When review scores are utterly meaningless, how does a video game journalist decide how to assign them?
Is that review on metacritic?
IDK y but that was funny to me
I like to just goof around on here...I am glad you liked it.
lmfao +bubs. I remember that's the first comment you'd see on every really good or really bad review.. oh good times.. Too bad they closed down the Open zone :(
this is why gaming needs a site like imdb.com....a database of all games and reviews by gamers...although i can see fanboys ruining such an idea just to screw with people because of brand loyalty
metacritic have a system like that sadly after lbp, gears of war, killzone and halo wars incident proved this system can only works in alternate universe where only one console exit
yeah but there is always some jealous dick who brings down the score. Look at Toy Story 3, has like 150 out of 151 perfect scores. And some douche gave it a low score and some MORONIC reasoning, absolutely dumb.
There already are games on IMDB. Halo Reach: 9.5 Gears 2: 9.3 MGS4: 9.8 Uncharted 2: 9.7
www.gamefaqs.com is good for info on games, and just about everything has user reviews.
Do people ever read articles nowadays? He isn't giving the game this score, he is critiquing the video game review system, and yet you get two people who have reported the article because they have obviously only read the title.
I guess you are having issues seeing the very thick sarcasm... I am sorry I didn't spell it out for you.
If he was aiming it at you, he probably would have replied to you -_- lol kids these days.
naw usually when it says review or something to do with review they just look at the score and comment some fanboy shiit. but i agree with the article though
"Do people ever read articles nowadays?" This is n4g we're talking about here!!! :P
They dint read it. They are lames afterall.
lol, the lames. haha.
8/10 by far graphic are average game play ok space battle was good
Graphics are Excellent only game rivaling it is Gears of war Gameplay is great better then any other shooter out there User Created content (forge) Allot of Different Modes for Multiplayer ''Space battle'' Variation and there is allot of variation in Reach Im comparing it with games on the 360 not on ps3 where there are better looking titles. although graphics are not everything..right ps3 fanboys? Its gameplay is allot better then any killzone or whatever exclusive shooter the PS3 has...Its not the most popular shooter on Xbox 360 for nothing.. I bet you haven't even played the game yet only judging from the videos
first, ps3 fanboys are idiots, and you should know that by now. there is no reason to concede that ps3 games look better cuz even if they didn't, they'd still troll all the halo articles criticizing it and disagreeing with ANYONE that praises it. second, the words are 'a lot' not 'allot' -- allot means to distribute an amount of something.
I disagree with your opinion. I have entered the forge mode of many of the maps and I am very impressed with the visuals. I can zoom in very close on walls and the textures are excellent in most places. Only in Forge World on the highest rock faces where many won't ever play, are their low-res textures. The game looks great. As for gameplay, I love it.
I don't think I'm in the total minority when I believe that the Forerunner architectural pieces look a bit lackluster. Some shadows around corners could help with the visuals, but they don't cut it compared to maps like Reflection.
you only read the title. Gameplay is good but nothing spectacular which is not that bad. Same old Halo with some enchantments which keeps the game fun. Graphics are really good but again nothing spectacular compared to some other games. I would give the game like a 8.7 because I am not really heavy on multi-player but it is still a lot of fun to play every once in awhile.
graphics are better than average but not great gameplay is very good space battle sucked agree with the 8/10 (to me, only a very small handful of games deserve an 8 this generation, and maybe 2 deserve a 9, and NONE a 10)
classic n4g. miss the point much. how about commenting on the topic of the article for a change, and not the title. Lattocky knows what i'm talkin about.
Vice versa goes for people like you. Most people would agree that even the best games has its flaws and doesn't deserve that perfect score. The best Halo Reach review that didn't stink of Halo fanboyism is that on gamesradar.com and they seem to give the game the score it deserves. Most of the reviews for Halo Reach are from people who live, eat, and sleep Halo. That in itself makes the game for them the best thing ever.
I agree. Should simply be a nice article detailing faults and what's good about it. Either be a "Definitely buy" "buy" "be cautious" "rent" "avoid"
Review scores are stupid. Review system is biased, inconsistent and broken. Nothing new from me to say, I wish more bloggers/people would bring this fact to light.
You know how many PS3 fanboys questioned the validity of the 11/10 score that one French site gave to Uncharted 2? None of them. When it's a franchise you love, on the system you love, of course you're not going to say anything. Is Halo Reach deserving of a perfect score. Ideally, no. But many games have been given perfect scores in the past, such as God of War 3, Halo 3, Uncharted 2, Little Big Planet, Gears of War, Forza 3, Super Mario Galaxy, and so on and so forth. Halo Reach is to me better than Halo 3 was, and if the matter is that Halo 3 got a perfect score, and at this point in time reviewers are deciding that no game should get a perfect score, then it seems a little unfair that Halo Reach should suffer. Maybe all the review sites should retroactively go back and re-review all the games they gave perfect scores to because newer games that improve upon their predecessors should not be subject to harsher reviews.
Someone gave UC2 an 11? Hah. This has NOTHING to do with Halo, any franchise or console preference. The review system itself is broken, across all lines, and needs to change.
people should just be realistic about review scores to begin with. if 10 is perfect, no game is a 10. an honest reviewer would never give any game a perfect score.
A perfect scores does not denote a perfect game. That's another problem, the scale has left 1 - 10, and become 7 - 10. Anything else is ignored.
The review system is broken. Gametrailers gave MW2 a 9 and uncharted 2 a lower score. The reason they gave was uncharted 2 is not original.
Well thats the problem. Because Uncharted 2 wasn't original. Im not saying MW2 was, but what this means is, I don't think originality should ever be taken into account. I loved uncharted. Not because it was original, but because it was a great experience. Honestly, how often does one find themselves playing a great game and enjoying themselves only to realize the game doesn't do anything new, resulting in them disliking the game? I'd say damn well near never. All a review should do is rate the experience, not taking into account others.
Scores aren't bad, but it's the stupid reviewers who wreck them. When they rate a game honestly instead of it's popularity, then getting a 7/10 would be respectable. When they ding one multiplatform version because of differences (Bayonetta) but rate a game with greater differences between the two console versions the same (Final Fantasy XIII) or rate the worse version higher, then scores are meaningless. When games are supposed to be "art" but none of the people who want to call it art can review it with artistic sensibilities or pick-up on the subtleties with any critical consistency then a review score is useless. The most ironic thing about calling games art is when people who support that point of view don't even look at the manual that comes with the game and comment on the art or writing in the manuals and totally ignore the art on the cover.
it is the stupid buthurt fanboys that think that a score matters. read the damn review and ignore the score. the score has a negative affect on the review because quite often it will sway people from reading the review or even bothering to get the game. what annoys one person is different to another, so read the review (and plenty of others) and make up your own mind. or if you are an idiot, just continue to look at the score.
A score is the summation of the review just as the review is the technical breakdown of the score. They are interchangeable, just as any other reviewed item whether it be a power saw, movie, restaurant, or shoe. If the score is flawed, or not analogous to the review, then the review is equally flawed and not worth reading since the person who scored the review also wrote it. Or, if you're an idiot, you can dissociate the reviewer from his review score and relieve the writer from his responsibility to score his review accurately.
uh i think he meant to put -1000 out of 100
Some people should read reviews rather than the scores attached. They complain when something scores too low or too high and never actually read the print.
all people should
He says what needs to be said. Systems like Metacritic are flawed and don't work, when you have magazines with 1-100%, as well as 1-4 point scales mixed together.
People put way to much attention to games that hit 10 or 9. Frankly if a game hits 75 or above than that's good enough for me. I enjoyed games like Lost Planet 2 which got a high 7 a hellava lot more than some games that got an 9.
Thank god I'm not the only one I don't even look at reviews anymore if there's a game I want to play I could care less what websites, blogs, useless journalist or even Muppet's have to say about the game I'm gonna play it. Reviews with number, letter or stars are nothing but flame bait from fanboys and joke sites like Metajoke.
I am playing Reach every day (for many hours), and I would give it a 7/10 from a competitive aspect, and that is really all I care about. There are so many things wrong with it, but MLG settings and great community maps from forgers will make it better.
this article is so very true.. some reviews have become biased.. reviews used to be better when some people didn't incorporate their own feelings as much as you find some reviewers are doing. its all good to know that you think a game deserves 8 rubber chickens out of 10 but when i review is more neutral i find myself more interested.. on another note i havent played reach yet and i am very, VERY disappointed in myself for taking so long and not yet having at least a 5 min play but from what i've seen, heard and read it seems like a magnificent game.. cant wait to try it myself
The multiplayer is so smooth in reach i punch they die joy.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.