Call of Duty's Success: 2nd Greatest Mystery Known to Man
Don't worry, I created a TL;DR version. Just climb over the wall of text ahead
The Call of Duty franchise is no doubt one of the biggest and most successful video game series in history, and with the latest installment, Call of Duty: Black Ops", selling 5.6 million units within the first 24 hours of release, I had to see what all the fuss was about. Although I spend a lot of time with FPS games, I'm not a big Call of Duty fan, mainly because I haven't had much exposure to the series. I have tried their previous installments like Modern Warfare 1 & 2 as well as World at War, but not enough to develop a strong opinion on it. Therefore I'm not going to spend time on this review explaining how much better or worse Black Ops is compared to its predecessors. Rather, the majority of the review will be spent on discussing all the problems plagued in multiplayer (Again, you can scroll down for the quick summary). Sure single player is an important aspect of the game, but for most of us, the majority of our time will be devoted to online multiplayer. Again, I'm going to look at this as a standalone game. FYI, I purchased this game on console (First COD game for me) because the majority of my friends were getting it. If I had to choose between playing this game with my friends or being Forever Alone [insert Forever Alone pic here], I would easily choose the latter without any hesitation.
Forever Terrible
Where to begin? How about the technical problems of the game, mostly in the servers? I can't understand why the developers would choose to use P2P (Peer-to-peer) networking to host games, as opposed to using dedicated servers. What this results in is that you'll be playing games hosted by another person's internet connection, which can result in noticeable lag. This isn't a problem if the host has a fast internet connection, but that's not always the case. As well, if the host decides to leave at anytime during the game, the match will actually pause and the game will actually migrate you to another host. Imagine you're in the middle of a basketball game, with the ball in your hand, game on the line, and YMCA tells you guys to move to another court. And this is assuming there is another court. Almost half of the time where a host decides to leave, the game fails to find a new host, resulting in everyone returning to lobby. People will tell me to wait for a patch so Treyarch can iron out the problems associated with lag (given it's only been released for a week or so). They can patch the symptoms all day, but they're never going to fix the cause associated with connection problems. (I highly doubt Treyarch will switch to dedicated servers)
And speaking of lobbies, the options available in it are rather very disappointing. The most obvious is the lack of an option between choosing to join a new game or one that's already running. This results in you joining games where your team is already down by 95 points, or even games that's about 5 seconds away from finishing (I actually joined a game where the match was done and the scoreboard was already up). With no option available, I'm forced to join games where my team has lost any chance of winning. I don't care much about my win/loss record, but for the people who does, it will get somewhat irritating knowing you earned a loss after only playing for a minute in-game.
Furthermore, there needs to be an option to veto a map? In a perfect world, we would enjoy every map equally. However, each one of us has that one map (or ten in my case) where we would avoid it like leprosy. I'm not sure why people have a fetish for Array, Cracked, Jungle, or Nuketown (terrible maps IMO), but there's a very good chance they'll be chosen. Many of these maps suffer from the numerous amounts of buildings (and thus windows) for campers to pick you off. Add to the fact that camouflaging is ridiculously easy because of the environment (snow and jungle maps), what you'll actually be playing is maps designed to fulfill a camper's wet dream. Don't mistake me for someone preferring vanilla-style, "Final Destination" type of maps. Details are important, but there are more windows here than a Microsoft convention. Looking through the map list, there isn't a single map that I actually want to play on. Once you play through all the maps a couple of time, you'll realize you're not going to vote for a map because you like that one map, but rather you'll choose one map just because you dislike the other. You'll just be choosing the lesser of two terribles. From a business standpoint, these maps make more sense. Release a bunch of terrible maps with the game, and then create an expansion pack with better maps for the community to buy approximately a year down the road. And since there isn't an option to exclude any maps from the search process, you are now forced to "appreciate" every map equally.
Rather disappointing gameplay
Well, if you're still reading this, then let's actually get to the problems plagued with the gameplay in multiplayer. I have heard many problems associated with previous Call of Duty games, especially in the spawn system. Again, I don't really have much of an opinion on previous games, so I can't say whether or not it has improved, but if the spawn system in the previous games were anything similar to the spawn system in this game, I can now understand why the Call of Duty series is seen as inferior (and constantly made fun of) in the rest of the FPS community. I actually spawned three straight times under an attack helicopter. Why am I dying before I even get to pull out my anti-aircraft missile launcher? Next to spawning under an unstoppable war machine, you'll also get the pleasure of spawning in front of and around your enemies. Your average lifespan in this game is probably about ten seconds (I'm being very generous with this guess) before someone puts two in your back. You need to have some type of fetish for getting shot in the back to enjoy this game. For a good portion of your deaths, you will be wondering where your enemy was. It has nothing to do with me being a bad player or not being careful in where I run off to. I can familiarize myself with every map inside and out, cautiously sneak around every corner, but there's nothing I can do if an enemy spawns behind me at any possible moment. You can't constantly watch your back, because your front will now be your back and there's just as good of a chance for someone spawning in front (or behind, I guess) of you. Another issue I've been hearing about the previous Call of Duty games were campers. Although I'm not a fan of this playing style, I can now understand why they're doing it (besides increasing their ever-important k:d ratio). Many people argue this spawning system eliminates spawn campers that plague other multiplayer games. This is very true. But now look at what you're getting as a replacement. It's so much better, right? Let's hope Treyarch fixes the spawning system in a future patch down the road. That way, I can delete this entire paragraph altogether and possibly reconsider the score. But at the time of this review, the spawning system will kill you and any enjoyment of this game.
I also want to express my hatred for this feature called "Killstreaks" (Yes, I know there are modes that disable Killstreaks, but since it's such a huge part of the main modes in multiplayer, I'm going to cry about it). Killstreaks are bonuses the game rewards you with for getting multiple kills in a row without dying. The problem is that Killstreaks won't turn the tide of a game. In fact, it does the exact opposite in widening the gap in score between the two teams. In other words, two teams can be relatively even in terms of skill with one team having a slight advantage. Rather than keeping that slight advantage throughout the whole match (thus making it a closer game), Killstreaks will reward the team with the slight advantage (since they have the highest chance of getting a high Killstreak), and so the team that was just slightly better is now much better due to the Killstreaks at their disposal.
A good example is the attack helicopter I complained about earlier. There are actually 3 different helicopters in this game, each one being more deadly than the last. You can deploy a helicopter after 7 straight kills (6 kills if you have the Hardline perk). Yeah, sounds relatively hard so it shouldn't appear that often, except for the fact it appears in every single game at least once. It's easy to say missile launchers are the answer to helicopters, but any new player to the game will notice how hard it is to actually shoot down a helicopter because 1. The default launcher provided doesn't give a guaranteed hit (and the better lock-on launcher doesn't actually become available until you're level 30) and 2. You'll notice the attack helicopter dodging your missile once you lock on, and since the launcher only provides one missile, you're pretty much out of luck if you miss the first time. The funniest thing is that even if you do hit him with a missile the first time, helicopters will effectively counter it with flares. You actually need 2 missiles to take down a helicopter. All in all, this means you'll be forced to equipping the missile launcher as your secondary weapon, which effectively makes pistols worthless in the game, assuming you actually want to counter helicopters (and trust me, you will want to). Otherwise, you'll be chomping down helicopter bullets for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. I'm not even going to review the rest of the Killstreaks, just know none of them are any easier to counter.
The guns and classes in this game are also of a concern for me. The game does a good job of providing new players relatively strong guns to fight with. This means you don't necessarily need to be at a high level to have the best guns. But the (arguably) best guns for some classes feel exactly the same. More specifically, the Assault Rifle class provides you with the FAMAS and AUG, the Sub-Machine Gun class provides you with the AK74U, and the Light Machine Gun class will give you the Stoner63. Again, arguably the best guns for their respective classes, the "feel" between them are very similar to one other. Once I got these guns for my respective classes, I actually didn't care which class I played. I can very easily just close my eyes and pick a class and still play with the same style because each gun (and class) was so similar from one another., If the game provides me with a choice of 5 different classes, then each class should be unique and playing one class should be a completely different experience from playing another. So if I played an assault class, it should feel different from an SMG class, because each class should perform a different role in the game. But instead, the roles of the 3 classes I mentioned above are exactly the same. Your answer is for me to play the sniper class right?
The sniper class in this game is, for the most part, completely useless. It is easy to notice the lack of snipers in game because snipers will be responsible for very few of your deaths. A sniper's role is to provide support for the team, being most effective when they're away from the front lines (obviously the safest place for snipers). But because of the spawning system, playing sniper in this game won't mean you're providing support for your team, nor will you be sniping from a safe distance afar. Playing a sniper in this game means you will be in constant danger at all times because you are now thrown into the front lines, whether you like it or not. And because of the random spawning system, you will never once feel safe in your sniping spot, as you know within 5 seconds there is a very good chance someone is behind you (not because they effectively flanked your team's front line but because they just happen to have spawned nearby). It also doesn't help that nearly every map discourages sniping. You can play all of the maps but you'll never once say "wow this area here is a pretty safe stronghold for me to rack up kills and support my team as a sniper". Because of the chaotic (and favoured) run-and-gun style of the game, alongside the random spawning points, snipers aren't going to be as effective as they can be. Yes, this means you won't see as many snipers camping a single spot, but they're effectively replaced by campers of other classes. You will notice I mentioned earlier about all the maps with windows and ease in camouflaging. In theory, this is great for snipers. In practice, you'll notice very few snipers dominating the opposing team by the window. Due to the majority of the maps emphasizing close-quarter combat, everyone knows it's much more effective to "snipe" from a window using the other 3 classes (AR, SMG, and LRG)
Where's the teamwork?
And finally, the biggest issue for me is the game's emphasis on individual achievements. Because you can level up, earn money, and buy unlockables, the game shifts from a team-based game to a more individual-based game. We will capture the flag and control points to gain more experience points, so we can gain more money at the end of the match to buy that gun/attachment we wanted. Terrible players who are on a good team won't feel any type of accomplishment even if his/her team wins, because it isn't about team win, but rather how many achievement points you've earned by the end of the match. You'll want to be on the winning team not because you want to show your opponents your team is better. In reality, you'll want to be on the winning team because the winning team gets a "Match Bonus" to help you level up quicker. None of the modes will make you go "yeah, teamwork is needed for us to win this". A good example is Capture the Flag. If you and a teammate are going for the enemy's flag and your teammate gets the flag (because he was half a step ahead of you) and returns it to base, you won't think "oh good, we're up 1-0", but rather you'll think you should've been the one who returned that flag for that little bonus XP.
Other modes like Team Death Match, Free-for-all, and the new Wager mode (where you can bet your earnings on games, which does make it fun at times) all emphasize individual achievements over team achievements. This sadly means all you'll hear from other people's headsets (aside from young kids talking smack) are their complaints on how they didn't get that kill or how many times they've died in a row, rather than actual communication between teammates on how to best achieve the objective as a team. You'll eventually learn to mute everyone in-game before you start playing (no all-mute option either) because you know nothing good will come out of their mouths. I'm not looking for a game like Left for Dead where teamwork and communication can make or break a match, but there's nothing here that makes me want to play with my friends rather than with a group of strangers, because at the end of the day, I'm really just playing by myself. The leveling, achievement and monetary systems in this game are a hit for many people, but it's a huge miss for me.
My kindest paragraph yet
If you're still reading this essay, then congratulations, you should get some type of achievement from GameFAQS for staying with me this long. You'll notice I didn't even touch upon other aspects of the game like the campaign, zombie mode, theatre mode, playercards, or customizations. Unlike multiplayer, these aspects of the game didn't give me an ulcer, so that's where the 5 points come from. I thoroughly enjoyed the campaign (maybe my mind will change after playing Veteran Mode), and making my own unique emblem is strangely addicting. The theatre mode is a great way to rewatch your game for improvement, as well as showing off to your friends (and the world) those random sticky grenade kills you threw onto another player. The zombie mode is probably the only mode where some sort of teamwork is required in order to make it far. However, at the end of the day, it seems the only people who enjoy Black Ops are the same people who enjoyed the previous Call of Duty series. Many people say if it's not broke, why fix it? Well, the problems I've mentioned throughout this review say otherwise, and even though the problems are well known to every COD player, they still enjoy the game. Clearly, they're not enough of an issue for COD fans to quit. But for everyone else who wants to get their hands on an online, solid team-based FPS game, I implore you to look elsewhere. [Rereading this review, I realize I need to go get a life]
TL;DR version
Good
+ Campaign mode (Interesting storyline, fun vehicle levels)
+ Zombie mode (Dead Ops Arcade is also fun)
+ Theatre mode (Show off your kills to friends and the community)
+ Playercards and emblem customizations (Making your own detailed emblem is addicting)
+ Wager mode (Can be fun, knowing your own COD money is on the line)
+ High replay value (But only if you can stand the game)
Bad
- P2P networking to host games online (resulting in disconnection and lag because the entire match relies on a random individual's connection, as opposed to just your own)
- Lack of options in the lobby (Map choice, as well as not being able to choose to join between a new or existing game)
- Every. Single. Map. *plays Nuketown for the 9th straight time* Literally.
- Rage inducing spawn system *Gets shot in the back*
- Killstreaks (the better team gets even better advantages)
- Same feel between classes and (some) guns
- Sniper class is now obsolete (Sorry sniper fanatics)
- Emphasis on individual achievement, rather than team-based achievements ("Screw the team, I have money!")
- Nobody uses headsets for team communication (You'll either hear kids in the background, feedback from someone's television, or random thoughts from other players thinking out loud)
I don't expect anyone to quit the game after reading my review. Again, most of the problems I've mentioned aren't going to be revelations for COD fans. But for anyone thinking about buying this game, I hope my review has convinced you otherwise. If this review managed to stop just one person from purchasing the game, then my job here is done. If for some strange reason (other than just trolling me), you decide to purchase this game solely after reading my review, then eh, that's okay too.
TL;DR version of the TL;DR version
DON'T BUY IT