Jump to content
IGNORED

Halo Infinite - OUT NOW - no campaign spoilers pls


Wallace
 Share

Recommended Posts

54 minutes ago, footle said:

And to be fair the entry price of Halo is GamePass for a month (£8) not £70. 

 

From what I've read/seen seems like a solid entry into the series. Yes it lacks a bit if diversity which I expect will be fleshed out over the coming years (hence the Infinite in the title I guess!). 

 

Must admit not a huge FPS fan but at least Halo is a bit different to a Call Of Duty.. set in a different world, with different weapons and vehicles etc. And well its there to try out on GP - people who never play FPS games might give it a try. Just happy I can play it through there rather than having to shell out £55 for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Kryptonian said:

I haven’t bothered with reviews for 15 years or so. 

Tend to get better vibes from here TBH... At least we know that (other than people being huge fans of the series) the views are impartial and warts and all. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Oz said:

I am struggling to understand what we are disagreeing about with regards to reviews. Please don’t go the way of the subreddit guys. Who gives a shit about reviews? 

Yeah but if everywhere was giving it 10/10 then it would be a different matter. 
 

It looks excellent from what I’ve seen of the campaign, and the multiplayer is as good as ever. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MattyP said:

Tend to get better vibes from here TBH... At least we know that other than people being huge fans of the series the views are impartial and warts and all. :D

 

I really would not use here as any kind of quality barometer either :lol:

There's some wild opinions fired about and in literally every game thread there will be someone professing it the worst thing ever! 

 

Spoiler

Sometimes it's can be the same poster in every thread, buying every game and hating each and every one of them ;)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Stanley said:

Yeah but if everywhere was giving it 10/10 then it would be a different matter. 
 

It looks excellent from what I’ve seen of the campaign, and the multiplayer is as good as ever. 

I am having a ton of fun. I have bought a couple of outfits for 15 quid. Send help

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have rarely used reviews as a buyers guide for anything since I was a kid and read zZap64 , I now use preview materials and other media to inform my choice. Or more likely I just play stuff I have always liked as I am old and dont like change :D

 

However I do read reviews of books, film, motorbikes, videogames because I enjoy reading the reviews and information. It is entertainment for me and also an information datapoint.

 

The score (if there is one) is irrelevant to me , again since the days of zzap, and it never fails to amuse me when scroes get everyone so het up. I'd be more annoyed if the review was factually inaccurate int he actual text - like the infamous HeadHunter review.

 

EDIT - this place is also a good resource for info on all the media I pick up (games, film,tv,music etc) and yes there are opinions that I disagree with but doesn't mean the info supplied isn't useful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Digital Foundry review is really good I think, and it doesn’t give a score. Yeah obviously it focusses a lot on technical stuff but he (John) seems to have enjoyed the game and says as much. 
 

It looks lovely I think and 60fps quality mode is exactly what I want. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Stanley said:

The Digital Foundry review is really good I think, and it doesn’t give a score. Yeah obviously it focusses a lot on technical stuff but he (John) seems to have enjoyed the game and says as much. 
 

It looks lovely I think and 60fps quality mode is exactly what I want. 

Enjoyed the review too... the campaign feels well structured with each level/episode given more breadth to explore ways of completing it without feeling like its completely moved away from a linear plot-line. So like when you hit Halo in the original - its perhaps more in line of what Bungie wanted with the original release but obviously constrained by technical limitation at the time.

 

Also think the graphic updates look great - everything suitably shiny and the music looks to be a return to form too. One of the aspects I loved about the original Halo was the music made everything feel it was happening on an epic scale for some reason. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to admit digital foundry are the only reviews I ever listen to anymore. Dudes in mainstream websites are getting a bit young for me. I want to hear about decimal points and milisecond measurements of frame pacing issues. Also, I want them to zoom-in and show me the defects. This fills me with joy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reviews are a good way to judge quality. You’re obviously not going to agree with every single one but a game is far less subjective than a film or a music album.

 

Things like controls, how it performs, is it too repetitive, progression, are the enemies useless, does it have bugs etc aren’t really down to artistic interpretation.

 

You can be pretty assured (most of the time) that if a game is getting universal 9’s and 10’s it’s going to be great and things stamped with avoid or low scores are going to be shit.

 

From there on in its just a case of deciding if you like that sort of thing. I’m in little doubt that Persona 5 is an incredible game but I just don’t like turn based JRPG’s so I know it’s not for me. You’ll obviously decide for yourself after playing a game but if you want some sort of indication as to whether you’re about to waste £60 or not then you’ll want to know what other people think.

 

Also, scores are good because I want to know if the person rates it without having to read through any potential spoilers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, MattyP said:

Tend to get better vibes from here TBH... At least we know that (other than people being huge fans of the series) the views are impartial and warts and all. :D


Given that almost no one here has played it I think I’d rather read from the people who have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Oz said:

I have to admit digital foundry are the only reviews I ever listen to anymore. Dudes in mainstream websites are getting a bit young for me. I want to hear about decimal points and milisecond measurements of frame pacing issues. Also, I want them to zoom-in and show me the defects. This fills me with joy. 

Yeah quite like them for their geek factor. Its interesting to learn where compromises might have been made etc. Looking forward to when they do a complete rundown of it on all the various Xbox One hardware iterations. Think the target platform for this was the One X so it will be interesting to see how it compares on that to a Series X (other than obviously the improved loading times). Also when they throw the PC version into the mix too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Strafe said:


Given that almost no one here has played it I think I’d rather read from the people who have.

Well they haven't ... at the moment... :) 

 

Anyhow its not as if many people on here will be dropping a lot of cash to play this - and pretty much everyone with a GamePass account will be at least giving it a go I expect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Uncle Nasty said:

 

Metro's reviews have been some of the best and most credible out there for years. Usually my goto site when a big new game comes out. Unpretentious, honest and usually quite low scoring when everyone else is losing heir minds, with none of the flowery shit of the bigger sites.


I’d have to read a few but if everyone else is saying it’s good and one site says it’s bad you have to question that. All clicks count the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Oz said:

I am struggling to understand what we are disagreeing about with regards to reviews. Please don’t go the way of the subreddit guys. Who gives a shit about reviews? 

 

Any review that doesn't 100% match by pre-existing oprinion is a stinky piece of trash and the writer is a hack who should be drummed out of the media forthwith.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Strafe said:

Reviews are a good way to judge quality. You’re obviously not going to agree with every single one but a game is far less subjective than a film or a music album.

 

Things like controls, how it performs, is it too repetitive, progression, are the enemies useless, does it have bugs etc aren’t really down to artistic interpretation.

 

You can be pretty assured (most of the time) that if a game is getting universal 9’s and 10’s it’s going to be great and things stamped with avoid or low scores are going to be shit.

 

From there on in its just a case of deciding if you like that sort of thing. I’m in little doubt that Persona 5 is an incredible game but I just don’t like turn based JRPG’s so I know it’s not for me. You’ll obviously decide for yourself after playing a game but if you want some sort of indication as to whether you’re about to waste £60 or not then you’ll want to know what other people think.

 

Also, scores are good because I want to know if the person rates it without having to read through any potential spoilers.

True but they can also taint your view of a game before you try it... I've played for example plenty of games Edge gave 6/7s and loved them. Suppose the main purpose of reviews is to ascertain whether something is worth buying or not... but with GP that kind of goes away and all that is needed is a bit of bandwidth and some time to give it a go. Which is a massive plus point for me around GP. Lots of games I've played on there I might not have bought and I have really enjoyed.

 

It really has changed my buying/playing habits to be fair. Its probably one of the reasons why the PS5 gets mostly dusty these days because I really don't want to drop cash on games when I can't at least try them first - no demos etc. 

 

Anyhow looking forward to trying this  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fucking hell that Metro review gave it 7/10. That's three points less than a perfect score. This isn't yet quite as embrassing as the meltdowns we had over God of War getting an 8/10 at Eurogamer and posters on here literally calling them 'joyless cunts' when they gave Uncharted 3 an 8, don't let it get there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Harsin said:

Fucking hell that Metro review gave it 7/10. That's three points less than a perfect score. This isn't quite as embrassing as the meltdowns we had over God of War getting an 8/10 at Eurogamer, don't let it get there.

 

No, it's important to remember that anybody scoring a game lower/higher than the average is doing it for clicks/has been bribed, because the quality of games is barely subjective and so any variance can only be so-explained. Hence the writers at Vice, PC Gamer and Metro are all playing devil's advocate, while the writers at VG247 and the Washington Post are shills. Such a shame.

 

The silly thing is, as the Giant Bomb review flags up, the whole 'buyers guide' angle is even less important than usual; a very large portion of interested players will get to try the game for very little outlay at all, so if anything we should be getting a wider selection of reviews as actual reviews, i.e. exploratory articles showing us different people's experiences with the game, rather than focussed on If You Like X You'll Probably Like Y. I'm certainly hoping for a wide range of viewpoints to read once I've had a chance to play the campaign, to see what other people make of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Strafe said:

Reviews are a good way to judge quality. You’re obviously not going to agree with every single one but a game is far less subjective than a film or a music album.

 

Things like controls, how it performs, is it too repetitive, progression, are the enemies useless, does it have bugs etc aren’t really down to artistic interpretation.

 

You can be pretty assured (most of the time) that if a game is getting universal 9’s and 10’s it’s going to be great and things stamped with avoid or low scores are going to be shit.

 

From there on in its just a case of deciding if you like that sort of thing. I’m in little doubt that Persona 5 is an incredible game but I just don’t like turn based JRPG’s so I know it’s not for me. You’ll obviously decide for yourself after playing a game but if you want some sort of indication as to whether you’re about to waste £60 or not then you’ll want to know what other people think.

 

Also, scores are good because I want to know if the person rates it without having to read through any potential spoilers.

I disagree, a game is at least as subjective as a film or music.

 

Film and music also have technical aspects where things might be less subjective (although that is a big subject). Quality of acting/editing composition/visual fx/sound fx/camera work - all are technical and can all be less subjective (again another BIG subject)

 

The part where you say decide if it is your sort of thing is exactly what the subjective part is and so a 9 or 10 out of 10 game isn't "great" unless you enjoy it. I didn't enjoy Uncharted - to me it is not a great game it is a dull wannabe movie that barely held my interest. Yeah the shooting works the graphics are pretty its all very pleasant but I hate the way it plays. That is not a popular opinion but it is a subjective opinion that I hold. Similarly I do not like Titanic and it is not great. It has great fx and is well made and has some competent actors but it bores me to tears.

 

Both are technically sound but that doesn't make them great it makes them competent. Reviewng that level of competency is dull and uninteresting. If I reviewed either of those two they would not get an 8, 9 or 10 and nor should they.

 

Games need to get away from their infancy where if a game "works" then it should get 7 out of 10 or whatever. The technical competency is the least interesting part it is how it grabs you and makes you play. Many games work despite their technical incompetency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Strafe said:


I’d have to read a few but if everyone else is saying it’s good and one site says it’s bad you have to question that. All clicks count the same.

 

The game sounds like a good Halo (campaign) but not a classic Halo. I wanted it to be a classic, but here we are. I bet when this all calms down and we look back, the Metro score and the more conservative reviews will be the ones most of us on here align with. It looks like the combat is great but the rest of the campaign has issues. The lack of variety is a real kick in the spuds.

 

I read that you can't select individual missions to replay. That's just, fucking hell. Really wondering about the replayability of this one.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Clipper said:

I disagree a game is at least as subjective as a film or music.

 

Film and music also have technical aspects where things might be less subjective (although that is a big subject). Quality of acting/editing composition/visual fx/sound fx/camera work - all are technical and can all be less subjective (again another BIG subject)

 

The part where you say decide if it is your sort of thing is exactly what the subjective part is and so a 9 or 10 out of 10 game isn't "great" unless you enjoy it. I didn't enjoy Uncharted - to me it is not a great game it is a dull wannabe movie that barely held my interest. Yeah the shooting works the graphics are pretty its all very pleasant but I hate the way it plays. That is not a popular opinion but it is a subjective opinion that I hold. Similarly I do not like Titanic and it is not great. It has great fx and is well made and has some competent actors but it bores me to tears.

 

Both are technically sound but that doesn't make them great it makes them competent. Reviewng that level of competency is dull and uninteresting.


I think you’re missing the point about the non-subjective bits. There’s a reason why games tend to get universal high, medium or low scores. Of course there are outliers but it’s generally quite consistent.

 

Music and films are far more subjective than games because of the format.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Strafe said:


I think you’re missing the point about the non-subjective bits. There’s a reason why games tend to get universal high, medium or low scores. Of course there are outliers but it’s generally quite consistent.

 

Music and films are far more subjective than games because of the format.

 

and I am saying that is wrong and shows that the industry is still in its infancy.  Any discussion on any game will show you  the wide variety of opinions and reviewing competency is just terrible.

 

Music and films may appear more subjective but they aren't. Big review outlets often give tentpole films good reviews regardless (with outliers) then places like here will say no the film is shit or good or whatever. The crucial difference is that any decent film discussion would rarely say "Oh well this review outlet gave it 9 so it must be good" or "They only gave xxx film 8/10 then that reviewer has been paid off" etc.

 

Games discussion is often the place where the subject turns toxic and peopel start flinging around the idea that reviews are "wrong" and reviews should be more "objective". It shows the immaturity of the media and the consumers of it.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Clipper said:

and I am saying that is wrong and shows that the industry is still in its infancy.  Any discussion on any game will show you  the wide variety of opinions and reviewing competency is just terrible.

 

Music and films may appear more subjective but they aren't. Big review outlets often give tentpole films good reviews regardless (with outliers) then places like here will say no the film is shit or good or whatever. The crucial difference is that any decent film discussion would rarely say "Oh well this review outlet gave it 9 so it must be good" or "They only gave xxx film 8/10 then that reviewer has been paid off" etc.

 

Games discussion is often the place where the subject turns toxic and peopel start flinging around the idea that reviews are "wrong" and reviews should be more "objective". It shows the immaturity of the media and the consumers of it.

 

 


Nah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.