New MobyGoal! We're aiming for 1,500 well documented Arcade games.

Gears of War (Xbox 360)

94
MobyRank
100 point score based on reviews from various critics.
3.5
MobyScore
5 point score based on user ratings.
Forum Search  
View Mode: threaded | watch thread

Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Simoneer (30) on Oct 03, 2010


User Avatar
This "cover 'n' shoot" gameplay has often been credited as an innovation, and wrongfully so. The game's basic gameplay is more or less like an improved WinBack (N64). Hell, it goes even further back than that; the 1988 arcade game Cabal (http://www.mobygames.com/game/cabal) also features similar gameplay, based on the concept of taking cover. Gears of War far from created this. It only impoved upon it. That said, praise the gameplay all you want, but don't claim it's oh so innovative.

Sorry. I've had this on my mind for a long time. Also, I realize not everyone considers this original. I have, on the other hand, heard (or rather, read) people call it as such. Even professional reviewers praise the gameplay like they've never seen anything like it before.

(Edited by Simoneer (30), Oct 03, 2010)

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Adzuken (702) on Oct 03, 2010


User Avatar
Wasn't there just a big debate to the effect of Super Mario Bros. not being the first platformer, but rather the most influential? Same goes for Gears of War. I remember Winback's cover system being pretty cool back in the day, but most people never even played it, and fewer remember it, so it's not surprising to see it overlooked. Now, I'm no fan of the Gears of War series. The only reason I played them was because the co-op is decent fun, but I can at least see where the appeal lies. For better or worse, Gears of War popularized stop-n-pop gameplay, which is now a hallmark of this console generation. So it still deserves some credit.

Also, professional reviewers are only human. They haven't played everything.

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

leilei (282) on Oct 03, 2010


Wasn't KillSwitch hyped and praised for the same exact cover system so much shortly before Gears of War? I'm not saying it invented it either, just that there's this strange ignorance that supercedes a previous title when a new game introduces something, like Halo's ultra-praised dual-stick aiming invention that came after Timesplitter's dual-stick aiming by a full year.

Professional reviewers are forgetful goldfish when it comes to even something is only a year apart.

Don't forget the possible case of bribery for the reviews.

(Edited by leilei (282), Oct 03, 2010)

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Indra is here (19679) on Oct 04, 2010


User Avatar
Adzuken Wrote:
Also, professional reviewers are only human. They haven't played everything.

Hmph. :p

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

אולג 小奥 (168604) on Oct 04, 2010


User Avatar
Also, professional reviewers are only human. They haven't played everything.

Isn't it your obligation as a professional reviewer to have - perhaps not played everything, but at least heard of everything connected to the game you review?

I find most professional reviewers disastrously lacking in knowledge. Gears of War is just an example; anyone could point out dozens of reviews that praise a game for supposed "innovations" that were in effects done years ago.

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Indra is here (19679) on Oct 04, 2010


User Avatar
אולג 小奥 Wrote:
Also, professional reviewers are only human. They haven't played everything.

Isn't it your obligation as a professional reviewer to have - perhaps not played everything, but at least heard of everything connected to the game you review?

I find most professional reviewers disastrously lacking in knowledge.

We really should have a thread that highlights professional reviews that are actually good.

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Sicarius (61031) on Oct 04, 2010


User Avatar
Well "everything" is a bit too much but yes, its important to have knowledge you can throw around even if you never touched that particular game yourself. It's even one of the ways to differentate between good and bad ones. A good one can fake-talk his way through a normal conversation about a particular game without the other guy ever knowing that he's never really played it.

Having said that: It's equally important to give the reader a comparison he actually has heard something about or even played himself. It's nice if I know that feature A was already present in that one obscure game from 1979 for a system only 100 people ever owned and I can certainly mention it to show that I know it but it won't help the text as much as if I take a hugly popular game from the last 5 to 10 years that picked feature A up again and made it accessiable to the masses as a point of comparison. It may be unfair to the older game but if you have also give credit to the newer title: Without Max Payne, the market wouldn't have been flooded with bullet time. And its the same with GoW. The curse came after it - not before, even though the mechanic was already "known".

My point being: You know that feature A was there and probably even played that game on its original system. But always remember: We're here at MobyGames are a special kind of people and we're not the only ones reading (or writing) those reviews ;).

(Edited by Sicarius (61031), Oct 04, 2010)

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Zovni (9367) on Oct 04, 2010


User Avatar
Well the thing is the "professional reviewer" is a mythical creature, at least at this moment in time. Videogames don't have the credibility to attract serious enough critiques as it is, nor to warrant someone with actual journalistic training, integrity and a thorough understanding of the subject matter and the medium. Thus professional reviewers for the most part are just people who like videogames first and know how to write second, and had the fortune to get into the biz.

In realtity they are like most of us in their ner-sightedness and fanboyism, so let's cut them some slack guys.

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Simoneer (30) on Oct 05, 2010


User Avatar
Zovni Wrote:
Well the thing is the "professional reviewer" is a mythical creature, at least at this moment in time. Videogames don't have the credibility to attract serious enough critiques as it is, nor to warrant someone with actual journalistic training, integrity and a thorough understanding of the subject matter and the medium. Thus professional reviewers for the most part are just people who like videogames first and know how to write second, and had the fortune to get into the biz.

In realtity they are like most of us in their ner-sightedness and fanboyism, so let's cut them some slack guys.



Your typo aroused me. Better mark your post as adult.

Anyways, yeah, they are like us. On that note, a thing I like about certain Swedish gaming magazines (Super PLAY, at least a few years back, and LEVEL) is that all the people writing for it clearly have their own likes and dislikes, which they do nothing to hide. They just let the people who are into certain genres or franchises write reviews for those games. For instance, one of the guys clearly dislike most Japanese games and he is a big Halo fanboy. Nothing they once tried to hide. I think they let him write the review for the first two Halo games because of this, and left the Japanese stuff to other guys with interest in it. Seems like very legit magazines, both of them. Real people with (mostly) real opinions.

Not to mention that both magazines feature a section in which the staff gets to say a word or two about what they like or dislike. Some mention whole genres, other mention themes. But either way, yeah, very human.

(Edited by Simoneer (30), Oct 05, 2010)

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

אולג 小奥 (168604) on Oct 05, 2010


User Avatar
I think they let him write the review for the first two Halo games because of this, and left the Japanese stuff to other guys with interest in it.

Letting a Halo fanboy review a Halo game results in precisely what I don't like about those professional reviews: most of them are too fanboyish. Yes, we are fanboys too. But in our case, it's an advantage, because we allow multiple reviews per game and there is no "main" or "official" review that would express this site's opinion.

Professional reviewers, on the other hand, should not be fanboyish. They must be as objective as possible, and they must know history.

One could argue there is no such thing as objective opinion; it's true. But we need at least better arguments for their praise/dislike.

Going further with the Halo example; how many of this game's professional reviewers have played classic FPS games of the past? Most of them know Goldeneye and Perfect Dark; perhaps they've heard of Half-Life. So what is the result? Unprofessional reviews. Because if your first FPS was Goldeneye, you clearly have almost nothing to compare Halo to. Comparing it to Goldeneye, you rave about how the game actually works smoothly on a console, and how the graphics rock compared to N64 FPSs., totally missing all the important points.

It's pretty much the same as praising Kenny G's music because he holds the record for the longest saxophone note ever.

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Simoneer (30) on Oct 05, 2010


User Avatar
Letting a Halo fanboy review a Halo game results in precisely what I don't like about those professional reviews: most of them are too fanboyish.

Well, it's not like it's more fair to have someone who dislikes it or the FPS genre in general reviewing it. No one is neutral in this aspect, either you like something or you don't, so it won't be any more accurate. There simply is no balance in this world. This will never change.

They might need to be as objective as possible, but at the same time, it's indeed arguable if such a thing as an objective opinion even exists. That said, though, I personally like reviews that not only are subjective, but show their subjectiveness as well. I find reviews more enjoyable to read if they share their personal feelings and emotions towards parts of the game at hand. That way they can move me, too, and might even convince me to get a game. As long as the reviews are also informative... I also like when their personalities show. In fact, my favorite reviewer of both of the magazines I mentioned is the one that is, to me, the most distinguishable of the lot; Victor Sjöström.

(Edited by Simoneer (30), Oct 05, 2010)

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

אולג 小奥 (168604) on Oct 05, 2010


User Avatar
Well, it's not like it's more fair to have someone who dislikes it or the FPS genre in general reviewing it.

No, but it's more fair to have someone who likes and knows the FPS genre. By "knowing" I mean that he did his homework. If you professionally review an FPS, you must have played Wolf 3D, Doom, Dark Forces, Duke Nukem 3D, etc., etc. If you haven't, then you aren't a professional reviewer. You are just a guy who writes down his opinion and submits it to a magazine or a website.

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Simoneer (30) on Oct 05, 2010


User Avatar
אולג 小奥 Wrote:
Well, it's not like it's more fair to have someone who dislikes it or the FPS genre in general reviewing it.

No, but it's more fair to have someone who likes and knows the FPS genre. By "knowing" I mean that he did his homework. If you professionally review an FPS, you must have played Wolf 3D, Doom, Dark Forces, Duke Nukem 3D, etc., etc. If you haven't, then you aren't a professional reviewer. You are just a guy who writes down his opinion and submits it to a magazine or a website.



I agree, but I never said this Halo fanboy in particular knows not of pre-Halo FPSs. He just really liked Halo.

(Edited by Simoneer (30), Oct 05, 2010)

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Zovni (9367) on Oct 05, 2010


User Avatar
You have to wonder at this point what was the background of the "pro" reviewers that reviewed Halo when it first came out...

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Lain Crowley (5413) on Oct 05, 2010


User Avatar
Maybe it was just people who found the game enjoyable. What a fucking travesty it would be to let those people speak their minds.

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Zovni (9367) on Oct 05, 2010


User Avatar
My point exactly. Those reviewers were right, and letting them do it was the right decision.

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

vedder (20150) on Oct 05, 2010


User Avatar
Simoneer Wrote:
אולג 小奥 Wrote:
Well, it's not like it's more fair to have someone who dislikes it or the FPS genre in general reviewing it.

No, but it's more fair to have someone who likes and knows the FPS genre. By "knowing" I mean that he did his homework. If you professionally review an FPS, you must have played Wolf 3D, Doom, Dark Forces, Duke Nukem 3D, etc., etc. If you haven't, then you aren't a professional reviewer. You are just a guy who writes down his opinion and submits it to a magazine or a website.



I agree, but I never said this Halo fanboy in particular knows not of pre-Halo FPSs. He just really liked Halo.



It's an impossible combination :P

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Simoneer (30) on Oct 05, 2010


User Avatar
vedder Wrote:
Simoneer Wrote:
אולג 小奥 Wrote:
Well, it's not like it's more fair to have someone who dislikes it or the FPS genre in general reviewing it.

No, but it's more fair to have someone who likes and knows the FPS genre. By "knowing" I mean that he did his homework. If you professionally review an FPS, you must have played Wolf 3D, Doom, Dark Forces, Duke Nukem 3D, etc., etc. If you haven't, then you aren't a professional reviewer. You are just a guy who writes down his opinion and submits it to a magazine or a website.



I agree, but I never said this Halo fanboy in particular knows not of pre-Halo FPSs. He just really liked Halo.



It's an impossible combination :P



Maybe. :P

I think this same dude has written some articles on that new games are far superior to old ones (which I guess TECHNICALLY is true, because now we can do everything we could previously plus a lot more), so he might just not have played them a lot. Although he has mentioned one of the Wonder Boy games as one of his favorites.

(Edited by Simoneer (30), Oct 05, 2010)

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

vedder (20150) on Oct 05, 2010


User Avatar
Simoneer Wrote:
Although he has mentioned one of the Wonder Boy games as one of his favorites.



Wonder Boy III: The Dragon's Trap, I hope. That game is awesome. The others not so much.

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Simoneer (30) on Oct 05, 2010


User Avatar
vedder Wrote:
Simoneer Wrote:
Although he has mentioned one of the Wonder Boy games as one of his favorites.



Wonder Boy III: The Dragon's Trap, I hope. That game is awesome. The others not so much.



Haha, actually, I'm pretty sure that's the one! :D Has many different characters (or shapes of one character), yes? A lizard, bird, etc.?

Personally I like Wonder Boy in Monster World as well, and perhaps Wonder Boy in Monster Land. I really dislike those traditional Wonder Boy games. Below average.

(Edited by Simoneer (30), Oct 05, 2010)

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

vedder (20150) on Oct 06, 2010


User Avatar
Simoneer Wrote:
vedder Wrote:
Simoneer Wrote:
Although he has mentioned one of the Wonder Boy games as one of his favorites.



Wonder Boy III: The Dragon's Trap, I hope. That game is awesome. The others not so much.



Haha, actually, I'm pretty sure that's the one! :D Has many different characters (or shapes of one character), yes? A lizard, bird, etc.?



Yeah, the game starts with a simplified ending of the previous game and then the final boss turns you into a Lizard-Man. Then you have to find a cure to become Hu-Man again, in the mean time also becoming Mouse-Man, Hawk-Man, Piranha-Man and Lion-Man. Each shape has different abilities that lets you explore new directions from the starting area where you keep returning back to. It's the perfect cross-over between The Legend of Zelda and Super Mario Bros.

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Adzuken (702) on Oct 05, 2010


User Avatar
אולג 小奥 Wrote:
No, but it's more fair to have someone who likes and knows the FPS genre. By "knowing" I mean that he did his homework. If you professionally review an FPS, you must have played Wolf 3D, Doom, Dark Forces, Duke Nukem 3D, etc., etc. If you haven't, then you aren't a professional reviewer. You are just a guy who writes down his opinion and submits it to a magazine or a website.

A review is nothing more than a published opinion. You'll only frustrate yourself if you think otherwise.

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Indra is here (19679) on Oct 05, 2010


User Avatar
Adzuken Wrote:
A review is nothing more than a published opinion. You'll only frustrate yourself if you think otherwise.

In the game industry, perhaps. In other fields, somewhat a bit more responsible than just a published opinion.

Fanbois have this odd tendency to want the industry to mature. Which is ironically the opposite of what a fanboi is supposed to be. :p

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

אולג 小奥 (168604) on Oct 06, 2010


User Avatar
In the game industry, perhaps. In other fields, somewhat a bit more responsible than just a published opinion.

Exactly. People actually go to college to become literature, music, movie critics. They study. That's what you do to become professional.

True, there seem to be no educational facilities that teach video game history and journalism (yet). That's why self-education is important. Learn the history of at least the genre you focus on reviewing.

A professional review is an opinion, true. But any opinion should be backed by arguments, which, in their turn, must be based on knowledge.

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Lain Crowley (5413) on Oct 05, 2010


User Avatar
A review is three things: Opinion, factual information, and criticism. Games reviews are usually just the first two with a heavy emphasis on the second. Reviews of other artistic mediums moreso contain the first and third. Whether or not a review is useful to someone depends on which of those three factors they're looking for.

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Indra is here (19679) on Oct 05, 2010


User Avatar
אולג 小奥 Wrote:
How many of this game's professional reviewers have played classic FPS games of the past?

...flashbacks from 10 years ago...playing Counterstrike multiplayer...32 players....remembers more than half of them jumping up and down while moving...bunny rabbits...open season...

Surely there must be a more dignified way to dodge bullets. :p

(Edited by Indra is here (19679), Oct 05, 2010)

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

lilalurl (778) on Oct 06, 2010


User Avatar
Indra is here Wrote:
Surely there must be a more dignified way to dodge bullets. :p



(Suprisingly :-p) Dodging in Unreal, Unreal 2, Unreal Tournament, Unreal Tournament III, Unreal Championship 1 & 2 + dodge jump in Unreal Tournament 2004 (+ a few variations).

Jetpack in Tribes games, Fallen Empire: Legions and Legends.

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Late (97) on Oct 06, 2010


User Avatar
The only professional review of GoW I've read made no mention of 'innovation' in respect to gameplay - perhaps because what other games are like is not really relevant when reviewing a particular game. It basically stated that the graphics are really good (they were at the time) and the gameplay gets pretty boring after a while. I consider that to be quite accurate.

EDIT: Feel free to call me a liar. I dug up the issue of Pelit from 12/2006 and there actually is one sentence in the 2,5-page review mentioning innovation regarding gameplay: "Disregarding the fact that the same was seen in the latest Ghost Recon, the simple combat system feels ingeniously innovative in the beginning." (my translation). Then it goes on to explain how the system sucks.

(Edited by Late (97), Oct 11, 2010)

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Simoneer (30) on Oct 06, 2010


User Avatar
By the sound of it, I would agree with much of that review. Also, neither I have really heard anyone come right out and say it's really innovative. It's a bit more subtle... Like, they praise it in a way that suggests they haven't seen anything like it.

And the graphics are still good, in my opinion. Just about anything this side of 2005 (after it as opposed to before it) looks very good in my eyes. Might just be too used to crappy graphics, though.

(Edited by Simoneer (30), Oct 06, 2010)

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

mobygamer (93) on Oct 09, 2010


Late Wrote:
The only professional review of GoW I've read made no mention of 'innovation' in respect to gameplay - perhaps because what other games are like is not really relevant when reviewing a particular game. It basically stated that the graphics are really good (they were at the time) and the gameplay gets pretty boring after a while. I consider that to be quite accurate.



Where did u read that review(mag,site)?

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Late (97) on Oct 10, 2010


User Avatar
Pelit magazine (pelit.fi, I think it's subscribers only these days and obviously in Finnish only). It's the only gaming magazine with reviews by 'professionals' published in Finland and it's the only place I read reviews by 'professionals'. Thus far I've pretty much been able to trust them when purchasing games.

EDIT: I did buy GoW based on that review but only once the price had dropped to below 20€. Because it is quite fun with a friend.

(Edited by Late (97), Oct 10, 2010)

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

havoc of smeg (12592) on Oct 03, 2010


User Avatar
I wouldn't say it was a bad game, though. I certainly enjoyed playing it. And I think it's worth considering if there has been a completely new, completely original ideas for, say, the last 10-15 years? Or even 20 maybe? i think Most games will have taken something from someones elses game, film or whatever for ideas and inspiration. For me, it comes down to how well a game executes what it has gameplay wise, and how well the game is as a whole package (graphics, story, multiplayer and sound/music as well as gameplay).

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Simoneer (30) on Oct 03, 2010


User Avatar
havoc of smeg Wrote:
Wasn't there just a big debate to the effect of Super Mario Bros. not being the first platformer, but rather the most influential? Same goes for Gears of War. I remember Winback's cover system being pretty cool back in the day, but most people never even played it, and fewer remember it, so it's not surprising to see it overlooked. Now, I'm no fan of the Gears of War series. The only reason I played them was because the co-op is decent fun, but I can at least see where the appeal lies. For better or worse, Gears of War popularized stop-n-pop gameplay, which is now a hallmark of this console generation. So it still deserves some credit.

Also, professional reviewers are only human. They haven't played everything.



I suppose you're right, although I think Gears of War is a tad bit too new to start discussing how influential it was within the genre. It does deserve SOME credit, though, indeed; there are some games inspired by Gears of War out now, like Vanquish.

Also, indeed, they are only human. But if they get paid and all that, and have their texts published in magazines that will be around for ages, they can at least do their freakin' research. That, and you'd think people who are so into games that they write about them for a living would know more than the average person.

havoc of smeg Wrote:
Wasn't KillSwitch hyped and praised for the same exact cover system so much shortly before Gears of War? I'm not saying it invented it either, just that there's this strange ignorance that supercedes a previous title when a new game introduces something, like Halo's ultra-praised dual-stick aiming invention that came after Timesplitter's dual-stick aiming by a full year.

Professional reviewers are forgetful goldfish when it comes to even something is only a year apart.

Don't forget the possible case of bribery for the reviews.



Indeed!

havoc of smeg Wrote:
I wouldn't say it was a bad game, though. I certainly enjoyed playing it. And I think it's worth considering if there has been a completely new, completely original ideas for, say, the last 10-15 years? Or even 20 maybe? i think Most games will have taken something from someones elses game, film or whatever for ideas and inspiration. For me, it comes down to how well a game executes what it has gameplay wise, and how well the game is as a whole package (graphics, story, multiplayer and sound/music as well as gameplay).



Yeah, it's not a bad game by any means. And I never said that. Although I do think it's highly overrated. I found it boring after not so long.

(Edited by Simoneer (30), Oct 03, 2010)

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

havoc of smeg (12592) on Oct 03, 2010


User Avatar
Simoneer Wrote:
Yeah, it's not a bad game by any means. And I never said that. Although I do think it's highly overrated. I found it boring after not so long.



I wouldnt say Its boring, purely because it's one of the few games i've completed more than once or twice on single player. Highly overated.... maybe. like many things, it kind of depends on who you ask. I personally don't think so. I consider it to be one of the most refreshing games for a while, purely because it is bloody and gorey in an increasingly politicly correct world. And it is also a decent game. Few games i think are both refreshing AND good AND not very PC.

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Adzuken (702) on Oct 03, 2010


User Avatar
Simoneer Wrote:
I suppose you're right, although I think Gears of War is a tad bit too new to start discussing how influential it was within the genre. It does deserve SOME credit, though, indeed; there are some games inspired by Gears of War out now, like Vanquish.

Gears of War came out four years ago. It's practically ancient. And it didn't just influence a few games, it influenced an entire generation of games. Stop-n-pop games are everywhere these days, and there's a good chance that this wouldn't have happened without Gears of War. Now we have games like Uncharted, Mass Effect, Kane and Lynch, Rainbow Six: Vegas, and even Mafia 2 all employing a sticky, health regenerative, cover-based combat system. It's getting to be even more common than the first-person perspective.

Simoneer Wrote:
Also, indeed, they are only human. But if they get paid and all that, and have their texts published in magazines that will be around for ages, they can at least do their freakin' research. That, and you'd think people who are so into games that they write about them for a living would know more than the average person.

Just because they get paid, doesn't mean they're all-knowing. A lot of them are likely hired more because of their writing talent and charisma than their enthusiasm for video games. Even still, they're constantly under pressure by deadlines, relentlessly assaulted by PR departments as well as their own readers, and forced to scour every aspect of new releases. It isn't as easy as a lot of people seem to think and mistakes are easy to make.

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Simoneer (30) on Oct 03, 2010


User Avatar
Adzuken Wrote:
Simoneer Wrote:
Yeah, it's not a bad game by any means. And I never said that. Although I do think it's highly overrated. I found it boring after not so long.



I wouldnt say Its boring, purely because it's one of the few games i've completed more than once or twice on single player. Highly overated.... maybe. like many things, it kind of depends on who you ask. I personally don't think so. I consider it to be one of the most refreshing games for a while, purely because it is bloody and gorey in an increasingly politicly correct world. And it is also a decent game. Few games i think are both refreshing AND good AND not very PC.



Yeah, it indeed depends on who you ask. I did say that *I* think it's overrated, not that "it is overrated". :)

Adzuken Wrote:
Just because they get paid, doesn't mean they're all-knowing. A lot of them are likely hired more because of their writing talent and charisma than their enthusiasm for video games. Even still, they're constantly under pressure by deadlines, relentlessly assaulted by PR departments as well as their own readers, and forced to scour every aspect of new releases. It isn't as easy as a lot of people seem to think and mistakes are easy to make.



Yeah, but I'm not saying they're all-knowing. Hence the part about doing some research. Like...maybe you should look into a genre before making statements about it? Indeed about the other stuff, though.

Adzuken Wrote:
Gears of War came out four years ago. It's practically ancient. And it didn't just influence a few games, it influenced an entire generation of games. Stop-n-pop games are everywhere these days, and there's a good chance that this wouldn't have happened without Gears of War. Now we have games like Uncharted, Mass Effect, Kane and Lynch, Rainbow Six: Vegas, and even Mafia 2 all employing a sticky, health regenerative, cover-based combat system. It's getting to be even more common than the first-person perspective.



I'm not denying its influence. :]

(Edited by Simoneer (30), Oct 03, 2010)

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

雷堂嬢太朗 -raido.jotaro- (55637) on Oct 03, 2010


User Avatar
It's weird. I actually really liked WinBack, and even WinBack 2, but I couldn't stand playing Gears for more than about 20 minutes. Maybe it's because the visuals were so damn busy that I got lost in the tutorial area, but something about this game just didn't sit right with me.

Those lasers in WinBack can go make love to themselves, though. That shit's just unfair.

(Edited by 雷堂嬢太朗 -raido.jotaro- (55637), Oct 03, 2010)

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Foxhack (12474) on Oct 04, 2010


User Avatar
Bad Boys Miami Takedown did it earlier than Gears; and yet a lot of the game's criticism seems to stem from that feature, which I actually liked.

(Edited by Foxhack (12474), Oct 04, 2010)

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Lain Crowley (5413) on Oct 04, 2010


User Avatar
Oni got a lot of flak too for putting camera controls on the right stick.

I think the important thing to note here is 'Who cares?', and the answer, hopefully, is no one. So what if kill.switch had cover based gameplay before Gears? kill.switch isn't fun to play, and Gears is.

Re: Gets too much credit for the gameplay

Simoneer (30) on Oct 05, 2010


User Avatar
I care. It's about justice. :P