What do you then do about Destiny, which is constantly changing with patches and new Iron Banner tournament incoming, then The Dark Below and House of Wolves all really expected to be bought by everyone in much the same way as World of Warcraft or EVE changes for its subscribers? In contrast, cars don't suddenly improve overnight as they sit outside your house, sometimes they need to be physically recalled like a Ford Pinto.
Destiny has been patched many times since launch and although The Dark Below and House of Wolves don't interest me as I have never played PvE the extra bundled multiplayer maps persuaded me to get the Expansion Pass for it.
Destiny is a bit unusual in the same way as World of Warcraft as it is being improved all the time with additional content such as the new version of the Iron Banner tournament. I think it is worth getting for the PvP alone even though it is terribly unbalanced, but in time it is not unreasonable to expect that Bungie will improve the story with the addition of Eris, perhaps.
Halo has a stronger story, though somewhat generic, but PvP is so much a core part of its identity that it has an equal impact upon the score it recieves when it wouldn't be unreasonable to anticipate both getting a rare 10 had they both provided decent campaigns with better character continuity when entering their PvP arenas.
If one were to wait for these early matchmaking problems to be patched before giving a review then Gamespot would be failing its readers by not warning them of unmerchantable product quality and giving them the opportunity to spend buy a more deserving Christmas present - such as Advanced Warfare, for example. If they went the same route as Polygon and downgraded the score when the servers were opened to the public, only to later upgrade that score when it was finally worth people's leisure time then Destiny's score would also be in flux as the story was improved with DLC.
Ultimately, 343i gambled on getting multiplayer ready whilst the campaign portion of the game went to be put onto discs and be distributed to stores. I found it suspicious that there was a second multiplayer update just prior to it launching an hour late at 1 a.m. GMT in the UK. I now feel this indicates that they can't have tested it sufficiently but were compelled to release it to tie in with the hype, Hyrb and hullabaloo.
Although I got mine digitally it would have been better if 343i had produced it conventionally on two discs for those who wanted a physical version as they could have then delayed its release into early December and probably saved themselves a lot of grief.
I only bought it for authentic Halo 3 multiplayer in 1080p60 with everyone having access to all of the maps. I found that my Player ID, Emblem, Control Scheme, Bungie Pro Forge maps, saved clips and 5-Star General Rank had not been carried across. I eventually got three games in sixteen hours, since the patch this is somewhat improved but post game freezes, sound dropouts, ugly buzzing noises and total console lock-ups have occurred. I've reset and relauched the game more times than I dare count. It is trash. Furthermore, just to rub salt in the wound when I did finally get to play a game in Halo 3 multiplayer I discovered to my dismay that 343i had the arrogance to monkey around with the object placement so that Narrows was no longer symmetrical and I had to watch out for being sniped by players using Active Camouflage which isn't normally on that map on the 360. What is the point of having a nostalgic collection if you aren't going to respect people's memories and long established strategies? As a result I have since gone back to playing Halo 3 on my 360. Unless you want a cheap way to play six campaigns and try out the dubiously Advanced Warfare like Halo 5 Guardians multiplayer on 29/12 then I cannot recommend a purchase.
Destiny also deservedly got a 6 despite having few online problems at lauch due to the closed Alpha and open Beta stress test conducted by Bungie. I think people reasonably expected it to have more expository cutscenes than were in the Beta and thought that Bungie were trying to avoid narrative spoilers. When it became apparant that it was just a series of horde mode encounters with Peter Dinklage squeaking on about some crap inaudibly in the background which had been done better in the Firefight mode of ODST then the backlash against their "more than a game" was justified and Gamespot's 6 was a fair verdict on what remains an overhyped merely above average game. Hopefully you won't have any technical issues with Far Cry 4 or GTA V on the 18th, personally although I have pre-ordered both in order to get the bonuses I won't touch either for a month as Rockstar themselves admit that they cannot find every fault in their game before many millions of players explore every nook and cranny. This is a fair review in my opinion, and it should be noted that Polygon changed their initial rating of 9.5 to 8 because of all the problems they had had with matchmaking - I have had three games in sixteen hours.
Everyone always goes on about power - usually for graphics, sometimes physics, rarely for next-gen AI. Nintendo made a success of their underpowered Wii by ensuring that it didn't frighten away its broader market demographic with complex controls and unfamiliar game titles. Instead they handed people a remote control and told them they could swing it like the handle of a tennis racket - a game that they already knew the rules to and didn't feel that they had to learn. Nintendo know that accessibility and familiarity trump raw power.
Uncompetative's comments