Gadget Review: Halo 4 Review

James Pikover of Gadget Review: Halo is going the way of massive multiplayer franchises like Call of Duty, but Microsoft and 343 Industries isn't completely confident in that route. The 7-hour confused campaign has poor writing but engaging gameplay, and it's long enough to say that it wasn't just an afterthought. Spartan Ops is an interesting cooperative mode, but it is really for the smaller group of gamers who want cooperative play, not to go through the campaign again... 3/5

[ThatsGaming]

I don't know how reviewers can take a game that has solid gameplay mechanics, solid graphics, great sound, smooth frame rate, a 6-8 hr campaign, an endless multiplayer component, and an additional co-op mode and give it only a 6/10. That would make 90% of the games on the market less than a 5/10.

Meanwhile they gave Birds of Steel 9/10... A game with good gameplay mechanics, average graphics, an average campaign, awful multiplayer, no co-op, and poor sound.

Nice consistency in reviewing there.

[bubblebeam]

Agreed. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but I really noticed that reviewers were out to get Halo 4 this time. They were never so picky before this, and they happen to be overly picky with the best Halo since CE.

Almost like an anti-Halo brigade this time around. I just find it strange. Why did these same reviewers give a free pass to Reach when this is much better, according to me and 95% of Halo fans.

[BattleAxe]

"but I really noticed that reviewers were out to get Halo 4 this time. They were never so picky before this"

Come on, there's nothing innovative about this game, and the graphics are ok, they're nothing special. I've played the multiplayer, and while its fun, its not revolutionary. Its just like how Cod is not getting the same high reviews that it is used to. The formula gets old after a while.

[Kalowest]

I've played all of H4s modes and they're all great. Even if your not a fan and hate halo, it's no lose than a 8 or 8.5.

[ThichQuangDuck]

I own Halo 4 and although I see your point. Reviews are opinions, if he loves Birds of Steel then he does. People seem to think that reviews are done by robots that analyze every point of a game the same way they do. Halo 4 multiplayer map selection is lacking right now that is not just me but consensus from myself and friends. I have not dived into single player since I see it as being pretty boring like all halo single players. I only derive fun from goofing off and co op and getting through. To each their own, my opinion or review of the game is not fact and neither is yours. A number should not dictate how you feel about the game. I do not know how you are complaining about the review if you own the game.

[bubblebeam]

"A number should not dictate how you feel about the game."

But if 95% of people disagree with the review score, what is the point in the review? If it isn't helping someone's decision in buying the game? I see your point, but the score isn't the be all end all. It is the consistency in reviews.

It's like complaining about bugs in one game, then letting them slide in another. At the end of the day, I don't care what score it gets, as to me, it is a 9.5-10.

Halo's only fault is that the story mostly caters to the hardcore fans, that have played all of them and have read the books (Like me). so I understand peoples confusion.

The story wasn't poorly written AT ALL, whether you liked it or not. If it was that bad you had to mention it, then I expect to see it in every one of his reviews except Bioshock and Beyond:2S

[ThichQuangDuck]

@bubblebeam

I read the beginning books of Halo and have played through Halo 1, 2, 3 and most of the others but not all. The story reaching new points in this game excites me actually digging into the psychology of the soldier. However I am kind of worn out of the generic shoot this gameplay and press a button. That is just me. This review score or any bad review scores for that matter of Halo 4 wont stop the majority of people from buying Halo 4. You and I both know that to be true. Halo is Halo at the end of the day. I really hope the next generation of scores is not numbers so people cannot complain about it is .1 too low. I hope it is just pure reading so people have to understand rather than scan and look for a number score.

[jamezrp]

Just an FYI, 3/5 (or 6/10 as you put it) is not "bad". It's just a properly scaled scoring mechanism, unlike the vast majority of game publications that have every game within the 7-10 score. At Gadget Review, we utilize a full 5-star method. 5 stars means perfect (so basically nothing ever gets 5 stars). 3 stars means "good". 2 stars is average (what most people consider 50%.

But I guess you'd have known that if you read the review, or at the very least scrolled down and saw the score and explanation (which every review we have comes with).

[ThichQuangDuck]

Notice how none of them complained about the review content but rather the number. Most of them probably did not even read the review.

In fact I could put a number at the end of this post and they would skip to it.

7/10

[jamezrp]

Aye. Constantly remind myself to the "welcome to the world of tl;dr". What more can a man do?

[ThichQuangDuck]

@Jamezrp

I truly depise TLDR it adds nothing to a conversation. It is like while something is talking or making a point saying Too Long Didn't Listen. Humans are becoming more robotic than their devices. I appreciate your review because it is some of my same complaints

[bubblebeam]

"2 stars is average (what most people consider 50%."

Why not just give it a 2.5 then? The star method is broken. I get your point. Metacritic counts 4/5 as %80, but how often do gamnes get a 4.5?

To me, a 4/5 is more like 90%, as most -/5 ratings never go .5 intervals. That's why we need an industry standard of rating games....out of 10 or 100% (It's easiest).