Ray

With the utmost respect I would like to say this article feels like someone was paid to write a positive review of BO7 while still maintaining the facade of being "unbiased". The article refers to unhappy customers who paid for a COD that is unrecognizable and ridden with lazy AI assests as r"eview bombers"? I would be so bold to ask the author how that is "review bombing" and not just reviewing an awful game, to infer users are the problem is very telling of the bias beyond the article. "Though it was one of 2025's most anticipated titles, Call of Duty: Black Ops 7" is the most tone deaf quote possible in this whole article. When was BO7 ever anticipated??? Ever since its first annoucement, trailer, beta, and literally anything else Activison put out has been absolutely dunked on and somehow this was one of 2025's most anticipated titles? It feels as though the reporting is to Activision and not to journalism. Sometimes it genuinely feels as if the companies are so entrenched in everything that even our reporters don't care about the state of the gaming culture.

Call of Duty: World at War was my first introduction to COD and I was stunned by how gritty and honeslty scary it was, the horrors of true war and not the idealization of death. The next game I purchased was Call of Duty: Black Ops, a chefs kiss of COD games (in my opinion). For those reasons I had 2 fantastic games to know what a base COD should feel and play like. I spent hours and hours playing zombies and multiplayer with friends, completely offline because we were kids and just wanted to plug in our 360 and go. Fast forward to 2025 and Beavis and Butthead are running around while Seth Rogen smokes weed in a corner of the map.

"No internet? Sorry loser you cannot play the game you just spent $70 on. Maybe don't be broke and get internet lol"

-Activision

It feels like a twilight zone episode I beg to wake from and yet we have articles like these that allow Activision to put out the slop they do.