Mark and Dan hash out review scores for Halo: Reach and decide that the campaign is good for what ails ya. This is arguably the most honest Halo review you will see on the net.
This game can get a score 1,but it will sell A LOT!!! Game has a lot of fans,and i need to mention that halo was almost in every bundle package!!! Halo game is something like Gran turismo on playsation!!! Since the franchise’s first entry in December 1997,over 56 million units have been sold worldwide for the PlayStation, PlayStation 2,and PlayStation 3
Is it cool now to hate on good, fun games?
Well, not exactly. Some people THINK they are cool to hate on good, popular games. It's like that with anything. As soon as something becomes very successful there are always those losers that think they are trendy or cool to hate on that popular thing.
Is it cool to insist that everyone likes exactly the same thing you like? r.
that's what i was thinking. at first i was with them. but when the dude on the left said he was blown away by parts in MW2, i stopped watching/caring.
Well to be honest i thought mw2 and mw had parts that where never done in fps games before. i wouldnt go as far to say that the mw2 campaign blew me away but parts did make me go " wow "
you're easily amused, i suppose. i thought it was a buncha cut scene garbage with generic shooting. the parts that were semi-memorable were the parts on rails where the game basically played it for you. like the identical endings, the snow mobile parts, and the terrorist part. halo's major parts are usually open ended and can pan out multiple ways and it's all on YOU to make them work. the game doesn't just kill enemies or save you to keep it flowing. COD is an unoriginal, boring game designed to have mass appeal to the primary consumers...aka the twilight crowd, aka the sheeple
so this guy implies that modern warfare 2 has a better campaign than halo reach, i stopped watching right there
I read your comment and i didn't even watch it
I agree and disagree with that. The story was much better in reach, but it was just kill these waves of enemies, cut scene, kill next wave of enemies, move on, kill another wave of enemies, space battles(not as great as i thought they would be). At least there was some variety in MW2. But who buys reach for its single player? Multiplayer is where its at, and it greatly exceeds the noob fest that is MW2.
I buy Halo in large part because of its campaign. It has the best narrative in any FPS, in my opinion. I have always enjoyed the Halo campaigns.
Play HL2 and thats all you need. Halo ain't got nothing on HL2
i have never agreed with someone more! that last sentence sums it up to a tee
So did I. I literally started laughing out loud!
hav you guys noticed tht all these guys do and point out everything tht is bad in every game?
What's wrong with that? It's much better than all the sites that give games a free pass and overlook all the problems just because they have some emotional attachment to a particular game franchise or developer. Every game has it's problems and there is no reason these problems shouldn't be exposed and discussed.
singleplayer is decent but the multiplayer is beast
I thought the single player was fuckin epic!! The story, cutscenes, battles, and ending .... well done!! especially played side by side with my 3 other buddies.
Thought the ending was handled poorly, SPOILERZZZZXXXXXLLLLLLLLLLLLLL LLLLLLLLLLLL He could've gotten an epic death scene with great music and a great reason to die. Not giving up when his mission was accomplished
I acually want it for the campaign i dont care for multi but thats why i will rent it seing as i wont come back to it and it isnt extremely long. I might buy it for co-op with my bro that would be worth it. I loved odst for the campaign. The soundtrack and atmosphere was brilliant.
If you loved ODST for the campaign, then buy this game. Hands down, withot a doubt, much much much better campaign then ODST .... story, locations, co-op. I'll be playing it again with other buddies again .... and again.
these guys are right. it does not deserve a 10/10. its the same old thing with little bit of improvement here and there. ign gave it a 9.5 for graphics. thats totally dishonest. graphics are a little bit better than halo 3. i was expecting a lot from this game after the dissappointing odst
Your kinda of right about the graphics. I wasn't impressed with the graphics that much either. Not bad at all, and I like the variety of different levels and designs, but there are better looking games out there. But as far as everything else .... it deserved a solid 10. Controls, story, multiplayer, sound, replay-value, fun factor ..... all a perfect 10. I don't think any site should have scored it less than 90.
So let me use some retarded logic here. "If everybody is giving the game 4s and 5s out of 5 and 9s and 10s out of 10, they are ALL corrupt and thus, an honest review would give the game 6.5? Yeah, yeah, that sounds about right, just so we can say we were honest and everyone else wasn't." Yerp, I can see the logic and critical thinking there for sure! /s One of the guys says there was nothing in the game that really stuck out. This is practically a repeat of the "Why Halo: Reach is the most Disappointing game of the year" article. I'm disregarding these idiots on the simple matter that once again, they can't back up what they are saying, and then they have the nerve to hold MW2 up as the poster child for success. LMAO. GG Pixel Enemy, keep it classy.
Personally I thought MW2 was, as he said, more jaw dropping than Halo: Reach. That said, was it better written? No. However, Halo: Reach really tugged at my emotions, and I really wanted to somehow change the way the story ended. Despite the main character being mostly silent, I felt attached to him because of the way he interacted with the other characters. I can see why Reach would not have been as adrenaline filled as MW2, it's a more somber, black parade kind of game that has action but is also meant to create a more solemn mood. However Reach had some amazing moments, and the work they did with the cut scenes was phenomenal and engaging. These guys can think whatever they want, but personally I found that (while not worth a 10) Reach was a fantastic game that pulled you in emotionally and achieved something no other Halo game has done.
At the end of the day if you enjoy it game on.If you don't like it find something else to ease that gaming itch.Makes no difference to my like/dislike of the game.Just my 2 cents worth......
Seems like a pretty fair and honest review to me. These guys obviously play alot of games based on the huge Xbox collection in the background. I respect reviews like this alot more than reviews that give out 10/10 with little reasoning behind it. I haven't had a chance to play Reach yet so I can't say if I agree with their scores or not right now.
I would have to agree with them on every aspect of the review they gave on it. A person that reviews a game should look for stuff just like what they were talking about. I see way to many passes on games that get reviewed just because of the name behind it. Was Halo Reach a bad game.. No not at all I was really good in fact, but it was not a 10 or even a 9. I would give it an 8 or 8.5 in my opinion it really didn't bring anything new and felt like more of the same thing. If would have been named anything else it would have gotten a lower score that is for sure. To many games get a pass when it comes to stuff like that. That goes for all BIG games on PS3, Xbox, and Wii.
You can swap what they are saying with any other FPS and it still sounds like a "flaw": In Killzone 2 you run and kill helghast after helghast, sure there are different enemies but its the same ones over and over. There is a small portion of a game where you are in a mech and vehicles, like the tank, here and there. In MW2 you run and kill bad guy after bad guy, sure there are different ones, be it a russian, afghanis or a somalian. But its the same ones over and over. There are small portions of a game where you are on a snow mobile or shooting a missile from a predator drone.... They complain because they didn't change the ENTIRE Halo formula. MW2 campaign is WAY worse for variety and story wise and Killzone 2's campaign is mediocre and the variety was very litle YET they are still fun to play. Reach is no perfect, but 6.5 outta 10? "cool to hate" syndrome.
i know im going to get gang raped for this, but i kinda agree with these guys. the campain for halo reach wasnt that fun for me. As i was playing, i always had a feeling of been there done that. ive played with all these weapons before, i driven most of these vehicles before, ive killed most of these enemies before, nothing in the campain blew me away. There was a few cool things that were new to halo, like the space combat. But ive done that before in other games, and it wasnt leaps and bounds above what ive played before. The gummi ship in kingdom hearts and the space section in R&C Crack in time both come to mind, the difference being that you could customize and upgrade you ship in those two other games. The low gravity part was one of my favorite parts, (took me back to tribes) but it was pretty short. The "sniper" section was fun, but it wasnt as well done as it has been in call of duty or bad company. The idea of a prequel got me excited, but the character development wasnt nearly as good as what i hoped for. most of the dialog didnt do much for me, and i only felt connected with one character, noble 5. all the others were either annoying, noble 2, had no personality, noble leader, or you only see them for a very brief time. The sniper spartan? I think i only played one mission with him. As i was watching trailers for this game i would get pumped. "Oh yeah, 6 spartans workin together kicking ass, it cant get any cooler than that!" But in reality, most of the time, you are only playing with one or two other spartans, or by yourself! So, to sum it up, i just didnt have that much fun. My jaw never droped, and my adrenaline only got pumpin maybe 2 or three times. Like i said, i just had this feeling of been there, done that. If i was a journalist that was assigned to review this, after playing it for a while i would tell my boss that its just not my type of game, and i probably wouldnt give it the review it may deserve, so someone else should probably review it. Im happy for all the people that enjoyed it, but, for me personally, if i had to give the campain a score, it would be a 7.5 maybe 8.
The campaign in reach was just like the rest of the series. Very boring. The only time i enjoyed the campaign was at the 2 last missions. I have no intentions on doing the campaign again, unless of course i get people over and they wanna play splitscreen campaign.
I tried playing 4 player legendary coop with all skulls on. Every little skirmish is like a small war.
I agree with this review as well. I believe the campaign, in story telling and game play, was like any other Halo, minus armor abilities. Reach is a untold story in a Master Chief Arc and I've been playing in that same Arc for far too long. The Armor abilities are different and kinda cool for multiplayer, yet they lack the formula to arouse excitement and slap freshness to the series as a whole. However, it maybe fair to say that Halo was never meant to be a game that was to turn the excitement to Level 12 but it was meant to share a good story (for the sixth time). Nevertheless, I know I've played too many Halos when I believe that the latest version is too similar to be truly entertaining. Nevertheless, in COD's MW2 defense, it's story telling made a fatal error, but that clearly never stripped anything away from the "enjoyment" of playing the game. In my conclusion, I agree with Pixel Enemy's review for the single player and propose that inflated review scores by other reviewers were probably enabled by the vocal Halo Community and Halo's publisher, probably. When I think about it, FPS shooters in this generation that deserve A's and up for story and story telling so far, in my opinion, are games like Bioshock, COD 4, Half-Life 2(series) and Portal.(I haven't played any PS3 FPS, so forgive me if Resistance is as good as these games) Do you believe Reach's story is as good as my petite list above? Enjoy :-)
Utter stupidity. These guys claim their review is "honest" but people who actually think it's a 9 or 10 somehow aren't giving an honest review. "Hey, my opinion is more authentic than your opinion". Idiots.
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.