selnor just let this reviewer his opinion and everything is good...the reviewer doesn't like more possible ways to beat the campaign and only wants to have everything extremely scripted so he obviously doesn't love halo and doesn't have so much fun with it which is the reason why he gave halo a “low“ score. people who can read and love what he doesn't like will read the review as positive for them like i read out of it that i will love halo 4. the score just tells his taste and not if it is a 70% game for everyone. it's the same vice versa, he will probably give cod a higher score because his taste seems to be perfect for cod singleplayer. if his score will be 90% and he will say that it's awesome scripted and nicely linear people who love this will understand it's also a 90% game for them and people who hate this kind of game will undestand this review as “don't buy it“ even with a high score.
pretty simple, there is no 100% subject review because everyone has another taste and taste is a big part for the experience you will get out of a game. you can objectively say if it has bugs/glitches or if the soundquality is fucked up (not if the music is awesome or only good for everyone) but not if scripted or not so scripted is the definitely better formula.
the only thing i don't like is if a reviewer says it had to be linear or open to be a good game or that a reviewer wants a game to transform to another game so he would like it even if fans don't want it. a reviewer should just realize it's nothing for him but still a good game because all subjectively points aren't bad in halo (fucked up controls or something)
