prinz_valium said:
btw: gtaV on next gen will get the same score, or even better one (because of first person and the added things) |
C'mon GTAV is a year old game... compared it with GTAIV or GTA: San Andreas and you will see how good GTAV's gameplay is.
ethomaz said:
C'mon GTAV is a year old game... compared it with GTAIV or GTA: San Andreas and you will see how good GTAV's gameplay is. |
god of war #94
god of war 2 #93
god of war 3 #92
god of war collection #91
and god of war collection was not a full remaster. only rmk
Halo 2 and Halo 3 hold up very well today. Halo 1 I agree feels a bit dated now, but 2/3 are still easily >87 games.
Halo 4...well that was definitely disappointing. I didn't like that it was being included in this collection all along to be honest.
Burek said:
Maybe they are implying that quantity does not equal quality. |
Which shouldn't be the case considering what is the subject here.
Not sure why people are focusing so much on the previous metacritic scores of the games, they are far less revelant to gaming now. Halo would not be a 97 by today's standards, not even close.
Anyway, perhaps some of the reasons for the sub-90 score are technical ones:
Each game within the Master Chief Collection has problems running at a 60 FPS in one way or another. Halo 3 seems to fair the best, however it is simply an Xbox 360 game running on the Xbox One. Because of that, it is not nearly as technologically demanding as the other titles, even if it means having human NPC’s with almost octagonal-shaped heads.
No, the biggest problems for me, unfortunately, came in the Halo 2 Anniversary campaign; the game this collection is arguably centered around. The issues are plentiful:
The reflections of pools of water in certain levels cannot mirror their reflection properly, resulting in massive stuttering.
Objects occasionally clip through walls, including a fish swimming through a capsule inconspicuously.
The Gravemind level featured especially bad framerate, even bugging out near the end and phantom “rewarding” me with 1,844,575,507,370 points upon completion.
Mission 8, Delta Halo, consistently crashed my entire Xbox One system loading the checkpoint right outside the temple (aka, after 90% of the level had been completed). I couldn’t even open up the Xbox One menu; it would eventually hard crash and shut off by itself.
The Day 1 patch offers some critical fixes across the board (including that Delta Halo bug), but it still doesn’t do much for Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary. Its troubles lie in the framerate (which is staggeringly bad when travelling in a vehicle and during cutscenes to the point of apparent “chugging” along), but also in odd instances of mixed-up visual efforts. For example, the design of orbital blasts of energy in the Anniversary Edition actually looks less detailed than its 2001 counterpart. They just look like a giant orb of energy, whereas the old edition featured two very distinct balls of energy. What’s even odder is that, at times, the textures on walls or objects in Halo: CE Anniversary look laughably worse than those from the past. Rare do these improvements look worse, but it does happen enough times to question how they got past quality assurance.
http://gamesided.com/2014/11/07/halo-master-chief-collection-single-player-review/
Ka-pi96 said:
|
Thank you, you're exactly the modern gamer I was referring to earlier. Absolutely no idea what good gameplay is. No wonder TLOU's gameplay gets so praised.
User was moderated for this post - Conegamer
| celador said: No, the biggest problems for me, unfortunately, came in the Halo 2 Anniversary campaign; the game this collection is arguably centered around. The issues are plentiful: The reflections of pools of water in certain levels cannot mirror their reflection properly, resulting in massive stuttering. Objects occasionally clip through walls, including a fish swimming through a capsule inconspicuously. The Gravemind level featured especially bad framerate, even bugging out near the end and phantom “rewarding” me with 1,844,575,507,370 points upon completion. Mission 8, Delta Halo, consistently crashed my entire Xbox One system loading the checkpoint right outside the temple (aka, after 90% of the level had been completed). I couldn’t even open up the Xbox One menu; it would eventually hard crash and shut off by itself. The Day 1 patch offers some critical fixes across the board (including that Delta Halo bug), but it still doesn’t do much for Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary. Its troubles lie in the framerate (which is staggeringly bad when travelling in a vehicle and during cutscenes to the point of apparent “chugging” along), but also in odd instances of mixed-up visual efforts. For example, the design of orbital blasts of energy in the Anniversary Edition actually looks less detailed than its 2001 counterpart. They just look like a giant orb of energy, whereas the old edition featured two very distinct balls of energy. What’s even odder is that, at times, the textures on walls or objects in Halo: CE Anniversary look laughably worse than those from the past. Rare do these improvements look worse, but it does happen enough times to question how they got past quality assurance. http://gamesided.com/2014/11/07/halo-master-chief-collection-single-player-review/ |
Not saying everything is perfect after that, though. But the checkpoint stuff is indeed fixed.
90 is my prediction, great collection and great repack, and with additional Halo 5 beta. Beside Orange box i think this the second best collection.
I want to play this games in future if i able to buy Xbox One.
|
prinz_valium said: god of war #94
and god of war collection was not a full remaster. only rmk |
GoW collection have two games... GoW (2005) and GoW II (2007)... 94 and 93... when reviewed in 2009 (just four years after the first release) recieved 91 meta... the same collection reviewed in 2014 for Vita received 74 meta.
You are just showing to me how time matter to reviews old games... that is exactly my point.
A good reply to why reviewers and reviews are not in the best light currently:
Originally Posted by ekim
Maybe some reviewers think the gameplay isn't up to todays standards but then they knew that to expect and imho a game should be rated by how much it's meets your expectations.
That would imply that today's gameplay standards are ahead of what Halo had to offer back in 2001, which is sadly not the case.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=137749234&postcount=271
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
yeah right. Nintendo couldn't make a good game if they tried. Reviewers just have their rose tinted glasses shoved so far up their asses when it comes to Nintendo games that they automatically give them high scores regardless of how crap the game actually is.
