Gears of War

Discuss and discover all the great games of yesteryear!

Moderators: mknott, NickThorpe, lcarlson, Darran@Retro Gamer, MMohammed

User avatar
killbot
Posts: 4824
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 5:36 am

Gears of War

Post by killbot » Sat May 03, 2014 7:23 pm

I've just given up on this after about 4 hours of play. I cannot believe that something as bad as this either got through the QA process or (perhaps worse) managed to garner significant critical acclaim.

What's wrong with it? Let me make a list:

1. Your squadmates AI is knackered. They run around getting themselves injured and (worst of all) getting in the way of your shots. They also offer contradictory instructions like telling you to flank an opponent even when there's no cover where they're telling you to go so it's basically a suicide mission.

2. The colour pallete means that from a distance the enemies are indistinguishable from your team-mates, a problem I can't believe wasn't picked up in playtesting. They also take a ridiculous number of hits before they go down, meaning fighting a group larger than two seems to take an age. One of the first enemy types you come across is manning a machine gun turret which means they can kill you in a couple of seconds if you pop your head over the parapet, while themselves remaining behind a barrier so you can't hit them. Fighting these guys ends up as a lengthy game of peek-a-boo that's no fun at all.

3. The checkpoints are ridiculous. Sometimes it checkpoints every few seconds, sometimes you have to get through several really hard bits before it saves. It took me ages to get through one battle only to be killed by a lone grub who wandered up behind me (there's no radar so I couldn't see him coming) and being sent right back to the start.

4. The controls are terrible. Having the same button for 'run' and 'snap to cover' is ludicrous - every time you're running, your character is automatically trying to snap to every wall you get within six feet of because he thinks that's what you want him to do. This often results in death because there's always something shooting at you.

5. The storyline is boring and the characters are all unlikeable idiots. Also the game is insanely repetitive - I was expecting some puzzle sections or something but no, it's just 'cover, shoot, cover shoot'.

What does it do right? It looks nice, I guess, and it's certainly polished. That aside I can't fathom why it got review scores north of 90% - I'd give it 30-40% if I was feeling generous. I paid 99p for the game and £2 for GoW2 (a game that will likely stay on my shelf unplayed forever, since I have no desire to play it but there's no point trading it either in given its absurdly low value) and I still feel like I was ripped off. So will anyone stand up and defend this wretched piece of crap?
Image

You can buy my book here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Wolfshead-ebook ... =wolfshead

NES, SNES, N64, GC, Wii, Wii U, GB, GBC, GBA SP, DS Lite, 3DS, MS, MD, Saturn, DC, GG, Xbox, 360

User avatar
gman72
Posts: 8018
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2008 9:41 pm
Location: UK. Norfolk

Re: Gears of War

Post by gman72 » Sat May 03, 2014 7:33 pm

I loved the first one but I seriously cannot be bothered to defend it to you, if you don't like it that's fine just don't assume that everyone agrees with your opinion on it. I do agree the underground levels look very brown, and incidentally the multi-player wasn't great.
“To gain your own voice, you have to forget about having it heard.” —Allen Ginsberg, WD

User avatar
killbot
Posts: 4824
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 5:36 am

Re: Gears of War

Post by killbot » Sat May 03, 2014 7:40 pm

gman72 wrote:I loved the first one but I seriously cannot be bothered to defend it to you, if you don't like it that's fine just don't assume that everyone agrees with your opinion on it. I do agree the underground levels look very brown, and incidentally the multi-player wasn't great.
Oh, I guess some people really do love it - I just wish I could understand why. I want someone to give me a new perspective on it that might make it 'click' for me, but I don't see how because I really despise it.

It's not that I just don't like the style of game either because I really enjoyed Rogue Trooper on the Wii and that's a similar third-person cover shooter.
Image

You can buy my book here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Wolfshead-ebook ... =wolfshead

NES, SNES, N64, GC, Wii, Wii U, GB, GBC, GBA SP, DS Lite, 3DS, MS, MD, Saturn, DC, GG, Xbox, 360

User avatar
felgekarp
Posts: 9351
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 11:47 am
Location: Earth 3

Re: Gears of War

Post by felgekarp » Sat May 03, 2014 7:41 pm

I got the first one when I first got my 360 as it seemed to be the game to have, played it for a bit and didn't see what the fuss was about, saw footage of the second one which re piqued my interest again, bought it, played it, loved it, went back and finished the first one and I've enjoyed every one since, but like you say it's all horses for courses.
Splink!

User avatar
The Last Ginja
Posts: 2005
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 3:29 pm
Location: Currently Adventuring in Norwich

Re: Gears of War

Post by The Last Ginja » Sat May 03, 2014 7:45 pm

gman72 wrote:I loved the first one but I seriously cannot be bothered to defend it to you, if you don't like it that's fine just don't assume that everyone agrees with your opinion on it. I do agree the underground levels look very brown, and incidentally the multi-player wasn't great.

This. Except for the multiplayer, which was new and a refreshing change from FPSs at the time. I played it through multiple times including INSANE! which was fun except for the minecart section (which may or may not have been down to the amount of alcohol myself and my co-op buddy had drunk) that was a bit censored.

Gears 2 upped the ante and 3 while good was pretty much more of the same. Haven't really played much of Judg(e)ment yet but I will. I like this series and in 2006 this was an awesome game, but possibly one of those, if you weren't there experiences it loses something. Having said that it's influences are there to see over the years since so don't rubish it MMMM'k.

User avatar
Antiriad2097
Posts: 26900
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 2:48 pm
Location: http://s11.zetaboards.com/RetroLeague/
Contact:

Re: Gears of War

Post by Antiriad2097 » Sun May 04, 2014 3:22 am

It does have most bof the problems you mention (though I found the controls OK), but I had a great time with the first 3 games.

I didn't have an issue with the palette, in war its often hard to see the enemy.

Story? Not really interested. Do any shooters have decent stories? The cut scenes are just something to get in the way of the game.

I don't recall any significant checkpoint issues. Perhaps your lack of ability with the controls is the problem here.

There ius the odd section that's a grind, but for the most part its run and gun.

Probably the reason to own a 360 tbh, since I've not had anything as good in that style on the PS3.
The Retro League - Where skill isn't an obstacle
Retrocanteen, home of the unfairly banned
Tom_Baker wrote:I just finished watching a film about Stockholm syndrome. It started out terrible but by the end I really liked it.

User avatar
felgekarp
Posts: 9351
Joined: Fri May 05, 2006 11:47 am
Location: Earth 3

Re: Gears of War

Post by felgekarp » Sun May 04, 2014 4:07 am

What are you classing as a puzzle section killbot as I don't think it's the type of thing you'd usually get in these types of games is it? Although thinking about it there's something you could possibly class as a bit of a puzzle section on the second game but that would be stretching it a bit, there's certainly no 'I need to work out how to open this door' bits in any of the games, not that I recal anyway. Maybe give Vanquish a try, that's supposed to be pretty decent.
Splink!

User avatar
gman72
Posts: 8018
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2008 9:41 pm
Location: UK. Norfolk

Re: Gears of War

Post by gman72 » Sun May 04, 2014 5:01 am

killbot wrote:I've just given up on this after about 4 hours of play. I cannot believe that something as bad as this either got through the QA process or (perhaps worse) managed to garner significant critical acclaim.

What's wrong with it? Let me make a list:

1. Your squadmates AI is knackered. They run around getting themselves injured and (worst of all) getting in the way of your shots. They also offer contradictory instructions like telling you to flank an opponent even when there's no cover where they're telling you to go so it's basically a suicide mission.

2. The colour pallete means that from a distance the enemies are indistinguishable from your team-mates, a problem I can't believe wasn't picked up in playtesting. They also take a ridiculous number of hits before they go down, meaning fighting a group larger than two seems to take an age. One of the first enemy types you come across is manning a machine gun turret which means they can kill you in a couple of seconds if you pop your head over the parapet, while themselves remaining behind a barrier so you can't hit them. Fighting these guys ends up as a lengthy game of peek-a-boo that's no fun at all.

3. The checkpoints are ridiculous. Sometimes it checkpoints every few seconds, sometimes you have to get through several really hard bits before it saves. It took me ages to get through one battle only to be killed by a lone grub who wandered up behind me (there's no radar so I couldn't see him coming) and being sent right back to the start.

4. The controls are terrible. Having the same button for 'run' and 'snap to cover' is ludicrous - every time you're running, your character is automatically trying to snap to every wall you get within six feet of because he thinks that's what you want him to do. This often results in death because there's always something shooting at you.

5. The storyline is boring and the characters are all unlikeable idiots. Also the game is insanely repetitive - I was expecting some puzzle sections or something but no, it's just 'cover, shoot, cover shoot'.

What does it do right? It looks nice, I guess, and it's certainly polished. That aside I can't fathom why it got review scores north of 90% - I'd give it 30-40% if I was feeling generous. I paid 99p for the game and £2 for GoW2 (a game that will likely stay on my shelf unplayed forever, since I have no desire to play it but there's no point trading it either in given its absurdly low value) and I still feel like I was ripped off. So will anyone stand up and defend this wretched piece of crap?
Perhaps if they had put a princess to rescue in it, eh, killbot :roll:
“To gain your own voice, you have to forget about having it heard.” —Allen Ginsberg, WD

User avatar
RodimusPrime
Posts: 4141
Joined: Sat May 25, 2013 12:16 pm

Re: Gears of War

Post by RodimusPrime » Sun May 04, 2014 6:03 am

I loved the first one, thoroughly enjoyed it. I also enjoyed the 2nd one, but after that got bored of the whole series.

I got bored of the series pretty quick, but while I was enjoying the game, I really really enjoyed it. I can actually understand why people both love and hate the game.

User avatar
gman72
Posts: 8018
Joined: Thu Aug 28, 2008 9:41 pm
Location: UK. Norfolk

Re: Gears of War

Post by gman72 » Sun May 04, 2014 6:21 am

RodimusPrime wrote:I loved the first one, thoroughly enjoyed it. I also enjoyed the 2nd one, but after that got bored of the whole series.

I got bored of the series pretty quick, but while I was enjoying the game, I really really enjoyed it. I can actually understand why people both love and hate the game.
I was bored by the third instalment but loved the first two.
“To gain your own voice, you have to forget about having it heard.” —Allen Ginsberg, WD

User avatar
adippm82
Posts: 1285
Joined: Sat May 01, 2010 4:59 pm

Re: Gears of War

Post by adippm82 » Sun May 04, 2014 7:16 am

I loved the first game, right up to the last boss battle with Raam, I went at him with the wrong weapons, what a complete git of a boss he is, and I updated the game, so the cheat does not work.

I have absolutely no idea how this could be a 30-40% game, it would not score as highly as it did originally, but it is quite a few years old.

I never had a problem shooting my own squad mates, or distinguishing them from the enemies, perhaps you were going in all guns blazing, and you just cannot do that with these games, the squad has to get into position, before I take any offensive action at all, part of the appeal for me was that you have to keep one eye on where your squad is, and act accordingly.

IMO there is nothing wrong with the controls at all, they are super responsive, and well laid out, never once have I found myself trying to cling to a wall every few seconds, and I find your comments about not having any puzzle sections bizarre, just would have been weird in a game like this, I have not played it for a while, but I believe there are a few little elements like that in the second one, not sure if my mind is playing tricks on me.

The first game is a bit more repetitive than the others, but that is progression for you, the other two games have some spectacular set pieces, and I really hope you never see a conflict, because believe me you will find an awful lot of dislikable characters, war changes people, causes them to at least partially bury their humanity, this was one thing the series got spot on, slowly peeling away the hidden layers to the characters to reveal what had happened in their lives before, and what drives them.

The first game is still good, the second extraordinary, and the third a fitting ending.

errolwd40
Posts: 74
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 5:39 pm

Re: Gears of War

Post by errolwd40 » Sun May 04, 2014 7:22 am

I really loved the original game, but did not like the sequels so much. Especially the second there was way too many cut scenes during the campaign, during the bit where you meet dizzy and take a ride on his big rig called betty there is 20 mins of cut scenes and around 5 mins of gameplay.

The original also had more open battlefields in campaign mode whereas the sequels seem to be very linear, I was always up against a real or invisible wall.

User avatar
theantmeister
Posts: 3440
Joined: Wed May 26, 2010 8:36 am

Re: Gears of War

Post by theantmeister » Sun May 04, 2014 8:12 am

I loved the combat and the sense of weight everything in the game had. Forget about squad mechanics or story - GoW is all about roady-running in and chainsawing people in the face.
errolwd40 wrote:I really loved the original game, but did not like the sequels so much. Especially the second there was way too many cut scenes during the campaign, during the bit where you meet dizzy and take a ride on his big rig called betty there is 20 mins of cut scenes and around 5 mins of gameplay.
Agreed. Gears 2 was a linear, melodramatic load of old censored.

HEAVYface
Posts: 1114
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 2:48 am

Re: Gears of War

Post by HEAVYface » Sun May 04, 2014 8:18 am

played 1 a bit, 2 quite a bit, got to say I recognise some of the problems you highlight. I also had problems with the controls and the repetition. I think as games or gameplay experiences they are average, hell I love 2d shooters (which are super repetitive) .....if they made the gears games as 2d shooters it would be a boring, uglier space invaders clone rather than something like radiant silvergun...which could be a bonus to some people.

the visuals I absolutely hate. also the voice overs and the cut scenes are just horrible and cringe worthy.

I played judgement for about 5 minutes before turning it off for being visually offensive ...every texture is so noisy it was like looking at static on a crt tv. also everything is made out of cogs (buildings, walls etc) which is stupid, but then the series has the whole stupid thing covered to the nth degree.

User avatar
retrojc
Posts: 4267
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 5:41 am

Re: Gears of War

Post by retrojc » Sun May 04, 2014 9:18 am

I really enjoyed it, and I think Gears got better with its sequels too. Can remember some good sessions with some folks of here

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests