Although I’ve decided to write notes on it, there’s something I can’t explain that makes this game so unlikeable. Maybe it’s the horrible characters.—so macho and aggro, cursing and shouting because, you know, that’s how the special forces are. I used to pride myself on not skipping cut scenes, but here I can’t wait to get to the action
So, yeah, cut scenes get skipped, so I don’t really know what the story is. I know it ties into the first Black Ops game, which had a respectable story, but I don’t care enough to keep up. There’s some guy called Mendez or Menendez or Menendenez who’s bad. I was in Africa, then the future. There was a thoroughly fucking stupid level where I controlled Mendenez and went on a rampage with a sword and managed to kill about 30 people who were armed with machine guns. That stands out as stupid in a Call of Duty game.
I’m 90% done with gaming now. When I do play, I want to get to the action quickly, play for half an hour or so, and switch off again. The Call of Duty games are normally perfect for that: it’s easy to refresh yourself on the control scheme, their stories are mostly forgettable so you’ll never feel confused about your objective (shoot anything that moves). But Black Ops 2, for some reason, seems dedicated to holding me back from the shooty-shooty, with long cut scenes talking to an old guy or Michael Rooker or Candyman, or wandering about, or badly-designed RTS-type missions. Modern Warfare 3 was justly criticised for being CoD at its purest, a mindless, constant barrage. Black Ops 2 breaks away fom that loop, but somehow suffers for it. So much in this game just slows down me getting to the fun stuff. For example, I slinked around on a roof a guy having a conversation. Three separate times, with no shooting in-between. I never thought I’d say this about a CoD game again, but why won’t you let me shoot some people?
I only became interested in the game when I arrived in flooded Lahore. That level was fun to play
5. One of the few positive things I can say about the game is that some of the graphics are impressive. Michael Rooker actually looks like a young Michael Rooker. Is that even a positive?