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?
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 »