Multiplayer Overview: Call of Duty: Black Ops

[MiracleOfSound]

Well said, Mr. Funk!
I haven't even touched the SP of the game, actually.
I jumped right into the MP, and it's pretty darn fun to play. Especially with pals.
Nuketown has to be the most frantic, crazy, and awesome map I've ever played in a modern shooter.
You get guys spawning everywhere, because the map is so tiny.
It's fun, annoying, exhilarating, and frustrating all at the same time.

Love it.

Yeah it's like Shipment with even worse spawns...

It makes for absolutely hilarious private free for alls

 

[KiKiweaky]

While I have never heard of special soldiers (SaS, FSK or Navy Seal) using crossbows, I know for a fact that crossbows penetrate body army better than normal guns. The arrow is heavier than bullets, and thus have more force on impact.

Multiplayer looks fun. But I can't help but think it will get old after a week, like with MW2. And with the singleplayer being as bad as it is, I'll hold off buying it for now.

I'm pretty sure the bullet would have a waaay higher impact, its moving at insane speed. Remember your mythbuters? When they were testing to see how far below the surface of the water bullets could go, turns out they arent very good at doing it at all. They are moving so fast they hit the water surface so hard they to shatter on impact.

It's the other way around, the armours designed to stop bullets (small blunt objects traveling really fast) while the bolt (heavier, but moving way slower and sharp will just cleave through the layers of kevlar) will just go through it.

Excuse this late night post, im pretty tired and mot of what i said is probably wrong anyway :/ I would go and make sure its right etc... but i want to sleep z.z

 

[Excludos]

While I have never heard of special soldiers (SaS, FSK or Navy Seal) using crossbows, I know for a fact that crossbows penetrate body army better than normal guns. The arrow is heavier than bullets, and thus have more force on impact.

Multiplayer looks fun. But I can't help but think it will get old after a week, like with MW2. And with the singleplayer being as bad as it is, I'll hold off buying it for now.

I'm pretty sure the bullet would have a waaay higher impact, its moving at insane speed. Remember your mythbuters? When they were testing to see how far below the surface of the water bullets could go, turns out they arent very good at doing it at all. They are moving so fast they hit the water surface so hard they to shatter on impact.

It's the other way around, the armours designed to stop bullets (small blunt objects traveling really fast) while the bolt (heavier, but moving way slower and sharp will just cleave through the layers of kevlar) will just go through it.

Excuse this late night post, im pretty tired and mot of what i said is probably wrong anyway :/ I would go and make sure its right etc... but i want to sleep z.z

No idea. I just know arrows penetrate armors with ease, and I was told it was because the arrow weights so much that the force of impact becomes higher. Meaning it takes more to stop an arrow than it takes to stop a bullet, even tho bullets fly a lot faster.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Alot of the things that plagued previous COD games are gone.
Infact, the only one left is camping, and at times, its extreamly easy to get rid of that pest.

This, in my opinion, not only lives up to the hype, but completely surpasses it in some aspects.

I agree and I'm praying it stays that way.

Campers are so easy to deal with... you have the tabun gas, nades, plus the fact that they're usually much slower to react than crazy rushers.

God I love this game, I am so pleasantly surprised by it

 

[Not G. Ivingname]

All I can say is the home page looks hilarious right now.
'Black Ops lacks the "wow" of the series'
And right next to it
'Black Ops is right on the money'

Yes, well, that's always the risk when you split a review up into two parts

But who is going to review zombies now?

 

[JordanMillward_1]

All I can say is the home page looks hilarious right now.
'Black Ops lacks the "wow" of the series'
And right next to it
'Black Ops is right on the money'

Yes, well, that's always the risk when you split a review up into two parts

There's also a risk when one of the reviewers doesn't even try to be unbiased about it. Why couldn't they have gotten you to do both parts, but separately? And what's your opinion on the Single Player part of the game?

 

[Chesterfield Snapdragon McFisticuffs]

There is a crossbow in the game? Seriously?

Elite black ops operatives use medieval weaponry?

Well, in the modern era, soldiers actually use Riot Shields and throwing knives with Marijuana symbols all over everything, so this seems pretty reasonable chronologically.

 

[Ross B]

Someone on page 1 called it, but /rage at the unique and original game modes comment. Maybe for the CoD series, but that's about it, and that's like saying this games unique and Original because it's got guns in it.

 

[MDSnowman]

In before QQ about "useless sniping", there are way less hax and imba weapons here, crossbow = 1 shot kill, balanced by a fairly long reload time, etc, no akimbo shotguns here...

I don't know if I'd call it QQ, but if I shoot someone in the head with a sniper rifle I shouldn't have to line up a second shot. Range doesn't even matter, I did it point blank on some guy I could have knifed and still had to shoot him twice.

It kinds of kills my old tense "Wait for the right moment to shoot" style of sniping, but I have noticed that with the variable zoom scope I'm getting some decent results, really makes it easier to get that second shot on target when he's zoomed in nice and big. Kind of like sniping with the old M21 back in CoD4, you just got used to firing twice if you wanted to take someone out with a body hit.

Now that I'm getting used to it the Multiplayer seems to be pretty damn good.

 

[Octorok]

There is a crossbow in the game? Seriously?

Elite black ops operatives use medieval weaponry?

Actually, yes. Silent, accurate and modern crossbows can kill instantly from ranges long enough for a conventional weapon to have been just as effective.

Sure, they aren't hocking around big-ass medieval ones, but they do still take longer to notch a second bolt than to get off a second shot.

OT : I do like the MP. Better than MW2. Although I don't agree with the SP score. I feel that while the early game suffered from being too disjointed, and the cutscene was inexcusably long, it was fun. At first it failed to draw me in as much as previous stories (MW2's, while amazingly stupid, was very good at flowing nicely) due to a lack of focus, but it got its act together and I have to say, I enjoyed it.

 

[Nexus4]

I kinda wanted to hear whether or not Pitts enjoyed the multiplayer. Seeing as he did the single player review, I would have liked to see if he believed the multiplayer made up for the scrappy single player.

 

[Jfswift]

I know you're joking about lag but it is more of an issue this time around. I just replaced my router and omg, what a difference that made. Now my hit detection isn't broken anymore and the lag spikes I get occasionally are gone. For some reason Black Ops is more sensitive to net connections than say MW2 or Halo: Reach, which seem better able to compensate for bad connections.

 

[Karisse]

First thing that came to mind was that if Call of Duty players only care about multiplayer and the single player appears to have just been thrown together for the sake of being there, why not save the developers time (and, more importantly, money) by making a solely online game? It certainly isn't a radical concept, and the multiplayer could be even more refined, taking those alleged brief entertaining moments of single player and finding a way to apply them to the multiplayer experience. Hell, you might even save the PLAYER some time and money which they could spend on DLC.

 

[Tempest13]

I do like the customization of Black Ops, but the aiming doesn't feel as precise as the previous edition. I feel like it struggles to get where I want it to go. Maybe I just needed to adjust the sensitivity.

 

[level250geek]

I would actually much prefer the Black Ops system than TF2's frustrating random drop mechanic. It's gradual, you unlock things at a constant, rewarding pace, and you are assured whatever you want as long as you put enough time into it without having to achievement hunt.

Classic TF2? Absolutely. Current TF2? Not a chance.

First of all, I think it's really cool that you engage readers directly in the comments. I've only seen a few contributors to this magazine do so, and I think you've done so more in this thread than any others.

Now, game talk.

The thing about TF2, though, is that it is very well balanced. Yes, unless you're willing to trade items--or buy them outright--you're stuck achievement hunting. But every weapon and item balances every other weapon and item out. You can never equip a special item and use all default equipment, and you stand just as good a chance of performing well than if you loaded up your character with top-level gear.

I can't speak from personal experience with Black Ops, and anything has to be better than MW2. In fact, I think purchasing upgrades at your own pace is a really good idea and probably would have made MW2 a much more enjoyable experience. But the problem is that the gamers who log the most hours and rack up the most kills are going to have the nicest gear, and I have the sad and sick feeling that things aren't as evenly balanced as in TF2, where skill and teamwork trump phat loot.

Now, combine Black Ops economy-based upgrades with Bad Company 2's class system--which rewarded your for helping out your teammates almost as much as it did for killing your enemies--and you've got something quite unique and rewarding indeed. Maybe that will be the next development in multiplayer FPS.

 

[Shihoudani]

After my expressed concerns for the single player review that Russ put up, this one is much more refreshing and in my opinion more accurate. The Multiplayer is down right fun as hell, the maps are varied and different then each other. The wager modes are a joy, more so if you can convince some friends to battle it out with you for credits.

I must say, you gave a lovely review of the multiplayer John. Keep up the good work!

 

[DayDark]

Yes, well, that's always the risk when you split a review up into two parts

So are you scottish or irish, or something-ish? I get this William Wallace vibe from the reviews you do.

Er, you mean ancestry-wise? I grew up in New Jersey.

Okay, then maybe it's just me, I just keep hearing it like you have an accent of some kind.

 

[IBlackKiteI]

Alot of the things that plagued previous COD games are gone.
Infact, the only one left is camping, and at times, its extreamly easy to get rid of that pest.

This, in my opinion, not only lives up to the hype, but completely surpasses it in some aspects.

Yeah and it still got trashy reviews from everyone for being a good game.

What the hell is with that?

Anyways, awesome review, and the campaign is really not that bad.

 

[bjj hero]

The spawns are terrible and the graphics and sound seem to be worse than MW2. How does that happen in a sequel?

I regularly spawn and there is an enemy directly behind me. There is no excuse for that. The choppers are over powered as there is no cold blooded (unless I've not unlocked it yet). The matchmaking stinks, if you try to join a game as a group (on the 360) only half of you will get in. Nuke Town is far too small for a 6 on 6 team death match, it shouldnt be in the map list for it. Finally I hated having to wait until level 19 to play hardcore. Hate core with its grenade spamming.

Is it better than MW2? No. Its ok though. I like that they kick Team killers, the selection of maps is good and none of the perks seem very useful so they must be balanced (did anyone really use danger close on MW2?). Countering the balanced perks though, the shotguns are useless.

Thats my take as a hardcore TDM player. The level up system is nice but I just bought what I wanted, ignored the rest, and am now sitting on a pile of cash I have no plans to use.