[editorial] Why should I pay for Black Ops?

Really? World at War was well received from what I can remember, and was still in the top 5 Xbox Live user activity the last time they listed it.

Black Ops isn't restricted to one era like previous CoD games, it spans the breadth of the Cold War which should provide some interesting moments. It also looks like they've removed a lot of the annoyances of MW2's multiplayer, so if you're into that thing (and millions are), then I guess there's quite a bit to look forward to.

Also Gary Oldman.

 

I'm not a biased gamer. I like to play different games instead of "Oh I hate Call Of Duty, I'm just a Halo fanboy kind of guy". I enjoy both Halo and Call of Duty. MW2 had major issues for online multiplayer, but it looks like Treyarch is doing the things that Infinity Ward did right back in COD4. Now if they can just keep out all the "modders" we should have the best COD game ever.

 

I found the single player lacking. Perhaps that is the difference between myself and the usual COD fanboy. However I have looked at the game. And I dunno, it just doesn't seem that great. Certainly not "wow this is going to be the best game ever thats why everyone is buying kind of great" anyway.

 

I'm no "usual COD fanboy" and still found it quite entertaining, as did a majority of reviewers. Obviously the series isn't for you, but it's not hard to understand why so many people enjoy it.

 

Treyarch isn't garbage. Theor CoD offerings have been solid recently; W@W was standout and played very well. Fantastic voice acting and a great damage system (limbs blown off FTW) and a solid story.

Black Ops looks to be another solid offering. Plus, more Gary Oldman this year; I'd buy it just for that.

 

Heh, perhaps I have misjudged Treyarch then. But still your missing my point. Im asking why is there SO MUCH fuss about this game as compared to usual games.


I might have to replay through 360 version of W@W. I don't quite think my computer was upto playing it properly. And I will give Black Ops a rent.

 

Because it's the next iteration of one of the biggest selling and most played franchises of all time. As Activision put it, it's this generation's Star Wars.

 

And Activision can kiss my @$$ for making a statement like that about a damn FPS. Not even all of the Halos, Halflifes, Dooms and whatnot can rate that high. Mass Effect...maybe.

IGN only gave it a 8.5. GameInformer was a bit more generous. But had it been 9.5 or higher, I might've been impressed.

 

Do you ever play games that get scores below 9? Just curious.

 

8.5 isn't bad, at all. They said it had the best story of the franchise. Count me in.

Amazon had a great deal (the game was listed at 54 dollars earlier in the month) and with release date shipping (a whopping .99 cents) it's a smooth deal. Plus, I had a 10 dollar credit. Can't beat that.

 

In this day and age, yeah, pretty much. I'm married, (almost) the sole provider in my homestead and with all the expenses that conveys, deciding where and where not to spend $60+ US is pretty important to me. So yes, I want the biggest bang for my buck and reviews do help me decide, whether for video games or movies or any other sort of entertainment.

Besides, don't you get it by now that I'm not a CoD fanboy? I only bothered with MW1 because for some reason I can't fathom i found it very cool at the time.

 

I'm not persuading you to buy the game, I don't care. I was just wondering is all, for me I think I've enjoyed more games in the 80-70 range than games above 90. Reviews mean nothing to me anymore, I judge games by demos, forums, videos etc.

And you don't have to be a CoD fanboy to enjoy these games! Why does everyone think this way?

 

Yeah, I love how you have to be a "fanboy" to like these games. I've played every CoD game and enjoyed all of them except for CoD3, but I'd hardly consider myself a fanboy of the franchise. They're not perfect, they each have their flaws, but they're all just really, really solid and fun FPS experiences, and you don't have to be a fanboy to appreciate them.

I've played it for about three hours now (about an hour in each in single player, multiplayer and zombies) and I already know that this game was worth my money. No, there's nothing truly revolutionary in any of these modes, but they're all still extremely fun. Good single player campaign story so far (though, yeah, it's just as Michael Bay-ish as MW2), multiplayer is... well, CoD multiplayer, which isn't a bad thing and there are several fun tweaks to keep it fresh. And few things this year have been as awesome as tearing up zombies while playing as Richard Nixon.

If it's not your thing, it's not your thing, but it's a pretty good game IMO.

 

Yes, I bought the damn thing, and I've died many times already. I'm a dirty sell-out. Or is that buy-out?

 

I'm sure it'll be good. Mine is sitting on my desk, right now.

 

Well, if you enjoy the pain and aggravation...what else can I say, eh? You did ask in your first post why should you buy it if that sort of aggravation was your main deterrent.

That right there is a pretty good deterrent for me.

 

Maybe I'm not as far in as you, but I wouldn't say that.

Also, the extras in this game are really cool. Very classic arcade of Treyarch.

 

Yeah, I should be clearer on that. I wouldn't say that the actual story itself is Michael Bay-ish at all. I was talking more about the action set pieces, but... after taking in more of the game, I don't think I'd go quite that far anymore. It can still get pretty over the top in places, but not to the level that MW2 took things.

And really, I didn't mean that in an insulting kind of way. I actually liked MW2's story campaign, absurd as it was. I mean, I can appreciate some mindless, Michael Bay style nonsense on occasion. Nothing wrong with it in moderation.

 

No no no, I was asking why I should pay for it. It was never going to deter me from buying it and playing it.

 

So how's your KDR?

 

I just had to check, it's not something I've been keeping track of.

[image=http://b.imagehost.org/0368/BlackOpsMP-2010-11-11-20-11-24-99.jpg]

Meh, you win some, you lose some. It's real easy to level up in this one, I think I even got 250XP for falling to my death.

Also, JFK!

[image=http://amonhen.net/athenaeum/plog-content/images/games/call-of-duty-black-ops/blackops-2010-11-11-13-44-58-86.jpg]

 

I have to say, I really like this story. I'm not too horribly far into it (I'd say 3 or 4 missions in) but I love the narrative and how it's all laid out. Really good.

Haven't touched MP yet, I set my status to "offline" so I can get some playtime in away from my friends list; most people will invite me into a MP game and I hate saying no.

 

I can not find myself to put this game down. I think the biggest reason is that there is so much to do. The campaign overall is well done. The multiplayer is great and I would say it is the best in a COD game yet. Zombies is always fun to play(the new maps are great). -9.5 out of 10 in my books

 

Despite some snags (playing on Veteran), I'm really enjoying this game. The only thing I wish Treyarch would have done is squashed the monster closets/never ending enemy spawn. It's not as big a problem this year as it was with W@W but it's still quite the pain. I was glad when Infinity Ward did away with them, now Treyarch needs to follow suit.

Still haven't taken this game online, but I'm excited to. Just to pump myself up I did some "training", and got the "level 10" achievement within 15 minutes. The bots on there are fun to kill but are not a true representation of online players. Then again, they really wouldn't be.

 

Does the 360 version pull all your friends names for bots? It does on Steam and it's really freaky. I can't tell you how many times I've been killed by Katana, Rich and Xan.