Are you enjoying Black Ops ?

[FamoFunk]

I'm enjoying BLOPS multi-player (don't get my started on my glithy copy for campain, though)

I like it just as much as I liked MW2 I go between the both. BLOPS, it's super fast to level up and XP is thrown around like no ones business. I enjoy how the fact you have to earn your killstreak by killing people and no replying on your previous killstreaks.

If you were a fan of the other CoD's and other games like BC2, MoH then get it I say. Or wait for it go cheap if you can (I suspect this will be a long while yet)

 

[ShockValue]

I'm enjoying it though I can't really play the multiplayer too long without getting quite bored. Doesn't draw me in as much as it used too, especially compared to the previous versions...

 

[Knightvision]

i agree. in general it doesn't improve much (if at all) on MW2 and i also noticed how farcical the weapons where for the time-period. at first it didn't bother me but after i get killed by somebody using an AUG that wasn't even in service to the late seventies, that really pisses me off.

 

[badgersprite]

Not particularly. I don't play multiplayer, so I'm only judging on the single player campaign here, but the way it jumps between missions feels really choppy and unfocused, which keeps dragging me out of the experience. I know shooters aren't really plot-heavy to begin with, but the story actually becomes rather incomprehensible, because you wind up jumping straight from one place to another with little to no transition or explanation. It's like, "Suddenly, I'm here for flimsy reason X never established before." Oh, okay. So the narrative is loose at best.

Characterising the protagonist feels like a mistake, because it's really distracting when he talks out of nowhere, and I have no idea whether it's him or the random allied guy on this mission with me.

Also, for once, I really agree with what Yahtzee said, in that the choppy framing device means there's nothing to break up the action; you just get thrown straight into it in almost every mission. It honestly feels like I'm just having the same gunfights in different locations, which is something previous CoD games have avoided really well. The only times you're not in a firefight is during what are basically cutscenes, and one mission where you dress up as the enemy for about two minutes, only for that to become useless when they start firing on you anyway. So the constant barrage of action actually becomes boring to me, because there's no tension leading into it.

And, this may be a really petty gripe, but it kind of breaks immersion when you try to shoot under a table, only to have the bullets deflected off air. I kind of expected that to have been weeded out of this generation of console games...

Anyway. These are just my issues with the game, and why I personally haven't liked it so far. If none of this sounds like a deal breaker to you, then you might really enjoy it. At the very least, if you're someone who really likes shooters, then you'll likely find this a competent FPS, though not particularly memorable.

Basically, I'd rent it rather than buy it. Find out if it's to your taste before shelling out the cash.

 

[Sephychu]

I really liked it. Campaign was mad, but in a very self-aware way, multiplayer is still pretty fun, especially with friends, but even without. I'd say buy it.

 

[Musiclly enhanced]

short awnser: No
long awnser: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

 

[FightThePower]

Yes, but it infuriates me at times, for one the inability of CoD Developers to balance weapons strikes again, by which I mean: fuck the AK74u.

 

[Gahars]

Yeah, it's really good.

Fun campaign with an enjoyable story, awesome zombies (though I really don't like the whole "start the generator" bs, I preferred the more straightforward approach of the first zombie map in CoD:WaW), and great multiplayer all balance out for one really good game.

Definitely worth the money, at least in my opinion.

 

[SovietSecrets]

Enjoying it whenever I actually play. Been too busy with other games to play Black Ops all day like I did with MW 2.

 

[ladylaracroftxx]

I think it's great fair enough there will be the odd time when you feel like throwing your remote at the screen but it's still worth it

 

[FightThePower]

I hate Second Chance so, so much.

You and me both. Nothing gets my blood boiling more than completely outplaying a guy only for him to win because his magical half a second of invincibility allows him to just take bullets in the gut without any injury whilst he kills you by shooting you twice with a Revolver. And then despite being so mortally wounded the blast from a flashbang would kill him, he is somehow restored to full health in just over a second by one guy poking him with a needle.

It's wrong on so many levels.

 

[Hisshiss]

Its alright I guess. Shootin people in the dick with my friends is always a solid 6/10 experience at the least. I don't find myself rushing to go play it unless someone gets on live with me, but its fairly entertaining with company.

 

[Korten12]

snip

My review was mentioned in a post.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

You and me both. Nothing gets my blood boiling more than completely outplaying a guy only for him to win because his magical half a second of invincibility allows him to just take bullets in the gut without any injury whilst he kills you by shooting you twice with a Revolver. And then despite being so mortally wounded the blast from a flashbang would kill him, he is somehow restored to full health in just over a second by one guy poking him with a needle.

It's wrong on so many levels.

...and even better is when you get a hitmarker when he's in his Second Chance position only for him to kill you, which happened me tonight.

The perk is not only super annoying and cheap, it's buggy too.

Makes me wonder how the fuck it made its way into 4 games.

 

[Tddawg25]

To be honest it's not TOO different from MW2 but it's more complete as an entire game (*COUGH COUGH* MW2'S TERRIBLE SINGLE PLAYER *COUGH COUGH*) but it's not an amazing new entry to FPS's everywhere. Really if you liked MW2 but thought it wasn't complete and/or you wanna play a game with your friends since that's almost always a good time no matter what you're playing you should get Black Ops. If not then skip it.

 

[acklumos]

I liked the campaign a lot, but I got bored of the multiplayer pretty quickly. Although, multiplayer just really isn't my thing.

 

[Treblaine]

Much better than MW 2, but then a game about a disabled cat on a unicycle would beat that piece of crap.

Plus where I live there were too small earthquakes (3.6 on the scale) and I genuinely didn't notice them because I was playing the black ops campaign.

Seriously? What was THAT bad about MW2. I have never met the 'noob tube brigade', the story was okay (until they tie it up then for me it's 'meh'), the multiplayer was not full of 'ZOMG PWNSUM 3PIC W!N N0 SK177Z' weapons. If there was an especially nooby Winchester running around then I got out a SPAS 12 FMJ Stopping power with a SCAR Heartbeat. After they switched classes it was back to the F200 and my USP.

How about:
-everything that happened on the No Russian Mission, makes no sense
-You cannot shoot the terrorists in No Russian mission, it calls it a failed objective to spite doing that would save the entire world or at very least a thousand innocent civilians
-Entire tangent in South America is practically irrelevant, it's just a shooting gallery
-Russia invading USA... what the fuck?
-Russia invading USA without a nuclear exchange, nuclear weapons can be launched manually regardless of any "super virus"
-It makes no sense how Shepard could have masterminded anything, Makarov would never trust or co-operate with an American General.
-He has no reason to kill Roach, Price or anyone, who suspected nothing till his botched attempts at silencing him.
-his reasons are bullshit, invading USA to "increase recruitment"... that is stupid on so many levels. He already boast to having the most powerful army the world had ever seen!
-How does Shepard convince US President that Makarov is responsible?
-no resolution with Makarov, game just loses interest in him
-no resolution with the Russian forces in USA
-Yay, now we're team-killing, who are these guys with American accents we are supposed to be gunning down?
-Why do we have to kill Shepard? Rather than send a tape to Wikileaks or Washington post? Shepard may control US media but not global media and so on.
-Why is China a non-factor in this game? They should be shitting bricks over Russia invading their biggest customer, also counting their ongoing animosity since the Sino-Soviet split.


Mutliplayer:
-ridiculous killstreaks, those kills earning more killstreaks to earn game-ending killstreaks
-such overpowered secondary weapons like Ranger, Raffica and M1887
-Client hosted multiplayer rather than dedicated servers as well as general betrayal of their PC fanbase
-

 

[Treblaine]

I hate Second Chance so, so much.

You and me both. Nothing gets my blood boiling more than completely outplaying a guy only for him to win because his magical half a second of invincibility allows him to just take bullets in the gut without any injury whilst he kills you by shooting you twice with a Revolver. And then despite being so mortally wounded the blast from a flashbang would kill him, he is somehow restored to full health in just over a second by one guy poking him with a needle.

It's wrong on so many levels.

Funny, I don't remember being killed by anyone in last stand and I only possibly kill my opponent in last stand if I've already chipped away most of their health and already have my cross-hairs trained on them, so you have to be a good player. Then again, I am playing the PC version, maybe the console version is too vulnerable to exploitation of aim-assist. Maybe on console the "aim assist" effect disappears as soon as they go into last stand mode but remains for the last standee.

On PC if I can mouse-aim my cross-hairs on them to put them down then I can easily put the last round in them to kill them for good, that and I think PC's WASD controls make it quicker strafing left and right quickly so harder to hit (while last standee is stationary).

At least martyrdom is gone, now THAT is noobish, you don't need any skill to get kills, it makes people too afraid of fighting in enclosed spaces or where they can't run away.

"he is somehow restored to full health in just over a second by one guy poking him with a needle."

*insert "Lol CoD realism" joke here*

Screw realism, it's about whether the game is fun and fair for all, and reviving downed team-mates can't take too long or you might as well not have it in the game at all.

 

[AudienceOfOne1]

Yeah that's basically what I was getting it.

 

[MrJKapowey]

Much better than MW 2, but then a game about a disabled cat on a unicycle would beat that piece of crap.

Plus where I live there were too small earthquakes (3.6 on the scale) and I genuinely didn't notice them because I was playing the black ops campaign.

Seriously? What was THAT bad about MW2. I have never met the 'noob tube brigade', the story was okay (until they tie it up then for me it's 'meh'), the multiplayer was not full of 'ZOMG PWNSUM 3PIC W!N N0 SK177Z' weapons. If there was an especially nooby Winchester running around then I got out a SPAS 12 FMJ Stopping power with a SCAR Heartbeat. After they switched classes it was back to the F200 and my USP.

How about:
-everything that happened on the No Russian Mission, makes no sense
-You cannot shoot the terrorists in No Russian mission, it calls it a failed objective to spite doing that would save the entire world or at very least a thousand innocent civilians
-Entire tangent in South America is practically irrelevant, it's just a shooting gallery
-Russia invading USA... what the fuck?
-Russia invading USA without a nuclear exchange, nuclear weapons can be launched manually regardless of any "super virus"
-It makes no sense how Shepard could have masterminded anything, Makarov would never trust or co-operate with an American General.
-He has no reason to kill Roach, Price or anyone, who suspected nothing till his botched attempts at silencing him.
-his reasons are bullshit, invading USA to "increase recruitment"... that is stupid on so many levels. He already boast to having the most powerful army the world had ever seen!
-How does Shepard convince US President that Makarov is responsible?
-no resolution with Makarov, game just loses interest in him
-no resolution with the Russian forces in USA
-Yay, now we're team-killing, who are these guys with American accents we are supposed to be gunning down?
-Why do we have to kill Shepard? Rather than send a tape to Wikileaks or Washington post? Shepard may control US media but not global media and so on.
-Why is China a non-factor in this game? They should be shitting bricks over Russia invading their biggest customer, also counting their ongoing animosity since the Sino-Soviet split.


Mutliplayer:
-ridiculous killstreaks, those kills earning more killstreaks to earn game-ending killstreaks
-such overpowered secondary weapons like Ranger, Raffica and M1887
-Client hosted multiplayer rather than dedicated servers as well as general betrayal of their PC fanbase
-

Just to pick out a few...

An 'email wikileaks' side mission?

Forgets about the Russians? That's called a cliffhanger ending... Otherwise the Rangers would be rendered irrelevent if the Russians were ALL dead.

Most of the others...

SO THE GAME IS PLAYABLE.
Or: Because making it that realistic would be OTT. China is irrelevent as far as gaming is concerned so doesn't need to be mentioned.

The only two that I agree with are No Russian and the 'Nuke' comment. That is, 'why do No Russian'. Not 'Why can't I kill Makarov'. That's just stupid.