Halo 4 criticized for not having iron sights...wut?

[Erttheking]

I mean, everyone has a right to their opinion but...this just reminds me of that Wallstreet Journal review of Borderlands 2 that basically broke down to "it's bad because it's not Call of Duty", I mean...WHAT!?

i just...read this. http://www.egmnow.com/articles/reviews/egm-review-halo-4/

It also criticizes Halo 4 for not having "big ticket sequences" and also they criticize it for focusing on "slow, methodical combat and unnecessarily large environments" In other words, it's criticizing Halo 4 for not being linear enough. This is just...wow, I have no idea what to say to this. Any thoughts on this?

 

[hazabaza1]

People don't like change, and we've spent so long with Ironsight aiming it's become the norm.

EDIT: By this I mean in recent years it's become so common.
Jesus fuck you guys will pick at anything.

 

[Supertegwyn]

Wow, that is really stupid.

Damn stupid people....

 

[Frission]

There's always going to be people like that.

 

[dessertmonkeyjk]

No iron sights, huh? Bring it on!

 

[ZekeTheHobo]

"It seems like fun! I hate it!"

Graa. People hate change too much.

 

[Tamrin]

The guy is catching more heat for giving Halo 4 a 7/10 than for his iron sights comments, although that is certainly doing a number on him as well. Justin also got some criticism for his 4/5 score.

Interesting that almost exactly a year ago Jim released his Hate out of Ten episode.

 

[major_chaos]

Any thoughts on this?

First thought: Wait, what EGM still exists?
second thought: Why the fuck does EGM still exist? I though almost everyone hated them, even more than IGN.
In all seriousness that was a fucking awful review, but I guess this proves that Microsoft couldn't pay off everyone for good reviews. (Disclaimer: that was a joke)
[sub] seriously? EGM? Still? why? how? grrrr[/sub]

 

[Ravinoff]

It's a valid complaint, especially considering how screwy the reticle can be in Halo. I'd certainly appreciate them a lot.

 

[Erttheking]

The guy is catching more heat for giving Halo 4 a 7/10 than for his iron sights comments, although that is certainly doing a number on him as well. Justin also got some criticism for his 4/5 score.

Interesting that almost exactly a year ago Jim released his Hate out of Ten episode.

I guess I'm not a fanboy in that I don't really care about the score, I'm still hung up on the absurd criticisms....I mean, asking Halo to have iron sights is to ask it to basically stop being Halo...I just...I don't even.

 

[Jacco]

The guy is catching more heat for giving Halo 4 a 7/10 than for his iron sights comments, although that is certainly doing a number on him as well. Justin also got some criticism for his 4/5 score.

Interesting that almost exactly a year ago Jim released his Hate out of Ten episode.

I guess I'm not a fanboy in that I don't really care about the score, I'm still hung up on the absurd criticisms....I mean, asking Halo to have iron sights is to ask it to basically stop being Halo...I just...I don't even.

As long as they dont add QTE's or big set piece cinematics that only let you control the camera, I'm okay.

 

[mattttherman3]

But there has never been iron sight in halo! AND WERE NOT GONNA START NOW. Adding that ridiculously unecessairy COD scoring system was bad enough

 

[Shadowstar38]

I live having iron sights. They make the aiming far better for me at least.

That being said... not adding them to your core gaming mechanics shouldn't detract from the overall quality of the game. The question is, does the shooting work without iron sights? If so, fuck it. It's not needed for the majority of the people who can play without it.

All those other things the reviewer mentions that makes the game bad are actually things that we WISH we had in Call of Duty.

I'm just going to chalk this reviewer up as a jornalistic troll and move on.

 

[Reginald]

I agree with the guy. Every game should be like every other game, that way it's easier for journalists.

 

[Netrigan]

It also criticizes Halo 4 for not having "big ticket sequences" and also they criticize it for focusing on "slow, methodical combat and unnecessarily large environments" In other words, it's criticizing Halo 4 for not being linear enough. This is just...wow, I have no idea what to say to this. Any thoughts on this?

Well, it's his opinion. That's what he's paid to write.

I kind of sympathize with him, because that's pretty much my problem with the Halo games I've played thus far (Combat Evolved and Reach)... as well as Unreal back in the day. They create these really big levels and fill them... well, not really all that much IMO. And the resulting game is just a bit slow for my tastes.

Bear in mind, my definition of "slow" in the circumstance is kind of fuzzy. Everything is all fast-paced and hectic, but half-way through encounters I just want it to be over with. Everything seems to go on a lot longer than I want it to. I quite maybe a third of the way through Combat Evolved and had to force myself to finish Reach.

And I happily accept that many people don't feel the same way.

 

[krazykidd]

I agree with the guy. Every game should be like every other game, that way it's easier for journalists.

I know right ? It also makes the transition from game to game easier . Why people feel the need to be different is beyond me .

 

[Batou667]

Why would a Halo game need iron sights? Plenty of the weapons already have scopes, and the ones that don't are the kind that don't require precise aiming anyway.

 

[Twilight_guy]

Opinions... how do they work?

I don't care. Somebody has an opinion about a game I'll never play. Big whoop.

 

[TIMESWORDSMAN]

Remember when everyone got worked about how media bigwigs would accuse other games of not being Halo.

My, how the seasons have changed.

 

[Baron von Blitztank]

Well I guess you can't please everybody!