Halo 4 Review

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT
 

Looks like this one, despite the story being more for those who like the expanded halo 'verse, will be better than Reach. This is after the review seemed to be down on the story.

Good review although one thing that you guys didn't like that pretty much every other reviewer has praised is the soundtrack. Not a big deal, I just found that odd. People also seem to be really inconsistent about how the story is. Some say it's amazing while others say it's just meh.

It currently hold a 90% average which is pretty damn good but since I don't play online for most of the year (I limit myself from this due to studying/homework purposes), I'll hold off on this one for now. Also, kinda sucks that Spartan Ops is only available to Gold members... Firefight was able to be played offline with the previous two games so why not this as well?

So basically another Crappy 60 fov console fps with guns that block half the screen?,
I Pass.

Saulkar:
IGN! You ass kissing fuckwits!

I more or less expected this kind of response from the Escapist review staff, it has become par for the course for the previous installments. The campaign does not completely suck and multiplayer remains solid. I feel that is a fair summary. IGN on the other hand makes it sound like the second coming of sliced bread.

CAPTCHA: kosher dill - is dill bread really kosher?

God that was like fellatio in review form. I'm sure if it's possible to be more kiss-ass.

OT: Pretty much what I expected. I was honestly hoping to hear something better about the singleplayer, but at least Justin was honest about it. I'll probably get it when it drops in price or something.

This is the only review I've seen that actually offers up some flaws. I'm glad to see that stuff before I buy it. It also is really comforting to see that a 4/5 is the worst review I can find at the moment. I'll take it, people. I'll take it.

Holy crap, I am so excited for this game.

Shocksplicer:
The story is actually pretty damn excellent if you've read the books from what I've heard.
I'm happy they're rewarding people for reading the books, especially after the massive Fuck You that was Halo: Reach.

People keep saying "Oh it's a great story....If you read the books that is..." Uh sorry I kinda gave up Game based reading material a long time ago. So does that mean I am pretty much screwed out of the narrative because I decided to read Tom Clancy's 'Rainbow Six,' or David Baldacci's 'The Innocent' instead of a book based off a video game? (Note: Rainbow Six the book came out way before the games even existed.)

And Reach was a 'Fuck You' to you? I thought it was an excellent game compared to Halo 3. It had a simple story about a small unit of SPARTAN's fighting a war they all knew they were losing instead of some over thought wannabe epic about ancient alien artifacts that spell the word "DOOM" everywhere you look. Don't get me wrong, I love Halo 1 and 2, but sometimes you need to cut back on the scifi a little.

I'm most excited to play the multiplayer, which is the most important to me as most of my friends don't play TF2 as much anymore, and hey maybe I can play with a couple of Escapists as well, sounds fun!

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Halo-Fans

Call Me Jose:
I'm most excited to play the multiplayer, which is the most important to me as most of my friends don't play TF2 as much anymore, and hey maybe I can play with a couple of Escapists as well, sounds fun!

If you are looking for fellow escapists that might be interested, look here. We don't bite, I promise. ;)

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Halo-Fans

Barda236:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Halo-Fans

Call Me Jose:
I'm most excited to play the multiplayer, which is the most important to me as most of my friends don't play TF2 as much anymore, and hey maybe I can play with a couple of Escapists as well, sounds fun!

If you are looking for fellow escapists that might be interested, look here. We don't bite, I promise. ;)

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/groups/view/Halo-Fans

It appears the Escapist did something weird to my post. I meant to say that if you are interested in playing Halo 4 with fellow Escapists, you can find some that would be interested with the link.

Shocksplicer:
Also, why are people acting like this is a negative review? 4/5 is good! The comments about the story aren't very accurate from what I've heard, but still!

Irrational fans of franchises expect people to give their games a perfect score no matter what.

There is also the problem that Metacritic has created along with the stupid ideas of developers. This review was a four out of five, basically an eight out of ten, which on the professional review section of Metacritic will translate to an 80 out of 100.

In this day and age, some stupid publishers and some developers have decided that window for what they consider a success for their game is a score of 90 to 100. Some of them even hang the possibility of whether a game gets a sequel on whether the game gets a 90 or higher.

This has influenced some fans because they then feel that their game franchise is threatened, and because of this mentality a score of 80 is no longer a passing grade, but failing.

It's a stupid thing I know, but that is a big part of the problem.

I am a Halo fan, but I know I will most likely like the game and since it is Halo, it is a pretty safe bet that we will get the whole new trilogy of games as is planned.

The story of the game is all about Cortana and Chief anyway, so I don't really care if they screwed up some side-characters who, when their main job of being cannon fodder can't be fulfilled, have to make do with making coffee and cleaning the crew quarters.

Besides, I've always bought Halo for it's multiplayer, and if there is a bunch of content to be found there, I have no qualms with buying for full price :D

Saulkar:
IGN! You ass kissing fuckwits!

I more or less expected this kind of response from the Escapist review staff, it has become par for the course for the previous installments. The campaign does not completely suck and multiplayer remains solid. I feel that is a fair summary. IGN on the other hand makes it sound like the second coming of sliced bread.

CAPTCHA: kosher dill - is dill bread really kosher?

I do thank you for bringing their review here to me because I don't watch their stuff.

It did reveal one thing I didn't know about the game, there is no firefight mode.

Argh, that was the one thing that I and my friends played the most in the previous installments.

I seriously hope that they bring a firefight mode back in a DLC or maybe Halo 5. Firefight was what kept Halo Reach's multiplayer fresher than Halo 3's. When I got tired of the normal multiplayer, I always had firefight to fall back on.

Grape_Bullion:
Prometheans...bahahahaha. Stay uninspired video games.

My first thought to. Gawd damn fantasy/sci-fi genre, try a little... oh whats the word... imagination.

It's funny that this review came out a week early, when it has absolutely zero chance of swaying anyone's opinion on whether or not Halo 4 will be worth buying.

But other games that might actually get more day 1 sales from a good review get reviewed on the day or a couple days late.

It's amazing how warped the system is.

Back to the point, you said the only thing I care about in the Halo series, Cortana is "Well Written" (What ever that means in the terms of a Halo game) so I guess it's worth a look

Shocksplicer:

erttheking:

Shocksplicer:
The story is actually pretty damn excellent if you've read the books from what I've heard.
I'm happy they're rewarding people for reading the books, especially after the massive Fuck You that was Halo: Reach.

If I read the plot summaries of the books will that do? Also I liked Reach, so if people thought that Reach was bad and 4 was good, then hopefully 4 will blow me out of the park

Umm, summaries would help I guess, but you'd be better off reading them.

Also, the reason I and many like myself hate Reach is because it violated the canon established in the book in like 8 different ways for no good reason. Stuff like how Spartan 3s work and the fall of Reach happened in the books were tossed out the window and replaced with stuff that was no way near as good.

As far as I'm concerned Reach is non-canon, and so long as Halo 4 doesn't follow on from how things were handled in Reach that is actually possible.

Wait...I'm confused here. How can something that the original creators created be non-canon? I mean I get you like the books better, but if Bungie wrote it that way, and it's their series then doesn't that mean what they say goes?

I love Escapists reviews. They always seem legit. They can say that this game is great, but still point out that there is room for improvement.

This review confirms that my pre-order was not a waste. Thanks! :)

This review seems to have proven my assumptions correct. Unfortunately, I still don't know if it's worth paying full price for. If anything, I'd b getting it because the warsim I'm in is gong to require it, but I don't think I'll be happy spending my $60 on Halo 4 rather than Dishonored or Assassin's Creed 3.

blink:
And if we are only in it for the singleplayer story?

Then you get Call of Duty: Halo quality single player content.

This game sees perfectly fine, but what's up with the prometheans opening their masks and having a flaming skull come out and scream at you? That seems really dumb IMO.

Arslan Aladeen:
This game sees perfectly fine, but what's up with the prometheans opening their masks and having a flaming skull come out and scream at you? That seems really dumb IMO.

It's spoilers, but it is explained during the game.

Korten12:

The Fonsz:
Typical of the escapist to hate Halo and attack every little flaw in the game. Your getting payed by Activision to say cod is better. You guys give dishonored and assassins creed better scores and every other review site gives Halo is better than both.

The Escapist reviews are crap, and the only thing that runs this site is zero and jim the rest of you guys should resign.

Oh boy... Here we go...

Also how is 4/5 bad?

I'm sure Jim did a Jimquisition about how a lot of people froth at the mouth if their games aren't given 10/10 (or full marks relative to the scoring system used). As if full marks is a common resource in reviewing to just be bandied about.

Anyway, I've never been big into Halo, but if it's good, it's good. It's going to beat sales records and will be played for many months regardless.

how the fuck is better graphics anything less then better... the logic -_-

Slycne:

Arslan Aladeen:
This game sees perfectly fine, but what's up with the prometheans opening their masks and having a flaming skull come out and scream at you? That seems really dumb IMO.

It's spoilers, but it is explained during the game.

As long as there is a reasonable explanation then I'm cool with it.

Do they do this during combat as well or just those in-your-face moments? If so, does this create an advantageous opening, OHK?

It's only when creatures do that and there is no point other than than V this V that annoys me as a gamer.

Ok, so it doesn't live up to the hype, nor the benchmark set by Bungee, but still a solid game.

Can't say I'm very surprised. Guess I'll give it a try. It's been a while since my 360 saw any exclusives coming its way.

Tamrin:
Do they do this during combat as well or just those in-your-face moments? If so, does this create an advantageous opening, OHK?

The Knights, what the creatures are called, will sometimes do it when you knock out their shields. If you shoot them in the face then it's a kill, otherwise it's a few more shots to the body depending on the weapon.

Slycne:

Tamrin:
Do they do this during combat as well or just those in-your-face moments? If so, does this create an advantageous opening, OHK?

The Knights, what the creatures are called, will sometimes do it when you knock out their shields. If you shoot them in the face then it's a kill, otherwise it's a few more shots to the body depending on the weapon.

Thank you for answering my question.

+ Nice Review

Shocksplicer:
The story is actually pretty damn excellent if you've read the books from what I've heard.
I'm happy they're rewarding people for reading the books, especially after the massive Fuck You that was Halo: Reach.

Finally, all those years of reading the Halo novels will finally pay off. Though unfortunately this makes me regret not picking up the forerunner novels yet and now I have to quickly finish up "Glasslands". Glad that their giving more focus to Master Chief and Cortanna as well.

Overall nice balanced review and based on all the other reviews I've read it seems like it'll be a solid 9/10 for me.

Jesse Billingsley:

Shocksplicer:
The story is actually pretty damn excellent if you've read the books from what I've heard.
I'm happy they're rewarding people for reading the books, especially after the massive Fuck You that was Halo: Reach.

People keep saying "Oh it's a great story....If you read the books that is..." Uh sorry I kinda gave up Game based reading material a long time ago. So does that mean I am pretty much screwed out of the narrative because I decided to read Tom Clancy's 'Rainbow Six,' or David Baldacci's 'The Innocent' instead of a book based off a video game? (Note: Rainbow Six the book came out way before the games even existed.)

And Reach was a 'Fuck You' to you? I thought it was an excellent game compared to Halo 3. It had a simple story about a small unit of SPARTAN's fighting a war they all knew they were losing instead of some over thought wannabe epic about ancient alien artifacts that spell the word "DOOM" everywhere you look. Don't get me wrong, I love Halo 1 and 2, but sometimes you need to cut back on the scifi a little.

Speaking as a Halo fan, I would say that Reach was pretty good in its own right. However the problem with Reach is that it retconned some things that were established in the "Fall of Reach" novel that came out years before Reach (simply having Spartan IIIs on Reach raises a lot of continuity issues). This why Reach was a kick in the teeth for some Halo fans.

Well, since this is 343's first game, I can forgive them not making the campaign some super badass thing. While yes, the studio is comprised of many old faces that have worked on previous Halos, they do also have some newbies on their team. From what I've seen so far of this game and for it being the studio's first game, I really think they did a good job. How much of a good job however, we won't see for another 5 days.

Zetatrain:

Speaking as a Halo fan, I would say that Reach was pretty good in its own right. However the problem with Reach is that it retconned some things that were established in the "Fall of Reach" novel that came out years before Reach (simply having Spartan IIIs on Reach raises a lot of continuity issues). This why Reach was a kick in the teeth for some Halo fans.

I didn't have a problem with it. They were Spartan 2's+1. Big deal. Maybe the writer made a typo. Plus I don't believe they ever said that they were Spartan III's and if they did, I missed it. Oh well.

The Fonsz:
Its just the fact that there was not one noteworthy compliment to Halo 4 IMO. He said the soundtrack is bad and I have listened to it on Itunes and it is nice soundtrack, probably one of the best in 2012 not as good as guild wars 2.

Look forward to this game! Can't wait until next week when it finally arrives. Although I do have AC3 arriving today...lol

Also, why the fuck did this guy get a suspension? What did he do wrong? Srsly, this site needs to stoop being so god damn care bear in everything...My god.

Lionsfan:

Shocksplicer:

erttheking:

If I read the plot summaries of the books will that do? Also I liked Reach, so if people thought that Reach was bad and 4 was good, then hopefully 4 will blow me out of the park

Umm, summaries would help I guess, but you'd be better off reading them.

Also, the reason I and many like myself hate Reach is because it violated the canon established in the book in like 8 different ways for no good reason. Stuff like how Spartan 3s work and the fall of Reach happened in the books were tossed out the window and replaced with stuff that was no way near as good.

As far as I'm concerned Reach is non-canon, and so long as Halo 4 doesn't follow on from how things were handled in Reach that is actually possible.

Wait...I'm confused here. How can something that the original creators created be non-canon? I mean I get you like the books better, but if Bungie wrote it that way, and it's their series then doesn't that mean what they say goes?

Basically I want it to be non-canon, because the original version of the canon from before Reach was just better. Also, if Reach is non-canon that just effects Reach. If Reach is Canon, that fucks up about half a dozen books and counting, and Halo 4. You can see why things would be better off if Reach was non-canon.

Rainboq:

Shocksplicer:
The story is actually pretty damn excellent if you've read the books from what I've heard.
I'm happy they're rewarding people for reading the books, especially after the massive Fuck You that was Halo: Reach.

I fail to see how Reach was a massive fuck you. It had the most interesting cast of characters by far, and it captured the feeling of a desperate, bloody minded struggle against overwhelming odds.

Other people have already said it, but yeah. It was a Fuck You to anyone who's taken the effort to read the books, it muddies the waters of the canon much more than it needed to and was just very frustrating. Also, retconning the details would maybe be ok, if it wasn't for the fact that the original canon was much better than the one presented in Reach.

Jesse Billingsley:

Zetatrain:

Speaking as a Halo fan, I would say that Reach was pretty good in its own right. However the problem with Reach is that it retconned some things that were established in the "Fall of Reach" novel that came out years before Reach (simply having Spartan IIIs on Reach raises a lot of continuity issues). This why Reach was a kick in the teeth for some Halo fans.

I didn't have a problem with it. They were Spartan 2's+1. Big deal. Maybe the writer made a typo. Plus I don't believe they ever said that they were Spartan III's and if they did, I missed it. Oh well.

Well if you didn't read any of the novels before hand then of course you won't have a problem.

Despite my grievances, I still like Reach. Some of retcons made were given reasonable explanations that prevented them from negating previously established facts. However, what annoys me is that Bungie didn't have to retcon anything. I can understand that sometimes retcons are made because lore can severely limit what the writer can do with a story. The problem is that there was plenty of room. In the "Fall of Reach" novel most of what was described was the space part of the battle with little attention to the ground battle since Master Chief was not there. All we really knew was that about 20 some Spartan IIs were sent to defend these generators that were powering the MAC cannons that were giving the UNSC a fighting chance against the Covenant and they eventually got over run (though some survived). Bunige had a very lax guideline on how they could tell the story from the beginning and they did not follow it.

Another problem some fans had was that when Reach was first announced many fans thought they would finally get to see certain Spartan II's that had only ever appeared in the novels, like Fred and Kelly, as well as other Spartan II's that were never really characterized before. This could have been the first time that elements from the novels that many of the fans enjoyed made it into a Halo video game. To many fans Reach was like going to see a movie adaptation of one of your favorite novels only find out that several liberties had been taken with the source material.

In the end Reach's continuity issues did not break it for me but at the same time they could have easily been avoided.

Edit: And yes, those were Spartan III's as it was established by Bungie even before the game came out.

Mangles69:

The Fonsz:
Its just the fact that there was not one noteworthy compliment to Halo 4 IMO. He said the soundtrack is bad and I have listened to it on Itunes and it is nice soundtrack, probably one of the best in 2012 not as good as guild wars 2.

Look forward to this game! Can't wait until next week when it finally arrives. Although I do have AC3 arriving today...lol

Also, why the fuck did this guy get a suspension? What did he do wrong? Srsly, this site needs to stoop being so god damn care bear in everything...My god.

That's not the post he got suspended for. It was in fact this one:

The Fonsz:
Typical of the escapist to hate Halo and attack every little flaw in the game. Your getting payed by Activision to say cod is better. You guys give dishonored and assassins creed better scores and every other review site gives Halo is better than both.

That post belongs on YouTube with the rest of the inarticulate comments.

OT: Well, sounds like an alright game. Might check it out when I have more spare time.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here