Giant Bomb Review

413 Comments

Halo 4 Review

4
  • X360

The new developers behind the Halo franchise successfully emulate the style of their predecessors as a new trilogy begins with Halo 4.

Armor customization is merely cosmetic, but there are some cool helmets and stuff to unlock.

Did the new team at 343 Industries break Halo? No, not at all. Taking over the franchise from its creators at Bungie and creating a new, numbered sequel starring the Master Chief seems like the sort of daunting task that could have blown up the entire franchise if it had gone poorly. But the developers have executed quite well, developing a Halo game that gets that Halo feel down nicely while also playing around with the periphery of the experience in an attempt to modernize things a bit. Some of those new ideas work better than others, but if there's any actual issue with Halo 4 it's that the game plays it a little too safe. Master Chief starts the game surrounded by mystery, but it relies too heavily on the use of existing enemies and weapons, and by the end of the campaign it sort of feels like the Master Chief is right back in the middle of the same conflict and theater of war he seemingly left behind at the end of Halo 3.

The action opens with the Master Chief being woken out of his stasis only to find danger. Covenant forces have boarded his ripped-up ship and this whole mess is headed for a Forerunner planet called Requiem. Before too long a human ship called the Infinity joins the fray, giving you the standard factions of a Halo game. Mixed into this conflict is a new batch of enemies called the Prometheans. And tying it all together is a central bad guy known as the Didact. The story starts to head in some interesting directions. Your ever-present AI pal Cortana, for example, is falling apart due to being "alive" for more than seven years. As she breaks down, it's harder for her to maintain focus and help the Chief complete his tasks. It's also really interesting to put a face to the antagonists in a Halo game, rather than larger species or concepts like "the Covenant." That said, however, you sure do spend a lot of time fighting old enemies.

The most dramatic change you'll see on the enemy front is a floating Promethean Watcher that hovers above its allies, emitting beams that shield the Knights and Crawlers below. It'll also snatch any grenades you toss in their direction and fling it right back in your direction, which is sort of a jerk move if you ask me. But it also does a mean Doom II Arch-Vile impression by resurrecting some enemies after you take them down. In short, shoot the Watchers first. The other Promethean enemies aren't dramatically different from the types of enemies you've been facing in previous games. Crawlers can crawl down from the walls and the bipedal Knights can teleport, allowing them to warp away from the business end of your battle rifle and reappear behind you.

These mechs pop up in multiplayer and campaign.

But you'll also face a lot of Covenant opposition, including Grunts, Elites, Jackals, and Hunters. Fighting these guys feels the same way it always has, for better or worse. The Grunts are total chumps, the Elites are fun to bash in the face, the Jackals are never left-handed, and the Hunters are large and slow. As before, the game mixes up your various enemies to serve them up in different configurations. On the normal difficulty, this doesn't make much difference, as you can just plow through the opposition the way a big, armored dude like the Master Chief should. On higher settings, the action gets a little more tactical, forcing you to poke out, do some damage, and hang back to let your shields recharge. Again, this shouldn't sound like much of a surprise to people who have played a Halo game before, but it's just another example of the ways that this new development team made a game that feels very similar to Bungie's work on the previous games. That said, the promise of landing on a new planet and the potential for new experiences and encounters that the change of setting could have allowed for makes the notion of spending what feels like most of the game fighting enemies from old Halo games a little unfortunate.

You'll pick up some new weapons along the way, and the Chief himself has been given some additional abilities. Most of the new weapons drop from the new Promethean enemies. They look great, and the first time you pick one up you'll see it sort of form together into a gun. It's a nice introductory animation that, thankfully, doesn't play out every time you pick up a weapon. While the new weapons look nice, most of them just plug right into the existing Halo archetypes. You'll see a shotgun, a pistol, a fully-automatic rifle, a single-shot rifle that fires three slugs at once (though one sniper-like megaslug if you're zoomed in), a new grenade type, and so on. The new weapons are disappointing for that reason. They don't feel like they fill any real need or plug into any gaps in the existing Halo arsenal. They're just more ways to do the same thing. The game also offers you the chance to pilot a large mech suit in a couple of spots, but taking a large, slow-moving armored guy like the Master Chief and slapping another larger, slower layer of armor around him for a couple of shooting gallery-like sequences isn't exactly my idea of a good time.

Thankfully, the Chief has some more movement options to keep the game running at a solid pace. You can sprint at will now by clicking in the left stick. This does a lot to speed up the pace of the game, as you might expect. But in addition to that, there's also an equipment slot that lets you use armor abilities, similar to the style of Halo: Reach. These include things like Promethean Vision, which lets you see through walls, or Active Camouflage, which gives you a Predator-style invisibility that the AI seems to be able to see right through most of the time. You can also equip abilities that let you deploy auto-sentries, use a large shield, and so on. Being able to sprint without having to equip that as your armor ability is terrific.

This shield is one of the armor abilities you can equip.

Overall, the Halo 4 campaign is pretty good. It looks fantastic in some spots and it takes you to a lot of different-looking places along the way. It sets up a few story elements that won't pay off until later on in this new trilogy of games, but a lot of the story plays things very safe. At the opening of the game it feels like Master Chief and Cortana could be set off onto some great new mystery in a mysterious place where everything could be different. Instead you spend a lot of time fighting old Halo enemies and, by the conclusion of Halo 4's story, I felt like much of the promise inherent to this potentially new setting had been squandered. Maybe that's on me for wanting Halo to be something other than Halo, but without getting into the specifics of the characters and their fates, where things are left at the end of the game feels like a stopping point that sets you up for more of the same enemies and settings in the future.

The multiplayer side of Halo 4 brings in those new weapons and movement changes, so you can sprint there, as well. There are also additional armor abilities to play with and, overall, it feels like the team sat down with a recent Call of Duty game and found ways to plug some of those concepts into Halo. Some of them are cosmetic. Any points you earn during a match pop up right in the center of the screen. When you die, you get a killcam feed of the person that took you out. But some of them are more dramatic, like more customizable loadouts that let you pick your primary and secondary weapons, a starting grenade type, and a few perks, like shields that recharge more quickly, infinite sprint, the ability to scavenge grenades from fallen Spartans, and so on. As you play, you'll earn experience points that give you unlock points, but some items also have a level requirement before they can even be unlocked. So you'll have to play for a bit before you can start out with plasma grenades, and you'll have to play a little longer before you can equip things in all of your perk slots. Halo has done loadouts before, but this is a deeper, and ultimately, more interesting set of options. As before, you'll also unlock various armor pieces as you play, gain levels, or complete challenges. New helmets, shoulders, chest pieces, and so on are also available for you to play around with.

These portals teleport you around the planet in the campaign.

The modes you'll play when playing with the public are your typical sort of Halo modes, but with some changes here and there. Team Slayer (as well as some of the other modes) now allows you to call in ordnance after a set number of kills. Don't start freaking out, you're not calling in air strikes or UAVs or anything that dramatic. And it doesn't require you to earn all those kills in a streak. But when you fill an on-screen meter, it gives you the option to call in one of three different things. They might be weapons, like the SAW, a very rugged light machine gun. Or you might have the option to get an overshield, a temporary speed or damage boost, and so on. One time I got the gravity hammer, but was immediately killed before I got to run around and smash people with it. It's a cool little addition. Other modes include Regicide, which is a standard deathmatch mode but the lead player gets marked by an on-screen indicator and also has an additional bounty on his head. Killing the king gets you that bounty, but doesn't automatically make you the king--you need to be in the lead to wear the crown.

You can also get in and build your own custom matches with a variety of rules settings, and the Forge mode that allows you to alter the placement of items in the multiplayer maps (along with a set of Forge-only maps) also returns with some additional options, like the ability to fuse items together. And, as before, you can take your custom games, screenshots, and so on and share them with other players.

There's no wave-based survival mode in Halo 4. In addition to the campaign, the game also has a cooperative mode called Spartan Ops. This is an episodic series that follows a team of Spartans that work out of the Infinity, a large ship that shows up in the campaign. These episodes are going to be released for free on a regular basis as downloadable updates and will contain video clips that help set them up. The first such episode is included alongside the launching game, and as such that's the only one I can really review at this point. The story opens with a video showing Spartans reporting for duty on-board the Infinity. From there, you're tossed into a set of five missions. The locations are ripped from other parts of the game and are extremely combat heavy. And once you're past that initial cutscene, any additional dialogue is delivered via radio chatter. If you're into the combat of Halo and like playing with others against occasionally overwhelming batches of enemies, the missions are passable. But don't go in thinking that this is some sort of elaborate and unique segment of the game that's going to give you a campaign-level experience. It's a set of co-op missions with a loose story wrapper around it, nothing more, nothing less. You can bring in your custom Spartan from the other multiplayer modes and earn experience points by playing Spartan Ops, and there are mode-specific challenges to complete here, as well.

Shoot the flying dudes first.

The presentation end of Halo 4 is quite nice. The music is outstanding, breaking away from the franchise's past a bit by updating the sound and getting away from some of the overt monk chanting that one still tends to associate with Halo. It helps make Halo 4 sound like its own thing, and that goes a long way. Visually, Halo 4 has some terrific moments that really stand out, but it also holds up well on the technical end with a good frame rate, great lighting, and, for the most part, sharp texture quality. Again, these things help to make Halo 4 look and feel different from its predecessors, probably more than the gameplay does.

From the moment I saw Master Chief put himself back to sleep at the end of Halo 3, all I could think about was how his next adventure--if he would even have a next adventure--should be something dramatically different from the adventures we had already seen. Moving him out into the middle of nowhere and cutting him off from his allies is an idea with huge potential. So that's why I find the storytelling side of Halo 4 to be fairly disappointing. Within the first few hours you've fought enemies that go all the way back to the first game in the franchise and you've reconnected with the human race. That's not to say that the entire story is a bust--and it does set up some potentially interesting things for the next couple of games to address--but it's good that the developers have backed this story up with sharp, time-tested gameplay that gets enhanced in meaningful ways across all modes.

Jeff Gerstmann on Google+
413 Comments
Posted by Imsorrymsjackson

@algertman said:

So Mortal Kombat Vita is a better game than Halo 4.

That's a joke.

After the shit storm with the gaming press this last week Jeff was never going to give this game 5 stars. Especially when they he just gave another 360 exclusive, Forza, that score. And to hear Jeff talk about Forza in the NFS QL you could tell it didn't deserve that score. He mentioned NFS had a far superior multiplayer and he would end up sinking more time in NFS than Forza. So Forza got a 5 and NFS got a 4. But hey, here's some free DLC codes for Forza.

Jeff is smart and knows people will always see him as some unmovable rock that's better than your average reviewer because he got ran off from Gamespot years ago. Now people will claim Jeff was above it all again because he gave Halo 4 just 4 stars. Jeff knows that and that's why he gave it 4 stars.

Let the hate flow, it sustains us all.

Posted by AuthenticM

Yup, as soon as I saw the number of comments after reading the review, I knew there were going to be a bunch of angry lemmings in here.

As for the review, it is as expected. I'm disappointed that the game is playing it too safe and too similar to the other games. It pretty much confirms what Ryan Payton was saying: that he left the studio because while he wanted to make a new game, Microsoft wanted "another Halo". Sigh. I'll still play it as it seems good, but not the event I wanted it to be.

Posted by ChernobylCow

Another ho-hum game. I'll get it when it's $10 on either Newegg or Gamefly.

Posted by machinerebel

@Kevitivity: "I did not need another Halo. Kind of tired of them."

This is pretty much exactly how I feel about Call of Duty. And every other yearly/biyearly franchise.

Posted by Oldirtybearon

I thought 4/5 was "damn good"? isn't 3/5 "average"?

Posted by ChrisTaran

Great review Jeff. Reading this I know this is a game I will not be sad about missing out on. They had the chance to reinvent the franchise but all they did was go back to the same well in no time at all.

Posted by iAmJohn

@algertman said:

So Mortal Kombat Vita is a better game than Halo 4.

That's a joke.

After the shit storm with the gaming press this last week Jeff was never going to give this game 5 stars. Especially when they he just gave another 360 exclusive, Forza, that score. And to hear Jeff talk about Forza in the NFS QL you could tell it didn't deserve that score. He mentioned NFS had a far superior multiplayer and he would end up sinking more time in NFS than Forza. So Forza got a 5 and NFS got a 4. But hey, here's some free DLC codes for Forza.

Jeff is smart and knows people will always see him as some unmovable rock that's better than your average reviewer because he got ran off from Gamespot years ago. Now people will claim Jeff was above it all again because he gave Halo 4 just 4 stars. Jeff knows that and that's why he gave it 4 stars.

Omg your bitter tears are so delicious.

/!\ IMPORTANT REMINDER TO GIANT BOMB COMMENTERS /!\

Three stars means a game is good and still worth playing if you can look past certain caveats. Four stars means a game is great and well worth your time. Five stars means a game is fanflippingtastic and you really need to play it. All three are good scores and mean that the game is good and deserving of your time. There is no conspiracy.

Posted by MarekkPie
Posted by HT101

As long as the Flood are not in this game, this will most likely be the best Halo game of all time.

Posted by Snakepond

If this game is a 4 star I would love to see what a 5 star game looks like.

Edited by CaLe

The Halo games have always been solid rentals. Looks like this one continues that tradition.

Some of the commenters in here are indicative of exactly why I have zero interest in playing Halo online. The immaturity and fanboyism is insufferable.

Posted by jakkblades

@ChernobylCow said:

Another ho-hum game. I'll get it when it's $10 on either Newegg or Gamefly.

You don't know things about rating systems.

Posted by Bobby_The_Great

Keep in mind, Jeff isn't a big Halo fan. Why he keeps reviewing them I'll never know, so to get a 4/5 from him is a pretty good score.

Posted by SHADOSTRYKR

I understand "8 is great" but if Halo 4 is a 8 in your opinion, what gets a 9?! You're the lowest score on metacritic, and I know you don't care. Its just that it seems from an outside perspective you could be considered the most critical of all the critics. Of any game, not just Halo.

Posted by SHADOSTRYKR

@CaLe: what exactly would Halo have to do to be a purchase for you...because I think they did it... with Halo 4. Perhaps you're the insufferable one here.

Posted by groin

@SHADOSTRYKR said:

I understand "8 is great" but if Halo 4 is a 8 in your opinion, what gets a 9?! You're the lowest score on metacritic, and I know you don't care. Its just that it seems from an outside perspective you could be considered the most critical of all the critics. Of any game, not just Halo.

This is comedy gold.

Posted by Slixshot

Alright, here's my take: if you wanted Halo to take a vastly different approach, why don't you go play one of the many other FPS franchise. I mean, the name of the game is, in fact, Halo 4; why would the gameplay be so far changed that it's no longer recognizable as part of the series? What I took from this review is that the game made advancements in all the right places: pushing graphics to the limit, introducing a compelling storyline, switching up the sound, and adding enough variation to the gameplay to give that new car smell.

Online
Posted by Clean

Man just reading the review and how the story will be! I agree with Jeff! Good review!

Edited by CptBedlam

@SHADOSTRYKR said:

I understand "8 is great" but if Halo 4 is a 8 in your opinion, what gets a 9?! You're the lowest score on metacritic, and I know you don't care. Its just that it seems from an outside perspective you could be considered the most critical of all the critics. Of any game, not just Halo.

Exactly! Because we all know Halo 4 is objectively the pinnacle of videogaming for every single gamer who ever lived and will ever live. It's impossible anyone can like a different game better than Halo 4. Giantbomb should from now on make 4 Stars the highest score for all reviews (and only award future Halo games with it).

Posted by CaLe

@SHADOSTRYKR said:

@CaLe: what exactly would Halo have to do to be a purchase for you...because I think they did it... with Halo 4. Perhaps you're the insufferable one here.

Yes, and perhaps Santa will be kind enough to get you that Master Chief suit you've always wanted.

Edited by Wrighteous86

Seems like Jeff was a bit tired and cranked this review out when he wrote it. It's a bit choppy and repeats itself a few times too many, along with a few minor writing errors, but that's nitpicking.

Still, it's a shame that Halo 4 didn't try to do too much new. Understandable since it's a sequel to a major franchise that was just handed off to a new studio that they'd play it a bit safe and lock down the formula, but hopefully now that they've proven they can make a good Halo game, they'll try to improve upon Halo.

Also, commenters be crazy. People need to grow up.

Posted by Druminator

Can't wait to see what happens but then it's on to multiplayer for the next couple years like always.

Posted by tourgen

@Ravelle: @ImmortalSaiyan said:

I'm disappointed about the Covenet being players in the story. I would have liked Halo 4 to get away from all of that completely.

yep, exactly. A new trilogy deserves more of a clean break from the past games.

Posted by drevilbones

@MarekkPie: Thanks for posting that. Classic. I miss the Brodeo.

Posted by SHADOSTRYKR

@CptBedlam: Thanks for completely missing my point.

Posted by LikeaSsur

@Lozz said:

@Tarsier

@Mystyr_E said:

heh, it's funny: Gamespot, IGN, Destructoid, Game informer, they're like WOW dude! holy crap!

here it's like "ya know, it's good"

its because jeff is biased and always has been and he sucks at the multiplayer so it hinders his enjoyment levels. hes a racing game / fighting game guy not a FPS player he should stick to what his taste is and not give un fair reviews to other games. OF COURSE i am not assuming this is the case in this review. for all i know he could be right in not giving it 5 stars. but the past has shown that he is probly not.

he should have let drew or vinny review this game imo

Jeff is just critical which is one of the reasons I enjoy his reviews. He can take a step back out of all the fan boy hype and say, how good is this game. 4 stars is a great game.

Agreed. I know it's in bad taste to mention other website reviews (or maybe it's not?), but IGN's reviewer said that he was already sold on the next Xbox because of how good this game was. Like....okay? That doesn't tell me anything about this game. I know it's just one sentence, but to almost end with that was a bad move, it told me all I needed to know: You're more excited that Halo's back than anything.

Posted by GorillaMoPena

Nothing makes me happier on the internet than people complaining about a review score of a game they haven't played yet.

Online
Edited by CptBedlam

@SHADOSTRYKR said:

@CptBedlam: Thanks for completely missing my point.

My point was: opinions, they differ.

Posted by kgb0515

Here's what I'm on the fence about. For one thing, it's fantastic to see that 343 studios seems to be worthy enough to take up the mantle of what Bungie made into one of the most well known franchises of all time. Halo 4 sounds like it is a worthwhile game that stays loyal to its roots and adds just enough flavor to keep it relevant. On the other hand, it's disturbing to think that Microsoft had such a choke hold on production given the fact that they funded 343 studios with the sole purpose of keeping Halo alive.

I'm not saying that more Halo isn't interesting or exciting, but I worry about the state of my favorite franchises when they start going into ultra survival mode like they have towards the end of this hardware generation. Activision is most likely going to be sold off and they publish the most successful series on the market (in terms of sales figures) with CoD. Will there be more CoD if this happens? Probably. There is potential for innovation, but they stick to tried and true formulas like Halo 4 has just so they won't risk alienating their fan base.

I will still play this game, and I will most likely follow and play the next two, so I'm not taking some moral stand here against iterative game play. It's just something to think about.

Posted by Fwankenstein

I guess they figured

keep a bit of old to bring people in instead of changing it all up right away

and alienating fans? Something tells me if they went all Promethean you would

see 1000 threads in gamming forums with titles such as "Halo doesn't feel

like Halo" "Shouldn't be called Halo"

I'm not making excuses,

I too am a little disappointed that if feels like more of the same, at least

from a story stand point. I mean hell we already finished the war with the

covenant, why must we still fight it? It just takes away from Halo 3. Will have

to see.

Posted by OriginalGman

So in short: it's more Halo? Pre-order justified.

Posted by Xeirus

Sounds like a 3 star review to me.

I'm so bored of Halo it's unreal, I was really hoping they would use the potential of the ending on H3 to make this different, even if it was only story-wise.

Posted by Benny

I love that you all need someone else to validate your opinion of something and disagree with anyone who says otherwise. If you read this review without a score attached, you would think it was one of the greatest multiplayer shooters released on consoles that only slightly falls short of its potential in the campaign. Grow up you fucking babies.

Posted by chaosnovaxz

I'm a total Halo nut, so I'm obviously foaming for this game right now.

Every other site seems to be giving it gushing reviews, but I like the GB reviews better because they're always way more grounded. This is a prime example. Awesome work Jeff!

Posted by advent_crash

@algertman: Just because one game gets a 5 over a 4 doesn't mean it's a better game. Comparing Mortal Kombat to Halo is like comparing Nachos to Liberty it doesn't make any sense. Scores are contextualized to the type of game they are. Mortal Kombat was a five star fighting game and Halo 4 is a four start first person shooter. And considering the completely overwhelming amount of shooters on the market 4 out of 5 is a huge honor. Especially when they are recycling old enemies from a storyline that was all wrapped up. I'm not a Halo fan at all and even I'm interested in this game isn't it enough that its a good game?

Edited by thornie

Giantbomb seriously needs to put disclaimers on their reviews. Something to the effect of: "The following review is a matter of opinion not fact. Please refrain from getting butthurt over the following review score."

Or ditch the numbering system altogether and go with a "don't play it", "rent it", "must buy" sort of scale.

Posted by Stealthmaster86

@Bobby_The_Great: Because it's better to get someone that doesn't care about a game than someone who is a big fan. If a person is a big fan of something, they are more likely to give it a higher score.

Online
Posted by Skytylz

Jeff saying they took more cues from Call of Duty kills what interest I have left in Halo. I played less Reach then I did three and I don't even know if I'll buy this one. It doesn't help that I finally met some people that play Halo and they aren't exactly the most fun crowd of people to game with, I guess I'll stick with Starcraft as my multiplayer game of choice for now.

Anyways, I love watching these meltdowns in the comments section, hopefully GB stays as the low review score and it keeps things interesting. I really fucking hope whoever reviews COD this year is brutal on it like it has probably deserved for a few entries now.

Posted by linkforever1

Sounds like a good, honest review to me. I wish they would've changed things up more and I'm going to pass on this since I'm not really interested in paying for xbox live to experience more halo multiplayer..

Posted by Oni

I too am disappointed that once again it's Covenant and UNSC. They had an opportunity to make a total clean break and they did not take it. What a bummer.

Posted by bigsmoke77

@algertman: Can you do us all a favor and not come back to this site again...

Posted by RAMBO604

Surprised Jeff gave it the same score he gave Reach, reading other reviews seems to indicate 4 is a superior game in every way to Reach.

Edited by GetEveryone

The intellect on display in here is minimal. People are rabidly arguing over the number of stars this thing got and it's fucking depressing.

You know the debacle recently about media and its relationship with PR? Well, you people are part of the cause.

What a total travesty.

Posted by Humanity

@Xeirus said:

Sounds like a 3 star review to me.

I'm so bored of Halo it's unreal, I was really hoping they would use the potential of the ending on H3 to make this different, even if it was only story-wise.

Thats what I thought as I'm also bored to death by Halo but I was never a huge fan to begin with. Underneath it all it's still a very well made first person shooter so I suppose it deserves a 4/5 for being technically great while maybe the content is not that fresh. Also some people are just content to shoot Grunts and to this day giggle at the noises they make, they will enjoy Halo 4 regardless.

Posted by Alorithin

@thornie said:

Giantbomb seriously needs to put disclaimers on their reviews. Something to the effect of: "The following review is a matter of opinion not fact. Please refrain from getting butthurt over the following review score."

Or ditch the numbering system altogether and go with a "don't play it", "rent it", "must buy" sort of scale.

Because opinions contrary to the reviewer are all in the butthurt camp. If I'm allowed to mount my high horse, the people in the peanut gallery are far more annoying than the zealots.

Posted by Gladiator_Games

@wumbo3000 said:

Dang, I was hoping they would take the story in a more radical direction. Still sounds interesting though.

It's kind of obvious they weren't going to go overboard with it. New studio afterall. They don't want to do something crazy with the formula, then have it thrown back in their faces by potentially poor review scores, and lose the license and be branded "the studio that messed up Halo".

It's a shame, but it was the safe bet.

Posted by Gladiator_Games

@Tarsier said:

@Mystyr_E said:

heh, it's funny: Gamespot, IGN, Destructoid, Game informer, they're like WOW dude! holy crap!

here it's like "ya know, it's good"

its because jeff is biased and always has been and he sucks at the multiplayer so it hinders his enjoyment levels. hes a racing game / fighting game guy not a FPS player he should stick to what his taste is and not give un fair reviews to other games. OF COURSE i am not assuming this is the case in this review. for all i know he could be right in not giving it 5 stars. but the past has shown that he is probly not.

he should have let drew or vinny review this game imo

Oh. You're one of *those*. You know, those small people. Who think that "pwnin tha fags" on Xbox live is the only way to enjoy a game. Going to pwn some fags before you do your homework? Or are you not allowed on Xbox until after the dishes are done?

Posted by Alorithin

@algertman: I read it. He gave it a 9.8 out of ten and described everything with a postive quality.

Eurogamer, Edge, and Giantbomb all gave 8/10 in the same "well done but no change" camp.

These are opinons. They are all allowed.

Posted by Shuborno

Sounds like 343 made a great Halo game.

I feel bad for them to have had this impossible task: initially, I think there was a lot of doubt that anyone other than Bungie could even make a Halo game, period.

343 seems to have removed those doubts too well - they gained so much trust in their execution in showing the game that now people like Jeff can talk about being disappointed that they didn't take enough creative liberties.

Edited by thornie

@Alorithin said:

@thornie said:

Giantbomb seriously needs to put disclaimers on their reviews. Something to the effect of: "The following review is a matter of opinion not fact. Please refrain from getting butthurt over the following review score."

Or ditch the numbering system altogether and go with a "don't play it", "rent it", "must buy" sort of scale.

Because opinions contrary to the reviewer are all in the butthurt camp. If I'm allowed to mount my high horse, the people in the peanut gallery are far more annoying than the zealots.

Dude, you are well within your right to express your opinion. I am one of those people who are very critical of this site, and I have caught a lot of heat for speaking out against the apparent laziness and lack of basic research during quick looks. I just think that review scores are not really the problem. Reviews are pure opinion and are completely subjective. If you think a game is worth a better score? Great! Write a user review here and let us all know.