During the last couple of weeks me and my friend finally decided to make a video and review black ops, you can watch it here if your at all intrested... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jk1GM8XxgW8

If not, i just want to ask you guys, comparing the campaighns of both games, what one was better? They were different in alot of ways, within the review we talk about the pros anc cons and compared it too MW2. Check it out and join in with our discusssion.    

I actually much preferred MW2's campaign. I just generally believe Infinity Ward do better campaigns. Multiplayer on the other hand....

I think you're just trying to hide your self advertising...

Not gonna watch it. 
 
Mostly because, 
  
Good story? 
 
Hah! That's a laugh! On both counts... Ha!

I think Black Ops has a better story and is told in a much more coherent way but the story is still not very good by my standards.

The story was much better in Blops (MW2's seems like it was written by a bunch of retarded monkeys), but MW2's level design and overall pacing was a lot better. Also Blops has one of the worst levels I've ever played in a videogame (Vietnam trenches).

It's blatantly obvious that, although confusing at times, Black Ops had much better storytelling than Modern Warfare 2, in all aspects.

MW2 is better.  Blops is a lot easier to follow, bordering on completely transparent.

Black Op's storyline isn't good per say but it is told in far more coherent and understandable manner.

There was a couple times in the campaign where i thought i would be a little interested in whats going on but man those interrogation sequences are the corniest things ever. 

I had more fun playing MW2, but I think BLOPS' story was more interesting.

No, Black Ops was much worse. It was somewhat unbearable really. After I beat it once, I was done and didn't want to see any of it again. On the other hand, MW2 was amazing to the extent that it makes me wish for a sequel which the original Modern Warfare didn't even do. I'm probably in the minority, but MW2's single player experience was fantastic and the story was great in my opinion.

The story was much better in Black Ops, but the campaign was much more fun and exciting in MW2.

I enjoyed both, but I gotta go with MW2.  Captain Price is just such a fun character to be around. Woods was pretty good, but nothing compares to Price.

I thought MW2 had a more enjoyable and entertaining campaign, not to mention that Treyarch brought back the atrocious never ending enemy spawning in the Black Ops campaign and having the enemies that instantly know where you were. I thought we had moved past that Treyarch I really did. Maybe they will get it right the next time. It felt like Treyarch was trying really hard to do what IW does only better, which it wasnt.

I feel that people haven't accepted Black Ops for what it is... A game that IS NOT made by IW. In my opinion, Black Ops was a better game that MW2 in terms of story. Yes, the level design may not be as EPIC as MW2, but certain levels do blow my mind. Also, people complaining about the game being "too cheesy", because a Rolling Stones song played in a mission, need to realise something... While yes, it may be slightly cheesy, it also fits into the time period perfectly. That was the kind of music that the soldiers in Vietnam listened to.

My final words: Black Ops delivered an epic cinematic experience that, while slightly flawed, was a fantastic experience. It may not have had as many "OH S**T" moments as MW2, but it delivered the most solid Call of Duty story/campaign since COD4.

And the plot twist was pretty sweet :)

How could I have missed it !  on a side note , you could always find other ways to get viewers . Making quality videos for example?

I think BO was better because at least I could follow the thing. MW2 jumped around way too much.

" The story was much better in Blops (MW2's seems like it was written by a bunch of retarded monkeys), but MW2's level design and overall pacing was a lot better. Also Blops has one of the worst levels I've ever played in a videogame (Vietnam trenches). "

Black Ops's story is more plausible (Barely), but it's poorly told and gets in the way too much. They tried to beef the story up into something big, but it doesn't work out. With MW2's story, the whole thing is ridiculous, but the game kinda knows that and is just trying to put on a big, flashy show. MW2's story tried to be "cool" and "exciting" and although it it was absolutely ludicrous, it wasn't trying to be serious. With Black Ops, it tries to be serious and flashy, and just ends up being rather embarrassing.

"

I feel that people haven't accepted Black Ops for what it is... A game that IS NOT made by IW. In my opinion, Black Ops was a better game that MW2 in terms of story. Yes, the level design may not be as EPIC as MW2, but certain levels do blow my mind. Also, people complaining about the game being "too cheesy", because a Rolling Stones song played in a mission, need to realise something... While yes, it may be slightly cheesy, it also fits into the time period perfectly. That was the kind of music that the soldiers in Vietnam listened to.

 

My final words: Black Ops delivered an epic cinematic experience that, while slightly flawed, was a fantastic experience. It may not have had as many "OH S**T" moments as MW2, but it delivered the most solid Call of Duty story/campaign since COD4.

 

And the plot twist was pretty sweet :)

"

BLOPS had a WAY better campaign. MW2 felt like they were trying to hard to make a modern 80's movie. AMERICANS AREN'T AFRAID OF RUSSIANS ANYMORE!

BLOPS has a way better story and campaign. 
 
The one eyed man truly is king in the land of the blind (the FPS genre that is ...).

None of the stories are good, but if I had to choose between one of them, I'd say BLOPS-- at least its consistent within its own universe.

I think that the framework of Black Ops is quite interesting with a lot of movement around the world in regards to setting & story. That being said I strongly feel that Sam Worthington ( as well as the inclusion of Eminem/Pink song at the end) felt incredibly tacked on at the last possible moment, for me without that the overall game would have been alot better.  I'd get into the story some especially with Reznov (sp?), or some of the other black op teams were there though when Sam opened his mouth it just threw me out again from the story. Wonder why they could have picked some actor from the states to take that role.
 
BTW I do think that the co-op mode was a stronger part of the previous game over the zombie mode, personally I'd rather see the zombie mode as dlc that's optional for those that want to get more into that one.

I found the Black Ops story line to be slightly better, but what ruined it for me was all the cutscenes and talking. (I group the parts where you walk/move the camera, but down do anything into the cutscenes category since theres no real skill/fighting involved) All of this made the game take twice as long as it should. I understand you need cutscenes here and there for the story to make sense, but I felt like all I was doing was sitting there. So, in that aspect, I like the MW2 campaign much better because I actually spent the time playing, not watching people talk and walk around.

Both games have terrible terrible stories, although if that is what they need to do for me to go around awesome places shooting shit up then that is fine with me. I personally think MW2 was a much better story though, I cared about what happened to the characters were as in Blops half the time I had no fucking clue what was happening/cared. :D

Would MW2's story have been better without the No Russian sequence?