Halo 2 Single Player Review

By Kristan Reed Published 7 November, 2004

Can Microsoft's hype bomb blow everyone's expectations out of the water?

Version tested: Xbox

Order yours now from Simply Games.

Expectation is such a double edged sword. The cultural obsession with building things up disproportionately (while simultaneously taking our eye off the ball elsewhere) seems to snowball with every passing year - and yet almost every single time a movie/album/game lets us down we still get suckered into the same cycle of buying into the frenzied hype. Then, if things haven't quite worked out, there's this psychological crash as people pick over what went wrong; people divide up into camps - the 'defend it to the hilt' faithful, the 'slag it off anyway' cynics, and the massive silent majority that go and buy it anyway, regardless of what anyone says. Halo 2 fits perfectly into this model.

Regardless of what we or anyone else thinks about Bungie's long-awaited sequel, Microsoft's job is already done. The millions of pre-orders are proof of that, not to mention those that would happily spend hundreds of dollars on eBay just to play it a few days early. Whatever. Some people will think it's the best thing ever, the 'too cool for school' crowd will scowl about it being 'just another shooter' in a determined effort to pretend they don't care, while millions rush out there and part with their cash regardless. But aside from all this, the expectations are simply too high. It can't ever be as good as anyone wants it to be. It just can't.

Let's try and defuse the hype bomb for a moment and bring some sanity to the whole ludicrous Halo 2 expectations and simply talk about it as if it was just A.N Other game and stop pretending its launch is in some way akin to the second coming of Christ. As far as the offline, story-based Campaign mode is concerned (as we're not reviewing the multiplayer until later this week) it's a bombastic first person sci-fi shooter not hugely different to the original. Visually more impressive, a few more impressive set pieces than before, slightly less boring repetitive parts (although, yes, they're still there), a few minor gameplay tweaks (which we'll go into in a moment), quite easy most of the time (on Normal), a more expansive storyline but overall not something that will have you leaping out of your chair screaming as if you've just seen the very future of entertainment. In calm, logical, rational hindsight, it's a high quality game that feels like a refinement of the original; a crafted, well-thought out evolution of the series that will satisfy the millions of fans around the world that they've got their money's worth. What it won't do, however, is do anything to convince the doubters that anything significant has happened over the intervening three years to make them any more interested in the Campaign side of the game than they were before. In short, if you liked it then, you'll lap this up - but if the original left you cold, so will this. The same old arguments that have been trawled out over the last three years as to why people did or didn�t 'get' Halo are about to be revived, so get ready to don those flame retardant suits once more. Things are going to get heavy over the coming weeks.

Halo, boys

'Halo 2 Single Player' Screenshot 1

So. Anyway. Halo 2. It's 15 missions of epic sci-fi combat. A game that is, once again, "30 seconds of fun over and over" and a "game about guns where you don't have to think". And this isn't us cussing your favourite game - this is exactly what Bungie makes of the Halo series. So if you don't agree, don't shoot us. As we've touched upon already, one of the first things you'll notice about Halo 2 is that much more effort has been put into the story side of the game, with around some truly lavish and hugely impressive cut scenes regularly interspersing the action to deliver one of the most rounded Sci-fi tales ever to feature in a videogame. If there's one identifiable area where Bungie have really ramped up Halo 2 over the original it's here. The story comes at you in a surprising manner - and we wouldn't dare spoil it for you - but once the penny starts to drop as to how the game is going to progress it's one of those moments you'll always remember. For the big fans of the game it's like a dream come true right there and then - and one of those things you can't believe didn't leak out. No wonder Bungie didn't want any of the single player stuff to leak out.

But even when the game's not breaking off into another cut scene extravaganza, the sheer variety in the AI dialogue is consistently surprising, adding another layer to what might otherwise just descend into a straightforward 'clear the room and move onto the next wave' gameplay that Halo is so evidently built around. Whereas before the AI would endlessly repeat their stock phrases, even as you approach the end of the game you're still surprised by their incidental chat. It fills in the gaps, and adds another layer of suspension of disbelief, which is arguably Halo 2's greatest achievement.

While it's easy to knock Halo and its successor for adding up to a series of clear the area and move on' linear encounters until you reach the end of the game, so much of the enjoyment of Halo 2 is the lavish environments, so full of life, colour, detail and technical achievement that you actually don't really care too much about the inherent repetition of the gameplay. Just taking a look around at some of the breathtaking architecture, and the epic battles ongoing within them, you'd have to have a heart of stone not to be slightly impressed by that. Outside our window right now fireworks explode all around us; you could just wearily sigh about the noise, or you could just appreciate the aesthetic beauty in the carnival of colour in the sky. It's one of those situations to ponder on. If you like your games to look the part, then Halo 2 most definitely looks the part. The better the kit you have, then the better the game will look and sound; widescreen support is a huge plus, but throw in progressive scan support and probably the most well-conceived surround sound we've ever heard, an impressively dramatic score and characteristically over the top voices and the cinematic effect is complete.

Xbox evolved

'Halo 2 Single Player' Screenshot 2

Bungie wanted the game to be as much like a movie as possible, and with this technology it's fair to say that this is as far as a game has gone to achieve this goal with mind bogglingly lavish animation, and incredibly detailed characters set to a simply breathtaking set of backdrops. It's a feast for the eyes that's almost too much to take in in the space of a few days. We'll have to play through several times before we'll come close to appreciating the incredible effort and talent that has gone into this game. Next to most games we have the pleasure of playing through, Halo 2 goes further in trying to put the player in that environment; just sit back and listen to what's going on. Stop and simply watch the battles ensuing without any of your input at all. Take a close up view of a downed corpse. It's an assault on the senses. Is it as good a movie though? No. Of course, every developer will start out with that notion, but the limitations are there to see, still. The cracks show through once you play it for long enough, but no-one should have ever expected a PIII 733mhz-based machine with 64MB RAM and GeForce 3 graphics to do any more than this. If anything, it's the biggest two fingers to lazy PC development we've ever seen, and proof that if you optimise things enough there should be no reason why PC gamers should have to upgrade as much as they do, but that's another issue entirely. What is does show is the huge gulf between the Xbox and the PS2 when a decent developer is set to work on it with a gigantic budget from the world's richest software company.

So, okay, it's an audio visual feast, the likes of which console gaming has never seen. That'll be enough to sell it to most people; but what about those who aren't so easily impressed with normal mapping and don�t get quite so dizzy with particle and real time lighting effects? The game, stood in cold isolation without all its fancy glad rags on hasn't really changed a great deal at all. With 15 chapters (and one of those merely an introduction) to run, gun and fly through, half of these are stand-out exciting sci-fi movie moments, packed with often incredible set pieces, and the other half are padding, full of the kind of pre-fabricated levels that the detractors of Halo bitched so heartily about.

After an extraordinarily dull introduction that seems unbelievably bad next to what follows, the game suddenly turns up the heat to such an extent you'd swear you could smell cordite as the innards of your console spontaneously frazzle with excitement. For sure, these moments will live long in the hearts of any gamer with a pulse, but then midway through the game we get the trademark Halo lull where Bungie appears to have bloody-mindedly ignored the fact that presenting the player with identikit repetitive sections in corridors, with similar encounters with the same bunch of enemies doesn�t make for an especially entertaining and inspiring playing experience. It gets tiring, and at worst monotonous. Things once again improve to supernova proportions, but you're left wondering why Bungie couldn't have trimmed the fat and simply came up with a game that never stops wowing you. Why the need to pad things out with areas that are neither impressive to look at, or even that entertaining to play in? We don't get it.

No medals conferred

'Halo 2 Single Player' Screenshot 3

More baffling is why the game allows the player to run away. A few levels near the end were giving us a certain amount of hassle, so instead of getting bogged down in trying to see off enemies conscientiously, we simply legged it. The game let us, the enemy didn't bother following, we moved on, often able to bypass entire chunks with a little ingenuity. Why not force the player to face the repercussions by having a huge army chasing you in hot pursuit and nailing you in style? Instead you get to cheat by being a coward, and in turn exposing a major AI flaw where enemies are only allowed to patrol certain 'zones', so that once you're outside of that zone you're safe either way.

The same principle of cheating the game applies to when you enter a new zone - and this was inherent in the original as far as we recall. Faced with a barrage of new enemies, rather than use their intelligence and chase you down, they sit right where they are, always allowing you to track back and regain your health. It may well be part of the design, and certainly allows you to take a welcome breather, but as far as being combat evolved? Hardly. These two example of obvious exploits make the game feel very much still like a game, and not the involved, combat experience it often becomes when it's not letting the player get away with it. In the more convincingly designed areas where killing everything is the only way to move on, the game becomes an incredibly breathless experience where the AI starts to shine (especially on Legendary - Normal is if anything even more forgiving than it was in the original). AI grunts hunt you down, lobs grenades with terrifying accuracy, man emplacements, and run rings around you at times. It's not hugely different to the original, but it's still a cut above anything we've played in this genre, without hesitation. Later on in the game when the game dares to really pile on the headcount and aids you with powerful buddies, it feels like war. The day when they can increase the environment sizes and on screen enemies will be one to look forward to, but for now even the close combat set pieces are excellent fun, no matter how many times you have to go through them. That, for Halo fans, is at the heart of the enjoyment. That ability to approach a bunch of enemies and never have the same fight twice. Our advice, though, is ignore Normal difficulty. It's way too easy, and you'll breeze through the entire game virtually untroubled right the way to the end.

As for the changes and tweaks, there aren't actually that many to report. Sure, a few new weapons appear, you've got dual wielding, there are a few new enemies, the ability to hijack enemy craft and so on, but they�re not massively significant, gameplay changing additions - certainly as far as Campaign mode in concerned. In terms of firepower, the majority are staples from the original, or slightly tweaked versions of. On the Covenant side the Plasma Pistol is as useless and ubiquitous as ever, the Plasma Rifle is the same as before (i.e., not very powerful, but does receive an upgraded version later), the Needler is marginally better (but not much), the Covenant Carbine is new but fairly lightweight in firepower and hamstrung by its single shot fire, the Particle Beam is another new addition and a very powerful at long range magnification, but sod all use in close quarters combat. Elsewhere, the Brute Shot grenade launcher makes a belated appearance - by which time its usefulness is somewhat negated thanks to limited ammo, while the excellent melee weapon, the Covenant Energy Sword is a superb means of despatching enemies at close quarters, while the Fuel Rod Gun acts like a concentrated flame thrower, pulsing out a beam of deadly energy, but not available for long.

Double trouble

'Halo 2 Single Player' Screenshot 4

On the human's side, the Pistol and Rifle are pretty much your last resorts, the SMG is the Needler equivalent (i.e. of medium strength, but not what's really required against anyone but the smallest of enemy), the Sniper Rifle is useful but rarely seen, ditto the Rocket Launcher, while the Shotgun is great close up while it lasts. While most of the weapons we've just listed probably sound a bit crap in the main, used in dual wielding mode your firepower is suddenly doubled and you get to mix and match most of the lower powered weapons, thus turning you into a gun toting freak of some prowess (using both triggers, in case you were wondering). On the other hand, having two Needlers or Plasma Rifles negates your ability to whip out a Plasma or Frag Grenade and toast clusters of pursuing enemy. It's a fine balance, and although sounds like a very cool new addition soon becomes part of the furniture - the likelihood is that Dual Wielding will become more of an important issue in multiplayer, something we've yet to find out either way at the time of writing.

What's undoubtedly more impressive than a bunch of new weapons are the many more new vehicles you can drive or fly around in. The new improved Ghost and Banshee return, but only new and improved in terms of their looks and level of destructibility - they still handle much the same - while these small flying craft are joined by the ground craft. On the Covenant side there's the Wraith, Spectre and the awesome Shadow while the humans get two versions of the Warthog; one with a machine gun, one with a Gauss Cannon, while the piece de resistance is the incredible Scorpion tank - surely one of videogaming's most incredible pieces of destructive machinery yet.

Flying plays a relatively small part in the game this time, and fun though it most definitely is, it can't really hold a candle to the feeling of power that comes with driving either the Shadow or Scorpion. It's like being the boss monster for a change, and the first time you strap up in one of these bad boys is likely to have you grinning ear to ear as you wreak havoc with anything thrown at you. It really is one of those 'bring it on' moments, and exactly the sort of thing Halo players will have been desperate for. Almost as much fun is hijacking enemy vehicles, and surprisingly it's not actually that hard, requiring players to stab X when near enough, then mash the melee attack with B, before either popping a grenade down the hatch or legging it - again, this isn�t especially important in single player (although definitely useful), but it�s something we can imagine will be a huge part of multiplayer. All top notch additions, without a doubt, and all aided considerably by the levels of destructibility and physics that Bungie has heaped upon the game, not to mention the excellent particle effects as your equipment starts to smoke and spark, and the raw, crunchy sound effects that accompany them. It's hard to think how this could have been made any better - apart from maybe the ability to fight back from melee attacks (as, yes, even in single player it happens to you, and you do feel a little helpless while it�s going on).

Better than Halo?

'Halo 2 Single Player' Screenshot 5

If you haven�t already guessed from what you've read so far, the ante has most definitely been upped in Halo 2's Campaign mode, and while Microsoft is desperately hoping that the game will be a Live Trojan Horse (and only time will tell if this will really be the case), it's heartening to find out that the game is worth buying even if you have absolutely no intention of bothering with the game's multitude of online multiplayer options. Statistically, the overwhelming majority of people who buy Halo 2 won't care one iota for multiplayer (whatever the very vocal minority want you to believe), save for maybe the split screen co-op - so thank goodness Bungie hasn't really sacrificed the single player mode to make it into some sort of side show to the main event. It's very clear, having played through all 15 chapters (12 hours on Normal is probably a fair guess) that it's a much more consistent, more exciting game than the original with far less of the moody tedium that blighted the middle section of the original. As we said loud and clear, though, no-one should purchase Halo 2 with expectations that it's going to change their life or anything. The game has some welcome new additions, but in the main it sticks very rigidly to the formula that made the first game such a runaway success - it wasn't particularly broken, and should come as no surprise to find out that they didn�t really do a huge amount to change it. And as far as the narrative side of the game goes for all its big budget grandiosity and Star Wars Episode Two brow furrowing leanings, it's still fairly throwaway stuff that most of us will take or leave. It's impressive, don't get us wrong, but it's the side dish to the main course - and that, as far as we're concerned is a good thing. We didn't want Metal Gear Solid levels of impenetrability anyway, thanks.

"But is it a ten?!" you're all busy screaming, while some of you are probably wryly still holding that score against us all this time. The truth is, the real Halo fans will say it's a ten, the unbelievers will nod reluctantly and cling onto their stubborn belief that it's not as good as everyone makes out it is and mentally score it an eight whatever, but we�re going to sit on the fence for this one with a solid, creditable nine. The production values and the technical achievements of this game are almost beyond what anyone's managed in the short history of gaming, but that doesn't necessarily make up for the shortfalls. The truth is, for every hour our blood was pumping like a turbo charged locomotive through our adrenaline scored veins, there were an equal number of hours where we were bored with the unimaginative repetition of formulaic corridor based FPS trawls. On balance, we feel, the Campaign mode deserves a score somewhere that snugly sits between the two; it's an up and down game, and although it hits stellar heights, it trawls some murky depths, and for that we're not going to sit back and praise it unconditionally like some people might. But like we said all along, you probably made your mind up whether to buy it or not before we uttered a single word. The final word? Brilliant, but not enough of a progression to deserve top marks. Better than Halo? Yes.

Order yours now from Simply Games.

Update: You can now read our take on the multiplayer side of the game here.

9 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Kristan.

About Kristan Reed

Kristan is a former editor of Eurogamer, dad, Stone Roses bore and Norwich City supporter who sometimes mutters optimistically about Team Silent getting back together.

Read more articles from Kristan by visiting the Kristan Reed archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (191) Latest comment 2 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Hunam85 #1 7 years ago

    better than halo then?

  • kururin #2 7 years ago

    yap. better than. halo. indeed.

  • Ed_209uk #3 7 years ago

    Ace! Reports from those who procured this illegally had me worried but this review definitely restores my faith.

    Bring. It. On.

  • tengu #4 7 years ago

    It had BETTER be good!

    Take that as a warning!

  • andrewfromdoncaster #5 7 years ago

    I never liked Halo the original, and given the way some people have been bumming on like it was worth an 11 before it'd been released, seeing this may disappoint somewhat

  • Tiitiz #6 7 years ago

    Woohoo!

    9.8 on IGN with a video review as well for insiders
    5/5 on Gamespy
    9.4/10 on Gamespot

    Edited by 2 at 07/11/04 @ 20:20

  • kdsh7 #7 7 years ago

    not content with being the best thing to read 5 days a week, i have a great piece to read on a sunday. cheers!

  • Decoded #8 7 years ago

    "The truth is, for every hour our blood was pumping like a turbo charged locomotive through our adrenaline scored veins, there were an equal number of hours where we were bored with the unimaginative repetition of formulaic corridor based FPS trawls"

    5 would have been more appropriate having read that. Get off the fence and OFFEND PEOPLE! \O/

  • Hunam85 #9 7 years ago

    I loved halo from the xbox co-op i played of it (was the only time i ever played halo xbox) then liked it from completing halo pc, but was let down by it, the co-op fun covered up all its flaws

  • Sucram #10 7 years ago

    Yeah, Halo 2 is only worth 8/10.

    Eurogamer are just XBox fanboys.

    :)

  • krudster #11 7 years ago

    Yeah, imagine the shitstorm that sort of score would produce. It's nearly a ten, let down by padding, that's all.

    Five...Cuh!

  • krudster #12 7 years ago

    Xbox fanboys? That's hilarious, considering we've been slagged for being Xbox haters for years.

  • phAge #13 7 years ago

    Neat.

  • Decoded #14 7 years ago

    "Yeah, imagine the shitstorm that sort of score would produce."

    But shitstorms can be entertaining for the neutral observer ;-)

  • MaTTy_P #15 7 years ago

    thank god for that...after this comment i think i shall forsake the reading of these comments. I fear of spoilers from 12 year old children.

  • UncleLou #16 7 years ago

    Great review, and on a Sunday, too. Nice.

  • Pirotic #17 7 years ago

    Good review! i agree its a better game - but i'd prob mark it down as it doesn't bring anything new to the table.

    you're going to have to give the multiplayer 10/10 now ;)

  • lost_soul #18 7 years ago

    But but but... it's Sunday and there's a review?!

    Nice one Krudster. Sounds like not cancelling my pre-order was the right decision.
    Edited by 1 at 07/11/04 @ 20:32

  • PoundHound #19 7 years ago

    Can I ask why the review has been split into 2? Has this happened before? Is it a regular Eurogamer occurance? After all, when I buy Halo 2 I'll be buying what we've been told elsewhere is the best XBL experience as well as an excellent single player game. Surely that matter?

  • morriss #20 7 years ago

    So my earlier synopsis was correct. If you liked the original you'll love this. I love being right!

  • perilikid #21 7 years ago

    After an extraordinarily dull introduction that seems unbelievably bad next to what follows, the game suddenly turns up the heat to such an extent you'd swear you could smell cordite as the innards of your console spontaneously frazzle with excitement.

    Terrific line, Kristan. This is why I like Eurogamer so much: journalists who can actually write.

  • Schwabing #22 7 years ago

    hmm. interesting review. incremental improvements seems to be the theme of the day. does that mean nine though?

    i actually wasn't going to look at it after reading the gamespot review (yes i know they say nasty things about EG) - they absolutely slate the single player mode and then go on to give a high score for no reason.

    Glad to see you judged the single player mode on its own. good move.

  • Bru-Man #23 7 years ago

    "it fees like war"

    Courtesy of Typo Tony

  • otto #24 7 years ago

    w00t - I'm too cool for school! Except... I'm not pretending - I really *don't* care! Where does that leave me? In the wrong thread I suppose.

  • smelliot #25 7 years ago

    I don't like Halo 2. It's just another FPS.

  • penhalion #26 7 years ago

    I loved Halo so I guess I'll love this. I'm one of those people who actually have a brain and like stories as much as action so Halo was for me the best consol FPS just as Half life was the best PC FPS.

    Role on Thursday

  • Feanor #27 7 years ago

    LOL! Great first post, Hunam85. How long had you been saving that one up?

    Eurogamer have actually been kinder to the single-player mode than Gamestop who claim experienced Halo players will finish the Campaign in less than 10 hours on Normal. It's great to know in advance that Heroic will be the right difficulty for me to play Halo 2 in single-player, and in co-op mode.

    It's cool Eurogamer reviewed the single-player and multi-player modes separately. I thought you might do that, as I said on the forum two days ago.
    Edited by 2 at 07/11/04 @ 22:13

  • Lothar Hex #28 7 years ago

    If it's better than Halo I'll be happy.

    I gotta ask though, why review the multiplayer and single player seperatly?

  • Dizzy #29 7 years ago

    So does that mean single and multiplayer will get different scores and we should have average?

    Hmmm.. a 9? So as good as RCT3 then? ;)

    Oh well review is well written and you do explain why you don't give it a 10. I find it a bit of a pity it gets the same as GTA:SA...

  • mcmonkeyplc #30 7 years ago

    Just for mugs:

    MEH!

  • Tiitiz #31 7 years ago

    I've just watched the Halo 2 video review done by IGN

    OMFG!

    /drops jaw to floor

  • HarryB #32 7 years ago

    it's not that good
    but there WAS a huge crate of the limited editions in the tin box at work today in toys r us... looked pretty :)

  • krudster #33 7 years ago

    Maybe 10 hours if you're stupendously good at the game; took me probably 13/14. Just ignore Normal difficulty, seriously.

  • morriss #34 7 years ago

    The review contradicts itself. I'll show you....
    midway through the game we get the trademark Halo lull where Bungie appears to have bloody-mindedly ignored the fact that presenting the player with identikit repetitive sections in corridors, with similar encounters with the same bunch of enemies doesn’t make for an especially entertaining and inspiring playing experience. It gets tiring, and at worst monotonous.
    Then it goes on to say...
    It's very clear, having played through all 15 chapters (12 hours on Normal is probably a fair guess) that it's a much more consistent, more exciting game than the original with far less of the moody tedium that blighted the middle section of the original.
    So is it boring or not?

    The library is one of my least played level in Halo 1, but still the first time I came across it, I didn't think 'Christ, this is boring!'

    It seems the reviewer is confused as to how boring he himself finds it!!

  • UK NINJA #35 7 years ago

    10/10 for me Eurogamer! I disagreed with your Halo review and it's the same for this............tut tut.

  • Nemesis #36 7 years ago

    Not. Long. Now.

    /drums fingertips.

    Nice review Krudstie.

  • chronom4n #37 7 years ago

    Not being a halo fan in any form or shape whatsoever, i thought that i might as well have a change. Well,i have put my pre-order in for the limited edition version of Halo2. After reading the review of HALO2 i am having second thoughts. It seems that after saying that as i understand it half of it is good and half of it os disappointing, I think I will be giving it a miss. I think that i will wait for something that does not rely totally on utter hype. correct me if i am wrong anyone.

  • APR #38 7 years ago

    Kinda confusing review there. If it's more of the same, with a load of boring bits but mostly entertaining does it really deserve a nine?

  • krudster #39 7 years ago

    I didn't contradict myself at all - I said *less* of the moody tedium, not that it was gone altogether. I, like most people, can accept a certain amount of repetition. I just wish Bungie had realised what wasn't very entertaining about the original and wiped it out entirely. There's evidently a big fan of this style of gaming at Bungie otherwise they wouldn't keep putting it in.

  • BartonFink #40 7 years ago

    Excellent review Krudster as per usual.

    So who is doing the multiplayer review?
    Mugs?

  • Rusta #41 7 years ago


    Sucram wrote:

    Yeah, Halo 2 is only worth 8/10.

    Eurogamer are just XBox fanboys.

    :)

    lol - and I wonder what console you own........

  • Razz #42 7 years ago

    I've read so amny positive reviews, but I still ain't buying this game. I hated the first one.. and chances are I'll hate the second one.

  • BartonFink #43 7 years ago

    Can someone explain to Mr Hopkins what a multipart review is? But with less syllables obviously so he can grasp the concept. :)

    No it's head may explode!

  • BartonFink #44 7 years ago

    You should get that crystal ball fixed then! :p

  • Monsta #45 7 years ago

    Although i can see the point for a multi part review i woulg have to go with a combined score. Someone has already said that you don't buy half the game. Lets say for instance a game had a great multiplayer mode and a dreadful single player (theres been a number on xbox live) in most of these cases the score has been either raised by the multiplayer or dragged down by the single player.

    thats my addtion to this argument and its only an opinion.

    Great review thought, loads of info and no spoilers.

    Last point, if its better than halo, how come it got a lower score. If there hadn't been a halo 1 and therefore all the hype, would it have been a 10?

  • medulla oblongata #46 7 years ago

    Although I consider myself unbias (Err don't read the PES V FIFA threads)

    I can't see Halo2 being better than Halflife2, Halo 2; for a console game that is available to anybody that has 100 quid is quite simply astounding, the stuff of dreams.

    halo2 is as big a leap above the competition as Hl2 will be to videogaming as a whole.


    I will buy and no doubt love Halo2(as I did the first) but come on.....halflife2 has made a consious effort to be the greatest game ever created and judging by the reviews it has succeeded with flying colours.


    Final word : If anyone misses either of these games due to fanboism you should go and stare in the mrror and get a grip of yourself.




    final word 2: I heard that the early halo2 demo of masterchief on a highway and in the warthog....know the one I mean? Is not in the final game!?

    is this true?
    Edited by 1 at 08/11/04 @ 00:42

  • Sid-Nice #47 7 years ago

    You just didn't have the balls to give this 8/10. :)

  • medulla oblongata #48 7 years ago

    Will EDGE have the balls to give it an 8, that whats I want to know.

  • beep #49 7 years ago

    What is does show is the huge gulf between the Xbox and the PS2 when a decent developer is set to work on it with a gigantic budget from the world's richest software company.

    A somewhat fanboy appeasing comment that.

    The best looking PS2 games really only lack bump mapping and detail textures. Hardly a huge gulf.

  • medulla oblongata #50 7 years ago

    He probably meant a graphically gulf (oh and framerate)

  • BartonFink #51 7 years ago

    Definately!

  • Sid-Nice #52 7 years ago

    Halo 2, Half Life 2, GTA San Andreas, Jak3 and Ratchet and Clank, have all received very high scores. What worries me is that these games aren't perfect. Many flaws have been overlooked, sooner or later a great game will receive a low score when the reviewers decide to do a bit of nitpicking. I'm betting on Metriod Prime 2 Echoes to be the fall-guy or girl in Samus Aran's case.

  • medulla oblongata #53 7 years ago

    That'll be a shame is that happens.
    Edited by 1 at 08/11/04 @ 01:50

  • medulla oblongata #54 7 years ago

    Welcome to the site mate.


    And a great site it is too, the best there is.

  • TripSkyway #55 7 years ago

    I seem to be one of those people who constantly needs hype busting reviews. My expectations tend to be way to high and I end up not enjoying great gaming experiences because of this.

    Thanks for the great review and similarly the review of fable, which put me in the right frame of mind to have a great time with it.

  • Sid-Nice #56 7 years ago

    Welcome Kirk, why not join up? Kristan will need all the support he can muster, when we get to play the game on Thursday. :)

  • Sid-Nice #57 7 years ago

    An excellent point 'Trip' I read the IGN review of San Andreas and expected too much, I was more disappointed with the graphics than anything else. But it is a great game.

  • TripSkyway #58 7 years ago

    I tend to have a better time with games I have no, or at least realistic expectations of. Before PSO came out in the UK back on the dreamcast, it got an 8 in some magasine (Which i for some reason considered a low score at the time) Tempered my anticipation to a level that led me to be pretty much dazzled by the game when i finally played it. The 10 for halo in edge however, left me in my bubble, and i must admit to being dissapointed that it was "just a game" when i played the first time. I just need to wake up a bit and reviews like this are pretty good for that.

  • medulla oblongata #59 7 years ago

    I've been in a bubble over Half life 2 for the past 2 years (nearly)

    The reviews that have been coming ot recently have been a huge wait off my shoulders, I have essentially put my life on hold since 30th sep 2003.

    They tell us the wait has been worth it......but we'll see.



    7 - 21 - 32 - 36

  • Sko #60 7 years ago

    "What is does show is the huge gulf between the Xbox and the PS2 when a decent developer is set to work on it with a gigantic budget from the world's richest software company."

    Are we still talking about Rare and 'Grab by the Ghoulies', here? ;)

  • any1 #61 7 years ago

    The guy gave an honest review, i guess. But going by his written review, the game was was equal parts great and boring. So basically the reviewer had a miserable time as muchas he had a great time. To be honest with you, that sounds like a game worthy of a 6 not a nine.

    Honestly how many games have you considered great that were half fun and half boring as hell. The score does not reflect the review at all. Going by the review, half of the entire game was a complete waste of time and was nothing more than filler.

    But at the very least he did say it was better than the first. And since the first, is one of the best video games ever made, what does that make this one?

  • medulla oblongata #62 7 years ago

    "The first is one of the best videogames ever made"



    One of how many? one of the best 30 videogames ever made...... maybe.

  • 3william56 #63 7 years ago

    Sheesh. The reason for a Single Player only review, is that the vast majority of purchasers will only ever play single player, and need to know what it's like for those without XBLive.

    Excellent Review EG - one of your best yet. Hit the nail on the head. Have to put it in the Doom3 box of top quality same old, but another missed opportunity to do something radical with the rapidly wilting FPS genre. Here's hoping Half Life 2 brings something new to the party.

  • Sid-Nice #64 7 years ago

    Zeph it might have something to do with the fact, that the version of Halo2 Eurogamer were given to review didn't include the Xbox Live feature.

  • #65 7 years ago

    I don't think I'm speaking out of turn here, when I say Eurogamer write the best reviews on the web! The Halo 2 review was excellent, not only was the creative writing descriptive, factual and entertaining, but it also 'reviewed' the game without the need to post any spoilers at all unlike some!

    Take TeamXbox for example there mediocre review starts off well, then no sooner do they say the review will contain no spoilers they immediately proceed to tell you the whole opening sequence to the game! Glad they told me that saves me playing that part now, in fact tell me what happens throughout the game and save me £34! To me, that isn't a review of the game, it's more the game in paperback variety.

    It also seems to me, most people are looking at Halo 2 as a means to fuel PS2 flame wars in a 'Halo 2 got the best scores ever, therefore Xbox is the best console ever' kind of infantile debate, how about reading the review and appreciating the writing skills of it, then maybe when you've played the game for yourself you'll have some literary knowledge to actually formulate your own opinion about your own feelings for the game rather then depending on the slanted average of subjective scores!

    As for the game itself, the single player campaign is by far the most appealing aspect of this game for me and for the most part what I've read and seen seems to confirm the plot is going to be gripping, twisting and coupled with the edge of the seat, adrenalin fuelled and orchestral scored action! Great for making the hairs on your back stand up as rushes travel up your spine while your absorbed into a state of lucid hypnosis.

    I'm sure once you leave this state of nirvana without your thirst being fully quenched or left hanging on the cliff, of course your going to be upset, but all the more reason for you to shell out on the next incarnation of the euphoria! Maybe; but I haven't played the game yet, we can speculate that there will be further incarnations of the story. I'm pretty sure that plenty people will want more of them '30 second' highs though :)

  • Scimarad #66 7 years ago

    Sounds great, and as long as the co-op campaign option is still in there I'll be very happy. Couldn't give a toss about live, though...

  • #67 7 years ago

    Zeph I think you did miss the message in my paragraph! And as I said prior to me it seems the only site to give a decent and informed opinion of the game was Eurogamer. But horses for courses mate!

    And I'll concur 'arseliquid face's and frod' reply to your post in regards to Gamespot who need to look up the word contradiction and IGN :)
    Edited by 1 at 08/11/04 @ 08:28

  • kdsh7 #68 7 years ago

    Someone here in this monster thread mentioned you don't buy half a game. Well you do. If you don't play online (about 85% of xbox owners), then essentially you're forking out fourty quid for half the features the game offers. Reviewing the single player campaign is wholly justified.

    And I never used to mind unregistered posters before, but when some bastard starts spouting spoilers about the game it's enough to make me avoid the comments section altogether. Which is a damned shame, because I'm sure there are others who feel the same way, and the comments section is one of the features that make Eurogamer the great site that it is.

  • penhalion #69 7 years ago

    Speaking as a Halo fan. I would rather have seen a combined score as I don't think that scoring single player seperately to multiplayer is a valid thing to do. No-one is going to buy just the single player or just the multiplayer. They are a complete package.

    I suspect that the score would have been an 8 had they been reviewed together. I find multi-part reviews to be misleading and ultimately that's a bad thing.

    edit to add: Frankly I find the opinions of some trusted people on these boards more honest than the eurogamer reviews have become in the last few months.

    I've pre-ordered my copy but, then as I say I loved the first one. Doesn't mean I think everyone should have loved it.

    Sadly after the Doom 3 fiasco I don't place much stock in euro gamer reviews anymore anyway. Honesty in reviews is paramount as some people will have saved up months to buy a game and having a reviewer hype something to death simply because everyone else is doing so is just not on!

    I find that reading between the lines of the review you get the impression that the start of the game is fun i.e. with good set pieces but, then in the middle things go quiet and repetitive, then the ending is quite good. It also sounds like there is supposed to be a part three at some point too (no-one is saying it's a great conclusion to the story).

    probably a 7 or 8 would have been fairer but, then I guess lots of people who let's face it haven't even played the game, would have complained that the score was too low (doesn't mean the reviewer hasn't just copped out of being honest though).
    Edited by 1 at 08/11/04 @ 08:46

  • [maven] #70 7 years ago

    IGN etc. based their multiplayer reviews on SystemLink sessions done at Bungie. How indicative is that of the real Live performance that will happen when when all those millions of preorders go online?
    Eurogamer is (hopefully) waiting to find out, similar to what they did with Burnout 3-fiasco. And waiting to publish a combined review in a week's time would make even more anxious people unhappy.

    So quit yer whinin'!

  • #71 7 years ago

    I'd like to point out that when reading a review I couldn't give a flying .... what numbers they stick on the end of it! Usually I read a review and base my decision to buy the title on the reviewers experience and opinion of the game in addition to the facts and trivia, but don't care for spoilers much.

    There is no way you can judge whether or not you'll like a game by what number it has on the end! Scores or ratings are subjective, pointless, misleading and totally devoid the past 10 minutes of reading if your reading a Gamespot review!
    Edited by 1 at 08/11/04 @ 08:50

  • space_ace #72 7 years ago

    > The guy gave an honest review, i guess. But going by his written review, the game was was equal parts great and boring. So basically the reviewer had a miserable time as muchas he had a great time. To be honest with you, that sounds like a game worthy of a 6 not a nine.

    hmm, that's medal of honor: pacific assault!

  • krudster #73 7 years ago

    Just to clarify why we only published a single player review at this stage: it was at Microsoft UK's request. We can only go online with our copies of the game once the game goes on sale in the states on the 9th, so once that happens we'll give it a couple of days play and give you the multiplayer review.

    That IGN et al reviewed the multiplayer as well is their perogative; plus you have to understand that not only do they have more resources than we could ever dream of and putting together system link is easy for them, they're a US site and traditionally US sites get everything on a plate. We were lucky to even get the game to review at all, seriously.

  • Blerk #74 7 years ago

    Awww....! I was so hoping it would be an 8!

    /puts flame-retardant suit back in cupboard

  • Tiger_Walts #75 7 years ago

    Admit it, you wanted to give it 11/10 but were too scared.

    Sounds like it has less flaws than GTA:SA but then SA is a wee bit more revolutionary.

  • krudster #76 7 years ago

    I think that as someone else pointed out, some of the best games ever have dull and repetitve sections in them. It's probably more the case that I tend to point them out more than other people do, hence all these accusations of writing nit picky reviews. Sorry chaps, that's what I do.

    But at the end of it all, I consider the high points and maybe forgive some of the low points and work out that often the best bits are SO good that the high score is still justifiable.

    Think of reviews like this as one of an album that has some of the best songs ever on it, but that although a few duffers are on there, where it hits big it does so to such an extent that you're still buzzing over it, even though you're mindful of there being some dodgy tracks. White Album syndrome - a lot of games suffer from this.

    All I can say is read the text, the score is less important.

  • Day #77 7 years ago

    Great review Eurogamer, I'm so pleased it got a high score!!

    Really glad you separated the single/multiplayer reviews...

  • NAC #78 7 years ago

    Review scores really dont matter. As long as the review was well written and the good points and bad points were highlighted objectively. Thats all that matters. Are you really going to base a purchase on a score alone? It would be very foolish to do so. Any way great review. (On a sunday?! now thats dedication to the job!)

  • krudster #79 7 years ago

    We should start a vote for and against having scores at all. I for one think they're more trouble than they're worth, as so many people focus entirely on the number at the end without ever bothering to work out how you came to that conclusion and you end up spending hours trying to justify it to people - having, in this case, already spent three hours writing 3500 words on that *very subject*!

  • UncleLou #80 7 years ago

    Scores definitely matter to me - this review is almost exemplary - if you read it, it's not entirely clear how you weigh the more boring parts against the excellent ones. This isn't a fault of the review, though, as the score you provided makes it perfectly clear. Review and final score form a unity which complement each other. Without the score, this particular review would have had to be written differently, in my opinion.

    Other people obviously differ, which is why you'll always find comments like "the review didn't make it osund like a 9 at all".

    Not providing a score is just the lazy way out, in my opinion. And let's face it, most people enjoy debating and comparing the scores. :-)

  • Blerk #81 7 years ago

    We should start a vote for and against having scores at all.

    I vote 'no scores'! \o/

  • Tiger_Walts #82 7 years ago

    I'd vote for an emoticon scoring system, you could have as many as you wanted:

    ;_; - tear-jerker
    :D - a joy to play
    :/ - a let down
    :| - uninspiring
    :p - tricky
    etc...

  • krudster #83 7 years ago

    I think we all accept the backtracking for health bit, (as it wouldn't be fair to have enemies tearing after you), but being able to outrun huge swathes of enemies feels like a massive exploit. I'm amazed you don't get punished for that.

  • bzzct #84 7 years ago

    I agree with UncleLou on saying that if you take away the scores the reviews would have to be written differently. Without a score, the balance of the amount of time spent on describing the good points/bad points would have to be made proportional, so as not to mislead people as to how much good/bad there is in the game. Also I think either people would feel a little lost as to what the reviewer's final opinion was, or the concluding paragraph would gradually start to become a slightly expanded version of the score eg. ...but overall it's an excellent game, ...in the main a terrible game. There's got to be something to sum up the opinions of the review succinctly, and I think a score, in collaboration with a full review, is the best way of doing this.

    To use this review as an example, of all the people complaining about 'only' a 9, if the same review was there without a score it would seem as if you were being far more harsh.

  • Kiigan #85 7 years ago

    "...in turn exposing a major AI flaw where enemies are only allowed to patrol certain 'zones', so that once you're outside of that zone you're safe either way"

    To be honest, that doesn't really seem like a flaw to me.

  • RayRay #86 7 years ago

    EuroGamer's review is the lowest score on Metacritic.com (98 average), but they do indicate that it's only a single player review. I need this sucker.
    Edited by 1 at 08/11/04 @ 10:43

  • Killerbee #87 7 years ago

    Nice review.

    So when's the PC version due then?

    On the "to score or not to score" debate - I say keep them. I always read the review and pretty much make my mind up whether to buy a game based on the text of the review rather than the number at the bottom.

    But equally I do want the reviews I read to actually offer me a verdict. "You'll like it if you like this sort of thing" is all well and good, but doesn't really help me distinguish, say, Halo 2 from Doom 3 from Half-Life 2 in a clear, unambiguous qualitative sense if I know I like FPS games.

    i.e they're all first person shooters, they all have varying degrees of moody atmosphere, shiny graphics, action and excitement... but I want someone who has played all these games to compare the overall experience and offer me some way of contrasting the three games.

    Although obviously if they all get a "9" that argument is blown out of the water... er... :/

    I say keep the scores - just ignore the posters who focus entirely on the number and don't bother to read the text. If they can't appreciate why Halo 2 got a 9 and not a 10 in the subjective opinion of krudster's review, their opinion isn't really worth getting upset about is it?

    :)
    Edited by 1 at 08/11/04 @ 10:54

  • statix101 #88 7 years ago

    "If anything, it's the biggest two fingers to lazy PC development we've ever seen, and proof that if you optimise things enough there should be no reason why PC gamers should have to upgrade as much as they do"


    So true, it boggles the mind what todays mid-high end pcs could do if the developers didnt take the attitude of.."if they want it to run better, they can buy an upgrade"...rather than actually use some of their skill to improve things....

  • gizmo #89 7 years ago

    "...in turn exposing a major AI flaw where enemies are only allowed to patrol certain 'zones', so that once you're outside of that zone you're safe either way"

    This is like 99% of games out there, and if we're digging this deep for faults, thats sounds real good to me!

  • steven #90 7 years ago

    Review scores MATTER to me... it is what justifies the statements made throughout the review so I definately like seeing scores :) But wait... why should a 9 out of 10 generate any controversy? It is an opinion and if it doesn't fit with yours then too bad... 9 should be reason enough for any one to buy this game especially given that it was based solely on the 'single player' game which souhld be far less in quality to the multiplayer mode which is why everyone is so hyped up.

  • IronGiant #91 7 years ago

    Though the 'boxed' AI in this game means you can clear entire sections of enemies just by using a long range weapon as they just run from side to side wondering what the hell is happening.

  • tiddles #92 7 years ago

    How about Eurogamer "Silver" and "Gold" awards for the best stuff, and leave the rest without scores? That'll confuse GameRankings, at any rate...

  • rauper Verified Managing Director, Eurogamer Network #93 7 years ago

    I think the Halo fanboys have already petitioned gamerankings to get our review taken down from there (it has disappeared)... can't cope with having the average score being dragged down by a 9!

  • bzzct #94 7 years ago

    "If anything, it's the biggest two fingers to lazy PC development we've ever seen, and proof that if you optimise things enough there should be no reason why PC gamers should have to upgrade as much as they do"


    So true, it boggles the mind what todays mid-high end pcs could do if the developers didnt take the attitude of.."if they want it to run better, they can buy an upgrade"...rather than actually use some of their skill to improve things....

    Although do we really want development times to start getting even longer...

    In regard to AI zones thing, I guess in a lot of games which are largely set in interiors things such as rooms operate as sort of natural zones - the enemies only operate within their zone, but there's no way to progress without fighting through these zones. Wide open spaces I suppose need a different approach, as the zones are far easier to avoid (ie. run around!)
    Edited by 1 at 08/11/04 @ 11:15

  • SIDEARM #95 7 years ago

    At 98.6% with 13 reviews Halo 2 is now gamerankings.com highest rated game ever.

  • Shadrach #96 7 years ago

    What I want to know is.... What the fuck happened to the ATV, the Snow-Hog, the Jungle-Hog and the Transport-Hog? Cos I remember seeing their pictures ages ago...

  • bzzct #97 7 years ago

    I think the Halo fanboys have already petitioned gamerankings to get our review taken down from there (it has disappeared)... can't cope with having the average score being dragged down by a 9!

    In fairness though(not to those petitioning, that's just taking things TOO far ;-)) in the context of a site like gamerankings your 9/10 doesn't come across as a 9/10, it comes as a 90%. They're giving your review a score out of 100, which it doesn't have, the score to the nearest 1/10 may be 9, but that doesn't mean the score you would have given would have been 90 to the nearest 1/100. (Obviously you already know all this - you wrote the review, but I'm rambling and I can't think of how to make the point any better!) Basically I'm saying that in a way it's understandable that your score might not appear on such a site as your scoring system is not compatible with theirs.

  • rauper Verified Managing Director, Eurogamer Network #98 7 years ago

    I agree. But we do have a few hundred of our other reviews up there where they call 8/10 80%, 9/10 90% etc...

  • steven #99 7 years ago

    Why is scoring such a big issue now (Halo 2 review), every other game experienced it (the out of ten scoring)? Please drop this score issue.

  • Decoded #100 7 years ago

    Wouldn't 9/10 equal 81-90 on an out of 100 scale? So it could be as low as 81 :p

    /fans flames

    Dump the scores and save your sanity guys.

  • rauper Verified Managing Director, Eurogamer Network #101 7 years ago

    I haven't played Halo 2 so I don't have an opinion yet. But I do find it strange all these people saying Halo 2 is amazing, when it hasn't yet been released. How do they know?

  • UncleLou #102 7 years ago

    A 9/10 score would rather be somewhere between 85-94.

    And the majorityof sites gameranking lists do not use a 1-100 scoring system. Just take Gamespy or Avault as examples. Gamerankings just converts everything to their scale

  • Schwabing #103 7 years ago

    penny arcade are speculating that completing the game on legendary gets you some more content due to the poor standard ending.

    have you guys managed to do this - confirm or refute? is the ending really such a let down?

    oh yeah, to the 'why no multiplayer review?' crowd: who would you like them to have played against? a bunch of pirates and a couple of mid-west farm boys?
    Edited by 1 at 08/11/04 @ 11:34

  • #104 7 years ago

    Keep the scores Eurogamer, sometimes they're useful to see if a review is actually worth reading. :)

  • snick #105 7 years ago

    How on earth could a multiplayer review be posted, when so few people can potentially be playing the game online. Going with a single player only review at this time makes a lot of sense.

  • lost_soul #106 7 years ago

    Gamers Europe gave Halo2 an 8 and their score is included on gamerankings.

  • mash the x button #107 7 years ago

    Ico is 10 out of 10 :)

  • rauper Verified Managing Director, Eurogamer Network #108 7 years ago

    lost_soul: From that "review"

    "I didn’t get the chance to play online but the Xbox Live feature will be the biggest selling point of the title."

    So their review should be removed too...

  • rauper Verified Managing Director, Eurogamer Network #109 7 years ago

    tomtomtomtom: We have the proper version. Thanks for your comment.

  • Pinchy #110 7 years ago

    Is it really not worth playing through the first time on normal?

    oh, and to the "worst review evar" lot - it got a NINE ffs. dry your tears, pick up your toys and shut up. your precious game is just fine.

  • Decoded #111 7 years ago

    "Gamers Europe gave Halo2 an 8"

    So they did. And the fanboys are out in force in their comments thread!

    See the loving attention you COULD have had, EG? :D
    Edited by 1 at 08/11/04 @ 12:19

  • Killerbee #112 7 years ago

    Hang on - this "it's only half a review" thing.

    Halo 2 gets its first official release in the US today, right? That means no one has been able to play Halo 2 via Xbox Live until today.

    So how can other reviews claim to have properly reviewed the multiplayer aspects of the game?

    Personally I think EG's approach of splitting the review in two is to be applauded.

  • #113 7 years ago

    I sympathise with the reviewer, the single most difficult part of the review has to be thinking of a number to stick at the end of your labour of love. Eurogamer make the task slighty easier by narrowing the choice down to 1 out of 10 but for those who use decimal or percentage how do you really decide the best number to pick out of 100 0_o

    I could go on forever questioning the ranking system, but I'll just say how can you put a number on what is fundamentally a emotional responce to the game! I love my girlfriend 6 out 10, unless she cooked me some dinner then she gets a 7 :)

    Like I said before scores or ratings are subjective, pointless and misleading!

  • bzzct #114 7 years ago

    Exactly my point. The review alone was me expecting an 8... Would krudster have the balls to give that game an 8? Hitchcockian suspense, until i reach the bottom of the page and realize he wouldn't.

    That doesn't mean it's an 8/10 game that was given a 9, it just means more time was spent in the review talking about the things that were wrong as the reviewer felt they needed more discussion, than some of the good things that there was no need to go on about.

  • eviltobz  #115 7 years ago

    hee hee hee

    this really is quite an amusing little thread. on the scoring front i'd agree with something like tiddles said of some very simplistic pointers to how good it is rather than a number, something like utter crap, poor, average, good, bloody great. or even just crap, average, good, to give a quick idea of how it stacks up separate to the words.

    /giggles at the morons who think that a review of just the single player, which clearly states that it's just the single player is worthless or stupid.

  • krudster #116 7 years ago

    Surely it's pathetic to claim to have reviewed the Live aspect when they clearly haven't played it on Live?

    I think we will decide on a final score by the end of this - an average of the two marks in this case.

  • krudster #117 7 years ago

    We're going to start marking out of a million. Surely the most accurate rating system ever, no?

  • #118 7 years ago

    Personally I think the scoring system is too inaccurate.

    Scores marked out of hundred would be better. Then perhaps you could award Halo 2 94 or 95 out of 100
    Edited by 1 at 08/11/04 @ 12:52

  • mash the x button #119 7 years ago

    Er, that's the same as 9.4 or 9.5...

  • Malimbah #120 7 years ago

    good review !
    now i really wanna play it asap
    /preorders

  • HairyArse #121 7 years ago

    It really amazes me how people get so worked up over a review score. It's almost as if Kristan is blaspheming by giving the score a 9.

    "How dare you only give the righteous Halo2 a 9! May god strike down on you with much fury!"

    Get a grip guys, it's a game. Kristan's opinion was that it was a 9 out of 10. Has he ever let you down before? No. So read the WHOLE review, then buy the game. If you agree with Kristan - great. If you disagree, so what.

    Opinion - A belief or conclusion held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof: I.e. everyone can have an opinion, none of which are right or wrong.

  • gizmo #122 7 years ago

    EG Guys: I feel so sorry for you on occasions such as these. The site content is great, just remember all the groaners are probably under 12.

    I enjoyed the review, and it sounds as though I will enjoy the game if it is similar to the first one, then some.

  • Royal Fool #123 7 years ago

    Excellently written review as usual. I think EuroGamer are currently one of the best examples of gaming journalism.

    Honestly, some of the replies here border on the idiotic, like Zeph's comments about GameRankings retracting EG's score and the like. Look,who the hell gives a f*** about scores? It doesn't sum up the game nearly as well as the review itself; you cannot possibly judge a game purely by a score from 1-10.

    I knew a thread about such a hyped game like Halo 2 would garner complaints about the score (Even if it is a 9... what the hell?). Other reviews (IGN, TeamXbox, etc.) that mention and praise the multiplayer mode aren't being totally honest as they never had full, unrestricted access to the multiplayer on Live during the review period. It's perfectly understandable that EG didn't review that component of the game. Boohoo to the naysayers. :)

  • #124 7 years ago

    "Er, that's the same as 9.4 or 9.5..."


    I realise that, thankyou. I thought the decimal places might confuse some people on here ;)
    Edited by 1 at 08/11/04 @ 13:21

  • Kiigan #125 7 years ago

    Good review IMO. Personally I'd give it less, maybe an 8.
    It's just Halo. More Halo, same flaws as before, fancier cut-scenes and a better plot. With Xbox Live support. Fun, but far from perfect though.

  • Petrarch #126 7 years ago

    Enjoyed the review, and feel that the 9 is well deserved.

    On the topic of a 10, I'm of the opinion that no game ever deserves that, purely on the reason that nothing is perfect. I'm expecting Half Life 2 to score highly as well across the board, but is it a 10? I don't think so. Is Halo 2 a 10? Again no. After all, there's always some imperfection in games that denies them from attaining that perfect score if you're logical and practical about assessing them.

  • wattoo #127 7 years ago

    To zeph who thinks halo is better than vice city because a greater percentage of the respective console owners, own halo.

    pish, tshaw and nonsense.

    if i liked halo that much, i'd have bought an xbox. i didn't. however, i was quite willing to part with my cash to get gta3 even though it involved buying the ps2 as well, because i wanted it THAT MUCH.

  • SIDEARM #128 7 years ago

    Go home NEWBORN GTAfan.

  • Royal Fool #129 7 years ago

    Jesus. I'm not one who often says this but the fanboys really come crawling out of the woodwork here. Buy 'em all, stay happy.

    AND FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THAT IS GOOD AND HOLY GO AND REGISTER SO I CAN IGNORE YOUR ASSES! Thank you.

    P.S. I'm not a religious person. At all.

  • Schwabing #130 7 years ago

    I hope gamerankings do remove the reference to EG, and all the other sites regularly read by Muppets do the same. Then hopefully, finally, the influx of opinionated idiots will end and we can get back to normal.

  • mash the x button #131 7 years ago

    "ill trade my ps2 anyday for a Xbox and halo 2"
    What are you waiting for then?

  • Royal Fool #132 7 years ago

    I think EuroGamer need to make registration necessary to comment. The flood of unregistered posters here is annoying and I can't use the Ignore button on them because that will ignore them all (Some unregistered posters are better than the rest, natch).

    P.S. I said natch. Do I win a prize, Kieron?

  • IronGiant #133 7 years ago

    Anyone with any common sense has already left this thread..

    /looks around.. runs.

  • krudster #134 7 years ago

    We are seriously looking into making all comments available only to registered users. We're not happy with the influx of loons either.

  • ChrisOTR #135 7 years ago

    That's a good idea Frod :)

    Bizarrely I just started a thread about this in the forums only seconds before Krud's comment...

  • snibril #136 7 years ago

    "How about a line on the comments page that says "many registered users ignore unregistered posters" in a bid to get people to register?"

    I do not think that will prevent them from posting.

    Register, then you can post, seems the best way.

  • Derblington #137 7 years ago

    I'm up for banning the idiots, but there's nothing stopping them from registering.

    You guys at EGtowers must be pissing yourselves at some of these comments.

  • krudster #138 7 years ago

    We expect it tbh!

    If we make all comments registered only, it's very easy then for us to ban the morons who just come along to be offensive.

  • IronGiant #139 7 years ago

    make it so..

    /in a captain pickard voice

  • BartonFink #140 7 years ago

    krudster wrote
    We are seriously looking into making all comments available only to registered users. We're not happy with the influx of loons either.
    Please say you will do this soon and get rid of the loons, tards and plainf good old fashioned idiots.
    Another idea would be to switch on ignore un-registered users by default for all registered users.

  • Sid-Nice #141 7 years ago

    Did Games Rankings remove Eurogamers review because it doesn't score high enough? Or is because E/G only reviewed the single player elements of the game? How did IGN and Gamespot go on-line? Did they simulate Xbox Live through the Xboxes LAN capabilities? The reviews I've read say that Xbox Live is where it's at, so 9/10 for the single player mode is too high. Will games Rankings show your Xbox Live review of 10/10?

  • BartonFink #142 7 years ago

    Reason
    The message companies like MS are getting is clear: Forget originality, forget progress, forget anything new happening to games ever again. Just spend more money. Market aggressively. Buy good reviews. If it just looks good, no-one can ever say anything bad about it.    Sony have been doing it for years too. That's where the problem with having one single near monopoly (ala Sony) in the industry lies.

  • Mr Richard #143 7 years ago

    Progressive Scan?

  • Eighthours #144 7 years ago

    How long are you planning to spend on the MP before that part of the review goes up, guys?

    Liked the review, by the way. By way of comment, I'd just say that even my fave film of all time (The Usual Suspects) has its mediocre scenes. There's no entertainment product out there, in my view, that truly has a no-filler level of content.

  • ralphwolfenstein #145 7 years ago

    "NewBorn GTAfan you are a new species on this planet.

    Stupidity has reached a new level."

    This is probably the most amusing thread to read, and the most pointless to try and get involved in, but WOPR, I'll say this - he's being ironic. And doing it rather well...

    Unless... you're also being ironic?

    Damn it, I hate this bluff and counter bluff...

  • gamingdave #146 7 years ago

    By way of comment, I'd just say that even my fave film of all time (The Usual Suspects) has its mediocre scenes.

    Interesting point, but in the review they mentioned "The truth is, for every hour our blood was pumping like a turbo charged locomotive through our adrenaline scored veins, there were an equal number of hours where we were bored with the unimaginative repetition of formulaic corridor based FPS trawls. On balance, we feel, the Campaign mode deserves a score somewhere that snugly sits between the two"

    Kinda suggests that half the game is worth maybe a 5, and half a 10, going inbetween at around an 7 or 8, as with the original game. But these things (dull sections) can normally be forgiven when played amongst great ones. I for one shall definately be picking this up at some point (and not for Live) and am sure ill enjoy it. Far to much to play at the moment though.

    But, I have to also agree with Reason .. "Why do gamers and the press continue to APOLOGIZE for even having the slightest bone to pick with a game if it happens to have high production values?" This site gave doom3 the same score, even though people complained that game was far to repetative, and it seemed to be getting the score for production alone. In todays market there will be some increadably polished looking and sounding games, the techs pretty increadable compared to not long ago after all. Some will be great to play, others not. Halo was great to play if you liked that sort of thing, obviosuly it wasnt if you didnt. I think the review does plenty well enough to point these things out, and agree that scores are really of little use compared to descriptive views. Read the review and then give it your own score if you must, but better still play the thing through and then make your mind up.

    Never assume just because a game looks good, it is good. And vice-versa, just because theres some bugs in there doesnt meen the games doomed (ie driver3, ok it had bugs, but if you played the game instead of hunting bugs so you could grumble on a forum, there was some fun in there, albeit not as much as there should have been, given its budget)

    --edit--

    oh and yes, force registration to post comments please.
    Edited by 1 at 08/11/04 @ 18:02

  • #147 7 years ago

    Once again another superb review. I like to think that Eurogamer appeals to the more intelligent gamer, but you wouldn't think that by reading some of the comments on this thread.

    Want to know where you can stick IGN, Gamerankings, Gamespot etc?

    I TRUST EG's reviews. Even if I don't agree with the scores 100% of the time (there would be something wrong if I did), the reviews are always superbly written, informative, entertaining, and extremely intelligent. I love the way EG doesn't get carried away on a wave of hype.

    I didn't exactly fall in love with Halo the way most did, I found the repetetiveness somewhat grating. I'm glad that Krudster has warned me that there is similar in Halo 2. I'm still going to get the game of course, but I for one now won't be disappointed when I hit those samey sections, because I now know what to expect.

    Roll on thursday :)

    Mapster.

  • ekko #148 7 years ago

    I'll be waiting til the new year by then they'll probably patch it up because of the cheaters/tards which will no doubt ruin it for the rest of us.

    Sigh.

  • bungalooBunny #149 7 years ago

    Holy shit, over 250 comments and I hadn't even seen the thread yet! Record comment number for sure?

    Anyways can't wait to play this... It's great to hear they didn't ruin the whole game by making it overly online focused and they kept the main elements of gameplay.

  • spindizzy #150 7 years ago

    I like the idea that someone (sorry, can't be bothered to search for the post) had :
    put "ignores unregistered posters" under the username if that person has chosen this

    That way at least people know why they don't get a reply.

    Frankly though, if it's easier to just ban unregistered posters then do that. Anything improve the situation is fine by me - the various GTA threads really sapped my will to live.
    Edited by 1 at 08/11/04 @ 19:15

  • Polymath #151 7 years ago

    Hi all,
    Long time since I've posted on the site, but I couldn't resist replying to this...

    Krudster, 'twas an excellent review! I think that reading your review in light of how you review games gives a very clear impression of what you like in a game, and what you liked and disliked in this game.

    From reading your review, I know that I will nearly undoubtedly enjoy this game... and you've done so without spoiling any of the surprises. The journalism here is excellent... and is opinionated, as it should be. Art appeals to taste, and opinions are therefore integral to the appreciation of the games.

    I think what bothers the pro-H2 adherents is that the rankings will go down because of this review. Perhaps best game of all time is what they might like to see? Given that I have yet to play the game, I can't say how good the game is (I will tonight!) but I think your review did a wonderful job of communicating what you saw as the strengths as well as weaknesses.

    The only comment is that without the score, your vascillations on its quality might suggest something less than a 9. True, when you wrote on the more "brilliant" aspects, you were nothing less than effusive... :)

    I think Eurogamer might be best served without a numerical scoring system... because, unlike many other sites, a perfect score is reserved for a truly perfect game.

    Which brings to mind the question: How would EG rate chess? or Go?

    Kristan, could you do a review of one of those classic board games? I think that would be tremendously cool...

    How about a rating system:
    Perfect
    Classic (many will play it for years to come)
    Good (solid enjoyment for several weeks)
    Average (Play through once, then shelve)
    Poor (Difficult to even finish due to poor quality)
    Abysmal (Who published this? It's a blemish to their integrity!)

    That way, Gamerankings can't score it, but our readers will still discern the relevant stylistic information that is perhaps the most valuable information in EG reviews...

  • mash the x button #152 7 years ago

    Which brings to mind the question: How would EG rate chess? or Go?

    Go, now we're talking! Do you play?

  • EVERYGAMER #153 7 years ago

    I say you should just have 3 scores.

    Buy it!

    Rent it!

    Bin it!

    What more do you need. I like to think we're all big and ugly enough to make up our own minds without the acceptance of others.

  • gonrico #154 7 years ago

    This game sucks. cmon it didnt get a ten. It aint worthy for me

  • morriss #155 7 years ago

    "Don;t know about it being better than Halo, but i do know that playing as an Elite for 11 of the 16 levels is a little disheartening."

    You must be fucking joking!! 11 out of 16!?

  • morriss #156 7 years ago

    " I don't know whats so good with this game...its an average shooter. Its the same old
    run around shooting aliens and when your done shooting them...you spend ALOT of
    time running around the corridors or landscape where to go next. Man people
    go on about the AI in halo..but whats so smart about these aliens who do not
    keep renforcing their troops when your wiping them out. All i got was all aliens dead..where
    do i go next? run around in circle for hours!

    PS: the AI in the original wasn't that good anyway...no wonder they needed that shield!
    Anyway i think the reviewer explained enough to convince to go with the people who will
    score this game an 8 or below. I can't see anything too exciting about this game!"

    That's EXACTLY how I feel about GTA...

  • Derblington #157 7 years ago

    Finally got around to reading the review just now after following the thread all day and checking out reviews on 2 other sites. Superb.

    EG is easily the most mature review site I have ever come across. You deserve way more notice than you currently get (but only as long as you don't become more "commercial" in that success). I only found out about this site around 4 months ago but I will definately be following it for the rest of my gaming life. Keep it up guys.

  • IronGiant #158 7 years ago

    Shit.. spoiler alert.. don't read above the last 3 posts as some tit has dropped a big spoiler in.

  • EVERYGAMER #159 7 years ago

    "Don;t know about it being better than Halo, but i do know that playing as an Elite for 11 of the 16 levels is a little disheartening."

    Shades of MGS: Sons of Liberty :/

  • Jmog #160 7 years ago

    Thought I'd better register. Already feel like a more complete and less annoying person :-)

  • quantumsheep #161 7 years ago

    Great review mate and spoiler free ;) Unlike some of the twats that just had to put spoilers in cos it's a laugh. Tossers.

  • pjmaybe #162 7 years ago

    "..and proof that if you optimise things enough there should be no reason why PC gamers should have to upgrade as much as they do, but that's another issue entirely."

    One definitely worth mentioning though! Well said!

    Peej

  • Nillsens #163 7 years ago

    Interesting review, certainly set me straight again. I was drowning in hype, even getting goosebumps when the commercial came on.
    I would have liked to hear a bit more about how the new things influence gameplay, that's a big issue for me.

    Anyway, good job Halo got an 8 then, this way the 9 can be symbolic of the improvements without saying that it is perfect, which it apparently is not. Can't say yet meself, but maybe tomorrow...

  • Tiger_Walts #164 7 years ago

    moriss quoted:

    A SPOILER

    You fucking cock!
    Edited by 1 at 09/11/04 @ 09:31

  • UncleLou #165 7 years ago

    If you're so afraid of spoilers, why the hell do you read the comments? I am not saying it's ok to post spoilers, mind, but you really should have known better.

  • BartonFink #166 7 years ago

    Peej wrote
    "..and proof that if you optimise things enough there should be no reason why PC gamers should have to upgrade as much as they do, but that's another issue entirely."

    One definitely worth mentioning though! Well said!

    Peej

    And probably not mentioned enough. So is it lazy coding or something worse....

  • Tiger_Walts #167 7 years ago

    I expect unregistered users to post spoilers but for a registered user to comment on it..? Unforgivable.

  • smoothpete #168 7 years ago

    Good god, everyone gets so uptight about reviews! Personally I can't wait for friday, and may well call in sick so I can get stuck in. A lot of people have posted here slating the lack of originality in Halo2, but come on, it's a sequel, what were you expecting? Around the subject of originality I can't remember any games I've played that don't remind me of something else to some extent... There are some out there like WarioWare, and Katamari Damacy, but I doubt that will ever be available on PAL (although if I'm wrong please correct me). I can't imagine any game being released that you can't pigeon-hole into a category of some kind. But then who cares?

    Incidently I'm glad the flood are back. That bit when they first appear in Halo was excellent. You just gotta love blowing up those popping ones on top of a big pile of grenades.
    Edited by 1 at 09/11/04 @ 13:49

  • IronGiant #169 7 years ago

    "I expect unregistered users to post spoilers but for a registered user to comment on it..? Unforgivable. "

    Yeah especially as he spends most of his time posting about how wonderful Halo/2 is, then he goes and ruins a big gameplay twist for those that didn't know about it.

  • gamesb*tch #170 7 years ago

    9 hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm... anyway you forgot to take back one chhh (throaty noise) adam to honour the Hebrew god in who's name this temple was built... ;o)

  • BartonFink #171 7 years ago

    Can we please get rid of the unregistered users!
    Krudster puleeze!!!!

  • Azu87 #172 7 years ago

    Imo maybe Halo is the best console FPS, but it's not THE best game in the world (as it would seem when you look the reviews at Gamerankings). Zelda OoT is a much better game (which was previously the number 1 in all time rankings) and I can't see the reason why everyone is so f***ing excited of Halo 1 and 2. I played the first one and there was only one short part I liked much in the whole game the rest is just well done average FPS. 9 is the maximum points I would ever give Halo and the multiplayer isn't so unique as every reviewer says. Even Killzone is better in some parts than Halo because it has done some thing right (and I don't know what). Even though it has some serious bugs it just feels right(something you can't say from halo somtimes)
    Edited by 2 at 10/11/04 @ 14:46

  • bungalooBunny #173 7 years ago

    A lot of games get 9/10 so I don't see why some people get so upset when this games gets that score. Envy, maybe?

    Unregistered users: I would prefer to get rid of them. It's all to easy to keep changing your name and not assume responsibility for what you say. You hardly see registered users spamming around all the time. You also get to know better who said what.

  • max #174 7 years ago

    Many Registerd Users Proclaimed: Can we please get rid of the unregistered users!

    "Ignore Poster". Works like a dream. You never need to worry about anonymous posters again :D

    Max

  • MikeP #175 7 years ago

    three hundred and FIRST!

    w00t, yay, l33t, etcetera, etcetera.

    I'm not really a tard, honest.

  • elchuppa #176 7 years ago

    So I got Halo2 yesterday and have put around 2-3 hours in. My initial impression was that the graphics were pretty awful (Texture popping, jaggies, etc.) , the feel was off from the first game.. In Halo1 I loved the control feel, I mastered the head shot with the handgun very quickly, not so in Halo 2..
    Then around 15 minutes before bed I tried turning off 480p (because I couldn't for the life of me understand how Halo2 could be uglier than Halo1), and this significantly improved both feel and look. Anybody else notice that the game is but ugly in 480p?

  • Mr Richard #177 7 years ago

    Perhaps I should have been more clear.

    While I understand that progressive scan is hardly the standard in British homes at the moment, it would still be nice for games to support it. Having said that, would having, say, a 100Hz TV make much of a difference on a title like Halo2. I have a feeling that TVs are will soon be the hinderance to a good visual gaming experience with its lines and lines and lines and lines.

  • penhalion #178 7 years ago

    I think maybe it's time to go back to the old school rating system of categories i.e. graphics, sound, lasting appeal and originality. I always found this to create a better rating system than some bizzare 9/10 score that is based on what exactly?

    Maybe have extra reviewer opinions at the end and that way we simply go by the opinion of whichever reviewer we trust or has been found to have the closest taste to us as individuals.

    so you get a main review covering game content, category scores to tell you what the graphics, sound, controls and originality were like and finally some second opinions from other reviewers saying whether they liked or disliked the game as much as the main reviewer.

    So for instance if I were writing a second opinion about say GTA:SA it would go something like

    "Having started playing San Andreas, I found the game to be fun but, not as fun as it could have been.

    Making the game area bigger, while welcome has the side effect of making finding and doing things into a somewhat tedious hunt the needle in the haystack job. Cars are destroyed far too easily and hitting anything even gently causes silly damage to the vehicles.....blah blah

    You get the idea (flicks two cents skyward)

  • davyuk #179 7 years ago

    I find reading reviews tedious when they aren't split into clear catagories. This is why so many people head straight for the score, and start their criticisms based on that alone.

    Presentation, motivation, gameplay, control, graphics, sound, summary. Scores aren't needed - when a friend tells you of a film they saw from a previous night, the opinion is never wrapped up with, 'I'd give it 96.5 out of 100'. So a well written review should be able to convey a game's worth.

    Normally, scores of between 8 to 10 would suggest a purchase, 6 to 8 a rental, and below that you may as well forget it. So how about the simple 'buy, rent, forget' rating?

    I suppose it comes down to the score whores who need that numerical fix, and websites wanting to be listed in gamerankings.com.

    /thinking aloud

  • elchuppa #180 7 years ago

    I'm down with 3.. come to think of it how about just 1. 1 star means it's worth playing, 0 means it's not.

    the review text can resolve any genre specific questions I might have.



  • chronom4n #181 7 years ago

    if you do not want to know what to score is, do what football programmes tell u to do..'Look away NOW"

  • akina #182 7 years ago

    anybody know how many Collectors Editions were actually made?

  • Scimarad #183 7 years ago

    There is ONE thing I dislike about this however - Why the hell did they change multiplayer co-op to a vertical split? Surely a broader horizontal field of view is more important than the vertical. Unless there is some way you can choose...

  • Mashum #184 7 years ago

    Re: Co-Op split screen, you're absolutely right about the daft vertical split. It's like playing the game with blinkers on. Does changing the xbox from widescreen to standard (or whatever it's called) in dashboard -> settings -> video make any difference? I remember Burnout3 had the same vertical split but only when in widescreen mode.

  • Mashum #185 7 years ago

    On the subject of field of view - I found the view far too close and kept bumping into stuff that was just outside my limited field of vision, as someone mentioned earlier this is worse when you are dual weilding a couple of covenant rifles which take up yet more screen space. Also while I love it dearly I found field of view problems with Halo 1 quite annoying too.

  • ABXY #186 7 years ago

    WOW, played it until 11pm last night... really cool controlling the enemies with new weapons..... bring it on!

  • Scimarad #187 7 years ago

    I think maybe it's just not to your taste - I've played plenty of FPS on my PC and I'd still rate Halo/Halo2 as just about my favourites. Curiously, In second place would probably be Riddick which is ALSO on the Xbox!

    Edit:

    Just checked the Bungie forums and a quick tweak of the dashboard (normal rather than W/S) does indeed change the split to horizontal.

    Woohoo!!!

    Edited by 1 at 12/11/04 @ 19:57

  • Pirotic #188 7 years ago

    indeed, it feels like unreal tournament with joypads.

    both the online and single player could be better, but the online is helped by the fact all my friends are on xbox live, and therefore even an average game becomes great all of a sudden as i can play it with friends.

  • masterson #189 7 years ago

    Well this was all very predictable wasn't it?

    Fans anticipate games like this as though they were the second coming of Christ, and then upon release dismiss them as overrated crap.
    I'm almost through the campaign now, and have enjoyed almost every minute thus far. Far less repetition than the orignal, markedly improved graphics, lots of nice gameplay additons - exactly what a good sequel should offer. Playing on Live is great, bar a few quirks with the matchmaking and looks like it will only get better.

    So, revolutionary? - No. The best ever console FPS? - Damn straight

    Anyone moaning about it either hates EVERYTHING, doesn't own an Xbox, or was expecting it to suck them off between levels.

  • RumpyStumpy #190 7 years ago

    "even halflife 1 is much better. why dont bungie hire people who know how to make good levels and things 2 shoot? if this aint the most overrated game in history i dont know wot is."

    Killzone :)

  • drumbaby #191 7 years ago

    I'm mildly curious about KZ...Well, as curious as I can be about an fps on a console.

    Mainly for its multiplayer aspect I must say...slouched in front of my widescreen with my cordless gamepad, and a bottle of Newkie Brown.

    :)

  • Jontacular #192 7 years ago

    a dodgy online element that could have been made a lot better.

    Ha ha.

  • IronGiant #193 7 years ago

    "Anyone moaning about it either hates EVERYTHING, doesn't own an Xbox, or was expecting it to suck them off between levels."

    How very predictable, anyone who dare criticize Halo2 get's this kinda crap response from a blathering fanboi..

  • Hicksy #194 7 years ago

    Maybe not the best game of all time EVAR! (that comes out tommorow) but in all seriousness H2 is still VERY good! I think EG's 9/10 is spot on :D

  • mash the x button #195 7 years ago

    After much scientific analysis I have concluded that all fanboys are twats.

  • RumpyStumpy #196 7 years ago

    consoles can't do FPS games. FULL STOP. So to be the best console FPS is like being the best looking toad in the swamp. you dig?

    yes they can and a pad is much more user friendly than a keyboard and mouse.

  • #197 7 years ago

    Hmmmmm

    Interesting, but at last a score I actually agree with.......

    http://www.ntsc-uk.com/review.php?platform=xbo&game=Hal o2

    Mapster.

  • bungalooBunny #198 7 years ago

    I'm fed up of people dicing FPS games for 'lack of originality'. This game is great, and so is HL2 and Doom 3.

    If one doesn't like FPS games why even bother buying them? Not very bright, I think.

  • caligari #199 7 years ago

    Ohhhh, well Digitiser gave it 5/5. What? Oh...there is no Digitiser...

  • destinygirl8 #200 7 years ago

    I realy like Halo 2 its a great game espesaly with the multiplayer but the single player rocks to. The thing that I liked best was being able to be an alian for onece. The one thing I just dont under stand is it just doesnt beat halo 1. Mabea its caus of the recharging of ur health...........well anyways its still a great game!!! ^_^

  • Mashum #201 6 years ago

    I just tried this out on the xbox 360 - the texture poping in a split second after the initial scene renders still occurs during the cutscenes also the change in detail level on models as you approach them is still just as obvious.

    Perhaps it is too complex to fix essentially for free - oh well, on the plus side it's certainly a bit sharper and the game still rocks.

  • Niall #202 2 years ago

    There's a line that reads "most of the people that buy this won't care one iota for the multiplayer"

    They are most likely a market analyst now.