That is the quick and dirty version of the story from the single player of the game. The more robust is that you are Alex Mason and you are being forced to recount your past missions while being tortured for information. This is because you are the key to stopping that nasty Russian attack mentioned above. In the process you get to go on an interesting ride around the world to see what Treyarch and Activision think some of our Black Ops guys go through during war-times. Also with a bit of Manchurian Candidate stuff mixed in.

But does this new Call of Duty stand up to last year's Modern Warfare 2? Let me give you my thoughts on this.

So what has changed? From my point of view, pretty much only the setting that the game takes place in. Don't get me wrong, that is not a bad thing by far, but it is really the only thing that stood out for the franchise since last year. That being the case, I really do think that they were able to catch the era and feel Treyarch was going for. In most cases I was whisked away to the places and times I have read and seen from history; all to the point where I could actually make the mistake of it being based on 100% fact.

I do find it a bit odd though that for being a title called Black Ops, it didn't feel like there was a lot of covert operation needed to be done. In fact there were way too many run and gun missions to feel like I was a Black Ops operative. (That makes sense.) That I remember, there was really only one mission were you were partially required to go in completely quiet. Isn't the whole point of a black op to never be seen or heard about? I mean, the general public isn't going to know, but other governments, especial those targeted, would know if an aerospace facility was attacked.

Maybe it's just me.

Another weird thing I found was that the A.I. had a huge tweak to it. Almost like Treyarch decided, "Hey, let's make all of the bad guys crack-shots and the good guys miss guys that are four feet away." I constantly had to be a one man army even when surrounded with my own team. That and no matter the threat the A.I. always left what they were doing to hunt me down. While running the trenches in Vietnam I actually had VC run past all of my guys to come and knife me in the back. How could 20 guys with automatic weapons let one guy walk through our defenses and stab the one person they were all obviously relying on? Seriously?

Also, when did ALL cover pretty much do nothing for you? I can understand that standing behind a wooden door, sooner or later the bullets will make it through. But sitting in a heavily armored vehicle that can take rockets with no problem, one should be able to take more than two shots before they are downed while sitting inside. Instances like this are just downright ridiculous. Especially when it is only one sided. I don't know how many times I would unload on a guy hiding behind a pane of glass and could not hit them. Did they just have magic "I Hit You No Matter What" bullets? Seems so.

In the end, you most likely have already picked up Call of Duty: Black Ops and you are just reading to see if you need to bitch or agree. I enjoyed the single player considerable, not enough to play through more than once, but enough to where I don't feel like I wasted my time. Then again, the big selling point here is the multiplayer for most of you out there. Something that I know I won't be able to even sway your thoughts on, even with the known issues.

As far as if you should shell out the cash, if you haven't already, like I said, the single player is worth a good play. Which is more of a rent status. But you already know all of your friends have it and are going to be online, thus making it almost a no brainer to add to the overwhelming sells Call of Duty: Black Ops has already had.

Call Of Duty: Black Ops was developed by Treyarch and published by Activision on November 9^th 2010 for the PS3, XBox 360, PC, DS and Wii. The game retails for $59.99. A PS3 copy of the game was supplied by the publisher for review purposes.