• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Halo 5 Review Thread

Phat Michael

Banned
Aug 10, 2010
11,692
0
0
Dubai, UAE
God damn that first mission. It's so smooth and the presentation and sound are both incredible. To the people complaining about random background things in the distance, I suggest you okay the game, it really is so well put together
 

Synth

Member
Dec 4, 2005
14,000
3
1,450
38
London, UK
They do, every review site or publication uses the same scale to rate all games.

Ah sorry, I misunderstood what you were referring to. I thought this was in regards to metacritic. Yea, the individual sites would review a Miku Hatsune and Halo 5 using the same scale (be in a 5 point scale, 10 point scale, binary "yes or no" or whatever), but then the metascore is created with a dynamic mix of those scales. That's what I was getting at.
 

JayWood2010

Member
Sep 16, 2014
1,954
0
0
That is what review threads are for...

I dont really think that is the case for everyone though, specially when it comes to exclusives. It a lot of e-penis swinging, downplay, etc Its just typical posts with users who have an agenda in these type of threads. Its this way with every exclusive thread anymore, regardless the platform.
 

Munki

Member
Apr 2, 2013
570
69
490
I dont really think that is the case for everyone though, specially when it comes to exclusives. It a lot of e-penis swinging, downplay, etc in these type of threads. Its this way with every exclusive thread anymore, regardless the platform.

I give this game 10 swinging e-penis's out of 10!
 

ethomaz

is mad because DF didn't do a video on a video of a video of a video on PS5
Mar 19, 2013
42,187
44,969
1,310
39
Brazil
I dont really think that is the case for everyone though, specially when it comes to exclusives. It a lot of e-penis swinging, downplay, etc Its just typical posts with users who have an agenda in these type of threads. Its this way with every exclusive thread anymore, regardless the platform.
Reading the reviews looks like the game deserves the 8-9 it is getting... it have big flaws in campaign that holds it from a 9-10.
I see no issue in a 86 game... it is really good game... nobody need to be mad about a game getting over 80.

I think reviews threads are to discuss the pros/cons of the games... that include what it did right and its flaws.

Said that I guess most people in GAF expected a better meta for Halo 5... that is just normal and that doesn't make the game bad in any way.
 

darkinstinct

...lacks reading comprehension.
Jul 24, 2015
4,787
2,812
715
Switzerland
Well, your slide directly contradict what you're saying.

For a game with low marketing effort good reviews can increase sales almost two fold. This is a big number. If say some game is like Halo but for some reason gets no marketing push then good reviews may increase its sales from 2-4 mln to 4-8 mln.

And for a game with a big marketing push - which most 1st party exclusives would fit I think - the difference is even more dramatic, almost 4 times tops and close to +50% at the bottom. 4 times more copies sold because of good reviews - just think about it.

It's also quite interesting to see that good reviews are increasing sales more than a bigger marketing push - contrary to the general public's opinion on how a big marketing campaign can sell any shit in billions.

That last statement has no foundation whatsoever in that slide. All one can see is that better games sell more. And that higher marketing expenses can multiply sales by 2 or up to 4 times, even for bad games. The slide does not say that games sell more or less because of review scores, it just can't. That would be apples and oranges, of course the better game is gonna sell more and gonna review better. Doesn't mean that the review score led to the better sales.
 

Birgitte2004

Member
Dec 17, 2013
2,038
1
290
Couldn't agree more. Not to mention the problem of a 7 in gaming being seen as almost below average, leaving no room in the top 30% of possible scores for meaningful variation.

7 is below average, even in today's newer harsher grading scale.

Gamespot is supposedly gone "super harsh". They have 180 PS4 reviews. They have 112 Xbox One Reviews

82(~46%) of PS4 games still scored 8 or higher. Only 11 scored 4 or lower.

51(also ~46%) of Xbox One games scored 8 or higher. Only 7 scored 4 or lower.

And Gamespot, with their new harsher scale, scores lower on average than almost every other review site out there.

EDIT: Added Xbox One numbers, like I should have in the first place.
 

Hockeymac18

Member
Aug 10, 2013
1,826
0
0
SF Bay Area
7 is below average, even in today's newer harsher grading scale.

Gamespot is supposedly gone "super harsh". They have 180 PS4 reviews. They have 112 Xbox One Reviews

82(~46%) of PS4 games still scored 8 or higher. Only 11 scored 4 or lower.

51(also ~46%) of Xbox One games scored 8 or higher. Only 7 scored 4 or lower.

And Gamespot, with their new harsher scale, scores lower on average than almost every other review site out there.

EDIT: Added Xbox One numbers, like I should have in the first place.

I think "average" on most scales is around 7.5/8 (Gamespot seems to be on the lower end of that "average" range, while other outlets seem to be on the upper range). Your numbers seem to illustrate that well.
 

dr_rus

Member
May 3, 2007
10,983
0
1,350
Moscow, Russia
That last statement has no foundation whatsoever in that slide. All one can see is that better games sell more. And that higher marketing expenses can multiply sales by 2 or up to 4 times, even for bad games. The slide does not say that games sell more or less because of review scores, it just can't. That would be apples and oranges, of course the better game is gonna sell more and gonna review better. Doesn't mean that the review score led to the better sales.

So why is a better game selling more? How exactly people are finding out that it's a better game and chose to buy it? You're thinking in the opposite direction. A game is selling after the reviews are published. Good reviews result in 0.5-4x more sales than bad ones with the same marketing effort. It's not that simple of course as there's word of mouth and viral spreading of information but reviews are the starting point.
 

Synth

Member
Dec 4, 2005
14,000
3
1,450
38
London, UK
So why is a better game selling more? How exactly people are finding out that it's a better game and chose to buy it? You're thinking in the opposite direction. A game is selling after the reviews are published. Good reviews result in 0.5-4x more sales than bad ones with the same marketing effort. It's not that simple of course as there's word of mouth and viral spreading of information but reviews are the starting point.

I think you're massively underestimating the impact of the bolded here. When I think back to the games I absolutely HAD to play as a kid (Mario, Sonic, Street Fighter, DooM etc) these were all games I was convinced were something special. I had no idea what any of them reviewed like though, and I doubt many people in the mainstream did, or do today. To us something like Destiny is considered a disaster.. but do you know think any of my friends and co-workers knew that it didn't review well? (hint: nope)

You're the one working backwards here. Things that are considered good (or just fun) will see more sales. Many of these will then naturally get good reviews, because a review is just someone telling you "yea, this game is good"... much like your friend in school as a kid would. A shit game being given an artificially inflated review would probably not lead to it selling 2-4x the amount of copies, as what you're claiming would suggest. The games sell because they are good, and they review well because they are good... not the other way around.
 

dr_rus

Member
May 3, 2007
10,983
0
1,350
Moscow, Russia
I think you're massively underestimating the impact of the bolded here. When I think back to the games I absolutely HAD to play as a kid (Mario, Sonic, Street Fighter, DooM etc) these were all games I was convinced were something special. I had no idea what any of them reviewed like though, and I doubt many people in the mainstream did, or do today. To us something like Destiny is considered a disaster.. but do you know think any of my friends and co-workers knew that it didn't review well? (hint: nope)

You're the one working backwards here. Things that are considered good (or just fun) will see more sales. Many of these will then naturally get good reviews, because a review is just someone telling you "yea, this game is good"... much like your friend in school as a kid would. A shit game being given an artificially inflated review would probably not lead to it selling 2-4x the amount of copies, as what you're claiming would suggest. The games sell because they are good, and they review well because they are good... not the other way around.

Again: without the reviews no one will know if a game is good or bad. Good games do not sell because they're good, they sell because they were recognized as good by the critics and the community. You're overestimating social means of information spread. Even if I hear that some game is good I will go and check its reviews before I will buy anything. Most people just notice that some game produces good reviews / feedback and they'll snag it some time later. It doesn't matter if this were real press reviews or some guy telling how good a game is on Facebook. All this amounts to the same thing - good reviews directly affect game sales.
 

RxFiller

Neo Member
Jan 10, 2014
20
0
0
Just finished my solo legendary run. My brief thoughts are - some missions dragged on too long, especially while playing as Spartan Locke, however, the story felt it ended too soon. I wasn't very invested until the end and at that point I really wanted it to go on.
 

Synth

Member
Dec 4, 2005
14,000
3
1,450
38
London, UK
Again: without the reviews no one will know if a game is good or bad. Good games do not sell because they're good, they sell because they were recognized as good by the critics and the community. You're overestimating social means of information spread. Even if I hear that some game is good I will go and check its reviews before I will buy anything. Most people just notice that some game produces good reviews / feedback and they'll snag it some time later. It doesn't matter if this were real press reviews or some guy telling how good a game is on Facebook. All this amounts to the same thing - good reviews directly affect game sales.

They'll effect them yes, but they're not the cause of them, and certainly not to the tune of 2-4x the sales, unless the game has no marketing budget at all. People don't need reviews to know if a game is good... hell, you don't even know if a game is good for you even with reviews. You look up reviews for something when recommended? Cool. Almost nobody I know does, so now what?

Destiny sold as well as it could hope to, even with middling reviews. CoD kept growing in sales even as it declined in reviews. Halo 4 outsold nearly all other Halos despite drastically lower reviews. Watch Dogs murdered nearly everything in sales last year regardless of reviews. Bayonetta 2 still sold like shit. It's really not as strong a factor as you're claiming.

And I can't believe you're actually claiming that nobody would know how good/bad something is without professional reviews... like they're the only people that are authorised to state "hmm yea.. I like this". Even stuff which critics absolutely fucking despise will do great if others tend to like it regardless (Transformers...).
 

dr_rus

Member
May 3, 2007
10,983
0
1,350
Moscow, Russia
They'll effect them yes, but they're not the cause of them, and certainly not to the tune of 2-4x the sales, unless the game has no marketing budget at all. People don't need reviews to know if a game is good... hell, you don't even know if a game is good for you even with reviews. You look up reviews for something when recommended? Cool. Almost nobody I know does, so now what?

Destiny sold as well as it could hope to, even with middling reviews. CoD kept growing in sales even as it declined in reviews. Halo 4 outsold nearly all other Halos despite drastically lower reviews. Watch Dogs murdered nearly everything in sales last year regardless of reviews. Bayonetta 2 still sold like shit. It's really not as strong a factor as you're claiming.

And I can't believe you're actually claiming that nobody would know how good/bad something is without professional reviews... like they're the only people that are authorised to state "hmm yea.. I like this". Even stuff which critics absolutely fucking despise will do great if others tend to like it regardless (Transformers...).

The effect of a bigger marketing budget is shown in the slide as well. It is smaller than the effect of positive reviews.
 

hamster3 3

Member
Sep 7, 2014
217
22
450
I was worries about the game being too short after reading this thread but I just finished it on Heroic in 8:23:56. 8-10 hours is the perfect time for me when it's not an open world game.

My only criticism is the pointless missions that could have been added to the start or end of another chapter. I finished chapter 11 in 2mins 17secs.

It's a great game but it's not perfect. Its Metacritc score seems spot on to me.
 

Synth

Member
Dec 4, 2005
14,000
3
1,450
38
London, UK
The effect of a bigger marketing budget is shown in the slide as well. It is smaller than the effect of positive reviews.

The slide is showing correlation. It both can't show an alternate universe where the same exact game gets lower scores, and it can't disprove that games sell better for being liked, rather than being reviewed well. The two are just likely to occur at the same time because both generally happen if a game is fun... however it's a lot easier to show examples of bad games selling well regardless (and good games not selling regardless), than good game that wouldn't have sold if reviewers disagreed.
 

Trup1aya

Member
Jan 18, 2015
8,853
1
0
The effect of a bigger marketing budget is shown in the slide as well. It is smaller than the effect of positive reviews.

Fuck that slide. Looks at the sales of Destiny, Call of Duty, Madden, Assassins Creed, Watch Dogs, Batman Arkham Knight etc...

Witness as middling reviews are over powered by strong marketing and brand recognition. Also consumers don't always agree w/ reviewers, or place the same importants on a games components.

There are more factors that determine whether or not people will buy a game than marketing budget and average review scores. Way to many factors to assume coorellation infers causation.
 

VanCityGamer

Member
Jan 11, 2013
3,044
4
595
Seems like the game is reviewing pretty well from the 'major' sites. 9's from IGN and gametrailers, I think the metacritic score isn't a huge deal, when the dust settles I'm guessing the meta score will hover around 88-89.

It won't go that high. Literally no chance it goes to 89. 88 would be a shock too. The major/most heavily weighted review outlets are all in. And the overall score generally goes down if anything after that/over time. Very rare for scores to go up after the initial large wave of reviews. My money is on either staying at 86 or falling back down to 85.
 

Iced Arcade

Member
Oct 3, 2013
3,845
4,909
925
Canada eh
Was almost worried but after playing it I can honestly say its definitely an amazing game.

Straining my eyes trying to find some of the things DF and people keep botching about though.
 

RichiRamjag

Member
Nov 6, 2014
6,910
0
0
Was almost worried but after playing it I can honestly say its definitely an amazing game.

Straining my eyes trying to find some of the things DF and people keep botching about though.

Not sure why you'd need to strain, most of it was self-explanatory and easy to find if you look for it. If you're just enjoying the game and running through at a normal pace, then you'll most likely never notice half of that.
 

Ol No Bones

Banned
Jan 8, 2013
6,733
1
0
Played the game and loved it. Multiplayer and Campaign. Some of the review criticisms just weren't my experience. Either way, try the game.
 

VinFTW

Member
Jul 19, 2014
5,271
2
0
Buck has some pretty hilarious moments in halo 5.

Not sure I agree completely but I can see how the Spartans could have been fleshed out much more.
 

Mass Appeal

Member
Nov 4, 2014
1,800
0
0
Southern California
I have played arena and war zone for 3 days now and I will say this is one of the best playing halos in terms of multiplayer. I have played CE - Halo 4 and I would put halo 5 multilplayer up their with CE, halo 2 and 3.
 

Trup1aya

Member
Jan 18, 2015
8,853
1
0
Just compare it to their Killzone reviews, and it tells you everything you need it know.

Oh I see, Killzone: shadow fall is a much better game than Halo 5. H5 is borderline garbage tier, worse than Guitar Hero live, but even with Murdered Soul Suspect.
 

Pez

Member
Jun 3, 2013
788
0
0
Damn. That's an overly scathing review.. I get it if you don't like the story, But do you really feel like overall the game is worse than average? I'm not buying it.

I'm a big Halo fan (bought an Xbox One for this franchise) and I feel the review hits the nail on the head when it comes to MP.

Warzone needs a serious rethink.

Also, as dude above stated, 6/10 is above average.
 

Surface of Me

I'm not an NPC. And neither are we.
Oct 24, 2011
13,478
50
725
The deep south.
I honestly cant agree with reviews complaining about the story. You're playing a Halo game, a series known for not having great in game narratives. I really do feel this is the best story Halo has had in game, nudging ahead of Halo 2. Then again, Ive never seen story as a integral part of most of the games I play, and it very rarely ever detracts if the actual gameplay experience is up to par, which Halo 5 is in spades.
 

Trup1aya

Member
Jan 18, 2015
8,853
1
0
I'm a big Halo fan (bought an Xbox One for this franchise) and I feel the review hits the nail on the head when it comes to MP.

Warzone needs a serious rethink.

Also, as dude above stated, 6/10 is above average.

On what scale is 5 and average?

Also his impressions on Warzone differ wildly from the general consensus... Casuals and core players alike seem to be unable to get enough of it, largely DUE to the Req system.
 

munroe

Member
May 29, 2012
1,178
8
410
I'm enjoying the game, only played a handful of missions, mainly playing warzone, as much as I like the warzone mode, I feel it could be improved in a number of ways.

Warzone assault: When I'm attacking it always seems too easy to capture bases, maybe if the defending team had stationary turrets on the bases, it would spice things up a bit.

Warzone: Randomise the AI drops, make the AI a more threatening force on the map, have them essentially as a third team fighting for the map. More maps!
 

EGM1966

Member
Aug 5, 2011
10,350
0
0
UK
It must be a very bad time for video games if we consider 5/10 to be average
Empirically 5/10 is average.

This is why numbered scores are rubbish. People shouldn't be considering what these scales are that's empirical.

6/10 does seem harsh for what I've played of H5 though but that's s different point.
 

leeh

Member
Dec 30, 2014
4,268
0
0
Oh I see, Killzone: shadow fall is a much better game than Halo 5. H5 is borderline garbage tier, worse than Guitar Hero live, but even with Murdered Soul Suspect.
Review scores are really messed up these days. I feel like some sites purposely be controversial so they get hits.