I really dont see what production values have to do with it.

I have enjoyed many low budget movies and hated many blockbusters.

Its down to taste really.

The reviews are comparing it to the Halo franchise.

its cause bungie is still using their old Halo 2 engine that they also use on Halo 3.

you can also notice the animations are too outdated in the cutscenes, but i think they didn't want to build a new engine for this one, im betting they're going for it for Reach.

Those wonderful graphics got a 9 from IGN.

The animations and even every other aspect of the graphics (more in response to psrock there) don't bother me, it's just the face are so bad that it's distracting.  They looked fine on the Xbox, were just barely excusable on Halo 3 since you didn't have to see them often at all, but just judging from that review it looks like you see them all the time.  At this point in the generation there really just isn't an excuse for something that shitty looking.

The environments and the rest of the model is fine, just the faces look like last gen and its made even worse when they talk.

Don't get me wrong, I love low budget games, I still play World of Goo regulary and many other indie games.
However, if you're going to compare this game to the whole Halo franchise then ODST falls short on practically everything.

It does look kinda bad at times when it comes to faces...but when game is in motion it looks as good as any other 360 FPS.

One must understand things like scope, draw distance, split screen multiplayer to understand that Halo really looks the best it can on the 360 with what ts trying to do.

No it doesn't. Campaign is the best best since part 1, Firefight is really well done and addictive as hell. And it includes all Halo 3 maps plus new ones for multiplayer.

So the only way a reviewer can be respectable is if they give MGS4 a review higher than an 8? IGN gave MGS4 a 10, so IGN is the MOST respectable reviewers confirmed!

I am so not repectable, MGS4 was my biggest disappointment this gen. It was a beautiful game, with one of the best stories ever told in a videogame. But for me, the gameplay was sprodic and confusing. There just plain wasn't enough of it, in my opinion, leaving me not able to ever get a good feel for it. As much as there is to do, 20 minutes at a time of gameplay followed by 30 minutes of cutscene continually pulled me out of the game. As such, the game felt incomplete and like I was just trudging through to get to the next part of the story. 8/10.

Apparently I suck at videogames.

OT: I have this preordered but I am just on the fence, I really love Halo 3, and therefore already have all the mappacks. Do I want to pay $60 for this then? Arrrgh I am so torn! Help!

How so (and I'm only going by reading reviews and what others have said since I obviously haven't played it)?

• It has the definitive multiplayer
• It has the same wonderful AI
• It has the same high level of polish that comes from Bungue games
• It brings a new feel to the Halo universe (instead of invincible spartan, you have vulnerable human)
• It brings in a new and good hub world design
• It has the same wonderful firefights you come to expect from the Halo franchise
• Excellent pacing
• New interesting story with even an interesting side story from another perspective (Sadie's Story)

Where did it fall short?

-edit-

Don't get me wrong, it's fine not to like Halo (Hell, even I don't like it that much), I'm just curious if you're hating it because it's Halo or hating it because you actually think it does fall short.

Well that is the problem of MGS4 : A very high production value that lacks a bit/lot of gameplay actually.

I was really impressed when I saw it, but this is the first time I had a bitter taste in my mouth while playing MGS (Wayyyyyy to much cutscenes.. and that silly story... ).

Nothing will ever beat Snake Eater, best of the series.