Official Halo Wars Thread - Keep It Here!

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]It's not even that.

Lets see then:

Have you played the full product? No. Check.

Do you disagree with the review? Yes. Check.

Do you belive Gamespot has lost credibility because of a single review of a game you havn't played except for a demo? Yes. Check.

So basically when we add this all up, your post = damange control.

It's as simple as that.

xsubtownerx

Right. Expect for the fact GS gave the lowest score so far out of all the critics. I think there is reason for some damage control for those who have played the demo. I for one, after reading the IGN review this morning, think this GS reviewer is pretty weak.

Dosn't matter that it is the lowest score. You can not agree or disagree with it until you play the full product, it simply isn't possible. You could just as easily agree with the IGN review as you could the GS review after playing it. The demo is just that, a simple demonstration that gives the player a mere sample of the final product. I'm not saying the review is right, but what I am saying is that it can't possibly be said to be wrong by people who have not played the final game. For those that attempt to do so, that is known as damage control, and I'm sorry to tell you that you are quilty (EDIT:Word jumble.) of that. If you don't like the review fine, don't let it impact your descision, but don't try and question the critics crediblity when you have none your self/ lack the requirements to do so.

So basically, after reading and watching the review, if it's not a shooter gamespot won't like it. Doesn't anybody find it strange that they're the ones that gave this game it's lowest score? Don't you also find it strange that Age of Empires scored a 6.8 here also?xsubtownerx

I have to agree, it seems that shooters always score high even when they aren't that great while other genres have a tough time getting a AA score from GS.

Sites ranking this a 9 are ultimate fan boys. I can accept an 8 but a 9? Give me a break. Its an uber easy short boring looking uninnovative CONSOLE Rts. 7 seems like a decent score.

Gamespot has been rating games low lately almost to make up for their overrating games for so long

acsguitar

[QUOTE="carlisledavid79"]Ok so now onto the next big game. If a certain FPS thats due out soon scores 6.5 or lower. I will personaly eat my PS3 and post it up on youtube.Uptown

I will drop out of dental school if Killzone 2 gets a 6.5. (It wont)

I am so bookmarking this

just in case^^

[QUOTE="xsubtownerx"][QUOTE="WasntAvailable"]It's not even that.

Lets see then:

Have you played the full product? No. Check.

Do you disagree with the review? Yes. Check.

Do you belive Gamespot has lost credibility because of a single review of a game you havn't played except for a demo? Yes. Check.

So basically when we add this all up, your post = damange control.

It's as simple as that.

WasntAvailable

Right. Expect for the fact GS gave the lowest score so far out of all the critics. I think there is reason for some damage control for those who have played the demo. I for one, after reading the IGN review this morning, think this GS reviewer is pretty weak.

Dosn't matter that it is the lowest score. You can not agree or disagree with it until you play the full product, it simply isn't possible. You could just as easily agree with the IGN review as you could the GS review after playing it. The demo is just that, a simple demonstration that gives the player a mere sample of the final product. I'm not saying the review is right, but what I am saying is that it can't possibly be said to be wrong by people who have not played the final game. For those that attempt to do so, that is known as damage control, and I'm sorry to tell you that you are quilty (EDIT:Word jumble.) of that. If you don't like the review fine, don't let it impact your descision, but don't try and question the critics crediblity when you have none your self/ lack the requirements to do so.

Ensemble + Halo + Console RTS = I saw this coming from miles away.

A five hour singleplayer campaign? If it's true, that's just pathetic.

I didn't read the GS review.

I read this one, and agree with it completely.

wow the damage control in this thread is impressive already over 600 postsTekkenloving

Finally! the shipment of DC has arrived... for a second I though SW had failed me.

I give credit to the few that just shrug it of and don't bother posting some essay about how GS reviews are this or that.

It's a flop in SW, not at your house.

Ensemble + Halo + Console RTS = I saw this coming from miles away.

A five hour singleplayer campaign? If it's true, that's just pathetic.

[QUOTE="WasntAvailable"][QUOTE="xsubtownerx"]

Right. Expect for the fact GS gave the lowest score so far out of all the critics. I think there is reason for some damage control for those who have played the demo. I for one, after reading the IGN review this morning, think this GS reviewer is pretty weak.

xsubtownerx

Dosn't matter that it is the lowest score. You can not agree or disagree with it until you play the full product, it simply isn't possible. You could just as easily agree with the IGN review as you could the GS review after playing it. The demo is just that, a simple demonstration that gives the player a mere sample of the final product. I'm not saying the review is right, but what I am saying is that it can't possibly be said to be wrong by people who have not played the final game. For those that attempt to do so, that is known as damage control, and I'm sorry to tell you that you are quilty (EDIT:Word jumble.) of that. If you don't like the review fine, don't let it impact your descision, but don't try and question the critics crediblity when you have none your self/ lack the requirements to do so.

You have every right to question credibility after you have played through the game. To do so before hand is damage control, in order to reasure your self that you will enjoy the experience. I don't see you critising the flaws of the IGN review, even though I am sure they are there. Care to explain why?

There's no need to answer though, I already know why, just make sure you do before you try to do this again.

Oh.

I was one of the people expecting a AAA from GS. I'm at a loss for words right now.:shock:

hehe this is just like when all the cows were accusing gamespot of being "lemspot"

it's amazing how many people suddenly trust IGN and metacritic (among other sites) over gamespot

teh hipocracy!1!!

It's weird that most of big titles on 360 get flopped for random reasons, yet I don't remember anything beside last Ratchet and Clank on PS3 that was flopped in a random fashion. Hey, I can understand their 7.5 for Race Pro, but 6.5 for Halo Wars? The same score for Rise of the Argonauts which is the most pathetic technical mess I ever played? (the game underneath is decent-to-quite-good though, just the technical side of it is a total mess). I don't know what GS did try to manifest in here? I guess I have to find out by myself.Salt_The_Fries

I believe the review for halo wars said the game is too simple, not that there is a pile of technical problems. Too simple = no depth = no fun.

For anyone who cares, Eurogamer have reviewed it.Floppy_Jim

"As a return to one of the 360's most popular universe, it's about as good an RTS as a Halo fan could expect."

Oh, so true :lol:

as a RTS fan?

[QUOTE="TheOwnerOner"]GS game it the lowest score out of all the reviews, I think we all can agree that GS is an unreliable source of review for Halo Wars.Mr_Apple_Soup

:lol: gotta love damage control

Agree :D :lol:

Hey, is there any other RTS on 360 that offers 3 vs. 3 with co-op option? And campaign in co-op?Salt_The_Fries

Gamespot is still at the very bottom at Metacritic. Average is at a strong 82.Stevo_the_gamer

Now now. I thought we are using only GS scores here right?;)

[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]Gamespot is still at the very bottom at Metacritic. Average is at a strong 82.loseittoo

Now now. I thought we are using only GS scores here right?;)

Not since that poll where the majority voted anarchy. ;)

[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]Gamespot is still at the very bottom at Metacritic. Average is at a strong 82.loseittoo

Now now. I thought we are using only GS scores here right?;)

[QUOTE="loseittoo"]

[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]Gamespot is still at the very bottom at Metacritic. Average is at a strong 82.Hexagon_777

Now now. I thought we are using only GS scores here right?;)

Not since that poll where the majority voted anarchy. ;)

[QUOTE="Stevo_the_gamer"]Gamespot is still at the very bottom at Metacritic. Average is at a strong 82.loseittoo

Now now. I thought we are using only GS scores here right?;)

[QUOTE="Hexagon_777"][QUOTE="loseittoo"]

Now now. I thought we are using only GS scores here right?;)

Stevo_the_gamer

Not since that poll where the majority voted anarchy. ;)

Link me up, mate.

[QUOTE="Salt_The_Fries"]Hey, is there any other RTS on 360 that offers 3 vs. 3 with co-op option? And campaign in co-op?Teufelhuhn

Hmmm, co-op - yes, but I'm not sure about the number of the participants.

Lemmings are now going to create damage control for the next few months just like cows did when GS flopped Socom PS3.Nerd_Man

I enjoyed the DC in that thread more. "Bu bu bu wait for the patch:cry:"

No patch for Halo Wars, just flop.

Cue the horns!!

Halo Wars = FLOP-tastic! :cry:

Hmm, I'm not a big fan of RTS games, but I played the demo and it didn't seem that bad. Oh well, I guess it sucks. Though I have a hard time believing that this game is worse then FEAR 2, that game is crap....

[QUOTE="Teufelhuhn"][QUOTE="Salt_The_Fries"]Hey, is there any other RTS on 360 that offers 3 vs. 3 with co-op option? And campaign in co-op?Salt_The_Fries

Hmmm, co-op - yes, but I'm not sure about the number of the participants.

Its 4 vs 4 on the PC...could be less on consoles.