A review score is (or should be) more than the sum of its features
But i've been on the "reviews are broken" plank for a long time. I'm a Nintendo fan, after all.
Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.
A review score is (or should be) more than the sum of its features
But i've been on the "reviews are broken" plank for a long time. I'm a Nintendo fan, after all.
Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.
Honestly, the multiplayer alone warrants an incredibly high score. The campaign, however, is near unbearable. It has one of the worst single player modes I've ever forced myself through. I kind of wish they had just left it out and included more multiplayer maps.
But the argument that reviews are broken is completely legitimate. For example, the same reviews that bashed Metroid: Other M for it's voice acting and story gave Halo a pass by either saying the campaign wasn't really important, or even worse yet, that it was SO GOOD and made you sympathize and care about the characters (it does NOT). Having been through it, I can now most certainly say Halo Reach is FAR worse in almost every regard (single player). It's hokey, corny, contrived, and generic. It's a bad Michael Bay B-rate action movie. I've criticized Metroid Other M quite a bit, but the fact that Halo Reach gets a pass is ridiculous. Is it all in the hype? Possibly. One thing I've started to realize lately though, is that reviews are:
1. For sale (advertising etc)
2. A way to promote one's love of a certain console
On multiplayer alone though, I truly believe that Reach unquestionably deserves high praise. I guess the question is, what SHOULD A REVIEW BE? Does it have to include every facet of the gameplay possibilities? Do even the menu screens count? Should excessive load screens drop the score even though it doesn't affect the game itself? I personally believe each game is different and requires it's own criteria. So READ the reviews, be familiar with the reviewers track record, and don't by into hype. It's really easy to tell when a game suffers from it's own popularity. You just have to pay attention.
You are seriousley complaining about a 9.3 metacritic score?
You understand that puts the game above masterpieces such as God of War 3, Super Street Fighter IV, Team Fortress 2, Final Fantasy X (XII and XIII as well), Arkham Asylum, Uncharted, Assassins Creed 2, RE4Wii and Shadow of the Colossus? What's funny is every single one of those games is better.
arcane_chaos said:
|
I said GoW not GeoW and since GoW3 is out and GeoW3 isnt, its obvious what I meant. Thanks for clearing that up though. Just have to add this!
xDD
perpride said: You are seriousley complaining about a 9.3 metacritic score? You understand that puts the game above masterpieces such as God of War 3, Super Street Fighter IV, Team Fortress 2, Final Fantasy X (XII and XIII as well), Arkham Asylum, Uncharted, Assassins Creed 2, RE4Wii and Shadow of the Colossus? What's funny is every single one of those games is better. |
Yeah cause you have played Halo Reach right?
Aldro said:
I said GoW not GeoW and since GoW3 is out and GeoW3 isnt, its obvious what I meant. Thanks for clearing that up though. Just have to add this! xDD |
Seeing as this is the MS forum and GoW is used for Gears here.
Mind you I've seen you guys throw hissy fits in Gears 3 threads for using GoW so this doesn't surprise me.
Also I was winding you up. Don't be so quick to bite in the future.
Lord Flashheart said: Seeing as this is the MS forum and GoW is used for Gears here. Mind you I've seen you guys throw hissy fits in Gears 3 threads for using GoW so this doesn't surprise me. Also I was winding you up. Don't be so quick to bite in the future. |
Needlessly winding people up is called flamebait, so just don't do it in the future and everyone will be happy.
...
Lord Flashheart said:
Seeing as this is the MS forum and GoW is used for Gears here. Mind you I've seen you guys throw hissy fits in Gears 3 threads for using GoW so this doesn't surprise me. Also I was winding you up. Don't be so quick to bite in the future. |
No you weren't. You were just wrong because the "3" gives it away.
Hackers are poor nerds who don't wash.
Torillian said:
|
Oh come on not fair. i was having a laugh It's not my fault they bite too easily and are way too serious.
Besides coming into the MS forum and using GoW and not seeing the fault in that then posting badly shopped photo's isn't flaming?
Didn't realise we couldn't have a laugh and wind each other up anymore? I know I've been away for a while but this is silly.
Apparently "3" means I was wrong on something but he'll have to explain that to me.
Lord Flashheart said:
Oh come on not fair. i was having a laugh It's not my fault they bite too easily and are way too serious. Besides coming into the MS forum and using GoW and not seeing the fault in that then posting badly shopped photo's isn't flaming? Didn't realise we couldn't have a laugh and wind each other up anymore? I know I've been away for a while but this is silly. Apparently "3" means I was wrong on something but he'll have to explain that to me. |
I have no patience for starting the idiotic GoW vs. GoW argument. Particularly when it was obvious by context. Take this less as an admin telling you you can't do it because of rules against flamebait and more as a fellow user of this site who is sick of seeing the same pointless idiotic argument brought up again.
...