Ok, so turns out the government captured me. They tortured and interrogated me for this last month. Then they decided to take the information about my life that they got and turn it into a video game, and that game turned out to be COD: Black Ops. So yes, I feel it fit to review it. I'll start by saying that i was VERY skeptical of the first "yearly" installment of the now Maddenized COD series. Well, Black Ops both failed and met my expectations in different areas. I'll start with the account of my life, the campaign. You play as me (no I'm not Alex Mason the name was legal purposes) as I am captured and tortured by government officials in order to explain a set of numbers. Of course you (or me, or Alex Mason depending on your view) have no clue what the numbers mean. The missions are flashbacks of my (mason's yours etc. man this is confusing) service across the world, and I definately mean across the world. You go everywhere, from Cuba to Vietnam to Russia and back. The campaign was the area where the game actually exceeded my expectations. With a more personal story that has many references to World at War instead of a "this army kills this army" approach, the campaign feels different from any other in the series. It has awesome set pieces, a ton of variety, and is paced at the speed of a Michael Bay movie on crack after taking three 5-hour-energies and drinking six Monster's. Suffice to say, playing the game actually managed to wear me out. Whether this is a testament to the insane pacing or my own incredible lazieness remains to be seen. All in all the campaign will last about six hours, and has a less than stellar ending. The main problem with the campaign though is the lack of direction at certain parts. Some parts literally require you to die and then and only then will your objective be clearly stated to you. In a shooter, this is more than a minor annoyance. In the end though, it isn't enough to tarnish the overall quality of it. On the graphics side, Black Ops definately impresses. The texturing is perfect, the frame rate is solid, and the number of enemies on screen is sometimes jaw dropping (Vietnam base siege I'm looking at you. The multiplayer however, failed to impress. Essentially, it is Modern Warfare 2 with new killstreaks and guns, and instead of earning guns you must buy them. The new contract system is cool, challenging you to complete a specific task in a match for extra points. The wager matches allow you to bet the points you earn, and while the match types have awesome ideas the fact that you will most likely lose credits will keep you from playing them over and over again. Also on a side note, the return of Nazi Zombies is hilarious and quite awesome except for the fact that it is now so horrendously difficult that it verges on unplayability. Overall, the first "issue" of the now yearly COD franchise is a good game, with a better than expected campaign and the same multiplayer that people all over the world love. I'm starting to wonder though, when will players stop buying a new COD game each and every year?
Final Score: 8.75 out of 10
so.. and let's see if I followed this.. you liked it, but multiplayer wasn't as good? I get so lost :)
ReplyDelete*Jewel*
good review
ReplyDeletegood review and I agree COD needs a revolution(no pun intended fable 3) as big as COD4 did back in 2007 if its going to continue to make a difference for me IMO
ReplyDeletei was so lost i dont even know what to say..one of these days you should write a blog in understandable english....
ReplyDelete