Reviewer: ODST is 'underwhelming'

[Express]

Halo 3 ODST is 'underwhelming', reckons a journalist who has recently been given access to a review build of the game.
When asked what it was like, our source mustered a fairly despondent response:


"Two words: really underwhelming."
"You just look at it and think 'so what?'. Sure, the multiplayer is fun (it's Halo after all) but it's all built on an old engine (which looks pretty much untouched) and looks nowhere near as good as games such as Gears of War 2 or Killzone 2. It smacks of no effort and is a teensy bit cynical. [Microsoft] needed a big franchise title for this Christmas and presumably there wasn't enough time to build something new, so they gave us new missions on old, ageing technology that didn't really look that great first time round."


Harsh, but is pretty much what we we've been thinking all along really. Just take a look at the direct-capture screenshots and videos we got our hands on a few days ago. The game runs in less-than-720 resolution, is really jaggy and overall looks pretty washed out - regardless of what the gameplay is like, we reckon a 'triple A' franchise deserves 'triple A' technology.


This is Halo. HALO! One of the most recognisable and popular franchises the videogames world has ever seen. In terms of overall quality, it SHOULD be up there with Gears and Killzone, not limping along at 640p. Let's be clear, we say this as people who want Halo to be amazing, not 'fanboys' or 'haters', as backwards-cap-wearing American teens will no doubt accuse us of being. It doesn't matter if you're the biggest Halo and 360 Fan going - don't bury your head in the sand, demand better!


Anyway, back to our source. He reckons most reviews are poised 'to drop' September 20th:


"Embargo’s lifted ten days from now. That’s when we’ll be slammin’ our review live."


But what score will it be getting?

"Haven’t decided yet. Prolly give it an eight to be safe."
To be safe... that's the world we live in people. Don't give big games low marks - no one wants to hear it.

Source

Pretty bold to say something bad about a game/series everyone praises. I just hope reviewers dont give it a nine or ten just because its halo.

[Cuguy]

I guess the reviewer must have been on holiday because I swear the game was being billed as basically an expansion onto Halo 3...

Oh well, even though not the most graphically intense games *which is what this author seems to focus on ONLY*, Halo has always been about the 1st rate MP and controls. Solid game play goes a long way to make you look past a few jaggies.

[BioSonic]

If the only thing "wrong" with it is its graphics, then the game is set to be awesome.

[Mopey.]

Hmm, well at least he didnt say anything negative about the gameplay.

But I guess it is dissapointing to hear that the tech is primarily unchanged.

[BioSonic]

The new tech is being saved for Halo Reach.

[Cuguy]

Yeah, Bio... I believe that to be the case as well. Drop a game based with the same Halo engine as 3, make oodles of cash to further the R&D and DEV into Reach.

Simple business model.

Plus, like you said, if only the graphics are what this man complained about, then we are all good.

[Mopey.]

The new tech is being saved for Halo Reach.

I certainly hope so.

But either way, ODST will still be a great game.

[Tyrien]

HA.

This thread reminds me so much of all the threads complaining about how GTA4 looked before it released (now now, we're not going to talk about GTA 4, it's just an example).

The whole "It's about the gameplay not the graphics!" debate. That was discredited by the graphics advocates because "it shouldn't matter this is 2007!"

[I_Luv_2_Game]

When i read this early today it didn't surprise me at all...

[admartian]

Regardless of what anyone here thinks of the game; I hate the fact that big games have to be treated 'with care'. (see bolded quote on OP)

It seems, so far at least, that this only seems to happen with MS games. Might be wrong, but that seems to be the case.

Either way, I think it's wrong, and just a shame, for the gaming media to be like this.

[Phantasmn]

If I remember correctly, ODST was made using a teensy tiny team of no more than 14 people. A few artists, a few coders, and a few designers, a director, producer, and that's about it. Once the game was mostly finished, then more people were brought on to do testing. For a game made by such a small team, it looks good, regardless of the outdated tech that's used.

That said, I didn't have high expectations for the game. Bungie originally said the game wouldn't be priced like a full retail game, instead it would be around $40. Microsoft changed that, and as a result, left a bad taste in my mouth. It's just an expansion, with a short campaign (Bungie said shorter than Halo 3, so very short), and one new MP mode.

[skulpt]

I guess the reviewer must have been on holiday because I swear the game was being billed as basically an expansion onto Halo 3...

Oh well, even though not the most graphically intense games *which is what this author seems to focus on ONLY*, Halo has always been about the 1st rate MP and controls. Solid game play goes a long way to make you look past a few jaggies.

I think the issue is $60 for a game with 3 new MP maps, the same engine it seems, and a campaign that might only last 5-6 hours. I mean look at what Dark Corners DLC did. 7 new maps and a chapter.

If they had released this game for $40, I don't think people would care about this stuff. But when 95% of the time spent on Halo 3 is online, and they don't even bother doing more than 3 new maps?

I get the feeling that this game is going to sell craploads. But I also get the feeling that a lot of gamers will be wondering if this $60 was even close to the value of the $60 they spent just on Halo 3 or Gears 2 or any other game for that matter. I think if any other game would try this at full price, they would get some serious backlash.

[Metfanant]

But what score will it be getting?

"Haven’t decided yet. Prolly give it an eight to be safe."
To be safe... that's the world we live in people. Don't give big games low marks - no one wants to hear it.

let me start by saying this is HORRENDOUS to hear...i have the game pre-ordered...and intend to enjoy the crap out of it with friends....BUT if the game is not that good LET PEOPLE KNOW don't be safe...don't worry that big bad MS might be upset with you...ugh...

I guess the reviewer must have been on holiday because I swear the game was being billed as basically an expansion onto Halo 3...

i guess you were on vacation for the part where we are being charged full admission ($60) to the show...anything that costs $60 better be a fully fleshed out game...look at Gran Turismo 5 Prologue...at least it didn't cost $60...

Halo has always been about the 1st rate MP and controls. Solid game play goes a long way to make you look past a few jaggies.

shame really...considering the MP has been broken since Halo CE....

Regardless of what anyone here thinks of the game; I hate the fact that big games have to be treated 'with care'. (see bolded quote on OP)

TOTALLY...

It seems, so far at least, that this only seems to happen with MS games. Might be wrong, but that seems to be the case.

uh oh...don't go there...(but i agree)

I think the issue is $60 for a game with 3 new MP maps, the same engine it seems, and a campaign that might only last 5-6 hours. I mean look at what Dark Corners DLC did. 7 new maps and a chapter.

absolutely

If they had released this game for $40, I don't think people would care about this stuff. But when 95% of the time spent on Halo 3 is online, and they don't even bother doing more than 3 new maps?

agree...and i dont even plan on touching the competitive MP of this game (I HATE H3's MP)...but i plan on playing firefight with my friends A LOT

I get the feeling that this game is going to sell craploads. But I also get the feeling that a lot of gamers will be wondering if this $60 was even close to the value of the $60 they spent just on Halo 3 or Gears 2 or any other game for that matter. I think if any other game would try this at full price, they would get some serious backlash.

i agree...i mean i pre-ordered the special edition from gamestop (with the controller) and like i said plan to love the game...but it really should have been $40...

[One-Shot]

If his only complaints are graphics which personally I still think halo 3 looks great then whatever. Wii games have crappy graphics but gameplay is awesome on a lot of them which is what it is about. Now if reach's graphics are like halo 3s than yes that is something to complain about, not in a expansion (key word).

[J3ff3]

let me start by saying this is HORRENDOUS to hear...i have the game pre-ordered...and intend to enjoy the crap out of it with friends....BUT if the game is not that good LET PEOPLE KNOW don't be safe...don't worry that big bad MS might be upset with you...ugh...

that quote should make you worry about the reviewer, not the game. although despite that i'll be treating this game like DLC. Not interested. I sold Halo 3 for a reason.

**edit. the fact he uses the "word" 'prolly' should seal it for you.

[Fenix]

Halo 3: ODST or Demon's Souls. Choices.. choices.

[Wrath]

Halo 3: ODST or Demon's Souls. Choices.. choices.

If you let Demon's Souls slip for ODST you cannot be helped anymore.

[Stewie Skywalker]

I'm probably going to buy this just for entry into the Reach beta at this point. The more I saw the game the more down on it I got, nothing to do with this review. I don't think its different enough from previous Halo games in terms of look and gameplay. As an ODST you are human and should have to rely more on stealth and tactics. This is essentially just Halo with a dumb down MC. The ODST gameplay concept isn't fleshed out enough. I'd like to see a full fledged ODST game with its own unique MP and new gameplay. I sometimes feel that Bungie is afraid to take risks. They need a set of those James Cameron type balls.

[Fenix]

If you let Demon's Souls slip for ODST you cannot be helped anymore.

yes master *bows*

[Mopey.]

If his only complaints are graphics which personally I still think halo 3 looks great then whatever. Wii games have crappy graphics but gameplay is awesome on a lot of them which is what it is about. Now if reach's graphics are like halo 3s than yes that is something to complain about, not in a expansion (key word).

Well considering this 'expansion' costs as much as a full retail game, I'd say some complaining is certainly justified.

[Sparc]

Well considering this 'expansion' costs as much as a full retail game, I'd say some complaining is certainly justified.

I totally agree with this. DON'T tell me it's an expansion and then charge a full retail price for it because that just means you're making an excuse for not revamping those parts of the game which would usually be revamped and improved if it was a sequel.

I will totally be surprised if this game is anything special.

[SpyroViper]

Let the milking begin! Now the first (and only good Halo game) has long since been released, the milking engine is revving up!

Expect many more 'sub par' Halo games.. Poor Cheif will end up like Sonic! Could even be a Halo Pinball!

[Dasimpse]

the game is 29.99 in the uk, thats not the price of a full fledged title. and this reviewer is obviousley a punk if he darn't mark it down. what a loser, its probably fake lol

[SixAxisRumble]

If it's not moved on from Halo 3 then i can see why it's underwhelming. Bring on Reach!!! Although i'd be happier if Bungie were not doing it.

[Sparc]

Let the milking begin! Now the first (and only good Halo game) has long since been released, the milking engine is revving up!

Expect many more 'sub par' Halo games.. Poor Cheif will end up like Sonic! Could even be a Halo Pinball!

The milking argument is a tired one especially when you look at the franchises out there on other consoles which have been milked to death.

There's room for more Halo games imo, but that doesn't mean I consider this to a be anything special. In fact I suspect it will seriously just be a run-of-the-mill game.