I find it quite odd that the reviewer had all these damning things to say about the game, and then goes and gives it a near perfect score...
HALO 3:
‘While the story doesn't transcend the genre, it is some pretty engrossing stuff’
‘There just aren't a lot of groundbreaking gameplay elements, turrets and shields have been a part of pc shooters for almost a decade, and this is one area where the Halo series is still playing catch up’
‘You get all the staples of the series, but there's nothing trailblazing’
‘The gameplay in halo 3 can't exactly be considered combat evolved, more like combat refined’
‘More boss battles would have been nice’
‘The first 2 halos set technical benchmarks on the consoles, but this is one area where halo 3 will be a disappointment for some. It’s definitely not the best looking console game on the market, or even it's platform’
‘The real sore spot is the character modeling. They simply don't look as good as you'd expect.’
Then it's given a 9.8.
Does anyone else find this passing strange?
