Review: Call of Duty: Black Ops

[Arcadial]

Desperately confused and pointless plot, Sappy overly patriotic ending and Some of THE WORST exposition and voice acting I have ever seen in a game with a decent budget. End of story.

Multiplayer is good so far, once they work the bugs out it will be excellent; Still seems less crisp and clean than the engine used for MW2 and it is obviously not running as smoothly.

 

[maddawg IAJI]

Strange how far off some of the escapist reviews are... I'm glade I bought this game before reading the review here because after playing it your scores should be swapped for myself. The single player all boils down to what kind of movie you like really, I like suspense and plot twists and black ops had plenty of it. Most people I would think want more story, I really don't see how this isn't an improvement over MW2, I'm just happy they didn't go crazy and made you play a character that died as that was getting old.

The multilayer is a different story, I hate how limited you are on unlocking gear and attachments. Just reaching the level to use the gun should be enough and then completing challenges to use the attachments would be nice, giving you something to specifically work towards.

And if it were up to me, I'd score it lower. This is by far the worst Call of Duty I have ever played. The Characters are crap, everything you do just feels pointless and the voice acting, god damn, I thought Reznov was annoying enough. Just look at the mission where you played as Hudson, the stereotypical tough CIA operative who always, ALWAYS wears sun glasses. You spend the entire level trying to escape with the British Bio-Terrorist (Who seems far too willing to help, given the interrogation I just gave him) only for him to die in a cut scene that I can't control. Not to mention that everything that occurs is pretty predictable. As soon as I began the Reznov level, I predicted the EXACT ending. As soon as I began the Hudson mission, I predicted an almost EXACT ending to it. Even when attempting to assassinate Castro, I came pretty close to guessing how it would end. Its not a plot twist when you see it coming 5 miles down the road and there is a road-sign up that says "Plot Twist" ahead.

The biggest problem I have with Black Ops isn't the plot, it isn't the annoying characters, it isn't the fact that they cut out a lot of cool stuff in their missions (Remember that mission where you had to destroy the missile? Remember how afterward, the main character talks about how he found the main bad-guys limousine and they chased it down and destroyed it? Wouldn't that have been a lot better to actually do then listen to.), it isn't even the constant jumping through time, but rather the annoying way they perceive Vietnam. The first thing we see of Vietnam is Woods getting off a helicopter. He has cuts all over his body, a bandanna wrapped around his forehead and isn't wearing a shirt, all the while 70's rock music is playing in the background. Bravo Treyarch. Way to completely ditch the whole "War is hell." motif you have been known for in order to go with the stereotypical Hollywood rendition of 'Nam. It felt like I was watching Forest Gump and after that scene, I just couldn't take anything seriously.

It didn't help that every single enemy I killed looked exactly alike. I mean, what are the odds that 50 Vietcong will all be shirtless and all be wearing Red Bandannas on their heads?

 

[Devil's Due]

No matter what you say, there will be thousands of people who will claim that it's the greatest game they've ever played. Kind of sad, really...

And no matter what they say, there will be thousands of people who claim it's the worst game they've ever played. Kind of sad, really...

As for the review, meh, the singleplayer is a bit slow at times, but I've mainly been trapped with the zombies. I still love my zombies, no matter how many games seem to have them now.

 

[ProfessorLayton]

No matter what you say, there will be thousands of people who will claim that it's the greatest game they've ever played. Kind of sad, really...

And no matter what they say, there will be thousands of people who claim it's the worst game they've ever played. Kind of sad, really...

As for the review, meh, the singleplayer is a bit slow at times, but I've mainly been trapped with the zombies. I still love my zombies, no matter how many games seem to have them now.

I've already had this conversation... and I'll say what I've said before. There will be people who say it's the best and people who say it's the worst and they will both be right. Also... [http://www.cracked.com/article_18805_5-ways-stores-use-science-to-trick-you-into-buying-crap.html] (check #1)

 

[Valagetti]

YES!!! I had the exact same issue. I spawned about a dozen times, then I finally realised I get to do shit, instead of watching NPC's do stuff. And why was sextex strapped to a oil barrel in the first place? Infinity Ward will never ever let this shit fly!

 

[Valagetti]

I would like to add onto that with the mission objectives being very vague at times.

There are times where in order to proceed you are required to do something that is not set as objective and you are not told to do it until you have either failed (for not doing it) or have been told by an ally who sometimes "forgets" to tell you.

For example, playing on Hardened there was this one bit where you had to push back some forces for a strike (vagueness is intended to remove the need for spoiler tags) but they spawn fast and infinitely. The game never tells you that you had to stab a barrel and kick it down a hill. It doesn't even be nice and waypoint it.



YES!!! I had the exact same issue. I spawned about a dozen times, then I finally realised I get to do shit, instead of watching NPC's do stuff. And why was sextex strapped to a oil barrel in the first place? Infinity Ward will never ever let this shit fly!

 

[Evil Tim]

Again. Let's take the Pentagon cutscene as an example. (...) Total elapsed time: over 20 minutes.

Anyone want to do a comparison with how long it takes Half-Life 2 to give you a gun and something to shoot it at?

As regards the notes on the rocket base section: really, how does that differ from the Chernobyl segment of the original Modern Warfare that the critics raved over, where basically you did exactly what the NPC told you to do or died? If you didn't get killed yourself, he usually did. You can hardly claim a Simon-says sequence is some unique low for the series when both preceding games have done exactly the same thing, and I have some issue with any claim that it's worse than MW2's boring-ass rock climbing sequence.

And that's why FPS games will never advance anywhere. Companies don't want to take risks and develop interesting characters or intricate backstories or plot lines, they'll never really innovate, because people like you just think, "Wait, what the fuck? There's a story? Screw that, I just want to shoot stuff."

Actually, I think this attitude is worse than the alternative. Imagine if a movie suddenly shifted into a series of text screens partway through, because, say, the big payoff is that the scenes are actually being told from the perspective of a tree and if it were being shown visually, it wouldn't work.

It would be stupid.

It would not be valid to argue that the people who object are just morons who can't stand a story without the bright flashy moving pictures.

It's the same when a game stops all gameplay to tell a story with a non-interactive sequence; if you can't tell your story within the confines of the game, it's not a story that belongs in the medium. You don't pick up a movie because you wanted to read a book, and you don't pick up a game because you want to watch a movie.

The sooner games stop trying to ape the conventions of movie storytelling and focus on stories that can be told through gameplay, the sooner we'll see actual progess in the medium. Until then we'll keep getting shambling chimeras that are part game and part movie, and keep stopping the game so the story can happen. It's not a game when Half-Life 2 locks you in a room with nothing to do so that it can dump ten minutes of exposition on you.

 

[Bruce Edwards]

Generally, I kind of enjoyed Black Ops. Although, unusually for Call of Duty, all of the best stuff is stacked towards the end.

If you only played through the first two hours of gameplay I can understand a low review score. However, both the story and gameplay improve dramatically during the last half.

The story, expecially, impressed me with how it ended. This is seemingly the reverse of most other shooters (Modern Warfare 2, Half Life 2, Doom 3, FEAR) where most of the story is about setting up the environment, and things either fall to pieces or end after an arbitrary boss battle without resolving anything.

 

[Cade the Imperfect]

Its nice to see, their is finally a review of Black Ops i have some version of agreement with. I keep reading all these 9s and 10s. People calling it amazing, beautiful so well done. And when i bought it (now put in mind i loved mw2) i found myself... disappointed. Mutli-player is solid, enjoyable, i will put a fair amount of hours into that to be sure. But excluding that, i feel as if nothing else was up to the expectation i had for a game that no only is a huge release but has a budget through the clouds to the moon itself. Its not a bad game, just not up to the level of quality one should expect.

 

[Flamespeak]

I wasn't a fan of single player campaign, but I vastly prefer the online MP component over that of Modern Warfare 2. A good online game overall, though there are still better online shooters out there.

Wish it was about $30 bucks cheaper, then I have a feeling I would have enjoyed it a lot more.

 

[Arawn]

Rather than comment on the content of the review I'd like to make a few questions/points in general:

1)At what point did single player on a FPS become not the focus?

As fun as online play is, shouldn't single player get just as much attention as the multiplayer aspect? Especially for those that lack the internet access to play online. But I guess if multiplayer is the point of the game, they should buy something else. Sounds cruel.

I got to play this game on a friend's system. It was multiplayer, so I asked how the single mode was. "It was alright, I already beat it." was the response. Looking back at the fact I didn't ask anything more shows how much I too have fallen. I should really care about FPS single player mode, but I've come to expect nothing. I'm starting to see multiplayer like player added content. The developers give you tools and settings, and the player does the rest. That awesome firefight on that last map wasn't made by the developer it was made by me and 6 other guys.

2)Who cares if it sold X amount copies?

Sales does not equal success. If asked if you liked a movie and you reply "It made $10.4 million on opening night." you didn't tell me anything other than that alot of people saw it. Just because they saw the movie doesn't mean they liked it. The sale was made nothing else.

The last thing I want to say is bad reviews are just as bad as good reviews. Sure a bad review can give someone a poor impression of a good game. But a positive review can give someone a good impression of a crappy game. I ask you which is worse? If you buy a bad game because of a review you've wasted your money. At best you can sell it to a friend or store. But not buying a game due to bad review is easier to fix, you can go and buy the game later after new/better information is provided. This game has sold X amount of copies, so despite the review people are still buying it. I'm looking forward to games like Deus Ex and Crysis 2

 

[Evil Tim]

Sales does not equal success.

Reality calling, yes they do. However, something succeeding is not the same as it being good. Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen was a staggering success. It was also a shitty movie.

Unfortunately, when something succeeds, it's usually taken as proof that it was good (or, more exactly, that people want it regardless of whether it's good or not), hence sticking with safe formulas. When you pay money for a product, no matter what you think you're doing, you are placing your stamp of approval on that product in the company's eyes.

 

[latenightapplepie]

Play it then make up your own mind.

This review is not indicative of the feelings of anyone I know who has played it, personally I thought it was great.

I got the game and I have bad news: Russ was right; this game blows. I haven't finished the campaign yet, and I'm not sure if I want to.

Maybe I just hate formula for of the Call of Duty games and therefore couldn't have possibly liked this game, but I really didn't enjoy this.

Ugh. That's the last time I get a game purely for curiosity's sake. I feel dirty.

 

[Arawn]

I guess I should clarify my statement. Success in sales doesn't necessarily mean a successful product. Good advertising can move a product, but doesn't mean everyone is satisfied with their purchase. As noted among the comments; people that bought the game and didn't like it. The sale was made, and profit obtained. No follow up. But one can say that's the goal of any product, the sale itself. I guess I'm speaking of principle; a product the consumer is happy and satisfied with. Which is hard to judge or gauge at times. But if sold and returned that would be a negative against the sale. Usually they don't keep track of such things if so don't make such numbers public. Games aren't returnable in most stores anyway. Sale it or trade it back for credit.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

Play it then make up your own mind.

This review is not indicative of the feelings of anyone I know who has played it, personally I thought it was great.

I got the game and I have bad news: Russ was right; this game blows. I haven't finished the campaign yet, and I'm not sure if I want to.

Maybe I just hate formula for of the Call of Duty games and therefore couldn't have possibly liked this game, but I really didn't enjoy this.

Ugh. That's the last time I get a game purely for curiosity's sake. I feel dirty.

Each to thier own. I loved it and couldn't disagree more.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

I guess I should clarify my statement. Success in sales doesn't necessarily mean a successful product.

I agree, but try telling Bobby Kotick that

 

[TheEndlessSleep]

To be honest, with all these COD games, we've reached the point now where the haters toatlly hate it and the fanboys are totally loyal, so unless they completly wreck the game (which they didn't) but just tweak it here and there, people who like it will continue to play it, and people who don't like it will stay away.

 

[Iamnotawitch]

Thank you for voicing opinion of silent minority. At times it feels that CoD franchise is canonised and pointing out flaws is akin to heresy.

'... putting hat on a dog' - that was gold!

 

[L-J-F]

IGamers dont want the same fucking games spat out every year in the same way we dont give a fuck about motion controls

Judging by the sales figures you're about as wrong as you can be, on both accounts. I really liked Black Ops, best Cod since the first one. The only thing that annoys me is that the maps aren't quite as good as the MW1 ones in MP. The campaign wasn't the greatest thing ever made but who the heck plays a CoD game for the sp? A hermit?

 

[Hugodastrevas]

Black Ops it's a huge step back from moder warfare 2, the story makes no sense the effects almost burn my eyes out (and what's up with the "firework" grenades?).
There is only co-op for zombies and online (at least make ripoff of mw2 spe-ops).
I just can't recommend this game, not even to fans.
specially not to fans because they'll be really really really disappointed.