Halo 3 Comments by Rob Fahey
The fight, finished.
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Poster
|
0
"No game EVER deserves a 10/10, nothings perfect."
I find this idea foolish. A range of scores must all be used, or there's no point in having them. If you never use the 10, then the 9 becomes the de-facto highest score possible. Then logically, you cannot use the 9 either since 9 is now the best of the best! 10/10 simply means "As good as a game can be at this point in time and compared to it's contemporary peers." |
|
mcmonkeyplc
23/09/07 @ 19:37
0
Interesting. Now to read the review.
You should have made a "mistake and given it 1" You forgot the 0 |
|
speedofthepuma
23/09/07 @ 19:41
0
Good review Rob, although over-long.
A "brave" 10 given the text. But most importantly you couldn't ask for a more informed description and that is why EG remains my reviewer of choice, occasional *cough* blue-dragon *cough* glitch aside. |
|
Eighthours
23/09/07 @ 19:43
0
I should have mentioned somewhere in the article that the first person to claim that 10/10 means a game is perfect is going to have their trousers filled with vicious wasps.
Sorry mate, pass over your pants. IGNORANCE IS NO EXCUSE. Rob, your verdict is right on the money. Halo 3's not perfect, as you say, but it is a colossal achievement. On Press Start Online, I gave the game our first ever "gold medal" despite its minor flaws, and I'm glad that EG's on the same page. It deserves all the massive scores it's getting, and it's my personal favourite game of this entire console generation already. |
|
0
'10/10 simply means "As good as a game can be at this point in time and compared to it's contemporary peers."'
So how can a game that has so many flaws, as pointed out in the review, get 10/10. I don't even play FPS, so couldn't careless, but would this game recieve 10/10 it it hadn't been followed by a mountain of hype? Looking back over gaming history so many games that were hyped and recieved great reviews were nothing more than mediocre and natural evolutions, nothing exceptional, yet at the time they were untouchable.
Edited 1 times,
most recently on 23/09/07 @ 20:47
|
|
captainrentboy
23/09/07 @ 19:48
0
Just read IGN'S review, they've given it 9.5 out of 10, but spent the first whole page, out of two, absolutely ripping it to shreds.
The reviwer even admitting that he played through on Normal, even though Bungie have recommended playing through on Heroic if you're a seasoned player. He played on Normal, then had a massive moan that it only took six hours. Wankstain. |
|
0
i'm just about finished the 2nd level on the hardest difficulty setting, i really enjoyed the first level but the second is pretty ugly in places and is basically a standard corridor shooter affair (certain doors locked, only the one u are meant to walk through not locked etc). i already like it a lot better than halo 2 though, but then i REALLY didn't get on with that game. Not getting a 10 vibe from the game though i must say.
|
|
0
This game is doing a Bioshock in review scores, it's the real deal. I wonder what kind of a dent this will put in PS3 sales for the rest of the year.
Should be interesting... Quite a bit I should imagine. Im all ready to F*** my ps3 off now and get a 360 after this and bioshock. Prob wont though coz use it for all my muisc and multmedia guff. looks like I will have to do some overtime and have both. |
|
0
Ive played it on a chipped 360,no doubt its a really sharp looking game,however its same old slow paced shooter.
Its an 8 of 10, microsoft has clearly paid for this review,that massive marketing cash flow has clearly been spent on the gaming media as well. Expect ign,gamespot and 1up to all hail this as the greatest thing in the world. Paid for review everyone eurogamer just got a fat pay day. Its a good game,not a great one thats as honest a thing I can say to anyone who hasnt played it yet. |
|
0
The notion of a 10/10 score is ridiculous to me - it's like saying the game is perfect and can never be surpassed, quite literally because there is no room to award a higher score to any future title.
No... no, it's not like saying that. Once again: Let us make absolutely clear that a 10 is not and probably never will be "the perfect game". There's always something criticisable about a game, however small. A 10 will inspire the reviewer because it gets so many things correct. It will be something truly groundbreaking and aesthetically successful, be consistently enjoyable, get the balance right in difficulty terms, be technically very impressive, and be polished to a shine. ... from the Eurogamer scoring guidelines Anyway... continue... |
|
0
I think what Shinji's review really strives to say is that it's a 10 when considered as one of the most complete packages ever released, not that the singleplayer alone is necessarily a 10.
Which is fine by me, campaign is like foreplay for the coming years of multiplayer. Not that I get to try either for another month, if not three... |
|
0
Let's cut the crap. Halo 3 IS just a videogame, as you quite rightly point out. Yet, after trying to convince us to look past it as an event, EG somehow sees fit to give it a fairly unwarranted 4 page review regardless? I'm sick of games that are marketed to buggery.
Highly polished FPS though it may be - and I realise I haven't played this iteration, although you do call it 'more of the same, except tweaked well' so I speak while referring to the past Halo games - I struggle to see how this game could measure up to, for example, another recent 10/10 of yours Bioshock, which I had the pleasure of finishing the other day and was quite amazing. Unlike the past Halo games, both of which I did play, Bioshock was intelligent and complex from a narrative perspective, beautiful, unique (for gaming) and interesting from an artistic perspective and taut, tense yet enjoyable and ruthlessly compelling from a design perspective. With regards to multiplayer, although I appreciate the choice, I firmly believe in the case of 'less is more' rather than being bludgeoned over the head with a wealth of options, many of which turn out to be mostly useless and ignored by the community. You'll forgive my cynicism, I realise the Halo games are far from 'bad' in the traditional sense (I mostly agreed with the past two Halo reviews, although maybe would've rated them a 7/10 on the EG scale) and I'm not interested in all this platform bias malarkey (I own all three consoles and the PC is still the best platform after all these years ;) ), they're just not the be all and end all of first person shooters that so many would have me believe based on my experiences with the games to date. I'll be interested to see if this 10/10 stands up to scrutiny once the initial giddiness of a big release subsides, or whether EG have produced another staggeringly accurately written review when I finally get around to playing it. |
|
0
What's happened, Yoss?
I decided not to take my 360 with me when I moved to England a week ago for my year-long masters. I'll be home for a weekend in October and again at Christmas and Easter for a few weeks, so I'll have campaign done shortly, but the real meat of it for me is multiplayer, and I just have to hope that I don't fall too far behind the crowd to really get into it when I have the time to spare. But since I was still playing Halo 2 a few days before I left, some three years after release, I think there is plenty of Halo 3 to come. I am insanely jealous of you all, though. :'( |
|
killyourtv
23/09/07 @ 20:09
0
if this game wasnt called halo, and it wasn't hyped it would probably just get an 8 or something
|
|
0
*sigh* I suppose we'll have to wait a few years before we get the "real" review where the game gets a deserving 6 or 7 score, as with the Halo 2 PC review.
There's no way in heck this game deserves 10/10. Replay and multiplayer options are nice, but the game itself is freaking identical to Halo 1 and 2. There exists far better FPS games than this. |
Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!
Advertisement
