How did Halo 3 achive the same score as Super Mario Galaxy?

because the review was unbiased had alot of fun and gave it points for some many great features, tune ups and awesomness.

ps user scores? lol do know how many ppl mark a game for being bad because its exclusive like a game halo, i believe halo is the number 1 hated game by fanboys.

LibertySaint

Halo 3 didn't change much, but had a lot of content. SMG changed a lot, and was awsome.

I am still trying to figure out how GTA4 received a 10?

lvgaming

the pros outdid the cons, simple as that.

while i agree, those are not valid points.

in my opinion, halo 3 improved in no way over halo 2 besides slightly in graphics and adding the theater mode. that makes it worthless.

but then again, smg is just sm64 in space, which on the contrary makes it even more boring than you would think.

and gamespot's scores aren't meant to be compared cross-genre.

what they're saying is that SMG is better than ratchet and clank, which it clearly is.

[QUOTE="lvgaming"]

I am still trying to figure out how GTA4 received a 10?

KGB32

the pros outdid the cons, simple as that.

1. story was ignored for a good 40 percent of the missions

2. missions were extremely repititive

3. driving on ice

4. online sucks

now IMO those are big enough flaws to knock it down to 9.0, but 9.5 seems like a really good score for gta. i mean most long time GTA fans admit that this is the worst one.

Super Mario Galaxy was too slow for my tastes

kthxbai

Is this a joke. In no way is Halo as innovative, fun, and exicting as Super Mario Galaxy. I mean look at the user scores Halo 3 (8.9) and SMG(9.3). Halo 3 single player is nothing to SMG and if you don't have live the online is usless. COD4 is better anyway. Dark-Pain

'not innovative'..: Forge, Theatre, Screenshot taking & sharing, Film recording & sharing, I guess those aren't innovative for a console shooter right? hopesfall2own

Innovation is defined as a new thing or method, and those are all new to Halo, so yes, Halo 3 was very innovative.

"You're comparing apples to oranges. Reviews don't work like that. "

Unless your a fruit critic.

Super Mario Galaxy was too slow for my tastes

kthxbai

SSCyborg

This

Because it has more content than any console in existance, all of which is produced to a very high quality. :| Also... you cant just ignore the entire online portion of the game "because i dont have live". That makes no sense at all. All of that content is still there; it shouldnt be ignored because you choose not to play online.

It's like saying SMG is useless if you only play online.

Ninja-Hippo

halo3 comes with a ton of features. Forge, Theather, Picture/movie/map sharing, addicting multiplayer, 4 player (online) co-op

Well you cant compare the two.

But honestly the massive hype, and media circus had to do with Halo 3s score being skewed imo.

A 8.5 to 9.0 game in my eyes - the singleplayer has more faults than I can shake a gravity hammer at.

I agree, people are missing the big picture here.

halo3 comes with a ton of features. Forge, Theather, Picture/movie/map sharing, addicting multiplayer, 4 player (online) co-op

killerfist

On paper the features all look great... however in implementation its not a case of 'more = better'.

The multiplayer and community features are exellent, however other features like the replay mode (for singleplayer) was not fleshed out, neither was Forge - as much as it could have been, and the 4 player coop was not properly implemented to complimtent the design of the singleplayer - it felt like a 'feature to tout' rather than something that added to the game design. And of course the SP... well it didn't really hold up well compared to all the other big name shooters offered in my eyes....

Its all about things being properly cohesive and well implemented into the game design.
If it was just - more = merrier, than games like UT04 which pack in astronomical amounts of content would be the best shooters.

'not innovative'..: Forge, hopesfall2own

Far Cry Instincts on original Xbox had a map editor.

[QUOTE="hopesfall2own"]'not innovative'..: Forge, Theatre, Screenshot taking & sharing, Film recording & sharing, I guess those aren't innovative for a console shooter right? CronoSquall

Innovation is defined as a new thing or method, and those are all new to Halo, so yes, Halo 3 was very innovative.

It was NOT innovative at all.

the Halo series never has been innovative. Polished yes, well exectuted (for most of the part) yes. Innovative no.

Those have all done been before.

And no there is no 'well its innovative for a console' That is NOT 'innovation', taking one thing from another platform to the next.

how did mario acheive the same score as halo 3? (just kidinh) each of those game have there strong points, imo halo certenly desreves a 9.5 for its great replayabilty

Because it was an awesome game

/thread

[QUOTE="CronoSquall"]

[QUOTE="hopesfall2own"]'not innovative'..: Forge, Theatre, Screenshot taking & sharing, Film recording & sharing, I guess those aren't innovative for a console shooter right? skrat_01

Innovation is defined as a new thing or method, and those are all new to Halo, so yes, Halo 3 was very innovative.

It was NOT innovative at all.

the Halo series never has been innovative. Polished yes, well exectuted (for most of the part) yes. Innovative no.

Those have all done been before.

And no there is no 'well its innovative for a console' That is NOT 'innovation', taking one thing from another platform to the next.

I agree with the above... but having seen SMG and played it (for a while on my friend's Wii) its a great game, but to say its innovative or that it re-invented the platform genre is an overstatement (imo)...

so lets just say both are great games which reviewers thought deserved a 10/10 score..

[QUOTE="killerfist"]

I agree, people are missing the big picture here.

halo3 comes with a ton of features. Forge, Theather, Picture/movie/map sharing, addicting multiplayer, 4 player (online) co-op

skrat_01

On paper the features all look great... however in implementation its not a case of 'more = better'.

The multiplayer and community features are exellent, however other features like the replay mode (for singleplayer) was not fleshed out, neither was Forge - as much as it could have been, and the 4 player coop was not properly implemented to complimtent the design of the singleplayer - it felt like a 'feature to tout' rather than something that added to the game design. And of course the SP... well it didn't really hold up well compared to all the other big name shooters offered in my eyes....

Its all about things being properly cohesive and well implemented into the game design.
If it was just - more = merrier, than games like UT04 which pack in astronomical amounts of content would be the best shooters.

the rest is all well done for a console game imo. if it werent for the content, it would have scored much lower. 8.5ish I think.

just look at COD4, it only has a (short but fun) SP and multiplayer, but it still managed to score a 9 here and win several GOTY shooter awards. I halo3s score is fine where it is, compared to COD4 (also an xbox game).

How did mario galaxy get 9.5? its short, pathetic story, rehashed characters, all it had was graphics and "Oh looks I R MOONWALKING".

Nostalgia wins again.

PC360Wii

Bumped for complete confusion. a short flashy game like Mario with a slightly new spin is somehow GOTY? because it has toy train levels and music from previous games?

Same exact gameplay bar grabbing objects with a pointer..... just another Mario.

No replay value, 2007 couldnt have been as good as it was made out.

How did mario galaxy get 9.5? its short, pathetic story, rehashed characters, all it had was graphics and "Oh looks I R MOONWALKING".

Nostalgia wins again.

PC360Wii

:lol:!!!!

"Oh looks I R MOONWALKING".

Oh thats classic!! :lol:

I'm gonna sig that! :)

I agree with some of that, 4 player co-op was too easy with 4 players, but still pure fun imo.

the rest is all well done for a console game imo. if it werent for the content, it would have scored much lower. 8.5ish I think.

just look at COD4, it only has a (short but fun) SP and multiplayer, but it still managed to score a 9 here and win several GOTY shooter awards. I halo3s score is fine where it is, compared to COD4 (also an xbox game).

killerfist

I would ask how many people are still playing Galaxy?

It was a great experience while it lasted, but after January I don't think the disc has even left its case. Halo 3 still makes regular apperences as the multiplayer continues to offer play value for me,

Bring back 2d mario games already Nintendo.

Tykain

Halo rocks, pure and simple....

I feel there is a touch of innovation in the series.....I think it was Gametrailers or gamepro or somthing that said ''Halo (CE) reinvented a genre that didn't know it needed reinventing''

One feature thats been copyed to death since halo 2 is the ''regenerating healthbar/sheilds'', COD 4, gears etc. they all do it now...

for me its Halo>>>>>>SMG all the way :P

Super Mario galaxy is good but Halo is the better game. Super Mario has an interesting idea behind it and it's great to play through. But once you've done it? Bloop. Don't care anymore. I've got like 70 odd stars? Trying to force myself on to get more but I'm busy with my 360.

Halo wins on story.

Halo wins on replay.

gameplay is a complete toss up, it's personal opinion. Call of duty 4 was epic but again, the novelty wears off and people move on, Halo is still going strong and will remain going strong till the next one. That's what makes a great game, being able to pay out £40 for something and still find yourself playing it 4 years later. Galaxy, COD4? They'll be dead in the water.

Halo rocks, pure and simple....

I feel there is a touch of innovation in the series.....I think it was Gametrailers or gamepro or somthing that said ''Halo (CE) reinvented a genre that didn't know it needed reinventing''

One feature thats been copyed to death since halo 2 is the ''regenerating healthbar/sheilds'', COD 4, gears etc. they all do it now...

for me its Halo>>>>>>SMG all the way :P

ImOldGreg

A gross exaggeration designed to throw fans into gushing fits.

It didnt re-invent anything. Sure as hell popularised the shield, 'hit' button, and was a major step forwards for the console shooter genre (not to mention was tremendously polished) but thats about it.

Games that 're-invented' the FPS for example are Doom and Half Life. Otherwise other progressive ones have made much more changes to the genre than Halo - even inspiring Halo, pushing the evolution of the genre.

[QUOTE="ImOldGreg"]

Halo rocks, pure and simple....

I feel there is a touch of innovation in the series.....I think it was Gametrailers or gamepro or somthing that said ''Halo (CE) reinvented a genre that didn't know it needed reinventing''

One feature thats been copyed to death since halo 2 is the ''regenerating healthbar/sheilds'', COD 4, gears etc. they all do it now...

for me its Halo>>>>>>SMG all the way :P

skrat_01

A gross exaggeration designed to throw fans into gushing fits.

It didnt re-invent anything. Sure as hell popularised the shield, 'hit' button, and was a major step forwards for the console shooter genre (not to mention was tremendously polished) but thats about it.

Games that 're-invented' the FPS for example are Doom and Half Life. Otherwise other progressive ones have made much more changes to the genre than Halo - even inspiring Halo, pushing the evolution of the genre.

What about Quake?

[QUOTE="skrat_01"][QUOTE="ImOldGreg"]

Halo rocks, pure and simple....

I feel there is a touch of innovation in the series.....I think it was Gametrailers or gamepro or somthing that said ''Halo (CE) reinvented a genre that didn't know it needed reinventing''

One feature thats been copyed to death since halo 2 is the ''regenerating healthbar/sheilds'', COD 4, gears etc. they all do it now...

for me its Halo>>>>>>SMG all the way :P

xscrapzx

A gross exaggeration designed to throw fans into gushing fits.

It didnt re-invent anything. Sure as hell popularised the shield, 'hit' button, and was a major step forwards for the console shooter genre (not to mention was tremendously polished) but thats about it.

Games that 're-invented' the FPS for example are Doom and Half Life. Otherwise other progressive ones have made much more changes to the genre than Halo - even inspiring Halo, pushing the evolution of the genre.

What about Quake?

smg is just as much as a rehash as halo isVendettaRed07

SMG added gravity effects and neat level designs never seen in a platformer before.

What did halo 3 add?

[QUOTE="VendettaRed07"]smg is just as much as a rehash as halo isShinobishyguy

SMG added gravity effects and neat level designs never seen in a platformer before.

What did halo 3 add?

A level editor. That sucked.

[QUOTE="PC360Wii"]

How did mario galaxy get 9.5? its short, pathetic story, rehashed characters, all it had was graphics and "Oh looks I R MOONWALKING".

Nostalgia wins again.

sam280992

:lol:!!!!

"Oh looks I R MOONWALKING".

Oh thats classic!! :lol:

I'm gonna sig that! :)

Thanks, but other than gravity what did it have over Mario 64?

Is this a joke. In no way is Halo as innovative, fun, and exicting as Super Mario Galaxy. I mean look at the user scores Halo 3 (8.9) and SMG(9.3). Halo 3 single player is nothing to SMG and if you don't have live the online is usless. COD4 is better anyway. Dark-Pain

Hype and large fan base, people are scared to upset the majority party. I am still trying to figure out how GTA4 received a 10?

lvgaming

what did gta4 do not to deserve a 10?

[QUOTE="KGB32"][QUOTE="lvgaming"]

I am still trying to figure out how GTA4 received a 10?

mistervengeance

the pros outdid the cons, simple as that.

1. story was ignored for a good 40 percent of the missions

2. missions were extremely repititive

3. driving on ice

4. online sucks

now IMO those are big enough flaws to knock it down to 9.0, but 9.5 seems like a really good score for gta. i mean most long time GTA fans admit that this is the worst one.

oh man, how can you hate on the online play? damn thing is fun as hell.

'not innovative'..: Forge, Theatre, Screenshot taking & sharing, Film recording & sharing, I guess those aren't innovative for a console shooter right? hopesfall2own

[QUOTE="Tykain"]

The question should be how did SMG achieve that score.

I thought SMG was crap, tbh. Just like every other 3d mario. Bring back 2nd mario games already Nintendo.

iammason

Paper Mario?

I really didnt understand what they were trying to do with paper mario

it was weak on the rpg elements, and very week on the platforming elements. It was a good game, but i mean, it was just weird like they didnt know what kind of game they were trying to make.

[QUOTE="lvgaming"]

Hype and large fan base, people are scared to upset the majority party. I am still trying to figure out how GTA4 received a 10?

LEGEND_C4A

what did gta4 do not to deserve a 10?

idk man but people need to stop complaining about it

san andreas got a freaking 9.6 and it wasnt even good really. This one is awesome, so how could it really not get a 10, people here seem to forget that it goes by .5 increments now, and that a 10 is much much easier to score

[QUOTE="VendettaRed07"]smg is just as much as a rehash as halo isShinobishyguy

SMG added gravity effects and neat level designs never seen in a platformer before.

What did halo 3 add?

my point was that they are still both fun geeze... i love both games, but when people say halo is a rehash i just say well, smg isnt all that new either but its still awesome, even though all it was, was mario upsidedown, and halo was halo in hd, with forge and a theater so who cares.