Yeah, they are killing this dooshbag on Gaf. At least it got them off of all that Doritos Geoff Keighly shit even though it was funny as hell, Pope picture FTW.

So lemme get this straight....you bought a PS3...have always been a big Xbox supporter and suddenly due to owning PS3 as well you went from being enjoyable to see in discussions and normally unbiased to turning into an irritating Sony fanboy.  It`s one thing to be a fan of a certain 1st Party more and a certain console more but it is a whole different ball game when you stop being rational.

What`s wrong with the 9.8 score? I saw the review and he came away much more satisfied and impressed than he even expected. I follow Ryan McCaffrey`s podcast on IGN and WAY back to OXM podcast and trust me he is a Halo fan but was also cautiously optimistic about this game and unsure whether 343 would be able to take up the huge challenge. Believe it or not some people may feel a game is worthy of a 9.8. The game itself is getting raving reviews all across the board anyways so it`s not like his is completely random. His opinion seems pretty universal for the most part.

Anyways...welcome to the multi-system owner club like myself...just don`t turn into a thorn that won`t get off my pant legging. I haven`t been posting here for quite some time but seeing you go all Sony troll mode is very disappointing coming from one of the users I typically respected and agreed with on many subjects whether I posted in the thread or not.

Like I said earlier, a fucking toolbag. 

What a tool! LOL Got to love how he openly admits to dissing the game based on expecting it to be like COD and no iron sights or enough scripted moments. LMAO Real gamers know that Call of Duty 4 was the last mind blowing COD game the rest have been average at best and solely catered to mostly the casual/multiplayer crowd.Funny how he menions the flood cause none of the other reviews I seen mention them. In fact, many stated the flood isn`t in the game.

PS I don`t believe people that play multiplayer or enjoy it are specifically casual in my eyes but those that solely play gamee for multiplayer and play a very specific one religiously are in my eyes casual.

The screen shots and videos of this game look impressive. Halo 4 looks like a true HD sci-fi shooter game. Halo 3/ODST and Reach look dated in comparison to Halo 4.

I think its a typo. Given the context, I think he meant flood of enemies.

What a tool, indeed - gee, that's what's left of EGM - the former king of videogame media and my favorite magazine of all time?

And Metacritic is not important - the important thing is scores from sites you respect or are respected. 9.8 in IGN,, for example, followed by a video review that almost makes the reviewer cry (and you in compassion) is a thing to brag about.

Wait, whaaat?

Halo 4 suffers from big ass enviroments and not enough scripted moments?... *facepalm*

Not liking Halo is one thing, but only a COD toolbag would write that in a review.

There really is no reason to look at reviews at least for large AAA titles. Games like Halo, Gears, COD, Uncharted, and many others will always be effected in the positive or negative due to bias.

Take Uncharted 2. People were giving that game a perfect score. However the game play in that game would say no it isn't a perfect game and I still feel in all 3 games that the game play is very poor and the gun battles are some of the worst we have seen.

Halo 4 most likely isn't a 7. I see a few reviews wanting the game to have iron sites. Like WTF is that all about.

Also Halo more than any other title (maybe COD) has a lot of hate of there from people and would like nothing more if it failed.

In the end these review sites just give there opinion. They are no different than you or I except they get paid. The problem is their is no criteria to properly review these games. When someone reviews a car there is a guideline you follow. And most importantly you leave bias at the door. Shooting a gun isn't broken in Halo and never has been., so when you tell me you are taking points away because they need to add iron sites is more of an opinion than you actually reviewing the combat in the game.

Sadly, that is true. People like to focus on the negative reviews and criticize them, but the truth is, the positive reviews aren't much better. In all honesty, I usually focus on negative reviews more because, while I don't necessarily agree with them, they atleast point out the potential flaws. The overly positive reviews....I just have a hard time trusting. When an attempt isn't even made to criticize the game (no game is perfect), I take the review with a grain of salt.