Halo Anniversary reviews come online – all the scores

These reviews are as predictable as COD’s always are XD

EG have 8.

Which you would know JC since you posted on their review.

@1 because its awesome?

Strategy Informer Review – http://www.strategyinformer.com/xbox360/halocombatevolved/1728/review.html

Videogamer.com – 8/10

http://www.videogamer.com/xbox360/halo/review.html

Strategy Informer is spot on in my opinion.

Strategy Informer. Nice to see there’s still reviewers on the internet that actually have some balls.

Strategy Informer was badly written imo.

Also don’t see how it can be “spot on” if you haven’t yet played the game (with it out tomorrow).

@7

Yer I hate when journalists give marks based on their opinion. They should give marks that I personally agree with instead.

@8 Please don’t patronise me, kiddo.

This has absolutely nothing to do with my opinion. It has to do with journalists rampantly scoring everything in the 8 – 10 range like no other number in the scoring table exists.

They actually seem to understand the concept of “5 = average”, not “7 = average”.

Has more to do with the fact that most truly bad games simply do not get reviewed at all then with the quality of the games.

Especially at this time in the technology cycle and the risk averse nature of publishers creates an enviroment where most games are simply “solid” experiences, nothing especially bad but nothing outstandingly amazing either.

@10 I see plenty of terrible games getting scored super high scores all the time.

Modern Warfare 3, for example.

“Especially at this time in the technology cycle and the risk averse nature of publishers creates an enviroment where most games are simply “solid” experiences, nothing especially bad but nothing outstandingly amazing either.”

And yet that all keep scoring 9s across the board anyway.

Balls. Am getting this anyway.

But Modern Warefare isn’t a terrible game at all. It might not be something you enjoy playing, me neither for that matter, but I can see the quality. It delivers on an interesting campaign with some nice set pieces combined with a fast paced simpel multiplayer game.

@13 As far as I’m concerned, it is a terrible game. As far as I’m concerned, it does deserve lower scores.

If an author kept releasing the same kind of books with almost identical plots ever time, he or she would be considered a terrible author. Repetition without evolution *is* bad design.

Regardless, a media where all the reviews sound the same and score the same is a media full of cowardly, pussy writers, too willing to satisfy mandates shoved in their faces and site sponsors (usually video game companies) to appease.

It would be the equivalent of Roger Ebert running ads on his site for a new movie, then scoring it a perfect score. Nobody would believe it for an instance.

@14 I think ultimately Modern Warfare 3 should be ranked alongside Fifa and other sports games in as much as, it’s better than last years, but it will deliver a very similar experience. People say they want innovation and change and difference, but in the same way that Fifa can’t break out of the fact that it’s a game of football, CoD is so successful now, it can’t really break out of its model, it is constrained by its very form. If you consider it as a sports game it becomes more logical.

No they woulden’t be, that’s pretty much what every “genre” writer does. The same concept with a different spin on it. If it isn’t broken, don’t fix it.

Eventually people might get tired of it, and then opinions might change, but that hasn’t happened yet.
That usually only happens when somebody discovers “the next big thing”, wich is a rare event as concepts that strong don’t grow on trees.

But that’s the entire entertaiment review industrie, you know that going in. There’s an intrecate relationship between publisher and outlets that cover them. Some times this goes bad and only verry few, verry powerfull media outlets can go against it.
But so long as you keep hearing people from within the review buiseness expose the mechanism when it goes bad (like Kotaku did with the EA BF3 review shenanigins) I woulden’t call the whole system broken.
Or people like Giantbomb freely expressing their opinions on games no matter how negative or sweary they are.
Or magazines like Edge scoring more harshly.

The system isn’t broken, it’s just that some times you might not like games that are good and popular. Or enjoy games that are flawed.
But you can’t expect a review system to relfect your personal tastes.

@8 you’re wrong as I have played & completed the game. cheers

@15 And people want more Justin Bieber, more Lady Gaga, and more X-Factor. That doesn’t mean they’re good.

Your argument would work, except its not a football game.

The FIFA title where they finally ditched the arcadey ball mechanics and started to move further towards simulation deserved a decent, high score. The subsequent games that proceeded to rehash the mechanics without almost no changes? Not so much.

@16 “No they woulden’t be, that’s pretty much what every “genre” writer does. The same concept with a different spin on it. If it isn’t broken, don’t fix it.”

You can do stuff in the same genre without completely rehashing the same ideas all the time.

Stephen King comes up with unique ideas for almost all of his story. The characters are consistently original, and rarely fall into the same overused stereotypes across various novels. Sometimes he steps out of his genre completely.

Dean Koontz uses the same ideas, over and over and over again. Dogs, special children with extraordinary talents, witty detectives. He has very little range of creativity, and constantly rehashes plots and stories between novels.

One is a good author. The other is not.

“But that’s the entire entertaiment review industrie, you know that going in.”

No, it isn’t. Go look at metacritic, and you will see almost instantly that the film and music industry are far more willing to score harshly about it’s media than the video game industry is. It’s not even subtle.

Who’s that trolling MW3 in a completely unrelated thread? Oh its Ireland Michael “voicing his opinion”….. Again.

Surprise surprise ;D

Shopto or Edge magazine. Hmm.

.. Erm, yeah.

@19 You really need to get a solid fucking grasp of what ‘trolling’ means.

@20 9/10 was a surprising score for me actually, I would have thought that they would have low-balled it a tad somewhere in the region of 7/10.

@19 It was a passing comment in about 60 other lines of text.

@21 I’m a big EDGE reader, but they’ve always had some sort of strange hard-on for the Halo franchise that I’ve never personally understood all that much myself.

GamingXp 90%

http://www.gamingxp.com/bericht-5261-microsoft-microsoft-x360-page1-halo_combat_evolved_anniversary.htm

10 years ago Halo: Combat Evolved amazed everyone with stunning gameplay, an absorbing story and an epic soundtrack. Since then it has become a bit old graphically, so 343 Studios decided to do a remake with enhanced HD and even 3D graphics and remade the soundtrack to 5.1 surround sound. 6 classic multiplayer maps were reimagined as well, and a new Firefight mission was added. The online multiplayer is even compatible with Halo: Reach. Basically, they made a near-perfect game even better!

#21 Why? It’s the most well done remake I’ve seen, even better than Gamecube RE. I would ‘ve removed armor abilities from the Anni multiplayer though, even though they tweaked them.

Yes Michael a passing reference, which you then reiterated twice when people fed you. Still whatever floats your boat eh?

Moxifool… I have thanks. Michael loves to troll. Who doesn’t?

@25 “which you then reiterated twice when people fed you.”

Yes, because I was responding to them. Again, only a few lines out dozens, whilst making significantly broader discussion on a number of other points, which you seem intent on ignoring simply for the purpose of making ad hominem accusations.

So yeah, learn the definition of trolling, please. I was simply using the game as an example of my point. If people choose to get needlessly defensive about it, that’s *their* own choices.

There is no DELIBERATE intention on my behalf of provoking a negative reaction out of people, and no number of times assuming that there is will change that fact.

^ lol, of course its deliberate! What you *accidently* type things do you?

@27 I never even remotely claimed to “accidentally” type anything. I was simply using Modern Warfare 3 as what I considered a valid example of the point that I was making.

You’re the one taking three lines of text about MW3 (I counted) and treating it as the whole discussion, while ignoring the other THIRTY SEVEN lines of text that had absolutely nothing to do with it.

So again, simply trying to claim that I’m trolling doesn’t actually make it trolling, especially when 90% of what I wrote has absolutely nothing to do with what you’re claiming I’m trolling about.

StickSkills – 9/10

http://stickskills.com/2011/11/14/review-halo-ce-anniversary/

^ Look, just stop saying bad things about MW3…..

Pretty please *kitten eyes*

@30 Or maybe you could stop derailing every thread bitching about my non-existent “trolling”?

Pretty please? *Falcon PUNCH to the ovaries*

How bout some comments on Halo Anniversary or the reviews…

Looking forward to going through this in HD with the new graphics. Love that they added that on the fly switch button for comparison.

@31, Sheesh, try to be nice & look what happens. Typical troll Is typical.

@32 It’s a boring rehash of a game that was already boring when it came out.

There you go.

^Coming from an annoying prick who described something as tacky as Steven King being a ‘good author’, compared songs’ popularity to an online multiplayer game and and has a k/d of 0.5

Why don’t you go and yawn at yourself in the mirror, hmm?

@34 your comments are boring, nothing more, nothing less.

@35 & @36 http://i1197.photobucket.com/albums/aa431/aprevidelli/forever-alone.png

“Why don’t you go and yawn at yourself in the mirror, hmm?”

I would, but I’m far too damn handsome to be bored by that!

@34 you just crossed the line. Well, if Goldeneye is considered as the grandfather of FPSers then Halo is considered the father of FPSers. I know I experienced both in all they’re glory. Goldeneye was great because of the 4 player experience that offered hours upon hours of trash talking with your friends under one tv set. Halo took that formula and increased it by a factor of 16 players. Halo offered a excellant single player game but, deep within the multi-player experience it offered a complexed formula that kept my friends and myself busy for up to 4:00 in morning sessions. Yes, 16 people connected to 4 Xbox’s on 4 different tv’s having the best local trash talking experiences ever. No sir, you couldn’t be more wrong in your review of Halo.

@38, incorrect usage of “increase by a factor of”. It increased by a factor of 4 (to 16) not a factor of 16 (to 64).

Like I said, guys a troll

@37 wow, your drawing skills are obviously better than your sense of taste.

@34.
I thought you were a mature and intelligent poster until that post along with your persistent negative/insulting comments in this thread Michael. If you don’t like the game, that’s fine, state your opinion if you wish and move on.

As others have already told you, you are in fact now trolling whether you see it that way or not. Your comments are now annoying, immature, borderline insulting, and most definitely un-necessary in this particular thread.

I don’t plan on having a discussion with you about this either (as I see that’s what you feed on). I’ll leave that to the other 10 or so people in this thread who seem to be in agreement.

@38 Goldeneye is so fondly remember because it fostered that idea of bringing people together in the same room to play a game, which made the experience all the more enjoyable.

Structurally and visually though, it was a mess, even back then.

The system-link / lan system you mentioned for Halo was by no means pioneered by that series, not by a long site, and it’s even more interesting you mention the game’s ability to bring people together, as split-screen co-op has apparently been removed in this game.

Why they would do this is beyond me. It was one of the best things about the franchise. I certainly hope split-screen online hasn’t been removed as well…

@42 Uuh… good for them?

^ Ironic that he still doesn’t get the message..

BTW – “Uuh…good for them?” = Best comeback ever.
http://assets0.ordienetworks.com/images/GifGuide/clapping/joker.gif

@43 You have no idea how much of a saddo u sound.

7

@44 I’m well aware of your “message”. I simply don’t agree with it.

It wasn’t an attempt at a “comeback”. I was simply stating that they are free to think what they want. It has no impact on my opinion or actions one way or the other.

@45 Oh, the irony…

^
Hence, you are a troll. And a blind one at that.
http://img.curated.by/lxh/8ti/ipqq/mwj/8qe97kv6lqd6kp568.gif

@47 Not caring what someone attempting to negatively insult me says and intentionally making a remark to provoke a negative response out of people are two very different things.

Troll:

>verb 
trolled, past participle; trolled, past tense; trolling, present participle; trolls, 3rd person singular present

Fish by trailing a baited line along behind a boat
- we trolled for mackerel

Search for something
- a group of companies trolling for partnership opportunities

Send (an e-mail message or posting on the Internet) intended to provoke a response from the reader by containing errors

So again, no, it’s not trolling, if there’s no deliberate intent to get a negative response out of people simply by expression an opinion. If you are reacting to my own personal opinions in a negative fashion, that is *your* choice.

^ What’s wrong Michael, you can dish it out plenty but you can’t take it? Another lengthy reply of bullocks in an attempt to make yourself look (or at least feel) intelligent. Ahhh ofcourse. We all know the patterns of Ireland Michael by now.

Take a look at your comments here sir and tell me who’s being negative.

@49 That doesn’t even make any sense. I am responding, after all.

You are completely free to insult me all you want, mate. You’re completely free to make whatever accusation, assumption or broad generalisation you want about me.

But I’m still going to think you’re wrong.

I do think it’s hilariously ironic though, that someone called Heavy D (if you name is derived from the artist) is criticising my posts, which were about the rampant mediocrity and laziness prevalent in certain franchises (Halo, Call of Duty, etc). The man was the epitome of the concept.

“Take a look at your comments here sir and tell me who’s being negative.”

Never said I wasn’t being negative. I simply said my opinions aren’t posting with the *intent* of getting negative reactions out of people. I’m really not sure what is hard to understand about this.

The world would be a pretty fucking boring place if everyone had the same opinion.

I would actually agree with your assessment of me if it wasn’t for the fact that I have countless mature, respectful and solid discussions with many of the regulars on here all the time. And that’s more than enough to keep me happy.