So, Halo: Reach currently holds a rating of 91 on metacritic.com. I would like to ask, do you think it deserved it? I know a lot of people (Primarily haters) are going to call me fanboy on this one, but I think it should score at least 93 or 94. Despite the rather lackluster story and poorly developed characters (Except for Jorge, and maybe Kat), it's easily one of the best first-person shooters of this gen and way better than Halo 3. The fact that this game has garnered lower reception than Modern Brokefare 2: Modern Campfare, has made me lose all faith in most game critics. BTW, I'm not Call of Duty hater. Every pre-MW2 Call of Duty game made by Infinity Ward were brilliant, and World at War was really good too.
[QUOTE="musicalmac"][QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]No, campaign was dull as hell. AAllxxjjnn
RAGE. Disagree. It deserves every accolade it has received--Maybe more! :o Only when Bungie remakes Death Island for the game will that be true!If a remake of Blood Gulch wasn't enough for you, then you are simply a monster
[QUOTE="musicalmac"][QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]No, campaign was dull as hell. AAllxxjjnn
RAGE. Disagree. It deserves every accolade it has received--Maybe more! :o Only when Bungie remakes Death Island for the game will that be true! Lemme call 'em up, I'll get that added--Just for you, my friend. ;)
A 91 is great, some people seemed to be tired of the Halo formula so it didn't get those ultra high scores people expected, luckily for me it was my second Halo, so I wasn't tired of the formula at all.
A 91 is great, some people seemed to be tired of the Halo formula so it didn't get those ultra high scores people expected, luckily for me it was my second Halo, so I wasn't tired of the formula at all.FIipMode
The problem is, it scored lower than one of the most broken and unbalance piece of crap ever made: Modern Warfare 2.
I think thje halo series overall is an average series.
All In all it's an ok series. 8.5 is what I would average it at.
brosyn
I found that weird for you to say, because you have a Red vs. Blue avatar and most Red vs. Blue fans are Halo fans. I love red vs blue. BUT halo is just a means of telling the story that Rooster teeth wants to tell. It actually has really little to do except with some universe cannon.
[QUOTE="brosyn"]So, Halo: Reach currently holds a rating of 91 on metacritic.com. I would like to ask, do you think it deserved it? I know a lot of people (Primarily haters) are going to call me fanboy on this one, but I think it should score at least 93 or 94. Despite the rather lackluster story and poorly developed characters (Except for Jorge, and maybe Kat), it's easily one of the best first-person shooters of this gen and way better than Halo 3. The fact that this game has garnered lower reception than Modern Brokefare 2: Modern Campfare, has made me lose all faith in most game critics. BTW, I'm not Call of Duty hater. Every pre-MW2 Call of Duty game made by Infinity Ward were brilliant, and World at War was really good too. Should have at least a 93 on Metacritic. There are always gong to be haters for every game. I didn't think Demon's Souls deserved GoTY and MGS IV and GTA IV definitely didn't deserve 10's. It's all just opinions anyways. I wouldn't worry about it to much.
I didn't like reach. The campaign and firefight bored me. MP was terrible with the worst maps ever. And Bungie had committed a wicked, mortal sin for ruining the blood gulch! It was the best map in Halo 1 PC MP but i don't understand how they could have screwed it up in Reach! I loved Halo 1 on PC, Halo 2 was ok, I loved Halo 3 and ODST bored me reach sickens me.
No way it should be even lower. Halo is the most overrated franchise ever. AA quality tops.kuraimen
Maybe every game after Combat Evolved. I don't get why people don't like the 1st halo. It introduced so many new features to FPS's and was a lot of fun, especially with a friend playing it co-op.
[QUOTE="kuraimen"]No way it should be even lower. Halo is the most overrated franchise ever. AA quality tops.XanderZane
I think the same about MGS and GT. Seriously overrated. Nothing is as overrated as Halo though look at the scores here in GS for the 3 series. The Halo scores are ridiculous, I no longer can take GS scores seriously after seeing those. According to GS Halo is close to perfection while those series you mentioned are pretty good but has their flaws which I think is more accurate.
No way it should be even lower. Halo is the most overrated franchise ever. AA quality tops.kuraimen
There are far more overrated games ever, I said it. Deal with it. Such as: MGS series (Especially Metal Gear Solid 4) GoldenEye and Perfect Dark TimeSplitters series The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess StarCraft 2 Modern Warfare 2 Half-Life 2 (Yup, I said it. The first one was better) S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series (Underrated by the gaming media, but overrated by the gaming community) GTA IV, and possibly Vice City or III Gears of War 2 (The single-player is great, but the multi-player must've been coded by mentally handicapped monkeys) Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind (By the gaming community) and Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (By the gaming media) BioShock, and to some extent: System Shock 2
[QUOTE="kuraimen"]No way it should be even lower. Halo is the most overrated franchise ever. AA quality tops.brosyn
There are far more overrated games ever, I said it. Deal with it. Such as: MGS series GoldenEye and Perfect Dark TimeSplitters series The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess StarCraft 2 Modern Warfare 2 Half0Life 2 (Yup, I said it. The first one was better) S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series (Underrated by the gaming media, but overrated by the gaming community) GTA IV, and possibly Vice City or III Gears of War 2 (The single-player is great, but the multi-player must've been coded by mentally handicapped monkeys) No, the Halo franchise is still more overrated than all those games put together.
They could have pulled a ODST on the Campaign or at least a Call of Duty.
Like Play some missions of Nobel 6 then play some of the Other Nobel Team Members so you can at least get to know them better than what you really did.
Most of the happenings in the game just felt empty.
It deserves to be higher. It's objectively the best console shooter out right now.
GS was right on the money with the 9.5. It could have been better (Custom game servers FTW) but its metascore should truthfully be comfortably above any other shooter on consoles in about the mid-high 90's range.
They could have pulled a ODST on the Campaign or at least a Call of Duty.
Like Play some missions of Nobel 6 then play some of the Other Nobel Team Members so you can at least get to know them better than what you really did.
Most of the happenings in the game just felt empty.
LegatoSkyheart
Yeah, lets make it like Call of Duty. Instead of having adaptive and cunning A.I., sandbox combat, and vehicular sections. Let us have a game where you constantly move from one set-piece to another, shooting the same wave of brainless baddies. Halo is teh generic compared to deep shooters with stupid A.I. and over scripted scenario like Half-Life and Call of Duty. It's also Noble, not Nobel.
Yes. I haven't even played too much of Reach (been busy) but it's probably the best FPS on consoles imo and it can give PC ones a run for their money easily. The campaign seemed dull to me, until around half way in. Then missions like "Tip of The Spear" came in and boom, and I'm yet to finish it (stuck on Exodus on Heroic, and I havent had the time to really go for it). Online is fantastic and constantly evolving thanks to Bungie's relationship to it's community. People complained about SWAT, they made a SWAT game type and removed it from others. Same with Snipers in the next one. So yes, it does deserve it's metacritic - and it's better than Halo 3 so actually, it deserves higher.
Is a very good game i agree, however some people are just tired of the halo formula, and i can understand that. However if your a true Halo Fan of the original then you will love it :)
They could have pulled a ODST on the Campaign or at least a Call of Duty.
Like Play some missions of Nobel 6 then play some of the Other Nobel Team Members so you can at least get to know them better than what you really did.
Most of the happenings in the game just felt empty.
brosyn
Yeah, lets make it like Call of Duty. Instead of having adaptive and cunning A.I., sandbox combat, and vehicular sections. Let us have a game where you constantly move from one set-piece to another, shooting the same wave of brainless baddies. Halo is teh generic compared to deep shooters with stupid A.I. and over scripted scenario like Half-Life and Call of Duty. It's also Noble, not Nobel.
He's not talking about enemy AI in the campaign. He's saying he wished the other Noble Team members could have been more fleshed out. Which I agree with. II'd argue Kat and Jorge were really coming into their own personality, and with a bit more screen time they could really shone.
The rest of Noble Team was hardly worth mentioning. We barely saw any of Jun and Emile's character, and Carter sits somewhere in the middle. It's a shame too - they all had potential but it was ruined by poor pacing.
I would say 91 on Metacritic is quite low to what I think it deserves. I loved it, biggest criticism would be the low number of maps, especially for Invasion (my favourite game mode).
Great game. Typical Halo though. Average level design, average story, average characters, fun gun battles, awesome campaign in co op on legendary. :) I'd give it an 8 - 8.5 personally. My little brother has already gone back to MW2 though. :lol:
I would say 91 on Metacritic is quite low to what I think it deserves. I loved it, biggest criticism would be the low number of maps, especially for Invasion (my favourite game mode).SaltyMeatballs
[QUOTE="SaltyMeatballs"]I would say 91 on Metacritic is quite low to what I think it deserves. I loved it, biggest criticism would be the low number of maps, especially for Invasion (my favourite game mode).WhenCicadasCry
[QUOTE="SaltyMeatballs"]I would say 91 on Metacritic is quite low to what I think it deserves. I loved it, biggest criticism would be the low number of maps, especially for Invasion (my favourite game mode).WhenCicadasCry
offtopic:
Your damn sig gets me every time. :x
Which part? Also, technology is only a tool. The end product, the thing that does matter, is the experience.
I didn't really care about Halo after Halo 2's release. Halo 3 was okay. I didn't really like ODST too much. I played those, don't get me wrong; but I didn't really like the stories too much. Reach, however... I don't think Bungie could have done a better job putting a nice bow on the series they created.
[QUOTE="SaltyMeatballs"]I would say 91 on Metacritic is quite low to what I think it deserves. I loved it, biggest criticism would be the low number of maps, especially for Invasion (my favourite game mode).Ravensmash
offtopic:
Your damn sig gets me every time. :x
Was just about to say that. EVERY TIME. That bad, huh? 8)
I felt that GS's 9.5 was spot on. a 10 seemed like it could have been deserving, until I found out how the characters weren't worth liking and it had some frame rate bumps in SP.
games only been improving since release too. have some major playlist upgrades coming in soon, and Co-Op matchmaking for campaign.
just glad Halo 3 is there to buffer all the hate this game could be getting with a 91. you know the cows would be attacking it a lot more right now if H3 didn't score as well as it had in 2007:D
[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]No, campaign was dull as hell. kozzy1234
Campaign was dull? :?
It's dull because it has sandbox combat and dynamic A.I. Which is all crap compared to highly scripted sequences and brainless A.I. like in Half-Life 2 and Call of Duty. Half-Life > Half-Life 2 I've said it Valve fanboys, deal with it.
[QUOTE="AAllxxjjnn"]No, campaign was dull as hell. brosyn
Campaign was dull? :?
It's dull because it has sandbox combat and dynamic A.I. Which is all crap compared to highly scripted sequences and brainless A.I. like in Half-Life 2 and Call of Duty. Half-Life > Half-Life 2 I've said it Valve fanboys, deal with it.
While Half Life 2 was heavily scripted and had average AI, it was a tour de force in level design, and still unrivaled in my opinion. No need to hate dude. ;)
It's dull because it has sandbox combat and dynamic A.I. Which is all crap compared to highly scripted sequences and brainless A.I. like in Half-Life 2 and Call of Duty. Half-Life > Half-Life 2 I've said it Valve fanboys, deal with it.
While Half Life 2 was heavily scripted and had average AI, it was a tour de force in level design, and still unrivaled in my opinion. No need to hate dude. ;)
[QUOTE="brosyn"]It's dull because it has sandbox combat and dynamic A.I. Which is all crap compared to highly scripted sequences and brainless A.I. like in Half-Life 2 and Call of Duty. Half-Life > Half-Life 2 I've said it Valve fanboys, deal with it.Sandvichman
While Half Life 2 was heavily scripted and had average AI, it was a tour de force in level design, and still unrivaled in my opinion. No need to hate dude. ;)
Vehicle sections, blargh,.
I still have nightmares about the boat sections.... absolutely AWFUL.
[QUOTE="brosyn"]It's dull because it has sandbox combat and dynamic A.I. Which is all crap compared to highly scripted sequences and brainless A.I. like in Half-Life 2 and Call of Duty. Half-Life > Half-Life 2 I've said it Valve fanboys, deal with it.Sandvichman
While Half Life 2 was heavily scripted and had average AI, it was a tour de force in level design, and still unrivaled in my opinion. No need to hate dude. ;)
Vehicle sections, blargh,.
I enjoyed them. :P They were almost unplayable on the console versions though, so I can see why they get so much hate.
Log in to comment