Something went wrong. Try again later

Giant Bomb Review

440 Comments

Halo: Reach Review

4
  • X360

Reach's expanded multiplayer component offers a huge amount of variety that will keep Halo fans going for a good, long time.


 The Spartans have changed, but the game remains the same: shoot grunts in the face.
 The Spartans have changed, but the game remains the same: shoot grunts in the face.
Halo: Reach is exactly the kind of game that Bungie has gotten great at building over the last two generations of console hardware. It's a Halo game through and through, with the same style and pacing that you've come to expect, but with a new cast of characters that are worth paying attention to and a multiplayer mode that has more variety than it's ever had before. It's not going to change your mind about Halo, but this special delivery for fans of the franchise is a great send-off as Bungie ends its involvement with the franchise to go work on something new.

Halo: Reach is a prequel to the first game in the series, providing some perspective on events that take place just before the opening of Halo: Combat Evolved. It also provides some perspective that isn't found in the book upon which these events are based, Halo: The Fall of Reach. So while you'll probably already know that things are about to go very, very bad on the planet called Reach, you don't know the specifics about how the attack went down. The story focuses more on a group of six Spartans called Noble Team, who encounters Covenant forces on the planet, immediately sending the entire world into chaos. You'll play as a Spartan referred to as Noble Six throughout the game. Six's shadowy past paints him as something of a lone wolf bad-ass in the Master Chief mold, but Six is new to the team, so you'll be paired up with and taking orders from the rest of your unit as you work your way from one conflict to the next. Though the constant conflict doesn't leave much time for the other five members of Noble Team to get personal, most of the characters manage to be interesting, which makes the story work well enough to keep it engaging.

If you've played just about any of the previous Halo shooters, you won't be too surprised by what you find in Reach. The pacing, structure, and most of the equipment have popped up in the previous games. Bungie didn't go "reinvent the Assault Rifle" or anything silly like that. And unlike its past game, Halo 3: ODST, Reach returns to a more conventional format, moving you directly from level to level without any sort of hub world. Though you'll often be teamed up with one or more of the other Spartans from your team, the gameplay doesn't really change as a result. They behave just like any other AI in the game, shooting when appropriate and automatically teleporting up to you at checkpoints if you decide to leave them behind. It might have been nice--and would have driven home the unique nature of Noble Team--if those guys were integrated more tightly into the action. The story does take a couple of twists, though, setting up some interesting vehicle sequences and some bits that are slightly more open-ended than Halo games have been, traditionally speaking.

 Unlike the Master Chief, these Noble guys will let you see their faces.
 Unlike the Master Chief, these Noble guys will let you see their faces.
Depending on which difficulty setting you choose--Bungie is again recommending that experienced players start on the second-highest difficulty setting, Heroic--and your own personal skill, Halo: Reach's solo campaign will probably land somewhere between seven and 12 hours. Though I've certainly appreciated the last couple of shooters in the series, by the end of Reach's campaign I found myself rushing past some encounters, hoping to skate to the next checkpoint without doing as much fighting. The combat is very similar to previous Halo games, and I feel like the last level or two drag a bit when compared to the rest of the game. It's too bad, too, because that's when the story starts to become familiar, as it begins to tie into things you'll probably remember from previous Halo games.

Rushing past those encounters is enabled by the game's new armor abilities. These are slotted and swapped out just like a weapon, though you can hit the left bumper to activate your currently equipped ability. The default ability is a sprint, which is great, especially if you're the sort of person that wishes that Halo had a slightly faster pace. You can't run forever, though. All of the abilities have a meter that drains when activated and takes a bit of time to recharge. In the campaign, you'll occasionally find other armor abilities out in the field, allowing you to swap out the sprint for a jetpack, a cloaking device, a couple of different shield options, and so on. These armor abilities also factor into the game's multiplayer.

OK, multiplayer. It's kind of a big deal in the Halo universe, right? In Reach, the options and abilities have grown quite a bit. Campaign co-op is still there for up to four players and can be played with or without scoring. It's also supported by the game's matchmaking features, allowing you to play through the campaign with strangers. For those of you without a bunch of Halo-loving friends who want to get a team together, this is a terrific addition. Matchmaking has also come to Firefight, the wave-based survival mode introduced in ODST. That's a great enhancement, too, but it's not the only thing going on with Firefight.

The default mode has changed a bit to make it more inviting overall, but it's what you can do with the addition of custom variants that makes Firefight so much more interesting. Much like Halo 3's multiplayer, you can tweak a ton of different things to make modes that feel very different from the default. If you'd like, you can enable generators that must be protected from the incoming Covenant forces. You can set which types of enemies come at you in every wave, or tweak your starting health, or alter damage modifiers on weapons and health... essentially, you can make it completely impossible, mind-numbingly easy, or just about anything in-between. Incidentally, making it incredibly easy is handy if you're the sort of person who wants to get some of Halo: Reach's Firefight achievements without breaking a sweat. The Firefight maps in Reach also feel more interesting than most of the arenas and other maps found in ODST.

 Forge mode has been expanded and a new Forge World map is ready for you to lay down all kinds of structures to build your own maps.
 Forge mode has been expanded and a new Forge World map is ready for you to lay down all kinds of structures to build your own maps.
The rest of Reach's multiplayer package builds on that game variant creation stuff that Halo 3 introduced, which is made deeper by the addition of new modes and options. Now, with the inclusion of armor abilities, you select a loadout before spawning. Loadouts are determined by gametype, and you can build (or restrict) custom loadouts when creating a game variant. So if you want everyone to have jet-packs and hammers, you can totally do that. The game also codifies the race mode that users created out of the VIP gametype back in Halo 3 and adds a new multi-tiered match called Invasion, where Spartans and Elites go at it in an objective-based match that puts one team on offense and the other on defense. Matchmaking lets users vote on the next map, rather than just vetoing whatever the current choice is, and the whole thing feels smoother than it's been in the past, whether you're looking to group up with friends or find strange corpses to duck over. Regardless of how you feel about the way Halo games play online or the community of foul-mouthed hooligans it stereotypically draws (though a new "psych profile" feature attempts to match you up with "polite" players, if that's your thing), the feature-set and options when configuring and getting into a game are completely unmatched in the world of console shooters.

Visually, the game looks sharper and has better texture clarity than its predecessors, though the frame rate can get a little unstable, particularly during the game's real-time cutscenes. It's nice that those cutscenes are being rendered on the fly, though, since you're constantly earning credits that can be used to buy various armor add-ons. They're totally cosmetic, but it's neat to be able to pick up new helmets, shoulder pads, chest plates, and so on as you play, and this helps you make your Noble Six a little more personal. You can also purchase additional voices to be used in Firefight mode, and these include the cast of Reach as well as some throwbacks from previous Halo games.

 The multiplayer maps offer a good variety of small and large areas.
 The multiplayer maps offer a good variety of small and large areas.
Most of those voices are really good, and Noble Team is especially full of quality voice actors, though they don't necessarily speak all that often in the grand scheme of things. The music, as you might expect, flips some of the common Halo themes in bits and pieces, but it's mostly an all-new soundtrack that fits right in with the look and feel of the action.

When taken with the appropriate context--namely, that the game's original developer is saying goodbye to the series and passing it off to a new team--Halo: Reach feels like a wholly appropriate stopping point for the series, filling out some more of the relevant fiction that surrounds the core trilogy while building the multiplayer out in such a way that Halo fans will have something to play until whatever's next is ready for release. While I do feel that the formula has worn thin in a few spots, Reach feels like a love letter from the developer to its fans. If you're one of those fans, you should have this game.
Jeff Gerstmann on Google+

440 Comments

Avatar image for cloudenvy
Cloudenvy

5896

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By Cloudenvy
@DrLove said:

" @horhaypi said:

"  This is hilarioius. The overeaction of the giantbomb community. Not the overreaction from the fans trying to argue why Jeff gave a low score but to the fans that are defending the review and it's process. It seems there's like 20 replies about how Giantbomb community is dumb if you disagree with his scores and that they're idiots for not understanding the complexity  of the reviewing process.  People will disagree on the score but there's no reason to just keep attacking them unless it's a unsubstantial comment.  "

this "
I wouldn't call users disagreeing with the review dumb, they are entitled to their opinion of course, but it is when people start to complain about the fact that he "only" gave it 4 stars as if his score is simply flat out wrong or start comparing this review to others which were written by completely different editors that I feel like it's justifiable to call them out. 
Avatar image for leburgan
leburgan

392

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

Edited By leburgan

Honestly I think the thing holding it back from that last star is that it really isn't that different, and if you don't like halo, your not going to like reach. Not everyone will like this game, hence the 4 stars

Avatar image for herostratus
Herostratus

11

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Herostratus

I love Halo, 4 out 5 is fair to me, Tuesday is going to awesome! 

Avatar image for cefka
Cefka

38

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Cefka
@Hamz:@Hamz said:
" Good review, seems like a game aimed at fans which is partly a blessing and a curse. From what I've seen the game looks a little dated in some areas, with more recently released and soon to be released shooters utilising mechanics Halo has yet to incorporate into it's games.  Still Reach is a solid shooter and I'd imagine one we'll all remember as being a great product of 2010! "
Could you please give an example of what you mean... are you referring to Crysis armor abilites, bullet time, cover based shoorting? I don't understand your point. I haven't played the game and although not revolutionary I don't believe Reach has dated design issues.
Avatar image for demontium
demontium

5084

Forum Posts

1801

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 5

Edited By demontium
@Death_Unicorn said:
" In essence, 4 stars =/= bad game, whatsoever. It's more in line of THIS IS A REALLY GOOD GAME! "
No. It just means its a good game, 7-8 range. Its not A REALLY GOOD GAME. Just good.
Avatar image for cefka
Cefka

38

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Cefka
@SpacePenguin said:
" I cant believe people are complaining about a 4/5 stars... 4/5 is almost a perfect game, giving it that means it is a very good game. "
It's about fairness and credibility of the scoring system as well as the reviewer. Some people don't care about the score, others expect quite a lot. I think the review is great but the not entirely in line with 4 stars.
Avatar image for meatsim
MeatSim

11201

Forum Posts

150

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 23

Edited By MeatSim

Yup it's still Halo but it seems like they did just enough to mix it up and get me interested in this game.

Avatar image for drlove
DrLove

449

Forum Posts

37

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By DrLove
@tankintheair315 said:
" Honestly I think the thing holding it back from that last star is that it really isn't that different, and if you don't like halo, your not going to like reach. Not everyone will like this game, hence the 4 stars "
ya i mean its not like you can shoot down UAV's...
Avatar image for drlove
DrLove

449

Forum Posts

37

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By DrLove
@Cloudenvy said:
" @DrLove said:

" @horhaypi said:

"  This is hilarioius. The overeaction of the giantbomb community. Not the overreaction from the fans trying to argue why Jeff gave a low score but to the fans that are defending the review and it's process. It seems there's like 20 replies about how Giantbomb community is dumb if you disagree with his scores and that they're idiots for not understanding the complexity  of the reviewing process.  People will disagree on the score but there's no reason to just keep attacking them unless it's a unsubstantial comment.  "

this "
I wouldn't call users disagreeing with the review dumb, they are entitled to their opinion of course, but it is when people start to complain about the fact that he "only" gave it 4 stars as if his score is simply flat out wrong or start comparing this review to others which were written by completely different editors that I feel like it's justifiable to call them out.  "
there are way more people defending the review than complaining about it.  at least so far.
Avatar image for handlas
handlas

3414

Forum Posts

18

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By handlas

4 stars....I'm gonna enjoy reading all the comments...hahaha...hahahahahahaha...hahaha.  Fun times.

Avatar image for razoric
Razoric

15

Forum Posts

51

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Razoric

4/5?  Ouch...

Avatar image for rio
Rio

605

Forum Posts

291

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By Rio

Wow you people are fucking nuts.  Amusing though I suppose. 
 
Edit:  some of you people need to go read the site faq again and remind yourself what the star scores equate too.  And while your at it read the damn review for once and completely ignore the score, this is journalism after all and not drawing class with stars.

Avatar image for bybeach
bybeach

6754

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By bybeach

I'm afraid i just can't get into the pure 5 point rating in game reviews. I appreciate some of the rationality and such in the explanations, but in the end it is how one poster says it, How do you read the stars? the 5 point system implies a given range to each star, that i do just do not agree with. But you are not supposed to read it that way, but rather it indicates the reviewers take on his judgments of the game. Well hell, in that context i can tell 4/5 is damned good,3/5 is okay2/5 is upper reaches of sucko, and so on  
 
But it doesn't work with tight ass meta critic. To me its just not accurate enough. Now there is the often stated get away from numbersdude argument and it's more emotional variants, but tell metacritic that, and the masses who look for a quick reliable indicator. To read a review here at GB, I have to have a feel for generalization and even personal re viewer's tilt, stopping short of reviewer bs, because these guys are true professionals and do not bs. It does leaves them open and check it out, this game hasn't been even played by us yet, just Jeff and I suspect several other of the staff. These guys i get the impression do like to talk to each other, though strictly of reviewer double checking his fairness and logic, and severely limited to that.  I think so, have heard of it before, but maybe I'm not sure of this at GB...
 
Probably the 10 point system failed for Jeff and company because it tried to dial in way too much, and became a silly burden to choose between say 8.4 and 8.5 by reviewers tilt or whatnot and balance the ticky- tacky micro numbers this will probably be shot down, and maybe because of a real flaw. But if one is going to work within implied number ranges, half stars would  sure tighten it up.  it is not  resorting back to the burdensome 10 point, with all points in between, fun as it is for reader, not so much for the reviewer. And also, keep it stars, the reviewer when it is all said and done doesn't really have to expose every feeling and thought and juggle on the damned game for a rounded out explanation we should understand.
 
And yes, above all else, read the damned review. Always read it! Because of Brad's written review, I'm still getting K and L2..when the price drops. This game, who knows? I never find the GB staff in a ridiculous number position despite how they do things, and I am not crying about the number rating of Jeff''s quality written review. I'm just saying what has bothered me for a while.
Avatar image for cloudenvy
Cloudenvy

5896

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By Cloudenvy
@DrLove:  
That is true.  
Avatar image for pop
Pop

2769

Forum Posts

4697

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

Edited By Pop

Shouldn't this review be up the night of sunday to monday? I thought that's what the letter said :D. Lol on twitter Jeff said that the HD version of the quick look is 1.2GB lawl.. that's crazy.

Avatar image for irishjohn
irishjohn

623

Forum Posts

77

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By irishjohn
@SpacePenguin said:
" I cant believe people are complaining about a 4/5 stars... 4/5 is almost a perfect game, giving it that means it is a very good game. "
I agree. To be fair, this site has been open from the start about reviewing. Yes, they have a five star system but the stress is supposed to be on the review itself. Saying that, I think this is a good review, I'm excited about the game.
Avatar image for lordxavierbritish
LordXavierBritish

6651

Forum Posts

4948

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 6

This review made my  day in multiple ways. 
 
Perfect.

Avatar image for cefka
Cefka

38

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Cefka
@Stubee said:
" Worst score ive seen so far, and tbh i always apply the jeff formula to his reviews (add 1 star for hyped games, take two off or fighting games.  Still putting my money down on it being the best game of the year though  "
Kinda makes sense but MW2 was really hyped and he gave it 5 stars. I think it's a matter of his taste. Also, he seems tired of Halo. I think Brad would have given it 5. They should have a second opinion section to their reviews.
Avatar image for cefka
Cefka

38

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Cefka

I think a few years from now, when people think about Reach, they will think about the game that perfected the Halo formula. A franchise which has millions of fans and which is highly successful. In that light, 4 is too low.

Avatar image for pk_koopa
PK_Koopa

593

Forum Posts

77

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By PK_Koopa

Great review. I'm not sure why there are comments that think its too low. =/

Avatar image for kinjirossd
KinjiroSSD

690

Forum Posts

38

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 5

Edited By KinjiroSSD

Halo Reach = Singularity 
 
/sarcasm 

Avatar image for natetodamax
natetodamax

19464

Forum Posts

65390

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 5

Edited By natetodamax

Oh no, Jeff gave the game 4 out of 5 stars. My enjoyment of Halo: Reach is now severely impacted because of this.

Avatar image for sins_of_mosin
sins_of_mosin

1713

Forum Posts

291

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 27

User Lists: 7

Edited By sins_of_mosin

After looking at the games you gave five stars too, I have to questioned your review of four stars.  From what I seen, the game is a lot better then this review makes it out to be. 

Avatar image for safe_bet
Safe_Bet

25

Forum Posts

52

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Safe_Bet

Any news about a PC-version of Reach?

Avatar image for cowswithguns
cowswithguns

219

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By cowswithguns

Great review Jeff.  But I heard something about only 8 multiplayer maps....not sure if that's true but that worries me....Still real exited though!

Avatar image for safe_bet
Safe_Bet

25

Forum Posts

52

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Safe_Bet
@sins_of_mosin said:
" After looking at the games you gave five stars too, I have to questioned your review of four stars.  From what I seen, the game is a lot better then this review makes it out to be.  "
You haven't even played it yet... 
 
:/
Avatar image for pplus0440
pplus0440

282

Forum Posts

275

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

Edited By pplus0440

lol nothing bad to say and four stars? sounds lke a personal issue to me. Never liked that about htis guy
Avatar image for tosshi
Tosshi

28

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Tosshi

Giant Bomb sold a copy to me. Well, the Amazon credit doesn't hurt either.

Avatar image for gabriel
Gabriel

4139

Forum Posts

638

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

Edited By Gabriel
@KinjiroSSD said:

" Halo Reach = Singularity  /sarcasm  "

Halo Reach = Bionic Commado 
  
Edit: I also forgot I always put this in when a Halo and Jeff Gerstmen come together for a review 
 
  
Avatar image for captain_max707
captain_max707

680

Forum Posts

697

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By captain_max707
@Safe_Bet: The last Halo game on the PC was Halo 2... I think Bungie has no intention of making the game for the PC when it was obviously designed for consoles. 
Avatar image for shoddyrobot
shoddyrobot

112

Forum Posts

21

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By shoddyrobot

Giantbomb = A site where everything is important to read, not just the star score. 
 4/5 stars = A very good game.  
Star scores = Not a great way to decide if you should buy a game.  

Avatar image for rudy
Rudy

131

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By Rudy

Nicely done. Thanks Jeff.  I'm looking forward to turning my xbox back on! :)

Avatar image for drlove
DrLove

449

Forum Posts

37

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By DrLove
Avatar image for charlie_victor_bravo
charlie_victor_bravo

1746

Forum Posts

4136

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 4

@pplus0440 said:
" lol nothing bad to say and four stars? sounds lke a personal issue to me. Never liked that about htis guy "
Yeah, lack of originality and bringing basically nothing new are not bad things. 
It is a good game but it is still the same Halo that it was 10 years ago. It is not going to blow your mind. You will love it, I will love it, but it is not a fresh, new experience.
Avatar image for drlove
DrLove

449

Forum Posts

37

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By DrLove
@charlie_victor_bravo said:
" @pplus0440 said:
" lol nothing bad to say and four stars? sounds lke a personal issue to me. Never liked that about htis guy "
Yeah, lack of originality and bringing basically nothing new are not bad things.  It is a good game but it is still the same Halo that it was 10 years ago. It is not going to blow your mind. You will love it, I will love it, but it is not a fresh, new experience. "
because you cant shoot down UAV's.. jk
Avatar image for zmilla
ZmillA

2519

Forum Posts

195

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By ZmillA

look at the other games that got 5 stars: 

 Starcraft 2
Super Street fighter 4
mario galaxy 2
Modern Warfare 2
Forza 3
Dirt 2 
gears 2
condemned 2
 
a majority of games that got 5 stars over the history of the site, could have the complaint levied at them that they didn't change enough.
 
and somehow this doesn't get 5 stars
 
Dead Rising Case zero is a perfectly rated 4 star game, this is not.

Avatar image for kinjirossd
KinjiroSSD

690

Forum Posts

38

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 5

Edited By KinjiroSSD
@DrLove said:

" @KinjiroSSD said:

" Halo Reach = Singularity  /sarcasm  "

Halo Reach=    Hydro Thunder Hurricane  lol "
Damnit! You win.  
 
Edit: I'll have to step up my game....hmmm....  
   
Killzone 2 > Halo Reach
  
That should get people riled up
Avatar image for joeltgm
JoelTGM

5784

Forum Posts

1760

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 1

Edited By JoelTGM
@ZmillA said:
" look at the other games that got 5 stars:   Starcraft 2 Super Street fighter 4 mario galaxy 2 Modern Warfare 2 Forza 3 Dirt 2  gears 2 condemned 2  a majority of games that got 5 stars over the history of the site, could have the complaint levied at them that they didn't change enough.  and somehow this doesn't get 5 stars  Dead Rising Case zero is a perfectly rated 4 star game, this is not. "
That's because the reviewers felt each one of those games changed and improved things enough to blow their mind all over again.  With Halo: Reach, Jeff said before that there's nothing really surprising about it.  A lot of the games in your post all have the number 2 next to the title, but this Halo game would have the number 5 next to it, and it's basically the same as all the other Halo games, and Jeff says that's a good thing for Halo fans.  He gave it 4 stars though, so what else is there to say.
Avatar image for seppli
Seppli

11232

Forum Posts

9

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 0

Edited By Seppli

Dude - Halo : Reach is 5 Stars MINUS 1 Star for HALO FATIGUE.
 
 
Albeit I don't like fatigue as an objective reason. Then again, this is Jeff's review and I'm perfectly fine with that.

Avatar image for chibi_kaji
chibi_kaji

209

Forum Posts

36

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By chibi_kaji
@CookieMonster said:
" @Chibi_Kaji said: 

@CookieMonster said: 

" They really need to get rid of the five star rating system...it doesn't work. "

How will that help? People will just complain that a game should have got 4 stars instead of 3.      "
What? I don't understand your point. If we got rid of the star system, you would not be able to complain about a game that got 4 stars instead of 3, since there are no stars...  I kind of understand giantbomb's system. Generally, a 3 star review equates to about a 7 out of ten, and a four star review equates to a 9, in my eyes anyway. My problem with it is people view it in different ways because a score out of five is a bit vague, so either get rid of it, or change it to an out of ten system. "
Sorry, I misread you post. I guess thats what happens when you post right after getting up in the morning....
Avatar image for drlove
DrLove

449

Forum Posts

37

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By DrLove
@KinjiroSSD said:
" @DrLove said:

" @KinjiroSSD said:

" Halo Reach = Singularity  /sarcasm  "

Halo Reach=    Hydro Thunder Hurricane  lol "
Damnit! You win.  
 
Edit: I'll have to step up my game....hmmm....  
   
Killzone 2 > Halo Reach  That should get people riled up "
Bad Company 1 > Halo Reach lol
Avatar image for stealthmaster86
Stealthmaster86

741

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 5

Edited By Stealthmaster86
@CowsWithGuns:  It may seem that way but with Forge world the amount of maps fans make will be endless. IF it's there the one place I can't wait to go is Blood Gulch. 
 
Since when did 4 stars out of 5 is a bad score? 
Avatar image for vrock
Vrock

86

Forum Posts

288

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 1

Edited By Vrock

My roommate has just pre-ordered The Legendary edition of it as well as the custom Reach-styled 360. I should start to be concerned about my GPA right about now.

Avatar image for jd183
JD183

44

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By JD183

Gonna get this tomorrow. :D

Avatar image for zmilla
ZmillA

2519

Forum Posts

195

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By ZmillA
@DOUBLESHOCK said:
" @ZmillA said:
" look at the other games that got 5 stars:   Starcraft 2 Super Street fighter 4 mario galaxy 2 Modern Warfare 2 Forza 3 Dirt 2  gears 2 condemned 2  a majority of games that got 5 stars over the history of the site, could have the complaint levied at them that they didn't change enough.  and somehow this doesn't get 5 stars  Dead Rising Case zero is a perfectly rated 4 star game, this is not. "
That's because the reviewers felt each one of those games changed and improved things enough to blow their mind all over again.  With Halo: Reach, Jeff said before that there's nothing really surprising about it.  A lot of the games in your post all have the number 2 next to the title, but this Halo game would have the number 5 next to it, and it's basically the same as all the other Halo games, and Jeff says that's a good thing for Halo fans.  He gave it 4 stars though, so what else is there to say. "
enough was added and improved to the OVERALL GAME for it to get 5 stars. lmao SSFIV getting 5 stars lmao
Avatar image for metaigearrex
MetaIGearRex

7

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By MetaIGearRex

Modern Warfare 2: 5 stars (the same exact game but actually worse than CoD4)
          Halo Reach: 4 stars ( new elements and content then any other Halo or any CoD w/ better community support) 
 
This guy is a total moron wow (same reviewer for both games) You guys have zero consistency, your a trash reviewer. 

Avatar image for ejm
ejm

95

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By ejm

This whole thing demonstrates exactly why I hate review scores.

Avatar image for carsonweekly
Carsonweekly

8

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Carsonweekly

For several years, my multiplayer life has oscillated back and forth between Halo and COD games.  MW2 is slowly winding down for me and many others.  I think Halo: Reach is coming out at a opportune time.  

Avatar image for cole_m_
Cole_M_

9

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By Cole_M_

SuperDuper pumped for this!

Avatar image for imurricane
IMurricane

4

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By IMurricane

Good review