: The Harry potter films are FILMS. They need to function as good pieces of
: cinema, and if they don't it's a failing of the creators, not of the
: reviewers.

: I don't see any reason why someone from Variety or the Hollywood reporter
: cannot review these despite not having played the game.

: Not having seen it yet, my initial gut reaction is that it's tied to closely
: to the game type storytelling and plots to really let it be its own thing.
: Halo has always been about a series of macro events, where characters are
: less important. That's okay when you are shooting most of the time, but
: when you are shooting NONE of the time, it becomes quite important.

Eh, that helps and doesn't help my point at the same time- I've never watched the Harry Potter movies, so yeah, I shouldn't exactly be reviewing them haha, but that's the point! Bad\good example.

Halo is action action action. FuD was so boring the first few episodes, but ratcheted up at the end. Nightfall will probably follow that same path, but I don't think that makes it 'suck'.

I still stand by my post Nightfall is going is aimed at, and will be successful, to the *invested* fans. (I hesitate to use "hardcore", or "dedicated", as that might not mean the same thing from fan to fan)

Nightfall will be a flop to less invested fans. Websites will use that as a jumping point to say Halo is in some kind of trouble, when in reality, it's fine. They don't care anyway, whatever drives traffic.