Log in or sign up to comment
288 Comments
Posted by ThePaleKing

It was nice to see a video of Halo 4 in which the people weren't shitting and pissing themselves in excitement over how masterfully evolutionary supremely sublimely the greatest FPS of our generation alive living.

Posted by FreedomTown

@ThePaleKing said:

It was nice to see a video of Halo 4 in which the people weren't shitting and pissing themselves in excitement over how masterfully evolutionary supremely sublimely the greatest FPS of our generation alive living.

Seriously. Well, the other "journalists" are drunk on Doritos and Mountain Dew, so it isn't their fault. The last time Halo was revolutionary was 2001, when Halo came out....

Posted by cthomer5000

Halo More

Posted by Tarsier

jeff is @madmanmaple89 said:

Jeff gives Halo 4 four stars. Jeff mostly complains throughout the quick look. Jeff complains about games he likes.

jeff isnt a 'halo guy' , he states that the multiplayer gameplay has never clicked with him. as we can see in his other outputs throughout time, he likes fighting games and racing games and things like that. i dont know why , someone who doesnt like the multiplayer of halo was allowed to review the game on giant bomb? it is strange to me. and it makes no sense.

Online
Posted by xMEGADETHxSLY

was standing outside a gamestop, all i saw was little kids with their parents. I told myself what a useless life i have. :)

Posted by DarkbeatDK

Looks allright, but I think I'll pass. Gave the other games a go, but never really had fun with them.

Posted by Zatoichi_Sanjuro

I worry for Jeff. He is audibly struggling to breathe throughout the QL.

Posted by GenocidalKitten

@FierceDeity said:

@Axelhander said:

@GenocidalKitten said:

He cares because he probably enjoyed the previous games and isn't getting this one because of the COD leveling system and wishes that that system wasn't there.

How the fuck can you not understand that?

Well said.

: The reason some people like leveling mechanics is because they're generally clueless about gaming and/or treat gaming as some sort of time-killer instead of the enriching hobby it's supposed to be. So they see a bar to grind in order to get better, mistake that for sound design, and assume "good game."

The reason is correct to be concerned is because he's dead right, and you're dead wrong.

And I say that he's wasting time bitching about it here. If he doesn't like that mechanic, then he shouldn't buy the game. He's not entitled to a Halo that conforms to his expectations.

So, you're saying that he isn't allowed to voice his displeasure about a game?

In that case why do people review or talk about games? Considering that they aren't allowed to.

Waste of time or not he is ABSOLUTELY entitled to voice his displeasure.

I think the only reason you don't like it is because you're a fan of the game and can't stand anyone talking bad about it

Posted by vince_kupo

Not to be a dick or something. But Jeff seems quite bored with a lot of games. I wondered if the experience would have been different if Brad was the one playing.

Edited by TPoppaPuff

@FreedomTown said:

@ThePaleKing said:

It was nice to see a video of Halo 4 in which the people weren't shitting and pissing themselves in excitement over how masterfully evolutionary supremely sublimely the greatest FPS of our generation alive living.

Seriously. Well, the other "journalists" are drunk on Doritos and Mountain Dew, so it isn't their fault. The last time Halo was revolutionary was 2001, when Halo came out....

To be fair, there are only two first person shooters a year with great multilayer at most. This is the first great Halo title since 2004 and the first on the 360. That's SEVEN YEARS! Seven years it took on 360. Think about it: It's either be excited about this, one of only two multiplayer shooters worth your attention, or just be so jaded by the world that you can't be excited about any multiplayer FPS. In which case, who cares at that point? Here's a complete list of great multiplayer FPSes on any platform since 2004:

2012: Halo 4 (360), Black Ops 2 (all) barring some huge matchmaking failures

2011: BF3 (PC only, consoles sucked)

2010: Black Ops (all)

2009: Killzone 2 (PS3)

2008: BF: Bad Company (consoles)

2007: Modern Warfare (all), TF2 (PC only, consoles sucked), Shadowrun (PC, 360)*

2006:

2005: Battlefield 2 (PC)

2004: Halo 2 (Xbox Original), UT2004 (PC)

Notable failures (decent titles that weren't great): MW2&3 mp sucked, BFBC2 was hardly even an update of the original, CSS and CSGO are garbage and exist solely as a cash grab and just reminds everyone they should go play 1.6, UT3 was barely an also-ran, and Killzone 3 was a giant miss-step. Oh yeah, and Halo 3 was broken in design and Halo Reach never felt as good to play or as competitive a title as Halo 2, which itself was great but not nearly what Halo:CE gameplay was.

As you can see, in the FPS realm, there's not a lot of multiplayer shooters to get excited about.

*The most competitive title nobody knows about. It's still a better competitive shooter than any 360, PC, PS3 title this generation. It's too bad nobody gave it a chance cause it was mutliplayer only and looks like ass because it trumps everything in the past almost decade for competitive gameplay. It's the only hardcore multiplayer shooter since CS 1.6. If you haven't played it, you really have no idea. Imagine if Starcraft 2 looked like a ps2 title. Nobody would ever know how solid it is for competitive play. Ity also takes at least 20+ hours of gametime before you can truly understand what's really going on.

Posted by mnzy

@TPoppaPuff said:

@FreedomTown said:

@ThePaleKing said:

It was nice to see a video of Halo 4 in which the people weren't shitting and pissing themselves in excitement over how masterfully evolutionary supremely sublimely the greatest FPS of our generation alive living.

Seriously. Well, the other "journalists" are drunk on Doritos and Mountain Dew, so it isn't their fault. The last time Halo was revolutionary was 2001, when Halo came out....

To be fair, there are only two first person shooters a year with great multilayer at most. This is the first great Halo title since 2004 and the first on the 360. That's SEVEN YEARS! Seven years it took. Think about it: It's either be excited about this, one of only two multiplayer shooters worth your attention, or just be so jaded by the world that you can't be excited about any multiplayer FPS. In which case, who cares at that point? Here's a complete list of great multiplayer FPSes on any platform since 2004:

2012: Halo 4 (360), Black Ops 2 (all) barring some huge matchmaking failures

2011: BF3 (PC only, consoles sucked)

2010: Black Ops (all)

2009: Killzone 2 (PS3)

2008: BF: Bad Company (consoles)

2007: Modern Warfare (all), TF2 (PC only, consoles sucked)

2006:

2005: Battlefield 2 (PC)

2004: Halo 2 (Xbox Original), UT2004 (PC)

Notable failures (decent titles that weren't great): MW2&3 mp sucked, BFBC2 was hardly even an update of the original, CSS and CSGO are garbage and exist solely as a cash grab and just reminds everyone they should go play 1.6, UT3 was barely an also-ran, and Killzone 3 was a giant miss-step. Oh yeah, and Halo 3 was broken in design and Halo Reach never felt as good to play or as competitive a title as Halo 2, which itself was great but not nearly what Halo:CE gameplay was.

As you can see, in the FPS realm, there's not a lot of multiplayer shooters to get excited about.

And you think they share your opinion?

Posted by Zajtalan

Can't stress this enough. Halo 4 is a pile of shit. It just reminds me of call of duty: halo. Fuck you 343 bungie is king

Posted by TPoppaPuff

@mnzy: I doubt it. Most people don't think that objectively.

Posted by TPoppaPuff

@Zajtalan said:

Can't stress this enough. Halo 4 is a pile of shit. It just reminds me of call of duty: halo. Fuck you 343 bungie is king

Someone needs a hug.

Posted by Sonny009

"it just sounds TOUUGGHHH" jeff loves tough

Posted by Vrikk

Yawn. More of the same.

Posted by MrBubbles

@roguehallow said:

Fish stick. Cod. Cute.

oh my god! until you said that i didn't get it

Posted by nail1080

@TPoppaPuff said:

@FreedomTown said:

@ThePaleKing said:

It was nice to see a video of Halo 4 in which the people weren't shitting and pissing themselves in excitement over how masterfully evolutionary supremely sublimely the greatest FPS of our generation alive living.

Seriously. Well, the other "journalists" are drunk on Doritos and Mountain Dew, so it isn't their fault. The last time Halo was revolutionary was 2001, when Halo came out....

To be fair, there are only two first person shooters a year with great multilayer at most. This is the first great Halo title since 2004 and the first on the 360. That's SEVEN YEARS! Seven years it took on 360. Think about it: It's either be excited about this, one of only two multiplayer shooters worth your attention, or just be so jaded by the world that you can't be excited about any multiplayer FPS. In which case, who cares at that point? Here's a complete list of great multiplayer FPSes on any platform since 2004:

2012: Halo 4 (360), Black Ops 2 (all) barring some huge matchmaking failures

2011: BF3 (PC only, consoles sucked)

2010: Black Ops (all)

2009: Killzone 2 (PS3)

2008: BF: Bad Company (consoles)

2007: Modern Warfare (all), TF2 (PC only, consoles sucked), Shadowrun (PC, 360)*

2006:

2005: Battlefield 2 (PC)

2004: Halo 2 (Xbox Original), UT2004 (PC)

Notable failures (decent titles that weren't great): MW2&3 mp sucked, BFBC2 was hardly even an update of the original, CSS and CSGO are garbage and exist solely as a cash grab and just reminds everyone they should go play 1.6, UT3 was barely an also-ran, and Killzone 3 was a giant miss-step. Oh yeah, and Halo 3 was broken in design and Halo Reach never felt as good to play or as competitive a title as Halo 2, which itself was great but not nearly what Halo:CE gameplay was.

As you can see, in the FPS realm, there's not a lot of multiplayer shooters to get excited about.

*The most competitive title nobody knows about. It's still a better competitive shooter than any 360, PC, PS3 title this generation. It's too bad nobody gave it a chance cause it was mutliplayer only and looks like ass because it trumps everything in the past almost decade for competitive gameplay. It's the only hardcore multiplayer shooter since CS 1.6. If you haven't played it, you really have no idea. Imagine if Starcraft 2 looked like a ps2 title. Nobody would ever know how solid it is for competitive play. Ity also takes at least 20+ hours of gametime before you can truly understand what's really going on.

cool opinion bro

Posted by captain_clayman

@JeanLuc said:

Kind of wish Drew was in this quick look. Jeff has never been the biggest Halo fan (which is totally fine), so having Drew and Jeff would help to give a better view from different mindsets.

True.

Posted by Tarsier

@GenocidalKitten said:

@FierceDeity said:

@Axelhander said:

@GenocidalKitten said:

He cares because he probably enjoyed the previous games and isn't getting this one because of the COD leveling system and wishes that that system wasn't there.

How the fuck can you not understand that?

Well said.

: The reason some people like leveling mechanics is because they're generally clueless about gaming and/or treat gaming as some sort of time-killer instead of the enriching hobby it's supposed to be. So they see a bar to grind in order to get better, mistake that for sound design, and assume "good game."

The reason is correct to be concerned is because he's dead right, and you're dead wrong.

And I say that he's wasting time bitching about it here. If he doesn't like that mechanic, then he shouldn't buy the game. He's not entitled to a Halo that conforms to his expectations.

So, you're saying that he isn't allowed to voice his displeasure about a game?

In that case why do people review or talk about games? Considering that they aren't allowed to.

Waste of time or not he is ABSOLUTELY entitled to voice his displeasure.

I think the only reason you don't like it is because you're a fan of the game and can't stand anyone talking bad about it

i think he just shouldnt have reviewed it. he should have given this to someone who actually was into halo. not a halo fan boy , trolls, someone who has played it and enjoyed it and who understands the gameplay to the point that they can give it a fair unbiased review. jeffs review is biased from the start because he just doesnt like halo. its not his kind of game. same as if ryan reviewed starcraft 2. its just sillyness. like ive said, not a big deal, its giant bomb. theyre chill and they dont put as much thought into these types of things because they probably dont care. jeff chose to be the one to play halo, he doesnt like halo, he gave it a review that someone who doesnt like halo but appreciates the level of craftsmanship involved would give it. and its kind of unfortunate. really, i think its something worth mentioning. some more thought should be put into who reviews what games at giant bomb, but it shouldnt be some kind of radical debate like the giant bomb community has about feminism and sexism and all that wretched bullshit.

anyways, i played this game, it well exceeded all my expectations, and im extremely pleased. its just somewhat of a bummer when i read this shitty comment 'its just more halo'. i strongly believe its more than that. its next level.

Online
Posted by Nushi

I saw a left handed jackal in ODST

Posted by TPoppaPuff

@nail1080 said:

@TPoppaPuff said:

@FreedomTown said:

@ThePaleKing said:

It was nice to see a video of Halo 4 in which the people weren't shitting and pissing themselves in excitement over how masterfully evolutionary supremely sublimely the greatest FPS of our generation alive living.

Seriously. Well, the other "journalists" are drunk on Doritos and Mountain Dew, so it isn't their fault. The last time Halo was revolutionary was 2001, when Halo came out....

To be fair, there are only two first person shooters a year with great multilayer at most. This is the first great Halo title since 2004 and the first on the 360. That's SEVEN YEARS! Seven years it took on 360. Think about it: It's either be excited about this, one of only two multiplayer shooters worth your attention, or just be so jaded by the world that you can't be excited about any multiplayer FPS. In which case, who cares at that point? Here's a complete list of great multiplayer FPSes on any platform since 2004:

2012: Halo 4 (360), Black Ops 2 (all) barring some huge matchmaking failures

2011: BF3 (PC only, consoles sucked)

2010: Black Ops (all)

2009: Killzone 2 (PS3)

2008: BF: Bad Company (consoles)

2007: Modern Warfare (all), TF2 (PC only, consoles sucked), Shadowrun (PC, 360)*

2006:

2005: Battlefield 2 (PC)

2004: Halo 2 (Xbox Original), UT2004 (PC)

Notable failures (decent titles that weren't great): MW2&3 mp sucked, BFBC2 was hardly even an update of the original, CSS and CSGO are garbage and exist solely as a cash grab and just reminds everyone they should go play 1.6, UT3 was barely an also-ran, and Killzone 3 was a giant miss-step. Oh yeah, and Halo 3 was broken in design and Halo Reach never felt as good to play or as competitive a title as Halo 2, which itself was great but not nearly what Halo:CE gameplay was.

As you can see, in the FPS realm, there's not a lot of multiplayer shooters to get excited about.

*The most competitive title nobody knows about. It's still a better competitive shooter than any 360, PC, PS3 title this generation. It's too bad nobody gave it a chance cause it was mutliplayer only and looks like ass because it trumps everything in the past almost decade for competitive gameplay. It's the only hardcore multiplayer shooter since CS 1.6. If you haven't played it, you really have no idea. Imagine if Starcraft 2 looked like a ps2 title. Nobody would ever know how solid it is for competitive play. Ity also takes at least 20+ hours of gametime before you can truly understand what's really going on.

cool fact bro

Thanks :)

Posted by hbkdx12
@vince_kupo: It would have been different and he probably would have been hyping everything up. It makes me think about the Rage quicklook where Brad and Patrick (pretty sure it was the two of them) were trying their damnest to make the game sound like the most awesome thing ever  with all it's 'pros" even though there were an equal amount of "cons" that you can tell they were reluctant to even acknowledge. 
 
 He seems really excited about the game (not that he shouldn't be) but he kind of reluctantly agrees with Jeff when he points out certain things that are disappointing, that i feel he wouldn't have mention at all if he took the lead.
 
I mean, take the first 5 minutes of the game....
 
Brad: I love that zoom!
 
Other than the orange interface that's part of the scope, i really had to stop and pause that part over and over to see what exactly was so great about the zoom and/or how it differs from any other zoom from any other game
Edited by Rox360

Wait... You can't pick up grenades from fallen enemies unless you get the perk for it? I feel like that says something about the game as a whole, but I'm not sure what...
 
Looks like it plays as well as I could possibly ask for from a Halo game, but a lot of the decisions about the abilities, perks and weapons, to me, feels more like limiting the players than giving them more options... I'm not into what they decided to change about the formula. But that was hardly unexpected. Oh well, it'll be interesting to see how this new trilogy plays out. Meanwhile, I will continue to swear allegiance to Combat Evolved.

Posted by chilipeppersman

it shoulda got 3 stars, its just more halo.

Posted by PandaBear

@chilipeppersman said:

it shoulda got 3 stars, its just more halo.

Insightful stuff.

Posted by Tesla

There sure are a lot of opinions here from people who haven't played the game.

Posted by meaninoflife42

The adventures of John Halo continue.

Posted by MattGrant

God damn, Jeff's an ice cold killer with that Battle Rifle.

Posted by GenocidalKitten

@Tarsier said:

@GenocidalKitten said:

@FierceDeity said:

@Axelhander said:

@GenocidalKitten said:

He cares because he probably enjoyed the previous games and isn't getting this one because of the COD leveling system and wishes that that system wasn't there.

How the fuck can you not understand that?

Well said.

: The reason some people like leveling mechanics is because they're generally clueless about gaming and/or treat gaming as some sort of time-killer instead of the enriching hobby it's supposed to be. So they see a bar to grind in order to get better, mistake that for sound design, and assume "good game."

The reason is correct to be concerned is because he's dead right, and you're dead wrong.

And I say that he's wasting time bitching about it here. If he doesn't like that mechanic, then he shouldn't buy the game. He's not entitled to a Halo that conforms to his expectations.

So, you're saying that he isn't allowed to voice his displeasure about a game?

In that case why do people review or talk about games? Considering that they aren't allowed to.

Waste of time or not he is ABSOLUTELY entitled to voice his displeasure.

I think the only reason you don't like it is because you're a fan of the game and can't stand anyone talking bad about it

i think he just shouldnt have reviewed it. he should have given this to someone who actually was into halo. not a halo fan boy , trolls, someone who has played it and enjoyed it and who understands the gameplay to the point that they can give it a fair unbiased review. jeffs review is biased from the start because he just doesnt like halo. its not his kind of game. same as if ryan reviewed starcraft 2. its just sillyness. like ive said, not a big deal, its giant bomb. theyre chill and they dont put as much thought into these types of things because they probably dont care. jeff chose to be the one to play halo, he doesnt like halo, he gave it a review that someone who doesnt like halo but appreciates the level of craftsmanship involved would give it. and its kind of unfortunate. really, i think its something worth mentioning. some more thought should be put into who reviews what games at giant bomb, but it shouldnt be some kind of radical debate like the giant bomb community has about feminism and sexism and all that wretched bullshit.

anyways, i played this game, it well exceeded all my expectations, and im extremely pleased. its just somewhat of a bummer when i read this shitty comment 'its just more halo'. i strongly believe its more than that. its next level.

We aren't talking about Jeff we are talking about this guy

said

Fuck COD leveling unlock systems. What the fuck happened to people that made them okay with this? Why should someone have an advantage just because they dumped more hours into a game?

What if if in Street Fighter you didn't have any special moves until you hit level seven? What if in Starcraft you only had access to the most basic units until you'd played for twenty hours? Why the fuck should anything except skill level matter in a fucking competitive game?

Edited by Dan_CiTi

@TPoppaPuff said:

@FreedomTown said:

@ThePaleKing said:

It was nice to see a video of Halo 4 in which the people weren't shitting and pissing themselves in excitement over how masterfully evolutionary supremely sublimely the greatest FPS of our generation alive living.

Seriously. Well, the other "journalists" are drunk on Doritos and Mountain Dew, so it isn't their fault. The last time Halo was revolutionary was 2001, when Halo came out....

To be fair, there are only two first person shooters a year with great multilayer at most. This is the first great Halo title since 2004 and the first on the 360. That's SEVEN YEARS! Seven years it took on 360. Think about it: It's either be excited about this, one of only two multiplayer shooters worth your attention, or just be so jaded by the world that you can't be excited about any multiplayer FPS. In which case, who cares at that point? Here's a complete list of great multiplayer FPSes on any platform since 2004:

2012: Halo 4 (360), Black Ops 2 (all) barring some huge matchmaking failures

2011: BF3 (PC)

2010: Black Ops (all)

2009: Killzone 2 (PS3)

2008: BF: Bad Company (consoles)

2007: Modern Warfare (all), TF2 (PC), Shadowrun (PC, 360)*

2006:

2005: Battlefield 2 (PC)

2004: Halo 2 (Xbox Original), UT2k4 (PC)

Notable failures (decent titles that weren't great): MW2&3 mp sucked, BFBC2 was hardly even an update of the original, CSS and CSGO are garbage and exist solely as a cash grab and just reminds everyone they should go play 1.6, UT3 was barely an also-ran, and Killzone 3 was a giant miss-step. Oh yeah, and Halo 3 was broken in design and Halo Reach never felt as good to play or as competitive a title as Halo 2, which itself was great but not nearly what Halo:CE gameplay was.

As you can see, in the FPS realm, there's not a lot of multiplayer shooters to get excited about.

*The most competitive title nobody knows about. It's still a better competitive shooter than any 360, PC, PS3 title this generation. It's too bad nobody gave it a chance cause it was mutliplayer only and looks like ass because it trumps everything in the past almost decade for competitive gameplay. It's the only hardcore multiplayer shooter since CS 1.6. If you haven't played it, you really have no idea. Imagine if Starcraft 2 looked like a ps2 title. Nobody would ever know how solid it is for competitive play. Ity also takes at least 20+ hours of gametime before you can truly understand what's really going on.

I found this pretty funny, but yeah Modern Warfare past 1 became pretty bad, though the first one had some weird problems too. Also Halo 2 was soooo bad, SP and MP. SP was dreary, poorly designed, worse music, too long, etc. and the multiplayer had pretty hit-or-miss maps, and it felt like a race to the weapons, mainly because of the hilarious lunge attack with the Energy Sword. Halo 3 was still no where near as good as 1, but still felt like they reigned some of the dumb things from 2 and added some fun things, and also a bunch of useless crap like those mines you could drop.

Shadowrun had bad graphics? I just remember the art style and some strange decisions with the classes putting people off as well as feeling as if the game could be more fleshed out in areas. The game itself was great, but for class-based shooters people just flocked to TF2 pretty quickly.

Posted by bushlemon

"Someone who loves the game should have done this quicklook because I don't like listening to people who have different opinions to me"

Posted by Napalm

I don't know. I'm not really happy to see the Covenant as a major player, again, plus all of the old enemy types, plus all of the old weapons. This is one of the rare times where I fully agree with Jeff - I wanted Halo 4 to be a more singular, introspective journey away from the military life and familiar enemies. I mean, how much cooler of a story would that have been? Master Chief all alone, fending for himself against an unknown force, all the while trying to deal with an artificial intelligence that's about to go insane? Truthfully, it's just easier to stick to a "winning formula" so to speak rather than reinvent a series which is one (out of many right now), that desperately need it.

Posted by Nes

"Wait a minute... is this Haven?"

"Yea. Of course. ...All matches take place on Haven."

Posted by HerbieBug

Hold on just a sec... did Brad say car-bean? :D

Posted by das9000

New king? New KING?! New KING?! I find that extremely offensive and sexists towards women. Why couldn't it have been a queen? This male driven society is bringing down women.

(Disclaimer : No I'm not serious, but we all know who will take serious issue with this trivial detail)

Edited by Gunharp

@Cheesebob said:

I'm not up to date with my Halo game knowledge but is there no dual wielding in this game?

There is no dual wielding.

@msavo said:

@Skanker said:

This game can eat poop for locking all non-Campaign content behind the Gold pay wall. You can't even play Spartan Ops splitscreen and offline unless all participating accounts have Gold. Absolutely stupid.

Please tell me you are joking... That is fucking stupid if true.

This is true.

@ZGoon said:

Wasn't it telling Jeff to hit the right bumper because that was the default controls for melee...? He should've tried hitting the right stick.

Correct. It's a known issue that was unfortunately left as is.

Posted by BlackPeople

Video's not working for me.

Posted by BlackPeople

Aaaaand now it is.

Posted by Ketchupp

I made it 10 minutes in! I'm proud of myself.

Posted by djhicks1

"Quicklook Halo 4" - could have started with multiplayer.

Obviously, smartass. Refer to comment above.

My thanks was genuine. You don't have to be assholes.

Posted by HyperionXR

Thoroughly impressed with the game, myself. I feel like 343 has out-Bungied Bungie.

Edited by thebigJ_A

From this Quicklook, they've reconfirmed that Jeff is jaded and Brad has no taste.

;P

Posted by thebigJ_A

"30 million people can't be wrong"

Well, more than that voted for Romney, so.... hehehe

Posted by GiveUpNed

@HyperionX3 said:

Thoroughly impressed with the game, myself. I feel like 343 has out-Bungied Bungie.

I'm assuming they poached many of Bungie's staff.

Posted by pwnmachine

@thebigJ_A: lol you are realizing this now? Can't speak for Brad but Jeff has some pretty valid points...

Posted by Dizzyhippos

yep thats more halo, moving on

Posted by Cramsy

Really really enjoying this

Posted by KaneRobot

Sorry to be the guy to ask this, and I know they are usually pretty careful about spoiling stuff, but is this fairly spoiler free if I've only played the first two levels?

@thebigJ_A said:

"30 million people can't be wrong"

Well, more than that voted for Romney, so.... hehehe

Yeah, and more than that also voted for Obama..."hehehe"

Posted by Gruff182

Looks pretty stale to me. Halo was a fantastic game in 2001, this is just seems like a shinier version of that.

It needs to evolve a bit to get me interested again, that being said I'm sure its still a perfectly fine co-op experience, just single player would bore me to tears.

I also hate shooters in this day and age that don't have iron sights or a zoom function on standard guns, a giant circle over the target is just dull to me and just seems old.

Jeff also took the words out of my mouth when he mentioned the dull alien guns, as soon as I saw that rifle it just looked like a carbine that shoots orange, it even had the same cylinder reload animation. The new alien race is one of the few new things to the series and those weapons could of been something really cool instead it just seems like poor or just a lack of design.

A 5 minute brainstorming session could come up with better ideas. But no, how about the shotgun shoots orange this time.