Agreed. It's what I've wanted Halo to evolve into for the longest time. Just would've liked more biome variety too, but feeling pretty confident that'll come in future content updates.Not gonna lie, this looks kind of like a dream game to me. Expanding the wide-linear old sections to an even wider space with dips into more linear structures from time to time, with Halo's signature feel of guns and enemy AI sprinkled throughout.
I keep my OS on a separate 250GB NVME drive. That's how we install in our labs and how we recommend. Granted, if you don't have that option then do what you must. Maybe partition 250GB to the OS on your current drive.Thanks. My OS is on my 1TB NVME and that's where I would prefer to play my games, on the fast SSD. I know many haven't had issues with GP on PC, but when you read that thread it makes me want to stay far away from it until it's fixed...
9/10 times pc reviews are lower across the board for any game.What's the deal with the game getting less favorable reviews on the PC side?
Broaden your horizonsThe game is not perfect as the scores and reviews suggests. Some could be minor or major depending on the person and if you can overlook them or not. As i said im going off the review by Robin from Hooked because his opinion on the Halo franchise is inline with my expierence of the past games. You are free to agree or disagree and explain why im wrong. But i dont expect a serious respond from someone who uses "yikes" .
What's the deal with the game getting less favorable reviews on the PC side?
Uh huh suuuuuuuureBasically the same score as Halo 5, expected
The open world was a bad choice after all, but Halo's gameplay remains king and it manages to hide all other setbacks
That Giant Bomb review is really funny and interesting to me.
It's like barely a review of the game at all and more just an op-ed of the state of the industry how a big tentpole title is launching into gamepass and whether reviews even matter now because people can just play it for basically nothing and make their own opinion.
When they haven't done a review in over a year, it's probably worth addressing from his end. I agree with him overall. In the traditional sense, I find them a relic of a bygone era. He's spot on in that anyone who clicked on his "review" already knew whether they wanted to give the game a shot.
How's legendary looking difficulty wise? I always do legendary in halo. Halo 2 was the biggest pain in the ass of my life. So how does this fare?
Physics!
I mean, by a country mile. Not even remotely close.So out of the big 3(cod, bf, halo) this year. Halo is the highest scoring
Half-Life: Alyx doesn't even require high-end hardware. It's very well optimized. Everyone is free to develop something similar instead of the 10th samey feeling sequel.If the only example that can be used is a platform-defining game built entirely for high-end hardware then I think it kind of proves the point.
Doesn't mean much with all of these being GaaS.So out of the big 3(cod, bf, halo) this year. Halo is the highest scoring
review codes were only for xbox consoles iirc
BUT u can simply try out the free multiplayer experience. Basically the same gadets, weapons and movesets. Imo Halo never felt better on PC than in Infinite.
I'm sure 343 is devastated to have one of the highest reviewed games of the year. What a big mistake they made.Basically the same score as Halo 5, expected
The open world was a bad choice after all, but Halo's gameplay remains king and it manages to hide all other setbacks
ah you are right there are just not many reviews for pc in comparison.Even for the PC-focused outlets? I think PC Gamer mentioned what PC hardware they used to test.
Is it a global release? Or should we quickly move to New Zealand 👀
Seems like pc version is borked for some peopleWhat's the deal with the game getting less favorable reviews on the PC side?
I agree honestly. I don't read them anymore to figure out if I want to play. For that purpose, I'd rather listen to or watch conversations about the game that aren't bound by the structures and constraints and weirdness of traditional game reviews. And then if I want real analysis, whether of culture or systems or themes, well I can read a smart critique by a smart critic at any time after playing the game myself. I'd much rather spend time with criticism that enriches or complicates my experience with a work, than with the increasingly unnecessary "worth a buy?" style.When they haven't done a review in over a year, it's probably worth addressing from his end. I agree with him overall. In the traditional sense, I find them a relic of a bygone era. He's spot on in that anyone who clicked on his "review" already knew whether they wanted to give the game a shot.
Yep, we'll said. Same.I agree honestly. I don't read them anymore to figure out if I want to play. For that purpose, I'd rather listen to or watch conversations about the game that aren't bound by the structures and constraints and weirdness of traditional game reviews. And then if I want real analysis, whether of culture or systems or themes, well I can read a smart critique by a smart critic at any time after playing the game myself. I'd much rather spend time with criticism that enriches or complicates my experience with a work, than with the increasingly unnecessary "worth a buy?" style.
It isn't a major turning point in the industry though. Nintendo has always held close to Miyamoto's quote about a delayed game only being delayed for a short time, while a bad game is bad forever. Sony has shown a similar view towards their internal projects, including many delays for the last few GT iterations as well as recent delays for Horizon: Forbidden West and God of War Ragnarok.Holy shit that Gene Park review, I'm sold.
I think this is going to mark a major turning point in the industry: This game is essentially the anti Cyberpunk in that it's receiving universal praise because of its delay. Microsoft under Mattrick would've probably forced a broken product out last year but the enormous risk of moving their flagship game back an entire year is paying off.
Now, first off, understand I'm happy with these scores, and I'm not trying to suggest the game isn't great or in any way undeserving of them. I'm coming from the perspective of someone who actually loved 4 overall, and liked what I played of 5. That said... why are there so many people saying "343 finally made a good Halo game!", "343 redeemed!", " Halo is finally back!", etc. when the scores are basically the same as 4 (also 87 MC) and only slightly higher than 5 (84 MC)? Again, I'm glad it's getting these scores, and is at least as good as it's predecessors which I greatly enjoyed, but I don't really understand some of the sentiments in here when it's actually scoring on par with 4 and 5?
Heroic for me. (Side note - upgrade your equipment, to your benefit!)Which difficutly did you play on? Since halo2 I've always started my first playthrough with heroic and after finishing went to legendary. As a Halo "Veteran" who played through every game multiple times and on legendary, is there value in starting on normal or should I just go directly to heroic as always?