Look what happens when you plot Halo’s campaign length vs. review score

Finder has unearthed a startling correlation between the reviews scores of the Halo games and their story length.

[SlappingOysters]

That's really interesting data. I can't imagine it is anymore than coincidence, but seeing it graphed out like that is a bit compelling

[kneon]

But aren't those also in order of release? So it could just be that Halo peaked with the first one and has gone downhill ever since.

[Concertoine]

You could say that, but the difference in score between the first 3 games is basically negligible. There's barely a 2% difference between those 3 games, then the percentage starts going down faster.

And that makes sense to me. Halo 1-3 were revolutionary. Stuff like theater mode or forge or custom games still sounds relevant 8 years later because they're still very ambitious ideas. Even Rockstar was 6 years late to that kind of innovation with GTA 5. Bungie were top dog until they started to hit a wall with Reach.

[PurpHerbison]

First Halo is indeed the best one.

[awi5951]

First halo was legendary. Halo 2 i hated the multiplay turned the guns to crappy underpowered mess and it was all about camping the super weapons. No one cared about the super weapons in halo 1 because all your weapons were effective. Halo 2 made me switch to the rainbow 6 series and ghost recon series. Because when they made grenades not kill you outright in halo 2 and the assault rifle couldn't kill a person at full health the game was dead to me.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

The study is flawed and wrong..they conveniently left off Halo 3: ODST which is the actual lowest in the series at 83. Other factors like number of reviews per game are also not accounted for. Halo 4 had 87 review scores compared to 68 for Halo CE and Halo 5 currently at 58 reviews. Additionally...the sources of the reviews like wise should be consistent but that isn't accounted for either.

[BQ32]

to add to your point, there also seems this gen to be a growing number of clickbait troll views were a hyped up game is given a low score simply to drum up controversy where editorial income is directly related to views and views are directly related to controversy

[BQ32]

This is interesting and gives credence to my view that single player and multiplayer should be reviewed separately and adopted industry wide. There are no multiplayer only dedicated sites and in most cases I find that the reviewers are not competitive gamers and lack the skill necessary to
break down the balance and the exploits. A good example is nba 2k, for years that game received top notch scores even while the multiplayer was very frustrating filled with lag, exploits, or not working at all, while on the other hand NHL 15 was bashed in the reviews for lack of offline modes though the game played fantastically smooth online. There seems to be nothing catered to the large base of competitive gamers who mostly just care about playing online, and all reviews of upcoming games so heavily reflect the portion of the game least interesting to them.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

@BQ32 You also raise an interesting point on the reviews being handled separately. Obviously you have to take the product in as a whole but the differences of SP vs MP and the importance each has really has changed over the years. MP used to be a nice to have that was thrown in as a secondary thought. Now we are seeing it given far more importance to the point it is as important if not more important from title to title. Having someone who is experienced in MP modes handling the online review portion & someone who is actively more SP only focused handling the campaign seems like a good move and one I hope the larger sites that could afford to do this will adopt the practice.

[awi5951]

Nba 2k is a great game on dreamcast i loved it.

[gillri]

I think the decline in scores is the same as you get with most franchises as you get to the 3rd, 4th, 5th iteration, mainly through repetition and familiarity scores tend to go down

But as someone who doesn't play Online shooters much anymore (apart from a blast on COD here and there) campaign length is fairly important to me so I'm disappointed in Halo 5's campaign length

I thought it would be the reason for me to get an Xbox One but I don't think so, I'll wait for Quantum Break and Gears 4 now

[SlappingOysters]

Forza is really good fun, but out of the coming exclusives, I like the look of Sea of Thieves and re:core. Shame Project Spark was still born.

[sammarshall102]

Halo 5 is worth every penny plus there's Halo MCC, Sunset Overdrive, Forza Horizon 2, Forza 6, Killer Instinct, Ryse, Dead Rising 3, Ori

[gillri]

Some great games I know but I dont play fighting or racing games anymore

I havent bought a fighting game since Virtua Fighter 4 or a racing game for Project Gotham Racing 2 I just have no interest in them

[gillri]

Oh I forgot I about Ori and the Blind Forest those kind of games I do like I'm a big metroidvania fan but I believe it is being released on Xbox 360 soon so I'll just get it for that

[vikingland1]

Doesn't backwards compatability interest you?

[gillri]

Yes it does but not enough to buy an XBox one, dont worry people I will buy one soon just not this year

[UserNameIsNotTaken]

Loving the multiplayer and can't get enough of it but the Campaign left me wanting more which is what they were aiming for (I think) 'cause Halo 6. It is kinda disappointing but multiplayer can make up for it imo.
I just hoped the game's story was as good as the trailers made it out to be.

Hope that I'm not the only one here that feel this :)

[Relientk77]

So the Halo games are getting progressively shorter

[SlappingOysters]

And scored progressively worse

[Relientk77]

Well yeah also that

[Bigpappy]

If people find the campaign too shot then that is a legit gripe. But the review is neither here nor there for me. I do understand that it hurts the perception of casual players who rely on them though.

[creeping judas]

@Bigpappy, do you think casuals actually go and read reviews before buying a game? I personally think reviews are for the core gamer, like yourself and myself who tend to pay more attention to games then the normal person.

[Hoffmann]

In their defense, Halo games get Microtransactions now at least and probably more dlc than ever before.

Thats good..isnt it?

[tinynuggins]

The free dlc maps are a welcomed addition.

[343_Guilty_Spark]

Sure if you play on Heroic which I think has gotten progressively easier. I still think reviewers should play through on Legendary and receive the proper challenge, instead of blowing through on Heroic.

Halo 1 is definitely not longer than H2 H3 Reach H4 Or H5.

[spicelicka]

How accurate is this chart though?? Halo 5 is wayy longer than halo 4, it has 15 freakin missions when halo 4 had 10....

[Darkwatchman]

The 15 missions could be shorter than the 10???? Ever thought about that???

[Christopher]

It looks like more of a continual decline over time with a leap in the decline when 343 took over.

[Mikefizzled]

To be fair they skip out Halo Reach which was a full release, scoring 91 it continues the slope down.

[Adexus]

Halo Reach is there, they skipped ODST.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

ODST was Bungie and the worst metacritic at 83.

[Mikefizzled]

ODST wasn't a full price release so I don't think it would be fair to compare. I think ODST launched at $50.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

@Mikefizzled... incorrect sir, Halo 3: ODST was launched with a $60 price tag. I think many people thought it was going to launch at a cheaper price but MS kept it as a full $60 tag figuring the inclusion of Halo 3 mp plus 3 new maps, Firefight and Forge would be enough to justify the cost.

And that was the rub on ODST as the maps included for online were the 21 maps from Halo 3 plus an additional 3 "new" maps. It was basically Halo 3 online and a map pack. It also had Firefight and Forge which were great but the feeling was the online offering was very much short on value.

[Mikefizzled]

That explains it. My pre-order was for £30 so I assumed it was a lower price point title.

[vikingland1]

Yes it does look that way, but for me after recently finishing the MCC and playing H5G 4&5 are my favorites.

Which is your favorite? For me the older Halo games are fun but out dated.

[Christopher]

I'm actually not a fan of Halo in general. I've only seen others play it and never could get into it (like most shooters). Why you won't see me comment on the 'quality' of the gameplay or story. But, just looking at the data, pretty easy to see what I did.

[vikingland1]

I hear ya, I'm not good at shooters in general but I try alot of them (and die alot in them lol) but I do like me some Halo.

Back on topic there are too many other factors missing to say why each game scored lower than the previous one. Is it because each game got worse or were there more reviews in total of each game? I don't know.

[Chivas11]

Huge difference between Halo 3 and 4

[Ko_Uraki]

So a 0 Metascore for Star Wars Battlefront confirmed

[JJShredder]

Isn't it amazing how at least having a campaign can result in a potentially lower score then a game without one?

[Ko_Uraki]

Absolutely.

[vikingland1]

@JJShredder

That's an interesting point you make. In this day in age when some games have mp only and score high. It goes to show if there is a campaign & mp they have to please 2 types of players. That's a very hard thing to do.

[spicelicka]

Yes it's quite absurd actually. It's like they're being punished for actually putting the time and effort to include a campaign.

I think the real reason is that sequels always get compared to their past counterparts instead of other similar games in the market, which in the case of Halo is a big deal. Past halos have consistently set standards and it only puts more pressure on the new game, in proportion.

Currently Halo 5 is the best FPS released this gen. Destiny would be right next to it if they actually released the whole game last year.

I mean Titanfall has the same meta score as Halo 5. Titanfall is a great game don't get me wrong, but it's a 6v6 multiplayer only game. Warzone mode in Halo 5 is literally bigger than all of Titanfall. How in the world does that make any sense?

Then there's COD:AW, with a 4 hour Micheal Bay campaign and barely a story sitting just 2 points under halo 5.

[JJShredder]

@vikingland1

Right??? So if the campaing was utter sh1t, which is def is not, would the game of still gotten maybe on a 6 even with a stellar MP that already is appearing to have more content the Battlefront or Titanfall?? If a game is going to be hounded for some small missteps with the campaign, MP-only games with low amounts of content should be crucified.

@spicelicka

Lets face it, Halo 4 and 5 have much more narrative than the bungie games. The reason its compared so much is the length and I beleive this is because the original games have so much fat in them while 4 and 5 are much more focused with better pacing.

Titanfall had great gameplay but yes no SP campaign sucked and the MP had less content than Halo 5 does on release...
As far as Destiny, I enjoyed it for the most part but damn, it could of been the game of the generation with some better execution and thats why I think people hate it.

[peshkavusCA]

I wonder whats the score if this game comes also to nes and Ps? :)

[NeoGamer232]

I don't think that is amazing at all.

No campaign = no purchase for me.

I find any game that does not have a campaign feels incomplete. I usually hit the MP after I have played the campaign and get a feel for the game.

[pabadamus1]

I believe the only way to make that correlation is if there were separate metacritic scores for single player and multiplayer. You cannot come to any conclusions regarding the single player portion of the game when we don't know how heavily each individual score within the metacritic average is weighted towards single player or multiplayer. The water is too muddy.

The author also makes a big mistake when he makes the assumption that "a writer is likely to be impacted more significantly by the single player campaign than other elements." He has absolutely no idea what each reviewer is most likely impacted by. This assertion is based solely on assumption.

If we wanted true, honest data on perception of quality as it would pertain to single player campaign length the reviewers should only play and critique the single player campaign without any knowledge of what theory is being tested.

[Bobafret]

Best campaign so far in my opinion, people just love to take a giant down.

[green]

I am seriously enjoying the campaign at the moment. The graphics are lovely, gameplay is buttery smooth and story is good.

[asadachi]

This is a tough one for me as my brother and I have played every halo back to the first. Co-op on the campaign has always been our favorite thing, but it seems we're in the minority compared to those who like multiplayer. I liked Halo 5's campaign, but it's ridiculously short. I don't feel like I got my money's worth at all and since i343 took over, it just doesn't feel like games to me anymore. Just a company trying to ride the franchise out as long as possible just to make money. I'll miss you Halo.

[Sm00thNinja]

Obviously played it in lesss than legendary game seemed overly long to me at times campaign was fine length wise must have played it on normal eh

[Sm00thNinja]

Game isn't called Masterchief 5. At people ssaying. But but your not chief enough. Halo 5 is a easy 9.5 out of 10 for me I liked Halo 4 but 5 really did right by me and I HATED 343 AFTER THE MCC DEBACLE

[Brisco]

Campaign is epic!

[76erz24]

Or maybe the reviews have just seedily gone down cause of natural familiarity of sequels just like every other major long running series. Peoples expectations change with every installment and come to expect more.

[alabtrosMyster]

So if they made an open world Halo with a 60 hours of campaign it would get a metacritics score of 500%?

AMAZING! /s

I'd say that the Halo series had better years for sure, but the length of the campaign is not the problem, now it's just a very good shooter, but it has no claim to "top dog" shooter ever, at least not the last two entries...

[NeoGamer232]

I think the correlation is purely coincidence.

Personally, I think reviewers have been overly harsh on the major FPS franchises this generation so far. On Metacritic:

Halo 5 = 86
Battlefield 4 = 85
Destiny Taken King = 85
CoD AW = 83
Wolfenstein The New Order = 79
CoD Ghosts = 78
Wolfenstein Old Blood = 76
Destiny = 76
Killzone SF = 73

Frankly, the worst game of the lot from my perspective was CoD Ghosts. Its MP was fine but the campaign was garbage. Both Wolfenstein's should've probably been in the 80's because they lacked MP. And to me the rest were at least low 90's games. I don't know what reviewers are expecting from FPS this gen. But, obviously the expectations are too high.

[super6646]

I have to agree. Halo 5 has an 86? I mean come on! Halo 4 was mediocre and got an 87, but Halo 5 actually puts effort and gets a lower score? Jesus, the expectations are way to high. Can't wait to see BF with a 90 score with no SP at all and absolutely no content...

[DasTier]

After playing through Halo 5 I really don't see how anyone could think Halo 4 deserves a high praise than 5.

Some of the missions in 5 really hark back to the epic scale seen in old school levels such as Halo 3's "The Covenant" and Halo:CE's "Assault on the control room" & "The Silent Cartographer".

[BallsEye]

I love Halo campaigns and the whole lore (no other console shooter is even close to the scale of it) but I believe it's due to huge effort that 343 and MS have put in MP for it to be an e-sport. I would love me some more campaign, but at the end, MP is where people are at. There are still millions playing every halo game out there.

As for metacritic, it's a crap fan fest where everyone downscore competitors camp. Try games. I found that some of the lowest on metacritic were my favourites.

[TripC50]

Alright, now somebody complete halo 5 guardians without sprinting once. Walk all the way through it. Just like the classics. How long does that take?