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 !!!

theprof00 on 11 September 2010

9.5 WTF is this shit?? It's at least a 9.57



Around the Network
evolution_1ne on 11 September 2010

to the MW2 affair, i completely agree, MW2 is a piece of shit with shit being a complete understatementevery site that gave that game over a 6 is completely fucking retarded . 

now with that being said 9.5 is a tremendous score quit yer bitchin, ps3 fanboys are the only one's who cry over review scores remember....... 



Isuck on 11 September 2010
evolution_1ne said:

to the MW2 affair, i completely agree, MW2 is a piece of shit with shit being a complete understatementevery site that gave that game over a 6 is completely fucking retarded . 

now with that being said 9.5 is a tremendous score quit yer bitchin, ps3 fanboys are the only one's who cry over review scores remember....... 



Lol yea. But still untill we know why they gave that score. I will continue to ask.



reidlosdog on 11 September 2010
rakugakist said:
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.

You know what, you're right.  It's just as of late I have been noticing GI is biased towards Sony.  And I paid a freaking subscription fee for them.  I look forward to games that I like getting great scores, and every month I'm given a let down, then I look at other sites (NOT OXM, I didn't even know that magazine rated games, I just think of OXM report when I hear that name).  I'm going to give @Gamer a go, cause of the coupons and stuff... that actually seems like a good buy.

But regardless, I've just recently come upon this realization that they are biased.



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.

makingmusic476 on 12 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.

Ha.

I agree with the assertion that GI is inconistant and a pretty bad source of reviews, but to claim they are biased towards any of the big three is rather silly.

First, Halo: Reach did not recieve a cover story last month because popular games always recieve cover stories fairly soon after they are announced, not when they are released.

Halo got its turn back in February:

Gears of War 3 got its turn only four months later:

Then there was Crackdown 2 back in October.  In comparison, we've only seen ONE exclusive title for both PS3 and Wii get a cover in the past 1.5 years, Infamous 2 and Epic Mickey.  You can see a full list of their covers here.

Also, FFXIII getting an unusually high score from the magazine was just a fluke.  They also gave Halo Wars a 9.0, which many would also consider to be a fluke.  That was the same month they gave Killzone 2 an 8.75, ironically, putting them in the bottom 20% of reviews for that game (18th lowest out of 95 reviews on MC), compared to the top 12% for Halo Wars (11th highest out of 92 reviews).

They're not biased., though they do often have questionable opinions.

That being said, I see absolutely nothing wrong with a 9.5 score.  It's hard to top that!



Around the Network
empireblood on 13 September 2010

Mmm i think Halo Reach needs a 10 :D



Predictions for the end of 2011

PS3 60m/ X360 64m/ Wii 95m

Made on 01/18/2011