XxNightvHawkxX

Good, not great. Graphics may be lackluster and the game may lack a multiplayer, but the single player is pretty fun. Game is completely different from the other versions of World At War and features Cod 3- like gameplay, but it's a short yet enjoyable ride.

Very generic game from what I have played. Felt uninspired and lacked the personality that made previous Halos great. Major Cons: -No split-screen. -Wimpy Sound Effects -Uninteresting story Linear level design "Lame" Michael Bay tier cutscenes Game feels uninspired Deviates from Halo's original formula Pros -A different take on the Halo franchise (For me, this was actually a bad thing, but for others, it could be good) -Multiplayer brings the competitive gameplay back -Ranked Arena playlists!!!!!!!! -Map control is once again an important factor -Hit detection feels very solid I know this is a very short review, but there honestly isn't much to say about it. It just lacks a lot of love. Not a bad game, but it doesn't deserve the "Halo" name on the front of the cover.

This is an honest review of the game. From what I have read, most of the reviews on this site are mostly people who hate the game because they have not played it that long/people that are raging because they don't know how to play that well or people who have clearly not played that many other games and think it's the most amazing game in the world. (There are some decent reviews though, Hint: Most of the 10/10s are the ones I was talking about being the ones that have not played many other games) This game is not bad, but it has a low metacritic average *for a game this popular* for a reason: because it's not that good. No, it isn;t because of graphics, yes there are a few broken champions (Not that many though. I don't overuse the word few. There are hardly any, but they are still there.), but this isn;t why the game is overrated. The combat in the game could be so much better, but it isn't. I'm not trying to sound biased, (not invoking a Dota vs League argument here, just using this as an example) but play Dota 2 for a while, learn how to play, and compare the 2's combat system. Ever notice how League's combat system is not as satisfying? Ever notice how League of Legends is based more around how good you are with a champion than actually being good at the game? This game is also not that hard, anyone who tells you that is lying. I have no difficulty in fighting 4v5s and winning or being ona feeding team and turning it around when the enemy team has the advantage. This game is incredibly easy once you learn the basics. The main reason why this game is not so great is because it tried to be an improved Dota (which it could have), but the changes they made thinking they were improvements are what makes this an overrated game that and the combat system is barely above average. Is this game addicting? Yes. Is it great? No.

Its okay........ It isn't bad by any means. It is certainly better than the first Black Ops. Treyarch actually tried this time around. Treyarch actually could have made something great, but unfortunately, Activision demands that a CoD game must come out every year. Had this game been in development for 3 years, it would have been a really good game. But yes, I agree, it is the same as the other CoDs.

At first I thought thought that this game got mainly negative reviews from critics, but then I saw that 7 reviewers gave it average scores and 6 gave it negative. I'm laughing at how some people on this site are giving it a 0 because they can't run it and because they can't host servers. Because of this, I will give it a 10 to bring up the score. Now on to the review. This is not a bad game, but it has its problems. This game is basically Team Fortress mixed with Minecraft. You can build cover, bridges, sniper stands, etc. That's good, because sometimes snipers can be VERY annoying on certain maps. However, if you are planning on building something cool, you're out of luck. Someone can easily destroy it. The environments are destructible, which makes for some interesting multiplayer matches. Someone can have a bunch of your buddies pinned down and you can dig under the enemy and flank them. The game, as I said, has its problems. The rocket launcher feels pretty boring to use to me, certain maps (like Lunar Base) have balance issues with the sniper class, and Diamond Mine can seriously be improved. SERIOUSLY. I have heard the original AoS was incredible, but I never played the beta, so I would never know. Overall: A 6 to a 7/10. MetaCritic can be misleading sometimes. More people liked this game than those that didn't (add up the pos the mixed and compare it to the negative) but it still has a low score.

The game is really fun but, but it is far from perfect.. It needs more ways to get into combat faster. I do understand that you can spawn vehicles, and being on big maps is part of the fun, seriously. The size isn't the problem. There also should be a variety of gametypes instead of going around and capturing bases. The level design is pretty good. The game is more fun IMO if you are on the losing side. You see enemies more frequent and it gets pretty fast paced when you charge out of your base and attack the enemy. The shooting mechanics are excellent in PlanetSide 2. I wanted to give it an 8.5) If I were to rate this on shotting mechanics, it would have a 9/10

The game is fun. However, its sequel, Blacklight Retribution, is FAR ahead of it, plus Blacklight Retribution is free, and has a very HIGH, playerbase, unlike Blacklight Tango Down did.

The game ****. It was only fun for a year and a half. It is really repetitive. There was NO variety in the game AT ALL. The level design ****. The game takes no skill to play. This is THE WORST FPS EVER MADE. It **** so bad.

I am someone who went straight from CoD 4 to Black Ops, and let me tell ya, this game is TERRIBLE. Call of Duty: Black Ops is VERY repetitive and takes no skill. The developers did not try at all to add variety to the game. It got so boring.