Why is Halo Reach so bad?

Is it the maps that all look the same.
Is it the bloom.
Is it that it doesn't have Master chief in it.

What is it?

I actually sold my copy back to Gamestop for reasons I cant explain.

I just hate the game to the point where I went out of my way to blast it on bungie.net.

And the funny thing is, I was obssessed with Halo 2 and Halo 3 playing well over 5,000 matches combined between both games.

The second I played the maps, the hatred began growing. And it spiraled out of control from there.

It's not.

My conclusion on your case: you thought it was the second coming.

Stop overhyping games like that and you'll be ok.

;)

While I agree the maps are mostly terrible the rest of the game is great.

I dont know why you dont like it, I for one think its a great game

what i want to know is how did Reach score 9.5 with current standards.

GS is scared to flop halo? i think so.

yea game is pretty good. I never played any other of the halos online though. I just went back to playing halo the other night since i had been playing black ops so much recently... and it just made me appreciate the game more.

what i want to know is howdid Reach score 9.5 with current standards.

GS is scared to flop halo? i think so.

ZoomZoom2490

It got a 9.5 because the reviewer liked the game. Which is what 90% of all the other publications thought too. Maybe MS paid off every reviewer to rate it 90+?

[QUOTE="ZoomZoom2490"]

what i want to know is howdid Reach score 9.5 with current standards.

GS is scared to flop halo? i think so.

It got a 9.5 because the reviewer liked the game. Which is what 90% of all the other publications thought too. Maybe MS paid off every reviewer to rate it 90+?

Halo Reach isn't bad.

[QUOTE="Fizzman"]

[QUOTE="ZoomZoom2490"]

what i want to know is howdid Reach score 9.5 with current standards.

GS is scared to flop halo? i think so.

ZoomZoom2490

It got a 9.5 because the reviewer liked the game. Which is what 90% of all the other publications thought too. Maybe MS paid off every reviewer to rate it 90+?

91% vs 95%. The difference is MIND BOGGLING. I know you are still really upset that GT5 flopped, but attacking Halo won't change the score.

I thought it was great. It is up there with CE in terms of single-player, and the best multiplayer of all Halo games.

It isn't bad, but it isn't great either

Except it's quite the opposite.

My conclusion on your case: you thought it was the second coming.

Stop overhyping games like that and you'll be ok.

;)

GreenGoblin2099

Oh wait...

[QUOTE="ZoomZoom2490"][QUOTE="Fizzman"]

It got a 9.5 because the reviewer liked the game. Which is what 90% of all the other publications thought too. Maybe MS paid off every reviewer to rate it 90+?

Fizzman

91% vs 95%. The difference is MIND BOGGLING. I know you are still really upset that GT5 flopped, but attacking Halo won't change the score.

Formula for the perfect Halo game:

1. Blend Halo 3 and Reach's forge features

2. Better custom games

3. Better maps, Bungie got lazy when it came to using forgeworld for a lot of the multiplayer

4. Keep the CR system

5. Keep the Armory

6. Add findable skulls again.

7. Get a legendary ending

8. Get a more epic story.

That's my opinion.

It's not bad. You, obviously, just have a very negative opinion about it. Unfortunately for you, it is in the minority.

The problems with the maps wasn't the fact that they were forgeworld but that they were all from the SP so the maps couldn't be balanced.

The problems with the maps wasn't the fact that they were forgeworld but that they were all from the SP so the maps couldn't be balanced.

Fizzman

[QUOTE="ZoomZoom2490"][QUOTE="Fizzman"]

It got a 9.5 because the reviewer liked the game. Which is what 90% of all the other publications thought too. Maybe MS paid off every reviewer to rate it 90+?

91% vs 95%. The difference is MIND BOGGLING. I know you are still really upset that GT5 flopped, but attacking Halo won't change the score.

[QUOTE="Fizzman"]

[QUOTE="ZoomZoom2490"] is that why Reach is barely AAA at GR? you should of checked the facts before replying.ZoomZoom2490

91% vs 95%. The difference is MIND BOGGLING. I know you are still really upset that GT5 flopped, but attacking Halo won't change the score.

[QUOTE="Fizzman"]

[QUOTE="ZoomZoom2490"] is that why Reach is barely AAA at GR? you should of checked the facts before replying.ZoomZoom2490

91% vs 95%. The difference is MIND BOGGLING. I know you are still really upset that GT5 flopped, but attacking Halo won't change the score.

No it really is that simple. Can you tell the difference between a 91% rated game and a 95% rated game? 71 out of 97 reviews on Metacritic were AAA. 20 were AA and 6 were A. The game obviously got the score it deserved since 73% of the reviews agreed with GS and 27% disagreed.

It's not bad. You, obviously, just have a very negative opinion about it. Unfortunately for you, it is in the minority.

lundy86_4

I bought it launch day. Did I think it was gonna be better than the 2nd comming of Jesus? No, but I expected it to be a good game. Had buddies over for the multiplayer and campaign. Didn't finish campaign, got boring although I do plan on finishing it. Multiplayer? Haven't played online yet but the co-op was fun for a few hours then it got boring and repeatative, in the bad sense. Halo is just one of those things I don't get why people like, and it obviously is a bad game imo. Deserved no more than a 7.0. Had about as much fun with it as The Conduit.

If a game was bad because a few people disliked it, every game would be bad. Every game, no matter how good it is, will have people who dislike it.

what i want to know is how did Reach score 9.5 with current standards.

GS is scared to flop halo? i think so.

ZoomZoom2490

[QUOTE="ZoomZoom2490"]

what i want to know is how did Reach score 9.5 with current standards.

GS is scared to flop halo? i think so.

JohnF111

Or you know, he likes the game?

Actually, it´s great.

[QUOTE="ZoomZoom2490"][QUOTE="Fizzman"]

91% vs 95%. The difference is MIND BOGGLING. I know you are still really upset that GT5 flopped, but attacking Halo won't change the score.

Fizzman

No it really is that simple. Can you tell the difference between a 91% rated game and a 95% rated game? 71 out of 97 reviews on Metacritic were AAA. 20 were AA and 6 were A. The game obviously got the score it deserved since 73% of the reviews agreed with GS and 27% disagreed.

It isn't bad, but it isn't great either

DanteSuikoden

Is it...awesome?

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

It's not bad. You, obviously, just have a very negative opinion about it. Unfortunately for you, it is in the minority.

ChubbyGuy40

I bought it launch day. Did I think it was gonna be better than the 2nd comming of Jesus? No, but I expected it to be a good game. Had buddies over for the multiplayer and campaign. Didn't finish campaign, got boring although I do plan on finishing it. Multiplayer? Haven't played online yet but the co-op was fun for a few hours then it got boring and repeatative, in the bad sense. Halo is just one of those things I don't get why people like, and it obviously is a bad game imo. Deserved no more than a 7.0. Had about as much fun with it as The Conduit.

There's nothing wrong with not liking it. Hell, not everybody is gonna like every game. Still, Halo as a series is critically acclaimed and has a lengthy and sizeable userbase to back it up.

Saying that, the game isn't perfect. I got bored of some of the maps, but when my friend has done playing it i'm gonna download the new map pack.

Game was very good, but I am disappointed with the MP. I still play it regularly, but it could have been better.

it really isnt, its my favorite halo game below combat evolved and its a heck of a lot better game the halo 3, odst was a lot different of a game though...so its harder to compare it to reach, but i enjoyed reach, and thats more then i can say for halo 3

[QUOTE="Fizzman"]

The problems with the maps wasn't the fact that they were forgeworld but that they were all from the SP so the maps couldn't be balanced.

SpiritOfFire117

While Reach had a great first impression, after about 2 weeks it good incredibly repetitive and boring for me

[QUOTE="SpiritOfFire117"]

[QUOTE="Fizzman"]

The problems with the maps wasn't the fact that they were forgeworld but that they were all from the SP so the maps couldn't be balanced.

jg4xchamp

Swordbase - Good

Zealot - terrible

Asylum -terrible ( I dont know why people pick this map)

Powerhouse -good

Countdown - good

Cage - terrible

Pinnacle - good (not balanced though)

Reflection - good (also not balanced)

Im only grading 4v4 maps.

Coming from playing ODST for a million years (Made the stupid mistake of trying to redo a level which made me have to restart, and the I kept forgetting to save) I liked it the second I started playing it. It brought back the old feel of not having to hide so much, and the teammates in sp are cool and actually do something, AI drivers will always be bad in Halo though.

While majority of the maps are horrid, the game itself is pretty good. There's nothing like playing games of Big Team Battle without studdering and breakdancing around the map like Call of Duty. Reach is the only reason I turn on my 360...