Ohh yeah, thats right. You've played Halo CE anniversary and Halo 4 and thought that they were broken games then rated them 0/10. I see...

Right now (For me):

Campaign : Halo:CE -> Halo 4 -> Halo 3: ODST (I fucking love ODST!) -> Halo 2 - Halo 3 -> Halo Wars

Multiplayer: Halo 4 -> Halo 3 -> Halo 3: ODST-> Halo 2 -> Halo Wars -> Halo: CE

Story: Halo 4 -> Halo 3: ODST -> Rest

Except Halo Wars I would rate them all 9-9.5.

Reach was also a disappointment for me too. I actually enjoyed ODST's campaign more than Reach's, and the multiplayer just felt like another expansion pack for Halo 3 with ODST's Firefight included.

Jumping straight from the thread title to the quick reply box with this one:

Reach wasn't a sequel to Halo 3. It was a prequel to Halo 1, and it was awesome. Now, Halo 4 is a better game but it's a numbered sequel and 343 was fortunate enough to just be able to take the things Bunjie had established and build off of that. I don't see feuding between two great games of the same great franchise. They go together.

Wait... HAlo 4 has the worst campaign or best? 

Ad hominem attacks count as thread derailment. We don't want to have to punish anyone over this.

Halo 4 is better than Reach and Halo 3, but it's not up to par with the original simply because it's not even close to as groundbreaking.

.

Second best, only Halo: CE gets a higher grade for it's Campaign from me

^This