Reviewer: Halo:ODST is Underwhelming

[QUOTE="simslifer"]

microsoft is just milking consumers dry of money ODST was originally suppose to come out as an expansion and even the reviewer shows that wasn't changed it's basically an expansion of Halo 3 the only difference is that microsoft knows unsuspecting fans will buy anything with halo on it so what do they do ? they say it's a full game and charge $60...

$60 for an expansion unbelievable the losers will be the ones who spent that amount of money for an expansion with 2005 graphics.

I wish the reviewer would not try to be safe and give the score it deserves 5.0 or 3.0 don't be scared do what you feel is right.

The__Havoc

Its also unbelievable that you pay $60 for console games when PC gamers get their games for $50 with better graphics too huh?

Wii owners are getting ripped the most! Xbox 1 graphics, no HD, no surroundsound, no online, all for $60!! :lol:

[QUOTE="The__Havoc"]

[QUOTE="simslifer"]

microsoft is just milking consumers dry of money ODST was originally suppose to come out as an expansion and even the reviewer shows that wasn't changed it's basically an expansion of Halo 3 the only difference is that microsoft knows unsuspecting fans will buy anything with halo on it so what do they do ? they say it's a full game and charge $60...

$60 for an expansion unbelievable the losers will be the ones who spent that amount of money for an expansion with 2005 graphics.

I wish the reviewer would not try to be safe and give the score it deserves 5.0 or 3.0 don't be scared do what you feel is right.

BodyElite

Its also unbelievable that you pay $60 for console games when PC gamers get their games for $50 with better graphics too huh?

Wii owners are getting ripped the most! Xbox 1 graphics, no HD, no surroundsound, no online, all for $60!! :lol:

So you're laughing at your own post's inaccuracies in price before I even get to comment on it?

[QUOTE="The__Havoc"]

[QUOTE="simslifer"]

microsoft is just milking consumers dry of money ODST was originally suppose to come out as an expansion and even the reviewer shows that wasn't changed it's basically an expansion of Halo 3 the only difference is that microsoft knows unsuspecting fans will buy anything with halo on it so what do they do ? they say it's a full game and charge $60...

$60 for an expansion unbelievable the losers will be the ones who spent that amount of money for an expansion with 2005 graphics.

I wish the reviewer would not try to be safe and give the score it deserves 5.0 or 3.0 don't be scared do what you feel is right.

BodyElite

Its also unbelievable that you pay $60 for console games when PC gamers get their games for $50 with better graphics too huh?

Wii owners are getting ripped the most! Xbox 1 graphics, no HD, no surroundsound, no online, all for $60!! :lol:

[QUOTE="BodyElite"]

[QUOTE="The__Havoc"]

Its also unbelievable that you pay $60 for console games when PC gamers get their games for $50 with better graphics too huh?

captain_diego

Wii owners are getting ripped the most! Xbox 1 graphics, no HD, no surroundsound, no online, all for $60!! :lol:

:lol: A last gen console is $50 less than two current gen consoles, and yet you are still trying to defend it :roll:

[QUOTE="captain_diego"][QUOTE="BodyElite"]

Wii owners are getting ripped the most! Xbox 1 graphics, no HD, no surroundsound, no online, all for $60!! :lol:

BodyElite

:lol: A last gen console is $50 less than two current gen consoles, and yet you are still trying to defend it :roll:

[QUOTE="BodyElite"]

[QUOTE="captain_diego"] hey guy.. the Wii is 250, the games are 50 at most, it has online play, and it has a little more power than the Xbox. Theguy56

:lol: A last gen console is $50 less than two current gen consoles, and yet you are still trying to defend it :roll:

The Wii has games? The last decent game that i heard of coming out for the Wii was SSB. Everything since then is a blur to me

[QUOTE="Theguy56"][QUOTE="BodyElite"]

:lol: A last gen console is $50 less than two current gen consoles, and yet you are still trying to defend it :roll:

BodyElite

The Wii has games? The last decent game that i heard of coming out for the Wii was SSB. Everything since then is a blur to me

I'm going to say this only once...

Anyone who thinks Halo 3's graphics don't look really good, regardless of whether they are or are not being compared to the likes of Gears of War 2 and Killzone 2, is f'n blind.

I know I would most certainly rather have a game with Halo 3's graphics than GOW2's for sure any day of the week.

I'm going to say this only once...

Anyone who thinks Halo 3's graphics don't look really good, regardless of whether they are or are not being compared to the likes of Gears of War 2 and Killzone 2, is f'n blind.

I know I would most certainly rather have a game with Halo 3's graphics than GOW2's for sure any day of the week.

amaneuvering

The importance of graphics is always trivialized when talking about Halo. Sure gameplay > graphics, but graphics matter too. The Halo engine looked dated when Halo 3 released. They're using the same frigging engine! I can imagine people would feel underwhelmed by that. Now people will of course call me cow or fanboy, because anyone who says anything negative about Halo gets labeled like that. I own a 360 though and I've played though Halo 3's campaign twice (nota big online gamer though). But any other game wouldn't get away with dated graphics as Halo does and you all know that's true.

Don't get me wrong though, it's just the graphics and the lack of a critical view for certain games that I fret about. I'm more than willing to believe that Halo's MP is very good, as millions of people enjoying it prove. But IMO it is completely justified to criticize Halo's technical prowess.

This brings up a good point though about the state of gaming magazines (online or otherwise) regarding the scores. I love how no one has the guts to be honest with high profile games, Edge gets bashed a lot because people don't agree with them, but at least they will score a game how they feel it should be scored and not what everyone else scores it.

I have a feeling that hype really drives review scores.

GTA 4 suspect number one, most reviewers score it 10 because its GTA (I think so)? Funny how no one else who actually plays thinks its worth that.

The list just goes on.

The importance of graphics is always trivialized when talking about Halo. Sure gameplay > graphics, but graphics matter too. The Halo engine looked dated when Halo 3 released. They're using the same frigging engine! I can imagine people would feel underwhelmed by that. Now people will of course call me cow or fanboy, because anyone who says anything negative about Halo gets labeled like that. I own a 360 though and I've played though Halo 3's campaign twice (nota big online gamer though). But any other game wouldn't get away with dated graphics as Halo does and you all know that's true.

Don't get me wrong though, it's just the graphics and the lack of a critical view for certain games that I fret about. I'm more than willing to believe that Halo's MP is very good, as millions of people enjoying it prove. But IMO it is completely justified to criticize Halo's technical prowess.

NielsNL

It's not that simple, the game was meant to be an expansion, it's really MSs fault, they said no we want it released as a full game. Considering the intentions through early development I think it's forgivable that they did use the Halo 3 engine because it makes sense. By the time MS intervened it was too late to redo any of the earlier work.

MS has complicated matters with regards to this game now.

I'll get it because I enjoyed Halo 3s gameplay.

[QUOTE="NielsNL"]

The importance of graphics is always trivialized when talking about Halo. Sure gameplay > graphics, but graphics matter too. The Halo engine looked dated when Halo 3 released. They're using the same frigging engine! I can imagine people would feel underwhelmed by that. Now people will of course call me cow or fanboy, because anyone who says anything negative about Halo gets labeled like that. I own a 360 though and I've played though Halo 3's campaign twice (nota big online gamer though). But any other game wouldn't get away with dated graphics as Halo does and you all know that's true.

Don't get me wrong though, it's just the graphics and the lack of a critical view for certain games that I fret about. I'm more than willing to believe that Halo's MP is very good, as millions of people enjoying it prove. But IMO it is completely justified to criticize Halo's technical prowess.

Darth_DuMas

It's not that simple, the game was meant to be an expansion, it's really MSs fault, they said no we want it released as a full game. Considering the intentions through early development I think it's forgivable that they did use the Halo 3 engine because it makes sense. By the time MS intervened it was too late to redo any of the earlier work.

MS has complicated matters with regards to this game now.

I'll get it because I enjoyed Halo 3s gameplay.

And you should get it if you enjoyed the gameplay. Why wouldn't you? You're actually not disagreeing with me here. You're also being critical, albeit you specifically direct the criticism away from Bungie and towards MS, which is justified. My issue is with the lack of any criticism many people have with respect to Halo. That's simply being blind to reality.

Only complaint I see are the graphics, did he even talk about the campaign and firefight?

mitu123

it looked like a lame game just from the videos ive seen of it.. such as E3 i think it was and other ones (all on game trailers anyway :P) it does look a bit ****. It just seems like a back up game from microsoft. Its no where near as cool looking as Gears2 or Killzone2. Halo3 was good and great in places but it felt like the truely last game now they are bringing out 2 more titles.. plus the halo wars. its all very rushed and milked. The gaming community does forget about franchises alot quicker when they start pumping out poor titles.. such as NFS bit of a classic case...

Oh well it may be a great game.. just doubt it alot =\

[QUOTE="Darth_DuMas"]

[QUOTE="NielsNL"]

The importance of graphics is always trivialized when talking about Halo. Sure gameplay > graphics, but graphics matter too. The Halo engine looked dated when Halo 3 released. They're using the same frigging engine! I can imagine people would feel underwhelmed by that. Now people will of course call me cow or fanboy, because anyone who says anything negative about Halo gets labeled like that. I own a 360 though and I've played though Halo 3's campaign twice (nota big online gamer though). But any other game wouldn't get away with dated graphics as Halo does and you all know that's true.

Don't get me wrong though, it's just the graphics and the lack of a critical view for certain games that I fret about. I'm more than willing to believe that Halo's MP is very good, as millions of people enjoying it prove. But IMO it is completely justified to criticize Halo's technical prowess.

NielsNL

It's not that simple, the game was meant to be an expansion, it's really MSs fault, they said no we want it released as a full game. Considering the intentions through early development I think it's forgivable that they did use the Halo 3 engine because it makes sense. By the time MS intervened it was too late to redo any of the earlier work.

MS has complicated matters with regards to this game now.

I'll get it because I enjoyed Halo 3s gameplay.

And you should get it if you enjoyed the gameplay. Why wouldn't you? You're actually not disagreeing with me here. You're also being critical, albeit you specifically direct the criticism away from Bungie and towards MS, which is justified. My issue is with the lack of any criticism many people have with respect to Halo. That's simply being blind to reality.

Well we agree. :)

I have to say though, while it is a bit shoddy, I won't really care, I kind of have slightly lower standards with games graphics :P, I enjoy great graphics but don't need high end graphics if you see what i'm saying, maybe it's the art style, i'm not sure but I like Halo 3s graphics.

But I do think MS has a duty to have its 1st party stuff looking good.

My standards aren't low to the Wii level though because ya know... damn :| (I have one, but thought Nintendo could have done a lot more with the GPU and some half decent MSAA would have made me very happy).

I read an article in GI about how some franchises should have died before the got shamed (like the Tony Hawk and Sonic games), I'm hoping Halo doesn't go that same route.

Reach better be a damn good game, and it better be the last because I don't plan on buying Halo7 when it has a review score of, well, 7. Please, don't milk Halo to death.

I read an article in GI about how some franchises should have died before the got shamed (like the Tony Hawk and Sonic games), I'm hoping Halo doesn't go that same route.

Reach better be a damn good game, and it better be the last because I don't plan on buying Halo7 when it has a review score of, well, 7. Please, don't milk Halo to death.

SPYDER0416

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

I read an article in GI about how some franchises should have died before the got shamed (like the Tony Hawk and Sonic games), I'm hoping Halo doesn't go that same route.

Reach better be a damn good game, and it better be the last because I don't plan on buying Halo7 when it has a review score of, well, 7. Please, don't milk Halo to death.

II_Seraphim_II

Like I pointed out to my friend earlier, it would have been great if a Halo FPS had environments the size of a map in Halo Wars (albeit a bit more streamlined) with massive battles going on.

[QUOTE="gmc2u_64"]

[QUOTE="Brownesque"] I've played a few. I've played a Forza 2 demo, a CoD2 demo, a PDZ demo, a Halo Wars demo, a GRAW 2 demo.....all those on an HDTV demo kiosk... Unfortunately I've only played Gears 1 and Oblivion on an SDTV and Gears of War 2, Halo 3, and Viva Pinata briefly on an HDTV. Seeing as I don't own an Xbox 360 and don't get a lot of opportunities to play them, I haven't played many Xbox 360 games, but that's really besides the point. You know, it's sick. Some guy apparently thinks I'm being too technical so I summarize in a single sentence and you tell me something completely unrelated, insinuating that my analysis was based on an experience I obviously don't have. My analysis wasn't based on experience, it's based on the careful reasoning you can see at the top of this page in the thread. You take a 640p image and display it natively without stretching out the image on your computer screen and it looks as its rendered. If you play it on a television set it stretches that picture out to match the size of your television set. It doesn't look worse in the sense that it degrades the actual visual quality of the image, but try saving an image to your desktop and open Microsoft photo viewer. Then zoom into the image. That's effectively the same thing. Here, take one of these ODST screens, save them to your desktop, open them with Microsoft photo viewer and zoom in. That's the kind of effect you're getting on your television set. Obviously, you're increasing view distance to compensate, but the actual attractiveness of the image will have degraded. And for the record I've played a lot of PS3 games that look nice in screens and look horrific when you actually play them. For example, MGS4 looks pretty terrible from time to time and so does CoD4. It's the same effect, it isn't dependent on the color of plastic or the branding of the machine.Brownesque

[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="Brownesque"] If you say so.Brownesque

He only complained about graphics. The other complaint I would give is it being overpriced. Really, though, the graphics point is irrelevant because it's a Halo 3 expansion pack; it will have close to the same graphics, if not exactly the same.NYrockinlegend

[QUOTE="NYrockinlegend"]He only complained about graphics. The other complaint I would give is it being overpriced. Really, though, the graphics point is irrelevant because it's a Halo 3 expansion pack; it will have close to the same graphics, if not exactly the same.Vandalvideo