By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
thismeintiel on 19 September 2009
Edit Thread
voty2000 said:
MAFKKA said:
I just watched the 50min single player campaign of ODST. Graphics are good and the story seems good. The first map however was really dark! And the Visor that helped out with highlighting friends and foes looked like the same thing L4D does, its good but personally i dont like it. And i didnt like how the game looked so smooth (not a good type of smooth). There was almost no recoil, and when you run theres no movement with he character. And when you jumped around it looked like you were under water because of the "smoothness". And is it autoaim? Looked like the crossair was really stuck to some enemies, but that might be the greatness of the FPS controller that the 360 has.

But overall id say the game is definitely a 8/10.. based on what i saw, which once again was just a short 50min.

THe ODST's are super soldiers so they are no supposed to have recoil.  That's part of their and Master Chief's charm and what makes them so deadly.


That seems more like a cop out so they don't have to program it in.  But the real reason I'm posting is, guys don't take critizisms about Halo as personal attacks.  Everyone has differing opinions.  I've only played multiplayer on Halo 2.  It was fun.  And some kudos have to be given to Bungie for bringing online gaming to the majority of games.  I don't believe they invented FPS, the control scheme, or online gaming, like some blind fanboys claim.  But I will give them credit for polishing these components and putting it in an overall fun package.  Having said that, I still feel original X-box owners were looking for something to cling onto to make their purchase justifiable, and Halo was it.  The same argument that was used last gen is used this gen, too.  "Well, we have Halo."

Now for this review.  What I find sad is how gaming sites and magazines have started to allow either their own console prejudices, or the fear of hundreds of messsages from mad fanboys cloud their reviews.  As a reviewer, your supposed to rate these games as an overall package, while allowing your own opinions to only SLIGHTLY sway your final judgement.  As someone pointed out earlier, you can't rate something with below average or average graphics, with fun gamplay, the same as another game that has spectacular graphics and fun gamplay.  To do that just slaps developers who spend years prefecting a game in the face, while rewarding mediocrity.  Now consider if this game was released on the PS3 with the same graphical traits as this game has.  It would be Haze all over again.  Lower scores than it deserves (6.9 average) because the graphics aren't up to snuff.  But because it's Halo, fanboys won't except games lower than 9, no matter how little polish is put into it.