Games TM issue 88 scores

I consider the Halo 3 multiplayer to be free with ODST (or saving myself 800 MSP, since it contains the three extra maps I'd have bought anyway), and I'm still very happy with my purchase.

ODST cost me £30, £10 off the RRP of £40. GAME are even selling it for £34.99, and when do they ever go £15 below the RRP?

People should play the game on a difficulty they enjoy (except for MGS, as they basically turn the A.I. off on easy! :lol:

). I went straight into ODST on Heroic and really don't fancy the idea of playing it on Easy or even Normal, but then I really don't fancy the idea of playing Ouendan on anything above Normal either. People are better at some games than others, is that really a big surprise? :lol:

See, I find Ouendan on Normal quite dull. Hard's the optimum difficulty for me. Insane isn't quite as fun - it's a decent (but very doable) challenge even when the circles are turned off. But it's not quite as enjoyable, because one slight error can cost you. And I do feel slightly embarrassed using the female cheerleaders rather than the male Ouendan.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Parksey** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 12:36 am

Hero of Canton wrote:See, I find Ouendan on Normal quite dull. Hard's the optimum difficulty for me. Insane isn't quite as fun - it's a decent (but very doable) challenge even when the circles are turned off. But it's not quite as enjoyable, because one slight error can cost you. And I do feel slightly embarrassed using the female cheerleaders rather than the male Ouendan.

Same here, but Ouendan's difficulty curve was well judged. Normal seemed really quick after the opening difficulty, with Hard feeling impossible. After a bit of practice, Hard was my "default" setting and how I expected the game to be played, with Normal seeming really slow and having massive gaps between beats.

That's how difficulty should be approached, rather than just ramping up the numbers of enemies, their health and accuracy etc.

It should be a proper progression, not an unenjoyable slog through more punishing gameplay.

I barely finished Ouendan on Normal, it took me months of on and off attempts to do the final level and the satisfaction from that was enough for me to be happy with what I had played. I started Hard, and found that I was capable of handling the first few levels quite well, which showed it had a pretty good difficulty curve, but I never really went back to step up to it so any time I replay it I stick to normal.

At the same time, after playing MGS on Extreme "the way it was meant to be played", I would strongly urge everyone to try it like that, as they not only change the usual ammo/health stuff, but the weapons you get as well as the enemies that appear, and how well they can see/hear/react etc are all tweaked too. You could never tackle it first time, and I doubt many people have the time these days to replay a 20 hour game, but it's such a completely different game that I'd probably try and argue it wasn't a "re"play. :mrgreen:

It's a funny one, since they really had to tone down the A.I. as the game would be too hard on lower difficulties if the enemies were as smart but had less health, which is the norm for almost every other game. The game never tells you any of this though, so many people might have just played the game on a lower difficulty setting and called it a day. I even remember someone on old GR who played it on easy and was thinking we were absolutely mad for complimenting the A.I. :lol:

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by Fm » Thu Oct 01, 2009 2:02 am

This is a bit late in the day, but I really don't get posts like this:

Hypothetical forumite man wrote:
Games magazine wrote:Game - Score
Other game - different score

It's as if each score is perfectly fine in isolation, but somehow placing them together makes them ridiculous? Either one score is "wrong", or the other is. (Or both.) But the idea of someone enjoying Scribblenauts more than Halo is hardly unfeasible.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **HSH28** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 7:16 am

The Alchemist Penguin wrote:People should play the game on a difficulty they enjoy (except for MGS, as they basically turn the A.I. off on easy! ). I went straight into ODST on Heroic and really don't fancy the idea of playing it on Easy or even Normal, but then I really don't fancy the idea of playing Ouendan on anything above Normal either. People are better at some games than others, is that really a big surprise?

Of course thats the case...

...but there are also a few games which have difficulty levels that anyone who's played a game before shouldn't really be using (as a main playthrough). Halo on Easy is one of those. I stuck it on Easy to check stuff out, and it really is almost impossible to die on that difficulty.

YouTube

I played on Normal first and found it had the right amount of challenge for me. I'm playing on easy now just to find all the audio logs (which is admittedly shockingly easy), and then I'll do a third and final play through on Legendary with some people in co-op. Not bad for a sub £30 game.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Eighthours** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 9:25 am

Fm wrote:This is a bit late in the day, but I really don't get posts like this:

Hypothetical forumite man wrote:
Games magazine wrote:Game - Score
Other game - different score

It's as if each score is perfectly fine in isolation, but somehow placing them together makes them ridiculous? Either one score is "wrong", or the other is. (Or both.) But the idea of someone enjoying Scribblenauts more than Halo is hardly unfeasible.

But Scribblenauts, by all accounts, is a broken game due to the terrible controls and the illogical outcomes. That's why I pointed out the higher score as being a bit weird.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Poncho** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:07 am

Carlos wrote:
How long it takes is irrelevent. The fact is your getting a mission pack + horde + the halo 3 multiplayer (which everyone whom ODST is aimed at already has) and Microsoft are charging £50 RRP for the privelidge. Even if it's available at discount GamesTM/GameCentral both reviewed it based on the full price and found it lacking.

It's like valve charging £50 for blue shift.

Seriously, give back the shovel and stop digging yourself into a hole. Now that it's clear that you were pulling the 4 hour campaign out of your arse, you're back-pedalling by claiming that it's now irrelevant. In fact, you've now settled on calling it a mission pack. :lol:

And yet again with making stuff up: the game's RRP is not £50. It's £39.99 and anyone that isn't completely inept could easily find it for £10 cheaper. Oh and by the way, it's called Firefight, not horde. And if you knew anything you'd know there was more to it than just being a completely copy of Gears' horde.

And did gamesTM really review it based on it's apparent £50 RRP? Or are you just making that up as well?

Go away and stop trying spout bollocks about something you clearly know nothing about.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Rik** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:09 am

How long it takes is irrelevent. The fact is your getting a mission pack + horde + the halo 3 multiplayer (which everyone whom ODST is aimed at already has) and Microsoft are charging £50 RRP for the privelidge. Even if it's available at discount GamesTM/GameCentral both reviewed it based on the full price and found it lacking.

It's like valve charging £50 for blue shift.

You're starting to sound like a robot.....you earlier complain it is four hours long but now "How long it takes is irrelevent" :lol:

A "mission pack" would be the same gameplay, ODST has some very different gameplay due to the comparative weakness of the player and the removal of dual wielding and some weapons.

the halo 3 multiplayer (which everyone whom ODST is aimed at already has)

As stated previously it contains all the DLC which not everybody has and the Mythic pack which nobody had, so you're simply wrong.

It doesn't have an RRP of £50

The Games TM review says price wasn't a factor if you read the review.

Have you played the game?

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Judoscar** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:12 am

When I buy a book I always ensure it has a hardcore mode for us real readers. Not those casuals. Wasters.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Rik** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:15 am

The difficulty level in Halo simply doesn't just increase damage or the amount of enemies like most games, it totally changes the way the enemy reacts to your tactics.

If people haven't worked that out in the last seven years then they truly are thick.

Rik wrote:The difficulty level in Halo simply doesn't just increase damage or the amount of enemies like most games, it totally changes the way the enemy reacts to your tactics.

If people haven't worked that out in the last seven years then they truly are thick.

I agree, but I tend to play these games on easy/ normal difficulty as I do not have the time or patience to keep restarting and I am crap at fps games.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Rik** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:18 am

Which is fair enough, but if you race on through on easy then you don't really have the right to say it's too short and not value for money.

Rik wrote:Which is fair enough, but if you race on through on easy then you don't really have the right to say it's too short and not value for money.

I don't think anyone's done that. Carlos hasn't even played it, I don't think.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Harry Ola** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:20 am

It seems to me there is little doubt that ODST gets a rough time at the review stage. If you look on gamerankings today, it is currently listed as the 51st game of 2009. Now if there have been 50 games released this year that are better than ODST then we are in some truly halcyon days of gaming.

Rik wrote:Which is fair enough, but if you race on through on easy then you don't really have the right to say it's too short and not value for money.

True, but I also believe games should not be artificially lengthened by being more difficult, which is what a lot of them do.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Rik** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:21 am

Hero of Canton wrote:
Rik wrote:Which is fair enough, but if you race on through on easy then you don't really have the right to say it's too short and not value for money.

I don't think anyone's done that. Carlos hasn't even played it, I don't think.

He seems to have trouble answering that question

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Wedgie** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:22 am

Rik wrote:Which is fair enough, but if you race on through on easy then you don't really have the right to say it's too short and not value for money.

Pretty much agreed.

Heroic difficulty, it even bloody said on the main menu when you choose the difficulty levels, is the way Halo was meant to played.

PostRe: Games TM issue 88 scores by **Poncho** » Thu Oct 01, 2009 10:26 am

On the subject of difficulty, I do genuinely think that unless you've played it through solo on Heroic, then you haven't truly played Halo to its full potential. I don't say this from high up in my ivory tower; I have no problem if someone wants to play it on normal - hell - even on easy. But I do think anyone that comes charging in with the increasingly boring line: "Halo is so overrated! I don't get what people see in this series." or anything similar having not played it on the higher difficulty levels aren't really in a position to do so (I'm speaking in general, that isn't directed at any one person in here).

Halo is the only series that I actively encourage myself to play through on the hardest difficulty settings on the first play through, because like has been said many, many, many times already, when Halo gets harder it's simply not just a case of making you take more damage; giving you less punch to your weapons, and everything else you see in other games. The enemy A.I. completely changes - it sounds like such a simple thing but it really makes the game something quite different. Something quite special.

It's not like Call of Duty 4, for example, where Veteran is more a war of attrition than a demonstration of skill.

Games TM issue 88 scores

Who is online

Affiliates