I was surprised to not see this posted within the few pages so I’ll just throw this all together …
GameSpot -9.0
IGN -9.8
Machinima -10/10
Joystiq- 5/5
G4- 4.5/5
Eurogamer- 8/10
Destructoid- 10/10
Enjoy the read(s)!
So, what do you guys think about this? Made me super excited for the game, that’s for sure!
I can’t wait for Halo 4
Also some more scores
Joystiq- 5/5
G4- 4.5/5
Eurogamer- 8/10
Destructoid- 10/10
It’s all well and good but no reviewer is qualified to comment on what I’m most interested in, which is the answer to “How good is Halo 4 for competitive play? Does it return to Halo 2/3 form or continue the descent in quality begun with Reach?”
Reviewers aren’t skilled enough to comment on those things and haven’t had nearly enough time with the game to make an informed judgment even if they were.
> It’s all well and good but no reviewer is qualified to comment on what I’m most interested in, which is the answer to “How good is Halo 4 for competitive play? Does it return to Halo 2/3 form or continue the descent in quality begun with Reach?”
>
> Reviewers aren’t skilled enough to comment on those things and haven’t had nearly enough time with the game to make an informed judgment even if they were.
As true as this is, I like seeing the games I love reviewed well. It gets me more stocked for the game.
Just so you know, you got your IGN and GameSpot links mixed up.
Ign is not worthy of giving that low of a score…9.0? Pssh this game is a solid 10/10 just by looking at it. Most of the stuff tey complained about was stupid crap lol
Don’t forget GameInformer!
Seeing all these good reviews is getting me more and more excited…and making the last few days much longer than they need to be. 
IGN actually gave the game 98/100.
> It’s all well and good but no reviewer is qualified to comment on what I’m most interested in, which is the answer to “How good is Halo 4 for competitive play? Does it return to Halo 2/3 form or continue the descent in quality begun with Reach?”
>
> Reviewers aren’t skilled enough to comment on those things and haven’t had nearly enough time with the game to make an informed judgment even if they were.
Once you read like 3 reviews, you’ll notice that they’re all structured the same. I didn’t like any of the reviews because they just glossed over everything and didn’t go into much detail or left out things in general. I’m getting the game regardless but it sucks to have to hunt around for information.
> Ign is not worthy of giving that low of a score…9.0? Pssh this game is a solid 10/10 just by looking at it. Most of the stuff tey complained about was stupid crap lol
You can’t say it’s worth a 10/10 just by looking at it, you don’t even own the game…
I’m fed up of people -Yoinking!- about low scores when they haven’t even played the game yet.
Eurogamer can go eat a -Yoinking!- cookie! Oh you expecting another word? No no.
> Ign is not worthy of giving that low of a score…9.0? Pssh this game is a solid 10/10 just by looking at it. Most of the stuff tey complained about was stupid crap lol
They gave it a 9.8/10… that’s literally .2 away from being a perfect score…
I can’t believe people are bringing it down for Spartan ops not having replay ability.
It works like a TV show it’s not supposed to, you don’t replay the episode you just watched you wait for the next episode to come out. That’s how tv seasons work.
Also it does have replay ability, there are Weekly and daily challenges for Spartan ops as well as commendations for it. I know 10/10’s are rare and very few games deserve them but it was marked down for a few silly reasons, it’s like they just had to make excuses to make it less than a 10
Ign’s Review was horrible but machinima and Gamespot reviews were good they actually gave much more details about what they thought they really liked in mostly:
Ign = Dumb review by far (They didn’t even talk about forge features)
Machinima = Focus a lot on story related review
Gamespot = Focus a lot on multiplayer review