"Is Halo 4 a non-polished, bug-infested mess that is almost unplayable and a 5.5 out of 10 game? Of course not, and it is also not the perfect 10 out 10 game that other reviews would have you believe either. So why are reviews so all over the map? Why is it that there seems to be only 3 categories to rate a game? Either a game is horrible, or it’s Meh, or THIS IS THE BEST GAME EVER, OMG!" - Gamer-Rider.com
30°
40°
100°
70°
Ad 
160°
10°
10°
10°
10°
30°
No, its not. More like an 8.5 / 9.5
Halo 4 sits at an 87 on metacritic which says that the industry as a whole thinks it's the worst Halo game of them all.
Halo CE- 97
Halo 2- 95
Halo 3- 94
Halo: Reach- 91
Halo 4- 87
Besides, you guys always whine that COD is the same every time yet when reviewers point out that Halo is the same every time you guys whine and make excuses for Halo that you don't make for COD. Make up you mind, is more of the same good or bad?
@Snookies12
Halo Wars was a real time strategy game and ODST was just a DLC for Halo 3 that MS decided to stick in the Halo 3 multi player and charged a full $60 price tag to. I only counted full Halo stand alone FPS games.
I understand what you were going for with the whole COD vs. Halo argument, but I do believe despite your valid point, Halo also has improved more than COD has (obviously my opinion), besides ODST.
Have to get some shuteye, .but worth every second of the wait.
If Halo 4 is a 5.5 then the scale only goes up to 6..
Love it..bought Limited..Halo console arrives tommorow
Life is good
Evil
Really? You topped off your comment with "life is good"? Talk about trying way too hard.
@edd
Who said it was?
People, we're talking about one review that gave a middling score to the worst rated game in the main series. Quit being so sensitive. Believe it or not, there are a lot of people not impressed by the Halo series, especially the most recent installments, so a review like that is not surprising.
mmmm your avatar speak for itself.....
another fanboy without bubbles, bashing someone else dear game.
you're complainning about a game that you don't own for a console you probably don't have either.
I'm a bigger playstation fan than a Xbox fan, but I can assure you that halo is a very good Competitive FPS. had a blast playing halo 3 back then.
basing how good a game by comparing it to previous games in a series is not totally accurate. that statement goes for all games reviewed in the past... games reviews are like everyone says, one persons opinion. the fact is gamers have evolved as well as the games we play, we have become a lot more demanding as the games have gotten better over time. IF game reviews were based on a uniform and standard rating scale then your statement is true, but it is not.
and your statement about the game not changing is just flat out wrong as well. go to the forums on halo waypoint and you will see that some actual fans of the series are very upset with the changes made in halo 4. some examples would be the fact that the grunts looked to "aggressive", or the fact that MC's armour seemed to be upgraded while he was in cryo sleep.
point being, that game reviews can't be trusted as a real indication of how good a game is, the fact is that a person reviewing a game should be giving an unbiased/professional review not a biased and downright unprofessional review. it should not have been allowed to be submitted. this would never happen on a respectable legit site for any other product, cars, movies, pc's... anything. respectable and trusted reviewers conduct themselves accordingly, with professionalism and integrity.
Do you make your opinions based on metacritic? very clever dude, the ratings on that website are made by morons and the "professional" reviewers nowadays like to ride the trend of hating whats popular,
5,5???? are you serious? thats plain stupid
Killzone 3 has a 84.....besides this is a xbox news,we can tell dont have a xbox.Halo is a amazing game.
Its obvious halo 4 has very high quality and deserves high marks. Sometimes opinions suck ass and have no real substance. It was Hitlers opinion that Jews were the source of Germanys problems. It all comes down to preference tho, ya know?
This is one situation where numbers lie. There are 60 positive reviews for Halo 4 and 3 negative reviews, one being absolutely ridiculous which brings the game's average down. Almost every reviewer has said this is the most polish, most full featured Halo game to date. You're clearly being a troll but I'll let you be. Dick!
The amount of time between the first halo CE and now and the amount of new 'review sites' that have dramatically increased during that time.
obviously if there were some that intended to bring down a good game score they have found the way to do it.
Hell even gamer reviews for other games like halo or gear have been intentionally bad to bring the score down.
I am disgusted with the lack of professionalism in todays so called game reviewer. I dont have a problem with a real fact binding legit review. we are just getting more opinion now than actual real legit reviews.
I guess the days of respectable journalism really are gone for good. Its all about sensationalism now.
Not everyone likes Halo. Same with every other game. Mystery solved.
A 5 /10 for one person may be a 7 /10 for another and a 9 /10 for a fan.
People need to learn what opinions and different tastes are.
The Critics are murdering a good game.
No one gave counterstrike go shit for just making minor tweaks to the 13 year old formula, because everyone knew cs fans would appreciate GO regardless.
The point is, either be unanimous or Shut Up about it. The gaming community did this. Where did you think this stupid PS3 vs Xbox war would go. Clearly neither console suffers in sales, so now its the games that get low balled as to somehow drive a point home, or just to sensationalize in general. A site like Destructoid can low ball a game then turn around and give your favorite game a great score, and its like all is forgiven. Its madness. Get it together people. Remember before the internet when videogames were alot of times an impulse buy. Play games that look cool to you, and F*** the rest. This over analysis is getting ridiculous. Unless you own stock for a company, screw the numbers. What does the sales matter to you? In the end, the consumer drives an industry. We are the reason it is this way. STOP IT.
/End rant
lol some people.
WHAT?? so because if I don't enjoy a game as much as you or anybody else...... I'M DOING IT WRONG??
LMFAO!!!!!!
You have to be a kid to think such a thing.
And to all the people agreeing with 5.5 and bullshitting about the guys opinion, I can guarantee you 99% haven't finished the game or are total trolls. It's so transparent to me, u idiots have a certain jealousy towards halo but u know u don't wanna like it, so as soon as u see a shitty review u find an excuse to justify your hatred, because if all halos got all 10s it would make u green with envy. So u go on every bad review saying "o u haven't played the game, u fanboys always wanna defend halo, o it's the guys opinion, o it had an xx on metacritoc oo it's the worst game on the series".
You idiots know it's true and I can guarantee it cuz I used to think like u when I was younger and more immature. You ppl are pathetic!!
It's just like saying I tried gt5 at my friends house. It was nothing special. Then he tried Forza on my 360 and bought one the next day.
Actually, you sound just like a pepsi vs coke commercial.
And note that you absolutely didn't need to mention whatever your friend thought about god of war or killzone, you just couldn't resist to spice things up a little bit ;)
i believe JOURNALIST is being paid to lie for MS to say "THIS IS THE BEST GAME EVER".= sales
or if a gamer honestly say "it is horrible" you get boo's and called a TROLL by MS fanboys.
couldnt it be that some attention seeking ""journalists"& quot; are bashing the game out of proportion as its common recently???
noooooo, you SONY FANBOY prefer to belive that the game MUST be sooo sucky that it deserves a ridiculous 5.5 thats even lower than cooking mamma, are you damn serious????
Your argument is that Halo 4 reviews have been largely paid off by Microsoft simply because its reviews are slightly erratic. Which is a symptom that A LOT of games' reviews have. I don't think that I saw you whining about those ones though.
Countless games, countless movies, tv shows, discographies have multiple reviews of which can and do diverge from one another. This does not mean that they're paid off SOMEHOW.
People are different. They have different opinions. They do not always agree with each other, and this is what leads to diverging scores.
''reviews all over the map''? What are you talking about? The score of Halo 4 is consistently high. It's at 88%, not at 50% with like a see-saw reviewer battle to see whether it gets 49% or 51%.
Most of the reviewers have given it a good score. And I find it hard to believe that like 70% of the reviewers have been ''paid off'' and the minority is somehow right, without any solid evidence to back that up.
I am not saying that reviewers don't get paid off. It's something that can happen and does happen. But it can happen with anything that has reviews. The review/s of any game on any console could have been bought off.
That's why you need solid evidence. Because it's not something that is easily determined. It's certainly not something that you can easily determine by just looking at the scores of something.
.....who the heck said that a 5.5 meant "almost unplayable"? Sheesh, gamers/publishers get more stupid every day about how a 10 point system works. They act like you can't use the lower 7 points of the system without being some sort of troll.
That's a good score.
One guy gives a 5.5 out of 10 to Halo 4.
Some guy writes and article about it and titles: "Is Halo 4 really A 5.5/10 Game?", essentially reviewing a review.
"Gaming journalism" is dead as sh*t confirmed...
You can get your free Doritos and Mountain Dew at the exit from Geoff Keighley.
http://gamecola.net/wp-cont...
I blame this on Metacritic because they accept reviews from any crap site there is.
but will you enjoyment be less because someone gave it a 5.5/10? no right so forget the scores enjoy it
It might be...to a certain person.
It's nearly impossible to get an objective review for a game like Halo 4 because most serious console gamers have been exposed to the franchise in some form or another...therefore having a positive/negative opinion on it.
A 5.5/10 review from a person that has never liked the franchise would be highly biased. On the flip side, a hardcore Halo fanboy that goes to sleep with a Master Chief plush doll every night that gives Halo 4 an 11/10 would be equally as biased.
Seems like the closest thing to getting an objective review would be to find someone within the deepest recesses of console gaming who has never played a Halo game, thus having no predetermined opinion on it.
Then again, maybe this person has a bias towards first person shooters.
As I said, reviews are VERY tricky. I guess we're just supposed to assume that MOST gamers tend to agree on the same things...just as most people agree on the same things(Angelina Jolie is attractive, the gap between the rich and the poor is TOO wide).
I LOVED playing Halo 1 as a kid, and this was before I knew about Gamestop, IGN or any review sites for that matter. Afterwards, I realized that these sites existed and found out that virtually everyone else also loved the game.
So I guess in a way, reviews aren't so tricky, since when theres a general consensus on a game, I almost always agree with it.
Sir, I am that person from the deepest recesses of the console gaming world who has never played a Halo game (because I've never owned an Xbox).
Form what I hear though, all Halo games are awesome (except ODST) so I'd be happy to review if someone would kindly lend me an Xbox and a copy of the game.
really? So you have to be a halo fan to love halo 4? lame..
Pretty sure you totally misinterpreted that in every way possible. What was meant was that if you don't like the style of game Halo is (sci-fi fps), your not going to magically love Halo 4 because it somehow transformed itself into a sports strategy game.
Every sequel it very similar to the original but with some tweaking to gameplay, graphics, and the storyline.
Each game has their strengths.
EDIT: Btw, I think Killzone is a great franchise as well, but I don't think KZ2 or KZ3 even surpasses Halo 1 as an overall FPS experience...this coming from a person who hasn't owned a Halo game in 8 years. The only FPS I've played this gen thats even come CLOSE to what I felt when I played Halo 1 is Resistance 3.
I finished bioshock twice, and bioshock 2 once and yes they were greattt but it was maybe 50 hours of my life spent in that franchise. Whereas i play even halo 3 to this day (over 5 years of playing it) let alone halo reach, plus the time spent on reading up on the backstory of the universe.
That was a really shitty comparison by you, see how you made me almost hate on bioshock when it's one of my favourite games? So never say bullshit like "you can't honestly tell me any Halo game is better than xxxx" again.
Halo 1 alone's campaign is longer than Killzone 2 and 3 put together. The story is way deeper and the universe is more fleshed out, Killzone is literally just a bunch of space nazis , and a bunch of republicans in an arena, with dreadful characters there is zero identity.
The online community features for those games are so robustthat the Halo 2 severs only just went down in 2010. Has anyone played Killzones 2 recently its a ghost town and Killzone 3 isnt that far off. Yet people still play Halo 3 and Reach.
Halo 3 alone has more maps than Kilzone 2 and 3 combined with dlc. Halo has way more online modes, and features, the depth of the online is way more flexible.
Comparing the 2 is absurd you can say you prefer Killzone but to say its better just doesn't make any sense, Killzone as a series has always lacked and identity, character, personality. Its like a pretty girl, great to look at but once you dwell in completely shallow.
Obviously visuals have increased, but haven't the mechanics as well?
Even sports games have increased physics for a more realistic gameplay, and all they do is move a ball back and forth (just an example).
9-10 = Play
7-8 = Rent
1-6 = Skip
You still play when you rent.
9-10 = Buy
7-8 = Rent
1-6 = Skip
Is it possible that they do it for hits, knowing that extremists/console warriors make a huge deal out of a game scoring one-TENTH higher(or lower) than another game?
8-10 must owned
5-7 rental or price drop
1-4 avoid this game like no tomorrow
apart from that they did change some things. ordenance drops, armor abilities and something similar to perks. these are slight adjustments in a dose that it makes sense but doesn't change the game too much, yet people are shouting COD all over the place already.
concerning multiplayer i think 343 did a great job making a halo game with new mechanics that fit great, but the feeling is a different, it's more customizable and more fast-paced with great map design.
campaign is where you make a point. i didn't play it but from what i've heard there's not much new, a new race in a good story but nothing we haven't seen before really. this is where i think they could really come up with new ideas.
the problem with gamers and reviewers these days is that they are so used to Call of Duty and most games copying COD that they assume that when a game is unique and different from COD it is automatically a bad game that the game refuses to get with the times. I call bullshit
Yes, it is only the reviewers opinion. However; reviewers get paid to do a job and that's what they should be doing. There should always be a certain level of unbiasedness when approaching a game for review and it should be reviewed on the titles success in it's relevant genre and demographic.
We all have opinions and it's definitely okay to let them influence our work, but there also needs to be a level of professionalism kept and a lot of reviewers just don't do this. I want to read reviews which are informative and have influences of the reviewers opinions, but I am not interested in biased opinion pieces (Good or Bad). The 10-Point scale needs to go.
To imagine playing it as something never experienced before, which is pretty hard.
Of course there is another way, to point out what is new and what is old. To also state your personal opinion on the goods and bads of the new and old. At least this is how I see it. lol still will be biased in some way.
Perhaps unbiased isn't the correct term, lets go with being Objective. :)
The stuff that gets approved here, and especially the stuff that stays at the most popular spots of the website is just flat out embarrassing. Most of the time, like 70% of it is just some crappy opinion of some crappy website that just serves to piss people off. I don't mind crappy opinions/reviews that much, but it annoys the hell out of me when they continue to live past their 15 minutes of attention when there are plenty of other reviews out there.
The real question that the author and commenters of these types of articles should be asking is do we need to be writing or approving these articles to n4g? By you creating what is basically a reply article, you're bringing even more undeserved attention to that crappy 5.5 review that many were simply able to brush off as some persons awful opinion.
Idk, maybe I'm just in a bad mood atm, but it's getting to be quite annoying when I see less and less ACTUAL NEWS and more and more articles whose content is something that would be far more appropriate as a simple comment rather than a full blown article. We've gotten to the point where we've literally started making articles out of comments, MANY of which aren't even relevant comments made by people in the industry, they're just comments made by some random dude.
/rant
Everyone has an opinion, but Halo is one of the few games where it would not make sense to score it below a 7.
I really see no pint in getting upset about some no name sites scoring the game low. Let alone arguing with the trolls on this website that have an agenda to bring Halo down in the eyes of the other members.
If you are interested in playing Halo then buy the game and be your own reviewer. That's what I plan to do.
mostly 10, any less than 9-10 and your dreaming or your a bashful hateful fanboy who hates on halo. Why am i even bothering replying to these dumbass reviewers, back to halo 4....
The worlds look gorgeous, by the way. If you are in this for the view, you are set! Some of that epic scenery you only see in games like Heavenly Sword, Mass Effect, and Uncharted is here...and is one of the best-looking games on consoles. ;)
I can see many people enjoying this game, but the enemies seem to come in repetitious droves, which is a problem I have with many shooters. I want to feel like every single bullet makes a difference in the war. (Killzone 2 says hello.)
I've only played a couple rounds of the multi-player, but it's back to the old Halo for this one. Nothing particularly special. It's just...Halo multi-player. Again. *shrug* Most people love that, however, so I won't complain about it too much.
MAG
I know it isn't story driven and is MP only, but the teamwork in that game makes you feel important. Like you have a job to do and you can't let just your group of 8 down, but the whole 120 (was it? I forgot) teammates down.
I want to play again but finding a match is too long and too many games to get through. Still, it feels good to get the job (whatever it may be) done in that game.
Edited for missing word.
NO SCOOOOPE!!!
Im well aware that there are paid reviews, reviews made by trolls and by idiots that want hits on their website and i agree when you say that "Its just an opinion" becomes an excuse. That is why the only reviews that matter to me are my own.
If readers can't trust reviews to mean something, to follow common conventions, to be accurate, specific, and sometimes even skeptical of their own feelings, observations, and conclusions then reviews are just childish vanity rants and snooty posing about supposedly having refined tastes or passionate enthusiasm.
Reviews ARE opinions but opinions and reviews can both be stupid, wrong, insane, quickly crapped out tripe, sloppy, vague, or just BS. The point is to make good and useful reviews that communicate effectively to a lot of people in a trustworthy way that engages their interests and perceptions. Honestly I don't care what Tom Chick likes or hates because his reviews have nothing to with what I like about games, and frankly I don't find him very persuasive. And apparently the same is true of Brandon Justice judging by a quick read through of his reviews.
People who think that subjectivity means that anything goes and it's automatically right from a certain point of view are sophomoric cretins trying to buck a trend that they don't even understand. Subjective opinions can be and often are stupid uninformed knee jerk garbage.
The visuals are stunning, the gameplay is smooth and fun but most importantly the story is really good. The amount of polish and work that went into this game is just unbelievable. the scene in chapter 2 I think before you get the warthog, you're walking through the cave, you step outside into the light and you realise just how beautiful the game is when the eye candy and scope hits you. Even if you disregard the gameplay this game is at least a 7/10. But even the gameplay is better than ever so this reviewer is just seeking hits and attention. Do yourself a favour and play this game
haters gonna hate like always
It has WAY better graphics than Gears 3. Now the next one may raise the bar again, but we'll see when its out.
And to touch on the "smooth gameplay..." I'm not sure whats going on, 343 said it was running at 30 FPS, but I am having a hard time seeing it. I could TOTALLY tell a difference in frame rate between BF3 & MW3 on the 360 (NOT A SLAM, TECHINCAL LIMITATIONS ON THIS GEN! Sacrafice either Graphics or FPS), but I'm not seeing any chugging or slowdown at all in Halo 4.
I'm very impressed so far.
I could say the same thing about uncharted.
Abit confused.
BF3 is a 30fps game with dips. Because of graphics and environment.
MW3 is a 60fps game like every other cod title.
HALO4 is is more a shinny environment, without the fx of BF3.
The artwork is good, but graphically it's not upto much.
5.5 is certainly harsh, but everyone has an opinion.
The game is at least a 7/10. But if someone is sick of the fps genre, halo or shooters in general, yeah this game can be a 5.5 or lower it's the reviewer's opinion; the 2/10 review was bullshit though.
I hope next gen games are judged on true creativity in terms of originality and innovation that seems to be lacking in this stage of current console cycle.
Have yet to see a plausible reason why halo 4 should be a 9-10 either.
Booya! Ding! Ding!Ding!
first of all, where were these people when halo reach came out? oh yeah. they were hailing it as the messiah of FPS games. come on guys, halo 4 utterly destroys halo reach.
secondly, alot of these people are the same ones who bash games like Resistance 3 for changing things up. they say that games that are different with every entry "have no identity." these are the same people that discourage change and innovation
thirdly, alot of these same people rate COD games with 9s every year. so they really have no right to bash a game for not changing
there is just no consistency within the reviewing community. there really is no reason why halo 4 should have a lower metascore than the other halo games. its the best one in a while. this is coming from someone who thinks that the series is generally overrated