The Official Halo: Reach review thread

[iWarMachine]

Icyedge said:

CGI-Quality said:

93 is a solid Meta. Should hold at least 91 or 92 to the end though, and perhaps even 93 or 94, depending on the 8s and 9s. Anyone read any of the sub 9 reviews?

I read the gamesradar one since I was curious about the only 80. It was well written, splitten in 2 categories, campaign and multiplayer. Honestly, after reading the campaign review I thought it were going to score 8 but it scored 7, no big deal there, he wasnt praising it. But, after reading their multiplayer section, I really thought it was going to score a 10, it scored 9. Strangely, their Halo 3 multiplayer score is 10 and the reviewer said himself that halo reach multiplayer is even better. The way he review the multiplayer really does seem like he think it is the more advance multiplayer of all console FPS. Why does he give it a 9 then? Read it, its interesting. Maybe gamesradar wanted hits...

maybe this happened because i think that the standards had changed since 2007, that's why Halo 3 is supposed to be "better" than Halo:Reach, because back then, the standards were not as high as nowadays.

in 2007 Halo 3 was THE multiplayer, today we've MW2,BC2,U2... maybe that's why the score is lower.