Call of Duty: Black Ops

Treyarch didn’t just make a shooter here; they made a high-stakes psychological thriller. From the "Numbers" mystery to the birth of the modern Zombies craze, this title represents the peak of military noir storytelling. The Campaign: A Masterclass in Narrative Most FPS campaigns are forgettable "Michael Bay" explosions, but Black Ops is different. Following Alex Mason through the Cold War, the Bay of Pigs, and Vietnam, the story is dark, claustrophobic, and genuinely surprising. The performance by Sam Worthington (Mason) and the return of Viktor Reznov (Gary Oldman) create an emotional weight that is rarely found in the genre. On the PS3, the cinematic pacing remains tight, and the "mind-bending" twists still land with incredible impact. Multiplayer: The Birth of Personalization This was the game that introduced CoD Points and Wager Matches (Gun Game, Sticks & Stones). The Maps: Firing Range, Summit, and the legendary Nuketown were born here. These maps were designed with "three-lane" perfection that modern shooters still try to emulate. The Feel: The gunplay on the DualShock 3 is snappy. While the graphics show their age today, the "crunchy" sound design and the recoil patterns of the Galil and Famas still feel incredibly satisfying. Zombies: The Gold Standard While World at War started it, Black Ops perfected it. Kino der Toten is arguably the most iconic Zombies map of all time. It struck the perfect balance between accessible survival and deep "Easter Egg" lore. On the PS3, the split-screen performance is surprisingly stable, making it a staple for couch co-op nostalgia. PROS Unrivaled Storytelling: This is widely considered the best story in the Call of Duty franchise. It’s gritty, smart, and doesn’t pull any punches. The "Wager Match" Suite: These party modes (especially One in the Chamber) are some of the most fun you can have in local or online multiplayer. Comprehensive Zombies Content: From the "Five" map (featuring JFK and Nixon) to the Dead Ops Arcade, the amount of content outside of the campaign is massive. Iconic Soundtrack: Sean Murray’s score captures the tension of the 1960s perfectly. Stereoscopic 3D Support: For those with 3D-capable TVs of that era, this was a rare, immersive treat on the PS3. CONS PS3 Performance Dips: Compared to the Xbox 360 version of the time, the PS3 version occasionally suffers from lower frame rates and slightly softer textures in high-action scenes. Host Migration: Since the game relies on peer-to-peer hosting, a player with a poor connection "leaving" can still interrupt the flow of a match. Graphics are Dated: By 2026 standards, the lighting and character models look blocky, but the art direction carries it through. Overall Input Call of Duty: Black Ops for the PS3 is a definitive piece of gaming history. It proved that Treyarch could not only compete with Infinity Ward but could surpass them in terms of creative storytelling and world-building. It is a rugged, intense, and endlessly replayable title that defines an entire era of gaming. Reviewer Pro-Tip: If you’re playing the campaign again, keep your eyes peeled for the hidden computer terminal in the main menu. If you break out of your chair (tap L2 and R2 repeatedly), you can access the terminal to play the text-adventure game Zork or unlock the Dead Ops Arcade! Who is this for? FPS fans who value story, Zombies enthusiasts, and anyone looking to experience the high-water mark of the 7th-generation console era.

I am writing this review after 5 hours of playing time. To that end, please realize that this should not be viewed as a comprehensive review. I will update as I become more familiar with the product, and if you do not find this review helpful, please let me know why in the comments section. I'll be happy to address the issue ASAP. Original Review begins here: COD: Black Ops is the third COD game I have played but the first I have owned. I opted for Battlefield Bad Company 2 over MW2 last time around, but I am neither a COD, BF, or MoH fanboy. I am also a professional software tester, and while that doesn't lend more inherent weight to my opinions, I hope it lets you know where I'm coming from in a review. For a game to be enjoyable to me, it has to be bug-free, smooth, and without major play imbalances. Each of these three types of issues have plagued FPS games, so I will begin with this point -- COD:BO does not suffer from any of those issues. It is the smoothest game, particularly multi-player, that I have ever played. I have read reviews on amazon from other customers who felt exactly the opposite, so I'm tempted to think that's an internet issue. I have the fastest connection possible, and I can tell you without doubt that it is much, much smoother than anything else I've played in the FPS realm for PS3 (or even PC, for that matter). Graphics: Really, really, really good -- but not perfect. This doesn't bother me, even a little. Multiplayer: Good gun balance but a bit of a learning curve. I'm an old-school PC FPS guy, so I still don't have my stick reflexes worked out. Melee attacks seem to have minimal "suck-in" effect (as opposed to, say, Gears of War) but I do wish the melee attack animations were a little more visually appealing. I haven't encountered any overpowered weapons yet, which is a huge plus. This game will *not*, however, work well for folks who like the objective-based squad play of BFBC2. If you want that out of this game, it isn't there -- at least not within five hours of gameplay. Maybe one of the unlocked modes will suffice -- I just simply can't say that yet. The unlockable system is great. It's vastly superior to anything else out there right now. Single Player: Beautiful and engaging from the first moments. I haven't played very far into it, so I'll leave it at that for now. Major gaming review sites seemed to think very highly of the story line, though, so I'd recommend checking around for some of those reviews. Training Mode: Honestly, this is a stroke of genius. Thank you, Treyarch. Thank you. You can actually learn the multiplayer maps before you play them now. This is the most useful tool I've seen included for a gamer because it lessens the learning curve. Critiques: Spawning in multiplayer can be bad. Sometimes you will spawn in as an enemy runs around the corner and pegs you while you try to figure out which way is up. The upside here is that camping choke-points off of spawn is virtually impossible (for the 'attacker') due to each map's design. The maps are smaller than I expected, but larger maps may have been too much to ask for. Overall: I highly recommend this game so far, and I also would submit that anyone experiencing "frame rate issues" in multi is instead suffering from a subpar internet connection. If you aren't a diehard of any previous shooter, this one will do very nicely for you. If you love BFBC2 and want something similar, hold off. If you love MW2, you may still prefer it. I'm not sure what to say for MoH because the critic reviews have been so negative about it that I didn't put any eggs in that basket at all. I'll be updating this review as we go. Good luck, and God bless! ***First Edit*** This game is just crazy fun in multi. I haven't spent any time in single player due to how fun multi is. There are issues -- there's no real reason to play with anything other than an assault rifle (famas or galil, usually) except for novelty. Certain killstreaks are virtually useless against experienced players (planes should be shot down 5 seconds after they're up if you're playing someone who knows what they're doing). Spawns are as good as they can be due to map size and game style. You *will* be spawn killed once in a great while. That being said, it's like crack. You won't be able to stop playing.

I cant believe that Infinity Ward released Modern Warfare 3 after this game with as little as they added to the series unlike Black Ops. Black Ops adds several features that try to keep the COD train going including more gun customization like putting your clan tag and emblem on your gun, you can completely make your own player card which is choose a background and design your own emblem, unlike MW3 where the titles are almost the exact same as MW2. They also added a credit system, wager matches and when you chose your first perk it is the deciding factor of what your character will look like. On top of that the campaign is actually lengthy and entertaining but doesn't try to be over entertaining like Infinity Wards last two entries. Then the zombies also return and are better than ever also this is the perfect start up game for someone new to the series with the addition of combat training which is where you can play team deathmatch with AI opponents so you can get the feel for online play and the maps without everyone getting mad and yelling stuff like noob in your ear which seems to ruin the experience for people right out of the gate. So really it just depends what you want, more of the same with spec ops where you shoot AI soldiers with a buddy or would you rather shoot zombies with buddies. Do you want a very short and explosion ridden overly exciting to the point that its predictable and boring campaign or a deep very thought out lengthy campaign and the thing that I care the most about: Multiplayer, do you want the exact same game as the one from a few years ago, granted COD online is almost the same anyway but the changes black ops added make it the best COD yet and hands down a no brainer for the COD game to get until we see whats happening this year with the series. To shorten this, lengthy entertaining campaign, plenty of zombies new maps and old, and the best multiplayer including customization, perks, hit detection, weapons and map choice the series has ever seen. Do yourself a favor and pick this one up and just let Modern Warfare slip back to 2009 where it belongs. Also anyone thinking about buying this for there children under 17 please reconsider. What people dont seem to understand is that there is a reason why its rated M for mature. I cant believe parents would buy a game like this for anyone under 17 and if you do dont get mad when your son or daughter run around throwing F bombs and racial slurs everywhere because thats a majority of what you hear online is 14 and under year olds using curse words and racial slurs in every sentence, Video games are not babysitters, pay attention to your kids in general and pay attention to what you buy them or what games they are playing because there are some pretty graphic games out there and they are easy to overlook. It sickens me to see so many young children playing a game like this and there parents thinking that its fine because they can trust there kids and there kids are "mature" for there age and everyone elses kids are playing it so why not ect. If you let them play them at least make sure they understand its just a game and parents realize that online gaming is a new social media and people from all over the world and of all ages are on there and alot of them say some pretty sick and disturbing things online, especially when a girl with a mic gets online, also make sure they understand that guns are not toys I cant count how many times Ive heard of firearm accidents in which online shooters and video games in general were the main thing to blame. The parents should be the ones to blame for buying a game that your child couldnt buy if he wanted to without you because its rated mature.

normally don't take the time to review, but due to the large amount of undeserving low scores, I thought it would be worthwhile to chime in. I won't cover everything, but just a few important points that seems to be vastly undervalued by naysayers at this point. (I have not touched the campaign) Let's get the cons over with first: Graphics: People have explained the graphics fairly well. They don't push it to the limits like your MW2 or UC2 did, but that's not necessarily a bad thing. The framerate is a bit choppy at times, but at the end of the day, my preference lies in gameplay variables rather than visual. Sound: Some of the sound is on the weaker side of good. Effects from guns and attachments like suppressors detract more from the realism than anything visual does. Note: the RC car kill streak reward is actually phenomenal in the sound department. Sounding like a toy obviously fits it very well - and then you have somewhat of the' Jaws' effect as it nears closer and closer and your team runs around like a bunch of little sissies trying to reach higher ground or just get the hell away. The good stuff: Multiplayer: All the familiar game types are there and they deliver fantastically. The maps are great and really offer a balanced experienced when you evaluate them through the use of difference classes. As people have said, you'd be hard-pressed to sit around and snipe the whole match, which is a good thing and has always been a pet peeve of mine in any FPS. Leveling is quick, but the customization of your character and skillset is endless and relies on the currency. Contracts are incredibly fun and really give you a sense of urgency in each and every match you play. For instance: I find myself both challenged and pissed when I have a team that is talented because that just means when we play Domination, I have that much less time to complete my goals. Adding purpose beyond winning a match is a big + to increasing repay value. Wager mode takes this a step further by providing games like one in the chamber and sticks and stones that are just plain fun. Zombies are obviously popular these days and black ops does not disappoint in this area. I find myself playing the traditional multiplayer for a few hours, then taking a break by blowing the heads off some zombies. The unlockable arcade game is also a hell of a lot of and can be fairly addicting as well. Conclusion: Ok, so what I have written is not nearly as in depth as lots of other insights we have seen on the game, and it certainly wasn't intended to be. My take-away is that everywhere you look, Treyarch has created additional value. At its core, we have a game that does have all the gameplay features that MW2 had. Sure, it comes up a bit short in the graphics and sound department, but graphics and sound don't keep you coming back for hours at a time. The innovation that goes into creating a zombie mode that is fun and frantic as you will find, adding an arcade game that would normally cost like $10 on the PSN or XBLA, creating additional 'mini game' type modes that have you wagering points, adding contracts which gives even more purpose to each match, it just goes on and on.... oh yea, and thanks for adding split screen! Treyarch has differentiated itself in all the ways that make sense when you look at the tried and true FPS model. The core game sticks to what people like most, and does it very well - so why would you want to touch that? Instead, they made tweaks here and there that don't always change, but they undoubtedly enhance your gaming experience. The additional of zombie mode, the doa ops arcade game, etc are all icing on the cake - again, they added in all the right places. Now when I take a break from CoD, I don't even turn the game off. I find myself playing a few rounds of DoA or Zombies for a different type of enjoyment. To think a company could take a franchise that has been around this long, and added ways to make it more addicting is mind boggling. They are providing the content and creativity that we can only hope we see more of in any genre. 5/5 must buy on this title is the bottom line. Grab a friend or two and just try out every game mode... hell, you may find you dont even make it online with all of the content they have provided.

Before I start my review, I want to let u guys know that I own the following games: Killzone 2, BFBC1 & 2, COD4, CODW@W, CODMW2, MAG, and MOH. I notice it's a fashionable thing to bash a mainstream game, but I believe in order to appreciate COD:Black Ops, you have to come from a background playing other FPS games such as COD4 and MOH, and not only from playing MW2. I loved MW2 and I prestiged as well, but you cannot expect a carbon copy of MW2. If you want MW2, then just play MW2 with those $15 map-packs (I bought the stimulus package for myself as well, lol). PERSONAL REVIEW ON THE MULTIPLAYER MODE: I realized many MW2 players are hating on COD:Black ops(BO) because of the graphic. I agree with them somewhat, that is why I wanna give 4.5 out of 5, but it doesn't mean u could give the game only 1 star just cuz it doesn't have more textures than MW2!! If you ever played W@W, you know the graphic and innovation isn't everything for Treyarch; they care more of the gameplay and balance in COD. If you want the innovation in COD, just don't play COD and just pick up a copy of BFBC2. After playing W@W, I knew in terms of graphic, Treyarch is still playing the catch up game with Infinite ward. The heavily modified id Tech graphic engine used in the development of COD4 and MW2 by Infinite Ward is far more superior. That is why many people who ONLY played MW2 with high expectations especially on graphic are disappointed. Anyway, a matter of fact, I was amazed how Treyarch pulled off such an amazing graphic in BO, which is almost close to MW2 consider W@W's graphic was really bad compared to COD4. Well, I believe those MW2 players who gave lower rating simply cuz BO got rid of the following: 1)Noob-tubing: scavenger + Danger close perk do not exist anymore for those noobtubers; so players who are not good at aiming cannot kill. 2)Sniping: it became so much more difficult due to the fact that BO got rid of the quick scoping. If you ever played MOH, you will know how annoying and over powered snipers are. Especially in MW2, many players want to earn their higher kill-streak combo such as Harrier --> AC130 --> Nuke, that the game promotes campers and snipers. I really like how kill-streak do not chained-up as more kills in BO, which further gets rid of campers. 3)Camping and dual shoguning: again there were so many campers and dual shotguners in MW2 that their strategies do not work in BO anymore. The implementation of RC-XD w/ ONLY 3 kill-streak (2 kill-streak with hardline perk) is simply to get rid of corner campers. I love that idea. For those of you thought that BO is just an inferior copy of MW2 with just few hours of gameplay, I suggest you to keep on playing. The multi-player mode doesn't grow on some players until you start the CUSTOMIZATION. The personalization of emblem, camo, face-paint, lens color, and lens will have you appreciate and hooked on BO even more. People who are hating on BO is only mentioning the surface of the game (graphic and sound), and have not experienced the real potential of BO. Those who are complaining about the lag, maybe their internet connections aren't good or do not know how to change their setting to LOCALE. You could change your connection setting to LOCALE, where you get to play with local people in your area/region, which personally helps getting the full bar while playing online. The game only came last week, and patches will come to fix those who really experiencing lags. All online games have lag and glitch problems when they first released. If you remember when COD4 first came out, many people including myself simply couldn't play online due to the infinite "DOWNLOADING GAME SETTING SCREEN" freeze. That was MUCH worse than any lag you will experience in BO. NOW, MY REVIEW ON THE SINGLE PLAYER MODE: I finished the campaign in 8 hours and loved every moment of it. The story was intense and creative that it reminded me of the movie, "Shutter Island." Treyarch did a great job. I loved how Reznov and Dimitri from W@W came back in the story, and how you actually get to be in Hong kong, and even in German to get rid of SS soldiers like the good old W@W. For me, I thought the story was much much better than other FPS out there. OVERALL: Call of Duty:Black Ops is the closest thing to COD4!!! which for me was the most balanced multi-player experience. In BO, players actually have to run and circulate around the map in Team Deathmatch, which reminded me much of COD4 and I really enjoy that. However, I know there are many people do not appreciate how balanced BO's gameplay is and judging the game by just the surface appearance. Simply, for me, the gameplay of BO is amazing, fun, and addictive.

I'm basing my review on the multiplayer aspect of the game only. I'm sure a lot of you do play the campaigns but single player aspects of most games play a secondary role these days. For example, I played 100 hours of muliplayer vs 6 hours for the campaign in MW2. That was of course completing the campaign. A game earns its keep in multiplayer and thats why I'm focusing on that. The online component of this game is a clear indicator that it was released prior to any substantial QA testing and debug. I've not witnessed a COD title with so many online issues since the infamous first days of COD 2. First you have to get into a game lobby, which certainly is not easy. Then, you pray the lobby doesn't close on you. Finally is the match, which is a full blown lag fest. In 5 hours of play, I'd say 75% of matches had some kind of detrimental lag going on at some point. Numerous times did I encounter mid game host migration that ended up canning the match entirely and also closing out the lobby. I have a superior internet connection so that is certainly not the reason for these issues. Regardless of host, the chatter amongst the players proved beyond a reasonable doubt that I wasn't the only one experiencing lag. As for the actual game, ho hum. Treyarch is a capable developer for sure but there isn't the magical innovation present that we saw in COD 2, MW, and to a slightly lesser degree, MW2. They usually do an OK job of taking what Infinity Ward comes up with in the game prior and modifying it enough so it feels somewhat new and fresh. Who didn't like tanks and the flamethrower in World at War? This being their 3rd full blown title, perhaps my expectations were higher than they should have been. I figured 3rd time is the charm. Boy was I wrong! Its not that the game isn't fun. It is. I will certainly play it for many hours. Its a quality game but with COD, we want and expect more than quality. First and foremost are the graphics. This is the 4th game now on the very tired and very modified MW engine. Its time for a new game engine guys! Old tech is only capable of so much. The fire effects, the blood effects, and the explosions are all being done better in other games this year. While the PS3 graphics capabilities are pretty much maxed with current games, this game takes us back a couple of years. Very disappointing. The leveling mechanic has been broken with the introduction of points. Points can be used for purchasing guns, perks, equipment, etc. You gain points over the course of matches just like you do experience points. The points system was surely implemented to enable the new wager matches and contracts but it seriously gimps the leveling mechanic and fights against it at times. One way it breaks the leveling mechanic is now many things that used to be unlockable via leveling or successful gameplay can be had at very low experience levels if you purchase them. Most of the perks are available right up front. Weapon attachments can be purchased as well. I take serious exception with purchasing of weapons attachments because having all of the attachments really meant you had mastered a particular weapon. It could take hours and hours to unlock all of a guns options via challenges in previous games. Now, spend 1000 points, and you can get a red dot sight. Spend 3000, get a grenade launcher. That one aspect of prior games contributed greatly to replay value. It was fun to unlock every paint scheme and attachment for a gun and then start new on another gun. The guns themselves are still unlocked as you level, which leaves some credibility with the leveling mechanic. However, once you unlock a gun at level 21 for example, you can't go using it just yet. You have to buy it with points! So, you may finally get to a certain level that has the gun you really want, and you can't have it yet because you haven't saved enough points to purchase it. Sure, some pre-planning will save one from that scenario, but it can be a letdown nonetheless when it does happen. Luckily, nothing is very expensive. That is the biggest problem with points. Everything is cheap so you can quickly get access to all of the perks and weapon attachments. Nothing is so expensive that it really makes you save points. So, there isn't much gratification associated with getting a particular perk or attachment. Kill streak rewards took a step back. I suppose it has to do with the era the game is set it but there aren't as many as MW2 and a lot are retreads. The SAM turret is pretty neat but the RC car is useless. Its a guaranteed kill when you nail someone with it but its a time drain to drive it around and search for people. I used it a couple of times and never bothered again. Nukes are gone, which I am pleased with. The actual game play is same old first person shooter stuff. The guns seem balanced with the notable exception of the flamethrower gun attachment. It was so fun to use in World at War but is pretty ineffective in this game. I tried to use it in quite a few matches and it is just too underpowered. Cover mechanics are largely nonexistent except for the new dive to prone ability. I was hoping we'd start to see some cover ability (ability to stick to walls, and peak around corners) introduced to the series but perhaps in the next game. So all that being said, this game is certainly enjoyable but the tinkering with the leveling system and addition of the points system could ultimately detract from replay value. That is if you can even play multiplayer without the huge lag issues. Treyach does a fine job sticking to the COD formula but their tweaks in this particular game generally take more steps back than forward. When the multiplayer is patched, you'll more than likely get your moneys worth out of Black Ops. However, with Infinity Ward no longer around to establish the formula for Treyarch to follow, I believe this is the last good COD game we'll see.

It seems interesting how much Call of Duty has grown from the original, yet at the same time, some of the mechanics that had made the series so popular are still alive in their latest release from Treyarch, Call of Duty: Black Ops. I'm moreso of a casual gamer, and since I'm certain most of the reviews are by outright gamers whom always get the latest FPS (first person shooter) games, I hope I can provide a different perspective. First, I can say I've played most of the Call of Duty series, but wasn't really "hooked" until Modern Warfare came out. I loved the current yet slightly futuristic gameplay of it; the storyline was, for a FPS, amazing. The game mechanics were great. But, I can say I didn't really try out the multiplayer aspect of the series until Modern Warfare 2, which I purchased for the PS3 on release. MW2 was notably geared towards its multiplayer, offering a decent but incredibly short single-player, so I decided to suck it up and play multiplayer, and let me say, I was hooked. There were so many failed aspects to MW2 multiplayer, yet for me, it didn't compete with the absolute wins of multiplayer. It was fun, and it was visually amazing. That being said, its biggest setbacks for me were lag/glitching (peer-to-peer gaming I still don't think is the way to go for FPS), and cheap hacks that never fixed (so, the biggest setback was the lack of support by Infinity Ward). Developer Treyarch seems to have listened to the gaming community, and has made an excellent effort to bring an excellent gaming experience. Here's my personal veiwpoints: *Graphics: Overall, the graphics are still a stunning next-gen presentation, but as many have noted, they lack slightly compared to the polish of MW2. Namely, there is jaggedness in much of the visuals, although I think the scenery settings are more robust than MW2, which was purposely scarce of scenery objects overall. Online is also slightly worse, but after playing for a few hours, its not really even noticeable. Not knowing the specifics, the engine seems to be far more similar to BFBC2 than MW2, I actually think a lot of Black Ops is really an in-between of those two games (saying this will probably get me flak from both communities, but it's just my opinion). *Sound: I thought the sound was overall very good in Black Ops, I love that it asks for your sound setup type. I thought MW2 had "better" sound, but it was more theatrical. The reality is, most of the SMGs sound like firecrackers in the game, but its also somewhat more realistic than the roaring "boom boom boom" every gun would make in MW2. *Single-player: I don't believe the storyline to be as great as MW, but it's certainly an interesting take, and I applaud them for the effort. The gameplay is good, but you'll find the AI to be lacking, particularly on the enemy side, making it slightly less-than-believable. *Zombies: A welcome addition; essentially worth it on its own, and for being included in the game makes it a great bonus. *Multiplayer: The meat of the game resides here in multiplayer. First thing to note is the small-scale of the maps. Teryarch seemed to want less of a "campers" paradise, although there are plenty of spots to take cover in, you won't be running for a minute only to be sniped and have to do it all over again. I think the many places for cover are well suited, and even without hardened perk, bullets can go through much of cover, an aspect I enjoy for being more realistic. I would say people are a little too difficult to kill sometimes, but as usual the "hardcore" mode provides a much more realistic representation. Some of my favorite aspects have been the removal of commando and danger close perks, the "weakening" of quick-scoping (sniper rifles can still be used quite successfully, even in close combat, but requires more skill in Black Ops), and fun maps (although it'd be great to see more, and some larger maps would be great additions as well). There are several issues I will point out about the game. First and most importantly, while there was much hype about the end of glitches and lag, it still runs rampant in the game (in my experience, the first two days were great, and has gone downhill since). This means its anybody's guess if you will actually hit the person you're shooting at, providing random advantages to different users; some games I can easily skate to a 20+/2 K/D ratio, many of my kills even I'll admit were less than fair, while others I'll be unable to kill anyone, despite shooting point-blank. I haven't had too many issues with disconnections/host migration, but I'd say it's close to as frequent as MW2. Knifing is currently somewhat of a guess/luck as well, as many times I'll see others or myself go flying by the person they're knifing, essentially knifing the air even though the guy hasn't moved, only to wind up being knifed yourself. While there is no "commando" in the game, having the ballistic knife out significantly improves the speed and ability to melee somebody. The largest thing I can do is have a "wait and see" attitude; I've heard Treyarch is more responsive to the community and patching, so hopefully they will improve gameplay (I don't expect perfect, but sometimes it can be ridiculous how off it is). *Multiplayer Training/Practice: Wow, I wish MW2 had this! Seriously, to me this is such a welcome addition, I just wish I had been able to use something like it in the past. When I first made the multiplayer leap in MW2, I went with trepidation that I would be slaughtered, and screamed at for being a n00b. Well, all those things happened. Multiplayer, for the first time you try it, is very different from an idiotic AI in single-player campaign modes (don't get me wrong, there's still plenty of idiots). The goals are very different, and thus playing is ultimately very different. Well, if you were hesitant to make that jump into multiplayer, Black Ops provides the ability to practice against AI of varying difficulty, some of which I found to be even better AI than in campaign mode (still stupid, but it does the trick, starting off very stupid at beginner difficulty, great for learning). *Overall: The game is excellent, albeit with its shortcomings. I hope they patch the flaws, that will really prove to the lifespan of the game for me. If you are on the fence, new to Call of Duty or online gameplay, this one is truly the one to get, since it has most of the best aspects of the series, and many improvements. I really would give this something along the lines of 4.4/5.0 or 8.9/10 if I could. Feel free to ask me questions in the comments section, I will try to check back, and even update if patches resolve the issues. I purchased this pre-order here on Amazon, and it was, as usual, a great experience.

Online: Like anything, when people get use to one thing (Modern Warfare 2), going into something new can seem awesome, until you actually do it. Then it all feels different and one's first reaction is "this is not as fun". After playing this game for over a month, then going back to play MW2 online again, I definitely like the online game play of Black Ops better. The music and game play sounds are better to start with. You can hear more detail, not only do you hear the pin from a grenade being pulled, but which direction was just thrown from as well. The weapons are much more varied, but better at not having a select few be overpowered. The addition of weapons such as the under barrel flame thrower attachment and the crossbow make for a more random game play. Can't say I have ever played another online game where a guy can get shot with an explosive arrow, and while he runs for cover behind all his teammates, it goes off and he blows them all up. The removal of the nuclear strike is a welcomed change. The only person who enjoyed that was the person setting off the nuke. Everyone else who was in the middle of working on their kill streaks just gets their game ended. The ability to customize every detail, from face paint to gun camo it a fun addition, making each players guns their own. There have been some teething problems with the stability of the servers hosts since the games launch. From inability to keep connected through a whole game, to lobbies getting stuck and the rounds not launching at all. Thankfully though, with the most recent game update, almost all of these problems have been fixed and only now are there occasional game disconnects. Had their been a public BETA testing of the games servers, this probably would have been avoided. Hopefully this lesson has been learned by Treyarch, in case they ever do another Call of Duty game. Offline Play: The storyline is darker than that of Modern Warfare 2. While you play the same character throughout this game (unlike the changing of characters in MW2), the game definitely has a twist at the end. The game has significantly more swearing and acts of prisoner torture. The "No Russian" airport mission in MW2 has nothing on the torture scenes in this game. Basically, I'm saying this is not for the little kids. I personally like the offline storyline and game play of MW2 better. I found the missions in Black Ops to feel a little like going through the same mouse maze over and over, just with different scenery and more viciousness. It seemed in Black Ops, the goal was to be better at stabbing people in the head, instead of taking down an enemy with one shot at 500 yards. The game play in Black Ops felt more constricted and the graphics weren't quite as dynamic as MW2. Still, the game holds it's own and is worth plaything through. Conclusion: In a head to head comparison of Black Ops and Modern Warfare 2, Black Ops (with it's new stable server updates) wins for better online play, while MW2 has a more fun offline play. Tip: After you have played through the entire offline game, wait for the credits to end and you will get a new zombie game. You play as JFK trying to fight off the zombies from the White House.