Halo Reach Perfect 10! WTF?
- Thread starter Evil_Weevil
- Start date
Recommended Videos
While I agree that no review site counts a "10/10" or "5/5" as a "perfect" game, harping on the story and then giving that game a 10/10 is bullshit. I guess IGN UK didn't want anyone going the way of Guesterman.
You can't spell "ignorant" without IGN. However, in the past year, they (the US team at least) has become much better at covering news and other things.Evil_Weevil said:
However, as far as reviews go, I always subtract 2 from the score given (usually). Because many games that are actually average get 7s. A 1-10 score system would actually put average games at a 5. It works for most games, but a game like Reach is easily above a 9.
If its missing a good story, it should be docked some points (or half a point or something). Period. Its like taking an exam and getting a questing wrong and still getting an A+, you only get an A (which is damn good)
And in this case its not a matter of not playing it before critiquing it. Its a matter of the review contradicting its self which it seems some fanboys are missing.
I think the only game I would give a 10/10 would be Metroid
rime. I seriously cant think of anything i didn't like about it. Not one little nitpicking thing.
And in this case its not a matter of not playing it before critiquing it. Its a matter of the review contradicting its self which it seems some fanboys are missing.
I think the only game I would give a 10/10 would be Metroid
rime. I seriously cant think of anything i didn't like about it. Not one little nitpicking thing.
It's not perfect. Nothing is. It's just that they liked it well enough to give it a 10. 10 is not perfect, because, again, nothing is.
Also, so, the story's bad, but maybe it's not important. In every great game you can find a downside, that's why 10 out of 10 should not be fucking perfect.
Also, so, the story's bad, but maybe it's not important. In every great game you can find a downside, that's why 10 out of 10 should not be fucking perfect.
I'm imagining that the baby in your avatar is smoking and looking depressed because it is trying to figure out how it got a 10 with 2 paragraphs dedicated to something that is wrong with it hahaha.Tdc2182 said:
I should go to bed now...
Exactly this. There have been several Halo: Reach reviews that mentioned mediocre story and single player mode, extremely crappy AI and cheater AI with unlimited ammo spamming bullets at you and when you kill they only drop half a clipper, and then they still give it 10/10. Consistency please.Snarky Username said:You can't simultaneously call a game perfect and say it has a bad story. THAT IS NOT LOGICAL!
I noticed in Gametrailers review, they gave the design a perfect 10, resulting in an overall score of 9.3, despite having said earlier that the singleplayer was severely stunted in favor of the multiplayer. It had me scratching my head for a while, but then I started to understand as I looked at the other scores. After adding everything up, I realized that if they hadn't given the design a perfect score, the overall score would have dropped below a 9. In case you don't frequent Gametrailers, for some reason, anything below a 9 is average, if not slightly above average. And, trust me, as soon as the massive amount of fanboys on that site saw that 8.something, Gametrailers would have been hit with a shit-storm worse than anything their bandwidth can handle. Personally, I think they should add a "Self-preservation" score to each game, at least then they would be honest.
I feel that it is the words that are what is important. While 10/10 may be "perfect", it hardly means that the game is perfect. I think we should either stop looking at the score if it really irks you that much, or realize that the reviewer just enjoyed the game enough to want to give it the highest score he could possibly give it. There are plenty of games I would give a "perfect" score to that I can find flaws with. It doesn't mean that those games would be for everyone, and it definitely doesn't mean that those games are perfect. It just means that I enjoyed the game so much that I wanted to give it the highest score I could possibly give it. It is the actual words that are really important, anyways.
No game is perfect, 10 is a score some people give when its pros outweigh the cons so much that the game rises above all of them. 10 doesn't mean the game is perfect and could not be made better, but rather recognition that the title is so good that it can get away with that.
I don't like the series, but hey, one mans trash is another mans treasure.
I don't like the series, but hey, one mans trash is another mans treasure.
I think it works like subliminal pricing, you know how if someone has something for $200 but another store has it for $199.99 the store with it for $199.99 will sell more of them because people think of it as a bargain even though it's a penny. They see 5 out of 5 whatevers and think that they use a lower scale than those that use a 10 point system. It gets even worse when places like IGN give things 8.2 or 8.9 ratings.Eipok Kruden said:There has to be another reason that that.John Funk said:Do I know? No, not at all. Maybe it's because people are silly
Yeah, it got 10 out of 10. Yes, there is something not quite up to scratch. You're making a fuss because...?
people suck. wow. i have been using that alot lately.
no game is ever going to be perfect, but if the game is great, and super fun, it should get a high score. i dont mind giving mirrors edge a 10 in my mind even though it has some blaring flaws (multiplayer and shooting) because it was one of the most fun games i have ever played.
i think the point of games should not be to make them perfect, but to make them go beyond their faults. there are always going to be people with different opinions on games but people shouldn't be bashed for their opinions. because they are just that - opinions.
take fallout 3 for example. that got game of the year, and i absolutely friggin hated it. it was without a doubt the least fun game i have ever played, and to show you how serious i am - i played runescape and looking back i enjoyed that far more than fallout 3.
no game is ever going to be perfect, but if the game is great, and super fun, it should get a high score. i dont mind giving mirrors edge a 10 in my mind even though it has some blaring flaws (multiplayer and shooting) because it was one of the most fun games i have ever played.
i think the point of games should not be to make them perfect, but to make them go beyond their faults. there are always going to be people with different opinions on games but people shouldn't be bashed for their opinions. because they are just that - opinions.
take fallout 3 for example. that got game of the year, and i absolutely friggin hated it. it was without a doubt the least fun game i have ever played, and to show you how serious i am - i played runescape and looking back i enjoyed that far more than fallout 3.
I think the scoring was based around how enjoyable the game was, rather than the sum of its parts.
Not excusing it by any means, just attempting to clarify their choice.
Not excusing it by any means, just attempting to clarify their choice.
you don't give something a 10/10 unless it is truly perfect in every way possible... and giving a game like Halo, that is being devoid of gameplay innovation and an outstanding story and characters, a 10/10 is, well, it's wrong... I would be fine with an 8 or even a 9 but a 10 I'm sorry IGN but I think I'll go to someone who isn't biased like Games Radar... or Yahtzee...