By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Microsoft - First Legit Halo : Reach Review - 9.5 / 10 !!!

rakugakist on 11 September 2010
reidlosdog said:
yo_john117 said:

A decent score but what is sad is they gave Halo 3 a 9.8/10  So they basically think Halo 3 is better then Halo Reach.

And the fact that they rated MW2 over Halo Reach is just a pure insult.

I know this is going to sound biased, but GI gives 10's to PS3 Games.  seriously.  Look at the list provided.  they really do have a thing for PS3, and they literally dislike Halo.  No one in the office plays the game hardcore, and no one was actually excited for the games release.  Just saying, that score is an actual shock to me.  I'm almost certain Halo Reach deserves a 10/10.  Looking at how well the AI plays, and how well the multiplayer (Forge, FireFight, then actual multiplayer!?!?), GI better have an actually LISTED reason for taking of .5

@yo_john

How do you know it's an insult?  Have you played Halo Reach?  Do you know it's better than MW2?  Also, scores typically are one man's subjective opinions. Don't let it get to you so much.

@ reidlosdog

How do you know that no one in the office plays the game hardcore or that anyone was actually excited for the games release. Especially figuring that it made the cover last month.  And how are you so certain that Reach deserves a 10/10?

I mean seriously, a 9.5 is a really good score.  Why is everybody freaking out so much?  And why don't we wait until everybody has had a chance to play it before we complain about the score.



Around the Network
Skeeuk on 11 September 2010

9.5 is a briallint score, just because they gave halo 3 higher score 3 years ago doesnt automatically mean reach isnt better.



...not much time to post anymore, used to be awesome on here really good fond memories from VGchartz...

PSN: Skeeuk - XBL: SkeeUK - PC: Skeeuk

really miss the VGCHARTZ of 2008 - 2013...

reidlosdog on 11 September 2010
rakugakist said:
reidlosdog said:
yo_john117 said:

A decent score but what is sad is they gave Halo 3 a 9.8/10  So they basically think Halo 3 is better then Halo Reach.

And the fact that they rated MW2 over Halo Reach is just a pure insult.

I know this is going to sound biased, but GI gives 10's to PS3 Games.  seriously.  Look at the list provided.  they really do have a thing for PS3, and they literally dislike Halo.  No one in the office plays the game hardcore, and no one was actually excited for the games release.  Just saying, that score is an actual shock to me.  I'm almost certain Halo Reach deserves a 10/10.  Looking at how well the AI plays, and how well the multiplayer (Forge, FireFight, then actual multiplayer!?!?), GI better have an actually LISTED reason for taking of .5

@yo_john

How do you know it's an insult?  Have you played Halo Reach?  Do you know it's better than MW2?  Also, scores typically are one man's subjective opinions. Don't let it get to you so much.

@ reidlosdog

How do you know that no one in the office plays the game hardcore or that anyone was actually excited for the games release. Especially figuring that it made the cover last month.  And how are you so certain that Reach deserves a 10/10?

I mean seriously, a 9.5 is a really good score.  Why is everybody freaking out so much?  And why don't we wait until everybody has had a chance to play it before we complain about the score.

Because besides sitting around all day looking at numbers, I actually study reviewers.  In a podcast themselves, GI has stated that Halo has never been a big game in the office.  Halo Reach DID NOT make the cover last month.  What you saw is called a STICKER.  Batman Arckham City made the cover.  GI did not put that as the cover, GAMESTOP did.  GI would never put a Xbox exclusive on their cover, just not like them. 

Because the game is making new and innovative leaps and bounds.  Completely customizable Firefight?  Make a new map, play it with Firefight, set the setting to make you insanely strong, but set the enemy to be insanely strong?  Holograms across the map?  A world dedicated to you just building it?  GI haS Uncharted 2 a 10/10, GOW 10/10.  This is how GI opperates, this is who they are.  They freaking game FFXIII a 9.25 I believe, onE of the best scores that game got, and then blatantly stated that the story was quite "odd" and off key 6 months later.  I know that specific one isn't a exclusive, but it is definetly a Sony game.  Then they give Reach a 9.5?  That's what Halo 3 recieved.  To say they are both equally great games is... well... the reason I don't like GI.

Everytime I look at Halo Reach, I see what gameplay should be like.  And with File Sharing, video replay capability, and a EXTREMELY competitive multiplayer bases, added on to the almost new game that they are bringing, Halo Reach should by all means get a 9.75.  The reason why MW2 got 9.75 is because of the fact that the AI were horrible still.  So something pretty big, get's over looked by GI and is equated into a 9.75.  9.5 means that the game was great, literally great, everyone should own it, but here's this one major problem...... <<<<<that's how GI sees it.





V:  And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense. Fear got the best of you, and in your panic you turned to the now high chancellor, Adam Sutler. He promised you order, he promised you peace, and all he demanded in return was your silent, obedient consent. Last night I sought to end that silence.

im_sneaky on 11 September 2010
yo_john117 said:

A decent score but what is sad is they gave Halo 3 a 9.8/10  So they basically think Halo 3 is better then Halo Reach.

And the fact that they rated MW2 over Halo Reach is just a pure insult.


Maybe they just liked MW2 more? I'm not a huge fan of the game (though I do own it) but MW2 was incredibly popular. Is it possible that they just think the game is very good/excellent without it being the end of the world?



 

 

M.U.G.E.N on 11 September 2010

9.5 is a great score...anything above 8.5/10 is a great score imvh :) so it's off t oa good start

and one of you should make an official thread for review scores, they should be pouring in soon



In-Kat-We-Trust Brigade!

"This world is Merciless, and it's also very beautiful"

For All News/Info related to the PlayStation Vita, Come and join us in the Official PSV Thread!

Around the Network
kitler53 on 11 September 2010
CGI-Quality said:

Can't imagine it receiving many scores below a 9.


nor i, looks to likely be the best game in the series. 



Solid_Raiden on 11 September 2010
reidlosdog said:
yo_john117 said:

A decent score but what is sad is they gave Halo 3 a 9.8/10  So they basically think Halo 3 is better then Halo Reach.

And the fact that they rated MW2 over Halo Reach is just a pure insult.

I know this is going to sound biased, but GI gives 10's to PS3 Games.  seriously.  Look at the list provided.  they really do have a thing for PS3, and they literally dislike Halo.  No one in the office plays the game hardcore, and no one was actually excited for the games release.  Just saying, that score is an actual shock to me.  I'm almost certain Halo Reach deserves a 10/10.  Looking at how well the AI plays, and how well the multiplayer (Forge, FireFight, then actual multiplayer!?!?), GI better have an actually LISTED reason for taking of .5


Your forgetting the fact that the first game GI gave a 10 to this gen was Bioshock which at the time was a 360 exclusive. And then that same year they gave the score to COD4 which was a multiplat. And I also believe twilight princess got a 10 (only on gamecube I believe though, they subtracted points for poor wii controls). The last 3 games they have given 10's to were PS3 exclusives which with the exception of Bioshock and COD4 they generally only give once a year. But they rate games, not consoles. In there eyes those were the games worth 10's. They are very unbiased. More 360 exclusives have recieved 9's and above from gi then ps3 exclusives. Seriously, go look it up. And they have awarded multiple 9.8's to 360 exclusives and with the exception of the 10's before mentioned none of the ps3's excluisves have gotten. With the exception of those 3 games the highest a ps3 exclusive has gotten is a 9.5.




PS3 Trophies

 

 

rakugakist on 11 September 2010
reidlosdog said:
rakugakist said:
reidlosdog said:
yo_john117 said:

A decent score but what is sad is they gave Halo 3 a 9.8/10  So they basically think Halo 3 is better then Halo Reach.

And the fact that they rated MW2 over Halo Reach is just a pure insult.

I know this is going to sound biased, but GI gives 10's to PS3 Games.  seriously.  Look at the list provided.  they really do have a thing for PS3, and they literally dislike Halo.  No one in the office plays the game hardcore, and no one was actually excited for the games release.  Just saying, that score is an actual shock to me.  I'm almost certain Halo Reach deserves a 10/10.  Looking at how well the AI plays, and how well the multiplayer (Forge, FireFight, then actual multiplayer!?!?), GI better have an actually LISTED reason for taking of .5

@yo_john

How do you know it's an insult?  Have you played Halo Reach?  Do you know it's better than MW2?  Also, scores typically are one man's subjective opinions. Don't let it get to you so much.

@ reidlosdog

How do you know that no one in the office plays the game hardcore or that anyone was actually excited for the games release. Especially figuring that it made the cover last month.  And how are you so certain that Reach deserves a 10/10?

I mean seriously, a 9.5 is a really good score.  Why is everybody freaking out so much?  And why don't we wait until everybody has had a chance to play it before we complain about the score.

Because besides sitting around all day looking at numbers, I actually study reviewers.  In a podcast themselves, GI has stated that Halo has never been a big game in the office.  Halo Reach DID NOT make the cover last month.  What you saw is called a STICKER.  Batman Arckham City made the cover.  GI did not put that as the cover, GAMESTOP did.  GI would never put a Xbox exclusive on their cover, just not like them. 

Because the game is making new and innovative leaps and bounds.  Completely customizable Firefight?  Make a new map, play it with Firefight, set the setting to make you insanely strong, but set the enemy to be insanely strong?  Holograms across the map?  A world dedicated to you just building it?  GI haS Uncharted 2 a 10/10, GOW 10/10.  This is how GI opperates, this is who they are.  They freaking game FFXIII a 9.25 I believe, onE of the best scores that game got, and then blatantly stated that the story was quite "odd" and off key 6 months later.  I know that specific one isn't a exclusive, but it is definetly a Sony game.  Then they give Reach a 9.5?  That's what Halo 3 recieved.  To say they are both equally great games is... well... the reason I don't like GI.

Everytime I look at Halo Reach, I see what gameplay should be like.  And with File Sharing, video replay capability, and a EXTREMELY competitive multiplayer bases, added on to the almost new game that they are bringing, Halo Reach should by all means get a 9.75.  The reason why MW2 got 9.75 is because of the fact that the AI were horrible still.  So something pretty big, get's over looked by GI and is equated into a 9.75.  9.5 means that the game was great, literally great, everyone should own it, but here's this one major problem...... <<<<<that's how GI sees it.

Okay, sorry about the cover.  I didn't realize it was a sticker.  Gears 3 did make the cover a few months back though, so it's not like they never do it.  

I still don't see why you care so much though.  A 9.5 is an excellent score.  You obviously feel like GI is biased, so don't read their magazine.  You also know that Halo isn't big in their office, so once again, why should their score even matter to you.

It's not going to effect anything.  The game is still going to sell millions.  And I'm sure Official Xbox Magazine will rate it a 10.



Isuck on 11 September 2010

Before I start calling GI biased I want to know what was so bad that they knock down the score by 0.5.

But what I cant understand is why MW2 and Halo 3 got a better score. I played Halo Reach on my friends modded xbox, it completely leaps, bounds, teabagges the crap out of mw2 and Halo 3.

I am waiting for IGN, and gamespot score. I lost faith in GT since Shane keeps dowing Reach all the time.



Solid_Raiden on 11 September 2010
reidlosdog said:
rakugakist said:
reidlosdog said:
yo_john117 said:

A decent score but what is sad is they gave Halo 3 a 9.8/10  So they basically think Halo 3 is better then Halo Reach.

And the fact that they rated MW2 over Halo Reach is just a pure insult.

I know this is going to sound biased, but GI gives 10's to PS3 Games.  seriously.  Look at the list provided.  they really do have a thing for PS3, and they literally dislike Halo.  No one in the office plays the game hardcore, and no one was actually excited for the games release.  Just saying, that score is an actual shock to me.  I'm almost certain Halo Reach deserves a 10/10.  Looking at how well the AI plays, and how well the multiplayer (Forge, FireFight, then actual multiplayer!?!?), GI better have an actually LISTED reason for taking of .5

@yo_john

How do you know it's an insult?  Have you played Halo Reach?  Do you know it's better than MW2?  Also, scores typically are one man's subjective opinions. Don't let it get to you so much.

@ reidlosdog

How do you know that no one in the office plays the game hardcore or that anyone was actually excited for the games release. Especially figuring that it made the cover last month.  And how are you so certain that Reach deserves a 10/10?

I mean seriously, a 9.5 is a really good score.  Why is everybody freaking out so much?  And why don't we wait until everybody has had a chance to play it before we complain about the score.

Because besides sitting around all day looking at numbers, I actually study reviewers.  In a podcast themselves, GI has stated that Halo has never been a big game in the office.  Halo Reach DID NOT make the cover last month.  What you saw is called a STICKER.  Batman Arckham City made the cover.  GI did not put that as the cover, GAMESTOP did.  GI would never put a Xbox exclusive on their cover, just not like them. 


Wow, you claim that you study reviewers and then make a bullshit claim like that. Reach didn't make the cover because the only game that ever makes the cover of GI is a game being REVEALED for the first time in the issue. Not a game coming out. When Reach was first revealed it graced the cover of GI's mag in February of this year. Since then Gears of War 3 made the cover in June's issue when it was revealed. The only PS3 exclusive to make the cover this year has been Infamous 2. And Batman Arkham CIty was put on the cover last month because, surprise surprise, it was a world exclusive revealing of the game.




PS3 Trophies