Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

[Locked] Thoughts on Angry Joe Review

OP junaid642

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 16
  4. 17
  5. 18
  6. 19
  7. 20
  8. ...
  9. 22
Wylyth1992 wrote:
I think he has a right to his opinion. Though, I also have to agree with him, the attitude of Mister Chief (apparently representing 343) of "shut up, the grown ups are talking" to the red and blue Spartan IVs (representing those who are uneasy about req packs or think they ruin the purity of the game and have VERY valid concerns) just seems....insulting. Like, is this how 343 views the fans who don't like what they have done with the Halo gameplay, they view them as children who don't know what they are talking about? Seriously, what the hell, 343?
Go to the bottom for a summary of everything written below if you don't want to read everything.

Regarding Split Screen:

Joe's Quote: "One of the Core Tenants of the Halo Franchise, now ripped out, with no warning...to force you to buy two copies of the game and a second Xbox One."
REALITY: Well, there actually was a warning for everyone as I can find articles dated back to July and August that say Halo 5: Guardians will NOT have Split Screen. 343i decided to take it out for the sake of 1080p and 60 Frames per Second. So the claim that there was no warning is obviously false and shows the ignorance of the reviewer here in researching before the review. Onto the claim that he makes about the article he uses with Phil Spencer: I actually have the original article where Spencer talked about Split Screen multiplayer and the full interview transcript here; in the interview, Spencer's response was that of pragmatism. He told the interviewer that most multiplayer and Co-Op action happens through Xbox LIVE. Now, for someone like Joe, who doesn't usually play on the Xbox to come out and call Spencer out for PR BS is makes zero sense and is atrocious.

Regarding Campaign:

Joe's Quote: "We beat the game in 4 hours and 30 minutes...on normal..." "...your campaign is going to be closer to 3 hours, you know, repeating levels and getting killed..."

REALITY: For me and probably many other people, on Co-Op the game takes way longer than 7 hours on Legendary. I had a full team of friends who wanted to play Co-Op together on Legendary and it took us roughly 11 and a half hours to complete the game. Also, the game wasn't meant to just rush right through the campaign, if I could quote some people at 343i I cou-- oh wait, I can, here is a link of Frank O'Connor talking about Halo 5's campaign length. In the article he discusses with the interviewer that the campaign is largely influenced by the player and he continues on by saying that players are getting better at the games and that's also why it take shorter periods of time to complete the game. Including the fact that later on the average campaign length was reported to be at least 9-13 hours long and that didn't include finding Intel or Skulls. What he does with the Grunts in the video is exactly what we are suppose to do in the campaign as there are plenty of tidbits from every NPC that talks about the lore or just has a funny moment of dialogue. He bashes the game for not having a long enough campaign but didn't play it the way it was meant to be played, but everyone can play the campaign however the like and I don't think Camapign Length tells as much about the story.

Regarding Story:

Joe's Quote: "[Halo 5's] campaign is mediocre at best with a cliffhanger, ball-busting of ending that never earns it..." ..."Halo 5 isn't very new player friendly, if you're brand new to the franchise...you'll be somewhat lost as to who the hell some of the these characters are and why they're missing arms and their current conditions, okay." "...unfortunately, it wasn't half and half, it's pretty much 85% Locke and his Osiris team and just three missions as Chief, THREE OUT OF FIFTEEN!"

REALITY: On the topic of the cliffhanger-ending, it wasn't so much as a cliffhanger as people make it out to be. A cliffhanger is like that of Halo 2 where Chief responds to Lord Hood "Sir, finishing this fight" and then cuts black (Not that there is a cutscene of Cortana in the Epilogue that is really important to the game currently, but who gives a damn about that, let's -Yoink- about the cliffhanger and not how everything ties together.), but in Halo 5, that wasn't a cliffhanger ending, that was simply closing the page of the game and changing the page to the next game, it's called a transition, but if you want to talk about a cutscene that looks like a cliffhanger, it's the one with the Halo ring in the background after you complete Halo 5 on Legendary; there were so many questions running through my mind after that cutscene that I didn't ask with Chief and Halsey because that cutscene has dire implications and makes one wonder if *SPOILERS* Cortana is going to activate the Halo ring as it is not known if she still has the first index from Halo: CE. I call that great and subtle story-telling. As for the new players who are just hopping into the game let me give you the information you need for Halo 5: Play the Master Chief Collection ($60) on Easy as it shouldn't take you any more than an 5 hours to complete, then play the Spartan Ops missions or watch the Episodes in Halo 4 Spartan Ops, then go and look up the terminals for every Halo game except Halo 3 on YouTube (FREE), then read up or get a summary on Halo: Escalation and Halo: The Fall of REACH (FREE-$10, also available on the Halo Channel), then listen to Hunt the Truth (FREE), watch Halo: NIGHTFALL (FREE) for Locke's story, and once you do all of that (Should take less than a day) then play Halo 5 as that's what you should know about Halo 5; completing everything shouldn't take more than a day because you can listen to the podcasts while playing Halo and then read up or research some of the lore to grasp the rest. Personally, I love Halo's story and if you like Halo's story I recommend reading into the lore. Regarding the Locke and Chief mission disparity, this is all about personal preference, Chief has some of the longest missions in Halo 5 and has the best cutscenes that are related to the story. Locke has definitely the shortest missions with several (Warden Eternal Battles) being pretty long. As I said, this is about personal preference.

Regarding Marketing:

Let me just say that the Marketing for this game was spot on. Many could argue, justifiably, that ONI was in charge of the ads to smear Chief after they released Hunt the Truth and the A Hero Fall and a Spartan Rises trailers. You just need to connect the dots and think of these as propaganda BECAUSE THEY ARE!

Regarding Requisitions:

I know I've been using his quotes to be able to rebut some of his major complaints but this is where his rant came in. Let me outline where he misses the points with the REQ system:

  • He forgets that you can add boosts that dramatically increase XP and RP.
  • He forgets that once you level up, you have a chance for cosmetics.
  • He forgets that once you fulfill a commendation you can get cosmetics.
  • He forgets that Bronze and Silver have their place in the REQ system as they drop commendations that Gold doesn't.
In summary, I found the review some what unfair to the greatness of the franchise as a whole. The game is amazing and does fall short in some areas and we should recognize those areas, but the areas he ranted on were the areas that I would deem low-priority. Why? it's simple, we need to assess a cost-benefit analysis with every decision and realize and be empathetic even if we don't agree with their moves. Do I think Halo could do better than Halo 5? Of course. Do I want people to enjoy a game they love, the way they want to enjoy it? Of course. As it stands right now, I find Halo 5's rating of a 6/10 not only wrong but a complete slap in the face to the franchise and it's wonderful, meaningful story and amazing multiplayer. I respect Angry Joe's opinion even though I disagree with it wholeheartedly so I hope that people will do the exact same for me even though you may disagree with me.
My exact thoughts. I agree.
He exaggerated his thoughts way out of proportion
Everyone has an opinion.
he does bring up some valid points, but he also exaggerates too much. joe's problem is that he tends to not be completely informed on the subject prior to reviewing it, so while that may lead to a more honest opinion, it's one based on a false premise. i will say he was right about not having chief as a boss battle, that would have been awesome
That is a little agravating
the campain was suposto be about spartan lock bringing in master cheif , but i wish it had more missions to play as i hero we have all grown to love
And that is the problem right there. You can't let the Chief go. 343 absolutely should have just killed him off in Halo freakin 4 so they could be free to develop Locke and the rest and allow the Halo universe to grow and evolve beyond the Chief. The Chief was great but his time has passed. Halo is so much bigger than the Chief.

I guarantee you if people got to play the entire campaign as the Chief they would be raving about how good the campaign was. Guaran freakin tee you. It is ridiculous how many people rate the campaign entirely on the fact that they only got to play three missions as the Chief. It is pathetic.
I agree with alot he says, the campaign was weak but that's mostly due part to the ads hyping it up. Split screen doesn't affect me, just never have liked it but I understand why people miss it. The REQ system is very easy to understand (Didn't agree with him here) I also do not think the REQ packs are pay to win.
I don't care

This post has been hidden.

0
Completely agree with everything he says, this is not a halo game. and the 3 missions for chief only..... are you serious????
i mean like i can see his points
Joe definitely makes some valid points. He is a hair harsh at times, but his gripes are also valid. I give his review a 6/10...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
(see what I did there?? :-) )
It's just the usual hyper negativity that Joe enjoys spouting about most long running franchises. He's getting boring.
I am a long time Halo fangirl and I 100% agree with all of this. Where is my big team and odd ball and all the things that make Halo fun? I remember where people wore recon from doing the vidmasters and you could see their skill from the armor but now its just random b.s. And I love the campaigns in halo games but this one didn't establish the characters at all. And lets be honest. Nobody gives a -Yoink- about locke. Hes an underdeveloped character that 343 is trying to force on people to be the "new chief." Halo 5's story is 100% between chief and cortana yet we get 95% locke being annoying and easily controlled by the UNSC and ONI. Like they could try to make the game about locke but they didn't. It's about Chief's relationship with Cortana. So why r we hardly playing as Chief? Honestly I would rather play as buck cause hes awesome! and marketed as locke vs chief and they have one little tussle where chief pushes him aside like a little kid? 10/10 343. I was hoping Halo 5 would be a huge breakthrough for 343 but they only slightly improved off 4. And no split screen?..........u understand how many college kids alone play halo in the dorms right? thats the -Yoink- I lived off of when I was a kid and a still do! Way more negative with this game than positive for me. I love Halo so much but its just falling out of favor recently :(
junaid642 wrote:
Go to the bottom for a summary of everything written below if you don't want to read everything.

Regarding Split Screen:

Joe's Quote: "One of the Core Tenants of the Halo Franchise, now ripped out, with no warning...to force you to buy two copies of the game and a second Xbox One."
REALITY: Well, there actually was a warning for everyone as I can find articles dated back to July and August that say Halo 5: Guardians will NOT have Split Screen. 343i decided to take it out for the sake of 1080p and 60 Frames per Second. So the claim that there was no warning is obviously false and shows the ignorance of the reviewer here in researching before the review. Onto the claim that he makes about the article he uses with Phil Spencer: I actually have the original article where Spencer talked about Split Screen multiplayer and the full interview transcript here; in the interview, Spencer's response was that of pragmatism. He told the interviewer that most multiplayer and Co-Op action happens through Xbox LIVE. Now, for someone like Joe, who doesn't usually play on the Xbox to come out and call Spencer out for PR BS is makes zero sense and is atrocious.

Regarding Campaign:

Joe's Quote: "We beat the game in 4 hours and 30 minutes...on normal..." "...your campaign is going to be closer to 3 hours, you know, repeating levels and getting killed..."

REALITY: For me and probably many other people, on Co-Op the game takes way longer than 7 hours on Legendary. I had a full team of friends who wanted to play Co-Op together on Legendary and it took us roughly 11 and a half hours to complete the game. Also, the game wasn't meant to just rush right through the campaign, if I could quote some people at 343i I cou-- oh wait, I can, here is a link of Frank O'Connor talking about Halo 5's campaign length. In the article he discusses with the interviewer that the campaign is largely influenced by the player and he continues on by saying that players are getting better at the games and that's also why it take shorter periods of time to complete the game. Including the fact that later on the average campaign length was reported to be at least 9-13 hours long and that didn't include finding Intel or Skulls. What he does with the Grunts in the video is exactly what we are suppose to do in the campaign as there are plenty of tidbits from every NPC that talks about the lore or just has a funny moment of dialogue. He bashes the game for not having a long enough campaign but didn't play it the way it was meant to be played, but everyone can play the campaign however the like and I don't think Camapign Length tells as much about the story.

Regarding Story:

Joe's Quote: "[Halo 5's] campaign is mediocre at best with a cliffhanger, ball-busting of ending that never earns it..." ..."Halo 5 isn't very new player friendly, if you're brand new to the franchise...you'll be somewhat lost as to who the hell some of the these characters are and why they're missing arms and their current conditions, okay." "...unfortunately, it wasn't half and half, it's pretty much 85% Locke and his Osiris team and just three missions as Chief, THREE OUT OF FIFTEEN!"

REALITY: On the topic of the cliffhanger-ending, it wasn't so much as a cliffhanger as people make it out to be. A cliffhanger is like that of Halo 2 where Chief responds to Lord Hood "Sir, finishing this fight" and then cuts black (Not that there is a cutscene of Cortana in the Epilogue that is really important to the game currently, but who gives a damn about that, let's -Yoink- about the cliffhanger and not how everything ties together.), but in Halo 5, that wasn't a cliffhanger ending, that was simply closing the page of the game and changing the page to the next game, it's called a transition, but if you want to talk about a cutscene that looks like a cliffhanger, it's the one with the Halo ring in the background after you complete Halo 5 on Legendary; there were so many questions running through my mind after that cutscene that I didn't ask with Chief and Halsey because that cutscene has dire implications and makes one wonder if *SPOILERS* Cortana is going to activate the Halo ring as it is not known if she still has the first index from Halo: CE. I call that great and subtle story-telling. As for the new players who are just hopping into the game let me give you the information you need for Halo 5: Play the Master Chief Collection ($60) on Easy as it shouldn't take you any more than an 5 hours to complete, then play the Spartan Ops missions or watch the Episodes in Halo 4 Spartan Ops, then go and look up the terminals for every Halo game except Halo 3 on YouTube (FREE), then read up or get a summary on Halo: Escalation and Halo: The Fall of REACH (FREE-$10, also available on the Halo Channel), then listen to Hunt the Truth (FREE), watch Halo: NIGHTFALL (FREE) for Locke's story, and once you do all of that (Should take less than a day) then play Halo 5 as that's what you should know about Halo 5; completing everything shouldn't take more than a day because you can listen to the podcasts while playing Halo and then read up or research some of the lore to grasp the rest. Personally, I love Halo's story and if you like Halo's story I recommend reading into the lore. Regarding the Locke and Chief mission disparity, this is all about personal preference, Chief has some of the longest missions in Halo 5 and has the best cutscenes that are related to the story. Locke has definitely the shortest missions with several (Warden Eternal Battles) being pretty long. As I said, this is about personal preference.

Regarding Marketing:

Let me just say that the Marketing for this game was spot on. Many could argue, justifiably, that ONI was in charge of the ads to smear Chief after they released Hunt the Truth and the A Hero Fall and a Spartan Rises trailers. You just need to connect the dots and think of these as propaganda BECAUSE THEY ARE!

Regarding Requisitions:

I know I've been using his quotes to be able to rebut some of his major complaints but this is where his rant came in. Let me outline where he misses the points with the REQ system:

  • He forgets that you can add boosts that dramatically increase XP and RP.
  • He forgets that once you level up, you have a chance for cosmetics.
  • He forgets that once you fulfill a commendation you can get cosmetics.
  • He forgets that Bronze and Silver have their place in the REQ system as they drop commendations that Gold doesn't.
In summary, I found the review some what unfair to the greatness of the franchise as a whole. The game is amazing and does fall short in some areas and we should recognize those areas, but the areas he ranted on were the areas that I would deem low-priority. Why? it's simple, we need to assess a cost-benefit analysis with every decision and realize and be empathetic even if we don't agree with their moves. Do I think Halo could do better than Halo 5? Of course. Do I want people to enjoy a game they love, the way they want to enjoy it? Of course. As it stands right now, I find Halo 5's rating of a 6/10 not only wrong but a complete slap in the face to the franchise and it's wonderful, meaningful story and amazing multiplayer. I respect Angry Joe's opinion even though I disagree with it wholeheartedly so I hope that people will do the exact same for me even though you may disagree with me.
My exact thoughts. I agree.
He exaggerated his thoughts way out of proportion
Would you care to elaborate please?
He is a joke and so are his "reviews", but lets look at his Halo 5 review.
In it, he gives the game -Yoink- for having an underwhelming story and abrupt ending, but he gave MGS5 a free pass when it had the SAME DAMN THING.
He states that split screen was removed with no prior warning, which is a straight up lie, just goes to show you how little research he actually does before reviewing a game.
He gives the game -Yoink- for having microtransactions that don't even impact the game in a major way, but yet again, gave MGS5 a free pass when Konami did the SAME EXACT THING for Mother Base/FOB.

Not to mention the fact that when people went into his chat to correct him and call him out on his incorrect statements, he just brushed it all off as them being fanboys, and went on to say that Halo has one of the most toxic communities. He is such a heavily biased person, it isn't even funny. He's not professional AT ALL, he took the wrong side in several different controversies, he consistently shows his lack of proper research, and blows small issues up to seem like dealbreaking problems. I would rather receive information from Pewdiepie in regards to a game's quality than AngryJoe, and people like TotalBiscuit put AJ to SHAME.
To be fair, some members of the Halo community can be pretty bad. I'm talking about the ones who fail to accept change and just want Halo 2 copy and pasted. I like Metal Gear but it has a ton of fanboys who seem to absolutely love Hideo Kojima. MGS5 does lack a proper ending and its supposed to be the final game in the franchise, but we have Konami to blame for that. Halo 5 will have a sequel so at least we will know what will happen next.
He is a joke and so are his "reviews", but lets look at his Halo 5 review.
In it, he gives the game -Yoink- for having an underwhelming story and abrupt ending, but he gave MGS5 a free pass when it had the SAME DAMN THING.
He states that split screen was removed with no prior warning, which is a straight up lie, just goes to show you how little research he actually does before reviewing a game.
He gives the game -Yoink- for having microtransactions that don't even impact the game in a major way, but yet again, gave MGS5 a free pass when Konami did the SAME EXACT THING for Mother Base/FOB.

Not to mention the fact that when people went into his chat to correct him and call him out on his incorrect statements, he just brushed it all off as them being fanboys, and went on to say that Halo has one of the most toxic communities. He is such a heavily biased person, it isn't even funny. He's not professional AT ALL, he took the wrong side in several different controversies, he consistently shows his lack of proper research, and blows small issues up to seem like dealbreaking problems. I would rather receive information from Pewdiepie in regards to a game's quality than AngryJoe, and people like TotalBiscuit put AJ to SHAME.
To be fair, some members of the Halo community can be pretty bad. I'm talking about the ones who fail to accept change and just want Halo 2 copy and pasted. I like Metal Gear but it has a ton of fanboys who seem to absolutely love Hideo Kojima. MGS5 does lack a proper ending and its supposed to be the final game in the franchise, but we have Konami to blame for that. Halo 5 will have a sequel so at least we will know what will happen next.
God those guys would be insufferable...

...if there more than four of them existed.

Perhaps Halo could simply gain something from re-evaluating its priorities on the mechanical level as a competitive console shooter. Perhaps we could all learn how to talk to one another without being condescending and generalizing them into a total strawman with no actual basis in reality.
I think his review hit the nail on the head for me. I agreed with a lot of his points, especially about getting hate for critiquing glaringly obvious issues with the game.
junaid642 wrote:
SKWRLY wrote:
I watched about 5-10 minutes of it because I don't want anyone's opinion to influence mine, but how in the hell did he not know the game was not-split screen? As a top tier game reviewer I expect him to at least be knowledgeable about the games he reviews. It's not like this information was tucked away until the day of release and kept on he hush hush. We've known about this for months and every game media outlet has covered it. For him to invite other Joe over and appear to be baffled seems unfair and just ignorant. Maybe I missed something but I found that to be in bad taste.
Idk why but it feels like they already knew to me...
I got this feeling too and that's why I said it was in bad taste. There are 2 possible evils from this: 1) he had no clue. 2) it was an act, therefor insincere.
L377UC3 wrote:
He is a joke and so are his "reviews", but lets look at his Halo 5 review.
In it, he gives the game -Yoink- for having an underwhelming story and abrupt ending, but he gave MGS5 a free pass when it had the SAME DAMN THING.
He states that split screen was removed with no prior warning, which is a straight up lie, just goes to show you how little research he actually does before reviewing a game.
He gives the game -Yoink- for having microtransactions that don't even impact the game in a major way, but yet again, gave MGS5 a free pass when Konami did the SAME EXACT THING for Mother Base/FOB.

Not to mention the fact that when people went into his chat to correct him and call him out on his incorrect statements, he just brushed it all off as them being fanboys, and went on to say that Halo has one of the most toxic communities. He is such a heavily biased person, it isn't even funny. He's not professional AT ALL, he took the wrong side in several different controversies, he consistently shows his lack of proper research, and blows small issues up to seem like dealbreaking problems. I would rather receive information from Pewdiepie in regards to a game's quality than AngryJoe, and people like TotalBiscuit put AJ to SHAME.
To be fair, some members of the Halo community can be pretty bad. I'm talking about the ones who fail to accept change and just want Halo 2 copy and pasted. I like Metal Gear but it has a ton of fanboys who seem to absolutely love Hideo Kojima. MGS5 does lack a proper ending and its supposed to be the final game in the franchise, but we have Konami to blame for that. Halo 5 will have a sequel so at least we will know what will happen next.
God those guys would be insufferable...

...if there more than four of them existed.

Perhaps Halo could simply gain something from re-evaluating its priorities on the mechanical level as a competitive console shooter. Perhaps we could all learn how to talk to one another without being condescending and generalizing them into a total strawman with no actual basis in reality.
Well, every fanbase seems to have some loud minority. That's Halos.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 16
  4. 17
  5. 18
  6. 19
  7. 20
  8. ...
  9. 22