Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: Halo CEA reviews are up!
  • Subject: Halo CEA reviews are up!
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3
Subject: Halo CEA reviews are up!

And they're dissapointing.

To me not only because of the relatively low scores but because of the "reasonings" behind those scores which really make me lose hope in reviewers these days.
For instance, there is a lot of complaining about the AI....and I seriously ask why, because CE's AI is still lightyears ahead of say....CoD/MW's...where you don't hear the reviewers complain about the incredibly stupid and bad AI (until this article at least). And then there's the complaining about the "levels being hard to navigate"....what do they expect? Straight forward leveldesign with no freedom to move around in and markers showing where you need to go every 10 steps? Again: a strength of Halo is not being appreciated because of what modern shooters have "blessed" us with. Besides: if those reviewers are moaning about the game not being fundamentally different from the original (wake up call reviewers: it's a remake...) that means they've also played the game before and should know how to get through the levels.

Sure: Halo Anniversary might not be perfect. I for ones would have loved it if the controls would have been made tighter and more up to par with the newer Halos. But I think Anniversary gets "bashed" on several elements that are just unfair, seeing how the reviewers completely overlook it games that perform weaker in those elements (AI for instance). Yes, I am a fanboy. Yes, I think a game that was almost perfect and receives updates like this is in fact "perfect". Still: I think reviewers should start to realize that modern offerings in the genre are by no means on par with what games like Halo did 10 years ago, and should be more fair in their critisism on games.

Anyways, just 1 more day to go. As a fan I'm really going to enjoy this game, that's for sure.

  • 11.14.2011 7:05 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Deva Path


Posted by: DecepticonCobra

We are all going to get banned aren't we?

The game should get the same score it got 10 years ago and a little more since it is the same thing just graphically updated.


Are they really trying to judge it like a completely new game?

  • 11.14.2011 7:14 AM PDT

-blam!- Was that actually blammed out? Or did I just type it? You'll never know.

What did you expect? They're judging an older game by the standards of today and it doesn't hold up as well. Who cares? I'd be disappointed in them if they gave it a grand score. They're being 100% fair and objective with the reviews.

Besides, the lowest I've seen it rated is an 8.

[Edited on 11.14.2011 7:18 AM PST]

  • 11.14.2011 7:16 AM PDT


Posted by: grey101
The game should get the same score it got 10 years ago and a little more since it is the same thing just graphically updated.


Are they really trying to judge it like a completely new game?


This.

Like I said: controls haven't aged well. I noticed that last winter during my annual "play through the entire series in chronological order" session. Vehicles are annoying to controls compared to H3-Reach standards. And the controls on foot also are a bit too "loose" compared to the modern standards. And sure: AI in Reach is better, especially on the UNSC side.

Still: it's unfair to really make a problem out of the AI (like IGN does for instance) when a game like MW3 fails at even reaching what CE did 10 years ago(!) and it's not even mentioned at all. People, including the media complain about games being too easy these days and giving the player too much guidance to navigate....here's a game that has near perfect pacing, lets you explore the world and doesn't litter your screen with markers and hints every 2 seconds and it's suddenly a bad thing...
It's hypocrite to really zoom in on those elements of CEA and completely ignore it when it's MW3 just to name something.

And no: 8's are no bad grades. Man, I am really happy with every 8 I get on my exams. Still, for a game that is better than most modern FPS games it's a bit harsh. That site that gave it a 6 esspecially misses the mark in my opinion. Edge and Destructiod seem to nail it better.

  • 11.14.2011 7:35 AM PDT

Those are bad scores?

  • 11.14.2011 8:22 AM PDT

Love your friends, Die laughing.

How could the launch title of the Xbox, improved with better graphics get a 6???

  • 11.14.2011 8:44 AM PDT

By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe.


Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
Those are bad scores?


Ask Cliffy B. :P

  • 11.14.2011 8:57 AM PDT

"Apparently people don't like the truth, but I do like it; I like it because it upsets a lot of people. If you show them enough times that their arguments are bull-blam!-, then maybe just once, one of them will say, 'Oh! Wait a minute I was wrong.' I live for that happening. Rare, I assure you."-Lemmy of Motorhead

i belive shhave funzes suppos

Yes, I'm the guy who had the Flood admit to being furries.

So 10 years and people still blame the game for being too hard for them, haha.

I think those are mostly fair scores. the strat informer 6 is too low though, indeed.

  • 11.14.2011 9:45 AM PDT

"Apparently people don't like the truth, but I do like it; I like it because it upsets a lot of people. If you show them enough times that their arguments are bull-blam!-, then maybe just once, one of them will say, 'Oh! Wait a minute I was wrong.' I live for that happening. Rare, I assure you."-Lemmy of Motorhead

i belive shhave funzes suppos

Yes, I'm the guy who had the Flood admit to being furries.

Posted by: abelsinh
How could the launch title of the Xbox, improved with better graphics get a 6???
Because the only way to get a 10 is to have incredibly linear levels that aren't "hard to navigate".

*looks at CoD*

[Edited on 11.14.2011 9:46 AM PST]

  • 11.14.2011 9:46 AM PDT

-blam!- Was that actually blammed out? Or did I just type it? You'll never know.

Posted by: DonVinzone1
Still: it's unfair to really make a problem out of the AI (like IGN does for instance) when a game like MW3 fails at even reaching what CE did 10 years ago(!) and it's not even mentioned at all. People, including the media complain about games being too easy these days and giving the player too much guidance to navigate....here's a game that has near perfect pacing, lets you explore the world and doesn't litter your screen with markers and hints every 2 seconds and it's suddenly a bad thing...
It's hypocrite to really zoom in on those elements of CEA and completely ignore it when it's MW3 just to name something.

Judging by your replies in this thread and your original post, you seem to have an oh so subtle anti-CoD streak in you. Ideally, you would be able to argue the merits of one thing without having to bring up the shortcomings of another. It's poor form.

Anyway, I'm about to make a bit of a disconcerting statement to you, and I'm sorry, but you need to know. CoD's current AI and Halo's AI from CE to now are par, and I'll tell you why. Halo's friendly AI is atrocious, CoD's friendly AI are actually pretty solid to sometimes even helpful. Halo's enemy AI have always been pretty smart and challenging, CoD's run at you in a straight line and just try to overcome you with fire. To say one is generally better than the other is to ignore the flaws of one and accentuate the flaws of the other.

And no: 8's are no bad grades. Man, I am really happy with every 8 I get on my exams. Still, for a game that is better than most modern FPS games it's a bit harsh. That site that gave it a 6 esspecially misses the mark in my opinion. Edge and Destructiod seem to nail it better.
I do have to agree that a six just seems ridiculous. I haven't read that review, but I can't imagine what points they came up with to justify it.

[Edited on 11.14.2011 9:53 AM PST]

  • 11.14.2011 9:53 AM PDT


Posted by: dahuterschuter
And no: 8's are no bad grades. Man, I am really happy with every 8 I get on my exams. Still, for a game that is better than most modern FPS games it's a bit harsh. That site that gave it a 6 esspecially misses the mark in my opinion. Edge and Destructiod seem to nail it better.
I do have to agree that a six just seems ridiculous. I haven't read that review, but I can't imagine what points they came up with to justify it.


I read it, seemed to be they never got the memo of "It's the exact same gameplay/game engine with new graphics." The reviewer wanted to play the CE campaign with all the improvements of the other games, and says it doesn't fully remake or preserve the original game. Also complains about how the halo ring got a slight redesign...

Course, it's pretty funny how he complained about "monster closets" and "dropships" bringing in additional enemies before you can move on, and that was fairly common in campaigns those days (FPS as far as I can tell). Or you know, as I read that some spawn infinite enemies until you cross an unknown line.

[Edited on 11.14.2011 10:25 AM PST]

  • 11.14.2011 10:23 AM PDT

Posted by:ScubaToaster
Posted by: HipiO7
This man, this man right here put it so eloquently that I actually cancelled my own 2000+ word long post.
/slow clap for respect


:)
The person who said participating is important, not winning, obviously never won anything.

Who ever gave CEA a 6 is full fledged retard.

Jesus, some people will just say anything and embarrass themselfs to get attention. The guy is obviously an idiot.

  • 11.14.2011 10:38 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: evilcam
Bobcast is paid in MILF blind dates.

Posted by: HipiO7
Who ever gave CEA a 6 is full fledged retard.

Jesus, some people will just say anything and embarrass themselfs to get attention. The guy is obviously an idiot.


Did you even read the review? He mentions some very good points on the low score.

  • 11.14.2011 10:41 AM PDT


Posted by: Thrasher Fan
Posted by: HipiO7
Who ever gave CEA a 6 is full fledged retard.

Jesus, some people will just say anything and embarrass themselfs to get attention. The guy is obviously an idiot.


Did you even read the review? He mentions some very good points on the low score.


Pretty much what I expected really, the fact the gameplay isn't changed at all meaning at least some would rate it low because it's 10 years old.

  • 11.14.2011 10:50 AM PDT

Posted by:ScubaToaster
Posted by: HipiO7
This man, this man right here put it so eloquently that I actually cancelled my own 2000+ word long post.
/slow clap for respect


:)
The person who said participating is important, not winning, obviously never won anything.

Posted by: Thrasher Fan
Posted by: HipiO7
Who ever gave CEA a 6 is full fledged retard.

Jesus, some people will just say anything and embarrass themselfs to get attention. The guy is obviously an idiot.


Did you even read the review? He mentions some very good points on the low score.


Yes, and it sounds like he was out against CEA since the start, even though he says otherwise at the start.

New elements aside, Combat Evolved's campaign is definitely showing its age. In stark contrast the immaculately paced shooters of today CE is slow going, forcing you to slog through dozens of repetitive enemies, which often keep respawning through monster closets or the use of drop ships, before allowing you to move on. Level design is often confusing due to repeating geometry, often lacking guidance and occasionally requiring you to backtrack through lengthy areas. These elements come to a head in the Library level which was notorious even back in the day for its agonisingly drawn out design.

He is not taking into account here that Halo CEA is a remake, he's rating it as it were a completely new game. Yes, it's showing its age, but what could you expect? 343 wanted to make to the game a picture perfect to the original as possible, and even then he's complaining.

If his arguments made sense, I would agree or at least understand, but he's just nitpicking at the stupidest things.

  • 11.14.2011 11:04 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: evilcam
Bobcast is paid in MILF blind dates.

Posted by: HipiO7
Posted by: Thrasher Fan
Posted by: HipiO7
Who ever gave CEA a 6 is full fledged retard.

Jesus, some people will just say anything and embarrass themselfs to get attention. The guy is obviously an idiot.


Did you even read the review? He mentions some very good points on the low score.


Yes, and it sounds like he was out against CEA since the start, even though he says otherwise at the start.

New elements aside, Combat Evolved's campaign is definitely showing its age. In stark contrast the immaculately paced shooters of today CE is slow going, forcing you to slog through dozens of repetitive enemies, which often keep respawning through monster closets or the use of drop ships, before allowing you to move on. Level design is often confusing due to repeating geometry, often lacking guidance and occasionally requiring you to backtrack through lengthy areas. These elements come to a head in the Library level which was notorious even back in the day for its agonisingly drawn out design.

He is not taking into account here that Halo CEA is a remake, he's rating it as it were a completely new game. Yes, it's showing its age, but what could you expect? 343 wanted to make to the game a picture perfect to the original as possible, and even then he's complaining.

If his arguments made sense, I would agree or at least understand, but he's just nitpicking at the stupidest things.


I don't think it was a slight against CE. It's just that he's providing a buyers guide for those who might be considering getting Anniversary. Those people who are considering buying H:CEA might have a choice between modern games and the remake and he's giving examples of what has changed over the years in the gaming industry for better or worse. IMO

[Edited on 11.14.2011 11:28 AM PST]

  • 11.14.2011 11:25 AM PDT

Vengeance only leads to an ongoing cycle of hatred.


Posted by: grey101
The game should get the same score it got 10 years ago and a little more since it is the same thing just graphically updated.


Are they really trying to judge it like a completely new game?

  • 11.14.2011 12:22 PM PDT

Those are good scores; this is only a quick project, and the scores reflect that.

Were you all expecting straight 9s and 10s? Also, "the game should get the same scores it did on release."

You seem to be thinking the ones who reviewed in ten years ago are the ones reviewing it now. Reviews are subjective. Always keep that in mind, and don't let it bother you.

[Edited on 11.14.2011 12:45 PM PST]

  • 11.14.2011 12:42 PM PDT


Posted by: dahuterschuter
Posted by: DonVinzone1
Still: it's unfair to really make a problem out of the AI (like IGN does for instance) when a game like MW3 fails at even reaching what CE did 10 years ago(!) and it's not even mentioned at all. People, including the media complain about games being too easy these days and giving the player too much guidance to navigate....here's a game that has near perfect pacing, lets you explore the world and doesn't litter your screen with markers and hints every 2 seconds and it's suddenly a bad thing...
It's hypocrite to really zoom in on those elements of CEA and completely ignore it when it's MW3 just to name something.

Judging by your replies in this thread and your original post, you seem to have an oh so subtle anti-CoD streak in you. Ideally, you would be able to argue the merits of one thing without having to bring up the shortcomings of another. It's poor form.

Anyway, I'm about to make a bit of a disconcerting statement to you, and I'm sorry, but you need to know. CoD's current AI and Halo's AI from CE to now are par, and I'll tell you why. Halo's friendly AI is atrocious, CoD's friendly AI are actually pretty solid to sometimes even helpful. Halo's enemy AI have always been pretty smart and challenging, CoD's run at you in a straight line and just try to overcome you with fire. To say one is generally better than the other is to ignore the flaws of one and accentuate the flaws of the other.

And no: 8's are no bad grades. Man, I am really happy with every 8 I get on my exams. Still, for a game that is better than most modern FPS games it's a bit harsh. That site that gave it a 6 esspecially misses the mark in my opinion. Edge and Destructiod seem to nail it better.
I do have to agree that a six just seems ridiculous. I haven't read that review, but I can't imagine what points they came up with to justify it.


I don't like CoD but that's got "nothing" to do with my argument. I'm merely using MW3 as an example because it's the most recent, and most obvious example of the complete opposite of what Halo CEA is. I might just as well have replaced MW3 with the campaigns of BFBC2, or BF3 because the arguments of really weak AI hold up in those games too. And I could have replaced Halo with the FarCry games, or F.E.A.R seris, Half Life seris or Crysis for instance.

The fact that friendly AI in MW3 is better than that in CEA is no suprise....Marines actually don't have any AI in CEA ;)
But the enemy AI definatly is better in CEA. What CoD, and most similar shooters like MoH and BF do is what you describe: running at you. That's nothing more "complex" than what the ghosts in Pacman do for instance. In other words: anybody with basic knowledge about writing AI can make that. The fact that it works doesn't make it good. Every battle is exactly the same and incredibly stale. It just results in a very static shooting gallery, while Halo's/FarCry's/FEAR's/Half-Life's battles are all more dynamic, engaging and can suprise you every time you play. That is good AI design.

My main gripes with the reviews is that they are so stupid.
Complaining about the leveldesign, as if they were expecting that would change.
Complaining about the Flood, as if they were expecting them not to be included.
Complaining about Kinect, without even having used it as the Kinect functionality doesn't get released until tomorrow.
Complaining about the multiplayer not being stand alone, while completely ignoring the fact we're getting some of the very best maps in Halo history.

Oh and IGN claiming it's the best of the HD remakes of this generation....then giving it an 8 while they gave the MGS HD bundle a 9 last week or so is also weird...

Again: I can live with the scores, but for God's sake: be consequent in your reviews. If one thing is "bad" than also mention that in other, new games, no matter what series it is.

  • 11.14.2011 12:43 PM PDT

Don't -blam!- with Kerser!

Listen to me guys. Why should we care about their scores? That is all their opinion. We are the true fan base and we give it the score we think it should get. IMO I think it deserves a 9 because it is Halo CE and an extra 1 because of the updated graphics (It is the 15th here in Australia guys haha). So overall it is a 10. I never listened to those reviews anyway, they don't matter to me. We know the facts and we know the work that goes into things like this. If anything the entirety of Bungie.net/343 should have a poll for the community to rate it. That is when you will get the true score of a game.

Quote if you agree.

  • 11.14.2011 2:10 PM PDT

1 P17Y 7H3 F00L

KOTOR

Halo CEA did not get 10s? What is this heresy?

  • 11.14.2011 2:11 PM PDT

*reminisces when the Bungie/Halo community wasn't made up of CoD kids*
*sighs*
*activates time-machine and sets the clock back to Nov. 9, 2004*
glory days here I come..
*vanishes*

10 years ago those reviewers gave CE a high score.

10 years later they play the game with bonus content, improved graphics and a multiplayer map pack a lower score?

*Sigh* What is the world coming to?

  • 11.14.2011 2:15 PM PDT

-blam!- Was that actually blammed out? Or did I just type it? You'll never know.

Posted by: DonVinzone1
My main gripes with the reviews is that they are so stupid.
Complaining about the leveldesign, as if they were expecting that would change.
Complaining about the Flood, as if they were expecting them not to be included.
Complaining about Kinect, without even having used it as the Kinect functionality doesn't get released until tomorrow.
Complaining about the multiplayer not being stand alone, while completely ignoring the fact we're getting some of the very best maps in Halo history.

Why shouldn't they complain about level design if level design had flaws?
Never saw Flood complaints.
The kinect compatibility for it is not a beneficial addition or done well.
Multiplayer should have been stand alone. The only reason it wasn't was because they wanted to squeeze a bit more life out of Reach.
Half of your issues with the reviews come from you not understanding where they're coming from with their gripes.

Again: I can live with the scores, but for God's sake: be consequent in your reviews. If one thing is "bad" than also mention that in other, new games, no matter what series it is.
They did exactly that.

  • 11.14.2011 2:28 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3