yes as example controls should be a factor of a review, you simply shouldn't give a game a perfect score if it has bad controls with which you have problems to aim or jumping or whatever. and if you look at halo you simply have to see that that's something halo is good at and better as many other games.

and he can think what he wants as much as you, that still doesn't qualify him do this job. we all know gaming journalism has many flaws but do you think people study journalism and learn "if you write an article about a game/product everything has to be your own opinion and you don't have to try to write it at least in a way people can still understand if it's good or bad for them"?

like i said about the egm guy (i edited my post you quoted), he gave 70 for halo and i even defended him in another thread as one of the biggest halo fan but the difference between him and this guy here is, he wrote the article to explain to people if it is a good or bad game for them. for me his review reads exactly as i will love like the game. he pointed some stuff out as negative for him which i prefer in a game and people who think like him will understand it's maybe not a game for them. if you read this guy's review NOBODY will read out of it that it could be good for them. if i would only read this review i would think this game has to be a horrible experience for me so this guy absolutely failed to write a review in which he differentiate between different kind of gamers. if all people would fail as much as him dance games would get a 5% metascore because most reviewers don't like those games but they obviously don't deserve it if they are good in their genre.

Journey does suck. You play as a flying tissue for maybe an hour with no story. Now your going to tell me it is art. However if the game has no story and is an hour long if that then what is the point? Here is a case of Journey being overrated because it is different. Different =/= Good.

Don't underestimate the impact of these particularly harsh reviews and the few percentages down on the Metascore will have on Halo 4.

I've already claimed it will have a significant effect on sales and that I'm pretty confident that even some of our own members here on VGC have canceled their plans to buy Halo 4 early and instead have taken a "wait and see" approach (to wait until other gamers have played it, or to wait until Black Ops is out, or to wait until Halo 4 drops in price).

(Please come forward and admit you are one of those so I get living proof to my claim lol)

That's how psychology works.

It has created doubt and it has totally shifted focus.

Just look at what's happening. We're having hundreds and hundreds of posts on this very site that all are discussing the bad reviews.

The whole focus is put on the potentially weak aspects of Halo 4 instead of the strong ones.

And the consequences of this will spread all the way to the developer itself, 343 Studios. I am sure that some of the 343 guys have just had a huge sigh of relief that their game was well received and that they've proved they are worthy to take over the Halo legacy from Bungie.

But at the same time I am also sure that the harsh criticisms and some of the impact from the internet meltdowns will be felt even by the designers at 343, that some of them will have this small ache in their stomach and think:

"oh damn, those harsh criticisms we got, could there be some truth to that?. It wasn't universal praise after all. Now the whole internet is aware that Halo has an image problem and is perceived as old compared to the competition."