Is Halo 4 really a 5.5/10 Game?

Is Halo 4 really a 5.5/10 Game?


If you’re one of those gamers who frequently visit the many online forums for video games, then surely you’ve spent quite a bit of time reading reviews of video games before you went out and spend your hard earned cash. And depending on how long you’ve been doing this, you’ve probably begun to notice a worrying trend with reviews becoming less and less trustworthy. Nowadays reviews seem to either be trying to persuade you that a particular game is near perfect or is perfect, or that it’s totally broken.

But the reality is that the majority of the games we’ve played this generation are nowhere near perfect, and far from broken and unplayable like some reviews would have you believe. Especially for this generation of consoles, where the focus of games have shifted more towards beautiful graphics and (extravagant) eye-catching set pieces with less emphasis on story and character development. The truth of the matter is that most of the games we play nowadays are merely carbon copies of each other with slight variations. Games that were traditionally slower in pace have willingly given up their core mechanics (and their fanbase) in favor of what is now lighting up the sales charts. Now, we do know that all companies are looking to turn in profits; afterall, that is what pays their bills and keep food on their family’s tables, but there is also something else at play here.

It is common knowledge that as of late, the influx of 9/10 and perfect scores for games have been at an all time high. Never before have so many different games, all mostly from the same genre, scored so well critically. Now this could be due to several factors as we’ve read in an interview with Kotaku, an anonymous publisher admitted the following:

” Reviews only have an impact if they’re 90+, and then the impact is huge.

We don’t take steps to get good reviews, we take steps to make good games. Then we invite reviewers to fancy promotional events to warm them up on the game before they play it on their own.

I think of our launch parties as warm-up comedians for the main act. Warm-up comedians are there to get you laughing and excited, so when the star performer walks onstage, you’re primed and ready to enjoy the set. Our promo events are the same way. We bring out media to a fancy location, wine and dine them, show them the best parts of our game, and generally build anticipation for release. The theory is that, once they get the game and play it privately, they already have a positive association with the game, which may influence their final score.”

Halo 4

Now clearly this is cause for concern as it demonstrates foul play and forces us to question the legitimacy of reviews and their purpose in this industry. Are reviews just another means of marketing games? In which case they only serve publishers and developers.
Or are reviews a public service? If so, the primary focus should be an accurate description of a product, free of spoilers and bias, which in turn serves the readers, and helps them make informed decisions.

Basically if after reading a review I do purchase that game, then the only surprises should really be the story and some gameplay elements directly tied to it. Besides that, everything else should be as stated in the review.  Anything that has been Exaggerated or undermined and that review is already on thin ice because that’s where double standards creep in.

As stated by the anonymous Publisher interviewed by Kotaku, we know that 90% plus review scores have a huge impact on games and how successful they are financially. So from knowing this, we can safely come to the conclusion that an overwhelmingly negative review will have an equally negative impact on a game, and that brings me to my next point.

Halo 4 Gameplay

When any reviewer decides to award a game a score of 5/10 or less, they’ve actually taken it upon themselves to prove, with facts, to their audience exactly why such a game should be avoided at all cost. Because let’s be honest, no one walks into a store to pick up a game that is essentially broken and unplayable, and that is exactly what such a review score implies.  For example, Game Arena awarded Halo 4 a 5.5 out of 10 and concluded the following:

“Yet where I praise the game – for doing things Halo has always done – don’t make the mistake of thinking I’m praising it for being like Halo. Those things I praise – the gorgeous Pelican mission, for example – are ‘Halo elements’ because the first game delivered missions of that grandeur, and they are now universally recognised as excellent elements to have in a game. The praise isn’t for being like Halo – it’s for featuring parts of a good game. Similarly, when I criticise the multiplayer for moving away from the Halo model it’s not for the movement, but more that it copies the steps of other games (which do it better, and are now abandoning that dance for something greater.)

The greatest praise and strongest criticism I can level at Halo 4 is that it sure is Halo”

Now here’s what the same writer from Game Arena had to say about Call of Duty: Black Ops which he awarded a 9/10.

“The polish is probably lacking because of all the other stuff Treyarch packed into the game. Zombies. Dead Ops. Zork. All readily available (once you know how) additions to the Black Ops experience. Keyboards are enabled so you can tool around in the console of the game (and actually play Zork).”

“Call of Duty: Black Ops isn’t just a superbly crafted multiplayer game, or a well-written story with a good deal more subtlety than any post Modern Warfare COD combined. It’s a fun and well made coop SmashTV clone. It’s a wave based coop zombie shooter with stacks of B grade charm. It’s brand new way to experience multiplayer by putting your hard earned credits on the line. Oh and it’s got region based matchmaking on consoles and dedicated servers on PC. Get Call of Duty: Black Ops. It’s more than worth it. 

Disclosure: Activision flew GameArena to LA to play Call of Duty: Black Ops at a Review Event.”

CoD Black Ops

If it seems like I am putting this guy on the spot then rest assured and know that this is far from my intentions. I don’t know the reviewer, the only reason his review is being talked about is because I think it represents a bigger problem that is all too common in games journalism. Now you’re free to arrive to your own conclusions about why one game is getting praised for a new take on multiplayer while the other game is being criticized for the exact same reason.  But to me it does seem a bit unfair and makes me question both reviews and their legitimacy.

Is Halo 4 a non-polished, bug-infested mess that is almost unplayable and a 5.5 out of 10 game? Of course not, and it is also not the perfect 10 out 10 game that other reviews would have you believe either.  So why are reviews so all over the map? Why is it that there seems to be only 3 categories to rate a game? Either a game is horrible, or it’s Meh, or THIS IS THE BEST GAME EVER, OMG!

Surely Halo 4 is a big enough title that such a score will mean very little if anything at all to most fans new and old.  But what it does do instead is discredit any real and substantiated criticism that the review might have been trying to address since the overall score and tone of the review failed to accurately represent the game.

But the biggest questions still remains unanswered as no one seems to really know how to fix this mess and will it ever be fixed?

15 Comments
  1. Date: November 6, 2012
    Author: pedro
    brilliantly put.. [Reply]
  2. Date: November 6, 2012
    Author: random.idiot
    To be honest, I wouldn't mind reading a paid for review. <b>As long as the writer disclose the fact, or their bias, <i>as the beginning of the review</i></b>! There a lot of unwarranted hate toward game -or console- for no other reason than the publisher that published it. Or worse, the fact that the reviewer is a fan of a competing game and therefore think it is alright to be unreasonably hard on the current game. If the reviewer is biased then I am fine with, but a discloser should be there at the <b>beginning</b> or the article and not as a footnote (if at all!). [Reply]
    • Date: November 6, 2012
      Author: random.idiot
      sorry, I should have proof read my post. Please forgive the EngRish [Reply]
  3. Date: November 6, 2012
    Author: Hardy
    How the hell does a 5.5 mean that the game is "essentially broken and unplayable"? It's a rating system from 0 to 10. Logically this would seem to mean that 0 is broken and unplayable and as the score increases, so does the quality of the game. Therefore 5 (or in this case 5.5) would indicate that the game is okay, not terrible but also not amazing. You talk about problems in games journalism, i think the biggest problem is when the scale used for 90% of games reviews seem to be from 7-10. GameArena use the 0-10 rating as it logically should be used, everyone else seems to be doing it wrong... [Reply]
    • Date: November 11, 2012
      Author: Chris
      I think the writer is making the right point but the wrong way. A 5.5 game in no way means it is "broken and unplayable", but it does essentially make the game "unbuyable" on release date. Nobody buys a 5.5 game at full whack, there's an interesting correlation between review score, game price and game sales that could have been made. That would be a great article to read. [Reply]
  4. Date: November 6, 2012
    Author: jivex5k
    The only review site I really trust any more is Penny Arcade, and they don't even focus on reviewing games. [Reply]
  5. Date: November 6, 2012
    Author: Italo Tabosa
    I think u guys r mad. [Reply]
  6. Date: November 6, 2012
    Author: Dirk
    The comments made by the 5.5/10 reviewer for Halo 4 makes no sense to me. He is giving it a bad score not because its a bad game, but because its derivative? Yet he castigates COD because its derivative of itself? If he/she explains the graphics, gameplay, etc. are bad then explains why they are bad in there opinion I can accept that review even if I don't agree with it. There seems to be no objective reason why Halo 4 is rated so poorly. [Reply]
    • Date: November 6, 2012
      Author: siesel
      Thanks for leaving your thoughts Dirk, and I agree with you as I think his review failed to show why the game scored so low. [Reply]
  7. Date: November 6, 2012
    Author: Agent75
    Can't say I'm a maths expert, but when it comes to reviews, you can't really trust any of them, more so from official magazines and websites. But no game can ever be perfect, so 10 out of 10, 5 stars or 100% just doesn't exist. 5 out of 5 or 50% is an average score, there's no argument with that. How different does Halo 4 play to the games before or even every other shooter there's been? It's the same old each time. A game getting an average score isn't a bad thing. [Reply]
  8. Date: November 6, 2012
    Author: larry
    Butthurt gay box 360 fanboy..motherfucker halo franchise is dead.87 at meta and going down further LOL [Reply]
  9. Date: November 6, 2012
    Author: otherZinc
    Is Halo 4 a 5.5 game? I'd say yes, Halo 4 is undoubtedly the worst pile of crap i've played all year and is an utter embarassment to the franchise, so if this game was being judged against previous entries like Halo 1 and 3 then yes, a 5.5 seems reasonable, because that's how garbage it was compared to it's predecessors. Honestly the Halo franchise has bombed ever since 3, ODST and Wars were tacky jokes and Reach had a story more boring than Quantum Theory. In a market where games like Call Of Duty, Killzone and Battlefield exist, Halo really isn't worth a damn to real gamers anymore. Also, the multiplayer is a laggy, broken pile of junk. [Reply]
  10. Date: November 6, 2012
    Author: MattAndre
    Let's make one thing clear first up, Halo 4's multiplayer is nothing new. It doesn't innovate. Instead of being "Halo" it is literally "CoD in Space".. And people are suddenly okay with that? There is a MAJOR issue with games journalism and the way games publishers "butter up" reviewers in an effort to get high reviews and hype. It's bullshit. It seems like the days when you just went to a damn store and bought a game you wanted (which was complete, btw, not littered with content that should be on the disc but is preorder content and "already announced future DLC"). There is a problem in this industry, and people need to judge games better. Halo 4 has done literally nothing NEW. It's trying to undo Bungie's trilogy, basing the game on the more recent, shitty Karen Traviss books. It's simply "Halo" on the cover in disguise. Why even revive Master Chief? That's a cop-out. That whole Spartan Ops thing? The NEW Spartan squad? Why wasn't the campaign, etc about them!? Being a new concept into it, instead of reviving old characters all the time! [Reply]
    • Date: November 8, 2012
      Author: Stigmaphobia
      And @Otherzinc Halo 4's multiplayer may have taken aspects out of CoD style shooters, but it plays nothing like CoD. Name me one successful franchise that throws out the formula for it's predecessors with each installment, and receives a positive reaction from it's fans. Square Enix tried with FFXIII and look how that turned out. Here's the thing; you can't eliminate bias. Maybe if they kept reviewers in a glass cube devoid of contact with the outside world and forced them to spend all of their time playing every video game out there, then maybe, just maybe you'd lose reviewer bias, but honestly even that's a long shot. Plus, the effects of this "buttering up" that's happening are kind of exaggerated. For example; if a reviewer for Sonic 06 (which is a notoriously unfinished game) was treated to some fancy traveling conditions and a nice steak dinner he'd pick up the controller, keep an uneasy smile, shake his head on the way back, and still think it's a piece of trash at the end of the day. The only effect this has is turning an 8.8 into a 9.8. And all that does is convince people wavering on whether they're going to get it or not to buy it. You can compare Halo 4 to anything you want. You can decide the Multiplayer is trash because it has sprint and perks like CoD. You can disagree with the direction they've taken the story. You're not wrong, just don't think your opinion has any credibility, because Halo 4 excels at absolutely everything it sets out to do. The innovation is in raising the standard for effort and polish put into Videogames. This is what warrants the high scores. Plus I haven't gotten any lag in Multiplayer. Go upgrade your connection. [Reply]
  11. Date: November 11, 2012
    Author: theone
    freedom is the key, if you dont like the game, dont go sh*t your pants so hard, play some cod and do whatever you mindless drones want to do. The halo franchise has come about because there are people who enjoy a quirky, sinister and epic plotline to an fps which may include aliens and supersoldiers, it really isnt that complicated, halo 4 is the product of diehard fans and producers alike of a much loved game. let it be and let it go. [Reply]
Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: