-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The Halo Infinite (campaign) Metascore prediction thread...
- Thread starter Men_in_Boxes
- Start date
Max Payne’s Baretta
Banned
Imagine putting this much weight on 3 points. How about you actually play the game to determine if YOU enjoy instead of having some weird obsession with an arbitrary # from other people.
NikuNashi
Member
If you don't place weight on scores why are you even in a metacritic score prediction thread replying?.
Gameplaylover
Member
Absolutely ridiculous, 3/100 points are nothing to talk about. Just a stupid number. Personally i think there is not even that much difference between 85 and 95 games.
Bernd Lauert
Banned
Your prediction was low 80s. The final score is closer to 90 than to your prediction. You lose
Max Payne’s Baretta
Banned
I’m actually interested in the game, I just caught you hoping it was mediocre bro. It’s ok take the L.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
3 weeks isn't long time when the game is large and it's expected that reviewers will actually finish it before needing time to write their reviews. And especially so at the back end of the year when there are plenty of other games critics are also trying to play and finish in time to get their reviews out.
So issuing the game 3 weeks in advance of launch IS typical for large games launching at the end of the year.
The Order 1886 had tonnes of previews prior to launch. As did many other mediocre to bad games that went on to review poorly.
Just because publisher marketing departments are actually marketing the game, doesn't mean they actually have confidence in the game's quality. It just means they're doing what they need to in order to ensure it sells because it's the biggest game in their portfolio and their fourth-quarter financials relies to some extent on the game being a fiscal success.
And all this aside, publishers having blind confidence in their unreleased game aren't any proof that the games will actually be good on release. There are innumerable examples in the industry history to demonstrate this fact.
Bernkastel
Ask me about my fanboy energy!
Does not seem to be typical according to the guy who first mentioned how early the review copies were given
James Sawyer Ford
Member
MidGenRefresh
*Refreshes biennially
after 37 reviews?
game will settle at 85 or less
How does it feel to be wrong?
Banjo64
cumsessed
Banjo64
cumsessed
For some people, the hardest thing in the world is to say ‘I was wrong’. Pretty crazy.
James Sawyer Ford
Member
Still has plenty of reviews left to go
either way if it does settle above 85, so? That’s barely changed from previous 343 entries. We know how those turned out, so consider me skeptical
it’ll take a 95+ meta for me consider the franchise back to the quality it deserves. 6 years and who knows how much money spent on this isn’t a showcase of an amazing turn of events for the studio
either way if it does settle above 85, so? That’s barely changed from previous 343 entries. We know how those turned out, so consider me skeptical
it’ll take a 95+ meta for me consider the franchise back to the quality it deserves. 6 years and who knows how much money spent on this isn’t a showcase of an amazing turn of events for the studio
tpieman2029
Member
Considering the new God of War only got a 94 and thats considered by a lot of people to be the best game of the last gen 95 plus is a pretty staunch figure.
James Sawyer Ford
Member
mid 90s then, doesn’t need to be exactly 95
something solidly in the must have GOTG range
halo is too big to fail or get a score it’s probably more deserving of by the media.
Banjo64
cumsessed
It looks like an 82 game.
Scores 87.
Anything less than a 95 isn’t worth shit
Embarrassing.
yurinka
Member
Last edited:
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
So not all reviewers got access so early.
See above.
Regardless, the game is reviewing very well so far. That's great for fans of the series. Seems 343i finally found their way with the Halo franchise. Glad to see the series is back to having a bright future ahead.
MasterCornholio
Member
STARSBarry
Gold Member
Dropped to 86, making us 86-87 predictors still on point...
Mid 80's title, and now officially on par with Halo 4....
What a return to form for the IP...
Mid 80's title, and now officially on par with Halo 4....
What a return to form for the IP...
Last edited:
Iced Arcade
Member
1 more day!
You are going to sulk when you catch a trolling ban. Literally all you do lolafter 37 reviews?
game will settle at 85 or less
Last edited:
Nikana
Go Go Neo Rangers!
ToTTenTranz
Banned
Right now it stands at 86 Critics / 72 Users on Series X and 82 Critics / 52 User on PC.
XBOne gets a 41 from Users and no critic reviews (?). Auch. Interesting how Metacritic doesn't mention One X nor Series S.
Why is the game being slammed on PC by users though? I haven't played it because I'm waiting for the raytracing patch to come out, but such a low score usually means the game has stability problems.
XBOne gets a 41 from Users and no critic reviews (?). Auch. Interesting how Metacritic doesn't mention One X nor Series S.
Why is the game being slammed on PC by users though? I haven't played it because I'm waiting for the raytracing patch to come out, but such a low score usually means the game has stability problems.
Bernd Lauert
Banned
User scores for console exclusives are riddled with console warriors. Literally useless.
Fun fact: I clicked on three random users who rated it a 0/10 and literally all three rated TLOU2 a 10/10. Weird coincidence
STARSBarry
Gold Member
Fun fact: I clicked on three random users who rated it a 0/10 and literally all three rated TLOU2 a 10/10. Weird coincidence
Its really strange, you would think as obvious fans of shit story telling they would love the boring, cringe inducing exposition dumps of Halo infinite.
Its one of those weird titles where I'm actually enjoying the audio logs far more than the actual cutscenes, because those don't feel forced.
Driving around with a Razorback full of sniper marines though, looking for them... now that's fun.
Last edited:
ToTTenTranz
Banned
User scores for console exclusives are riddled with console warriors. Literally useless.
Fun fact: I clicked on three random users who rated it a 0/10 and literally all three rated TLOU2 a 10/10. Weird coincidence
Would that explain the large difference in user score betwen the Series X and PC versions though?
Steam shows 79% positive feedback on the game, though.
Bernd Lauert
Banned
Steam is infinitely more reliable, yeah. I've heard of technical issues in the PC version, so that might explain it.
Freeman76
Member
God damn this is good. My favourite Halo by a mile! Surprised how small the game is though, had explored the map almost fully within an hour, and quite a way into it after about 5 hours play. Was hoping for an epic open world 70 hour experience, but I expected too much on that front. Still, top quality shit!
yamaci17
Member
devs are not capable of understanding that majority of Steam gamers are on gpus in the levels of gtx 1060-1070
yet, they do horrible ports and optimizations. since the game is free to play, the exposition is even bigger.
my friend for example gave the game a negative review, why you would ask? he has a gtx 1060 and gets 30-40 fps at 1080p with everything set to low.
he gets 50-60 fps with optimized hardware unboxed settings in rdr 2. and rdr 2 admittedly looks better than halo, especially when you consider he has to run the gam at lowest of lows and game looks even more horrible at such settings.
so conclusion? 343 is not an indie company. they should be capable of optimizing the game better. it looks good at high settings and high resolutions, but it really falls flat at lower settings and lower resolutions. rightfully so, most people will find the game's graphics unworthy of its performance
yet, they do horrible ports and optimizations. since the game is free to play, the exposition is even bigger.
my friend for example gave the game a negative review, why you would ask? he has a gtx 1060 and gets 30-40 fps at 1080p with everything set to low.
he gets 50-60 fps with optimized hardware unboxed settings in rdr 2. and rdr 2 admittedly looks better than halo, especially when you consider he has to run the gam at lowest of lows and game looks even more horrible at such settings.
so conclusion? 343 is not an indie company. they should be capable of optimizing the game better. it looks good at high settings and high resolutions, but it really falls flat at lower settings and lower resolutions. rightfully so, most people will find the game's graphics unworthy of its performance
ResilientBanana
Member
Not going to lie, Halo Infinite looks bad on my GTX 1080 at medium settings. I have to use the Variable resolution to achieve 60FPS and it makes the game look like garbage. That being said, the game is super fun.