Will Halo 5 hit a 90+ on Metacritic?

i knew my post would annoy the hell out of you. (Achievement Unlocked)

@silversix_: Is it really? I would imagine Halo sells more?

We know how honest Halo reviews are...

I bet it's going to sit at around a 92 tbh. It'll probably have one or two 10's from people that give games with big names perfect scores, and a few lower 7's from reviewers that like to be "edgy" and give games with big names low scores.

So you admit to being nothing more than a troll?

Oh...that's very true.

Truth is, I was being kind and uncharacteristically short(er) winded.

I think Gerstmann had an excellent point and Halo MCC having the brand name definitely helped 343 that time.

@intotheminx: it will sell more, of course. But when it comes to the most talked title among gamers, the Souls series is way more popular nowdays. I believe the same thing will happen with gears 4, people are simply tired of it. Sure you'll see some X1 owners hype it (not like there's anything else to look forward to) but its nowhere near as it once was. Another good example is Ass Creed, just look at how uninterested people are into Syndicate compared to ass creed 4 and the previous ones. this may very well happen with the Souls series if they keep spamming them on a yearly basis but since there's major changes in every entry and every game has a lot of depth into it (not like ass creed lol... all you do is climb shit and press one button to execute enemies), that thing may only be growing even its being made every year.

Do you know the story of Mr Niche Title aka nyadc? He gets annoyed when anything positive is being said about the Souls series. If you happen to mention a Souls game being better than his precious "dynamic resolution" Halo 5, game over. And by stating a simple fact that the Souls games are more popular among gamers, its supposed to be trolling? not anyone's fault he gets annoyed for random shit like that... Just look how quickly MCC and Halo 4 was forgotten (MCC less so but for obviously wrong reasons, broken game for over half a year, 6/10 etc) while BB is being compared to pretty much anything because its the best console exclusive since both systems launched. But i gotta admit, i do love nyadc defending his 1-2 console exclusives with a wall of text as if it was necessary for those games to do well. A true lem.

80-85-ish.

@intotheminx: I think it's on the first page. That's where I saw it a couple of days ago.

90-91 probably. I don't like Halo at all but it always was scored pretty high. Halo 4 score was surprise though because it is much better than any of the prequels.

GS and sites like it can give it a 6.0 to bring down the meta but no matter since all I know is ..... HOAT. :P

No...not it was not. You could argue that the story in Halo 4 was better than in previous titles of the series, but that's about it.

The multiplayer (the source of longevity for the game) was the low-point BY FAR for the series due to the number of anti-competitive mechanics they added like customized loadouts, random weapon call-ins, etc. It fundamentally destroyed the arena multiplayer aspects of the Halo series such as map control, power weapon control, and equal starts. Halo 5 is luckily reversing all of that and returning to its roots while still adding new mechanics to the gameplay.

As for the OPs initial question, I think the game has a solid chance to average over 90% given you only use reputable, professional reviews in your average. I know that huge titles like Halo get fanboys going crazy and they'll spam the user reviews with horrible reviews because it somehow makes them feel better. The Beta was the most fun I've had in a Halo title since Halo 2, and that was nearly a year ago.

probably not. im guessing high 80s

Yeah, I think so. At lowest 88, highest 92.

No. First person shooters rarely get 9 scores anymore, because they lack innovation, and each new iteration of a franchise is just an update.

Yeah it will. All the media outlets that got the early acess are raving about it. It won't get super high 90s because of all the fake cow reviews that will drag it down some but it'll hit 90.

343 is closing the chapter on Master Chief/Bungie Halo moving the series forward from here on with their own heroes.

81-84/100

No more, probably less.

95 percent of sequels lack innovation and are essentially updates, it's hilarious since you have an Nathan Drake avatar and Uncharted is the biggest rehash of all

Hmm a collection that was broken at launch got an 85, but Halo 5 will get an 80 or less...and this ladies and gentlemen is why you should never feed your kids lead flavored baby formula

If I remember correctly, a bunch of those reviews were done at an MS review event before the servers were online so they weren't aware of the multiplayer problems

Also, if it's just lead flavored without containing any lead, I'm not seeing the big issue

@rektpl1: probably not. Not that it doesn't deserve to, but there seems to always be a few sites that Halo games 1/10 ( which is rediculous) - probably to try to get site traffic.

They should have the talent, 343 is made up mostly of ex bungie people who worked on the first 5 halo's (1-3, reach, and ODST)

That's not true, that's a well known myth (considering it's been half a decade since this myth has been continuously proven false too many times to count across the internet). I always wonder why people post myths in SW. There must be a reasonable doubt when that misinformation was typed, right? Not even 343 nor Bungie ever made that claim, so surely this strange myth caused you some doubt as you started typing it all these years later?

Why is it left to me to constantly correct misinformation...dang.

Ex-Bungie and now 343 employee Frank O'Connor even set the record straight a few times. A handful of Bungie employees left for 343 and to this day they may have 2-3 left.

First of all, the scores speak for themselves. Bungie's main numbered Halo games were all 90+ metascore (ODST was meant to be an expansion and is called Halo 3: ODST).

343 has hit 87/100 with Halo 4 and a lower 85/100 for Halo MCC (which was too high, discussed by Jeff Gerstmann). That was the talent of which I was speaking, their actual output.

Secondly 343 is not made up of MOSTLY EX BUNGIE people that worked on the first five Halos.

343 was never comprised of mostly Bungie members. It was only ever a handful, but it became a widely-repeated myth throughout the community that most of the company was made up of the team who worked on Halo 1-3. I even remember an interview Frankie did while promoting Halo 4 where the interviewer stated as fact that there were a lot of former Bungie people at 343, and Frankie had to correct him and say it wasn't true.By my count, the only people at 343 who were full-time Bungie employees on any of Bungie's Halo games are Frank O'Connor, Greg Snook and Glenn Israel. There used to be a few more, like Nathan Walpole, Chad Armstrong and Vic DeLeon, but they've all left. There's also a handful of people who were contractors on one or more of Bungie's Halo games who are now full-time 343 employees, like Donnie Taylor, Will Christiansen and Dan Phillips. To quote a different Frankie interview, "343 is almost entirely non-Bungie people".

You can learn more about 343 and Bungie here:

https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/forums/f9237adeaf1742c09de144d7bf3f7507/topics/343i-is-made-up-mostly-of-former-bungie-employees/34429794-f02f-4c3c-b6f7-76df452d78a8/posts?page=1

https://www.reddit.com/r/halo/comments/2u4iq6/how_many_exbungie_employees_are_working_for_343/

https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/forums/f9237adeaf1742c09de144d7bf3f7507/topics/are-343i-still-comprised-of-mostly-bungie-members/53e21dab-4472-44de-a891-caa08bf69ed2/posts?page=1

There are many, many, many more links destroying that oddball myth perpetuated by Halo brand fanboys that want to believe 343 = Bungie, but the bottom line is that a handful of employees =/= mostly bungie people at 343. FAR FROM IT.

You do realize companies (especially ones as big as bungie and 343) have hundreds of devs involved of which nobody knows their names. So goes for every studio. Some people will become famous enough for names. community managers, studio heads etc but truthfully, nobody can name even 5% of most studios employees. the giant bomb list has 59 employees 6 ex bungie, 343 is over 200 currently. devs move around all the time. It's common in the industry.

With that said it is less then I thought, It's not a "fanboy myth" by any means. i can care less who makes a game, only fanboys think like that. a good game is good regardless of the devs. If a restaurant changed chefs but the food was still good, would you care? Yes that's what I heard a lot and maybe i was naive for believing it so thanks for the updated info even if it still leaves out 75% of the current employees. But since you like MC so much bungies last game is a 65 while 343's last game is an 87 so if anything your "MC meter" would say 343 is better. now i personally don't see things that way because review scoring lately has been terrible as gaming sites live off clicks and advertisements so it's way too shady to put any stock into, but so far 343 has made 1 game (they didn't make halo MCC it was mostly bungie material, and remastered by 4 different companies. all 343 did was the menu's pretty much) and that game was awesome.

Even with the negativity of not being bungie and the addition of loadouts in MP (which i hated) it still scored a solid 87. and more importantly i nejoyed the SP and most of the MP. swat was better then ever, grifball was awesome, the team modes (regicide, CTF etc) all awesome, and infected was awesome. I was originally soured on halo 4 becuase it wasn't bungie myself. yeah i was influenced by my love of bungie over the years. But after playing through all 4 halo's again, halo 4 had the best SP by far. and 2nd best MP behind halo 3, but after playing the beta halo 5 seems like it'll have the best MP of them all. SP i'll have to wait 2 more weeks to judge.

Asking Halo 5 being 90+ on meta is like expecting Call of Duty to be 90+ worthy title in 2015.

I'm glad to have aided another user with correct information. You are welcome.

Regarding your other stuff, it was straw-man material. I've already discussed that other stuff in other threads over and over since I first bought Halo 4 way back at launch Nov 6th 2012 (I stood in line for my midnight C.E. Copy). No offense to you, but I'm not looking to engage a tit-for-tat on 343's shortcomings/what they did right with Halo 4 and Halo MCC yet again (I'm sure you've seen my Halo pictures collection, so I won't re-post my pretty pics). I've posted my opinions about those too many times.

We all have opinions on these things. It's fine.

I own both products 343 got credit for so far and I posted my Halo 5 metascore prediction (what this thread calls for).

For the record, I don't like Destiny nor do I care too much about post-Halo Bungie...yet.

For this thread, I was tasked to rate Halo 5 and I'll just repeat myself to keep on topic.

In my prediction, Halo 5 will definitely be a 85+ game for sure. 343's last two games were 85/100* (Halo MCC) and 87/100 (Halo 4).

@upliver: and where did I say that Uncharted WAS innovative? I like the series, but I'll be the first to admit it's just a third person shooter, with very likable characters and good action. Same case for most fps. Did I say they were crap? No. Don't judge me for making an observation.

@SolidTy: weren't you in another thread making sure to distinguish the uncharted collection as a blue point game, even though it's credited to naughty dog, why the change for MCC if it for the most part was developed by different developers than 343, seems hypocritical.

@jet052006: First of all, wrong thread. Way off topic. This is a thread about 343's Halo 5 metascore. You didn't contribute to the topic of what you think Halo 5's score will be.

If you want to omit the Halo MCC 85/100 metascore in how you factor Halo 5's metascore, then you should know Halo 4 was an 87/100. It was the first main numbered Halo game to be below a 90+ metascore.

----

Secondly, no, it's only hypocritical when one is dealing with defensive fanboys willing to do and say anything for new developer 343. It's fairly easy to assess the situation when you put a little time into thinking about it rather than quoting people in the wrong threads. I literally just had to prove that 343 was NOT made up of "mostly Bungie ex-employees" and it seems you skipped over that post to talk about another post from some other thread. I have to be honest, these statements and corrections are very tedious. Part of me almost wants you guys to continue believing whatever it is you believe, since it's clear to me research isn't going into these posts, it's just a bunch of guesswork that I have to constantly address and correct.

The Uncharted Collection's development is not credited to Naughty Dog, it's credited to Bluepoint because that's the developer. There's your mistake.

Naughty Dog and Sony themselves have already given Bluepoint the credit before the game released.

Uncharted Collection and Halo Collection do share credits with the original developers (Naughty Dog and Bungie) because those are Naughty Dog's and Bungie's games being collected. The original developers are given credit for the original work.

Furthermore, Halo Collection (Halo MCC) is credited to 343. Although it's known 343 outsourced parts of Halo MCC, 343 did the same thing for Halo 4 (and 343 gets all the credit for that too). Hell, Bungie outsourced for previous Halos as well. This is all well known for people who follow developers like myself. I also get the thankless job of educating people on this forum from time to time on developers. It's thankless because after the education, I still see rude comments and no thank yous almost ever. At the end of the day, there is a PRIMARY developer behind these products. There is a developer that takes the blame for all these projects and the same developer gets all the fame and glory when these products are amazing.

343 acknowledged that Halo MCC is a 343 game because 343 developed it and it was their game: 343 apologizes for Master Chief Collection.

The industry recognizes that Halo MCC is 343's game. 343 also gave me and others a free copy of Halo 3: ODST for our troubles, courtesy of 343. 343 employees has also been interviewed and explained what went wrong with 343's Halo collection numerous times.

This isn't that hard to see from interviews and 343 saying that Halo MCC is their game, although they did outsource parts, just like Halo 4 has parts outsourced and again 343 got the credit for the planning and execution of the Halo MCC and took the fall for their delivery too.

I do agree that if you are trying to figure out Halo 5's metascore and YOU CHOOSE to OMIT Halo MCC and only look at Halo 4's metascore (87/100), that's fine. Do it.

Also, stop bringing up the Uncharted Collection, I don't own it nor do I care about it. Unlike 343 who had a hand and developed Halo MCC, Naughty Dog did not develop the Uncharted Collection. They are different situations. (BTW: Uncharted Collection is a 86/100 metascore, the Halo MCC is 85/100 metascore). I don't plan on owning the Uncharted Collection. I do OWN the Halo MCC and Halo 4. In fact, I own every main Halo game since launch. I have these answers because I pay attention to the industry that I enjoy. The same way others might follow sports or whatever.

Anyways, wrong topic. If you want more information on how the game industry works, want to discuss who Bungie worked with in the past, who Naughty Dog worked with in the past, who 343 worked with, Bluepoint, Crystal Dynamics, or whatever feel free to PM me and I will elaborate this further.

Dumb question, I've never played the game, how the **** would I know?

I don't care much about scores and won't get it...but still hope for it to have a 90ish score.

@SolidTy: Trying to claim 343 is a 85 scoring developer due to a game they for the most part didn't develop directly relates to this thread, I included your distinction between blue point and naughty dog to demonstrate you are capable of making this distinction. As to your comment about 343 apologizing we have seen this happen many times in such cases like rock steady publically apologizing for the PC port problems of arkham knight, even though they were not involved with that port, along with naughty dog directly commenting on why the uncharted collection has no multiplayer even though they were not developing the collection, but like 343 they are credited with the game.

I'm not sure what your end comments pertains to regarding my post to you.

@jet052006: The difference is, as I pointed out already, 343 did developmental work on Halo MCC and is noted as the primary planner and developer of Halo MCC product. They did outsource elements of the game, for sure. 343, like Bungie before, outsourced on Halo 4 and yet Halo 4 credit is all 343. You get the FAME or the BLAME depending on how things play out. They should have held the product back if it wasn't ready, that was on 343.

Also, I didn't try to claim that 343 is a 85 scoring developer because I stated they released 87/100's Halo 4 as well. That said, 343 IS NOT a 90+ metascoring developer...yet. It could happen with Halo 5 (it will take a few months for the final Halo 5 metascore to figure that out).

What I did do was what was asked of everyone in this thread.

I predicted Halo 5's metascore is going to be 85 or greater.

I will quote myself:

In my prediction, Halo 5 will definitely be a 85+ game for sure. 343's last two games were 85/100* (Halo MCC) and 87/100 (Halo 4).

You will also notice an asterisk* next to Halo MCC's metascore in my quote. That asterisk was deliberate and it was there before you posted in this thread. I also used 343's own Halo 4 87/100 metascore to make my prediction on Halo 5. It's not like I relied on Halo MCC 85/100 to guess.

I also stated that if you wanted to omit Halo MCC in your own personal prediction of Halo 5's metascore (this thread), feel free to do so.

You still haven't posted your Halo 5 prediction for this thread.

In order for it to be a 90+ on Metacritic, it's got to have at least one of two things:

1. A surprisingly great single player campaign, or
2. Better-than-Bungie multiplayer

The first one is easier than the second in concept, but all signs point to it being standard Halo fare with sprinkles of Republic Commando and spoonfuls of SyFy original scriptwriting.

But you need the technical and game-balancing excellence Bungie has to have the second one on lock. Bungie gave the blueprint for console multiplayer in the 7th gen that they were already doing with Halo 2 in the 6th gen. And last gen while people were bickering about Halo 3's graphics, Bungie were already laying out the software-as-service style in the very same game with constant updates that pretty much weren't scene except for on PC. That's a huge reason Bungie were seen as experts in console multiplayer.

343 haven't shown any desire to be a pioneer on that front (and pretty much because the next level of Software-as-Service is Destiny... another Bungie product). They just want to create a good Halo game, and that's fine. But unless it throws major curve balls in AAA design, or unless it's polished flawlessly in every way, it's going to be very hard to attain the 90+ rating in Metacritic five games (and several spin-offs) in.