he clearly was just doing this for attention esspecially seeing as he wrote a comment saying that 1 Star is actually his lowest possible score meaning Halo got a 0% which is well BS in my opinion
Halo 4 gets a 2/10...
- Thread starter RedDeadFred
- Start date
Recommended Videos
This^.BloatedGuppy said:
Here's something to remember folks, most reviewers give an 'average' game a 7 out of 10. This is partially to give head to the industry they are parasites of. In an honest system, an 'average' game would get a 5 out of 10, with 1 being reserved for the truly horrid and 10 being reserved for the mind blowingly good.
I guess I couldn't give less of a **** about what some dude thinks about some topic on the internet. Wait, no. That's not true. I stopped having that attitude in my teens.freaper said:
PS - All I will ever have of your personality is what you present of it.
He had the temerity to give a popular game a low score.Farmer_Casper said:
People can talk all they want about "honest" reviews. They don't want honest reviews. They want reviews that align with their opinions/preconceptions. If they don't, the reviewer will be accused of either trolling for hits or shilling for companies, depending on whether or not the review is perceived as scoring too high or too low.
From his Wikipedia page:Farmer_Casper said:It's kinda depressing to think about, but I do agree. One article I wrote a while back got a lot of flame and people just won't let it fly already. I hope this guys gets a rest soon
Chick is no stranger to controversy. I don't know if he actively courts it, but he's extremely stubborn about using the entire review scale and giving his opinion as he sees it in spite of whatever the populist perspective on a particular game might be.
I posted it earlier in the thread, but this is his response to the issue in his interview with Rock Paper Shotgun:
I don't really like Chick as a reviewer, because I find his tastes idiosyncratic and extremely different from my own. I've gotten weary of him coming out of left field and blasting something, seemingly randomly, to the point where when I hear he's hated something I like I can't help but think "Okay sure, but it's Tom Chick". However, I respect the guy. He's honest. He's educated. He knows the industry. It irritates me tremendously to see an online community that whines hourly about integrity in gaming journalism crucify him for not liking something. I maintain my stance from page 2 of this thread. There are a lot of hypocrites around these parts.
The reviewer was left with a bad taste in his mouth after expecting to see an awesome game. Maybe if he was reviewing this game having never played a Halo game before he would rate it more highly, but he's not. As it stands he doesn't like this game at all. So he gave it the lowest score he could because that's his opinion. Reviews are people's own opinions of a game. If you don't want to know this person's opinion, why read the review?
That is true, and while my "uninvolved" attitude might irritate you, I'll only really care if I can shake your hand in person.BloatedGuppy said:
Yes, we're all people talking here, but the fact that I don't get any visual feedback from you or anyone else detracts a lot from all but the most basic discussions. That's just how I feel about the internet in it's entirety right now. I can't imagine how you could honestly care about what everyone tells you, trolls and whatnot included. The simple fact that you assumed my first comment was mean spirited kinda shows what I'm trying to get at. Language is only a medium for communicating as long as we assume both parties are willing to.
Well, I don't think you're uninvolved, really, or you wouldn't be reading and commenting on the subject in the first place. It's empty bravado, the remark of "I don't care what YOU think". The fact you go out of your way to indicate how much you don't care what they think is revelatory of a degree of emotional investment.freaper said:
And really, it's okay to care about things. There's obviously a huge degree of separation between letting the opinions of others control your life, and acknowledging and taking an interest in the opinions of others. Of course I care what people think. I'm curious about their perspectives, I'm interested in learning about opposing points of view. It's intellectually healthy.
I've discussed this elsewhere, in connection to different (and often far more serious) subjects, this prevailing modern attitude of "I don't care what anyone thinks! Nyah!". I find it incredibly destructive.
I can't disagree with you, after all, we're just picking up the scattered pieces of our own jigsaw, and if someone, even if he or she lives miles and miles away from your own life, can contribute a piece of that puzzle, I do believe we become richer individuals.BloatedGuppy said:
Like you're saying, I am more invested in this conversation than I was in reading the review this thread was originally about. I hope that at least shows in the length and articulation of my reply. I do care about someone's opinion of a game as long as the reasoning behind is sound and the criticism isn't so venomous it turns me away from it (though honestly I haven't read the guy's review, so I'm just talking out of my arse here).
If anything I'll be less cynical about other members of forum boards in the future.
I dislike the Halo Series, but it'd have to be broken before I would give it a 4. I see review scores like Test Scores. 50 or 5/10 or 2.5/5 stars etc is a Minimal Pass. It works, but that's about it.
A 2 couldn't be more blatantly a call for attention if you set up your own stage and spotlights.
A 2 couldn't be more blatantly a call for attention if you set up your own stage and spotlights.
Man, that "A.I. Lifespan" criticism really bothers me. Does no-one remember Marathon? You know, that one series of shooters that Bungie developed for apple computers back in the day that had a plot dealing entirely with A.I. becoming rampant towards the end of their lifespan? The series that Halo was designed from the very beginning to be a prequel to? This stuff's been foreshadowed since before Combat Evolved even existed.
Dude is just an amateur. He doesn't know to review a title objectively.
He's probably a hype-hater.
(personal preference can't be taken out of the equation entirely, but it can be tempered)
He's probably a hype-hater.
(personal preference can't be taken out of the equation entirely, but it can be tempered)
Maybe he didn't outline what was wrong with it in conventional sense, but he absolutely gets across what he doesnt like about the game. Which I pointed out a few pages back. From new baddies and weapons being simple re-skins, not enjoying the story to lake of replay value and lacking features its all there its just not broken down the way the most people are used to.AzrealMaximillion said:Opinions can be wrong. They can also be ignorant. And judging by the review itself, the author didn't really give much of a reason as to why he rated the game so low other than, "I've done this before."snowbear said:Criticise as much as you like it doesn't make him any more wrong or right, it's his opinion and it's just as valid as yours. Which in my opinion makes bashing the guy repeatedly utterly pointless. But hey it's my opinionAzrealMaximillion said:
Anyway
Back to halo
He starts the review off with the title that says "Halo 4 is half the game it should be" and then doesn't go into what half of the game was missing. He instead whines about not being able to shoot the gun mounted on the Mammoth. I don't know about you, but complaining for two paragraphs about not being able to shoot a gun in the beginning of a game seems petty.
He also had a little cryfest about the replacement of Firefight mode. He then doesn't even describe in any detail what he doesn't like about Spartan Ops, the aforementioned replacement.
It was more whining and less actual review of the game, and that's what has people calling this reviewer out.
So yeah, I think his opinion can be called less "valid" as he didn't actually state that the game played horribly. In fact he didn't really talk about him playing the game at all.
With all that said its still his opinion, he played the game so I believe hes quite within his rights to hate it and score it accordingly. weather or not his review matches up to others is irreverent.
I do disagree with him and if pushed I would give it a solid 3.5/5 but im still not going to cry foul because someone else didnt like it.