EGM: And since folks are so bent out of shape about my comment on iron sights, I'll elaborate a bit here, too.

The thought came to me when I noticed that there is in fact a controller option called "Fishstick" in Halo 4 that gives you the same layout and functionality as most FPS titles on the market by allowing you to swap your zoom function to the left trigger.

However, several of the key guns don't offer sight-focused views, meaning that you use your binoculars and immediately jump out to the standard viewing angle upon firing. It's very jarring, and smacks as a half-assed concession to folks who want that feature in-game.

HiredN00bs: People were "bent out of shape" about your "iron sights" comment because it demonstrated a basic ignorance of the different shooting mechanics in Call of Duty and Halo--an ignorance that someone who reviews video games for a living shouldn't have. But, none of us are perfect, and some of these things may slip by someone who only casually plays the games (and at that point I would blame the editor for the poor decision of assigning such a person to review such a game).

The Aim-Down Sights (ADS) mechanic in Call of Duty isn't unique to the series, but it factors heavily into its gameplay. ADS grants greater precision, at the trade-off of lesser movement speed. It is worth noting that you can get a headshot in Call of Duty with just about any of the guns.

The Zoom mechanic in Halo is almost exclusively a feature of the headshot-capable weapons (although some other weapons may have it...Rockets come to mind, and in Halo 4, some headshot-capable weapons don't have it, such as the Promethean Pistol). This is because the other weapons trade precision for some other quality, like the close-range devastation of the Shotgun or Energy Sword, or the close to mid-range high rate-of-fire domination of the Assault Rifle.

Zooming in Halo does not restrict movement speed. There is an entirely different set of rules, carefully planned out to ensure balance between the various distinct kinds of weaponry. And they are VERY distinct. The weapons in Call of Duty have far less variation, and are built around the ADS mechanic--this is a crucial point. ADS is not an objective evolution in game design, but rather a tool used to craft a certain TYPE of game.

The Fishstick control scheme was built to make the game more accessible to Call of Duty players who are more accustomed to that button layout. I don't play Call of Duty very often, but I did finish the campaigns in Modern Warfare 1 & 2 on Veteran, and I bet I could switch from my Recon configuration to Fishstick without skipping a beat, just as it is when I jump between playing Halo and Call of Duty.

You didn't make some brave step in journalism, nor did you stir some designer at 343 Industries to wake from his traditional Halo slumber. It's not even about our bias towards Halo games. Halo 4 could very well suck, and takes many, MANY cues from CoD that gives the average fan pause, to say the least. What you did was make a huge leap in logic by assuming that because Call of Duty is most popular, it is an objectively better design. Here's hoping you learn from this experience.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=43904115&postcount=2219

Aldro said:

I doubt itll drop to 89 on Meta. I think itll stick on 90, and perhaps even climb back to 91. We still have GameTrailers review to go and far more. I am not implying anything, but I feel GT will score it high.