Anyone else here notice how Gamespot's seeming praise during the Halo Wars Marathon didn't match with the oppinions of the Video review done by the Uk branch. Very contradictory if you ask me.
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Remember, a review is just one person's opinion. It doesn't mean everyone that works for a publication feels the exact same way. That would be like saying that because some white guy hates black people, then all white guys hate black people.UT_Wrestler
Exactly. I feel the same way. It's a shame others don't realize a review is just an opinion.
Lots of people love to hate the Halo series. Get someone who has never heard of Halo before to do a review.Atomic_BaconLol that would require the review to be done by someone who really isn't a gamer. The guy who reviewed it isn't a halo hater, his review was based on how it stacks up to current rts games on the market. If you take the same gameplay but take the halo universe out of it, most people wouldn't have given a damn about it.
A review is someone's opinion sure. However, in the review, he made Halo Wars sound as if it were fun, but then he presented MINOR issues, like having no flood class, and therefore the game deserved a 6.5 . . . sometimes there's a difference between opinion and just being wrong, lol. In this case, Gamespot was WRONG.
Opinions can be neither right nor wrong. I think he was pretty clear on his problems with the game; it has nowhere near the depth or wealth of options that the best modern RTS games have. Now if you don't think that deserves so many points knocked off, that's fine, but to him, being a pc rts veteran, those are major issues.A review is someone's opinion sure. However, in the review, he made Halo Wars sound as if it were fun, but then he presented MINOR issues, like having no flood class, and therefore the game deserved a 6.5 . . . sometimes there's a difference between opinion and just being wrong, lol. In this case, Gamespot was WRONG.
ace070590
[QUOTE="Atomic_Bacon"]Lots of people love to hate the Halo series. Get someone who has never heard of Halo before to do a review.UT_WrestlerLol that would require the review to be done by someone who really isn't a gamer. The guy who reviewed it isn't a halo hater, his review was based on how it stacks up to current rts games on the market. If you take the same gameplay but take the halo universe out of it, most people wouldn't have given a damn about it.It is true that if you took the gameplay element and set it in something else it might not be that popular. However, if Ensemble can take that element an implement Halo music, Halo environments, characters, etc, and make the game more appealing, then there's nothing wrong with that. The reviewer, in this case, shouldn't just say oh well this game is bad simply because it's not like PC RTS's . . . the reviewer should recognize that Ensemble took a popular franchise, made it RTS, had good controls, great music, some of the best cutscenes, and fun co-op mode.
[QUOTE="ace070590"]Opinions can be neither right nor wrong. I think he was pretty clear on his problems with the game; it has nowhere near the depth or wealth of options that the best modern RTS games have. Now if you don't think that deserves so many points knocked off, that's fine, but to him, being a pc rts veteran, those are major issues.True, opinion can be neither right nor wrong until proven wrong . . . I think I proved him wrong.A review is someone's opinion sure. However, in the review, he made Halo Wars sound as if it were fun, but then he presented MINOR issues, like having no flood class, and therefore the game deserved a 6.5 . . . sometimes there's a difference between opinion and just being wrong, lol. In this case, Gamespot was WRONG.
UT_Wrestler
A review is someone's opinion sure. However, in the review, he made Halo Wars sound as if it were fun, but then he presented MINOR issues, like having no flood class, and therefore the game deserved a 6.5 . . . sometimes there's a difference between opinion and just being wrong, lol. In this case, Gamespot was WRONG.
ace070590
That's why they have a "Critics Score" link. That way you can see what all the other reviewers think. Typically, they're all pretty much in line with each other, though for this one they do seem a bit outta line.......
[QUOTE="UT_Wrestler"][QUOTE="ace070590"]
A review is someone's opinion sure. However, in the review, he made Halo Wars sound as if it were fun, but then he presented MINOR issues, like having no flood class, and therefore the game deserved a 6.5 . . . sometimes there's a difference between opinion and just being wrong, lol. In this case, Gamespot was WRONG.
Opinions can be neither right nor wrong. I think he was pretty clear on his problems with the game; it has nowhere near the depth or wealth of options that the best modern RTS games have. Now if you don't think that deserves so many points knocked off, that's fine, but to him, being a pc rts veteran, those are major issues.True, opinion can be neither right nor wrong until proven wrong . . . I think I proved him wrong. Actually no, you didn't. All you've proven is that you still don't understand the difference between a fact and an opinion.I see the "Reviews are just opinions!" brigade has found this topic. Next we'll have the "Are you saying he's not allowed to have an opinion??" crew descend to spread their peculiar brand of thinking.
I didn't watch the gameplay marathon. If they did gush all over it in that, but then gave it a 6.5 in its review...I don't think that really "proves" anything. A 6.5 is not "bad." I do think GameSpot or any reviewing site should be editorially consistent, but having fun playing a game and giving it a 6.5/10 aren't mutually exclusive.
Or if you prefer this:
"Reviews are just opinions!!11!!oneone!! /thread
Wow! That just solves everything! I'm going to go post this on every topic where reviews are mentioned!"
:roll:
I see the "Reviews are just opinions!" brigade has found this topic. Next we'll have the "Are you saying he's not allowed to have an opinion??" crew descend to spread their peculiar brand of thinking.
I didn't watch the gameplay marathon. If they did gush all over it in that, but then gave it a 6.5 in its review...I don't think that really "proves" anything. A 6.5 is not "bad." I do think GameSpot or any reviewing site should be editorially consistent, but having fun playing a game and giving it a 6.5/10 aren't mutually exclusive.
Or if you prefer this:
"Reviews are just opinions!!11!!oneone!! /thread
Wow! That just solves everything! I'm going to go post this on every topic where reviews are mentioned!"
:roll:
A game can be fun to play and still get a mediocre review score if it lacks replay value. Checkers can be fun to play, but it doesn't have the depth or lasting value of chess, so when I compare them side-by-side I'd give chess much more favorable reviews. Comparing Halo Wars to a game, like, say, World in Conflict, is pretty much like comparing checkers to chess.You guys underestimate a 6.5. It's fun if you like Halo - that's going to be a given. It's not like it got a 1.0. It's just deemed a below average game for people who aren't fans of Halo.A review is someone's opinion sure. However, in the review, he made Halo Wars sound as if it were fun, but then he presented MINOR issues, like having no flood class, and therefore the game deserved a 6.5 . . . sometimes there's a difference between opinion and just being wrong, lol. In this case, Gamespot was WRONG.
ace070590
[QUOTE="UT_Wrestler"]Remember, a review is just one person's opinion. It doesn't mean everyone that works for a publication feels the exact same way. That would be like saying that because some white guy hates black people, then all white guys hate black people.OfficialBed
Exactly. I feel the same way. It's a shame others don't realize a review is just an opinion.
I do, can I have a cookie? Either way. Halo Wars was a decent game. Good even. But I still only put it in my 7-8 range. Actually, a solid eight. There was things I didn't care for and things I did. One of my sillier issues was the game looked nice, why couldn't I get all the way down to the action? I felt like the lack of really interesting camera angles would end up making the game less awesome if I found a problem with it in the demo alone.God forbid anything halo related can get a bad score.sharpshooter188But....but...Mastur cheef are cewl gai !! He ken keel alienz and aren't afreid of nuthin!!!! (Dissing Halo3 these days is like dissing Twilight in a room full of Emo kids. Bound to make a scene but funny enough to do over and over.)
God forbid anything halo related can get a bad score.sharpshooter188god did forbid it, thats why we are all so shocked
Remember, a review is just one person's opinion. It doesn't mean everyone that works for a publication feels the exact same way. That would be like saying that because some white guy hates black people, then all white guys hate black people.UT_Wrestler
Exactly. I feel the same way. It's a shame others don't realize a review is just an opinion.
I do, can I have a cookie? Either way. Halo Wars was a decent game. Good even. But I still only put it in my 7-8 range. Actually, a solid eight. There was things I didn't care for and things I did. One of my sillier issues was the game looked nice, why couldn't I get all the way down to the action? I felt like the lack of really interesting camera angles would end up making the game less awesome if I found a problem with it in the demo alone. Well you'll be happy to know that most gaming publications had higher opinions of the game than gamespot.[QUOTE="OfficialBed"][QUOTE="UT_Wrestler"]Remember, a review is just one person's opinion. It doesn't mean everyone that works for a publication feels the exact same way. That would be like saying that because some white guy hates black people, then all white guys hate black people.phynixblack
Exactly. I feel the same way. It's a shame others don't realize a review is just an opinion.
I do, can I have a cookie? Either way. Halo Wars was a decent game. Good even. But I still only put it in my 7-8 range. Actually, a solid eight. There was things I didn't care for and things I did. One of my sillier issues was the game looked nice, why couldn't I get all the way down to the action? I felt like the lack of really interesting camera angles would end up making the game less awesome if I found a problem with it in the demo alone.If metacritic didn't have it around 82% it wouldn't have raised as much eyebrows.
Someone here made an analogy about checkers not having has much depth as chess, and Halo Wars not as much as World in Conflict. I thought World in Conflict didn't have any base building or resource gathering doesn't that make it as simple of an RTS as they come. Also the point of this forum wasn't about oppinions but about the inconsistancies exibited by people who arePAID to give insights into games which can in the long run kill or help a game.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment