIf you or your kid have been diagnosed with ADHD (Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder) or Kalnienk vision disorder this game is designed especially for YOU ! This is not the Black Ops game you were hoping for... This is Super Turbo Edition ! Treyarch came to the conclusion medium size maps are boring and not engaging enough.Play area has been shrinked significantly (on most of the maps) to accommodate extremely engaging close quarters play-stile of spawn chuck a grenade and then either kill something or get killed by whatever flew out of opposite side. Every map has been build around simple principle of tiny area and 3 corridors to flow the gameplay in the middle left and right side. I dont care about single player or will be talking about it but I assure you its Michael Bay style showcase from killing Vietcong soldiers, wing-suit flying all the way to some idiotic command and conquer RTS style mini-missions 0_o why ? I don't know... and YES ! There is dubstep, because every game in 2012 needs some of that wub wub. The only redeeming factor could be zombies, but why would you be willing to pay full price for it when there are more engaging brain eating themed games available for a lot less (L4D series) So far I've spend 5 hours in online battles and had no fun at all ! I'll try to sell this game by the end of the week or trade with somebody for something else. Meantime I'm going back to battlefield, maybe I won't have shiny 60 frames per second but at least game is not forcing me to have fun doing escapades inside rat maze size of a shoe box !… Expand
  79. Godspeed
    Mar 18, 2011
    3
    Black Ops is part of the Call of Duty franchise, we all know that, but if we pay attention to the game instead of its popularity, we can see it for what it really is. PROS: the maps are decent, the campaign is better than a lot of other games, and you can play online with 2 people on the same Xbox360. CONS: The guns are really unbalanced(some guns, such as the Famas or Ak74u,Black Ops is part of the Call of Duty franchise, we all know that, but if we pay attention to the game instead of its popularity, we can see it for what it really is. PROS: the maps are decent, the campaign is better than a lot of other games, and you can play online with 2 people on the same Xbox360. CONS: The guns are really unbalanced(some guns, such as the Famas or Ak74u, can kill you in 2 shots), it takes a lot of ideas from previous call of duty games, and the main point i gave black ops a 3 is because of the BULLET LAG. This kills the game. You could run around a corner getting shot, make it to cover, but then randomly die. If you watch the kill cams, they shot you before you even made it around. You also can see other players before they see you(or vice versa) obviously getting an advantage. You can also be shooting someone in the last seconds of your life, and you could be aiming right at them, but in the kill-cam it shows that YOU DIDN'T SHOOT AT ALL. I do know the kill-cams are what the other players see because i have done tests with friends. This con outweighs all the pros by far and just makes the game aggravating to play.… Expand
  80. Busketboof
    Mar 31, 2011
    3
    Call of duty 4: Modern Warfare 4th edition. You know how it feels when you buy a college textbook and then can't sell it back because the publisher changed 2 paragraphs and called it a new edition, that's how I feel about this game. In fact that is the cod franchise since cod 4.
  81. lidlcola
    May 5, 2011
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I didn't expect much when i got the game but after playing it for over an hour, i knew i got ripped off. To start off. the single player campaign is horrendous. Call of duty is supposed to be a realistic war simulation game. This is anything but, the story is like a bad action thriller, it's supposed to be clever and psychological, but it's more annoying and predictable. Especially the ending, finding out that Reznov isn't real. We've already seen that in almost every movie since Fight Club. The Cold war had so much potential for a realistic story, like in the first COD's. Of course i do have to give Treyarch some credit, co-op campaign can be fun. And secondly, the multiplayer, it's a mess. You can't take a single step on any map without getting killed by a camper, claymore, noobtuber (people using the grenade launcher attatchment), chopper gunner, etc. My point being, there's no skill involved in this game. I can camp on a small map for no more than a few minutes, rack up enough kills for a decent kill streak reward without going through any trouble. The maps are designed for camping. Take Nuke Town for example. It's the smallest map in the game and by far the most annoying one. Camping on this map is as easy as possible. This is where you start to notice that killstreaks such as Chopper Gunner and Gunship are way too overpowered. Not everything is bad about this game. Zombie mode for example can be really fun with a couple of friends, or online with strangers. But other than that, i highly reccommend anyone considering to purchase this game to look further, because it isn't worth it.… Expand
  82. ReviewerMan44
    Jul 2, 2011
    3
    Before I start this review let me just begin by saying I am not what people would call "a Call of Duty fanboy", yet I have followed the series since the beginning on the PC, all the way to Black Ops on the 360. I am not a huge fan, but I like what the "good" Call of Duty games have done for videogames. I enjoy all forms of videogames and am just giving my ten cents on what I thought whenBefore I start this review let me just begin by saying I am not what people would call "a Call of Duty fanboy", yet I have followed the series since the beginning on the PC, all the way to Black Ops on the 360. I am not a huge fan, but I like what the "good" Call of Duty games have done for videogames. I enjoy all forms of videogames and am just giving my ten cents on what I thought when playing Black Ops. I'm also fed up with the argument between the CoD fanboys who don't know anything about videogames and the hardcore gamers.
    Now let's start with talking about Black Ops. When I first picked up Black Ops and started playing it, I loved it. It was intriging and a blast on multiplayer. I honestly thought Treyach had outdone themselves, then it settled on me. I was playing a horrible game, utterly horrible, that felt tacked on and trying to do things it had no business doing. So did a game like this become the best selling form of entertainment of all time? Well people are suckers for things that look good and entertaining. They never really investigate, they just buy, buy, buy (I'll have you know I obtained my copy free of charge). Black Ops is a game designed for simpletons, children, and people who like to complain. Why am I saying this? Because Treyach took out everything good out of the multiplayer that made MW2 a great game. MW2 was realistic, it felt like raw warefare. Call of Duty Black Ops feels like little children playing with toy guns in the sandbox. It's pathetic. Take grenade launchers (noob toobs) for instance. This was a realistic part of Modern Warfare. While it might not be right sometimes to be bombarded and killed instanteously by a grenade launching through the air, it's realistic and makes the game more enriching and detailed. This is just one instance of where the realism has been ejected from the game. The RC-Cars, the lack of good guns, the ridiculous reticles, and the lack of even one good sniper rifle. The realism that the Modern Warfare series injected into the shooter craze was incredible, Black Ops is a total backstep for the series, but then again it's all opinion. If you like dumb downed arcady dull shooters be my guest.
    Then you have the campaign, which is not much better, but shines in some areas. The biggest and best part of the campaign? The story. Which takes unexpected twists and turns every which way, and is the one area BLOPS can beat MW2 at. Everything else? Not so much. It's still the same here. Linear mission design, muddy and ugly textures, hiccups and bugs about everywhere. The set pieces find themselves interesting, but everything else is awful, including the length of the game, an absolutely ridiculous 4-6 hours.
    Lastly is the co-op mode Nazi Zombies. Whearas World at War's Nazi Zombie mode felt like true to the grime, dirty and raw, yet fun and accessible, the new zombie maps are mediocre at best. The first Kino der Toten is actually quite good. It feels more like old school Zombies than anything else. The other map however features historical figures from history all conjoined in a survival group in the pentagon fighting off the hordes. What I don't like here is the little amount of diversity within the section and the main spreadout of the map, as well as the "boss" who arrives at around 10.
    Multiplayer 1/10
    Campaign 6/10
    Zombies 5/10

    In the end, Call of Duty: Black Ops just makes it ever so clear that Treyach does not know how to make a real, true to the grid, realistic, war game. It's disappointing, lackluster, and meddles in unrealistic gameplay. Make Infinity Ward not Treyach, for if not the Call of Duty serikes as a whole might just be done.    … Expand
  83. Overrwatcher
    Sep 27, 2011
    3
    The singleplayer campaign expects you to read the storyboard's mind or else you die, making a supposedly thrilling experience an infurating trial-and-error experience. Not only that, but Treyarch's attempts to make a psychological thriller makes a story that is so confusing that it seems as if 300 different writers worked on whatever they felt like and pasted it all together. So beside theThe singleplayer campaign expects you to read the storyboard's mind or else you die, making a supposedly thrilling experience an infurating trial-and-error experience. Not only that, but Treyarch's attempts to make a psychological thriller makes a story that is so confusing that it seems as if 300 different writers worked on whatever they felt like and pasted it all together. So beside the horrible singleplayer campaign, the rest of the game isn't that big of a redeemer. The zombies mode is a recycled, cliche, dull attempt to accomplish what games like Left 4 Dead and Killing Floor already succeeded, yet it is overrated beyond belief by Call of Duty's mindless, brainwashed zombies who take whatever is thrown at them. The multiplayer is the best part, and I occasionally find myself returning to the offline, but it becomes a "I have played longer than you, I have better guns" and "I can be selfish and make my team win when 20 dogs rush everybody".… Expand
  84. 7dogguy
    Feb 15, 2012
    3
    The worst call of duty to date the controls are sloppy the graphics are awful the story line is boring and online is the same thing everytime. all the guns feel as though they do the same thing and the unbelievably unfair perks ruin online even for the people who are great at this game. The only thing really good about this game is figuring out the zombies hidden storyline
  85. Fran6505
    Dec 1, 2012
    3
    Pepole there's nothing new here!!!! In fact the game should be called Call Of Duty Old Ops. Did activision took me for an idiot? YES!, am i an idiot?? SOMETIMES, but not in this one!
    Multiplayer IT'S OKay. Story is boring, gameplay its good,i mean, it have worked in the past so copy/paste. Fun for some short moments. Not worth the money. Get it used and sell it again. 3 points only for    Pepole there's nothing new here!!!! In fact the game should be called Call Of Duty Old Ops. Did activision took me for an idiot? YES!, am i an idiot?? SOMETIMES, but not in this one!
    Multiplayer IT'S OKay. Story is boring, gameplay its good,i mean, it have worked in the past so copy/paste. Fun for some short moments. Not worth the money. Get it used and sell it again. 3 points only for multiplayer.    … Expand
  86. shoebox1984
    Aug 10, 2013
    3
    Maybe I was just so looking forward to this game, but what a let down. Awful graphics, terrible shot recognition, claustrophobic maps, useless weapons. Tryarch games are garbage compared to Infinity Ward. Absolutely awful...
  87. Tpcool
    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 unlockI'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
  88. xXAnthonyXx
    Mar 4, 2011
    2
    Hands down, the worst X360 game I've played, to date. The campaign is ok but, I found it to be repetitive. Ah yes, now the multiplayer. It sucks, I only found only that...uh, I forgot the name but it's a little "town" with models of people in it. Avoid please. Don't be suckered in. So much hype all for nothing.
  89. Fury17
    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 sameThis 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
  90. hoghat
    Nov 12, 2010
    2
    This game is a major disappointment. The online play is just hands down terrible. It seems that the developers had been playing a lot of that horrible PS3 game "MAG" before writing this incarnation of CoD, complete with the awkward gun feel and horrible sound effects when shooting. I've owned every CoD since it came out, and unlike a lot of people I highly enjoyed the online play fromThis game is a major disappointment. The online play is just hands down terrible. It seems that the developers had been playing a lot of that horrible PS3 game "MAG" before writing this incarnation of CoD, complete with the awkward gun feel and horrible sound effects when shooting. I've owned every CoD since it came out, and unlike a lot of people I highly enjoyed the online play from the last Treyarch title World At War. This is a major downgrade from that, much less the Infinity Ward Modern Warfare titles.… Expand
  91. Kalasas
    Nov 16, 2010
    2
    I give this game 2. 1 point because of the bots available in split screen, and 1 point because of the cool new game modes and weapons. Those are the only good points about the game.

    Online- it lags very bad, and freezes up on ps3 and xbox 360 in HD mode. Two of my friends have already had their disks be scratched from the lock up that requires a hard power down of the console. There are    I give this game 2. 1 point because of the bots available in split screen, and 1 point because of the cool new game modes and weapons. Those are the only good points about the game.

    Online- it lags very bad, and freezes up on ps3 and xbox 360 in HD mode. Two of my friends have already had their disks be scratched from the lock up that requires a hard power down of the console.
    There are also bugs that randomly reset your rank and weapon unlocks.

    Zombie mode is back, and basically the same thing.

    Graphicly this game is horrible, The graphics in this title are worse than modern warefare 1. The screen shots of this game are basically the only good looking parts of the game. Multi-player maps look cartoonish and have bad graphics. Single player has bad graphics. They used the same engine as modern warfare 2, but made the graphics worse. Why? my only guess is so they could have more ai on at a time, but that should not effect the online maps. Campaign is very short, easily beat in four and a half to five hours even with taking time to explore ( little exploration since every map is linear.


    Basically this game is a huge disappointment. I am a big fan of the call of duty series and this just over hyped let down. This game was clearly over rushed and under developed.

    The fact that there is an issue with games freezing and cause scratches in the disks shows a severe lack of beta testing.    … Expand
  92. stengah25
    Nov 18, 2010
    2
    I found this game very disappointing especially online.I really should have expected this considering I hate WAW but I thought Treyarch would step up.Being an avid MW2 player I find Black Ops considerably inferior.The sound of the guns is terrible,the grenades sound weak and your own footsteps sound distant and when running like you're galloping like a horse.
    Having only recently got a    I found this game very disappointing especially online.I really should have expected this considering I hate WAW but I thought Treyarch would step up.Being an avid MW2 player I find Black Ops considerably inferior.The sound of the guns is terrible,the grenades sound weak and your own footsteps sound distant and when running like you're galloping like a horse.
    Having only recently got a HDTV all my games look fantastic,like having new games,especially MW2.The graphics in this look 3 or 4 years old,the weapon animations are terrible again compared to MW2.
    I did enjoy the single player although it is short and a bit dumb.Also I couldn't get past Masons terrible accent,obviously an Englishman trying an American accent.
    Well it looks like its back to MW2 for at least another year until Infinity Wards new release.my expectations of this have dropped too considering the trouble there at the minute.    … Expand
  93. VladimirLenin
    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.
  94. Matteo217
    Dec 18, 2010
    2
    I bought this game having high hopes as many others did as well, unfortunately all i got was the same mess that Modded Warfare 2 already stirred up. Treyarch said they did not want their game to end up like MW2, well Congratulations its WORSE. at least MW2 had decent enough Hit Registration and the Spawn system was not completely broken. MW2 also had balanced maps where sniping was atI bought this game having high hopes as many others did as well, unfortunately all i got was the same mess that Modded Warfare 2 already stirred up. Treyarch said they did not want their game to end up like MW2, well Congratulations its WORSE. at least MW2 had decent enough Hit Registration and the Spawn system was not completely broken. MW2 also had balanced maps where sniping was at least possible. When they announced they were removing Stopping Power from the game i was ecstatic i thought they would finally realize that A BULLET IS A BULLET!!!! guns should not have damage stats. They should remove damage as a stat for weapons and focus primarily on range, accuracy, mobility and rate of fire. if you get hit with a bullet you DIE. just because my gun has 4 bars of Damage and yours has 5 does not mean u win a fire fight when i put 3 rounds into your skull. If you, like myself, loved sniping well then your out of luck in order to fight the "War on Quickscoping" that Treyarch believes is happening they made it so if you don't aim down the sights for a full 2 seconds your bullet flies in some random direction like a revolutionary war musket. Threyarch needs to stop making promises they cant keep. they said it would be close to impossible to hack this game well its been a little over a month since the games release and there are already Wall hacks, Aim-bots, God Mode, No Clip, Infinite Ammo and much much more. The spawn system is non existent as well the game will consistently spawn you in the same location so some retard can run over to you place a sentry gun at your spawn and rack up the kills. The lag is also an extreme issue, if you do not have a 4 bar connection then it is virtually impossible to get a legitimate kill. Even at 3 bars bullets fail to register and do almost no damage. In MW2 it felt as if maybe 10-15% of your bullets might go unaccounted for well in BO change that to at least 50-75% of them. That may be an over exaggeration to some people but when you unload 15 bullets into one guy just to have him wheel around and shoot you twice in the leg and kill you something is definitely wrong. This game practically rewards mediocrity, the RC car is the most OP kill-streak ever put into a game, a 3 year old child with down syndrome could get the 2 kills in a row it takes ( i know its 3 kills but since everyone turns hard-line on anyway, you might as well make it 2) to get that reward. people literally can just do completely **** the whole game and towards the end just say, " hey look i have ten RCXD's to spawn kill people with". This game literally has so many bugs that by gaming "law" is Literally considered BROKEN. just to name a few... Railings: the spaces between railings on balcony's and stairs are programed as "walls" so you either can or can not shoot through them while doing minimal damage, Wanted: this is just what I'm calling it since i do not know the exact term, but when people shoot behind you as you run around cover and despite not hitting you at all the bullets almost seem to curve around the corner and get you anyway,KNIFING: its broken now so don't even try. the prime rule is, If you think you got him...you didn't. If you think you didn't get him... then you did. Air knifes are much more common then MW2 and 3arc really doesn't seem to care about it. This game literally did nothing new to the Cod franchise beside steal a bunch of ideas from Halo like their "new" currency system and map selecting in Multi player. Overall this is a piss poor game with outdated graphics and a Company backing it, cough* cough* Activision, that's to greedy to give a **** that their game has some serious problems that need addressing. If you wonder why the graphics are bad then, again look at Activison, they thought it would be a good idea to make the game 3D compatible so they down graded the graphics to satisfy the 2% margin of gamers with 3D TV's. Seriously if your going to market to a certain group then you should pick a larger one then that. This game, just like Modern Warfare 2, was fun at first but now is just another failed project. And to those who might say, "Oh you just suck, thats why ur mad", no, my KD is 2.05 and it i have 15,000 kills so no. I just know what a good game is, and this is not it. I think ill go back to Bad Company 2 and wait for Vietnam in 3 days. Lets hope Sledgehammer games learns from this and doesn't screw up Modern Warfare 3.… Expand
  95. classic_rocker
    Jan 9, 2011
    2
    that was terrible.this is just like every other cod game they throw in some cool new gadjets about an hour of story mode gameplay and some new maps.the online feels like im playing MW2 whitch suked also I was expecting something new frome cod Black Ops but sure enough it was like the other cods and suked balls
  96. SuPaPooPeR
    Jan 10, 2011
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. For a game worth £45 or $60 (in the US) I expect the following features as standard; *SINGLE PLAYER*
    DECENT GRAPHICS - This is comparable to WAW sometimes worse with the amount of grain on screen it's as if the grain were introduced to hide the fact of how little time was spent on the graphics. CATCHING STORYLINE - Main character relives events that bring him to current timeline; brilliant, very interesting and I love conspiracy theories. (Spoiler: the experience he shared with the guy that saved his ass from prison is his schitzophrenic self) WTF... so your hero technically is a villian..
    BANG FOR YOUR BUCK - After the helicopter mission found in the jungle(Single Player) I unloaded a clip of the FAMAS into the enemy; who was standing in a truck; inside the cave. He is still standing after i emptied my sidearm and threw whatever grenades I had. I almost had to collect pebbles or small rocks to finish him off. SOUNDS - This was quite good in single player. The guns sounded powerful even if the bullet spluttered on its way out and dies after shortly exiting the barrel.
    Conclusion = 1/10 "It sounded decent."

    *MULTIPLAYER*
    MAPS - If you're a runner and gunner, this will work for you but otherwise forget quickscoping, no scoping or just forget picking up a Sniper rifle because due to the number of industrialized buildings in each map, you will never find enough range. SOUNDS - I purchased an RPK (yes you have to rank up and buy **** it reminded me of my nephew farting uncontrollably after eating a sweetcorn or 3.
    WEAPONS POWER & ACCURACY - Very Average power, most weapons are completely inaccurate unless you lie down on the floor and set up camp. Conclusion = 1/10 "I killed someone!!" (A random tomahawk throw killed someone on the otherside of the map. They sent me hatemail after that and then I had to block him as a user)

    So don't buy this new but give it a once over when it hits the bargain bucket which at any rate with COD titles might take awhile.    … Expand
  97. binaryweapon
    Jan 27, 2011
    2
    I am not a fan of the online, multi-player aspect of any FPS games; I buy them for the single player campaign only. This game has one of the most disappointing single player campaigns that I've experienced in quite some time. It's uninteresting, way too scripted/on rails, and the game in general looks and sounds outdated. I generally don't trade games in either...but this one I will.I am not a fan of the online, multi-player aspect of any FPS games; I buy them for the single player campaign only. This game has one of the most disappointing single player campaigns that I've experienced in quite some time. It's uninteresting, way too scripted/on rails, and the game in general looks and sounds outdated. I generally don't trade games in either...but this one I will. What a waste of $60.… Expand
  98. Kuzmen
    Jan 30, 2011
    2
    Just another yearly Call of Duty. Although this game did have one thing unique from all other Call of Duties, I've never had a game so anachronistic that I had to stop playing for a week to recover from the shock of G11's, Famas's, Walther WA2000's and M60E3's in the Vietnam War. It has it's entertainment "Value" if you can look past all of that, however I can not.
  99. KnollDark
    Feb 3, 2011
    2
    Maybe its just because I've never really been a team death match guy (tho I am loving Crysis 2 TDM demo) but the kill feel cheap and most are got by snipers and campers, and the fact that you kill someone by shooting them in the leg is ridiculous, the only reason I pick up these games anymore is for the cinema quality single player (even then it doesn't top Uncharted 2) and that is theMaybe its just because I've never really been a team death match guy (tho I am loving Crysis 2 TDM demo) but the kill feel cheap and most are got by snipers and campers, and the fact that you kill someone by shooting them in the leg is ridiculous, the only reason I pick up these games anymore is for the cinema quality single player (even then it doesn't top Uncharted 2) and that is the reason it gets a 2 instead of a 0… Expand
  100. Lucas823
    Feb 26, 2011
    2
    Anyone who tells you this is a great game has obviously not played many games. I did not have very high hopes for this game, however I had read good reviews and was excited for the campaign. After playing through the campaign, I was thoroughly disappointed. It was not the story that upset me (because I will give Treyarch credit for coming up with a superb story), it was the execution.Anyone who tells you this is a great game has obviously not played many games. I did not have very high hopes for this game, however I had read good reviews and was excited for the campaign. After playing through the campaign, I was thoroughly disappointed. It was not the story that upset me (because I will give Treyarch credit for coming up with a superb story), it was the execution. Too many glitches, to many set pieces in which you simply had to walk places, the objectives seemed repetitive, etc. The AI was simply atrocious, and people would do nothing but roll around on the ground half the time. And a lot of the time Treyarch was just lazy. Puting infinite spawn points in places which eliminated any sense of tactics other than sprint as fast as you could and pray you dont die. None of the characters seemed particularly memorable. However, despite its shortcomings, the single player was not god awful. I was able to finish it and there were sections that i really enjoyed, but overall, not spectacular, not even close. Now on to multiplayer, which, for me, is the most important part of any game. Unfortunately, Black Ops's multiplayer was simply atrocious. Its an unbalanced mess. The guns are all either underpowered or overpowered. There was really nothing new brought to the table at all with the exception of the ability to customize your soldier, which still had been done before in other games multiple times. I found nothing good about the black ops multiplayer experience. In their attempts to make the game more fun, Treyarch removed perks such as Commando, and Slide of Hand. While many would argue that this is a good thing, and makes the games more realistic, I would say that these were some of the only reasons i ever came back to MW2. Also, instead of fixing MW2's problems (laggy, glitchy, hackers, "Host migrations") It seems like Treyarchs MP is just as, if not more littered with problems.

    Now, on the things like graphics, Sound effects, etc. Graphics seemed like three steps backwards. Modern Warfare 2 had much better textures than this game. Black Ops makes everything seem too... colorful. As in cartoonish. The explosions were boring and dissapointing. Sound Effects: ...wow... were do i start... sh*tty as f*ck. And while the voice acting was okay, the sounds of the guns and explosions all blended together and sounded two dimensional.

    Overall, this game is going on Ebay. For a game with such huge funding from Activision, this is probably the biggest dissapointment of the year, however, because its name is "Call of Duty," it will get praise from IGN and is bound to win several awards for no reason. If this game had not been a COD game and did not get the support of the Cod fanboys praising it blindly and calling it the "best game ever made" without ever playing any other FPS's, this game would have an average of 2.0 or lower    … Expand
Page:

Awards & Rankings

22
#22 Best Xbox 360 Game of 2010
3
#3 Most Discussed Xbox 360 Game of 2010
28
#28 Most Shared Xbox 360 Game of 2010

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
87

Generally favorable reviews - based on 89 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 83 out of 89
  2. Mixed: 6 out of 89
  3. Negative: 0 out of 89
  1. Xbox World 360 Magazine UK
    Jan 30, 2011
    72
    A short campaign which is never spectacular and never very clever, but always solid enough. [Feb 2011, p.99]
  2. Gamekult
    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.
    Read full review
  3. Cynamite
    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!
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »