‘Call of Duty: Black Ops’ Games, Ranked From Worst to Best

You’d be forgiven for not knowing this game even exists, partially because it was only available on one platform: the handheld PlayStation Vita. It’s the worst Call of Duty game ever made and clearly a low-effort attempt to bring the franchise to a new piece of hardware. Not only is it ugly to look at, but everything about it is barebones. The AI is painfully boneheaded, the controls are terrible, and all of the weapons and assets are largely borrowed from other games in the series.The campaign can be finished in under an hour and features an underbaked story delivered through expositional briefing cutscenes. Characters like Woods and Mason are featured once again, but the plot here is so paper-thin that it doesn’t feel like you’re gaining any more context or an interesting unseen tale for them. The actual missions are very short and populated with bland shooting galleries, missing that signature Call of Duty flair of blockbuster action.As for the multiplayer, it’s the typical Call of Duty experience, but scaled down for 4v4 matches. There are seven maps, some of which are remakes or straight ports of stages from other games. Nuketown, the level famous for being quite tiny already, is split in half, and there’s only one house to fight over. The gunplay itself isn’t great due to network issues, causing laggy matches where kills are massively delayed or don’t register at all. All in all, it’s a mess that we’re all better off forgetting about.

Even though Black Ops 4 is placed directly after the worst Call of Duty game ever, it’s not a bad one at all. It’s solid, but it’s compromised and weird for this specific series. It’s the only game on this list that doesn’t have a campaign, as it was scrapped near the end of development in favor of hopping on the battle royale train. Blackout was the franchise’s first-ever crack at the popular multiplayer genre and would eventually pave the way for the highly successful Warzone. It was much more arcade-y than its modern counterpart and a worthy attempt, but it was very short-lived.On the multiplayer side of things, Black Ops 4 goes in a bunch of different directions. The game retains the Specialist hero characters from Black Ops III, allowing players to use characters with special powers, but removes the wall-running and most of the advanced movement from that game. It’s a clear effort to steer the series back to boots on the ground combat, but Treyarch is still trying to shake things up. The gameplay is far more tactical, controversially removing auto-healing and forcing players to use equipment to manually heal themselves on the battlefield. Are these changes bad? Not necessarily, but it’s a different kind of game, one that is clearly more inspired by Overwatch rather than Call of Duty, and that makes it an oddity.Zombies, however, sticks closer to its formula while still finding ways to innovate with a more customizable experience thanks to loadouts, modifiers, and more. The co-op mode also boasts multiple maps that feature different storylines, creating a much more varied take on the mode.

Call of Duty: Black Ops 7 is the latest entry in the long-running saga, and it’s a very mixed bag. It’s both a sequel to Black Ops II and Black Ops 6, taking place a decade after the former and bringing back many of the characters from that specific story. Despite invoking the legacy of Black Ops II, fails to live up to its highs, hampered by a tonally jarring story with wonky pacing and minimal emotional stakes. Most baffling, the single-player mode is all weighed down by battle royale-like gameplay with guns of different rarities, loot to collect, and bullet sponge enemies. Somehow, it gives Black Ops III a run for its money for the worst campaign in Black Ops history.The multiplayer side is serviceable, but also clearly afraid to make concrete decisions. Modern skill-based matchmaking is optional via a playlist, divisive mechanics like tactical sprint are now a perk, and even the new wall-jump feature feels like a reeled-in version of the wall-running from past games. Treyarch is trying to appeal to fans of every kind of Call of Duty, which results in a game that’s mostly a flavorless hodgepodge. It’s not inherently bad, but there’s nothing enticing enough to push people to play the 22nd Call of Duty game over any other.Zombies has a lot more to offer via a larger map that can be explored with an upgradable truck, giving the player more freedom in an expansive environment. It’s riffing off Tranzit from Black Ops II while still finding a way to justify itself as a new experience, something the rest of the game struggles to achieve.

Black Ops III is a very divisive game. On one hand, it gets props for trying to push the series in a new direction with Specialists and movement advancements like wall-running. It felt incredible to play, even if this was a controversial change and would be relatively short-lived. It was a fresh new take on a series that was being criticized heavily for being too samey year-to-year.However, Black Ops III is held back tremendously by one of the worst campaigns in the series. It’s largely completely disconnected from the rest of the series as it is set in 2065, and follows an entirely new cast of characters. However, the story is totally nonsensical and is trying its best to emulate the mind-blowing twists of its two predecessors, but fails miserably in the process. It’s not as bad as Declassified, but the bar is excessively low and holds Black Ops III back quite a bit.

When it arrived last year, Black Ops 6 was a rather surprising addition to the series, largely thanks to the depth of the campaign. The game was developed jointly by Treyarch and Raven Software, with the latter team focused primarily on the campaign. By allowing one team to focus exclusively on the single-player content, it led to some of the most unique, fleshed-out missions in any Call of Duty game to date. There is an open-world mission with various side quests, one that feels a bit like Doom (2016) as the player rips and tears through Zombies with brutal melee attacks, and others that lean into the espionage side of the Black Ops franchise in a big way. It’s an extremely fulfilling experience and one that reaffirms Raven as an underrated developer when it comes to making high-quality single-player shooters.Treyarch was given an extra year of development, which allowed for some revelatory changes to the Call of Duty formula. Players desired faster, more advanced movement without turning to jet packs. Thus, the omnimovement system was born. Players can have a full 360 degrees of movement, allowing them to roll around on the ground, spin around while diving, and shoot to their sides without breaking any forward momentum. It’s like Max Payne meets Call of Duty, creating some of the most graceful gameplay of any game in the series.

World at War is canonically the first game in the Black Ops franchise, even though it doesn’t share the Black Ops branding. However, it plants seeds for key staples of the franchise, including Zombies and the character of Victor Reznov. Although previous Call of Duty games had a valiant vibe to them, World at War is intentionally haunting, even featuring an eerie main menu with an unnerving score rather than gnarly guitar riffs. This was the darkest and most violent Call of Duty game to date, utilizing gore for the first time and harrowing depictions of warfare. Prior games had mild blood squibs when someone was shot, but World at War demonstrated the full weight of every weapon and made full use of its M-rating by highlighting the savagery of war.The multiplayer is a natural successor to Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, implementing perks and limited killstreaks to the World War II era for the first time, but it doesn’t make any massive leaps forward from its predecessor. Instead, the real innovation is found in the game’s co-op offering.Once players beat the campaign, they’ were’re introduced to a secret co-op horde mode called Nazi Zombies, where players fend off waves of undead Nazi soldiers while making full use of the aforementioned gore. It’s extremely simple, but it quickly became one of the most addictive co-op experiences in gaming and a key pillar of the franchise going forward. The mode only grew with downloadable content (DLC) packs, adding not only new maps, but new features such as the signature Pack-a-Punch machine to upgrade your weapons. This addition alone makes World at War one of the most important Call of Duty games ever.

Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War brought the series back to its roots after a few years in the future. No more robots or jet packs, just some grizzly dudes doing the government’s dirty work with their boots planted firmly on the ground. Familiar faces like Mason, Woods, and Hudson were joined by shady, but intriguing new characters like Russell Adler, a new fan-favorite. With a branching storyline, players could either be the triumphant hero or a dastardly villain that unleashes nuclear devastation, allowing for big swings that hadn’t been seen in a Black Ops game in nearly a decade.The gunplay is also very punchy, the movement smooth, and the map rotation is exquisite, with a mix of remastered maps and original ones taking place in places like Miami and Moscow. It is a decidedly well-balanced Call of Duty that delivered on all fronts.