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

Forums - Microsoft - Metacritic: Halo: ODST ( Updated )

Zizzla_Rachet on 20 September 2009
disolitude said:
heruamon said:
ph4nt said:
Looks like people aren't happy that ODST has not received the metacritic AAA status award.

I can't say that I really expected it to achieve AAA...it is built off the same Halo 3 engine.  I don't want to call it an expansion, but i still think M$ should have launched this title for $49.99.  They might have sold better, and would have likely resulted in a better perception about the game.  Even if M$ didn't want to set a price-precedence, they could have offered gamers a discount like Toys R Us is doing. 

- 6-7 hour long campaign that is one of the best single player campaigns of the year and that you will play multiple times
- New multiplayer mode that is extremely fun and which I only played twice and wasted 40 min combined
- All of Halo 3's maps, including 12 maps not in halo 3. These maps alone will cost 2200 pts (27 dollars)
-Halo Reach beta invite

How is this not worth full price? I agree that 49.99 would have been nice, I like cheap stuff too... but yeah, lets be realistic.

Like as a 360 user, you can spend that money elsewhere and buy something like wolfenstien or FEAR 2 or some other FPS that came out this year...but would you really? And is ODST and what it offers really worh less thn those games?

WTF!

How did you get ODST already?



 



Around the Network
tio_coyote on 20 September 2009

I think the big problems with ODST are:
1. lack of matchmaking for firefight
2. THE PRICE! bungie is crazy to sell an expansion pack for 60 bucks! it would sell better for 39 bucks (the normal price of an expansion, not a compelte game)
if u ignore this two problems, ODST is a great game



Solid_Raiden on 20 September 2009
disolitude said:
heruamon said:
ph4nt said:
Looks like people aren't happy that ODST has not received the metacritic AAA status award.

I can't say that I really expected it to achieve AAA...it is built off the same Halo 3 engine.  I don't want to call it an expansion, but i still think M$ should have launched this title for $49.99.  They might have sold better, and would have likely resulted in a better perception about the game.  Even if M$ didn't want to set a price-precedence, they could have offered gamers a discount like Toys R Us is doing. 

- 6-7 hour long campaign that is one of the best single player campaigns of the year and that you will play multiple times
- New multiplayer mode that is extremely fun and which I only played twice and wasted 40 min combined
- All of Halo 3's maps, including 12 maps not in halo 3. These maps alone will cost 2200 pts (27 dollars)
-Halo Reach beta invite

How is this not worth full price? I agree that 49.99 would have been nice, I like cheap stuff too... but yeah, lets be realistic.

Like as a 360 user, you can spend that money elsewhere and buy something like wolfenstien or FEAR 2 or some other FPS that came out this year...but would you really? And is ODST and what it offers really worh less thn those games?


I don't understand why it hurts you guys so much to hear someone say that it doesn't have enough value to warrant a $60 price. These people aren't saying it's a bad game, or attacking the game or anything, not most of them anyway. And it's not like people are pulling this out of a hat, practically every review mentions this same thing wether the review was positive or not. It's all about percieved value, and what you might see as value other people don't. I mean, I loved Heavenly sword, and I also loved L4D but after buying and loving both games, I felt ripped off because the value just wasn't there for me. And this is another title like that. 6-7 hour campaign is not very long, this is the same thing that 360 fans were screaming foul against games like Heavenly sword for, but now it's acceptable? Why? Because you can play it over and over again? And you can't play every game over and over again? Yea, that's great that you can play the campaign co-op but that's not really a big feature to me and many others, I never played the first one co-op. I play most campeigns once and then I find replayability in online multiplayer or other modes. I'd much prefer a seperate co-op mode, which thank god this does have. In addition, the only real multiplayer mode in this game is firefight, which looks amazing fun, but ONE online mode is rediculous when asking full price. Should Gears 2 have been $120? Going by the price of this title, it seems like that price would have been not only acceptable, but a bargain. A longer single player experiance, co-op both online and off, horde mode, and competitive multiplayer with multiple modes. In comparison, a 6 hour campaign and 1 game mode  and 3 maps just does not cut it, and that is all the new content that you will find here. Saying that you get Halo 3's online isn't even a issue, I payed for that game 2 years ago, had what fun I could with it and I'm done with it, and even if I wasn't I'd be damned if I'm paying for it AGAIN! That's nuts. But I've moved on since 07, and there have been so many great online experiances since then and so many more coming for me to just give bungie more money for packaging in the same game I already bought. I'm not going to pay the same $10 to see a thirty mintue movie no matter the quality.




PS3 Trophies

 

 

Solid_Raiden on 20 September 2009
tio_coyote said:
I think the big problems with ODST are:
1. lack of matchmaking for firefight
2. THE PRICE! bungie is crazy to sell an expansion pack for 60 bucks! it would sell better for 39 bucks (the normal price of an expansion, not a compelte game)
if u ignore this two problems, ODST is a great game


Watch out! Those are the words of a fanboy in these areas. :/




PS3 Trophies

 

 

Zizzla_Rachet on 20 September 2009
Solid_Raiden said:
disolitude said:
heruamon said:
ph4nt said:
Looks like people aren't happy that ODST has not received the metacritic AAA status award.

I can't say that I really expected it to achieve AAA...it is built off the same Halo 3 engine.  I don't want to call it an expansion, but i still think M$ should have launched this title for $49.99.  They might have sold better, and would have likely resulted in a better perception about the game.  Even if M$ didn't want to set a price-precedence, they could have offered gamers a discount like Toys R Us is doing. 

- 6-7 hour long campaign that is one of the best single player campaigns of the year and that you will play multiple times
- New multiplayer mode that is extremely fun and which I only played twice and wasted 40 min combined
- All of Halo 3's maps, including 12 maps not in halo 3. These maps alone will cost 2200 pts (27 dollars)
-Halo Reach beta invite

How is this not worth full price? I agree that 49.99 would have been nice, I like cheap stuff too... but yeah, lets be realistic.

Like as a 360 user, you can spend that money elsewhere and buy something like wolfenstien or FEAR 2 or some other FPS that came out this year...but would you really? And is ODST and what it offers really worh less thn those games?


I don't understand why it hurts you guys so much to hear someone say that it doesn't have enough value to warrant a $60 price. These people aren't saying it's a bad game, or attacking the game or anything, not most of them anyway. And it's not like people are pulling this out of a hat, practically every review mentions this same thing wether the review was positive or not. It's all about percieved value, and what you might see as value other people don't. I mean, I loved Heavenly sword, and I also loved L4D but after buying and loving both games, I felt ripped off because the value just wasn't there for me. And this is another title like that. 6-7 hour campaign is not very long, this is the same thing that 360 fans were screaming foul against games like Heavenly sword for, but now it's acceptable? Why? Because you can play it over and over again? And you can't play every game over and over again? Yea, that's great that you can play the campaign co-op but that's not really a big feature to me and many others, I never played the first one co-op. I play most campeigns once and then I find replayability in online multiplayer or other modes. I'd much prefer a seperate co-op mode, which thank god this does have. In addition, the only real multiplayer mode in this game is firefight, which looks amazing fun, but ONE online mode is rediculous when asking full price. Should Gears 2 have been $120? Going by the price of this title, it seems like that price would have been not only acceptable, but a bargain. A longer single player experiance, co-op both online and off, horde mode, and competitive multiplayer with multiple modes. In comparison, a 6 hour campaign and 1 game mode  and 3 maps just does not cut it, and that is all the new content that you will find here. Saying that you get Halo 3's online isn't even a issue, I payed for that game 2 years ago, had what fun I could with it and I'm done with it, and even if I wasn't I'd be damned if I'm paying for it AGAIN! That's nuts. But I've moved on since 07, and there have been so many great online experiances since then and so many more coming for me to just give bungie more money for packaging in the same game I already bought.

Ok...let's play the example game...

Ex. 1

Halo ODST..

5+ hour Single player mode

Multiplayer CoOp mode

Fully updated Halo3 MP mode with new maps....

Reach beta Invite

Full Retail Price

DLC Possible as stated by Bungie

Ex.2

Heavenly Sword

5-7 Hour single Player mode

No MP...

No DLC...

Released at full Price (Last I checked in March the game was being sold at full price this year..At Virgin...Can't say it is full price new everywhere)

What do you think?



 



Around the Network
Solid_Raiden on 20 September 2009
Zizzla_Rachet said:
Solid_Raiden said:
disolitude said:
heruamon said:
ph4nt said:
Looks like people aren't happy that ODST has not received the metacritic AAA status award.

I can't say that I really expected it to achieve AAA...it is built off the same Halo 3 engine.  I don't want to call it an expansion, but i still think M$ should have launched this title for $49.99.  They might have sold better, and would have likely resulted in a better perception about the game.  Even if M$ didn't want to set a price-precedence, they could have offered gamers a discount like Toys R Us is doing. 

- 6-7 hour long campaign that is one of the best single player campaigns of the year and that you will play multiple times
- New multiplayer mode that is extremely fun and which I only played twice and wasted 40 min combined
- All of Halo 3's maps, including 12 maps not in halo 3. These maps alone will cost 2200 pts (27 dollars)
-Halo Reach beta invite

How is this not worth full price? I agree that 49.99 would have been nice, I like cheap stuff too... but yeah, lets be realistic.

Like as a 360 user, you can spend that money elsewhere and buy something like wolfenstien or FEAR 2 or some other FPS that came out this year...but would you really? And is ODST and what it offers really worh less thn those games?


I don't understand why it hurts you guys so much to hear someone say that it doesn't have enough value to warrant a $60 price. These people aren't saying it's a bad game, or attacking the game or anything, not most of them anyway. And it's not like people are pulling this out of a hat, practically every review mentions this same thing wether the review was positive or not. It's all about percieved value, and what you might see as value other people don't. I mean, I loved Heavenly sword, and I also loved L4D but after buying and loving both games, I felt ripped off because the value just wasn't there for me. And this is another title like that. 6-7 hour campaign is not very long, this is the same thing that 360 fans were screaming foul against games like Heavenly sword for, but now it's acceptable? Why? Because you can play it over and over again? And you can't play every game over and over again? Yea, that's great that you can play the campaign co-op but that's not really a big feature to me and many others, I never played the first one co-op. I play most campeigns once and then I find replayability in online multiplayer or other modes. I'd much prefer a seperate co-op mode, which thank god this does have. In addition, the only real multiplayer mode in this game is firefight, which looks amazing fun, but ONE online mode is rediculous when asking full price. Should Gears 2 have been $120? Going by the price of this title, it seems like that price would have been not only acceptable, but a bargain. A longer single player experiance, co-op both online and off, horde mode, and competitive multiplayer with multiple modes. In comparison, a 6 hour campaign and 1 game mode  and 3 maps just does not cut it, and that is all the new content that you will find here. Saying that you get Halo 3's online isn't even a issue, I payed for that game 2 years ago, had what fun I could with it and I'm done with it, and even if I wasn't I'd be damned if I'm paying for it AGAIN! That's nuts. But I've moved on since 07, and there have been so many great online experiances since then and so many more coming for me to just give bungie more money for packaging in the same game I already bought.

Ok...let's play the example game...

Ex. 1

Halo ODST..

5+ hour Single player mode

Multiplayer CoOp mode

Fully updated Halo3 MP mode with new maps....

Reach beta Invite

Full Retail Price

DLC Possible as stated by Bungie

Ex.2

Heavenly Sword

5-7 Hour single Player mode

No MP...

No DLC...

Released at full Price (Last I checked in March the game was being sold at full price this year..At Virgin...Can't say it is full price new everywhere)

What do you think?


Awesome. So your saying if a game is a better value then at least one other rip off it's value is attained? Let's do that same comparison but with a game like MW2, U2, Borderlands, Forza 3, and all the games it's actually competing against. Or even Gears 2, like I did above. And it's not a "fully updated" halo 3 online. It's the EXACT halo 3 online copied onto a disc with 3 new maps. And what does possible DLC have to do with making the game have value? You mean I have to spend MORE to get what should have already been on the disc seeing as how I'm paying $60. And I wouldn't feel better about buying a game for a free beta code, lol. Those are free giveaways with multiple titles and hold no value. I admit that it's great though. I wish I could get into it too. But not for that price.

Now, if you guys can see value in this title that's not the problem. In fact that's great. I wish I could feel good about buying it myself. But what is rediculous is when you go crazy when someone says the game looks great but isn't worth the cost, like their opinion is wrong. They don't try and force their opinion on you guys but you guys just can't stand it if someone doesn't share your view that this game is worth all the money in the world. That's the only problem here.




PS3 Trophies

 

 

Zizzla_Rachet on 20 September 2009
Solid_Raiden said:
Zizzla_Rachet said:
Solid_Raiden said:
disolitude said:
heruamon said:
ph4nt said:
Looks like people aren't happy that ODST has not received the metacritic AAA status award.

I can't say that I really expected it to achieve AAA...it is built off the same Halo 3 engine.  I don't want to call it an expansion, but i still think M$ should have launched this title for $49.99.  They might have sold better, and would have likely resulted in a better perception about the game.  Even if M$ didn't want to set a price-precedence, they could have offered gamers a discount like Toys R Us is doing. 

- 6-7 hour long campaign that is one of the best single player campaigns of the year and that you will play multiple times
- New multiplayer mode that is extremely fun and which I only played twice and wasted 40 min combined
- All of Halo 3's maps, including 12 maps not in halo 3. These maps alone will cost 2200 pts (27 dollars)
-Halo Reach beta invite

How is this not worth full price? I agree that 49.99 would have been nice, I like cheap stuff too... but yeah, lets be realistic.

Like as a 360 user, you can spend that money elsewhere and buy something like wolfenstien or FEAR 2 or some other FPS that came out this year...but would you really? And is ODST and what it offers really worh less thn those games?


I don't understand why it hurts you guys so much to hear someone say that it doesn't have enough value to warrant a $60 price. These people aren't saying it's a bad game, or attacking the game or anything, not most of them anyway. And it's not like people are pulling this out of a hat, practically every review mentions this same thing wether the review was positive or not. It's all about percieved value, and what you might see as value other people don't. I mean, I loved Heavenly sword, and I also loved L4D but after buying and loving both games, I felt ripped off because the value just wasn't there for me. And this is another title like that. 6-7 hour campaign is not very long, this is the same thing that 360 fans were screaming foul against games like Heavenly sword for, but now it's acceptable? Why? Because you can play it over and over again? And you can't play every game over and over again? Yea, that's great that you can play the campaign co-op but that's not really a big feature to me and many others, I never played the first one co-op. I play most campeigns once and then I find replayability in online multiplayer or other modes. I'd much prefer a seperate co-op mode, which thank god this does have. In addition, the only real multiplayer mode in this game is firefight, which looks amazing fun, but ONE online mode is rediculous when asking full price. Should Gears 2 have been $120? Going by the price of this title, it seems like that price would have been not only acceptable, but a bargain. A longer single player experiance, co-op both online and off, horde mode, and competitive multiplayer with multiple modes. In comparison, a 6 hour campaign and 1 game mode  and 3 maps just does not cut it, and that is all the new content that you will find here. Saying that you get Halo 3's online isn't even a issue, I payed for that game 2 years ago, had what fun I could with it and I'm done with it, and even if I wasn't I'd be damned if I'm paying for it AGAIN! That's nuts. But I've moved on since 07, and there have been so many great online experiances since then and so many more coming for me to just give bungie more money for packaging in the same game I already bought.

Ok...let's play the example game...

Ex. 1

Halo ODST..

5+ hour Single player mode

Multiplayer CoOp mode

Fully updated Halo3 MP mode with new maps....

Reach beta Invite

Full Retail Price

DLC Possible as stated by Bungie

Ex.2

Heavenly Sword

5-7 Hour single Player mode

No MP...

No DLC...

Released at full Price (Last I checked in March the game was being sold at full price this year..At Virgin...Can't say it is full price new everywhere)

What do you think?


Awesome. So your saying if a game is a better value then at least one other rip off it's value is attained? Let's do that same comparison but with a game like MW2, U2, Borderlands, Forza 3, and all the games it's actually competing against. Or even Gears 2, like I did above. And it's not a "fully updated" halo 3 online. It's the EXACT halo 3 online copied onto a disc with 3 new maps. And what does possible DLC have to do with making the game have value? You mean I have to spend MORE to get what should have already been on the disc seeing as how I'm paying $60. And I wouldn't feel better about buying a game for a free beta code, lol. Those are free giveaways with multiple titles and hold no value. I admit that it's great though. I wish I could get into it too. But not for that price.

Now, if you guys can see value in this title that's not the problem. In fact that's great. I wish I could feel good about buying it myself. But what is rediculous is when you go crazy when someone says the game looks great but isn't worth the cost, like their opinion is wrong. They don't try and force their opinion on you guys but you guys just can't stand it if someone doesn't share your view that this game is worth all the money in the world. That's the only problem here.

I fully paid for this game last month...your gonna have a tough time convincing me..but to each it's own..



 



Solid_Raiden on 20 September 2009
Zizzla_Rachet said:
Solid_Raiden said:
Zizzla_Rachet said:
Solid_Raiden said:
disolitude said:
heruamon said:
ph4nt said:
Looks like people aren't happy that ODST has not received the metacritic AAA status award.

I can't say that I really expected it to achieve AAA...it is built off the same Halo 3 engine.  I don't want to call it an expansion, but i still think M$ should have launched this title for $49.99.  They might have sold better, and would have likely resulted in a better perception about the game.  Even if M$ didn't want to set a price-precedence, they could have offered gamers a discount like Toys R Us is doing. 

- 6-7 hour long campaign that is one of the best single player campaigns of the year and that you will play multiple times
- New multiplayer mode that is extremely fun and which I only played twice and wasted 40 min combined
- All of Halo 3's maps, including 12 maps not in halo 3. These maps alone will cost 2200 pts (27 dollars)
-Halo Reach beta invite

How is this not worth full price? I agree that 49.99 would have been nice, I like cheap stuff too... but yeah, lets be realistic.

Like as a 360 user, you can spend that money elsewhere and buy something like wolfenstien or FEAR 2 or some other FPS that came out this year...but would you really? And is ODST and what it offers really worh less thn those games?


I don't understand why it hurts you guys so much to hear someone say that it doesn't have enough value to warrant a $60 price. These people aren't saying it's a bad game, or attacking the game or anything, not most of them anyway. And it's not like people are pulling this out of a hat, practically every review mentions this same thing wether the review was positive or not. It's all about percieved value, and what you might see as value other people don't. I mean, I loved Heavenly sword, and I also loved L4D but after buying and loving both games, I felt ripped off because the value just wasn't there for me. And this is another title like that. 6-7 hour campaign is not very long, this is the same thing that 360 fans were screaming foul against games like Heavenly sword for, but now it's acceptable? Why? Because you can play it over and over again? And you can't play every game over and over again? Yea, that's great that you can play the campaign co-op but that's not really a big feature to me and many others, I never played the first one co-op. I play most campeigns once and then I find replayability in online multiplayer or other modes. I'd much prefer a seperate co-op mode, which thank god this does have. In addition, the only real multiplayer mode in this game is firefight, which looks amazing fun, but ONE online mode is rediculous when asking full price. Should Gears 2 have been $120? Going by the price of this title, it seems like that price would have been not only acceptable, but a bargain. A longer single player experiance, co-op both online and off, horde mode, and competitive multiplayer with multiple modes. In comparison, a 6 hour campaign and 1 game mode  and 3 maps just does not cut it, and that is all the new content that you will find here. Saying that you get Halo 3's online isn't even a issue, I payed for that game 2 years ago, had what fun I could with it and I'm done with it, and even if I wasn't I'd be damned if I'm paying for it AGAIN! That's nuts. But I've moved on since 07, and there have been so many great online experiances since then and so many more coming for me to just give bungie more money for packaging in the same game I already bought.

Ok...let's play the example game...

Ex. 1

Halo ODST..

5+ hour Single player mode

Multiplayer CoOp mode

Fully updated Halo3 MP mode with new maps....

Reach beta Invite

Full Retail Price

DLC Possible as stated by Bungie

Ex.2

Heavenly Sword

5-7 Hour single Player mode

No MP...

No DLC...

Released at full Price (Last I checked in March the game was being sold at full price this year..At Virgin...Can't say it is full price new everywhere)

What do you think?


Awesome. So your saying if a game is a better value then at least one other rip off it's value is attained? Let's do that same comparison but with a game like MW2, U2, Borderlands, Forza 3, and all the games it's actually competing against. Or even Gears 2, like I did above. And it's not a "fully updated" halo 3 online. It's the EXACT halo 3 online copied onto a disc with 3 new maps. And what does possible DLC have to do with making the game have value? You mean I have to spend MORE to get what should have already been on the disc seeing as how I'm paying $60. And I wouldn't feel better about buying a game for a free beta code, lol. Those are free giveaways with multiple titles and hold no value. I admit that it's great though. I wish I could get into it too. But not for that price.

Now, if you guys can see value in this title that's not the problem. In fact that's great. I wish I could feel good about buying it myself. But what is rediculous is when you go crazy when someone says the game looks great but isn't worth the cost, like their opinion is wrong. They don't try and force their opinion on you guys but you guys just can't stand it if someone doesn't share your view that this game is worth all the money in the world. That's the only problem here.

I fully paid for this game last month...your gonna have a tough time convincing me..but to each it's own..


I apologize. I didn't think this through obviously. I know how crazy you guys get when someone explains why their opinion is different then your own. So you might have not even understood the parts in my posts which explained my ture intentions. Like I've said in both of my posts, I'm not arguing that the game has no value, and that's its not worth the money. I'm arguing that just because someone doesn't believe it is worth the price, doen't mean that they are wrong, which some people on here can't seem to understand. I only gave my opinion as to give insight as to why someone may feel that the title isn't worth the money to them. I'm not trying to convince anyone, I'm doing the opposite. I just want people who think it's worth the money to stop going crazy when someone gives the opinion that it's not worth the money and trying to force their opinion on them, over, and over, and over again in multiple threads. It's old. Some people believe that it's worth $60, and others don't. Get over it. It's one of those situations where no one is wrong.




PS3 Trophies

 

 

Squilliam on 20 September 2009

Its Halo. Which means obviously is better than any game anyone chooses to compare it to. If you don't get this fact then you will never get this fact so I will not bother explaining it to anyone.

Essentially its Halo > All (because like im being as dumb as the people coming in and bashing the franchise for NO GOOD REASON.

@Solid Raiden: Heavenly Sword was an inferior product which noone would really want to play through twice. You can litterally leave the room and make food and come back and not be dead if you mash the buttons fast enough. Halo 3 has an average playtime of over 100 hours, theres the difference in value.



Tease.

Solid_Raiden on 20 September 2009
Squilliam said:
Its Halo. Which means obviously is better than any game anyone chooses to compare it to. If you don't get this fact then you will never get this fact so I will not bother explaining it to anyone.

Essentially its Halo > All (because like im being as dumb as the people coming in and bashing the franchise for NO GOOD REASON.

@Solid Raiden: Heavenly Sword was an inferior product which noone would really want to play through twice. You can litterally leave the room and make food and come back and not be dead if you mash the buttons fast enough. Halo 3 has an average playtime of over 100 hours, theres the difference in value.


I already said that Heavenly Sword has no value. So why is everyone telling me how much better value ODST is? I already said how low the value of Heavenly Sword was, it was the entire reason I even mentioned it. So obviously ODST has more value. What things I already know are you guys going to teach me next week, that 2+2=4? Or maybe instructions on cooking a poptart? I'm awfully hungry.

On the subject though, Heavenly Sword was actually a really great game. The button mashing isn't any worse then most other games in the genre, it switched things up with shooting segments that were amazingly fun (nothing beats using motion controls to shoot arrows at people crotches), had some incredible boss fights (whiptail  had an AMAZING boss fights, one of my favorites from a non MGS non SOTC game) had great graphics, a good intelligent story with great acting and a perfect ending. The ONLY thing really wrong with that game was that it had NO value and was super short. It really is a great rent though.




PS3 Trophies