Halo (Xbox)

[digitalpress]

Critique the critique!

Rate this review on a scale of 1-10. Please explain your score. Was the review entertaining? Informative? Well-written? All of these things should go toward your critique.

http://www.digitpress.com/reviews/contest/halo.htm

[digitalpress]

Critique the critique!

Rate this review on a scale of 1-10. Please explain your score. Was the review entertaining? Informative? Well-written? All of these things should go toward your critique.

http://www.digitpress.com/reviews/contest/halo.htm

[Balloon Fight]

I really enjoyed this review, and am going to give it an 8. It was very good in explaining the backround of microsoft, and sounded like a game magazine review. I also liked that it had screenshots, which is always a plus. I detracted a little, because he/she didnt go into strategy at all.

[Balloon Fight]

I really enjoyed this review, and am going to give it an 8. It was very good in explaining the backround of microsoft, and sounded like a game magazine review. I also liked that it had screenshots, which is always a plus. I detracted a little, because he/she didnt go into strategy at all.

[Flack]

8.

Basically, ditto. Good background info, needed a little more info about gameplay.

[Flack]

8.

Basically, ditto. Good background info, needed a little more info about gameplay.

[Lady Jaye]

Not a bad review, but the writer should have included a short history behind the game (and god knows that Halo had quite an history!): how it was originally slated to be released on the Mac (and PC), until Microsoft bought Bungie and decided to move the project to the Xbox. And it should be pointed out that, ironically, the Mac port of Halo will not be made by Bungie, but that it will be published by MacSoft. Considering how Bungie used to be a big player among Mac game makers, that is sad.

Anyway, enough of my rant about Bungie, and back to the review. It's informative and to the point.

My score: 8/10

[Lady Jaye]

Not a bad review, but the writer should have included a short history behind the game (and god knows that Halo had quite an history!): how it was originally slated to be released on the Mac (and PC), until Microsoft bought Bungie and decided to move the project to the Xbox. And it should be pointed out that, ironically, the Mac port of Halo will not be made by Bungie, but that it will be published by MacSoft. Considering how Bungie used to be a big player among Mac game makers, that is sad.

Anyway, enough of my rant about Bungie, and back to the review. It's informative and to the point.

My score: 8/10

[hamburgler]

9 of 10

Was very truthful about how the game was and showed how much depth the game deserved.

[hamburgler]

9 of 10

Was very truthful about how the game was and showed how much depth the game deserved.

[BHvrd]

I rate this a 5.

Mainly for the reason that there isn't enough passion from the reviewer.

One day I wanna see a review for Halo that mentions how much more the game evolves when you jump up the difficulty. That's where the true meat of Halo's gameplay lies, and I hate that noone ever mentions this in a review.

On legendary, it's war, and a WHOLE new ballgame.

[BHvrd]

I rate this a 5.

Mainly for the reason that there isn't enough passion from the reviewer.

One day I wanna see a review for Halo that mentions how much more the game evolves when you jump up the difficulty. That's where the true meat of Halo's gameplay lies, and I hate that noone ever mentions this in a review.

On legendary, it's war, and a WHOLE new ballgame.

[BHvrd]

Also the reviewer never even mentions multiplayer, or co-op!

You guys are being far too kind to this reviewer imo.

[BHvrd]

Also the reviewer never even mentions multiplayer, or co-op!

You guys are being far too kind to this reviewer imo.

[maxlords]

I give it a 7. It's good, what there is of it, but I need more, especially about such a well-known and popular game (which I've actually NEVER played). Being as I've never played it, I don't get a real feel for the game above the fact that it's innovative and pretty.

[maxlords]

I give it a 7. It's good, what there is of it, but I need more, especially about such a well-known and popular game (which I've actually NEVER played). Being as I've never played it, I don't get a real feel for the game above the fact that it's innovative and pretty.

[TheRedEye]

Well-written, factual, and even had a smidgeon of creative subjectivity, which is so far OMG RARE in this contest.

However, I've never played this game. I know nothing about it. I still don't. I know that it was a launch title for the XBox, I know that it's first person, I know that you shoot things in war, and I know that there are a variety of ways to kill things. That's about it.

What I enjoyed was the author's brief mention of the variety of ways to kill opponents, and how a player might approach situations in different ways.

What I WANTED here was for the author to elaborate. The author should have put me in the game at this point, and shown me a situation, different ways to get through it, etc. etc.

This was the author's only strong point, to me, and it died quickly. I'm giving this review a six. There's nothing "wrong" with it, there's just not much here.

Also, as an aside, the anti-Nintendo tone was a little irritating. A general rule for me is that without sources or numbers, bashing another company or telling me how they're outsold is just annoying fanboyism.

[NoahsMyBro]

I thought this was good. AN easy 8/10.

[Jorpho]

In general, I'm still not quite sure how this game compares to the likes of Quake and Unreal Tournament, aside from having realism and good music. (For that matter, Halo has a lot more to do with Bungie than it does with the Microsoft-Nintendo rivalry.) What about control? Variety? Presentation? Multiplayer?

The review is coherent, but there's just too much missing.

6/10

[Drexel923]

A good review, but I would have liked to see more about the gameplay. the information that is there describes the game well. Also I feel the opening paragraph could be left out.

8/10

[Ascending Wordsmith]

This review is well written and very informative. The game is covered in great detail, and the reading is quite easy. One of the most significant things missing is the multiplayer capability, which is paramount when discussing Halo. Anything Nintendo coulda' been left out without reducing the review's effectiveness. Still, a good, informative work.

7.5/10

[Captain Wrong]

First paragraph has little relevancy to the review. If I didn't know Halo was a FPS, I still wouldn't after reading this. Plus "why is this game good?" Maybe I should change that to "why should I buy/play this game?" Either way, I feel like this is lacking.

Score: 5

[digitalpress]

I'm giving this one a 6/10.

For a game that's clearly Microsoft's flagship software effort, I'm not getting enough information explaining why this is so. The reviewer likes the game but I'm having a hard time (reading it objectively) figuring out what makes it SPECIAL, beyond some eye and ear candy. It's sometimes difficult to put aside the fact that people reading the review DON'T know the game, it seems to me that this one assumes that I do. And if I really don't, it's leaving out a whole lot of stuff that explains why HALO put the Xbox on the map.

Well written but needs more content.