Originally Posted by hulk

Uhm, I thought all those points you mentioned where what made the original Halo good? :P

In all seriousness, I think one game, ever, deserved a perfect ten, and that was Mario 64, simply because, even to this day, it's stood up as the pinnacle of it's genre.

While it'd be acceptable if it had a rediculously high score, like 9.8 or 9.9, giving it a perfect ten in every category IS NOT GOOD FORM. Especially when in the review they mention where it could go with some improvement. Case in point, as lpj8 mentioned, the cutscene graphics are sub-par. In any other game, that'd knock .5 or so off the score. Why should Halo be any exception? My guess it's publications wanting to keep in good standing with Microsoft, or they're just plain bad reviewers.

Upon release, nearly every review on GameRankings, bar GameSpot's, was a perfect ten. Now, once people have received the game after release and are not risking any backlash, it's dropped from the second best title do down, just underneath the original. Where it, in my (and quite a few others) belongs.