Well, by the looks of it, another Battle Field is coming out! Wait, no, it's, oh God, another Black Ops.
Yes, you have all watched the momentous trailer and it is set in stone official that Black Ops II will be released. Now, you know, I am a believer of Call Of Duty. The games carry a great story line throughout their branches (for the most part) and it serves as a pretty good first person shooter, but in the debate of Treyarch and Infinity Ward, all of my money is set on IF. Those guys deliver. You saw my MW3 review. They stay true to the CoD style and the scheme of things, so why is it that everyone seems to be so up in arms about Black Ops? Maybe because like BO, it reeks.
Where Treyarch Went Wrong:
Treyarch, we understand that you want to prove yourself and show that you guys can push out another Black Ops, bravo on actually rallying up the troops and pulling everything together to make yet another crappy game (must have taken a hefty amount of pride to swallow, huh?) But you went wrong in so many aspects of the game. First of all, the time gap. You go from the age of Kennedy and Creedence Clearwater's Fortunate Son to this 2025 time period of hovercrafts and shiny chrome buildings. The only thing that carries over from the first game, as it seems, is Woods. And he's in a wheelchair. HE SHOULDN'T EVEN BE ALIVE. If he was say, thirty or thirty-five around the time of the first game, he'd be about ninety. This game just has too many gaps for me to handle.
Secondly, can someone please explain to me the plot and how it go this confusing? Okay, the numbers, yeah, where are the numbers represented in the trailer? The numbers were a HUGE part of the first game, Mason and his god forsaken numbers, and yet there is no evidence of numbers. You cannot just cut off a factor like the numbers and carry on. It's not as easy. There was no major villain shown, that should usually be there to clear up a few things, it's just a confusing mess.
The style. I mean, is this a joke? It is such a dead ringer for Battle Field that it's not even funny. The scene with Woods literally looks like the beginning of BF3. I get it, Battle Field is a huge competitor for the CoD franchise, but making your game look aesthetically identical to the enemy is the complete and total wrong way to go about this. The detail and styling of the game is it's identity. You make it look like Battle Field and what have you got? A cheap rip off with a terrible storyline and poor writers. And people call me crazy for liking MW3, hey at least that game stays true to the original plot, picking up right where it left off, keeping the same villains, not leaving out any of the plot. Black Ops is just a sad excuse for a CoD game.
Where Treyarch Went Right:
Honestly, the only good thing they did was keep zombies. Black Ops zombies had to be one of the only aspects of the game that I actually enjoyed besides the time period, which has now been changed (idiots.) Zombies was rejoiced by zombie freaks everywhere in the first game, I mean, playing as President Kennedy, Nixon, and even Castro, you can't top that. But what I'm thinking is that they're going to alter Zombies some how and just make it as big of a let down as the second Black Ops. If it were up to me, I would just buy Black Ops 2: Zombies. Not the whole game itself.
So it's up to you, the reader, will you go out and buy this sad excuse for a game, or will you save your money for another game that actually looks worth its while? Because, I don't know about you, but I know that October 16th (yes I have the date memorized) Bioshock Infinite comes out and let me tell you, it looks a million times better that BO 2.
