Halo 4: Review Thread

Giantbomb: " I felt like much of the promise inherit to this potentially new setting had been squandered. Maybe that's on me for wanting Halo to be something other than Halo"

The bolded should put Gianbomb in to context. All throughout the review reeks of disappointment that it's too Halo. Too much like older games.

Maybe next time he can read the box and save himself time and money.
 
Now we're talking. Bring on the fanboys

Did you even bother reading the text?

They can rest easy. Halo 4 is authentic, and assures 343's role is more than a mere tribute act. Their delicate yet sprawling work may be more continuation than true expansion - and perhaps the true test comes in the next step - but for now, Halo returns with a bang, not a whimper.
 
Gamespot and IGN's video reviews are great. After Gerstmann's shitty Borderlands 2 review, I don't put much stock in anything he says. No biggie.
 
It seems people are forgetting that a lot of users have played the game by now and have loved each bit of it and thats only the single player of this game.
 
So you know what this means, right? Mass Effect 3 is probably going to get the most GOTY awards.
KuGsj.gif
 
From eg

"Nevertheless, your assigned tasks are over-familiar. Much of the game is spent racing from one location to the next in order to press some crucial button or to destroy some important shield generator. These objectives always come in threes, the repetition artificially extending the length of what is a somewhat short campaign"

sounds like halo
 
It does come off as a bit fanboyish, but really I think he just loved the game.

Yep, and how dare a reviewer love anything. We're living in better times now.

Gamespot reviewer loves the game, but rips Spartan Ops. Calls it inconsequential and far too short. The fact that this replaces Firefight is potentially shitty.
 
That EG review is exceptionally written, he praises the game a lot.

It really, truly is. The EG review employs salient criticisms that are articulated far better than their contemporaries have managed. While an apparent 8 would tell a layperson that Eurogamer looks ambivalently upon the game, the actual content of the review is anything but.
 
What did you not like about his BL2 review? It was pretty much more Borderlands.

It's far more than Borderlands 1. I don't care about his scores, his text was shit. "Wahhh it's more of the same, only better." He's so damn whiny. I've now beaten Borderlands 2 twice and its light years better than the first. So obviously my views dont align with his. Not a big deal. I just know not to turn to him for gaming advice.

It really, truly is. The EG review employs salient criticisms that are articulated far better than their contemporaries have managed. While an apparent 8 would tell a layperson that Eurogamer looks ambivalently upon the game, the actual content of the review is anything but.

Such crap. Gamespot, IGN etc do a fine job articulating their issues with the game too.
 
I suspect this is more likely to go down than up. Atleast that seems to be the usual with Metacritic scores. Which would make it higher than ODST, but lower than the rest.

yeah, a couple more 8s will do just that, ending up in 88 something. maybe edge contributes one :p

8s ruin the metascore, /serious business.
 
CE a 7? lol site invalidated.

This mark is for Halo CE: Anniversary and the PC version of Halo: CE (the xbox version got a 9/10), so it's understandable. Otherwise, they mark pretty harshly but their reviews are pretty good in general. A lot better than IGN that's for sure.
 
Top Bottom