It is blowing up on that site. He definitely scored all the website hits he could ever want.
And while you're there be sure to buy Halo 4 from his Amazon.com link!
It is blowing up on that site. He definitely scored all the website hits he could ever want.
Didn't the IGN video review contain campaign footage?
Didn't the IGN video review contain campaign footage?
Well, lately it's been true as I've only been playing a couple games and both are multiplat and both I own on ps3. I mostly said that as a joke to offset the "ps3 is good... as a bluray player" comment.
Regardless, I don't see how that as anything at all to do with what you bolded.
I just thought I would chime in and tell everyone to shut the hell up already.
This discussion is pointless. Halo 4 is the videogame industry's equivalent to a hollywood blockbuster. Discussing reviews of this game is pointless and idiotic. We're talking about a flashy, obnoxious, and expensive game. This game is pure spectacle (like a hollywood blockbuster) and that is completely fine. In fact, I'll be one of the morons waiting in line at midnight tomorrow to get a copy.
Reviews are not objective. Reviews are not scripture. Its frightening how much some of you people are indoctrinated into the... I don't know "ideology" of this product. Gaming commodity fetishism? This is not the videogame equivalent of Citizen Kane people. This is just a dumb game where you run forward and shoot aliens.
Also, everyone having this objective vs. subjective debate needs to grow some god damn brains. It shows that you know nothing about journalism, literature, or writing in general.
I also realize I am mostly talking to 15 year old boys right now. At least I hope you guys are 15. You are 15, right?
The fact that you think it's your duty to "offset" some perceived attack on your precious PS3 says a lot. None good.
Apparently IGN's campaign footage was approved by MS. GameTrailers wants to use their own campaign footage so they have to wait for the embargo which according to other posters in this thread will be midnight on Monday.
I thought the EGM review was stupid, but Tom Chick's review is fine. I don't share his point of view but I understand it.
I'm ready for more Halo and I'm glad 343 didn't rock the boat for their first major release.
Says nothing in regards to the bolded.
Just to make it clear so this non-issue is squashed, I own both consoles and have played both roughly an equal amount. ~30k gamerscore on 360, ~lvl13 on ps3. I dislike fanboyism and go out of my way to offset such remarks, even humorous ones. What do you think "PS360" was referring to btw?
A 2/10 should be reserved for a broken game, Halo 4 is not broken.
He gave H4 a 1/5.
Besides, that's your scale, not his. That's why it's important to review and not get caught up in the score. Personally, I love when reviewers don't use a 7-10 scale.
It's fanboyism to say you use your PS3 to watch Blurays? Hooboy.
Saying Halo needs iron sights isn't an opinion. It's fucking stupid.
...says you.
And it is an opinion, whether you like it or not. You're no different than the people who said or say that having the ability to run and shoot at the same time in Resident Evil would ruin the game, or that having a flashlight in Doom 3 would ruin the game. I'm not saying that having iron sights in Halo would improve the game, I'm just expressing that saying it's "fucking stupid" because you have a preconceived notion about what gameplay should be in a Halo game no matter what is dumb. Maybe the reviewer sees the style of gameplay in Halo dated. It's not like it hasn't been said about a million other games. It's just that it's Halo and it's supposed to be some way, because the fans have come to expect that.
Maybe instead of railing the guy because he gave the game a less than perfect score, and saying he feels like the gampeplay is dated, you all should explain why you think the Halo gameplay still works, and why it still works today. Then again, you could just say that it's Halo and you like that it's consistent, and that's fair (and I'd probably agree) but expect people to think that your view is "fucking stupid" as well.
...says you.
And it is an opinion, whether you like it or not. You're no different than the people who said or say that having the ability to run and shoot at the same time in Resident Evil would ruin the game, or that having a flashlight in Doom 3 would ruin the game. I'm not saying that having iron sights in Halo would improve the game, I'm just expressing that saying it's "fucking stupid" because you have a preconceived notion about what gameplay should be in a Halo game no matter what is dumb. Maybe the reviewer sees the style of gameplay in Halo dated. It's not like it hasn't been said about a million other games. It's just that it's Halo and it's supposed to be some way, because the fans have come to expect that.
Maybe instead of railing the guy because he gave the game a less than perfect score, and saying he feels like the gampeplay is dated, you all should explain why you think the Halo gameplay still works, and why it still works today. Then again, you could just say that it's Halo and you like that it's consistent, and that's fair (and I'd probably agree) but expect people to think that your view is "fucking stupid" as well.
...says you.
And it is an opinion, whether you like it or not. You're no different than the people who said or say that having the ability to run and shoot at the same time in Resident Evil would ruin the game, or that having a flashlight in Doom 3 would ruin the game. I'm not saying that having iron sights in Halo would improve the game, I'm just expressing that saying it's "fucking stupid" because you have a preconceived notion about what gameplay should be in a Halo game no matter what is dumb. Maybe the reviewer sees the style of gameplay in Halo dated. It's not like it hasn't been said about a million other games. It's just that it's Halo and it's supposed to be some way, because the fans have come to expect that.
Maybe instead of railing the guy because he gave the game a less than perfect score, and saying he feels like the gampeplay is dated, you all should explain why you think the Halo gameplay still works, and why it still works today. Then again, you could just say that it's Halo and you like that it's consistent, and that's fair (and I'd probably agree) but expect people to think that your view is "fucking stupid" as well.
He gave H4 a 1/5.
Besides, that's your scale, not his. That's why it's important to read review and not get caught up in the score. Personally, I love when reviewers don't use a 7-10 scale.
All of them.Have you ever played a Halo title?
And the cycle begins anew.
And your argument is dumb.
People have already done a great job detailing why it's a silly complaint. Besides, surely you can agree that homogenization is never something one should argue for in a critical review, right?
He gave New Vegas the review people wished critics would have given the PS3 version of Skyrim.
Reading some of his reviews, he seems to thrive on giving popular games bad reviews.
87 on Metacritic nowz thanks to
http://www.gamearena.com.au/xbox360/games/title/halo-4/reviews.php (5.5/10)
Have fun peeps
87 on Metacritic nowz thanks to
http://www.gamearena.com.au/xbox360/games/title/halo-4/reviews.php (5.5/10)
Have fun peeps
The greatest praise and strongest criticism I can level at Halo 4 is that it sure is Halo.
Amazing...
Welp, I guess the industry is fucked. Every FPS from here on out needs to be more like COD.
Speaking of multiplayer, some things don't add up. There's an underlying sense that at best the only new elements to the game's MP are borrowed. The Ordinance is clearly a nod to the Call of Duty series' Killstreak system, though the streak continues when you die. So too, the leveling system is the sort of carrot we've come to expect from Activision's game (though it obviously didn't start there.) The worst thing is that these are unnecessary additions to the game - people might appreciate the very obvious way they can track their progress, but it's not exactly a pure Halo experience, is it?
Reads like he didn't even want to give it a chance, SMH.
Amazing...
Welp, I guess the industry is fucked. Every FPS from here on out needs to be more like COD.
He criticizes it for being like COD
The greatest praise and strongest criticism I can level at Halo 4 is that it sure is Halo.
He actually critisizes the MP for being like COD.
I didn't want to have a huge ass post quoting it so have it in image form instead: http://i.minus.com/i2TTAkeFWO4Wt.jpgCan someone just post the full review here so that site doesn't get the hits it's obviously fishing for?
Damned if you do, Damned if you don't.He criticizes it for being like COD
I don't think he has played a lot of Call of Duty because this plays nothing like CoD, yeah some stuff has influenced Halo 4 but it plays NOTHING like Call of Duty.
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 really is the best multiplayer shooter on console right now. It's not changing the landscape of shooters - it's honing it to its sharpest point. It's a no-brainer purchase for console gamers, and there's very little to complain about regarding it.
Overall, MW3 exhibits remarkable maturity, and it will deliver it to an audience renowned for its immaturity. There's a chance it might even be a good thing for video games culture. Whether it is or not doesn't matter though - it's a great ride and a fantastic ending to the series.
He criticizes it for being like COD
Overall, MW3 exhibits remarkable maturity
Wtf, its like he never played games before cod, is he like thirteen or something. Halo being a halo game but in the same review he moans its trying to be something else, how does this person review games.
So it gets shit on for not being enough like COD, then gets shit on for being too much like COD, lol.
COD pretty much ruined this generation. Almost all games now try to cater to the COD crowd.
I'm not saying Halo would benefit from iron sights, but I'm saying it's silly to berate a guy who reviews games for a living because I think it may. If he thinks that Halo's gameplay is old, then let him say it. Having these silly, childish backlashes against these guys only goes to solidify the various stereotypes of forums, especially gaming forums, that even the prestigious and usually well respected Neogaf isn't above. The only reason these guys don't respond to say Gamefaqs posts is that they're usually completely disregarded and ignored because they're just another video game forum that has all the usual problems.
I'm not saying it's wrong to voice disagreement with the review, but to call him out, so to speak, and say that he's a joke or lacks credibility because he, or the site gave some other game in the same genre a higher score is an absolute joke. It's a joke that people are so enamored with these franchises that they can't consider that it's just some guy with his own views reviewing this thing. I mean it's basically the whole "anonymity+audience=asshole" type of thing that the internet (especially forums) has been famous for, but it's still childish.
Including Halo 4
imagine if the situation was reversed and COD was forced to copy from Halo how much better the industry would have been