The people known for saying nothing negative regardless of how bad is having to sit us down to explain how bad it is.
Is this the lowest point? The darkest hour? Is it officially the worst when IGN is the voice of reason? What’s next, will Buzzfeed come chime in too?
I know people hate on Reach and 4 but never have I seen, this.
> 2535440563759444;1:
> The people known for saying nothing negative regardless of how bad is having to sit us down to explain how bad it is.
>
> Is this the lowest point? The darkest hour? Is it officially the worst when IGN is the voice of reason? What’s next, will Buzzfeed come chime in too?
>
> I know people hate on Reach and 4 but never have I seen, this.
What are you talking about, could you provide a link or URL?
> 2533274811336073;2:
> > 2535440563759444;1:
> > The people known for saying nothing negative regardless of how bad is having to sit us down to explain how bad it is.
> >
> > Is this the lowest point? The darkest hour? Is it officially the worst when IGN is the voice of reason? What’s next, will Buzzfeed come chime in too?
> >
> > I know people hate on Reach and 4 but never have I seen, this.
>
> What are you talking about, could you provide a link or URL?
IGN made a video talking about how 343i flubbed with Halo 5G and how confusing their recent statement was and how it kind of points the campaigns failure at the fans despite 343i setting up the story and shooting it down on their own.
I’ll try to find the video but be aware that IGN’s video library is massive,. Serous,y I think they should apply the dewy decimal system to their YouTube channel.
Lol, how is it the fans fault unless I’m interpreting your post wrong?
> 2727626560040591;4:
> Lol, how is it the fans fault unless I’m interpreting your post wrong?
I think you are, I’m not blaming anyone, I’m just shocked that IGN has to come out and explain to 343i that Halo 5 isn’t what they hyped it up to be.
Along with that, they also talk about how they shouldn’t passive-aggressively blame it’s failure on the community. If you excuse me, I’ve got to find that video, seriously those guys at IGN need some form of labeling if they’re going to have 10 channels and release a video a day.
Nah, I wasn’t saying you were blaming the fans. I just didn’t see how IGN could come to that conclusion, but your last post explained it better.
> 2727626560040591;4:
> Lol, how is it the fans fault unless I’m interpreting your post wrong?
They (IGN) probably interpreted the “we’re going to make a simpler story” statement from 343i as “our fans are either being stubborn or are incapable and wont follow the expanded media”.
> 2727626560040591;4:
> Lol, how is it the fans fault unless I’m interpreting your post wrong?
343i thought it was the lack of Master Chief that made fans dislike the campaign. Whereas in reality it was the awful character development, writing, and story in general. So instead of addressing those points, 343i is just adding more Master Chief this time.
(They could actually be trying to fix those other points, but so far they have only admitted that the campaign’s downfall was due to the lack of Chief)
Ign to me is a joke…actual writers are so biased and are afraid to heavily criticize
> 2533274830166194;9:
> Ign to me is a joke…actual writers are so biased and are afraid to heavily criticize
Agreed!! I used to go there but not for a long time now, and I’m not ever going back either. I hate there set up, there constant ads, constant autoplay on videos and they’re constantly spoiling video game and movie plots too. I could go on and on… But I won’t lol Just a terrible site!
<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not post inappropriate content.</mark>
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
> 2535440563759444;1:
> The people known for saying nothing negative regardless of how bad is having to sit us down to explain how bad it is.
>
> Is this the lowest point? The darkest hour? Is it officially the worst when IGN is the voice of reason? What’s next, will Buzzfeed come chime in too?
>
> I know people hate on Reach and 4 but never have I seen, this.
Buzzfeed chimes in and Hillary Clinton and a bunch of SJW’s take over Halo…
> 2533274830166194;9:
> Ign to me is a joke…actual writers are so biased and are afraid to heavily criticize
I think that’s the point the OP is making. IGN going out of there way to say “Hey, this is bad.” certainly means that thing is bad since their group is known for throwing out 10/10 for games that are barely able to work on release.
So I got to agree with the OP, this does seem like Halo’s darkest hour or at the very least extremely meme worthy.
“The Day IGN Stood Still.”
> 2533274976607648;8:
> > 2727626560040591;4:
> > Lol, how is it the fans fault unless I’m interpreting your post wrong?
>
> 343i thought it was the lack of Master Chief that made fans dislike the campaign. Whereas in reality it was the awful character development, writing, and story in general. So instead of addressing those points, 343i is just adding more Master Chief this time.
>
> (They could actually be trying to fix those other points, but so far they have only admitted that the campaign’s downfall was due to the lack of Chief)
Agreed. As I’ve said in other threads, even if they add more Chief if the writing is still bad then the next game will be bad, regardless of how much he’s in it.
> 2533274830166194;9:
> Ign to me is a joke…actual writers are so biased and are afraid to heavily criticize
IGN can’t even judge a Kirby game properly for what it is. IGN needs to either hire new reviewers or stop reviewing all together.
Halo 5 had its downfalls, but that was NOTHING compared to the failed launch of MCC and the lack of mutiplayer balance in halo 4.
Who cares that IGN is baffled. Some people didn’t like the non-chief heavy story line, others enjoys getting deeper into the halo story line. Personally, I loved the blue team branch of the game, especially Nathan Fillion. I play multiplayer more than campaign so take what I say with a grain of salt.
It’s crazy, I feel like every company like that recent has some -Yoink- to say about Halo. hahah IGN, who cares? By the sounds of it, it’s a pretty recent video, lol it’s taken them over a year to give their honest opinion. I bet you can find a list of “Halo 5 is the best thing ever” from the same presenters if you find a video from around H5s launch date. Right now, it’s cool to bash Halo. Don’t get me wrong, I bash Halo more than anyone I know, but I feel like everyone at IGN just say what they think people want to hear
> 2533274976607648;8:
> > 2727626560040591;4:
> > Lol, how is it the fans fault unless I’m interpreting your post wrong?
>
> 343i thought it was the lack of Master Chief that made fans dislike the campaign. Whereas in reality it was the awful character development, writing, and story in general. So instead of addressing those points, 343i is just adding more Master Chief this time.
>
> (They could actually be trying to fix those other points, but so far they have only admitted that the campaign’s downfall was due to the lack of Chief)
Yes this. To further explain, Ill add this.
Halo 4-Terrible Story TELLING, Awesome story (plost points, foundation). Problem? Yes, because these amazing story points were not explained in game. To use an analogy, Imagine Halo 2, but without the cutscenes of arbiter in the council, arbiter being punished, then arbiter getting the title of arbiter. Then you play as him. That’s essentially what Halo 4 was. Even people who did read the EU were confused (chiefs “evolution” part). Further, if my memory is correct, the humans already earned the mantle. Secondly, why does the didact still hate humans? He should by now know that the human-forerunner war was the forerunners fault, they thought humanity was attacking them, when it was humanity running away from the flood with a cure! Surely he would know this?? Finally, horrible level design.
Halo 5-Ignored/quickly disposed of Halo 4’s good points. Blue team generated hype pre launch…but their execution was horrible. There was no dynamic. The only people who care about blue team are those who read the books. Add to this very similar issues to halo 4. Level design was an improvement, sanghelios was excellent if a little too linear.
Now, in closing, once again, ill contrast to Halo 2. Why always Halo 2? Well simple, because Halo 2 basically explained the dynamic between covenant, their hierachy, motivations (why they want to use Halo), the great schism etc. Now, imagine if Halo 5, instead of playing as spartan locke, you played as a Storm faction Elite on the Kraken. This would only be for 2-3 levels, only enough to explain Storms motivation, and how their structure changed after the death of Jul Mdama. It would also show the differences between them, and the “old” covenant. Spartan ops went into this somewhat into Halo 4 (I loved the spartan ops story, gameplay was horrid, palmer was horrid too) however it was not enough.
Hopefully this helps those who are confused on the matter. The more who understand, the better and more succinct the feedback response would be if 343 ever does surveys or whatever to get feedback on this.
IGN as we are all aware of take bribes in order to dish out their ‘not - biased’ review. I don’t listen to a word they say with their mouth filled with money.
I trust my instinct. Not a games company with an agenda to make as much money as possible.
IGN critique mostly focused on Locke and the “narrative issues” that apparently exist from Chief having went awol. Which I thought was funny because priorities. They also seemed to not realise that Cortana has taken over the galaxy and doesn’t want to kill everyone. You can’t rule dead people. In fact they actually suggest it’s a neat idea making Cortana the villain. So it’s not even a real criticism since everyone knows that Cortana being villain was going to be the main deal in Halo 6; not Locke vs Chief.
So in a round about way they are actually being quite positive if not manipulative.