Xenostar said: uh oh its down to 92 now |
it looks like its gonna struggle to stay above killzone 2, let alone to become a GOTY
Xenostar said: uh oh its down to 92 now |
it looks like its gonna struggle to stay above killzone 2, let alone to become a GOTY
i could say the same thing about Ratchet And Clank, the 1st one on PS3 scored 89...and the 2nd one being much MUCH better scored 87... this is what some calls "saturation" of the market, we could say that Halo: Reach does all the other halo did, but improved...Halo 3 didn't have firefight, ODST added it to the series, H:R is adding it too...what i'm trying to say, is that a game needs innovation plus improvements to get a higher rating that its predecessors, the same CAN'T be said about MW2 or U2, because both games added something new to the series, besides the explosive campaigns (which is something that looks like H:R doesn't have)
again, there's opinions, and opinions, it results that your opinion is one of those who gave the game a 100/100 because you like Halo, that's it.
I'm Back! - Proud owner of the best doomed handheld of all time!
Is the review score going to make you enjoy the game any less?
All I can say is I cant wait to get home a play my copy. Damn you people who are already playing it.
pizzahut451 said:
|
<333
GoW3 is 92 aswell. Same score as Reach x0.
yo_john117 said:
Nope your flat out wrong....all you have to do is actually play it to figure that out. OT: I completely agree, I think tons of reviewers are rating it low just to get hits (cause they know an absolute TON of Haters and hardcore fans alike are gonna look at the reviews) |
He'll never play it but is willing to blindly bash it due to which console it's on.
Aldro said:
<333 GoW3 is 92 aswell. Same score as Reach x0. |
Gears 3 isn't out yet.
Lord Flashheart said:
Gears 3 isn't out yet. |
I believe he meant God of War 3....
Reviews are always broken, thats why i always had more fun with the 60-70ish ones than i had with the exteremely overrated ones.
take RDR for example , Red Dead Redemption is very overrated, gets boring fast since you played this formula over and over, it had a pretty lame storyline and is very glitchy.... VERY glitchy, also the characters are a little interesting but not THIS much, they're all the stereotypical Western movie, very shallow.
Edit : also for fuck sake why is Scott Pilgrim so low in the reviews, its one of the most polished and most detailed retro beat em up EVER.
- Wasteland - The Mission.
Lazthelost said: The biggest fail here is that certain people in this forum are saying that the campaign is short and unmemorable, but they haven't played it, let alone beat it. I just started the 4th mission out of ten total,and around the 3 hour mark. So far this story has been amazing.Even more detailed than previous Halo games. I can't wait to keep playing today. |
I assume that is directed at my comment.
I said it "seems" to be that way, in that this thread is about Halo: Reach's reviews, and from what I gathered reading through the comments made by reviewers and critics, points were being knocked from the overall score because of a campaign mode that wasn't living up to expectations.
I wasn't giving my personal opinion on the story, that would be silly because I haven't even played it.