Try our new beta! Click here
Submitted by YipMan 1122d ago | news

EGM reviewer responds to criticism of Halo 4 on NeoGAF (gaming forum)

EGM reviewer,Brandon Justice, defends his stance on his review of Halo 4. (Culture, Dev, Halo 4, Industry, Tech, Xbox, Xbox 360)

« 1 2 »
Abash  +   1122d ago
Many big review sites have given a score to a game that people disagree with, people suck it up and get on with their lives. It is pathetic that people are attacking and harassing the reviewer over giving Halo 4 a 7/10
JANF  +   1122d ago
most people are not attacking and harassing the reviewer because of the score but beacuse of the content of the review. The reviewer wrote the review based on his preferences and if you read the review he basically bashed on the game for been more like the other Halos and less like COD.
NewMonday  +   1122d ago
it's not like he gave the game 4/10, 7/10 is a good score , and he backs up his opinion with detail.
Septic  +   1122d ago | Well said
He clearly didn't assess the game on its own merits and instead let his personal musings influence what is supposed to be an objective review. The way he tries to justify his point regarding ironsights with his point about the addition of the controller scheme goes to show how little credibility he has in that regard.

Still, it's obvious that he is in the minority when it comes to his views. He tries to make it seem as if he has a noble goal on mind with his criticism. We'll judge for ourselves whether or not the game deserves its critical acclaim.
RBLAZE1988  +   1122d ago
yea he reviewed it based on his preference and universal fps standards and you halo fans tear him up based on your standards that you don't want to break from? who's the bigger a-hole here? many halo fans are so blind to their own knee-jerk fanboy reactions but when it has to do with any other fps they bag it for not being like halo lol which is all this reviewer is comparing halo 4 too. you guys are also blind that halo had essentially been the same game structure wise since halo CE. And it has gotten a pass from gamers and most reviewers just like COD had while other games without the same brand recognition get crucified for the same reasons that they don't innovate. I've been tied of this stupid trend because gamers and the industry are giving mixed signals to game developers and those game developers are creating games that fail because of it which is terrible because creating a game is such a risk. I wish gaming went back to the days when the internet was just dial up and not add much visit was being communicated to gamers and the industry because it was worth more then than it is now
STONEY4  +   1122d ago | Well said
He complained that the game didn't have iron sights and scripted moements. This sums up the reviewers thoughts in a nutshell.

And the same reviewer gave Resident Evil 6 a 9.5.


People here are exaggerating about "harassment" of the reviewer too. I looked at the previous pages of the thread. Anyone talking about the review is pointing out how bad most of his points are, making jokes, or being all "What did I just read?", not insulting him. I think excessive harassment and threats are bannable on GAF anyways.
#1.1.4 (Edited 1122d ago ) | Agree(51) | Disagree(9) | Report
MikeMyers  +   1122d ago
It's just one review. There always seem to be that one or two reviews out there for any popular game that gets way too much attention.

If people rely on reviews to base their purchases my suggestion is to read a bunch of reviews and see what is the common denominator. In the case of Halo 4 it seems by far and wide that most critics think it's a great game.

When we focus too much on those one or two reviews we give those reviews more power than they deserve. Ever notice how Jim Sterling from Destructoid has a habit of reviewing big games and at the same time often causes controversy? He knows the power of influence and how to tap into this media frenzy.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Not everyone loves Halo or Zelda or Mario games, that's just how life is. You also have to consider that those big franchises will also have critics out there that will dissect those games more than your average ones. At one end of the scale you have people raving Halo 4 is a great game before even trying it, and at the other end of the scale you have people who are very eager to go to Metacritic and write down very low scores for the next Call of Duty game before even playing it as well. The bigger the game the more some people want to draw attention to it, either negatively or positively. That's the world we live in.
#1.1.5 (Edited 1122d ago ) | Agree(8) | Disagree(3) | Report
wastedcells  +   1122d ago
It doesn't have iron sights I kinda don't like that either. NoT saying I agree with the review but how do u get headshots.
Danniel1  +   1122d ago
Reviews are meant to be the sum of a persons opinion. Objectivity is impossible and for the most part isn't the point or particularly helpful. I've played many games that are technically outstanding that I didn't enjoy such as Mass Effect 2, being told objectively what that game is capable of doesn't show my real opinion of the game.
CuddlyREDRUM  +   1122d ago
I could only read "butthurt fanboy" in your post.

If you want a glowing review for popular games just go to IGN.
dragonrage00  +   1121d ago
You get headshots by actually aiming for the head and pressing the trigger
the pro gamer   1121d ago | Spam
EVILDEAD360  +   1121d ago
LMAO @ this response backfiring.

GAF ate him alive and literally exposed his complete ignorance to the Halo franchise.

He wrote..

'And since folks are so bent out of shape about my comment on iron sights, I'll elaborate a bit here, too. However, several of the key guns don't offer sight-focused views, meaning that you use your binoculars and immediately jump out to the standard viewing angle upon firing. It's very jarring, and smacks as a half-assed concession to folks who want that feature in-game'

One of the responses, which is much longer hit it directly on the head what ANY Halo fan would have screamed.

'People were "bent out of shape" about your "iron sights" comment because it demonstrated a basic ignorance of the different shooting mechanics in Call of Duty and Halo--an ignorance that someone who reviews video games for a living shouldn't have. But, none of us are perfect, and some of these things may slip by someone who only casually plays the games (and at that point I would blame the editor for the poor decision of assigning such a person to review such a game).'

'You didn't make some brave step in journalism, nor did you stir some designer at 343 Industries to wake from his traditional Halo slumber. It's not even about our bias towards Halo games. Halo 4 could very well suck, and takes many, MANY cues from CoD that gives the average fan pause, to say the least. What you did was make a huge leap in logic by assuming that because Call of Duty is most popular, it is an objectively better design. Here's hoping you learn from this experience.'

Loved it...

#1.1.11 (Edited 1121d ago ) | Agree(24) | Disagree(14) | Report
Old McGroin  +   1121d ago
It's funny that Halo has it's score knocked down for not being more like COD and only a few weeks ago Resident Evil 6 received low scores for being more like COD!
deno  +   1121d ago
I completely agree with you. I don't want anything following call of duty lame duck formula. This reviewer has bad taste even though it's his personal opinion. If you can't relate to gamers then you shouldn't write reviews based on games. Gaming journalism died a while ago. Where's my Genesis at?
#1.1.13 (Edited 1121d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report
Dee_91  +   1121d ago
This article went straight to a forum post ..
He not a real journalist, its his opinion I dont care what he says
/whole situation
#1.1.14 (Edited 1121d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report
Heavenly King  +   1121d ago
It is quite obvious that a reviewer will "review" a game based on his preferences, don't you think?
BattleAxe   1121d ago | Trolling | show
TheRealSpy  +   1121d ago
The bottom line is that Halo is HUGE series and millions of people are going to play it and enjoy it til the next one comes out and no score is going to change that. It could have gotten a 1/10, i'd still give it the benefit of the doubt and likely wouldn't be disappointed.

the next 25 hours are going to be very loooong.
lastdual  +   1121d ago
He's made it clear that he doesn't like open level design, which means that he was never going to like Halo 4, as all the Halo games have been known for open "sandbox" spaces that allow for dynamic firefights.

Let's face it: Some people really prefer the more linear, scripted design of games like COD. As this reviewer puts it, having to traverse open environments and fight enemies that don't instantly die from 2-3 bullets is a "chore".

Unfortunately, there are a lot of gamers who think this way.
hardcorehippiez  +   1121d ago
if im correct didnt every site do that to warfighter? cod is the new standard like it or lump it. me personally i was duped into buying black ops but that was the last cod i bought. its terrible and im so glad i didnt waste my money on mw3. watch as blops2 gets high scores across the board even though its just more of the same. reviewers are a joke plain and simple.
SilentNegotiator  +   1121d ago
Yeah, yeah. Lay on the typical "DURR HURRR He is tah cal of dooty fan! His opinin invalidz" crap.

He criticized it for having a stale formula and not innovating enough. The same people who agreed with MOH:W reviews are now whining for the same reason. Halo fanboyism is so sickeningly strong on the internet.
#1.1.20 (Edited 1121d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(3) | Report
vishant101  +   1122d ago
A reviewer has to judge a game on what it is and not what he as a person wants it to be i.e "cod" this is halo not cod
StanLee  +   1121d ago
The minute he bent to criticism and tried to justify his review, he invalidated his own review.
MRMagoo123  +   1121d ago
If you want a reviewer to be completely without bias get a robot to review games, ppl cant control what they like and dont like with a press of a button.
MuhammadJA  +   1121d ago
So what if he reviewed it based on his preferences and opinion? He's not stopping you or anyone else from buying it. Man, lots of people are sheep these days, and only care about reviews and not thinking for themselves.
the pro gamer   1121d ago | Spam
ALLWRONG  +   1122d ago
The fact that the guy wanted Halo 4 to more like CoD is why he is getting dissed. What's funny is the CoD series actually takes a lot from Halo, like the aim mechanic, theater mode and matchmaking.

It would be like giving Uncharted 4 a 7 because it's not Gears of War enough.
TreMillz  +   1121d ago
the aim mechanic? sure about that one?
snipes101  +   1121d ago
What aim mechanic are you talking about here, exactly?
TheRealSpy  +   1121d ago
yeah, i'm not sure what you mean by aim mechanic either. COD uses iron sights, halo doesn't. unless you mean auto aim, but all console shooters have had that since before either series.
DigitalAnalog  +   1122d ago
Whether or not 7/10 is a "good" score is irrelevant. Scores practically are meaningless due to the different attributes that tally up to it depending on the reviewer. His opinion is clearly not the kind that warrants such criticism because it can be applied to ANY game REGARDLESS how well made or polished it is simply because they don't "agree" to it's mechanics.

Secondly, too many people keep defending reviews (usually when it is negative to the opposite camp) and then give them benefit of the doubt with "opinion" rights. If that was the case any editor that would want to bring down the score will send the worst possible reviewer for that game and it would be accepted regardless. Doesn't exactly make the XX score is "good" argument a valid point anymore, right?
Perjoss  +   1122d ago
I agree that scores are only there for people that are too lazy to read. How many times have I read a review that was very good and informative but the score did not match what the reviewer had said, its almost as if the reviews put the score there because they are forced to.

Personally I wish they would remove all scores from reviews so that more people would actually read instead of looking at a single number.
#1.4.1 (Edited 1122d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(4) | Report
Eyeco  +   1121d ago
agreed and i've said this before, on Metacritic/ Rottentomatoes a 7/10 or 70% means a damn good Movie or Album but in the videogame world it's a piece of sh!t and isn't worth the time of day, why is that ? in fact I remember 10 years ago a 7/10 meant "this is a great game if you love the genre it's worth picking up" a 6/10 was a rental , now for some reason a rental is an 8/10 game and everything below is avoid.

One of my favourite games this gen is Folklore and that got tons of 7's and 6's, same with Blue Dragon I really enjoyed that game but it received 5's 6's and 7's/ 10.

That and having read the article the guy gave a pretty fair statement, he pretty much said if your a fan of the series your gonna love it. Which is what a 7/10 score is, so the question is why do fans care if there gonna love the game regardless ??
#1.4.2 (Edited 1121d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(6) | Report
MRMagoo123  +   1121d ago
I remember 5/10 was supposed to be worth giving a try if you liked that style of game, most games mags that reviewed games i used to read like "Amstrad Action" said even a 4 was worth a try. I have a feeling its the reviewers fault this happened because every "popular" game gets a 9/10 most times and ppl just expect every game they like to get the same.Like i said yesterday reviews should not have scores at all anymore they are worthless.
NewMonday  +   1121d ago
very true about the unstable scoring system today, lots of games I don't like get 9's and other games I like get 7's, scores don't give me the information i need.

reading game reviews these days and getting what you need to know is like codebreaking, for example I look for "convoluted story", something that I like but is listed usually as a negative, it's like the complaint of this EGM reviewer about "open environments", someone who likes them could adjust it as a positive in the overview of the review.
#1.4.4 (Edited 1121d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report
aviator189  +   1122d ago
the reviewer over at egm gave halo 4 a 7.0 for all the wrong reasons. basically, he wanted a carbon copy of a call of duty game- iron sights, michael bay-esque cliche moments, small environments, etc.

I wouldn't have minded if he gave halo 4 a 7.0, but the reasons he came up with are just frustratingly ridiculous.
#1.5 (Edited 1122d ago ) | Agree(34) | Disagree(7) | Report | Reply
Knight_Crawler  +   1122d ago
Did you even read his review...the dude wrote it with the mind set that he is not a Halo fan.

Bias has no place in reviewers hearts and this dude should have told his editor that he will not review H4 fairly so get someone else to do it.

I am glad that he is getting called out for it, he wanted to generate hits now he has them - Do not start fires that you can not put out.

The Call of Duty influence is now infesting our reviewers SMH - according to this guy next gen all FPS have to be clones of Call of Duty or get bad scores.
#1.6 (Edited 1122d ago ) | Agree(22) | Disagree(11) | Report | Reply
axshen  +   1122d ago
I would rather a nice mix of Halo fans and non-Halo fans review it than just people who absolutely love the series. If you're reading reviews to decide if you're going to buy a game or not, wouldn't you want views from different perspectives?

People are so quick to forget that the "CoD influence" is what used to be the Halo influence a a few years back.

And 7/10 is not a bad score. Cmon son.
MRMagoo123  +   1121d ago
The only way to get reviews without bias is either employing the borg or robots, everyone has different tastes and cant look at things with complete neutrality no matter how hard they try it is impossible.
memots  +   1121d ago
So to review a game you 100% have to be a fan of the series or your opinion is invalid ?
#1.6.3 (Edited 1121d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(4) | Report
Syntax-Error  +   1121d ago
A halo fan would be more objective about his beloved franchise. He wont praise a game that underachieves. The only people critics that review Madden are Madden fans. You don't give it to a guy that prefers FIFA. If you are a die hard CoD fan and you get to review Black Ops 2 that sucked in your opinion, you would say it sucked and not praise it for what it's done right
memots  +   1121d ago
So since your a fan wouldn't that be bias positively towards it ?

This is crazy.. Bias will always be there.

I don't like olives and love bacon so do you think i would like a veggy pizza or all meat ?
#1.6.5 (Edited 1121d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
Irishguy95  +   1122d ago
Don't be stupid, read his response, see how VERY wrong he is. To give Halo iron sights is to ruin halo's gameplay. Halo has weapons balanced out for Close medium long range. THe reviewer wants that to change, ie - Ruin/cod up Halo

Now...EGM sucks major dick anyway, they hired Hiphopgamer for ****s sake. The master of BS.
otherZinc  +   1122d ago
People need to read this guys review, then they'd understand the criticism hes earned.

GM created the Cadillac Escalade. It didn't come with the disclaimer:
Go here go there,
Drive here drive there,
Don't drive off road,
Use this as Luxury,
Don't put the baseball, basketball, softball teams in it,
No, you can use this Sports Utility Vehicle as you wish!
THIS is Halo, its a sandbox game that doesnt lead you by the Nose!

The reviewer wants Halo to turn into a scripted set piece experience:
Take that guy out
Take the shot
Go here
Go there
Go Go Go!
Go over there...No, go over there, now!
Take the Heli out, No, not with that but with that glowing RPG...yeah I know you can take the Heli out with that but We (the game) scripted you to hit it with this & the Heli is going to circle in the same pattern over & over again & we'll (the game) hold everyting up until you hit that Heli, then we'll allow you to progress!

The reviewer wants Halo to regress not progress! See, we've had scripted games in the 70's, 80's, 90's...its 2012:
Let us play the game the way we want(Cadillac Escalade: GM made it capable of many things, use it as you wish), not the "movie game" youre telling us to play!
#1.8 (Edited 1122d ago ) | Agree(13) | Disagree(6) | Report | Reply
TekoIie  +   1121d ago
Scripted scenes = cutscenes.

So I find it hard to see how he can complain about the lack of scripted scenes...
dillydadally  +   1122d ago
The core issue here isn't the score or even that he has a different opinion than most. Its that they chose someone to review the game that obviously doesn't even begin to understand Halo and its gameplay. It's the same reason people got upset at Ebert for saying games aren't art. Its obvious from Ebert's comments that he doesn't play games, doesn't understand why them, and is thus completely unqualified to make a comment on them. Likewise, Its obvious from this reviewers comments that he doesn't play Halo, doesn't understand the game, its systems or why people play it, and is thus completely unqualified to make a comment on it, let alone review it.

It would be like giving Diablo 3 a low review score because the game gives you tons of loot, instead of just one or two swords like Zelda. Or like bashing StarCraft for requiring too much strategy, or bashing Grand Theft Auto for not having a linear, mission based campaign. Understand now why people are upset with the review?
Jinkies  +   1122d ago
Wouldn't you think people would be going on about that 5/10 score Halo 4 got instead of the 7/10 one.

Seems silly to me
Jinkies  +   1121d ago
Disagrees really.

Oh for the love of god guys, come on, it makes more sense to be p***** off at a lower score then a 7/10 which isn't that bad

Go take your anger out on that review, thats the one which deserves it
Norrison  +   1121d ago
People aren't hating on the score, they're hating on the review itself, this guy wanted halo to be another COD clone and lowered it's score because of stupid reasons like not having iron sights.
CalvinKlein  +   1121d ago
eyah right, you sony fanboys would be crying like little school girls if someone gave a ps3 exclusive like uncharted 3 a loe review.

Waht happens when a ps3 exclusive gets below an 8? Sony fanboys attack saying "biased, paid off reviewers, there is a conspiracy against sony, American media hates sony, reviewers are morons, I think its much better and its a 9, bla bla bla."

but give a xbox exclusive below an 8 and those same cry baby ps3 fanboys are in every article defending the reviewer and the score. 'its his opinion, he has a right, bla bla bhla."

I find it funny to see so many sony fanboys defending a horrible biased review when they attack any and all legitimate reviews that dont give a ps3 exclusive(even the bad ones) over an 8.
#1.11 (Edited 1121d ago ) | Agree(14) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
TreMillz  +   1121d ago
um uncharted 3 did get a "loe" review score. clearly got a C+/A+ from some site, which spawned into the same situation Halo 4 is in, only Uncharted 3s score was worse, but by GOD a 7 and the 360 boys are ready to kill someone...
xAlmostPro  +   1121d ago
People don't understand big sites like IGN were paid to review it good. The halo 4 early review copy contract was posted online and the contract stated they weren't allowed to review it below 9.5 until after it releases..

Obviously these sites want to be the first for the traffic so it was rated highly because it had to be, his review may not have been fair however the others may not be legit..
dazreah  +   1121d ago
And that was proven fake almost after it appeared.
xAlmostPro  +   1121d ago
Proven fake by a gaming site that has no credibility
omi25p  +   1121d ago
Do the Uncharted 3 reviews ring any bells?

Like how when it was scored lower than Uncharted 2 everyone on this site started complaining saying EVERY REVIEWER was Anti Ps3 and obviously paid by Microsoft.
knifefight  +   1121d ago

I remember it well.
geddesmond  +   1121d ago
This is exactly why big sites always give big games great scores because they are afraid of the backlash. Whats funny to me is most of the people talking about the reviewers score haven't even played Halo 4 yet but there they are telling someone who has that his review is wrong. Halo fanboys. Worst fanboys of them all.
_LarZen_  +   1121d ago
Amen Abash! People have to little in their lifes when stuff like this makes them tick....I actually feel sorry for them.
StraightPath  +   1121d ago
the review should stop reviewing games awful review it was. his points are exactly the games he gave higher.
#1.16 (Edited 1121d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
Ak47Russia  +   1121d ago
Xbox fangirls cry more than PS3 fanboys.
I never seen a PS3 fanboy attack a site this much,
just for a one 7 score! LOL!

He has some good points its his opinion respect it!
ConstipatedGorilla  +   1121d ago
You realize you just trolled, right?
Norrison  +   1121d ago
Good points? Bashing Halo because it isn't another COD clone doesn't seem like a good clone to me
Gaetano  +   1121d ago
Yeah, but the review was awful.

It was basically him having a rant because the game isn't CoD.

If you can't review a game on its merits, you shouldn't be reviewing it.

Halo 4 is a great game, and its worth shouldn't be diluted by some snotty, smug douchebag reviewer that thinks he knows better than a majority of gamers.
slapedurmomsace  +   1121d ago
@ abash, completely agree. 7/10 isn't a bad score, and honestly, it's not gonna change any ones mind if they're buying the game or not. I have no problems with someone who's taste doesn't include Halo 4 being a 10/10. It's just his opinion, it's not a fact. People disagree all the time with review scores. Back when Mario 64 came out it was a 20/10 on most peoples radar, and though I did like the game, I like Crash Bandicoot more. People need to realize reviews are "guidelines" and not the end all be all.
wong3233  +   1121d ago
Attacking and harassing a reviewer or anyone for that matter is never in the right.

However, judged as a journalist I believe this EGM reviewer is at fault- if his track record proves to be as inconsistent as some have suggested then I think letting him go is something his employer should seriously consider.

His fault is that 1) He is a journalist for a major publication in the industry, and is therefore held to not just to a higher review standard, but higher journalistic standard. 2) To my understanding this "journalist standard" is a complex balance of the writer's opinion and objective presumed reaction from the potential audience. This reviewer has a good critical eye, but based on his peers' consensus on the same title, is not being OBJECTIVE- he failed to create the correct balance.

Let me digress- one strike out does not deserve any serious repercussions (from either EGM or the community). That does not change the fact that this review was a "strike out". No attacking, no harassing, simply stating my opinion (not fact). BTW please don't hold me to a journalist standard, just the N4G thread one is ok-
BinaryMind  +   1121d ago
He shouldn't have to respond to criticism in length. The review should have already explained himself.
indubitably  +   1121d ago
It is just hard to believe that a reviewer could think that Halo 4 falls right under Brink and right above the Game of Thrones game. He is an embarrassment to the industry and has made a mockery of himself on twitter.
Abdou23  +   1121d ago
Gamers are the number 1 reason why the gaming industry is taking a turns to the worst year after year.
yeah0kchief   1121d ago | Spam
wishingW3L  +   1122d ago
this whole thing it's so embarrassing....
#2 (Edited 1122d ago ) | Agree(31) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
ALLWRONG  +   1122d ago
For the reviewer yeah. I bet he feels like the last guy picked for dodge ball.
#2.1 (Edited 1122d ago ) | Agree(24) | Disagree(21) | Report | Reply
Jinkies  +   1122d ago
He got picked last because he couldn't even dodge a wrench.
JANF  +   1122d ago
"That being said, the campaign was essentially:

1.) OMGZ!! We're under attack/have to escape/have to stop so and so.
2.) Go blow up that shield generator/push that button/ kill a bunch of dudes!
3.) Now run back through the level and kill even more of the same 8 dudes!"

really? and how is this different to COD, a game the reviewer was praising.
Old McGroin  +   1122d ago
EXACTLY. Now, we all know this guy didn't review Modern Warfare 3, but his view reflects EGM as a whole. Modern Warfare 3 received a 9 even though it is majorly guilty of numbers 1, 2 and 3 quoted by JANF above.
1.) OMGZ!! We're under attack/have to escape/have to stop so and so. - Uhh yeah, it's a first person SHOOTER, what was he expecting, Halo Table Tennis?
2.) Go blow up that shield generator/push that button/ kill a bunch of dudes! - Every FPS game has these objectives. They all involve shooting a lot of people to get to a certain point where you activate an objective. Again, what the hell was he expecting?
3.) Now run back through the level and kill even more of the same 8 dudes!" - 8 dudes is a lot more variety than offered by COD, and I don't care what he has said since the review went live, it's very clear he's a COD head going by the comments he makes in the review. It's very easy to type "I'm not a COD head" afterwards, he's already nailed his flag to the pole.

I wouldn't be bothered by the score of 7, that's a solid score, it's the content of his review that bothers me. It's so damn obvious that he wants Halo to be COD and because it's not he rates it down. Very unprofessional.
Arcanine  +   1122d ago
Yea but it doesnt take alot of ammo to take out one creature or person and its cod is smoother. Like it or not
Old McGroin  +   1121d ago
Huh? Its cod is smoother? I'm intrigued by this statement...

I'm not sure if you're serious or not! The whole "it doesn't take alot of ammo to take out one creature or person" criticism is bullcr@p when you consider one bullet to the head will kill most enemies in nearly every FPS out there.
Knight_Crawler  +   1122d ago
@JANF - That statement alone was a very ignorant and childish thing for him to say.

How old is this guy and how long has he been reviewing games?

He deserves all the backlash that he is getting and hopes he now sees that you simply do not write a review based only on your liking but have to consider that your review a game on behalf of a very large community.

Sure he does not like large open world arena battles but a large majority of Halo players including me like large arena battles and not everyone likes the small COD map style.
#3.2 (Edited 1122d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
SpecialK  +   1122d ago
I dont think he had a problem with the large open world gameplay, it was the repetitiveness that bothered him.

fair comment if you ask me. Unless people want the same thing over and over again?
Shadowstar  +   1121d ago
Yep. He knows now never to review a game like Halo with less than 10/10. Because that's good journalism somehow.
Walker  +   1122d ago
Stop this shit .
sdozzo  +   1122d ago
It's a review. Just go buy the game and leave the guy alone.
swice  +   1121d ago
No. He must die.
sdozzo  +   1120d ago
Burning_Finger   1122d ago | Trolling | show | Replies(2)
trickman888  +   1122d ago
trouble_bubble  +   1122d ago
He wrote a really good rebuttal with details on what in his opinion were half hearted backtracking levels, control schemes like the fishstick, etc etc. Put the fanboys that haven't even played the game yet into their place, and called them as much. Good for him.

As he said, he's played 10 better story campaigns this year alone. Why lie to appease those who play nothing -but- Halo and treat it like "their baby", in his words. 7/10 sounds more than fair considering he said "...if this were a sports game, we'd be calling Halo 4 a roster update with better graphics." People say it about Madden/WWE/NHL and even COD all the time.
Hicken  +   1122d ago
Why continually refer to Call of Duty, which is guilty of the very same flaws he says are present in Halo? Why take points off for things like no iron sights, a Call of Duty feature which has never been a part of Halo?

His WHOLE review reads like "This game is good, but it would be better if it were like Call of Duty." No matter how you slice it or try to later defend it, that's wrong. You CANNOT review a game by saying it IS or ISN'T like a completely different game, scoring it in comparison to something you personally prefer.

There's no way that's okay. Not if you can't, first, judge the game based on its own merits, something he fails to do.

His review fails, his defense of his review fails, and the defense of his defense of his review also falls short.
InTheLab  +   1122d ago
Read some of those 9s and 8s and you'll see they say the same thing.

And wtf is up with iron sights being a CoD feature?

It's a modern feature for shooters much like sprinting, which is also in Halo 4...but you won't find a single Halo 4 fanboy screaming about a so-called CoD features making their way into Halo.
JANF  +   1122d ago

i dont know if you have played halo but adding an iron sight to Halo would destroy its gameplay completely. That is why i think this is one of the most ridiculous complaints the reviewer made.
#8.1.2 (Edited 1122d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(4) | Report
InTheLab  +   1121d ago

I've played them all and I disagree that adding iron sights would break the game. Many complained about armor abilities prior to HReach's launch and hell, some like armor lock actually did break the mp...but adding the ability to aim with precession with all weapons would only add another layer to the game, not destroy it.

Sure some of the weapons would need a re-balance, like the MA37 and the Plasma rifle, but I think it's a bit dramatic to say it will break the game.

Sprinting is now a permanent feature that relatively new to the franchise now that it's not just an armor ability, but it's not going to break Halo.


Killzone radically altered it's gameplay to satisfy those that thought the controls were awful, but that's not why the hardcore were pissed. Certain features that were standard in K2 didn't make there way to K3, and that's why the Killzone community was in an uproar. Same thing with the Uncharted community.

It's not the same situation with Halo, as all of the key features from past iterations made their way back, unlike KZ and UC.
#8.1.3 (Edited 1121d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(10) | Report
JANF  +   1121d ago

as per one of the post in the forum says

"You could not add iron sight into the Halo sandbox without significantly altering the players ability to strafe/dodge/melee/grenade/jum p and start stripping the arena-shooter element away from it all. While some guns let you scope, I'm not sure that means that all guns should have some aim enhancement. The assault rifle works because it's powerful but a bit sloppy. If you give the player the ability to iron-sight and increase accuracy - the balance is shifted immensely. If you give the player the ability to iron-sight with no benefit/penalty - you'd be doing the transferring/newcomer BF/COD player base a massive disservice by allowing them to waste time/effort - while anyone familiar with Halo takes the opportunity to move freely and destroy them via normal aiming. I don't think it's realistic that someone could iron sight and strafe/jump/dodge/grenade in Halo - just as (Halo veterans can call me out if I'm wrong) most/all Halo players cannot perform if scoped. "

i think this post above describes why exactly iron sights wont work well in Halo games.
Dms2012  +   1122d ago
"Put the fanboys that haven't even played the game yet into their place, and called them as much. Good for him."

And you, who hasn't played the game (probably never will) seem all too eager to agree with him. I am willing to bet you are a big fan of PC and that other console.
trouble_bubble  +   1121d ago
See, you just proved him right with that "dem dere's fightin' words" dig at PC gaming and what did you say? "That other console?" What other console would that be? Wii? Jaguar? NeoGeo? The evil TurboGrafx16?

Someone says "iron sights" and suddenly hip fire lynch mobs declare "if you're not with us you're against us!" Over a 7/10. I can't wait til Tom Chick reviews this and crashes the WorldWideWeb. Easy. 7/10 is still good.
#8.2.1 (Edited 1121d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(8) | Report
geddesmond  +   1121d ago
Its just the Halo fanboys. Ya know those fanboys that hate seeing other FPS games get praised.
"Ah he said KZ2 is one of his favorite FPS games ever made, get him"
"KZ2 is crap, Halos 100 times better"
"It sold 10 million copies"
"I'm gonna queue up at gamestop for 2 days in a master chief outfit waiting for Halo to release, I don't see any Killzone fans doing that"

lol yeah because we have lives and ain't sad crap heads.

I find this real funny because only a week ago everyone was with a reviewer who called out the BS that goes on in the gaming industry with reviews and fast forward one week and some dude gives his honest opinion and heres the gaming fanboys quick to the defence.

"Awe how dare he say that about this game I HAVEN'T EVEN PLAYED yet"
"Hes got some nerves on him that one"
"Lets get him, you hold him down, I'll pull down his jocks and you shove this master chief figurine up where the sun don't shine"
"No not the master chief figurine, that thing is sacred"
"Yeah I hear if you disrespect that, master chief will come to you in your sleep and make you play none Halo FPS games"
"Awe I don't wannttt
tthhhaaaatttt, I'm Sccarrreeed"

Fact is people should reserve judgement on the reviewer until they have played and finished the game for themselves. This always happens with games before people play them and its very childish if you ask me.
Dms2012  +   1121d ago
Judgement either way should be witheld. However your statements at the end of your post contr
adict everything before it. Don't make sweeping generalizations and then try to come off as fair and reasonable. Just admit it, you and many others can't stand it when Halo gets praise and then you shake your little bobbleheads with enthusiastic agreement when anything negative is published.
Old McGroin  +   1122d ago
@ Burning_Finger (I replied to you but my comment appeared down here for some reason!)

Quotes from the review:
" the series’ staunch refusal to get with the times when it comes to game mechanics and level design, ignoring obvious enhancements like big-ticket sequences and proper iron-sights mechanics"
" Fans of the game will have a blast here, and the multiplayer is something special, but if you expected Halo 4 to keep up with the Joneses, you might be disappointed."

It's a little bit too obvious that he wants Halo to be another game (COD) and and because it's not he knocks down the score. He also criticizes Halo for issues that are way way more apparent in the COD series, the last of which received a 9 from EGM (granted, not the same reviewer).

Unbiased? This guy obviously has a hard on for COD and will accept no substitutes. He can say as often as he wants that he isn't a fan of COD but it's a pretty fair assumption to make going by his review of Halo 4.
#9 (Edited 1122d ago ) | Agree(18) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
MadMen  +   1122d ago
EGM you are dead to me.
A7XEric  +   1122d ago
I don't think people are mad at the score, it's some of the ridiculous things the reviewer says in the review that has caused controversy.

For example, I quit reading what he said as soon as he said halo should have iron sights. What an idiot.
aquamala  +   1121d ago
Imagine if it has iron sights, people would complain its becoming cod! We are talking about a rare fps franchise that's distinct and NOT like a cod.
FragMnTagM  +   1121d ago
Some guns don't have scope and allow you to shoot at the same time. This makes the game more balanced.

If you are running and gunning, a sub machine gun and to a lesser extent, an assault rifle will not be used for long range and a cursor is just fine.

People should not be getting across the map kills with a machine gun in an fps they are made for close to medium range.

The guns you would expect to take long shots all have a scope in Halo.

I don't see the problem.
#11.2 (Edited 1121d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(1) | Report | Reply
KingItachi  +   1122d ago
As other have said read his review. It's funny how people wanna defend reviewers, but at the drop of hat they turn around and call people whiny and entitled.
StrongMan  +   1122d ago
Wow, are fanboys really mad that the reviewer gave Halo 4 a 7?! Get a life kids. All of your precious exclusives can't get perfect scores from everyone. Besides, Halo 4 sits at an 89 meta score which is the lowest of all Halo games so are you going to harass and attack Metacritic now?
#13 (Edited 1122d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(26) | Report | Reply
HaMM4R  +   1121d ago
As many people have said before, Its not the score that is annoying people, its the content of the review which is biased and utterly ridiculous to be honest. He is trying to convert the game to call of duty, and that is obvious. Halo with iron sights is not halo. Scopes on scope weapons is fair enough, but the gameplay just doesn't suit iron sights.
InTheLab  +   1122d ago
You know what interesting about the fanboys that are calling this critic a CoD fanboy? The fact that most reviews of the game said roughly the same thing about Halo 4.

Parts of CoD made their way into Halo but it's not really CoD, but modern shooter mechanics.

Another large criticism is that while big and beautiful, the environments are empty, thus pointless.

Lastly, "playing it safe" is in almost all reviews aside from the perfect scores that seemingly had no issues with Halo 4.

The point is, most of what this dude said has been mirrored by other critics. The difference? 8s and 9s at the end of the review.

Seriously, this shit happens with every major release whether it Uncharted or Halo. No matter the platform, fanboys are all the same.
JANF  +   1122d ago
Just the fact that he had to write another article to explain the first review shows how guilty this guy is and IMO it makes him loose alot of credibility.
Belking  +   1122d ago
My friend already has this game and it's definitely closer to 8.5 to 9.5 but definitely not a 7. But you know how journalist are these days. You really can't take too many of them serious. Some of them are the biggest fanboys out there.
#15 (Edited 1122d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
SpecialK  +   1122d ago
Im not understanding the hate here to be honest.

Not having proper sights in this game has always annoyed me, some will say "but thats its unique feel" but it always just reminds me of how much better it is now unlike years ago when many games worked like that.

And it doesnt sound like the reviewer wanted the game to be bad, he said the first 15 mins were incredible, but then the rest failed to match that with push the button mission types.

7/10 is a good score, Ive always liked halo mainly for its singleplayer and Im sure this will be good.

Just remember its this dev studios first go at the game, and to be honest I was really hoping theyd give the series a massive kick in a new direction and hopefully on their second go it'll happen. its a massive series that could easily accommodate for a few changes =)
CuddlyREDRUM  +   1122d ago
Military shooter fanboy backlash. It is one person's opinion, and just about all of you haven't played it.

If it is the reviewer's opinion that is should be more like COD, that is his opinion. I can't tell the difference between these military shooters, is Halo the one where you are a Marine robot named Master Shake?
Servbot41  +   1121d ago
So if I were to review Dragonquest and give it a 0/10 because its not CoD enough, that's absolutely fine with you?
sly-Famous  +   1121d ago
That makes no sense, did you think this over or did you just post your comment in the spur of the moment.
kupomogli  +   1122d ago
All the fanboys are bit**ing because their most awaited game of the year didn't get high rankings all across the board. I've read the review, and the part about the iron sights is in half of a short sentence somewhere in the middle of the review, but fanboys will obviously try and tell you he did more than that.

His complaints on the story mode was that Halo 4 is as stale and formulaic as the rest of the series instead of trying to change it up at all. Go here, protect this location by killing waves of enemies, go here destroy this, etc. Also backtracking by plodding across huge open areas to another destination past where you came from.

I'm sure there are many of you here that thought a game was great, enjoyed the series, but the game got slammed from being too similar to the other even when it's made a lot more changes than most games. But then you read another review that praises a game for being the exact same as the last. It happens all the time.

I haven't played Halo 4, but I have played the others, and I agree with his review(if I'm basing it on all the others.) The online multiplayer is good, but the story mode isn't really great. If a game is going to have a single player mode, then most of the review scores weight should be on the single player, because there are a lot of people out there who like the single player experience and not just the multiplayer. Why do you guys think every Halo deserves a 10? It's not like the single player is Uncharted.
#18 (Edited 1122d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(15) | Report | Reply
ILive  +   1121d ago
Like someone else said here: most other reviews are pointing out the same criticism for the game but following it up with higher scores. I was reading a review of it the other day and I would have sworn the person was going to give the game a 7 or 8 even. But it ended up being a 9.5 and I was shocked. I read the review and most people are exaggerating what the guy is saying because its their beloved Halo. People keep forgetting that set pieces are not only present in call of duty because they are so wrapped up in defending the game. I love halo and I would love to see it move forward rather than being at a stasis. I too also play halo for the single player since I don't have live. One reviewer even said that the single player is a target practice for the multi player and that does not sit well with me.
#18.1 (Edited 1121d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
ginsunuva  +   1121d ago
Who the hell cares about review score numbers anymore? If I told you the sun rotated around the earth, would you get all defensive and attack me, or would you know that it's a lie and just move on. If you lash out, it means you are insecure about your thought in the first place. If you're so sure of something, why do you have to prove it? It just means you're not actually sure. No one here knows how good Halo 4 is; they only WANT it to be a certain way. But because they're truly unsure, they become defensive.
blue_cheese  +   1121d ago
all i have to say is that there is most definitely a very distinct difference between a critique and an opinion.
grayfoxx881  +   1121d ago
People are taking this way too far. It's one review, just one person's OPINION. Some are reading way more into this review than what was actually said. You'd think it was the end of the world with some of the comments that were posted on EGM's website and on this one. What a bunch of whiners, so what if he mentioned iron sights? Big deal. So he said that 343 was just going through the motions in regards to the campaign, his wasn't the only review to mention this. Get over yourselves and enjoy the game when it hits Tuesday.
00  +   1121d ago
no people should not get over it
The review was complete BS, reviews should not solely be opinions, they are an evaluation of the product.
you can simply replace halo in this review with any other game and see why it is bad.

And it should not matter what game it is people should not have to stand for bullshit like this, then maybe gaming journalism might evolve beyond a joke.
grayfoxx881  +   1121d ago
Okay, wait a minute. So because you don't agree with the points Brandon brought up in his review about Halo 4, you believe that his points were purely based off of his own opinion, and he wasn't objectively evaluating the game whatsoever?

So gaming journalism is a joke? I completely agree. I'm assuming then you were commenting on the countless perfect reviews the game received, and how those reviews were also considered bullshit and a joke. Because plenty of those reviews had opinions in them as well. Not to mention that many publishers give gifts to reviewers days before a big release, including free games and swag, tickets to sporting events, free dinners, and some even get free trips. But that didn't happen for any of those perfect reviews for Halo, right? Those were all legitimate, right?

Why would Mr. Justice write a review like this if he didn't mean what he wrote? What benefit did he get out of all of this? For website hits? Maybe, but I highly doubt it. Critics and fans alike are now slamming his work, calling him unprofessional and biased. Why would he willingly want those very negative comments associated with him doing his job? This may follow him when looking for future employment. Why would anyone sabotage themself like that?

Your comments were based off of pure emotion, like so many others. And going back and reading it, it still doesn't make any sense. We get it, you like the game, you want it to score well. This guy is only trying to do his job. Gaming journalism is a joke, but his review was an evaluation. He was evaluating Halo 4 against past entries in the series, as well as evaluating it against other first person shooters. So the result of all that was a 7/10. Big deal. Don't make shit up and convince yourself and others to believe it just because you don't agree with the outcome.
00  +   1121d ago
I don't give a shit about the score
I read reviews to find out the pros and cons and to see if I will find it enjoyable, and I really don't care that the reviewer prefers oranges when I want to read about apples.

I agree with your second paragraph and that's why gaming journalism is a joke.

"Why would Mr. Justice write a review like this if he didn't mean what he wrote"

Because he is a hack journalist.
CuddlyREDRUM  +   1121d ago
Funny that a Polygon reviewer is bitching about the review.
Denethor_II  +   1121d ago
Wow, a lot of angry Halo fans out there lol. It's just his opinion, move on.
HaMM4R  +   1121d ago
An opinion is different to a review, reviews should be un-biased
ILive  +   1121d ago
Interesting you say that because I see alot of biased review all the time. But people don't say a thing about that because its there favorite game.
chukamachine  +   1121d ago
Looks boring tbh.

Reviews cannot be unbiased. There is always a personal preference involved.
AO1JMM  +   1121d ago
Should have sent him Mt Dew and some Dorritos.

Most retarded review I have ever read.
palaeomerus  +   1121d ago
Now GAF will eat his cyber-flesh and drink his e-blood and pile his gnawed virtual bones on the refuse heap right next to Denis Dyack's.
Sargerus  +   1121d ago
7/10 is a good score and i respect that people give H4 such score. But complaining about Halo not being CoD-ish enough just invalidates every word of his review.
#27 (Edited 1121d ago ) | Agree(9) | Disagree(2) | Report | Reply
AO1JMM  +   1121d ago
Here was 1 of many replies to that post Brandon made.
LisaWaters22   1121d ago | Spam
T3MPL3TON  +   1121d ago
Really, what this is about is people being butt hurt because it didn't get a 8 or 9.

It got a 7 because it deserves a 7.

You guys need to stop crying about people giving their opinion when that is what they are paid to do. If you want paid, every game is perfect, no matter what reviews take your asses to IGN. This guy gave his opinion and he gave it a 7.

It's a good game it isn't great it doesn't deserve a great games score. Now shut up and stop crying.

Halo, is becoming CoD. They've already announced Halo 5. Just like they do with CoD. BLops 2 will come out be out for a tiny bit and info on the next game will start coming in. It's the same lame over done and over played bullsh*t.
CynicalKelly  +   1121d ago
It isn't about the score, it's about his lack of expertise on how video game mechanics work.

Each game has it's own style of gameplay, Call of duty is fast paced and the ADS compliments that. Halo doesn't have ADS which appeals to it's fanbase. Give Halo a ADS and it slows down, maps need to be redesigned to work with it, it becomes more fast paced. Essentially, it becomes a Call Of Duty Clone.

It's the same as me reviewing Black Ops and saying that now we are in the future, why is there no shields, or energy swords. Or claiming that they are lazy for not putting in vehicles.

The only problem with the score he gives is that he justifies it with saying that Halo hasn't changed much yet gives MW3 a 9.5, a game well renowned for being the same game sold three times to the same sheep.

And your statement is wrong buddy. Call of duty is annual and has little to no changes, Halo has had a two year break and Halo 5 isn't coming until the next gen console. I can bet your entire IQ that the next Call of duty game will be released on current gen and the next two after that will be able to be ported to current gen because of how little they do to each game.
« 1 2 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
New stories

Xenoblade Chronicles X Review | TSA

17m ago - TSA: Having long been in development for Wii U under its understated codename, X, Xenoblade Chro... | Wii U

Xenoblade Chronicles X review | GamesRadar

17m ago - Xenoblade Chronicles X offers a resplendent world, fantastic combat, and transforming mechs, but... | Wii U

See what games are coming out in 2016

Now - Visit our release calendar to see what games are coming out in 2016. | Promoted post

Just Cause 3 Review - Viva La Revolution | Game Informer

17m ago - GI: Rico Rodriguez comes home in Just Cause 3, bringing revolution and his arsenal of devastatin... | PC

Xenoblade Chronicles X Review - Stabbing Dinosaurs in the Butt | Escapist

17m ago - Escapist: Xenoblade Chronicles X is a fantastical space opera about exploration and the humanity... | Wii U

Xenoblade Chronicles X Review: Broad and expansive and sometimes annoying | Post Arcade

17m ago - PA: Xenoblade Chronicles X is a huge game, teeming with complexity, open vistas and lots and lot... | Wii U