General Halo Thread & Discussion

[goku262002]

Who the hell are Quarter to Three? It looks like some basic blog someone made in a day rather than a press site blog, so why is Metacritic counting their review?

The archives state it has been around since March 2008. but I've never seen reviews from this blog before. are they regularally added?

[Remy]

Beeen playing multiplayer most of the day. It's pretty fantastic. Visals and sounds are incredible. I've never liked gun sounds in a game this much.

Only thing bothering me is most fights seem to be pretty messy DMR/BR wars, with whichever team has more players involved winning- but that is probably because I'm not used to the mechanics yet. Bloom is a lot less apparent than reach, i was nailing people long range with the pistol.

Love it so far.

[Candescence]

LOL Metacritic. It's a broken system, and a complete joke, why anyone actually cares about it is baffling. Though that review seems rather reasonable to me, but eh.

Yes, it looks beautiful and all, but it's another goddamn Halo game, decent at best, but there are so many better games out there, and I'm not gonna buy another FPS on a console ever again.

Edited November 6, 2012 by Masaru Daimon

[Alice Twilight]

I'm watching a video of the first level.

Looking pretty good, only minor nitpick I have with it is, Master Cheif talks way too much in-game and I'm noticing how annoying his voice is.

[Autosaver]

Apparently some huge (heartbreaking) spoiler is going around.

LOL Metacritic. It's a broken system, and a complete joke, why anyone actually cares about it is baffling. Though that review seems rather reasonable to me, but eh.

No. Metacritic is a very important guide to use when buying video games. Not everyone has the 60 dollars to shell out to go "LOL AT LEAST I TRIED IT FOR MYSELF". I understand that it isn't important to be specific but using the 3 different "color" ranges can be a nice tool. If most reviewers are having a negative experience with it, what do you think the game will be? Amazing?

Edited November 6, 2012 by Autosaver

[Alice Twilight]

Apparently some huge (heartbreaking) spoiler is going around.

No. Metacritic is a very important guide to use when buying video games. Not everyone has the 60 dollars to shell out to go "LOL AT LEAST I TRIED IT FOR MYSELF". I understand that it isn't important to be specific but using the 3 different "color" ranges can be a nice tool. If most reviewers are having a negative experience with it, what do you think the game will be? Amazing?

I've found a few games reviewers have slammed to be pretty great.

Sonic Unleashed comes to mind.

[Candescence]

No. Metacritic is a very important guide to use when buying video games. Not everyone has the 60 dollars to shell out to go "LOL AT LEAST I TRIED IT FOR MYSELF". I understand that it isn't important to be specific but using the 3 different "color" ranges can be a nice tool. If most reviewers are having a negative experience with it, what do you think the game will be? Amazing?

My main problems with it is the broken aggregation system, it's ludicrously disproportionate power (the whole mess involving Fallout New Vegas' developers not getting additional pay just because the game got a Metacritic score just ONE POINT under the minimum needed is an excellent example), and I think review scores in general are increasingly worthless, especially if many big games are simply given extremely high scores all the damn time, especially by big publications. When there's only one 'mainstream' reviewer who doesn't give out scores and isn't afraid to give the big, hyped games a complete thrashing (and with very good reason in many cases), there's something wrong with game reviews today.

[goku262002]

When there's only one 'mainstream' reviewer who doesn't give out scores and isn't afraid to give the big, hyped games a complete thrashing (and with very good reason in many cases), there's something wrong with game reviews today.

Mainstream? oh nono I haven't even heard of this guys' blog until yesterday. Don't care how long its been around, its definately not mainstream.

And your just noticing this?! theres allways been something wrong with game reviews even when it comes to our blue rodent mascot.

[Candescence]

Mainstream? oh nono I haven't even heard of this guys' blog until yesterday. Don't care how long its been around, its definately not mainstream.

And your just noticing this?! theres allways been something wrong with game reviews even when it comes to our blue rodent mascot.

Uh... Not what I was talking about, actually. Said blog actually uses a score. I'm actually talking about a certain fast-talking Brit who is pretty much famous for tearing games to shreds in video form and makes fanboys cry on a regular basis, and even did one review in limerick form because the game he was reviewing was so utterly dull and committee-designed that a regular review would be just as equally as dull. YOU KNOW THE ONE.

What, you think I haven't been noticing the horrible state of game reviews? It's been blatantly obvious for ages, now. The inability of reviewers to go below 7 for the vast majority of games on the ratings scale, with some exceptions for some blatantly bad games (and in some cases horrendously bad games, such as Big Rigs), is another glaring issue.

[Eternal EX]

*looks at link*

Wait. AC1 had DLC? I knew nothing about it til today. Not like I want to try it or anything (because playing that game after the sequels is a pain) it's just I never knew anything about that game having DLC.

[goku262002]

Uh... Not what I was talking about, actually. Said blog actually uses a score. I'm actually talking about a certain fast-talking Brit who is pretty much famous for tearing games to shreds in video form and makes fanboys cry on a regular basis, and even did one review in limerick form because the game he was reviewing was so utterly dull and committee-designed that a regular review would be just as equally as dull. YOU KNOW THE ONE.

What, you think I haven't been noticing the horrible state of game reviews? It's been blatantly obvious for ages, now. The inability of reviewers to go below 7 for the vast majority of games on the ratings scale, with some exceptions for some blatantly bad games (and in some cases horrendously bad games, such as Big Rigs), is another glaring issue.

Ah Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw, yes who could forget his utter meltdown over Unleashed. He didn't rip into Reach that bad tbh it was more of his "meh" games.

Yeah but this review is conflicting. giving a game a 1/5 or something like that now a days gives off the impression that your a major anti-fanboy whos venting its unprofessional and reviewers try to avoid it as much as possible. Dread's review is a good example of a level headed review, someone who did like the game but didn't treat it like gods best gift to man since bread.

[Detective Shadzter]

343 reflects on Halo 4: 'I knew this team was capable of something amazing'

http://www.computera...ething-amazing/

Halo: 343 would consider different genres, mediums

FPS is "the best place to tell one kind of story," says exec producer

http://www.computera...genres-mediums/

Halo 4 server issues reported, 343i 'investigating'

Players encounter launch-day multiplayer hiccups

http://www.computera...-investigating/

[Eternal EX]

I kinda expected a few hiccups on launch day. I mean who didn't?

[goku262002]

Yeah seriously, Didn't they study the Reach Beta & Final and Halo 3 launch day statistics? the servers crashed twice each time due to massive overload.

Now excuse me, I gotta contribute to the overload. *dives back in*

[Eternal EX]

Goku, what's your gamertag so I can DESTROY YOU!

[redhellc]

I wish I could be playing this, but I have to wait a little longer to have the game...

And I know I'm missing something good, right?

[Eternal EX]

I wish I could be playing this, but I have to wait a little longer to have the game...

And I know I'm missing something good, right?

Lets just say this. Before I played Halo 4 I was like this:

After playing Halo 4 for 4 hours I'm like this:

IT'S JUST THAT GOOD!

[KHCast]

Just beat the campaign. Wow. Seriously, the plot at first seemed pretty basic, but the flips and turns it took to get to the end is what surprised me. I loved it.

I literally shed a few tears when Cortana sacrificed herself. PLEASE let this not be the end of her!

The music, the design, the atmosphere the acting all was superb! Probably one of mmy favorite Halo plots or even game plots!

[Tommy.]

I'm such a nerd. I got my game this morning and maxed out the ammount of XP I could get in a day! For the record I had double EXP for every match I played!

[Eternal EX]

It's official. Halo 4 is on my list for Game Of The Year. Seriously the multiplayer is fantastic. I haven't touched Spartan Ops yet but I already know it's going to be good. And Campaign......I'll return for that verdict.

[Nix]

Well I started the campaign awhile ago. It's pretty standard Halo fare so far; I hope it starts to pick up soon.

I played one game of Team Slayer on the multiplayer. It was very fun, but I'm a little miffed that I have to unlock fucking emblem patterns. I don't mind unlocking shit, but I want my character to have some personality and uniqueness to him when I start multiplayer.

It's a nitpick, but I'm still mad about it.

Edited November 7, 2012 by Pinkamina

[SuperStingray]

I'm about an hour into the campaign. So far I'm really into it; it feels much more like a classic, high-velocity shooter. For the record, Halo 3 and Reach felt rather "meh" to me- kind of pompous and grand, trying to bring your attention more to the weight of the situation at hand than creating memorable scenarios within it. In Halo 4 though, I was thrust into the action almost without a moment's notice. I'm finding myself acting much more frantically and strategically than before. I'm running out of ammo faster than ever, which is really causing me to take advantage of the level design. I'm also fond of the new aesthetic direction; it captures the same environmental magnitude Halo 3 had, but is more focused on creating strong individual encounters and making the tale feel urgent rather than large. I guess I'm being kind of vague, but what I mean is that Halo 3 was like "you have to go on a long and epic quest to save the galaxy" and Halo 4 is like "you only have to save this one ship but you have to do it RIGHT FUCKING NOW." But then again, I'm only an hour in so that's subject to change.

Also, the forerunner weapons are AWESOME.

Edited November 8, 2012 by SuperStingray

[Chaos Warp]

Man, I REALLY wish I could play this but the money isn't there and my mom won't even let me buy it because it's M-Rated................

[DSP001]

I only played Halo 4 for two hours last night, but OH MY GOD I am in love with this game, It's just so visually beautiful, the new spartan armour designs are fantastic! I have yet to meet the forerunners though, I'm playing on heroic for the first time in my halo life and I'm kinda getting my ass handed to me.

[Eternal EX]

Best feature ever!