Halo 4 Review

[RadioactiveMicrobe]

Really? 10 hours for a single player game? Are the devs just not putting in any effort for games these days?

10 hours at the very max. Many people I know who got the leaked beat it in 6.

I played it, it's really nothing special. The single player plot leaves much to be desired, and while they at least tried new things with multiplayer, it deviates too much for the core "teamwork beats all" aspect of Halo.

 

[Patathatapon]

I just looked at the score of a Machinima review because I was too busy to read and saw it got 10/10. I thought "Wow, I'm pretty sure they said that about 2 and 3, and they were shit" (well Halo 3 wasn't that bad but it wasn't as good as the first).

 

[Jezzascmezza]

Music and single player not up to the standards set by previous Halo games?
That's a real bummer, because with most of the Halo games I've played, the campaign and the soundtrack have been the personal highlights for me.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

10 hours at the very max. Many people I know who got the leaked beat it in 6.

I played it, it's really nothing special. The single player plot leaves much to be desired, and while they at least tried new things with multiplayer, it deviates too much for the core "teamwork beats all" aspect of Halo.

It's Homefront all over again.

The story had a lot of potential. Seems like they are making a multiplayer game with single player shoe horned in. It'd have been better to split the game and have a team for both, that way you get two quality products.

 

[Korten12]

10 hours at the very max. Many people I know who got the leaked beat it in 6.

I played it, it's really nothing special. The single player plot leaves much to be desired, and while they at least tried new things with multiplayer, it deviates too much for the core "teamwork beats all" aspect of Halo.

It's Homefront all over again.

The story had a lot of potential. Seems like they are making a multiplayer game with single player shoe horned in. It'd have been better to split the game and have a team for both, that way you get two quality products.

Honestly, I have heard people who played it on Reddit said it's only 6 hours if you literally rush through it completely. Everyone who doesn't just play it to finish it says it takes them longer, Halo usually can be completed very fast. Hell if you wanted to you can beat Anniversary in 1 hour without any glitches.

 

[Erttheking]

10 hours at the very max. Many people I know who got the leaked beat it in 6.

I played it, it's really nothing special. The single player plot leaves much to be desired, and while they at least tried new things with multiplayer, it deviates too much for the core "teamwork beats all" aspect of Halo.

It's Homefront all over again.

The story had a lot of potential. Seems like they are making a multiplayer game with single player shoe horned in. It'd have been better to split the game and have a team for both, that way you get two quality products.

Honestly, I have heard people who played it on Reddit said it's only 6 hours if you literally rush through it completely. Everyone who doesn't just play it to finish it says it takes them longer, Halo usually can be completed very fast. Hell if you wanted to you can beat Anniversary in 1 hour without any glitches.

One hour might be pushing it a little, but I ddi search around out of curiosity and I did manage to find one guy who beat Anniversary in 5 hours.

 

[RadioactiveMicrobe]

10 hours at the very max. Many people I know who got the leaked beat it in 6.

I played it, it's really nothing special. The single player plot leaves much to be desired, and while they at least tried new things with multiplayer, it deviates too much for the core "teamwork beats all" aspect of Halo.

It's Homefront all over again.

The story had a lot of potential. Seems like they are making a multiplayer game with single player shoe horned in. It'd have been better to split the game and have a team for both, that way you get two quality products.

Honestly, I have heard people who played it on Reddit said it's only 6 hours if you literally rush through it completely. Everyone who doesn't just play it to finish it says it takes them longer, Halo usually can be completed very fast. Hell if you wanted to you can beat Anniversary in 1 hour without any glitches.

From the people I've talked to, 6-8 is the time. 6 is on the low end, and 8 is just playing through it normally.

Either way, not a fan. Huge Halo fanboy here, and I knew it'd be subpar, but I wasn't going to say it for lack of trying.

 

[Korten12]

10 hours at the very max. Many people I know who got the leaked beat it in 6.

I played it, it's really nothing special. The single player plot leaves much to be desired, and while they at least tried new things with multiplayer, it deviates too much for the core "teamwork beats all" aspect of Halo.

It's Homefront all over again.

The story had a lot of potential. Seems like they are making a multiplayer game with single player shoe horned in. It'd have been better to split the game and have a team for both, that way you get two quality products.

Honestly, I have heard people who played it on Reddit said it's only 6 hours if you literally rush through it completely. Everyone who doesn't just play it to finish it says it takes them longer, Halo usually can be completed very fast. Hell if you wanted to you can beat Anniversary in 1 hour without any glitches.

From the people I've talked to, 6-8 is the time. 6 is on the low end, and 8 is just playing through it normally.

Either way, not a fan. Huge Halo fanboy here, and I knew it'd be subpar, but I wasn't going to say it for lack of trying.

On Normal? So Legendary can take quite a bit longer. Also how does it now equal quanity = Quality? The game seems to be the same length as other Halo games, and I don't see how the length determines quality.

 

[Erttheking]

10 hours at the very max. Many people I know who got the leaked beat it in 6.

I played it, it's really nothing special. The single player plot leaves much to be desired, and while they at least tried new things with multiplayer, it deviates too much for the core "teamwork beats all" aspect of Halo.

It's Homefront all over again.

The story had a lot of potential. Seems like they are making a multiplayer game with single player shoe horned in. It'd have been better to split the game and have a team for both, that way you get two quality products.

Honestly, I have heard people who played it on Reddit said it's only 6 hours if you literally rush through it completely. Everyone who doesn't just play it to finish it says it takes them longer, Halo usually can be completed very fast. Hell if you wanted to you can beat Anniversary in 1 hour without any glitches.

From the people I've talked to, 6-8 is the time. 6 is on the low end, and 8 is just playing through it normally.

Either way, not a fan. Huge Halo fanboy here, and I knew it'd be subpar, but I wasn't going to say it for lack of trying.

On Normal? So Legendary can take quite a bit longer. Also how does it now equal quanity = Quality? The game seems to be the same length as other Halo games, and I don't see how the length determines quality.

Don't forget that we have Spartan Ops too, they say that it's actually longer than ODST.

 

[remnant_phoenix]

Typical of the escapist to hate Halo and attack every little flaw in the game. Your getting payed by Activision to say cod is better. You guys give dishonored and assassins creed better scores and every other review site gives Halo is better than both.

The Escapist reviews are crap, and the only thing that runs this site is zero and jim the rest of you guys should resign.

Oh boy... Here we go...

Also how is 4/5 bad?

Oh look, people are getting disappointed it was only 4/5.

May I recommend some insightful reference material?

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/4966-Hate-Out-Of-Ten

 

[Sergey Sund]

I liked this review because it is very balanced.
Other reviews I have seen have hailed Halo like it signified the reaching of some form of plateau on the mountain of gaming.
This positive, but nevertheless critical review sounds much more honest and has actually had greater appeal to me - aka increased the likelyhood that I will buy this game - than those other AAA+ reviews.
I get that 343 industries cannot afford to fail with this and so pressure on all press outlets is high to give the game a good review (or forever fuck up with the publisher/developer) but in the longrun this way of open criticising "the little things" that are wrong with a game will give you greater credebility and make the reviews on this website that much more worth in advertisement.
While I leave other magazines and sites unsure whether or not I can trust the 10/10 rating the game has got (together with 3 other AAA games) your websites provides me with valuable information that I feel I can trust and this furthers my relationship with both you and the games you really promote.
If I was a company I would value this honesty of yours, because it means that a B from you is worth much more than an A+ from some yay-sayer on the other end of the web.
Cheers.

 

[Rad Party God]

Great review, although I'm dissapointed that Michael Salvatori isn't making the soundtrack this time around (read, MASSIVE dissapointment), the game still looks like lots of fun, as for the story, I don't think it'll be any worse than Halo 2 (yup, that game had a campaign).

 

[Simonoly]

Typical of the escapist to hate Halo and attack every little flaw in the game. Your getting payed by Activision to say cod is better. You guys give dishonored and assassins creed better scores and every other review site gives Halo is better than both.

The Escapist reviews are crap, and the only thing that runs this site is zero and jim the rest of you guys should resign.

Oh boy... Here we go...

Also how is 4/5 bad?

Oh look, people are getting disappointed it was only 4/5.

May I recommend some insightful reference material?

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/4966-Hate-Out-Of-Ten

Oh you should take a glance over the comments section accompanying the EGM review. It's like feeding time at the zoo.

 

[Woodsey]

You shouldn't have to read any book.

I can't believe it took 30 posts or so to state the bloody obvious. If your plot requires the player to go to a different medium to be properly explained then you are a bad storyteller and your game has bad storytelling.

 

[Myndnix]

Oh. The single player content is lacking? Then I may think twice about this game. I don't play games for multiplayer.

 

[wooty]

To be honest, after boosting myself up properly for the massive letdown that was Halo 3 and ODST.........I'm not going anywhere near this one at all.

I'm just going to stay in my little bubble and troll the shit out of my "supa-dupaHaloobsessed andtattooedfriends" for the week. Its what keeps me going through work.

 

[jollybarracuda]

As far as I'm concerned Reach is non-canon, and so long as Halo 4 doesn't follow on from how things were handled in Reach that is actually possible.

Really? I would assume that people would consider the books non-canon since Bungie is kinda like, the creators of the games and their stories, while the books, I'd imagine, were just outsourced to a publishing company? I guess that's just the pitfall of having a franchise branch out into other forms of media, everyone has their own take on it.

Anyways, it's too bad that this Halo, while being regarded as a good game in it's scores, the actual content of the reviews all seem to be suggesting that it isnt quite up to standard. The biggest disappointment being that 343 didn't take any risks. I mean, this could have been a whole new world, with new enemies, allies, and lore. But it's looking like the same old Human vs. Covenant fight we've seen four times already.

 

[Reginald]

How much replay value is there in this game,exactly? Could you play through the campaign at least four times without getting bored?

You shouldn't have to read any book.

I can't believe it took 30 posts or so to state the bloody obvious. If your plot requires the player to go to a different medium to be properly explained then you are a bad storyteller and your game has bad storytelling.

It's bloody odd that the writers would assume everyone who'll play this is that into Halo.

 

[Shocksplicer]

As far as I'm concerned Reach is non-canon, and so long as Halo 4 doesn't follow on from how things were handled in Reach that is actually possible.

Really? I would assume that people would consider the books non-canon since Bungie is kinda like, the creators of the games and their stories, while the books, I'd imagine, were just outsourced to a publishing company? I guess that's just the pitfall of having a franchise branch out into other forms of media, everyone has their own take on it.

Anyways, it's too bad that this Halo, while being regarded as a good game in it's scores, the actual content of the reviews all seem to be suggesting that it isnt quite up to standard. The biggest disappointment being that 343 didn't take any risks. I mean, this could have been a whole new world, with new enemies, allies, and lore. But it's looking like the same old Human vs. Covenant fight we've seen four times already.

The reason I want Reach to be non-canon is because all the books rely on each other, and Halo 4 relies on the books. Nothing relies on Reach. So if Reach was made non-canon it would only affect Reach. If Reach is canon it really muddies the waters of the canon established in the books, and extends to Halo 4. Also, the version of events portrayed in Reach was crap.

Also, as for your comments about 343 taking no risks: It takes place on a whole new world. It features new enemies. It almost certainly features new allies. It features loads of new lore.

 

[jollybarracuda]

Also, as for your comments about 343 taking no risks: It takes place on a whole new world. It features new enemies. It almost certainly features new allies. It features loads of new lore.

My statement was based off some reviews that I'd seen so far for it, first being:

"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."
-Jeff Gerstmann (GiantBomb)

And second being looking at the Escapist video review. I counted about 2 or 3 times where the Prometheans were actually shown fighting, most of it is just the Covenant.

So while yes, Halo 4 does take place on a new planet, with a new alien species, it doesn't appear to really make much use of it, simply using it all as a backdrop for another Humans vs. Covenant squabble.

Maybe i'm just reading too much between the lines, but as much as i love the Halo franchise, I can say i'm a bit skeptical about how this will be sitting with me come release.