Call of Duty: Black Ops
Year: 2010
Developer: Treyarch
Publisher: Activision
Platform: PC, PS3, Wii, Xbox 360, DS
BBFC: 18
Published: 05/07/23
Developer: Treyarch
Publisher: Activision
Platform: PC, PS3, Wii, Xbox 360, DS
BBFC: 18
Published: 05/07/23
In the late 00’s Call of Duty was on such a rapid upwards trajectory in becoming the biggest gaming franchise on the planet at that moment. With the critical acclaim gained by Call of Duty 4 in 2007, Activision were literally rolling in the money as 2008’s World at War, and 2009’s Modern Warfare 2 were the best-selling games of their respective years. With the torch passing back over to Treyarch for 2010’s entry, expectations were high, especially coming off the back of the massive blockbuster that was Modern Warfare 2. But with Call of Duty: Black Ops, Treyarch didn’t just deliver a quality game (arguably their first time doing so as a CoD developer), but it went on to be the best-selling game in the entire franchise to date.
Set between 1961 and 1968, Black Ops follows Alex Mason, a CIA operative who is being interrogated about a mysterious number sequence. Recalling to his interrogators about a number of secret ‘Black Ops’ missions he was sent on wherein he and his fellow operatives came to uncover a Russian communist plan to unleash a deadly nerve agent on the United States.
I can’t say an awful lot about the story of Black Ops without spoiling it, so I’ll delve deeper a bit later. But I can say without spoilers that Black Ops does a lot of things right and provides one of the most compelling campaigns in Call of Duty history; and considering their sub-par track record Treyarch’s writers really outdid themselves here. Whilst it fully embraces the Modern Warfare 2 style of action-blockbuster extravagance over the franchise’s roots in realism, Black Ops is a great espionage thriller that sucks you in to a conspiracy driven psychological trip.
Whilst the characters certainly aren’t overflowing with backstory and development, they are considerably more memorable than most Call of Duty characters, and that’s likely because of the way their stories weave in and out of each other, and the mysterious nature of it all.
Set between 1961 and 1968, Black Ops follows Alex Mason, a CIA operative who is being interrogated about a mysterious number sequence. Recalling to his interrogators about a number of secret ‘Black Ops’ missions he was sent on wherein he and his fellow operatives came to uncover a Russian communist plan to unleash a deadly nerve agent on the United States.
I can’t say an awful lot about the story of Black Ops without spoiling it, so I’ll delve deeper a bit later. But I can say without spoilers that Black Ops does a lot of things right and provides one of the most compelling campaigns in Call of Duty history; and considering their sub-par track record Treyarch’s writers really outdid themselves here. Whilst it fully embraces the Modern Warfare 2 style of action-blockbuster extravagance over the franchise’s roots in realism, Black Ops is a great espionage thriller that sucks you in to a conspiracy driven psychological trip.
Whilst the characters certainly aren’t overflowing with backstory and development, they are considerably more memorable than most Call of Duty characters, and that’s likely because of the way their stories weave in and out of each other, and the mysterious nature of it all.
In my review of World at War I criticised it for having gameplay that was very similar to that of Call of Duty 3, with the only alterations being that now you were unquestionably a one-man army and that with the amount of grenade spamming that was going on you couldn’t sit still for longer than two seconds. Black Ops does a very good job at trying to put new life into the Call of Duty formula, without straying too far from what people love about it so much. There’s a surprising amount of vehicle sequences in the game which will see you driving cars and motorbikes, flying helicopters, and piloting boats. But the real meat and gravy is in the refinements made to character movement. Everything feels so much smoother now, even in comparison to Infinity Ward’s titles, clearly laying the groundwork for the more acrobatic Black Ops sequels in the future. I found myself getting stuck on the environment much less, with more responsive movement all around, plus the inclusion of a dive function allows you to go from sprinting to prone immediately, thereby foregoing that awkward mid crouch pause present in the previous games.
The more varied weapon choices are also a welcome addition. Of course, you’ve still got your wide range of shotguns, assault rifles, snipers etc. But Black Ops also introduces ammo variants (such as shotgun shells that set enemies on fire), and weapons that would be less conventional on a battlefield but make sense for secret missions such as crossbows and a ballistic knife.
This leads perfectly into the multiplayer which for the most part has remained largely unchanged from CoD4’s simple yet revolutionary design. Black Ops does make some notable alterations though and the biggest of which is CoD Points. Points are currency that is now used to purchase weapons, attachments, camo, and more which is earned alongside XP. This forces you to be more strategic in what weapons you use and which ones you should upgrade as you won’t earn all weapons and attachments naturally as you level up. CoD Points are best utilised in the new Wager Matches however, where players gamble points in a variety of fun and new gamemodes. Things like Gun Game where each kill nets you a new weapon, and the first to use all the weapons wins. Or Sticks and Stones where players are equipped only with ballistic knives and throwing axes. Sadly, Wager Matches don’t net you much XP so you can’t play them to level up, but these gamemodes are where I found myself spending the majority of the time in Black Ops as they were so much fun.
Zombies mode also sees a return from World at War, but this time it’s had a big ‘upgrade’. Personally, I didn’t like Zombies much in World at War anyway, so the version presented in Black Ops never interested me to start with, but if anything, I like it less than World at War’s iteration of the mode. As well as progressing through the map and unlocking new weapons, Black Ops now allows players to purchase perks, as well as become involved in a much deeper Zombies story. The maps themselves are far larger and more complex as a result, often requiring large amount of puzzle solving in order to unravel the story. I can see why a lot of people prefer this style of Zombies mode, but for me it overcomplicated things, and considering the moment-to-moment gameplay has remained unchanged I just wasn't on board with it.
The more varied weapon choices are also a welcome addition. Of course, you’ve still got your wide range of shotguns, assault rifles, snipers etc. But Black Ops also introduces ammo variants (such as shotgun shells that set enemies on fire), and weapons that would be less conventional on a battlefield but make sense for secret missions such as crossbows and a ballistic knife.
This leads perfectly into the multiplayer which for the most part has remained largely unchanged from CoD4’s simple yet revolutionary design. Black Ops does make some notable alterations though and the biggest of which is CoD Points. Points are currency that is now used to purchase weapons, attachments, camo, and more which is earned alongside XP. This forces you to be more strategic in what weapons you use and which ones you should upgrade as you won’t earn all weapons and attachments naturally as you level up. CoD Points are best utilised in the new Wager Matches however, where players gamble points in a variety of fun and new gamemodes. Things like Gun Game where each kill nets you a new weapon, and the first to use all the weapons wins. Or Sticks and Stones where players are equipped only with ballistic knives and throwing axes. Sadly, Wager Matches don’t net you much XP so you can’t play them to level up, but these gamemodes are where I found myself spending the majority of the time in Black Ops as they were so much fun.
Zombies mode also sees a return from World at War, but this time it’s had a big ‘upgrade’. Personally, I didn’t like Zombies much in World at War anyway, so the version presented in Black Ops never interested me to start with, but if anything, I like it less than World at War’s iteration of the mode. As well as progressing through the map and unlocking new weapons, Black Ops now allows players to purchase perks, as well as become involved in a much deeper Zombies story. The maps themselves are far larger and more complex as a result, often requiring large amount of puzzle solving in order to unravel the story. I can see why a lot of people prefer this style of Zombies mode, but for me it overcomplicated things, and considering the moment-to-moment gameplay has remained unchanged I just wasn't on board with it.
The biggest thing that can be held against Black Ops though is its dated visuals. Still running on the Call of Duty 4, IW3 engine, the game looks about as good as World at War, but noticeably inferior to Modern Warfare 2 which released the year prior. Despite this, Black Ops does run significantly smoother than World at War with far fewer instances of frame rate drops or bad pacing. Though I can’t help but wonder if these issues would have been resolved by running the game on MW2’s engine, IW4, because that game showcased considerably better character and environment detail whilst retaining smooth performance.
Black Ops also continues in Modern Warfare 2’s footsteps by having an 18 rating, however the reason for doing so is simply to up the gore factor that was present in World at War. Fire a shotgun and limbs go cartoonishly flying in every direction. It’s really quite gory, probably the goriest Call of Duty to date, and it’s kind of needless. I’m all for blood and gore, but it's so excessive at times that it detracts from the games otherwise serious tone.
I did say that I was going to come back to some more sensitive story material, so here it is before I wrap things up. I really like how Black Ops follows on from World at War, it’s subtle, but for long time Call of Duty fans it manages to lure you into a false sense of security ready for the big reveal in its final missions. The sole link is Viktor Reznov, your ally in the Russian campaign from World at War. Here he is Mason’s ally who helped him escape from a prison camp in one of the games early missions. Over the course of the game Reznov’s role becomes increasingly questionable, before going for a full Fight Club Tyler Durden style revelation. That Reznov died in that prison and Mason’s personality fractured into two halves to give him the strength to do things he wouldn’t normally be able to do. It’s great stuff, and whilst it could have been eye-rolingly cheesy it manages to stick the landing pretty well.
Call of Duty: Black Ops is a great step in the right direction for Treyarch following World at War, and whilst I know that the future isn’t so bright for the developer and this franchise, I will congratulate greatness when I see it. There’s good reason why this is the best-selling Call of Duty game of all time, and that’s because it’s a whole lot of fun to play. Whilst I do personally prefer Call of Duty 4 and Modern Warfare 2, Black Ops is a comfortable third place (at the moment). It pushes the franchise into interesting new territory, and the subtle gameplay refinements make a world of difference even if at first glance it doesn’t look like much has been changed at all. If you’re new to the franchise, Black Ops is a great starting point.
Black Ops also continues in Modern Warfare 2’s footsteps by having an 18 rating, however the reason for doing so is simply to up the gore factor that was present in World at War. Fire a shotgun and limbs go cartoonishly flying in every direction. It’s really quite gory, probably the goriest Call of Duty to date, and it’s kind of needless. I’m all for blood and gore, but it's so excessive at times that it detracts from the games otherwise serious tone.
I did say that I was going to come back to some more sensitive story material, so here it is before I wrap things up. I really like how Black Ops follows on from World at War, it’s subtle, but for long time Call of Duty fans it manages to lure you into a false sense of security ready for the big reveal in its final missions. The sole link is Viktor Reznov, your ally in the Russian campaign from World at War. Here he is Mason’s ally who helped him escape from a prison camp in one of the games early missions. Over the course of the game Reznov’s role becomes increasingly questionable, before going for a full Fight Club Tyler Durden style revelation. That Reznov died in that prison and Mason’s personality fractured into two halves to give him the strength to do things he wouldn’t normally be able to do. It’s great stuff, and whilst it could have been eye-rolingly cheesy it manages to stick the landing pretty well.
Call of Duty: Black Ops is a great step in the right direction for Treyarch following World at War, and whilst I know that the future isn’t so bright for the developer and this franchise, I will congratulate greatness when I see it. There’s good reason why this is the best-selling Call of Duty game of all time, and that’s because it’s a whole lot of fun to play. Whilst I do personally prefer Call of Duty 4 and Modern Warfare 2, Black Ops is a comfortable third place (at the moment). It pushes the franchise into interesting new territory, and the subtle gameplay refinements make a world of difference even if at first glance it doesn’t look like much has been changed at all. If you’re new to the franchise, Black Ops is a great starting point.