Gamespot accidentally posts early review of Halo 2

Scorch

Scorch

CAGiversary!
Feedback
72 (100%)
Yeah, another Halo 2 topic.

Gamespot posted the review for a bit then quickly took it down. Apparently, compared to the first, it didn't score so hot. See below..

















Halo2flops.jpg


Quite a good score, but with the original scoring a 9.7.. I wonder if it was a fake/test review, or if it was their actual review.

Manually putting in the review link yields a gamespot page that just says 'blank'..

review.html
 
That is the problem with hype. The game didn't come with a voucher for a free blow job and thus fell short of expectations.
 
Lol, I respect gamespot, it does seem low, maybe they were expecting more new stuff rather than improved (what im expecting is improved) if they scored it that for the single player then I will most def not care cause I only am buying it for the MP offline and online
 
I was on the GS and GF boards, and when you post about it (i didnt) you get modded in like 2 seconds.... also all the halo 2 fanboys are like, "No!!! it was a typo!!! teh real review wont come out tilll tommorrow, there is nto way they could have reviewed it that fast!!!"

Damn people, 9.1 is a GOOD score, and just cause one reviewer said that it shouldn't get a 9.9 or above means you won't buy it?
 
That is the problem with hype. The game didn't come with a voucher for a free blow job and thus fell short of expectations.

WTF!! I knew I should have gotten by free BJ Pre Order Bonus from GameStop up front instead of waiting until the game is released.
 
a review is just someone's OPINION. It only matters how you as the individual player feels about the game..... I have loved games that got bad reviews before.... This is a fine example: http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/action/godzilladestroyallmm/index.html?q=godzilla
This game only got a 6.4 on Gamespot and I LOVED this game. I would have given it an 8.5 or higher. My friends and I played the hell out of this game for a month solid and got much more than our money's worth. Why they gave it such a low score is what we don't understand, but the game is great in my opinion (and I own and play tons of games, so I am no rookie). I just think the reviewer gave his opinion, but that doesn't mean he is factually correct. Halo 2 may be better than the first to some people and not quite as good to others. Either way I think we will get a good game to play.
 
i have major doubts as to if anything published or "leaked" about halo 2 is acctually accidental, or just an elaborate marketing scheme.. but either way, 9.1 is pretty good score...
 
I don't mind what score it gets, I loved Fable and that didn't get above a nine! Anyway, just be happy that it's coming out.
 
I hope this isn't a hoax. I love the pain of fanboys and this will surely cause much.
 
[quote name='jmcc']I hope this isn't a hoax. I love the pain of fanboys and this will surely cause much.[/quote]

For once I agree with you
 
[quote name='help1'][quote name='jmcc']I hope this isn't a hoax. I love the pain of fanboys and this will surely cause much.[/quote]

For once I agree with you[/quote]From the guy with the Halo 2 sig and avatar. :roll:
 
[quote name='Arakias']I wonder how the scores for Metroid Prime 2 will compare to MP1 or Halo 2[/quote]

It doesn't really matter, honestly. That's like asking to compare the scores for Sly Cooper 2 to the scores for GTA : San Andreas. Halo and Metroid Prime are pretty much completely opposite games - the only similarity they really share (besides the main characters being badasses in space armor) is that you play from a first person perspective in each.
 
[quote name='help1']Lol, I respect gamespot, it does seem low, maybe they were expecting more new stuff rather than improved (what im expecting is improved) if they scored it that for the single player then I will most def not care cause I only am buying it for the MP offline and online[/quote]

It seems low? I mean it isn't a 10, but anything that they rate 8.0 or above usually is really good, and 9.0 and above is amazing.
 
I never understood why people say games never live up to the hype. Its your decision to believe the hype, so I don't see how you could possibly be angry at game developers. You, as a rational consumer, should wait til the final product is released and judge for yourself. Its your opinion in the end that matters right? Also people say games like MGS, GTA, and Halo 2 don't live up to their respective hype. So what? That doesn't detract from the fact that they are probably still the best in their genre in terms of console gaming. The bar is set so high up for these games that even if they do fall somewhat short, they're still gonna kick the ass of every other game in direct competition with them. Just my two cents, if you're complaining, stop.
 
This doesn't mean Halo 2 is inferior to Halo 1. It is related to the release date of each, which must be taken into consideration. When Halo 1 was released, there was nothing else like it on the market. Now, there have been several releases (many influenced by Halo) in the three years since then that the bar is raised. Halo 2 will likely surpass the original, but even the developers said they are not completely reinventing the game, only improving what they weren't satisifed with the first time around. Trust me, many will be bitching that it's "too similar to the first one". They're expecting to be as blown away by the sequel as they were by the original, and that will not happen.
 
How could they give gta:sa the same score as the other 2 gtas and halo 2 a relatively lower score. All the GTA had little innovation, unless Halo 2 just sucks.
 
[quote name='GameDude']How could they give gta:sa the same score as the other 2 gtas and halo 2 a relatively lower score. All the GTA had little innovation, unless Halo 2 just sucks.[/quote]

Perhaps Halo 2 has even less inovation? I bet this review is either to hype the site or actually is an accident I doubt it will get less than 9.5
 
[quote name='rebenns']This doesn't mean Halo 2 is inferior to Halo 1. It is related to the release date of each, which must be taken into consideration. When Halo 1 was released, there was nothing else like it on the market. Now, there have been several releases (many influenced by Halo) in the three years since then that the bar is raised. Halo 2 will likely surpass the original, but even the developers said they are not completely reinventing the game, only improving what they weren't satisifed with the first time around. Trust me, many will be bitching that it's "too similar to the first one". They're expecting to be as blown away by the sequel as they were by the original, and that will not happen.[/quote]

damn man, well said, well said

i give u the clappy smiley guys [-o< [-o
 
When is the review supposed to be up? Isn't IGN supposed to post it at lunch time pacific Sunday? What about Gamespot?
 
[quote name='GameDude']How could they give gta:sa the same score as the other 2 gtas and halo 2 a relatively lower score. All the GTA had little innovation, unless Halo 2 just sucks.[/quote]

There's a .5 difference between the GTA and this Halo 2 "score". So that instantly deems Halo 2 as a failure, and thus sucks? I don't understand. I'd have to disagree with the innovation thing. I think the GTA series had enough innovation with each game to make it a bigger, and better gameplay experience. If it didn't why would we purchase them? I mean we'd be buying the same game 3x over essentially.
 
[quote name='rebenns']This doesn't mean Halo 2 is inferior to Halo 1. It is related to the release date of each, which must be taken into consideration. When Halo 1 was released, there was nothing else like it on the market. Now, there have been several releases (many influenced by Halo) in the three years since then that the bar is raised. Halo 2 will likely surpass the original, but even the developers said they are not completely reinventing the game, only improving what they weren't satisifed with the first time around. Trust me, many will be bitching that it's "too similar to the first one". They're expecting to be as blown away by the sequel as they were by the original, and that will not happen.[/quote]

Nothing else like it on the market? I hope you mean for Xbox only.
 
[quote name='mmn'][quote name='Arakias']I wonder how the scores for Metroid Prime 2 will compare to MP1 or Halo 2[/quote]

It doesn't really matter, honestly. That's like asking to compare the scores for Sly Cooper 2 to the scores for GTA : San Andreas. Halo and Metroid Prime are pretty much completely opposite games - the only similarity they really share (besides the main characters being badasses in space armor) is that you play from a first person perspective in each.[/quote]


Sure, they're kinda different, but a score's a score no matter what. Say an RPG comes out and it gets a 6.0 and then Halo 2 comes out the next day and gets a 9.7. Someone then posts asking which is the better game. Do you someone would say something like, "you can't compare these because they're different genre's"?
 
Gamespots' reviews have always been stiff. IGN's are always higher than GS's. I usually average the 2 out to get the real score.
 
[quote name='MasterLin1'][quote name='GameDude']How could they give gta:sa the same score as the other 2 gtas and halo 2 a relatively lower score. All the GTA had little innovation, unless Halo 2 just sucks.[/quote]

There's a .5 difference between the GTA and this Halo 2 "score". So that instantly deems Halo 2 as a failure, and thus sucks? I don't understand. I'd have to disagree with the innovation thing. I think the GTA series had enough innovation with each game to make it a bigger, and better gameplay experience. If it didn't why would we purchase them? I mean we'd be buying the same game 3x over essentially.[/quote]

Please tell me all the innovation between the three games. You get to ride bikes instead of cars? Wow.
 
[quote name='GameDude'][quote name='MasterLin1'][quote name='GameDude']How could they give gta:sa the same score as the other 2 gtas and halo 2 a relatively lower score. All the GTA had little innovation, unless Halo 2 just sucks.[/quote]

There's a .5 difference between the GTA and this Halo 2 "score". So that instantly deems Halo 2 as a failure, and thus sucks? I don't understand. I'd have to disagree with the innovation thing. I think the GTA series had enough innovation with each game to make it a bigger, and better gameplay experience. If it didn't why would we purchase them? I mean we'd be buying the same game 3x over essentially.[/quote]

Please tell me all the innovation between the three games. You get to ride bikes instead of cars? Wow.[/quote]

All "innovation" means is "introducing something new". So yes, in that sense, riding bikes instead of driving in cars would be innovative.
 
[quote name='GameDude'][quote name='MasterLin1'][quote name='GameDude']How could they give gta:sa the same score as the other 2 gtas and halo 2 a relatively lower score. All the GTA had little innovation, unless Halo 2 just sucks.[/quote]

There's a .5 difference between the GTA and this Halo 2 "score". So that instantly deems Halo 2 as a failure, and thus sucks? I don't understand. I'd have to disagree with the innovation thing. I think the GTA series had enough innovation with each game to make it a bigger, and better gameplay experience. If it didn't why would we purchase them? I mean we'd be buying the same game 3x over essentially.[/quote]

Please tell me all the innovation between the three games. You get to ride bikes instead of cars? Wow.[/quote]

Well I guess it comes down to what we interpret innovation, we might see it as completely different things. New story lines, new vehicles, new missions, new weapons, characters, new gameplay features, and new settings are all things I would consider innovation. I know I'm taking the definition of innovative somewhat wrong, but I have to. Otherwise a game every few years would truly be "innovative" IDK if you would call these innovations, but I certainly do. You said yourself there was little innovation in the series. But with each game, it was obviously enough to warrant another purchase from millions of gamers. But hey, you're entitled to your opinion, I'm just not willing to agree.
 
[quote name='MasterLin1']I never understood why people say games never live up to the hype. Its your decision to believe the hype, so I don't see how you could possibly be angry at game developers. You, as a rational consumer, should wait til the final product is released and judge for yourself. Its your opinion in the end that matters right?[/quote]

Before the final product is released, I have to trust gaming websites and magazines about how the game is going and how good it is. Halo 2 has gotten a 9.7/10 from OXM, a 10/10 from GameInformer, and has now gotten a 9.1/10 from GameSpot. I have to believe that the game is as good as the scores until it's on my T.V. getting played the hell out of by me.

[quote name='MasterLin1']Also people say games like MGS, GTA, and Halo 2 don't live up to their respective hype. So what? That doesn't detract from the fact that they are probably still the best in their genre in terms of console gaming. The bar is set so high up for these games that even if they do fall somewhat short, they're still gonna kick the ass of every other game in direct competition with them. Just my two cents, if you're complaining, stop.[/quote] I couldn't agree more. Halo 2 has gotten a 9.7/10 from OXM, a 10/10 from GameInformer, and has now gotten a 9.1/10 from GameSpot (that's right, I posted the same thing twice). Those are all terrific scores for a game even though the 9.1 may not live up to the standards that were set for this game. That doesn't mean that this game has bombed.
 
[quote name='MasterLin1']Well I guess it comes down to what we interpret innovation, we might see it as completely different things. New story lines, new vehicles, new missions, new weapons, characters, new gameplay features, and new settings are all things I would consider innovation.[/quote]

The only thing in there that could be innovative is new gameplay features and I don't think any of the new features are innovative from what I hear. New story, vehicles, etc. is what a game is supposed to have. That doesn't make a game innovative since it has something that damn well better be in it. :roll:

[quote name='MasterLin1']I know I'm taking the definition of innovative somewhat wrong, but I have to. Otherwise a game every few years would truly be "innovative" IDK if you would call these innovations, but I certainly do. You said yourself there was little innovation in the series. But with each game, it was obviously enough to warrant another purchase from millions of gamers. But hey, you're entitled to your opinion, I'm just not willing to agree.[/quote]

That's because they are great games with each one being better than the last. Only GTA 3 was innovative, IMO, but that doesn't mean that the other 2 weren't fantastic games to play.
 
....some of you people scare me.

If this was a complete train wreck, than i would be laughing while slowly creeping away to cancel my pre-order. Its not. Its a Great game with flaws AND huge strong points. 9.1 sounds like a good score to me.

Its funny, no matter how much and how long im on the internet, the amount of petty/retarded/mean people always surprises me.
 
yeah I think that 9.1 is fine, I didn't think the first halo was a perfect 10. Hell I can think of only one game that is a perfect 10. Plus I liked the first halo but I didn't think it was ground breaking. So if the second one is better then the first then I will be happy. The only reason I'm getting it on launch day is I was able to find a good deal on it.
 
I never said it was a bad score. Come on, you're talking to a guy who bought Enter The Matrix at $50 and ENJOYED it.

I just stated that it's not good that the sequel, while adding more of the same and even online support with stat tracking and all, took a tiny bit of a dive. It's not a big deal, I did not allow myself to get hyped for this (I still don't see the big deal about Halo.. FPS with aliens.. been done before.. dual weilding OMG~!.. been done a ton of times..) I did the EB deal and have two reserved though, one for my cousin and one for myself.
 
[quote name='jmcc']I hope this isn't a hoax. I love the pain of fanboys and this will surely cause much.[/quote]

I didn't realize you were into that type of thing. They have a name for you ya' know.
 
"This was an unfortnate error on our part, but that ultimately isn't the final score for Halo 2. It was a system glitch, and one we fixed, although obviously not one we fixed soon enough. The score for Halo 2 isn't final yet, nor will it be until the review itself is up and live on the site. So, yeah, that's about the end of that. Figured a response from an admin type wouldn't hurt."
link
 
Interesting to see it was a glitch. But some of the people that posted above are right, who cares if it really IS 9.1?

Is a 9.1 game inherently worse than a 9.5 game or something? How do you define a game that is fucking "POINT FOUR" better than another game? People put too much stock in one douchebag's opinion. It doesn't matter.

If a game gets solid reviews across the board, then you can be pretty sure it's going to be good. That appears to be the case here.

Just as a side note, EGM gave it all 10's and a Platinum award according to HaloPlanet. For those that MUST know and think crap like this matters, it scored slightly higher than Metroid Prime 2 and MGS3. Oh, and Killzone. Duh.
 
[quote name='XboxMaster'][quote name='mmn'][quote name='Arakias']I wonder how the scores for Metroid Prime 2 will compare to MP1 or Halo 2[/quote]

It doesn't really matter, honestly. That's like asking to compare the scores for Sly Cooper 2 to the scores for GTA : San Andreas. Halo and Metroid Prime are pretty much completely opposite games - the only similarity they really share (besides the main characters being badasses in space armor) is that you play from a first person perspective in each.[/quote]


Sure, they're kinda different, but a score's a score no matter what. Say an RPG comes out and it gets a 6.0 and then Halo 2 comes out the next day and gets a 9.7. Someone then posts asking which is the better game. Do you someone would say something like, "you can't compare these because they're different genre's"?[/quote]

sometimes you cant. you cant compare halo to tetris, is the games are radically diffrent, they cannot be compared, but it can be judged that one is better than the other.

mp and halo is a good comparison.
 
[quote name='XboxMaster']Sure, they're kinda different, but a score's a score no matter what. Say an RPG comes out and it gets a 6.0 and then Halo 2 comes out the next day and gets a 9.7. Someone then posts asking which is the better game. Do you someone would say something like, "you can't compare these because they're different genre's"?[/quote]

Yep, that's exactly what I would say. I would look at the person as if they were retarded and go "uhm, one is an FPS and one is an RPG". You cannot compare ALL games just like you cannot compare ALL movies or ALL music.

Now, if someone says "I only have $50 and can only get ONE game, and I like BOTH RPGs and FPS games - which one should I get?" - THEN you can tell that person which is the better game knowing that they dig both genres.

And its tough to even compare games that are in the same genre. Technically both Xmen Legends and Knights of the Old Republic are in the same genre - can you really compare the two? When two things have more differences than similarities you cannot compare them fairly without sounding stupid.
 
[quote name='sir_ricedom']No one will not buy Halo 2 because of this review[/quote]

rrrrrrright. But then again if Halo 2 scored an 8.6 like Doom 3 did and by the same critic, I'd be really worried.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top