I'd agree to this, but I've seen little evidence of poor implementation or confusion. I haven't read your entire conversation with the OP, so maybe it has been covered already. My apologies if that's the case.Doomsdaylee said:I covered this, and to OP, this qualifies to your (thankfully intelligent) response as well.
Fair enough, it was written as a "canon" source.
It's still HUGELY stupid and egotistical to expect us to buy everything with the Halo logo slapped on it to fill their pockets so we can know what's going on...
If they DID cover this in-game, instead of just throwing it in and screwing all casual fans instead of brand hungry gits, good for them.
I do think the AI life-span is dumb, but that's not the point. The point ALSO isn't that it was "in the books first." It's HOW they did it.
For the record, I've only played Halo 2, and left when I discovered it was an over-hyped, sludge through mediocre town. That doesn't mean that Halo gets a free pass on bad writing/ideas/implementation of said ideas because it's a AAA (for some reason) game that I don't like.
Well what is the point of having a 10 out of 10 system then?xshadowscreamx said:no game deserves 2/10.. well im sure is a few but not this one.
Yeah, Deus Ex is my favorite game of all time. I've read his infamous review of it (3/10) and it never crossed my mind to go running to a message board to ***** about it. He played the game, formed and opinion, and explained said opinion.SirBryghtside said:YES! Called that it was Tom Chick as soon as I saw the title!
This is the guy who infamously gave Deus Ex (the original) a bad review. And while I generally disagree with his opinions, I'm not immature enough to go on a name-calling spree or whatever. He's entitled to them, and he is not a troll.
if you dont mind me asking, how did this person travel into the future and play the game before it was released? because to make that assumption, based on a full 7-10 hour game, they must have played it start to finish already.wooty said:While I'm no longer a fan of the Halo series, even a 2/10 seems harsh. A 5/10 would suffice for this series as it currently stands as from what I've heard from people......its not changed much. [Someone told me that it was practically Halo 3 with re-skinned enemies and a few extra colours.
(Note: This is just what I've heard from a few sources, I don't need people chasing me with torches, pitchforks and trays of cupcakes.)
There doesnt even seem to be much fanfare for this one too, I was barely aware it was even being released until I saw the review for it slide along the top of the homepage.
'Sup dude! Nice username, welcome to the Escapist, and thanks for making your first post perhaps one of the more reasonable ones in the thread.The Comfy Chair said:People are allowed to dislike things...
I probably would have been mad about this kind of thing when i was 12, only could afford to have one or two games outside of Christmas at best and only ever one console. At that age you have to be CERTAIN that EVERYONE likes the game you like otherwise you'll be the one with the 'dud' game and no-one will talk to you at school, laughing at you for liking the 'bad' game. When you grow up you learn to not give a damn (sometimes).
If you like halo 4 (pre-emptively i might add) then why does it matter to you that some guy with a keyboard didn't? I'm not a massive fan of playing FPS games on console whatsoever (but i will make an exception for the halo series, since i do like the universe, it's the only reason my 360 is still hanging on it there after i started playing on PC in 2008), and i think CoD is a steaming pile o' junk now. There are some of my opinions, if you don't agree with them, that's fine, you're allowed to think so. It's as easy as that.
That guy is also allowed to (potentially) disagree with halo 4 when i play it. I don't care if he personally didn't like it, the only thing i care about with my entertainment is if I like it!![]()
That is basically what IGN and other sites have done to the rating system, artificially inflated it to the point where anything below an 8 is likely garbage and even games in the 9 bracket can have huge flaws. A ten point scale should take 5 or 6 as perfectly average (within the context of the game's genre) - you don't need 4 levels of broken almost unplayable games, it defeats the purpose of having that range.The Rookie Gamer said:Generally, I thought 4 or below meant that the game was broken, like massive glitches and buggy controls, while 5 meant mediocrity, but the game works mechanically. I agree that people having massive fits over reviews and Metacritic scores is making a planetary obelisk of doom out of a molehill.