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

Forums - Microsoft - Halo 4 gets a 20/100 on Meta, proves eview system is broken.

man-bear-pig on 05 November 2012
JustThatGamer said:

Tom Chick, proof that some peoples 'opinions' can be wrong.

A review is meant to be as objective as possible, it's meant to tell you if the game's glitchy, long, short, varied, polished etc. Sure some things like the story, fun-factor, sound etc, will always be subjective but the majority of a review should be stating facts about the game and what the effects of them e.g. framerate, game length, play-ability, camera perspective and so on.

People who have read the review and defend it as the critics 'opinion' are moronic, what part of that awful review actually informed anyone about the game? Zilch. Why Metacritic uses a publication who's reviews are consistently poorly written and always troll popular and acclaimed games for hits is beyond me. GameRankings doesn't use shitty sites and is better for a ton of other reasons to boot, if you like accuracy and quality use that site instead.

-moderated Kasz216


I can't believe he got banned for saying this. Bullshit ban.



My prediction threads:

Wii U will sell under 40m units (made on 14th September 2012)

PS Vita will sell under 20m units (made on 30th September 2012)

Wii U will sell under 7m in 2013 - I was right

Halo 4 first 9 weeks sales prediction

PS4 to be down YOY in 2015

Around the Network
Slimebeast on 05 November 2012

He trolled Halo 4 to get attention but also to make an important statement.

Because these ridicilous 95% Metas and 9.8 scores from IGN are in fact also trolling. But instead of trolling games these 'critics' are trolling us - the gamers.

This guy has integrity (together with a craving for attention).

So a slightly cheap way to make a statement but nevertheless a very important statement that we ultimately should be thankful for.



kain_kusanagi on 05 November 2012
GameOver22 said:
kain_kusanagi said:
GameOver22 said:

Because tastes can change? Because a game series can change? Just for example, I disliked Assassin's Creed, but I enjoyed Assassin's Creed 2. Another example, I really do hate Devil May Cry 2, but Devil May Cry 3 is one of my favorite games. Should the fact that I disliked the original Assassin's Creed and Devil May Cry 2 prevent me from reviewing subsequent iterations? Same thing applies to Halo. If someone disliked the past few games in a series, this shouldn't prevent them from reviewing the current game, because the game could actually correct the flaws that made them dislike the game.

I also don't want to get into this too much because its been discussed to death on this site, but the fact that something is popular or garners positive reviews does not necessitate that its of high quality.

I think you are missunderstanding me.

There's a difference between not liking something and fundimentaly hating it. You disliked Assassin's Creed but enjoyed it's sequel. That means that you like the fundimental things that make Assassin's Creed what it is, but the flaws of the first game turned you off. Did you really hate Assassin's Creed or just not enjoy it?

I'm not asking that reviews should be written buy fans. In fact I stated the oposite and said that hater reviewers as as bad as fanboy reviewers.

What I'm saying is that if someone truly dislikes the fundimental core of a series their opinion is worthless to those who enjoy it even in the slightest. Do we really need to hear that Halo should be like COD? I don't think so. The core Halo gameplay machanics are well loved and therfore are not total shit. A reviewer that ignores this because they don't like those machanics isn't doing their job. Actualy that reviewer shouldn't have even gotten the assignment.

I don't know. Its difficult to define the fundamental components of a game. If I hated the FPS genre, I would say I shouldn't write a review for a FPS. Same thing goes for other genres. The problem here is that you are talking about sub-genres of the FPS genre. I think it is quite obvious that people can enjoy both types of games, so they aren't exclusive categories. If someone prefers one type over another, I don't think it should prevent them from reviewing a game from their less preferred category.

As to the bolded, I would disagree with that. I think someone who dislikes the fundamental core of a series can still provide some valid criticisms. I tend to like niche japanese rpgs, but reviewers don't seem to like them as much. I would also argue that, in some cases, they have a fundamental bias against these games. At the same time, I don't expect them to cater to my interests in disservice to the broader population of gamers. I also mentioned this in another post, but I often times agree with their criticisms, but this doesn't prevent me from enjoying the games.

I totaly see where you are coming from. I have a love of niche games as well and I also don't expect the reviews of those games to be as high as I would score them. However, I still believe that a game like Halo 4 that gets an average of 92.7 from the top review websites can't possible get a 20/100 from a legitimate reviewer. It can't be both total broken shit and one of the best games of the year. Since the top websites agree that it's very good, the ones calling it total shit are suspect.



GameOver22 on 05 November 2012
kain_kusanagi said:

I totaly see where you are coming from. I have a love of niche games as well and I also don't expect the reviews of those games to be as high as I would score them. However, I still believe that a game like Halo 4 that gets an average of 92.7 from the top review websites can't possible get a 20/100 from a legitimate reviewer. It can't be both total broken shit and one of the best games of the year. Since the top websites agree that it's very good, the ones calling it total shit aren't suspect.

I mostly agree with that. I just think there's going to be some variation about the mean. Some reviewers are going to be stricter, others are going to use different grading scales. If you read the review, it doesn't seem the guy is saying its a broken game. His main criticism seems to be that the game isn't innovating. I mentioned before too, in terms of how other sites grade, his score is probably closer to the 40-60 range....still low but not as low. If you want the truth, I personally don't think the body of the review is that bad, outside of one paragraph. The score seems a bit harsh though.



kain_kusanagi on 05 November 2012
GameOver22 said:
kain_kusanagi said:

I totaly see where you are coming from. I have a love of niche games as well and I also don't expect the reviews of those games to be as high as I would score them. However, I still believe that a game like Halo 4 that gets an average of 92.7 from the top review websites can't possible get a 20/100 from a legitimate reviewer. It can't be both total broken shit and one of the best games of the year. Since the top websites agree that it's very good, the ones calling it total shit are suspect.

I mostly agree with that. I just think there's going to be some variation about the mean. Some reviewers are going to be stricter, others are going to use different grading scales. If you read the review, it doesn't seem the guy is saying its a broken game. His main criticism seems to be that the game isn't innovating. I mentioned before too, in terms of how other sites grade, his score is probably closer to the 40-60 range....still low but not as low. If you want the truth, I personally don't think the body of the review is that bad, outside of one paragraph. The score seems a bit harsh though.

The impression I got for that review was that he wanted Halo to be something else. He doens't like Halo so the only way he'd grade it high would be for it to have been fundimentaly changed into something else. As a person he is entitled to that opinion. As a reviewer he should have known he couldn't objectivly give it a score reflective of it's merits because he doesn't like those merits. But merits they are.



Around the Network
SecondWar on 05 November 2012

If this troll site has got a review on metacritc, why hasn't VGChartz had its review included? I can just about tolerate the EGM review as it has decent reasoning. The two with lower ratings I'm forced to ignore as they make little sense and appeared to be reviewed by FPS-haters (I'd tell you to do the same if I ever reviewed a dance game).

It reminds me of one of the Mass Effect 3 user reviews which started 'Now I haven't actually played the game...'



Dark_Lord_2008 on 05 November 2012

Milked franchises like Halo, Final Fantasy, Call of Duty, Resident Evil, etc need to be called out. High reviews of mediocre games have been paid for by the developers. Popular mediocre games get high review scores spreading propaganda resulting in more sales from the brainwashed consumers. Good on this guy for speaking out against the corruption that is rife in the video game industry. The same game with a coat of new paint with a hefty $60 price tag that looks and plays like DLC.



ishiki on 05 November 2012
Dark_Lord_2008 said:
Milked franchises like Halo, Final Fantasy, Call of Duty, Resident Evil, etc need to be called out. High reviews of mediocre games have been paid for by the developers. Popular mediocre games get high review scores spreading propaganda resulting in more sales from the brainwashed consumers. Good on this guy for speaking out against the corruption that is rife in the video game industry. The same game with a coat of new paint with a hefty $60 price tag that looks and plays like DLC.


except those havent gotten high reviews so saying they paid of for sub 80 reviews is idiotic.



jamesmarkus87 on 05 November 2012

When I wake up in the morning, I'm sure that Halo 4 will be dropped to 84 on Metacritic thanks to some random "publication" giving it a 0.5 / 10.



kain_kusanagi on 05 November 2012
Dark_Lord_2008 said:
Milked franchises like Halo, Final Fantasy, Call of Duty, Resident Evil, etc need to be called out. High reviews of mediocre games have been paid for by the developers. Popular mediocre games get high review scores spreading propaganda resulting in more sales from the brainwashed consumers. Good on this guy for speaking out against the corruption that is rife in the video game industry. The same game with a coat of new paint with a hefty $60 price tag that looks and plays like DLC.


Milked huh?

As a Halo fan I'll have another tall glass of that milk. I think Final Fantasy, Call of Duty, and maybe even Resident Evil fans would say the same about their favorite series.

I personly can't get enough Halo and wish new entries would come out twice a year. I'd subscribe to Halo if it meant I'd get more of it.

Just because you don't like something doesn't mean it's garbage or there's a vast conspiracy to boost it up.