I did not read it. I try never to read reviews before I play a game or watch a movie, because I'm deathly afraid of spoilers.

But I still believe what I wrote. What are your thoughts on this subject?

now down to down to 87 thanks to this

http://www.gamearena.com.au/xbox360/games/title/halo-4/reviews.php

here's a line from it

"The greatest praise and strongest criticism I can level at Halo 4 is that it sure is Halo."

-_-

if you look at that reviewers list of least rated games on metacritic you can clearly see they downrate really big name games in the hopes of getting some traffic of people clicking their review just to call them idiots. Don't fall for the trap by clicking their site or reading their dribble, it's all they want by granting such a big game such an off the wall score.

Even clicking to their site just to call them idiots is giving them advertising revenue, just ignore and move on.

Look at it this way.

I hate sushi. I've tried it many times, but always hate it. I like cooked fish dishes, but I don't like sushi.

Stay with me.

If I wrote a review for a sushi restaurant, should I let my hate of sushi effect the review? No, I shouldn't even write the review. I should hand it off to someone else who at the very has nothing against sushi. My opinion of any sushi restaurant would be that the food is terrible, no matter how much that same sushi is loved buy sushi lovers. What point would my review of a sushi restaurant even serve?

Now back to games.

If a reviewer doesn't like Halo games, why would his review be taken seriously? It's not that his opinion or taste in games is invalid. It's that his dislike of the game series makes the opinion worthless to the reader. A review should include the reviewers opinion, but it shouldn't get in the way of informing the reader about the pros/cons that only an unbiased mind can conclude. A Halo hater is always going to hate the latest Halo game. Nobody needs a review like that.

Halo 4 is not a bad game therefor it should not be considered garbage by anyone other than those who hate it's style like I hate sushi. And just like I shouldn't rate sushi a Halo hater shouldn't review Halo 4.

I agree with the sentitment, but I don't think there is any such thing as an unbiased mind. I struggle with the idea that someone who dislikes something can't or shouldn't review it. It depends on the audience you are writing for. Personally, I think reviews should be more skeptical and intended for an extended audience. Point black, a Halo review should not be written for a Halo fan since they are going to buy the game anyway. It should be written for the people who are unsure about the purchase and need some further information. In some cases, this might include people who dislike past Halo games.

i know people are upset at the score and all, and from what i seen no way halo 4 is a 2 out of 10. but just because one person thinks so doesnt mean we have to ban the site from metacritic. honestly if we keep doing so reviews will mean nothing in the future because all we will get are high review scores for our favorite franchises no matter how bad or good the game really is

They are troll reviewers. They always give low scores for popular games, like uncharted 3, halo, probably a bunch of others I haven't cared to look at.

No..its not all about the score BUT the content of their review. 

Im tired at getting angry at EGM, Quarter to three and gamearena. Im just gonna go play halo. 

The guy did not give the game a 20/100

He gave it a 1 star:

Read his FAQ about his responses to Journey.
http://www.quartertothree.com/fp/2012/03/24/the-official-journey-review-faq/

1/5 = 2/10 = 20/100