Halo 4 gets a 2/10...

[RedDeadFred]

Ok so recently there was a post that pointed out a review of Halo 4 which criticized the game for not having iron sights and not being linear enough. The reviewer gave the game a 7/10 which isn't a bad score, it's just that his complaints seemed ridiculous (my opinion, yours may differ).

Now this reviewer http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/2012/11/04/halo-4-is-half-the-game-it-should-be/ has given Halo 4 a 2/10. Which in my mind means the game pretty much has to be broken but he doesn't say anything about it not working. These seem to be his primary reasons for the 2/10 score:
Too much like the past Halo games

Not enough like the past Halo games (yes I'm aware that these first two contradict each other)

You don't get to fire the big gun on the Mammoth

Enemies are Tron like

No scoring system in single-player (I agree with him on this, that's what made Halo 3's campaign so replayable)

AI's having a lifespan

The story is slow, sentimental and too serious

A 2/10 score really stands out on Metacritic so my review will get more traffic (oh wait, that's my assumption not his written reasoning)

Anyway, what do my fellow Escapists think about the review. I myself got a bit of a laugh out of it but a lot of the things he was criticizing I don't personally think are all that bad. I'm not going to get the game anyway because I've only ever really cared about the campaigns in Halo games but I'll definitely rent it.

 

[White Lightning]

I haven't played it yet, but to be honest it's a Halo game I mean... what else is there to say? Everyone and their mum knows what it's going to be like, so I don't see why people are even bothering to read the reviews.

 

[RedDeadFred]

I haven't played it yet, but to be honest it's a Halo game I mean... what else is there to say? Everyone and their mum knows what it's going to be like, so I don't see why people are even bothering to read the reviews.

Normally I'd agree with this but seeing as it's a new studio, people don't really know how much of a Halo game it's going to be.

 

[Pandabearparade]

A 2/10? Unless it's broken that's just trolling for hits.

 

[Deadlywere]

Well, this is a guy that hated the original Deus Ex, or so the comments and his other posts say.

 

[Nouw]

Hmm, that's rather odd. Halo:Reach had scoring in the campaign as well I believe, yet I wonder why they took out scoring in Halo 4. Yes I am aware Bungie made Reach but it still makes no sense to go backwards and remove it. It's like taking out Elites in Multiplayer, what is the point?

 

[TakeshiLive]

Can you give an example of a game this critic rates highly? It might show something about their standards and expectations

 

[GamingAwesome1]

Sounds like he just found the game pretty boring and not fun to play. Fair enough reason to give it 1 star, the rating scale is also fairly idiosyncratic, a 1 star communicates "broken game" to you while it probably just means "I did not get any enjoyment out of this whatsoever" to this guy. Maybe he just rates harshly or whatever, I really don't see why we get up in arms over arbitrary numbers that loosely correlate to how much someone liked a thing, a rating scale like that is incredibly open to interpretation.

Really now, I'm bored of this needless shitstorm over what people think about a videogame. So, they have a controversial opinion, so bloody what? This happened last time as well where people started crying "no credibility" at a reviewer just for having an opinion that differentiated from what people expected Halo 4 to get. Shameful behaviour, really.

 

[The Rookie Gamer]

Sounds like he just found the game pretty boring and not fun to play. Fair enough reason to give it 1 star, the rating scale is also fairly idiosyncratic, a 1 star communicates "broken game" to you while it probably just means "I did not get any enjoyment out of this whatsoever" to this guy. Maybe he just rates harshly or whatever, I really don't see why we get up in arms over arbitrary numbers that loosely correlate to how much someone liked a thing, a rating scale like that is incredibly open to interpretation.

Really now, I'm bored of this needless shitstorm over what people think about a videogame. So, they have a controversial opinion, so bloody what? This happened last time as well where people started crying "no credibility" at a reviewer just for having an opinion that differentiated from what people expected Halo 4 to get. Shameful behaviour, really.

Generally, I thought 4 or below meant that the game was broken, like massive glitches and buggy controls, while 5 meant mediocrity, but the game works mechanically. I agree that people having massive fits over reviews and Metacritic scores is making a planetary obelisk of doom out of a molehill.

 

[Eddie the head]

Can you give an example of a game this critic rates highly? It might show something about their standards and expectations

Well he has a top 10 games of 2012 so far list. It was made in July but, if that's what your looking for.

http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/2012/07/03/the-best-games-of-2012-so-far/

 

[RedDeadFred]

Sounds like he just found the game pretty boring and not fun to play. Fair enough reason to give it 1 star, the rating scale is also fairly idiosyncratic, a 1 star communicates "broken game" to you while it probably just means "I did not get any enjoyment out of this whatsoever" to this guy. Maybe he just rates harshly or whatever, I really don't see why we get up in arms over arbitrary numbers that loosely correlate to how much someone liked a thing, a rating scale like that is incredibly open to interpretation.

Really now, I'm bored of this needless shitstorm over what people think about a videogame. So, they have a controversial opinion, so bloody what? This happened last time as well where people started crying "no credibility" at a reviewer just for having an opinion that differentiated from what people expected Halo 4 to get. Shameful behaviour, really.

I normally would agree with this but he blatantly contradicts himself in the review and it really just seems like he's grasping at straws. Seriously, he devotes a whole paragraph to complaining about AI's having a lifespan... I'll give you an example of how he contradicts himself, he says that it feels like the new enemies are too similar to the old ones (just orange instead of blue) but then he complains about them not including the Flood.

Also, if you're bored of people discussing other people's opinions, you should probably avoid forums considering that's a pretty common occurrence. Also, how is this a shit storm. I see no angry comments. I'm asking people for their opinions. Don't get me wrong, I think your first paragraph makes some genuinely good points and this could very well be the case with the reviewer but your second paragraph is basically you insulting everyone who doesn't agree with you. So ya, others and I may be slamming this guy's opinion a bit but you're doing just the same. The only difference is that we're slamming a controversial opinion and you're slamming a more common opinion.

 

[The Rookie Gamer]

Can you give an example of a game this critic rates highly? It might show something about their standards and expectations

Well he has a top 10 games of 2012 so far list. It was made in July but, if that's what your looking for.

http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/2012/07/03/the-best-games-of-2012-so-far/

And he needs to tone down his pretentious writing. My spleen ruptured from reading the last entry.

 

[xshadowscreamx]

no game deserves 2/10.. well im sure is a few but not this one.

 

[Imperius]

It's his opinion and he's entitled to it. Still, personally I would have to hate a game pretty bad to give it a 2/10 but that's just me.

Also, AI having a lifespan has been ALL over the expanded universe for years now, the Halo games are finally catching up to that little segment of lore, so that complaint is pretty much invalid.

 

[Batou667]

A 2/10 score really stands out on Metacritic so my review will get more traffic (oh wait, that's my assumption not his written reasoning)

No, you're quite right. This reviewer is clearly just fishing for controversy to make a name for himself. It's a pretty childish act of iconoclasm and not nearly as impressive as he probably thinks it is.

Edge gave Halo 4 an 8, having given the previous five main games a 10, 9, 10, 9, 9 respectively (I think) and to my mind that speaks volumes more than some biased troll review that criticises the lack of innovation and simultaneously moans about anything that's changed since Halo 3/Reach/CE.

 

[4RM3D]

Oh gee, 1 reviewer gives a game a bad score. The end of the world is near!

I don't look at game reviews anymore; I haven't for years. Because the reviewers can not be trusted. There are mostly unprofessional, biased and sometimes even corrupt. There are a few exceptions, mostly the independent reviewers, e.g. hobbyist.

 

[Erttheking]

The review seems rather...for lack of a better word, unprofessional. He gets way too worked up over the inability to shoot a single gun and seems to get worked up over rather trivial things. Oh and yes A.I.s have lifespans, this is a thing. This isn't something 343 pulled out of their rears, A.I. decay and rampancy have been a part of the Halo universe for years now. Just a nitpick with that nitpick (lol). Also I'm just as freaked out by the comments that argue that Halo is bad because it's been getting bad reviews. The reviews in question? 8s...they're saying it's bad because it's getting 8s...I'm out.

 

[wooty]

While I'm no longer a fan of the Halo series, even a 2/10 seems harsh. A 5/10 would suffice for this series as it currently stands as from what I've heard from people......its not changed much. Someone told me that it was practically Halo 3 with re-skinned enemies and a few extra colours.

(Note: This is just what I've heard from a few sources, I don't need people chasing me with torches, pitchforks and trays of cupcakes.)

There doesnt even seem to be much fanfare for this one too, I was barely aware it was even being released until I saw the review for it slide along the top of the homepage.

 

[Psychedelic Spartan]

First off, the reviewer is entitled to his opinion, but he seemed to used Yahtzee's reviewing style, but in a serious manner. To me it looked like his only problems were lack of new scenery and that lack of firing the big ass gun on the mammoth. Okay, admittedly, I'm kind of disappointed that when I get to the mission with the mammoth, I won't get to see any big ass guns, but it's not the end of the world. And as for the scenery? That's not really something that one needs to get too concerned about unless 343 is literally copy pasting levels from previous Halo games. I really think that that dude needs to lighten up about it.