Why should I be excited about Gears of War?

[KeithTalent]

I've looked around at screenshots and whatnot, and it looks ok, I guess, but isn't this just going to be another crappy port? Particularly since it was done way after the console release (see Halo), sort of like an afterthought?

What the heck does it have that a hundred other PC games don't already have?

KT

 

[warcrow]

Unless you're interested in the coop play--there is no real reason to pick it up. With amazing SP games like Orange Box, Crysis, BioShock, and a few others--it's just weak in comparison.

Again, if you're interested in the MP portion of it, then I think you might enjoy it. But then again I would argue Orange Box (TF2), Crysis...etc etc...

 

[KeithTalent]

Originally posted by: warcrow
Unless you're interested in the coop play--there is no real reason to pick it up. With amazing SP games like Orange Box, Crysis, BioShock, and a few others--it's just weak in comparison.

Again, if you're interested in the MP portion of it, then I think you might enjoy it. But then again I would argue Orange Box (TF2), Crysis...etc etc...

Yeah and that's sort of what I was thinking. I'm hoping there is a demo at least, so I can what all the fuss is about.

Is there something special about the MP in GoW?

KT

 

[PingSpike]

I thought it was an ok game, and its 3rd person viewpoint and game mechanics worked pretty well with the xbox controller. But on the PC, I'd agree there are other games that you're better off spending your time on. Aside from being the first shooter game I'd played on a console that didn't control like crap, it didn't really seem all that special to me. With the exception of the orbital laser weapon (which you couldn't use most of the time, unless you had to use it :/) the weapons were pretty ho-hum. The characters and story were standard video game cliches.

 

[KeithTalent]

Hmm, not a huge fan of third-person in my shooters and your other comments do not get me too excited either.

KT

 

[Beev]

I got it the day it came out back when I had a 360. To say I was underwhelmed wouldn't even begin to cover it...

 

[EvilComputer92]

Campaign is pretty good. Multiplayer sucks. I would say it's strongest point is it's graphics, which are only second to Crysis.

 

[Queasy]

I found GoW to be very enjoyable on the 360. Both single-player and multi-player. There are some really great moments despite it being relatively short.

As for the port comment, I think it is wait and see at this point. The Halo ports sucked because the company that Bungie and MS farmed the port to did an awful job. Since Epic is doing the port themselves, I'd expect much better results. Plus there is all the extra content and map editor.

 

[KeithTalent]

Interesting. Opinions are really all over the place here.

I thought for sure some people would be saying it is the best thing ever, but maybe that would only happen if I posted in the console forum.

KT

 

[natep]

I had a lot of fun w/ it on the 360. Gears co-op was a blast, and the multi was an ok time.

edit: And I'm more of a PC gamer.

 

[BladeVenom]

Originally posted by: KeithTalent
I've looked around at screenshots and whatnot, and it looks ok, I guess, but isn't this just going to be another crappy port? Particularly since it was done way after the console release (see Halo), sort of like an afterthought?

What the heck does it have that a hundred other PC games don't already have?

KT

I think Gears of War was originally going to be PC game. Epic is mostly a PC developer. I think they were demoing the game on a PC at some show when Microsoft saw it, wanted it, and picked it up as a publisher to make it a 360 exclusive.

 

[raystorm]

Originally posted by: Queasy
I found GoW to be very enjoyable on the 360. Both single-player and multi-player. There are some really great moments despite it being relatively short.

As for the port comment, I think it is wait and see at this point. The Halo ports sucked because the company that Bungie and MS farmed the port to did an awful job. Since Epic is doing the port themselves, I'd expect much better results. Plus there is all the extra content and map editor.

Yea, I agree. Gears of War is at its best in co-op mode. The campaign is fun with two players and there is a ton of action. Not crazy about mulitplayer myself but its not terrible by any means. You are right about this port most likely being a good one since Epic is doing it themselves and improved the game with new levels, MP maps and modes and of course the level editor. Maybe more single player maps will be on the way by modders which would be a great thing.

I wouldn't pay 50 bucks for it when it comes out but knowing the pc gaming retail world it should be half price in no time.

 

[Fenixgoon]

epic actually didn't just port it from 360 --> PC. GoW PC is basically an entirely different beast than GoW 360 because they reworked so much. I'm quite excited for it. Not sure if I'll pick it up at launch, though.

edit: i've always wanted a good 3rd person shooter, so that increases my enthusiasm

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: BladeVenom

Originally posted by: KeithTalent
I've looked around at screenshots and whatnot, and it looks ok, I guess, but isn't this just going to be another crappy port? Particularly since it was done way after the console release (see Halo), sort of like an afterthought?

What the heck does it have that a hundred other PC games don't already have?

KT

I think Gears of War was originally going to be PC game. Epic is mostly a PC developer. I think they were demoing the game on a PC at some show when Microsoft saw it, wanted it, and picked it up as a publisher to make it a 360 exclusive.

That's the story of Halo and the original Xbox.

GoW was 360 from the beginning so that Epic could show off what the new Unreal engine could do for consoles.

 

[Sniper82]

I just bought a 360 and its still $50-60 which IMO is dumb. I am debating if I want to get it for 360 or PC. My PC should run it well but of course GoW was one of the main reasons for me buying a 360.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: Sniper82
I just bought a 360 and its still $50-60 which IMO is dumb. I am debating if I want to get it for 360 or PC. My PC should run it well but of course GoW was one of the main reasons for me buying a 360.

That's because it is such a hot game that people are still buying it. Halo and Halo 2 stayed at or near full price for a very long time for the same reason.

 

[warcrow]

Originally posted by: EvilComputer92
Campaign is pretty good. Multiplayer sucks. I would say it's strongest point is it's graphics, which are only second to Crysis.

Although it's a subjective statement--I have to wholeheartedly disagree with you. I think the entire HL2 series is above and beyond GoW. the mucky grey-blue pallette in the game is so.....blah.

 

[shortylickens]

Originally posted by: KeithTalent
I've looked around at screenshots and whatnot, and it looks ok, I guess, but isn't this just going to be another crappy port? Particularly since it was done way after the console release (see Halo), sort of like an afterthought?

What the heck does it have that a hundred other PC games don't already have?

Nothing.
Not a god damn thing.
BUT...
You cant really judge any game by screen shots, and this one is actually a lot of fun. MUCH more fun than any of the HALO's.
I played it on a 360 and while I hated the controls, I liked the overall gameplay and setting. I will likely buy the computer version.
Along with Test Drive Unlimited its the only game I managed to enjoy on the Xbox 360. And I have played a lot of games on that cursed thing. Got a monthly game membership at Blockbuster and ran through all of them in about 2 months. None were original or super impressive, but a couple managed to entertain me. I got the windows version of TDU a long time ago and I love it. Nothing fancy, just lots of good racing fun. Gears of War isnt special either, but enjoyable.

I have been hurting bad for some fun new games. So many have been huge letdowns since 2001, I would have to recommend this to anyone who feels the same way.
Because I didnt buy into all the hype of the console crowd this game didnt get me built up for a major fall.

 

[KeithTalent]

Ok, opinions are all over the map here.

Let me see if I get this:

1. Port should be ok since it is done by the developer not a third party. :thumbsup:

2. Lots of added content, so not exactly the same as console version. :thumbsup:

3. Nothing much innovative, but a fun 3rd person shooter.

4. Single player is anywhere between average and very good. :thumbsup:

5. Multiplayer is either terrible or pretty great.

6. Graphics fall somewhere in-between amazing and terrible.

Well 3 thumbs up out of 5 seems pretty good. I doubt I will pay $50 for it and I will definitely wait for reviews, but I could see myself giving this a shot

KT

Edit: heh, thanks to warcrow for noticing the two 3s.

 

[Oyeve]

Mouse and KB are a sell for me. I have the 360 version and cannot play because I need a KB and freaking mouse! ARG! MS, get your crap together and let us use a KB and mouse on the 360!

 

[Cabages]

It does seem to run better. I saw a video that was supposedly running on a 8600gt that didnt seem to hickup at all.

 

[450R]

If you want an MP game that will take you away from TF2, GoW isn't it. While I am a PC gamer and I hate console controllers, GoW is definitely the kind of game you sit on a couch and have lazy fun with your friends in on a weekend. I really enjoyed it on the 360 but I won't buying it for PC.

 

[Queasy]

Originally posted by: KeithTalent
5. Graphics fall somewhere in-between amazing and terrible.

It is the Unreal Engine. The graphics are closer to amazing than terrible. The only valid complaint would be color palette but that's an artistic choice not a graphics issue.

 

[KeithTalent]

Originally posted by: Queasy

Originally posted by: KeithTalent
5. Graphics fall somewhere in-between amazing and terrible.

It is the Unreal Engine. The graphics are closer to amazing than terrible. The only valid complaint would be color palette but that's an artistic choice not a graphics issue.

Ahh ok. Hopefully it doesn't look all foggy like the UT3 demo.

KT

 

[warcrow]

Originally posted by: KeithTalent
Ok, opinions are all over the map here.

Let me see if I get this:

1. Port should be ok since it is done by the developer not a third party. :thumbsup:

2. Lots of added content, so not exactly the same as console version. :thumbsup:

3. Nothing much innovative, but a fun 3rd person shooter.

3. Single player is anywhere between average and very good. :thumbsup:

4. Multiplayer is either terrible or pretty great.

5. Graphics fall somewhere in-between amazing and terrible.

Well 3 thumbs up out of 5 seems pretty good. I doubt I will pay $50 for it and I will definitely wait for reviews, but I could see myself giving this a shot

KT

1) I suspect the port will be fine, if not an improvement in some ways--but your computer will play a big part in this.

2) Basically they're expanding the game by 20%-25% from what I understand.

3) Some people, including CliffyB and Mark Rein, consider the "active-reload system" a fantastic edition and mini-game that will be copied by some other devs. I have to admit, it is more entertaining (in a meta sense) that a sandard reload because of the possible bonuses--but nothing really nothing that special. The CNN-report-in-the-field-chase-cam is kind of cool and added to the immersion, so that's enjoyable. Bit I've got to add--I just didnt like holding down a run button that also acts as a cover button--what?! Basically this turns every surface, that you can use for cover, into a vacuum cleaner, sucking you to it. It can be a frustrating mess. Also, Why do you have two 3s?

3) To be fair, the single player experience is better than average, so dont get me wrong--it's just not much better than average (better than Halo 3 though!). I guess I'm trying to drive home the point that there are a ton of other games coming out (especially this month!) that rival that experience.

4) The MP is really entertaining and is the only reason to pay full price for this game. As a SP experience only (a la BioShock), I just couldnt recommend it. So, if you're the type of gamer that likes MP (but can tollerate the X-Live childish banter), then you'll probably think the purchase is well worth it.

5) The art direction isnt that spectacular, but, the actual graphic fidelity is pretty impressive and will make you sit back and say "wow" a few times. Epic has poured a ton of R&D into this engine and it shows, but again, I have to mention the bland color pallette--it gets dull very quickly and the environments do not change up that much throughout the game (at least the 360 version). This new chapter they're adding might be built off of completely new art/model assets. Someone else here can probably chim in with more info about that. Anyone?

Hope this helps.