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

Forums - Microsoft Discussion - Halo: MCC review thread! UPDATE: Reviews incoming - 87 metascore so far

kowenicki said:
I said it would score 89 (but deserves 95 plus)

I may be quite close.

You have to be really nitpicking to score this lower and as many of us suspected thats is exactly what is happening.

The sheer amount of value is off the scale but value isnt an issue for reviewers it seems.... well they do get it for free after all.


I really don't get how it "deserves" a 95+. Hardly any games deserves such a score, and much less a collection. Every collection I know of scored lower than the average of each individual game in the collection. The remaster of Halo 2 has been put a lot of effort into, but the remaster of the other three are just average, it's just an upres/upfps of the originals. Despite the massive amount of quality content, I don't think it deserves 95+. But then again, I don't think GTA V deserves 97 either, so it might just be me. But that doesn't change the fact that this, along with a few other games, will be the first things I buy when I sometime in the future get an Xbox One.



Around the Network

GoW HD Collection recieved 89...

Not 91.



kowenicki said:
Ninsect said:
kowenicki said:

Well Orange Box is clearly the excpetion at 96  (except on PS3 where it was a mess)

What comes next?

I know God of War only got a 73 but that wasn't in the same league in terms of upgrades and value.

I cant recall any other "collection" scores from memory.

God of war got 91 though


I know, I was looking at the Vita port debacle.

But that getting 91 is even more reason why this is harsh imo... as illustrated by someone else earlier.

 

 

The VIta one was a rough port, of course it scored lower. The original God of War HD Collection was the first of its kind. The originality factor helped it score better. Plus it packaged two of the best action games of all time. Nowadays HD collections are a dime a dozen. And yes yes, I know, 4 games, beta, movie, unprecedented value etc. 



Sigs are dumb. And so are you!

ethomaz said:
GoW HD Collection recieved 89...

Not 91.

No it scored a 91. 



Sigs are dumb. And so are you!

kowenicki said:


I know, I was looking at the Vita port debacle.

But that getting 91 is even more reason why this is harsh imo... as illustrated by someone else earlier.

The Vita version received a 73, deservedly so with all the framerate issues.  The PS3 version received a 91.



Around the Network

This thread is a mess. And the bellyaching is pathetic. How do you know a game SHOULD or DESERVES a score if you haven't even touched it. A lot of ya'll need to take a step back.

Gg 343 and micro on another quality title.



EVERY GAMERS WORST NIGHTMARE...THE TANGLING CABLES MONSTER!

            

       Coffee is for closers!

Burek said:
man-bear-pig said:

First review will be here in under an hour guys. Here's hoping for a 90+ meta

Hoping?

90+ is a lock, it's just a question what the second digit will be.


Sitting at 88 right now. What about that lock?



errorpwns said:
Burek said:
man-bear-pig said:

First review will be here in under an hour guys. Here's hoping for a 90+ meta

Hoping?

90+ is a lock, it's just a question what the second digit will be.


Sitting at 88 right now. What about that lock?

Hey, I also predicted Bengals to win last night and Mel Gibson to win Nobel Peace Prize.

I'm hardly a relevant factor here...



Taken from GAF: top 3 Bungie games of the year



Only at 17 reviews so far though right? Score could go either way.