hYpnochronic said:
Lazthelost said:
hYpnochronic said:
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.
|
Wow. I am awestruck. You must have played a completely different game than the rest of us. I am almost finished and so into it. It is by no means "unbearable". The epic battles, the amazing score, the interactions between characters. I am literally begging to know what happens next, but unfortunately I have to sleep. The characters and story in reach are the most personality driven in a halo game, other than Halo Wars. I am completely at a loss for your comment.
I can't help but nod my head in shame and say "you're doing it wrong" if that is even possible.
|
I played a different game than you if what you played wasn't Halo Reach, because that's what I played. How can I be "doing it wrong" when it's an opinion? That's kind of a strange argument. I didn't find any "epic battles" or "amazing scores". I did find repetitive scenarios and bad voice acting and script. The score, which is normally one my favorite parts of Halo campaigns, was kinda bland to me this time around. The returning themes from the previous Halos were still good, but the new stuff was kinda banal. I'm sure if someone loves Michael Bay movies (or are just Halo fanatics in general) then they'll enjoy the Reach campaign. I, on the other hand, think they are trash (MB movies, not Halo). Opinions are opinions, and everybody can have one. At least I'm saying it having seen the campaign myself, and not making up a bunch of babble without any real experience with the game, like how people complain about review scores before the games are even released becoz they think they know more about a game that someone who has actually played it.
So I didn't trash Halo the game, but the campaign alone. I guarantee the vast majority of people play Halo for the multiplayer and not the campaign, and many have the same point of view that I have. I don't think many people can validly argue that point.
|
