Gaming Call of Duty: Black Ops Review

Well, the review score is meant as a guideline, but generally speaking yes. It's far better to read the review text and judge it that way - not because I'll say different things, but because you can assess the judgement and see how closely it matches your own expectations.

 

I agree although the first few levels are a bit naff as its rumoured (this may be fact I can't remember) that the developers learnt the PS3's abilities on the job, hence why the latter half of the games looks and plays alot better than the beginning half.

I am actually slowly replaying it at the moment on the hardest dificulty. I was going fine right up until Northern Command, the leaper tunnel half way through the level causes insta death for me.

 

Regarding Battlefield - they've *never* been single player games - while BF1942 and the ilk did have a single player mode it was just the same game but with AI bots. I was considerably surprised that Bad Company 2 actually had a story-based Single Player game as to the best of my knowledge that had never happened before.

I was even more surprised that it was supposedly really quite good too, but thats by the by

 

8/10 was rather generous .I must admit I havent really played the single player game for long, the flashing headache inducing cut scenes does nothing but gives me a headache. I cannot believe multiplayer is marked so well, did you play the PC version with friends?.

Excusing the techincal issues (lag, stuttering frames, etc) assuming they will be patched, more glaring ommisions are.
1. After levelling you have to quit the server you are playing in to equip your new gun. Want to tweaky it? out you go again.
2. The menu systems are clunkly at best.
3. Even when you managed to get into a server, and invited your friends in to the game (from the steam list of 100's including those who don't own the game), you cannot be sure you will be on the same side.

This is 2010, the ability to party with my friends and then all join the same server was in MW2 (last year), and even BFBC2 (join in squad option). I want to play mutliplayer games with my friends on the same side. When I unlock a level, I would expect at the end of the map to be able to equip or alter my class. Steam friends isn't even properly implemented, requiring me to hassle my friend to stop playing the game so he can invite me into the server he is playing in.

It all feels very clunky and very thrown together, I don't doubt it is fun in multiplayer if you are playing it alone.

 

Well there we go a 8/10 for a game he didn't seem to like very much and no mention of the multitude of problems the game has. Again why I never trust the shooter game reviews here so much, hell even the usually stupidly bias Destructoid managed an honest review of this.

 

Whilst I am enjoying the multi player immensely the following points are ruining it..

1. The friends system is just rubbish compared to MW2. How do I create a party and play on the same team as my buddy ?

2. The add to favourites button doesn't always work when in game.

3. No way to create a class to use your new weapon unless you leave the server.

4. On some servers I've played on, the lag and stuttering has been appalling. Is this a game problem or a server problem ?

5. On some levels the graphics are great, others look poor... Especially nuke town .


I think the review should have mentioned these points as in my opinion, the multiplayer part of the game urgently needs fixing on the PC.

 

Basically we have been robbed again on the dedicated server side of things. This is the last of the series I will be buying. After the IWnet crap with MW2 you would think they would have learned from their mistakes
- A S S H O L E S

 

After all of that complaining you gave it an 8 lol?

 

1. Same as BF:BC2 then...
2. Same as MW & BF:BC2 then...
3. Same as all the COD series & BF:BC2 then...
4. Hmmm, do they really think their multiplayer server strategy was the answer?
5. Now, what does that remind me of?

 

Nothing against Black Ops, it is what it is, a cash cow. But it IS games like this that pretty much ended fps'ers for me. I still play L4D2 and sometimes some TF2 but I've totally lost all interest in realism style military shooters. They've been done too many times for me to give a monkeys about a new one.

Not that I wouldn't mind one that makes me want to go back into them, guess I'll wait on Brink then.

 

Infinitely respawning enemies until I move into the correct position to trigger the next scripted sequence? Well, I'm totally fed up with the Vietnam mission.

 

Generally, I have found the multiplayer to be quite refreshing (after working out how to play locally rather than being pushed on to a server on the other side of the world where there are massive delays!).

My only gripe is that after killing an enemy, they either respawn pretty much directly behind you, or directly in front of you. Or after you have been killed, you are respawned in front of an enemy, with your back to them, and just get killed before you have a chance to say "ow". Fix this and I think that this could be better than MW2.

 

I'm obviously going to have to try to be more happy in my text, because my honest opinion is 8/10 and I like the game...

 

I think im waiting for a price drop on this before i buy

 

You'll be waiting a couple of years then

Might even be 3 CoD's behind at this rate!

 

Check the user reviews. 3.5/10 at the moment and falling... http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/call-of-duty-black-ops

Official reviewers that give a good score like 8/10 (8/10 = very good game) are corrupt and have been bribed by activision to give a good score. Details... http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/...ack-ops-review-event-press-gifts-detailed.ars

 

Yeah, maybe in America. Here, I had to queue in the cold for an hour to get into a launch event at Battersea Power Station, saw some friends I used to work with, complained about the food and then had to walk 2 miles to the nearest tube station in the rain after only staying for an hour or two.

No free gifts. No bribes. Didn't even speak to anyone from Activision (well, I chatted to the PR for Blizzard about Cataclysm, but that's it). Our review code hasn't even arrived - I had to play Paul's copy that he bought with his own money. And as you can plainly see Activision hasn't advertised on the site, ever - there opinion is that we, as a PC site, are irrelevant. Nor did we get access to the game early; our review went up late, in fact.

You might read that and think 'Well, why give it an eight then?' Because, as a professional, I know how to put that behind me. I've been given free T-shirts and stuff in the past and none of that has ever had any effect either. I try to provide honest opinions that weigh up the whole package, rather than honing in on just flaws in SP or MP map design and giving it 3/10. Trust me, compared to REAL 3/10 games, BLOPS compares very favourably.

Trust me, the first time I get offered a bribe like GamePro did, I'll tell you all about it - but that seems to happen mainly in the US.

 

Most of the people on my steam friends list seem to like it, and I've got plenty of readers on there. User submitted reviews are irrelevant at best and at worst are nothing but ill informed, venomous ranting. The fact that there's no accountability doesn't exactly make for fair or balanced opinions.

 

I just finished it. Single player was buggy as hell. I still think the two Modern Warfare games were far better. Single player for this one was on par with BF:BC2.