Games TM issue 88 scores

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **HSH28** » Wed Sep 30, 2009 4:10 pm

Fargo wrote:
TravelJug wrote:I honestly don't get why you all cream over ODST. It and the Halo series in general are distinctly average.

Agreed, well apart from the first game and the multiplayer in the second

ODST is close in quality to the original...I'm not one of the ones that thinks its better, but it is pretty damn close.

Its easily a 9.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Poncho** » Wed Sep 30, 2009 4:11 pm

ODST is nowhere near the quality of Combat Evolved - nowhere near. That said, ODST is excellent and probably the best attempt since CE.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **HSH28** » Wed Sep 30, 2009 4:17 pm

Poncho wrote:ODST is nowhere near the quality of Combat Evolved - nowhere near. That said, ODST is excellent and probably the best attempt since CE.

Really though? Whats wrong with it?

Its got a more advanced design than the original, its probably more atmospheric, it doesn't have a gooseberry fool level in it, it doesn't have the introduction of gooseberry fool enemies in it, in terms of how it plays its pretty similar...I fail to see where the quality of the game suffers signifcantly in comparison to the original. Perhaps it doesn't quite have the standout level design of a few of the originals levels, but its not that far behind in terms of overall level design quality throughout the whole game, I'd say.

It isn't as big as the original and it doesn't have the impact of the original...but those are seperate issues.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Poncho** » Wed Sep 30, 2009 4:25 pm

HSH28 wrote:
Poncho wrote:ODST is nowhere near the quality of Combat Evolved - nowhere near. That said, ODST is excellent and probably the best attempt since CE.

Really though? Whats wrong with it?

Uh, where did I say there was anything wrong with ODST? In fact, I believe I called it excellent.

Poncho wrote:
HSH28 wrote:
Poncho wrote:ODST is nowhere near the quality of Combat Evolved - nowhere near. That said, ODST is excellent and probably the best attempt since CE.

Really though? Whats wrong with it?

Uh, where did I say there was anything wrong with ODST? In fact, I believe I called it excellent.

Well, you did say it was 'nowhere near the quality', which implies that it's definitely weaker in certain areas. So to approach H's post with a different tone of voice...

HSH28 wrote:Oho! You think it's excellent but nowhere near CE? Might I possibly trouble you to explain your reasoning behind that line of thought, good fellow?

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Carlos** » Wed Sep 30, 2009 4:56 pm

ODST doesnt deserve a 7 for being rubbish, on the contrary it plays rather well. Nope, ODST deserves marking down for value. 4 hours + Halo 3 multiplayer + Firefight do not a full game make.

If it was £25 it would deserve an 8/9. At £50 it deserves a 7.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by KK » Wed Sep 30, 2009 4:58 pm

For what its worth, GamesRadar (US) also gave ODST a 7 so it's not like GamesTM have gone insane.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Poncho** » Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:01 pm

Carlos wrote:ODST deserves marking down for value. 4 hours + Halo 3 multiplayer + Firefight do not a full game make.

If it was £25 it would deserve an 8/9. At £50 it deserves a 7.

Where are you getting 4 hours from? Where are you getting £50 from? Are you just being a complete tool for the sake of it? Did you not bother to check back in the EDGE thread when a couple of people picked up on your misinformed 'opinion'.

Jesus wept.

Edit: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12985&start=40

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **HSH28** » Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:09 pm

On Heroic its an 8 hour game...some will take less time and some more, but on average I'd guess 8 hours is about right to complete the game (this time includes repeating any sections you might get stuck on, which shouldn't be all that many, but for most there will be some, but does not include searching out all the Audio logs).

If you've got any problem with that sort of time frame for the main campaign of a full price (whatever that might be) game, then you've got a problem with a hell of a lot of games.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Rik** » Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:12 pm

Nope, ODST deserves marking down for value. 4 hours + Halo 3 multiplayer + Firefight do not a full game make.

It isn't four hours long, there are probably a hundred hours of play in Halo 3 multiplayer and Firefight so for the £30 I paid it is in fact incredible value for money, have you even played the game?

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Pancake** » Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:16 pm

Rik wrote:
Nope, ODST deserves marking down for value. 4 hours + Halo 3 multiplayer + Firefight do not a full game make.

It isn't four hours long, there are probably a hundred hours of play in Halo 3 multiplayer and Firefight so for the £30 I paid it is in fact incredible value for money, have you even played the game?

Shouldn't really count that as a bonus for ODST, assuming the multiplayer is exactly the same as Halo 3's. Firefight, sure.

In fairness to Carlos, the Halo 3 multiplayer doesn't really count for the vast majority of ODST's buyers.

But then his post is otherwise completely spacktarded.

As you were, then.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Rik** » Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:27 pm

In fairness to Carlos, the Halo 3 multiplayer doesn't really count for the vast majority of ODST's buyers.

It isn't just Halo 3 multiplayer though, it's Halo 3 multiplayer plus all the download content, none of which I had and that costs money off XBL.

assuming the multiplayer is exactly the same as Halo 3's.

Which disc wise, it isn't.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **chalkitdown** » Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:30 pm

Halo is gooseberry fool.

Something Fishy

chalkitdown wrote:Halo is ****.

well hello Captain wrong pants.

Rik wrote:It isn't just Halo 3 multiplayer though, it's Halo 3 multiplayer plus all the download content, none of which I had and that costs money off XBL.

True, but in that case, you can only really count the DLC. If that's substantial enough to make a big difference to the online game then fair enough.

I still think it'd have been best off as premium DLC. Lost/Ballad-type price point would have seen across-the-board 9s and 10s.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **HSH28** » Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:34 pm

Rik wrote:
In fairness to Carlos, the Halo 3 multiplayer doesn't really count for the vast majority of ODST's buyers.

It isn't just Halo 3 multiplayer though, it's Halo 3 multiplayer plus all the download content, none of which I had and that costs money off XBL.

Even if you had all that was available its still 3 new maps, which is 800? MS points, and the value of not having to store all this crap on you HDD.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **HSH28** » Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:40 pm

Hero of Canton wrote:
Rik wrote:It isn't just Halo 3 multiplayer though, it's Halo 3 multiplayer plus all the download content, none of which I had and that costs money off XBL.

True, but in that case, you can only really count the DLC. If that's substantial enough to make a big difference to the online game then fair enough.

I still think it'd have been best off as premium DLC. Lost/Ballad-type price point would have seen across-the-board 9s and 10s.

If you think about it, its significantly more content than anything thats been DLC to date (counting Firefight too).

And it would have meant at least a 3.5GB download.

Going on previous pricing models, you've got Halo ODST campaign (2400MS) + Firefight (1200MS) + New Halo 3 maps (800MS).

You are looking at over £30 worth of points there anyway.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Parksey** » Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:40 pm

Hero of Canton wrote:In fairness to Carlos, the Halo 3 multiplayer doesn't really count for the vast majority of ODST's buyers.

This rings true for me, and is why I'd personally rate it as quite a good deal rather than expanded DLC.

I bought Halo 3 just before my Xbox RROD and by the time I managed to get it repaired, it was almost seven months after release. Consequently, I never played the online modes. Not even once.

So, ODST is a much more complete package in my eyes. It's got a brand new campaign mode (which is about average length for a shooter - I really should seek out all these 30 hour FPS games people have obviously been playing) and a "brand new" multiplayer. I fell out of love with Halo 2's multi, but, even though I've just been playing against strangers, I've enjoyed the games I've had on LIVE so far.

I can understand the reasons for the 7/10, though perhaps it underscores the very solid game mechanics somewhat. If you played Halo 3 multiplayer to death, then it doesn't represent quite the bargain I see it as. If you only play offline and don't get into Firefight then, yeah, it's going to be out of your disc tray fairly frequently.

It's no less than a 7/10 then though as, regardless of the quibbles about its length and status as a full release, it's still got all the quality of the Halo series.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **outoftime101** » Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:41 pm

Hero of Canton wrote:
Rik wrote:It isn't just Halo 3 multiplayer though, it's Halo 3 multiplayer plus all the download content, none of which I had and that costs money off XBL.

True, but in that case, you can only really count the DLC. If that's substantial enough to make a big difference to the online game then fair enough.

I still think it'd have been best off as premium DLC. Lost/Ballad-type price point would have seen across-the-board 9s and 10s.

As shocked as I am to agree with HoC on anything (particularly anything Halo related) he is spot on here. It is not a full blown Halo game to my mind and, as such, should have had a GTA episodes style price structure. I bought all the premium DLC and so don't really benefit from the 2nd disk, aside from the 3 new maps.

For one, Eurogamer's review would have read so much differently (with much more fulsome praise) had the thing been priced more sensibly.

Games TM issue 88 scores

Who is online

Affiliates