Call Of Duty: Black Ops – Declassified Review – D.O.A. | Metro.co.uk

If this really was the product of just six months work it’s actually fairly impressive, but there’s no way it should’ve been released in this state or at least not sold as a full price game. On the PlayStation Store it actually is the full £44.99, which is such a monstrously bad deal we’re not sure how Sony has the barefaced cheek to allow it.

NewMonday4240d ago

Many are starting to notice the disconnect between general gamers who enjoy the game and critics, don't remember the last time their was a big disparity like this. This will just hurt the credibility of these websites , it's a mistake if they think gamers give them unconditional trust.

Akuma-4240d ago (Edited 4240d ago )

professional game reviewers are worthless in todays gaming industry these days . the scores ive been seeing for cod black ops declassified aren't representative of how the actual game is.

first of all any game that scores less than half on a scoring scale basically should be almost unplayable. i see a lot of people rate some games like 3/10 or 4/10 but when i play the actual game it has gameplay focus, tight controls, good graphics, no apparent gameplay glitches and the game is functioning like the devs intended. a game shouldn't be penalised for lacking something devs didn't intend on using. there are too many disparities in todays game scoring system and its actually hurting the gaming industry. game devs are unwilling to take more risks due to fear of people critiquing their games for not following a trend or be exactly like something else.

cod black ops declassified is a good game for the ps vita and is the best fps ever made for a handheld gaming device

medziarz4239d ago (Edited 4239d ago )

it's Duke Nukem Forever all over again - mass hating on a decent product because of some vague expectations, being trendy or under mass hysteria

CalvinKlein4240d ago (Edited 4240d ago )

on this site people want to bash the console COD and defend this crap. I have a VIta and dont want to pay 50$ for a game that is not finished.

Fact is people keep bashing COD on this site but want to defend this worse COD ever simply because its handheld and on a vita. Doesnt change the fact that they are charging 50$ for a game that is not even finished and is half assed even compared to the COD console versions that are already half assed as it is.

Im surethe multiplayer is good compared to other stuff on VITA, but thereis no doubt in my mind that it could have been so much better if there was more time or effeort or a good developer on it.

Considering this is not nearly as good as the console CODs that get bashed on this site everyday I am surprised that people would defend a half assed COD(even more half assed than the console versions) simply because they want the VITA to have a good game.

Fact is for 50$ we should not be getting some half assed garbage. Unfortunatley if this is what sony is putting forward as its big hitters then it shows me that they will probably wait till its too late to get quality developers working on the thing.

AC vita is better than it was reviewed, this game is not. Sure it may be playable and one of the few FPS on VITA, that doesnt change the fact that is it a bad FPS that is not good enough to cost 50$.

Im glad people are bashing this crap as maybe sony will only allow real developers to make a game for the vita regardless of the Name. Sony needs to do some quality control and pricing policing because as it is half the stuff on VITA is way overpriced and alot of it is lacking in quality for the price asked.

Ive said this since the VITA launched and that is that some of the prices on the PSN store is making sony look bad as if it doesnt care about its customers. Sonys own 1st party games are still at the full price on PSN when they themselvs lowered the MSRP of those games and you can find them everywhere for the new prices except on the VITA store.

Now trying to charge 50$ for some cheap ass game that was made in 6 months, called COD and hyped out the butt by sony...and it is lacking in content(one of the few areas where COD usually excels) and is not doing the VITA any favors, only making it look like a joke.

edit-- I also dont buy that crap "its the best FPS on a handheld" because unless the game is actually a good FPS then its just another crappy FPS that is Ok for a handheld with no competition in the genre. I love vita and love FPS, I will not just buy something because its the only one there. I think the multiplayer looked OK but again, is that worth 50$ when it is lacking in maps and will get old really fast? I have no desire for some cheap side missions or a survival mode that I have to play alone when Ive played 100s of better FPS over the years.

If these vita fanboys were reviewing the games then everyone would get a 8 or above because its "decent for a handheld" and sony and the developers would think they are doing a great job with these half assed versions. Im glad that people are telling it like it is and that is the truth that this game is a 50$ POS that isnt even close to living up to the capabilities of the VITA.

nycgamer4ever4240d ago

Such a long wall of text and yey you havent a clue what you talking about. Let s stay on topic here. This article is a review of a game not the state of the vita address.

This game I fun runs well and looks good. It does what the developers intend it to do well. What more do you want. Get your facts straight if you are going to rant. This game was in development longer than 6 months. Activision was working on it until nihilistic took over after finishing up resistance bs.

I bought it with my 20 credit from last weeks psn promotion and it cost me only 30. I have to say for 30 or 40 bucks its a great fps. For 50 it is expensive. That should be the only complaint. If you dont like the price fine but dont bash it just because the the paid reviewers said so.

Be a gamer and try it first before you spew nonsense. Rent it borrow it or try a demo if they come out with one. You just might be surprise.

Ive no doubt this is the best fps on any mobile or portable platform. Why caise ive actually tried them all is why. You should too before writing a wall of text accusing people of being fanboys just because they like a certain game.

For all those who keep saying people who defend the game are vita or sony fanboys come one now. Maybe they just are having fun with it and feel they should voice their opinion. Have you never played a game and wondered what reviewers were thinking. I find that this generation I do that alot.

Monstar4240d ago

They were relying on the name a lone for dem SALESSSSSS. But since it's beyond shit...it won't work. Shame tho, if they actually put effort into the vita version, the game would have faired quite well for online/portable purposes. That being said, the game looks good, graphically. Like i said, it's too bad.

So far tho, one can consider it the best FPS on a handheld due to it playing well..and it's simply STILL COD in gameplay mechanics, regardless of it not being a full game.

While this lack of effort is quite disturbing, it isn't surprising, many times we have seen the same crap for consoles with DLC and just games that are simply too easy/short.

nycgamer4ever4240d ago

Anyone who disagreed with what I thought of the game please by all means explain what you didnt like or what youbthough was broken abiut the game, cause 1/5 and 3/10 scores shiuld mean the game is broken and unplayable. Un my time with it so far it is anything but broken. As a matter of fact the ps3 version IS broken and the developers themselve stated they are working on it. So what gives? Im not saying it is the best game ever just that it is a good game and deserves imo more like 7 to 7.5. Would have been more with more content and a better price. It is NOT a 1/5 or 3/10. What is your opinion of the game after playing it? Or did you not play it and just agree with these reviewers cause they are your friend and would never BS you?

Im open to a discussion on this cause after playing the game for hours I dont see how this is a 1/5 or even 3/10.

StraightPath4240d ago (Edited 4240d ago )

going down in history one of the worst games ever. vitas biggest game is one of the worst ever. this is bad for the vita.

memots4240d ago

You sound happy about it.

Reading your comment history... your actually happy about it lol.

aquamala4240d ago

"general gamers" you mean Vita fanboys that want to defend an exclusive.

Gordon_Shumway4240d ago

@aquamala- exactly. Also, LOL @ "the disconnect between critics and gamers". You fanboys do realize these critics are gamers too right? Quit fooling yourselves, and you should be ashamed of trying to convince people to buy this trash to further your own weird agendas.

Dante1124240d ago (Edited 4240d ago )

@ Gordan

Yeah, and we all have opinions too. You should be ashamed of yourself for telling people what to do with their money as well since you don't even own a Vita lol (Told everyone in the forum that thd Vita is dead and you're glad you don't own one. Remember?). You Xbox enthusiasts are something else. XD

Edit: I'm the dumba**? Having a Ps3 doesn't means you have a Vita. LMAO, Americans.

You get a F for effort.

Gordon_Shumway4240d ago (Edited 4240d ago )

@Dante112- So since I and everyone else who isn't blind can clearly see this thing is a flop I'm an"Xbox enthusiast"? LOL nice try dumbass I've had a PS3 longer than an Xbox and have been a plus subscriber for over a year....psn ID: LordJ81

You get an A for effort though.

EDIT: I never said I had a Vita, you said I was an Xbox fanboy in so many words, just proved you wrong. And what does me being an American have to do with it?

NewMonday4240d ago


I'm a fanboy of games in general whatever the platform for over 25 years, I value the opinion of fellow gamers more self styled critics.

I used to have a bad opinion about this game but others changed my mind. If anyone dosn't like it they can return it.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4240d ago
+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4239d ago
MasterD9194240d ago

The fact that it is selling at all is due to the COD name brand on the cover.

nycgamer4ever4240d ago

Not true. I don't even like Cod games. The last one I played was WAW and I returned it immediately. However I wanted an fps for the vita and this game delievered. It helps that it only cost me 30 because I wouldnt have purchased ot for 50, wich is rediculous!

People trust me if you like cod or fps games and own a vita try this game and dont listen to these reviews. It is hands down the best fps and mp on a portable!

Online works well, its smooth as butter and sure if you finished all the single player missions and take all of your best times you will have an hour but if you play on normal unless you are an expert you will be playing much longer. My point is dont just blindly listen to some stranger on the net who gets paid to review games. They of course will be much more jaded than us regular gamers and will be much more critical. Try it for yourself and you be the judge.

I would recommend waiting for a drop in price though. Its not worth 50. It should be 40. Or 35 downloaded.

rpd1234240d ago

Ooh, longer than an hour. How gracious of them to include more than an hour of play time.

ShadowGhost4240d ago

I am one of those gamers that spent $50 on this game and to be honest, I like it, even though it's not up to its console standards. For a portable COD, it's really fun, especially the multiplayer portion of the game. I'm not trying to justify my purchase or anything, but I really do enjoy it for what it is. Does Declassified have flaws? Yes. Did more content needed to be added to the final product? Yes indeed. Maybe Activision will have more by DLC as usual, but it's always been like that to them.

In my honest opinion, I would give the game a 6.5-7 out of 10. It's an average COD, but it's fun and that's the main reason why I play and pick up games. It must have a "fun" factor to it.

swansong4240d ago

This game is so much better than RBS. Multiplayer is really good. So with that in mind lets see,
Game informer-RBS-70/CODD-30
PlaystationOfficial magUK-RBS-80/CODD-40. And this trend will continue,these game sites have for the most part given Resistance:Burning Skies a higher score than CODD. COD for Vita has a much smoother frame rate both online and off. Better graphics and control. So what gives? These sites are pissed because they didn't get there free copy!

Series_IIa4240d ago

They do say, if you keep repeating something it might come true...

Seems like you are giving it a go.

swansong4240d ago

Thats how I won the lottory. LOL


Was Call of Duty: Black Ops Declassified Really That Bad?

PP: Was Call of Duty: Black Ops Declassified really that bad on the PS Vita?

Read Full Story >>
cluclap1059d ago

In comparison to its console counterparts at the time? Yes. Yes it was. In comparison to DS versions? It was god like

Amplitude1059d ago (Edited 1059d ago )

I got tons of fun out of it.

Killzone was better, yeah. Heck even Resistance online was better. But CoD Resistance and Modern Combat and such were all fun to change it up a bit when you've grinded too many hours into Killzone.

If i had to review them, yeah, all those games would get a low af score except Killzone. But i had fun plowing through the Resistance campaign and playing online and goofing off with CoD online while travelling. Not everything has to be a masterpiece but they were all fun enough for what they were lol


Why The PS Vita Ultimately Failed (And How The Switch Did It Right)

How is a system so loved within its community considered a commercial failure, and how did the Nintendo Switch take its idea and run with it?

Read Full Story >>
MadLad1239d ago

Highly overpriced proprietary memory, and Sony showing it little support, themselves?

VersusDMC1239d ago

Agree with the support but the overpriced memory was always overblown. The switch is an handheld charging 60 for games instead of 40 as they always had before...yet that cost hike is fine.

darthv721239d ago

As someone with both a Vita and PSP GO, it really made me curious why Sony felt the need to make a dedicated memory card when they already had one that was more than adequet. The M2 format (that the Go uses) is virtually the exact same size and shape as the vita... just flipped. It would have made things so much easier for people to buy into it, especially if they were able to insert their existing memory card with their purchased games on it.

I really like the vita, I also think they had a huge missed opportunity with not having TV out. I like to pop my Go onto the TV dock and play some games now and then (doing the switch thing before the switch). Doing that with a vita would have been awesome, especially with full DS4 support.