Halo 4 gets a 2/10...

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

Ok so recently there was a post that pointed out a review of Halo 4 which criticized the game for not having iron sights and not being linear enough. The reviewer gave the game a 7/10 which isn't a bad score, it's just that his complaints seemed ridiculous (my opinion, yours may differ).

Now this reviewer http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/2012/11/04/halo-4-is-half-the-game-it-should-be/ has given Halo 4 a 2/10. Which in my mind means the game pretty much has to be broken but he doesn't say anything about it not working. These seem to be his primary reasons for the 2/10 score:
Too much like the past Halo games

Not enough like the past Halo games (yes I'm aware that these first two contradict each other)

You don't get to fire the big gun on the Mammoth

Enemies are Tron like

No scoring system in single-player (I agree with him on this, that's what made Halo 3's campaign so replayable)

AI's having a lifespan

The story is slow, sentimental and too serious

A 2/10 score really stands out on Metacritic so my review will get more traffic (oh wait, that's my assumption not his written reasoning)

Anyway, what do my fellow Escapists think about the review. I myself got a bit of a laugh out of it but a lot of the things he was criticizing I don't personally think are all that bad. I'm not going to get the game anyway because I've only ever really cared about the campaigns in Halo games but I'll definitely rent it.

I haven't played it yet, but to be honest it's a Halo game I mean... what else is there to say? Everyone and their mum knows what it's going to be like, so I don't see why people are even bothering to read the reviews.

White Lightning:
I haven't played it yet, but to be honest it's a Halo game I mean... what else is there to say? Everyone and their mum knows what it's going to be like, so I don't see why people are even bothering to read the reviews.

Normally I'd agree with this but seeing as it's a new studio, people don't really know how much of a Halo game it's going to be.

A 2/10? Unless it's broken that's just trolling for hits.

Well, this is a guy that hated the original Deus Ex, or so the comments and his other posts say.

Hmm, that's rather odd. Halo:Reach had scoring in the campaign as well I believe, yet I wonder why they took out scoring in Halo 4. Yes I am aware Bungie made Reach but it still makes no sense to go backwards and remove it. It's like taking out Elites in Multiplayer, what is the point?

Can you give an example of a game this critic rates highly? It might show something about their standards and expectations

Sounds like he just found the game pretty boring and not fun to play. Fair enough reason to give it 1 star, the rating scale is also fairly idiosyncratic, a 1 star communicates "broken game" to you while it probably just means "I did not get any enjoyment out of this whatsoever" to this guy. Maybe he just rates harshly or whatever, I really don't see why we get up in arms over arbitrary numbers that loosely correlate to how much someone liked a thing, a rating scale like that is incredibly open to interpretation.

Really now, I'm bored of this needless shitstorm over what people think about a videogame. So, they have a controversial opinion, so bloody what? This happened last time as well where people started crying "no credibility" at a reviewer just for having an opinion that differentiated from what people expected Halo 4 to get. Shameful behaviour, really.

GamingAwesome1:
Sounds like he just found the game pretty boring and not fun to play. Fair enough reason to give it 1 star, the rating scale is also fairly idiosyncratic, a 1 star communicates "broken game" to you while it probably just means "I did not get any enjoyment out of this whatsoever" to this guy. Maybe he just rates harshly or whatever, I really don't see why we get up in arms over arbitrary numbers that loosely correlate to how much someone liked a thing, a rating scale like that is incredibly open to interpretation.

Really now, I'm bored of this needless shitstorm over what people think about a videogame. So, they have a controversial opinion, so bloody what? This happened last time as well where people started crying "no credibility" at a reviewer just for having an opinion that differentiated from what people expected Halo 4 to get. Shameful behaviour, really.

Generally, I thought 4 or below meant that the game was broken, like massive glitches and buggy controls, while 5 meant mediocrity, but the game works mechanically. I agree that people having massive fits over reviews and Metacritic scores is making a planetary obelisk of doom out of a molehill.

TakeshiLive:
Can you give an example of a game this critic rates highly? It might show something about their standards and expectations

Well he has a top 10 games of 2012 so far list. It was made in July but, if that's what your looking for.

http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/2012/07/03/the-best-games-of-2012-so-far/

GamingAwesome1:
Sounds like he just found the game pretty boring and not fun to play. Fair enough reason to give it 1 star, the rating scale is also fairly idiosyncratic, a 1 star communicates "broken game" to you while it probably just means "I did not get any enjoyment out of this whatsoever" to this guy. Maybe he just rates harshly or whatever, I really don't see why we get up in arms over arbitrary numbers that loosely correlate to how much someone liked a thing, a rating scale like that is incredibly open to interpretation.

Really now, I'm bored of this needless shitstorm over what people think about a videogame. So, they have a controversial opinion, so bloody what? This happened last time as well where people started crying "no credibility" at a reviewer just for having an opinion that differentiated from what people expected Halo 4 to get. Shameful behaviour, really.

I normally would agree with this but he blatantly contradicts himself in the review and it really just seems like he's grasping at straws. Seriously, he devotes a whole paragraph to complaining about AI's having a lifespan... I'll give you an example of how he contradicts himself, he says that it feels like the new enemies are too similar to the old ones (just orange instead of blue) but then he complains about them not including the Flood.

Also, if you're bored of people discussing other people's opinions, you should probably avoid forums considering that's a pretty common occurrence. Also, how is this a shit storm. I see no angry comments. I'm asking people for their opinions. Don't get me wrong, I think your first paragraph makes some genuinely good points and this could very well be the case with the reviewer but your second paragraph is basically you insulting everyone who doesn't agree with you. So ya, others and I may be slamming this guy's opinion a bit but you're doing just the same. The only difference is that we're slamming a controversial opinion and you're slamming a more common opinion.

Eddie the head:

TakeshiLive:
Can you give an example of a game this critic rates highly? It might show something about their standards and expectations

Well he has a top 10 games of 2012 so far list. It was made in July but, if that's what your looking for.

http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/2012/07/03/the-best-games-of-2012-so-far/

And he needs to tone down his pretentious writing. My spleen ruptured from reading the last entry.

no game deserves 2/10.. well im sure is a few but not this one.

It's his opinion and he's entitled to it. Still, personally I would have to hate a game pretty bad to give it a 2/10 but that's just me.

Also, AI having a lifespan has been ALL over the expanded universe for years now, the Halo games are finally catching up to that little segment of lore, so that complaint is pretty much invalid.

RedDeadFred:
A 2/10 score really stands out on Metacritic so my review will get more traffic (oh wait, that's my assumption not his written reasoning)

No, you're quite right. This reviewer is clearly just fishing for controversy to make a name for himself. It's a pretty childish act of iconoclasm and not nearly as impressive as he probably thinks it is.

Edge gave Halo 4 an 8, having given the previous five main games a 10, 9, 10, 9, 9 respectively (I think) and to my mind that speaks volumes more than some biased troll review that criticises the lack of innovation and simultaneously moans about anything that's changed since Halo 3/Reach/CE.

Oh gee, 1 reviewer gives a game a bad score. The end of the world is near!

I don't look at game reviews anymore; I haven't for years. Because the reviewers can not be trusted. There are mostly unprofessional, biased and sometimes even corrupt. There are a few exceptions, mostly the independent reviewers, e.g. hobbyist.

The review seems rather...for lack of a better word, unprofessional. He gets way too worked up over the inability to shoot a single gun and seems to get worked up over rather trivial things. Oh and yes A.I.s have lifespans, this is a thing. This isn't something 343 pulled out of their rears, A.I. decay and rampancy have been a part of the Halo universe for years now. Just a nitpick with that nitpick (lol). Also I'm just as freaked out by the comments that argue that Halo is bad because it's been getting bad reviews. The reviews in question? 8s...they're saying it's bad because it's getting 8s...I'm out.

While I'm no longer a fan of the Halo series, even a 2/10 seems harsh. A 5/10 would suffice for this series as it currently stands as from what I've heard from people......its not changed much. Someone told me that it was practically Halo 3 with re-skinned enemies and a few extra colours.

(Note: This is just what I've heard from a few sources, I don't need people chasing me with torches, pitchforks and trays of cupcakes.)

There doesnt even seem to be much fanfare for this one too, I was barely aware it was even being released until I saw the review for it slide along the top of the homepage.

Eddie the head:

TakeshiLive:
Can you give an example of a game this critic rates highly? It might show something about their standards and expectations

Well he has a top 10 games of 2012 so far list. It was made in July but, if that's what your looking for.

http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/2012/07/03/the-best-games-of-2012-so-far/

Actually apart from ME3 and D3 that list isn't half bad, I have to give some credit. It's reminded me of that damn Wii JRPG again, godamn I need to play that.

I have to admit that Halo 4 doesn't sound very good from what I've heard, although 2/10 definitely is a cry for attention from the reviewer that's for sure.

Batou667:

RedDeadFred:
A 2/10 score really stands out on Metacritic so my review will get more traffic (oh wait, that's my assumption not his written reasoning)

No, you're quite right. This reviewer is clearly just fishing for controversy to make a name for himself. It's a pretty childish act of iconoclasm and not nearly as impressive as he probably thinks it is.

Edge gave Halo 4 an 8, having given the previous five main games a 10, 9, 10, 9, 9 respectively (I think) and to my mind that speaks volumes more than some biased troll review that criticises the lack of innovation and simultaneously moans about anything that's changed since Halo 3/Reach/CE.

The thing is, it's the actual reasons that matter more than the score. I saw a review which gave it 7/10, but the reasons were bloody stupid.

First off, the reviewer is entitled to his opinion, but he seemed to used Yahtzee's reviewing style, but in a serious manner. To me it looked like his only problems were lack of new scenery and that lack of firing the big ass gun on the mammoth. Okay, admittedly, I'm kind of disappointed that when I get to the mission with the mammoth, I won't get to see any big ass guns, but it's not the end of the world. And as for the scenery? That's not really something that one needs to get too concerned about unless 343 is literally copy pasting levels from previous Halo games. I really think that that dude needs to lighten up about it.

So...if it's "half the game it should be"...then at it's best it should be 4/10?

Q: Why did you give Journey a 40%?

A: I didn't. Quarter to Three uses a five star scale. One of the reasons I avoid percentage ratings is that too many people associate it with grade school, where anything below a 70% is a failing grade. Any scale where only the top third of the ratings is considered acceptable is a broken scale. Which is fine for children doing multiple choice questions about The Scarlet Letter, isosceles triangles, or the capital of France. But adults evaluating entertainment should be afforded the full range of any ratings scale.

I don't know what to take from this. Having a scale is fine, but having a game you think is mediocre be THE LOWEST RATING YOU HAVE is ridiculous. So a bad game is what? Negative stars? He only works on five star system.

I'm thinking more like 6/10 but 2/10 seems a bit harsh.

erttheking:
Oh and yes A.I.s have lifespans, this is a thing. This isn't something 343 pulled out of their rears, A.I. decay and rampancy have been a part of the Halo universe for years now.

What's this lifespan thing? I haven't played Halo since 2 so maybe I don't remember but lifespans sound interesting.

OT: The cynic in me would agree he's just trolling for hits. Unless the game doesn't function I don't think a 2/10 is really ever justified, even for games I hate.

if a game hasnt changed much from previous games it should earn a 5. if its a solid version of that give it a 6

RedDeadFred:
Too much like the past Halo games

Not enough like the past Halo games (yes I'm aware that these first two contradict each other)

You don't get to fire the big gun on the Mammoth

Enemies are Tron like

No scoring system in single-player (I agree with him on this, that's what made Halo 3's campaign so replayable)

AI's having a lifespan

The story is slow, sentimental and too serious

Those are reasons for giving a game a 2/10?

I know people are entitles to their opinion and all, but... really?

Ilikemilkshake:

erttheking:
Oh and yes A.I.s have lifespans, this is a thing. This isn't something 343 pulled out of their rears, A.I. decay and rampancy have been a part of the Halo universe for years now.

What's this lifespan thing? I haven't played Halo since 2 so maybe I don't remember but lifespans sound interesting.

OT: The cynic in me would agree he's just trolling for hits. Unless the game doesn't function I don't think a 2/10 is really ever justified, even for games I hate.

"Smart" AIs unlike their counterparts "Dumb" AIs can only live for 7 years as they begin to think themselves to death and begin to turn off functions to prolong rampancy but it only helps fuel it. Cortana in 4 has begun rampancy as she has past her life span.

RedDeadFred:
Ok so recently there was a post that pointed out a review of Halo 4 which criticized the game for not having iron sights and not being linear enough. The reviewer gave the game a 7/10 which isn't a bad score, it's just that his complaints seemed ridiculous (my opinion, yours may differ).

Now this reviewer http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/2012/11/04/halo-4-is-half-the-game-it-should-be/ has given Halo 4 a 2/10. Which in my mind means the game pretty much has to be broken but he doesn't say anything about it not working. These seem to be his primary reasons for the 2/10 score:
Too much like the past Halo games

Not enough like the past Halo games (yes I'm aware that these first two contradict each other)

You don't get to fire the big gun on the Mammoth

Enemies are Tron like

No scoring system in single-player (I agree with him on this, that's what made Halo 3's campaign so replayable)

AI's having a lifespan

The story is slow, sentimental and too serious

A 2/10 score really stands out on Metacritic so my review will get more traffic (oh wait, that's my assumption not his written reasoning)

Anyway, what do my fellow Escapists think about the review. I myself got a bit of a laugh out of it but a lot of the things he was criticizing I don't personally think are all that bad. I'm not going to get the game anyway because I've only ever really cared about the campaigns in Halo games but I'll definitely rent it.

Who the fuck cares? It's not like the game won't sell like hot cakes if the scores are bad, it's Halo, it'll sell even if they just put a literal piece of shit in a box (which they do from the start, harr, harr).

Korten12:

Ilikemilkshake:

erttheking:
Oh and yes A.I.s have lifespans, this is a thing. This isn't something 343 pulled out of their rears, A.I. decay and rampancy have been a part of the Halo universe for years now.

What's this lifespan thing? I haven't played Halo since 2 so maybe I don't remember but lifespans sound interesting.

OT: The cynic in me would agree he's just trolling for hits. Unless the game doesn't function I don't think a 2/10 is really ever justified, even for games I hate.

"Smart" AIs unlike their counterparts "Dumb" AIs can only live for 7 years as they begin to think themselves to death and begin to turn off functions to prolong rampancy but it only helps fuel it. Cortana in 4 has begun rampancy as she has past her life span.

Ahh.. That explains what was going on in with Cortana in Forward Unto Dawn. Thanks :)

Only makes me more excited for the newest installment in the Halo/CoD war. The fanboyism shall be glorious.

The reviewer is obviously just fishing for attention, and it seems to be working.

Meh.

I am bummed however that the scoring system and firefight is gone. Yowzers.

Well, the reviewer blatantly admits in a follow-up to his Journey review that he doesn't review games objectively, so there's that. That wouldn't be so bad if the writing for the review wasn't absolute trash. Buddy went to Harvard and he thinks using words like big-ass, douchebag and eff off are acceptable? He sounds like a thirteen year-old typing out his frustrations to his buddies on metacritic. Unprofessional doesn't begin to cover how bad the review was.

This doesn't really surprise me, however. He's admitted to have been fired twice as a reviewer and it's apparent as to why. He has some semblance of knowledge of the industry if his top ten list is any indication but the fact that he feels being objective in a review doesn't make a review it's clear why he's where he is.

This is the equivalent of rating a cigar and then slamming it because you inhaled the smoke and started coughing.
Must be a bad cigar, yes sir. Surely there are better cigars suited for his lungs. Let's try some smoke free ones!

Methinks he missed some of the finer points. Like, oh, I don't know, the importance and reception of the maiden voyage that is 343i's first game? How well the shooting fares? What the new weapons and enemies contribute to the tactics pool? How the story fares in continuity? Are the MP game types unique and well thought out? The taste and quality of the cigar? Is the Forge Mode any good? Anything anyone will actually care about?

It comes out tomorrow, and if I find the game isn't horrendously broken, then I might never see this reviewer as credible again. Which is just as well, because I've never actually heard of him. I don't even know who this guy is.
Ooh, look! The Chief's back. Better kill some aliens and get to not afraiding of anything.

It's not the most professional review but I can relate to some of his complaints. I've always enjoyed Halo but there are certain things that the review touches upon like the over-sentimentality and over-seriousness of the story and characters that I've always found quite grating.
Although I do find it a bit strange that the reviewer singles out Halo 4 for this as, to my knowledge, every Halo has done this.

I wonder what will happen to 343 if they don't achieve a favourable metacritic score? Maybe Microsoft will take away their pensions or force them to make XBL avatar Kinect adventures for the rest of their lives. I think that sounds fair.

Well now I've got another sensationalist reviewer that's going to be ignored right alongside Razorfist.
Looks like he gets to have some company now.

Yeaaaah, a number of those points are positives in my mind....... 2/10 is just silly.
I can agree with him not being too pleased about it being about master chief, I wasn't either. However complaining about how it is covering the same thing and then holding up borderlands 2 as something you could be doing instead, seems a tad strange.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 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