I thought the story was ok, though I was really lost with this review... I understand that reviews are opinions and everything... But I don't remember any mention of the planet exploding... Like... At all... I do like the Gears series, but really only as a casual game to play with friends every now and again. Though you do say you review games solely based on the single player because you hate mutliplayer, you could at least aknowledge that people could like Gears more then Resistance because it has more multiplayer options. I will say, that the story in this one was a bit worse then the second's, which I thought was the best of the 3 single player wise. It had it's moments that were good, but really it wasn't as cohesive or interesting as the second's.

Also, just to clarify, the blonde girl, Anya, was in the first 2 games. She was the girl giving orders over the radio. The other chick, however, wasn't. The lambent were introduced in the previous installment and to this games credit, this installment's scenery was a lot more varied than the others.

I just thought I'd provide a bit of an objective opinion, I'm not really a huge fan of the games but I do enjoy them from time to time. This review just really seemed off the mark...

Djinn8:
Gears 3 strikes me as a pretty lazy release. I imagine that it was all but done months ago, the finishing touches being put on without any sense of urgency back when Bulletstorm was being shipped to stores.

I think this too, and what Yahtzee said fits this theory, the reason they delayed it this long was so it was a GOTY contender, because no one would remember anything about it when it came to voting at the end of the year :D

Waaghpowa:
Fanboys out in droves yet? *Glances* well I see at least one...

Finally someone who feels the same way as me. I've played every Gears of War game from beginning to end, some more than once, and 3 is by far the worst one. It's boring, repetitive, very gray and horribly predictable. It takes itself far too seriously and adds almost nothing new. I had to push myself to finish it.

Yeah anyone who disagree's with you or Yahtzee is a "fanboy". I dout you've ever played Gears before in your life. You just ran down a bunch of generic complaints that could be leveled at any game without elaborating on any of them. Gears 3 is the worst of the trilogy? How so exactly? It's the most polished gameplay wise, fixed pretty much all of the MP problems like the net code for example and added dedicated servers. Controls are reponsive the gameplay is fast and the shooting is the most intense it's ever been in Gears game. It's the most feature rich game since Halo:Reach maybe even moreso. Graphically it craps on nearly everything currently on consoles." It adds nothing new" can be leveled at nearly every game sequel ever made including the games you do like.

Also if you hate Gears so much why did you even bother playing it in the first place and "forcing" yourself to finish it?

major_chaos:
why am I less than amazed that he likes that steaming turd Hard Reset just because its has some resemblance to painkiller even if it doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence
also I don't think its fair to completely dismiss and ignore a games story and then say that the story is bad, also the game has sold very well for "a relic". but anyway funny video even if I disagree that's the magic of ZP

He didn't say he liked Hard reset, he said he liked that trailer. maybe you should listen better, and there is never an excuse for bad story in a video game. If all you can do for A story is "the planet will explode if you don't do this!" it's not storytelling, its forcing the player to care. Good story makes it so you don't need a new gun dangling at your nose for doing something, you do it because you like that character. The whole planet explosion is a cheap copout to make you support it.

Loled again at the new zero punctuation, makes me want to find the funniest quotes and put them on a t-shirt.

Jkudo:

JSRT:

The majority of Uncharted 2 was spent shooting in elaborate set
pieces. The platforming aspect was laughable compared to other games it held your hand and the puzzle aspects were as well compared to the likes of Tomb Raider. The cover mechanics of UC2 were very Gears esque. It's funny how people always compare UC with Tomb Raider when it's much closer to Gears gameplay wise.

The platforming is not laughable in uncharted and the majority of the game is not spent shooting in elaborate set pieces. I never found puzzles to be difficult or numerous but there is A LOT of platforming. The cover mechanics of UC2 could be found in games before gears. What uncharted got from gears was it's realistic setting. It's actually very different from gears gameplay wise. I see the influences, but they are minimal. The wack-a-mole in uncharted is actually fairly limited, especially when compared to gears 2.

The majority of UC2 was shooting, the only real puzzle i even remember from that game was the giant statue whos arms you needed to rearrange in one part. Most everything else was giant set piece shootouts where you were being chased by helicopters on tp of trains, or fighting in war torn environments , while occasionally running from trucks. I enjoy UC2 and yeah aside from the weak platforming and puzzles it's very Gears like. Can't imagine what "other shooters" other than Gears that UC2's shooting mechanics could have come from. Then there was that recent revelation from a former Naughty Dog dev that Uncharted was originally going to be a fantasy themed title until Sony suggested they change it in order to compete with the "gritty shooters" on the 360. Since Halo is far from gritty the only other shooter i can imagine they were referring to is Gears...

FPSfanatic:

major_chaos:
why am I less than amazed that he likes that steaming turd Hard Reset just because its has some resemblance to painkiller even if it doesn't deserve to be mentioned in the same sentence
also I don't think its fair to completely dismiss and ignore a games story and then say that the story is bad, also the game has sold very well for "a relic". but anyway funny video even if I disagree that's the magic of ZP

He didn't say he liked Hard reset, he said he liked that trailer. maybe you should listen better, and there is never an excuse for bad story in a video game. If all you can do for A story is "the planet will explode if you don't do this!" it's not storytelling, its forcing the player to care. Good story makes it so you don't need a new gun dangling at your nose for doing something, you do it because you like that character. The whole planet explosion is a cheap copout to make you support it.

Loled again at the new zero punctuation, makes me want to find the funniest quotes and put them on a t-shirt.

Except there is no "planet exploding" story line in Gears and no "storytelling" isn't the most important part of a videogame. Gameplay is. It's the quality of the gameplay that should make you want to continue to play a game. Whether or not the character is "likeable" is irrelevant. Of course it wouldn't be bad for a game to nail both story telling and gameplay but gameplay always should take priority. When it doesn't you get shit like Enslaved....

JSRT:

Waaghpowa:
Fanboys out in droves yet? *Glances* well I see at least one...

Finally someone who feels the same way as me. I've played every Gears of War game from beginning to end, some more than once, and 3 is by far the worst one. It's boring, repetitive, very gray and horribly predictable. It takes itself far too seriously and adds almost nothing new. I had to push myself to finish it.

Yeah anyone who disagree's with you or Yahtzee is a "fanboy". I dout you've ever played Gears before in your life. You just ran down a bunch of generic complaints that could be leveled at any game without elaborating on any of them. Gears 3 is the worst of the trilogy? How so exactly? It's the most polished gameplay wise, fixed pretty much all of the MP problems like the net code for example and added dedicated servers. Controls are reponsive the gameplay is fast and the shooting is the most intense it's ever been in Gears game. It's the most feature rich game since Halo:Reach maybe even moreso. Graphically it craps on nearly everything currently on consoles." It adds nothing new" can be leveled at nearly every game sequel ever made including the games you do like.

Also if you hate Gears so much why did you even bother playing it in the first place and "forcing" yourself to finish it?

I played the crap out of the first one, the second one was ok, and the 3rd one I thought was the worst one. I played the 3rd one because I played the others and enjoyed them to an extent, never once did I say that the whole series was bad, simply that this was the worst one.

You don't need to disagree with Yahtzee to be a fanboy, simply replying to every person who didn't like it. If you like it so much and think it's so great, why aren't you playing it? Must be a better use of your time than telling people their opinion is wrong.

Waaghpowa:

JSRT:

Waaghpowa:
Fanboys out in droves yet? *Glances* well I see at least one...

Finally someone who feels the same way as me. I've played every Gears of War game from beginning to end, some more than once, and 3 is by far the worst one. It's boring, repetitive, very gray and horribly predictable. It takes itself far too seriously and adds almost nothing new. I had to push myself to finish it.

Yeah anyone who disagree's with you or Yahtzee is a "fanboy". I dout you've ever played Gears before in your life. You just ran down a bunch of generic complaints that could be leveled at any game without elaborating on any of them. Gears 3 is the worst of the trilogy? How so exactly? It's the most polished gameplay wise, fixed pretty much all of the MP problems like the net code for example and added dedicated servers. Controls are reponsive the gameplay is fast and the shooting is the most intense it's ever been in Gears game. It's the most feature rich game since Halo:Reach maybe even moreso. Graphically it craps on nearly everything currently on consoles." It adds nothing new" can be leveled at nearly every game sequel ever made including the games you do like.

Also if you hate Gears so much why did you even bother playing it in the first place and "forcing" yourself to finish it?

I played the crap out of the first one, the second one was ok, and the 3rd one I thought was the worst one. I played the 3rd one because I played the others and enjoyed them to an extent, never once did I say that the whole series was bad, simply that this was the worst one.

You don't need to disagree with Yahtzee to be a fanboy, simply replying to every person who didn't like it. If you like it so much and think it's so great, why aren't you playing it? Must be a better use of your time than telling people their opinion is wrong.

I've been playing almost non stop since it launched actually. Also you still didn't explain why the 3rd game is the worst in the trilogy. You enjoyed the others which includes part 2, which most who played it agree had the most problems especially in MP. Gears 3 fixed pretty much everything wrong with the second one and delivered a more polished game, so what was so enjoyable about Gears 2 that wasn't in 3? I'm just curious is all. So many here claim to have played Gears and claim that it's such a horrible game yet no one elaborates on what makes it so "bad" in the first place. Then you have the nerve to call anyone who disagrees with you a "fanboy", it's posts like these that just come of as generic trolling and is hard to take seriously.

JSRT:
I've been playing almost non stop since it launched actually. Also you still didn't explain why the 3rd game is the worst in the trilogy. You enjoyed the others which includes part 2, which most who played it agree had the most problems especially in MP. Gears 3 fixed pretty much everything wrong with the second one and delivered a more polished game, so what was so enjoyable about Gears 2 that wasn't in 3? I'm just curious is all. So many here claim to have played Gears and claim that it's such a horrible game yet no one elaborates on what makes it so "bad" in the first place. Then you have the nerve to call anyone who disagrees with you a "fanboy", it's posts like these that just come of as generic trolling and is hard to take seriously.

I did say in my previous post that I thought it was repetitive, boring and predictable. They should have labeled this one "Gears of War 3: More of the same shit" because I swear the only thing they did was continue the story and add a new gun or two. Oh yeah, Ice T was also in the game, which was cool for a while. Gears 1 was fresh, at the time and at this point it's gone stale.

I'm calling you a fanboy because you simply wont accept the fact that some people don't like the game that you apparently love so much you're willing to marry. Not only that, you made your Escapist account today for the sole purpose of telling people their opinion is wrong? That's some dedication. If it's trolling for having a different opinion then everyone who disagrees with you must be a troll.

JSRT:

Jkudo:

JSRT:

The majority of Uncharted 2 was spent shooting in elaborate set
pieces. The platforming aspect was laughable compared to other games it held your hand and the puzzle aspects were as well compared to the likes of Tomb Raider. The cover mechanics of UC2 were very Gears esque. It's funny how people always compare UC with Tomb Raider when it's much closer to Gears gameplay wise.

The platforming is not laughable in uncharted and the majority of the game is not spent shooting in elaborate set pieces. I never found puzzles to be difficult or numerous but there is A LOT of platforming. The cover mechanics of UC2 could be found in games before gears. What uncharted got from gears was it's realistic setting. It's actually very different from gears gameplay wise. I see the influences, but they are minimal. The wack-a-mole in uncharted is actually fairly limited, especially when compared to gears 2.

The majority of UC2 was shooting, the only real puzzle i even remember from that game was the giant statue whos arms you needed to rearrange in one part. Most everything else was giant set piece shootouts where you were being chased by helicopters on tp of trains, or fighting in war torn environments , while occasionally running from trucks. I enjoy UC2 and yeah aside from the weak platforming and puzzles it's very Gears like. Can't imagine what "other shooters" other than Gears that UC2's shooting mechanics could have come from. Then there was that recent revelation from a former Naughty Dog dev that Uncharted was originally going to be a fantasy themed title until Sony suggested they change it in order to compete with the "gritty shooters" on the 360. Since Halo is far from gritty the only other shooter i can imagine they were referring to is Gears...

Except there is no "planet exploding" story line in Gears and no "storytelling" isn't the most important part of a videogame. Gameplay is. It's the quality of the gameplay that should make you want to continue to play a game. Whether or not the character is "likeable" is irrelevant. Of course it wouldn't be bad for a game to nail both story telling and gameplay but gameplay always should take priority. When it doesn't you get shit like Enslaved....

I just said the realistic setting was due to gears success... And i was JUST playing through uncharted there is A LOT of platforming probably more than shooting seeing as when you are traveling with the tibetan man there is little shooting at all. That entire level was 99% platforming. And enslaved did more positive things for gaming than gears did and i would still rather play it than gears 2, but i guess that's opinion. My opinion is that gameplay should not take precedence over anything. It should be a part of everything.
If you have writers, and make an effort with the story, it will be judged. There is no "it doesn't matter" if the developer actually put the work in.

Waaghpowa:

JSRT:
I've been playing almost non stop since it launched actually. Also you still didn't explain why the 3rd game is the worst in the trilogy. You enjoyed the others which includes part 2, which most who played it agree had the most problems especially in MP. Gears 3 fixed pretty much everything wrong with the second one and delivered a more polished game, so what was so enjoyable about Gears 2 that wasn't in 3? I'm just curious is all. So many here claim to have played Gears and claim that it's such a horrible game yet no one elaborates on what makes it so "bad" in the first place. Then you have the nerve to call anyone who disagrees with you a "fanboy", it's posts like these that just come of as generic trolling and is hard to take seriously.

I did say in my previous post that I thought it was repetitive, boring and predictable. They should have labeled this one "Gears of War 3: More of the same shit" because I swear the only thing they did was continue the story and add a new gun or two. Oh yeah, Ice T was also in the game, which was cool for a while. Gears 1 was fresh, at the time and at this point it's gone stale.

I'm calling you a fanboy because you simply wont accept the fact that some people don't like the game that you apparently love so much you're willing to marry. Not only that, you made your Escapist account today for the sole purpose of telling people their opinion is wrong? That's some dedication. If it's trolling for having a different opinion then everyone who disagrees with you must be a troll.

Lol another trollish post throwing around buzzwords and saying nothing, while calling anyone who doesn't joinn the generic Gears bashing circle jerk a "fanboy". I am sensing a pattern of that in this thread. Yeah Ice T was in the game everyone knew this from the beginning. "More of the same shit" complaint can be levels at any fucking game sequel ever, pretty much. You keep the core gameplay whie expanding on it. Not rocket science.

You've no real argument against the game, one can have an opinion on a game and thats your business. But this being a forum means those opinions can be challenged. You don't have any valid points to add so you call others fanboys, that's pretty much all you can do when you have no argument. I still doubt you've even played it.

I played this at a friends once and thought it was boring as hell, its no wonder the 3rd version sucked.

Also its funny you didn't blur out the picture of the dildo like you normally do.

Every time I see someone talk about how there's no "Exploding Planet" I cringe a little... I just didn't think making a post about it on page 3 would matter, since no one would read it.

That being said... it's been 7 pages now... I can't ignore it any longer.

There was no exploding planet in Resistance 3 either. The "Exploding planet" is an a metaphor for a doomsday scenario in which humanity will be wiped out in one way or another.

Gods, I hope he reads all this and clarifies in one of his articles.

Hmmm... it sounds like I'm going to have to replay the second one, and maybe the first.
I'm alittle excited to play it after watching this, honestly. I don't care so much about the series, I just want to finish it, you know, because I've stuck with it this long.

OT: He said MW3 is going to be the last MW game?

JSRT:

But this being a forum means those opinions can be challenged.

Challenging an opinion is a fight you can't win. You're just perpetrating ignorance by trying.

Jkudo:

JSRT:

Jkudo:

The platforming is not laughable in uncharted and the majority of the game is not spent shooting in elaborate set pieces. I never found puzzles to be difficult or numerous but there is A LOT of platforming. The cover mechanics of UC2 could be found in games before gears. What uncharted got from gears was it's realistic setting. It's actually very different from gears gameplay wise. I see the influences, but they are minimal. The wack-a-mole in uncharted is actually fairly limited, especially when compared to gears 2.

The majority of UC2 was shooting, the only real puzzle i even remember from that game was the giant statue whos arms you needed to rearrange in one part. Most everything else was giant set piece shootouts where you were being chased by helicopters on tp of trains, or fighting in war torn environments , while occasionally running from trucks. I enjoy UC2 and yeah aside from the weak platforming and puzzles it's very Gears like. Can't imagine what "other shooters" other than Gears that UC2's shooting mechanics could have come from. Then there was that recent revelation from a former Naughty Dog dev that Uncharted was originally going to be a fantasy themed title until Sony suggested they change it in order to compete with the "gritty shooters" on the 360. Since Halo is far from gritty the only other shooter i can imagine they were referring to is Gears...

Except there is no "planet exploding" story line in Gears and no "storytelling" isn't the most important part of a videogame. Gameplay is. It's the quality of the gameplay that should make you want to continue to play a game. Whether or not the character is "likeable" is irrelevant. Of course it wouldn't be bad for a game to nail both story telling and gameplay but gameplay always should take priority. When it doesn't you get shit like Enslaved....

I just said the realistic setting was due to gears success... And i was JUST playing through uncharted there is A LOT of platforming probably more than shooting seeing as when you are traveling with the tibetan man there is little shooting at all. That entire level was 99% platforming. And enslaved did more positive things for gaming than gears did and i would still rather play it than gears 2, but i guess that's opinion. My opinion is that gameplay should not take precedence over anything. It should be a part of everything.

Thing is you don't even get to Tibet until toward the end of the game and it's a fuck load of shooting and explosions getting there, not that i'm complaining. UC2 is one of my favorite games this gen, but it's a shooter plain and simple...
And What exactly did Enslaved do for gaming? What did any of Ninja Theory's games do for gaming? They have nice art and facial animations, stories are decent enough but what about the gameplay? Enslaved was a glitch fest with shallow and unresponsive combat, and the "platforming" is even more of a joke than in UC2. They basically hold your hand to the point that it's almost impossible to die while platforming. Enslaved represents everything wrong with gaming in my opinion, putting more emphasis on presentation than gameplay. (And now Ninja Theory will shit up DmC in the same way, a game known primarily for great gameplay.)
NT should realize that they are making games not movies. In movies stories matter more because it's a passive experience, a video game is interactive and lives and dies on it's gameplay. Stories are secondary to gameplay when it comes to vieogames.

JSRT:
Lol another trollish post throwing around buzzwords and saying nothing, while calling anyone who doesn't joinn the generic Gears bashing circle jerk a "fanboy". I am sensing a pattern of that in this thread. Yeah Ice T was in the game everyone knew this from the beginning. "More of the same shit" complaint can be levels at any fucking game sequel ever, pretty much. You keep the core gameplay whie expanding on it. Not rocket science.

You've no real argument against the game, one can have an opinion on a game and thats your business. But this being a forum means those opinions can be challenged. You don't have any valid points to add so you call others fanboys, that's pretty much all you can do when you have no argument. I still doubt you've even played it.

Yes, you're right. My subjective opinion has no real argument, while yours is immensely better. I haven't played the game despite my gamer tag on my escapist profile saying that I have with the achievements associated with completion. How could I have been so blind to the shear genius and complexity of the Gears of War series? Excuse me while I build statues of Marcus Fenix in tribute to its contribution to high culture.

If you're so sure I'm trolling, then why are you feeding me? Also pretty sure a troll wouldn't ignore the person he's baiting.

JSRT:

Thing is you don't even get to Tibet until toward the end of the game and it's a fuck load of shooting and explosions getting there, not that i'm complaining. UC2 is one of my favorite games this gen, but it's a shooter plain and simple...
And What exactly did Enslaved do for gaming? What did any of Ninja Theory's games do for gaming? They have nice art and facial animations, stories are decent enough but what about the gameplay? Enslaved was a glitch fest with shallow and unresponsive combat, and the "platforming" is even more of a joke than in UC2. They basically hold your hand to the point that it's almost impossible to die while platforming. Enslaved represents everything wrong with gaming in my opinion, putting more emphasis on presentation than gameplay. (And now Ninja Theory will shit up DmC in the same way, a game known primarily for great gameplay.)
NT should realize that they are making games not movies. In movies stories matter more because it's a passive experience, a video game is interactive and lives and dies on it's gameplay. Stories are secondary to gameplay when it comes to vieogames.

The game is a shooter, but it's fucking filled with platforming. It even starts out with a platforming section. The only moment that is extremely reminiscent of gears is right before he gets on the train. Platforming is fused within the core of the gameplay. I know enslaved was a glitchy mess haha. I know the gameplay was frustrating. It's not an emphasis on presentation, but an emphasis on art. If enslaved leads to a greater emphasis on story, dialogue and better writing then it's already done better for gaming than gears has. Ninja theory aren't handling the gameplay in DMC btw. An interactive experience DOES NOT negate storytelling. It's a brand new way of telling stories. There are games where they put work into the plot, and games where they do not. Story is supposed to be a part of gameplay so saying story is secondary is just ridiculous. If you intend to tell a story through an interactive experience it has to be a large part of the gameplay. I think the real problem is that you aren't looking for stories, and if so that's fine. An emphasis on better stories is NOT what's wrong with gaming. It's just something you don't like since you care little about stories .

I feel like this was less of a review and more of yahtzee talking to himself wondering why he liked the series and bashing it because he sort of admitted he liked it, because he just finished resistance 3 and may or may not be playing hard reset. Resistance 3 he really liked so i guess it's sorta like playing what he likes in an fps then going back to all the shit he constantly complains about. Gears 3 had bad timing with hard reset and resistance reminding yahtzee what he liked, so he took it out on the game.

I did not like this review. It was not funny like the Gears of War 2 review was, and most of the points it tried to raise were either completely invalid or blind to the point of insipidity. I'm sorry Yahtzee, but if you're going to pay ZERO attention to a game you're trying to review, then maybe you shouldn't be reviewing that particular game?

Now read this and understand why the review had me facepalming and groaning at just about every syllable:

1) If you think this is a "BROWN" game then you must have your TV smeared with mud, because most of the game has a massive variety of colors. Besides the ash-city and the desert areas, it's full of vibrant life and color. The ship is full of green and lively blue and bright yellows. The final levels are set in a utopia full of lush island life and flora, with massive buildings of orange and yellow, filled with tapestries and gardens.

2) Neither of the female characters are seen out of armor, and neither one acts sexual at all. In point of fact, I thought they acted too MANLY. And you can't see their cleavage. The only time the dark-headed one reminds you that she's a girl is when she shouts "AREN'T AFRAID OF A GIRL, ARE YOU?", though I will admit that that specific line does grow annoying.

3) The world blowing up? There's not one mention of the planet ever exploding. Instead, we're treated to the idea that a natural life form native to the planet is aggressively taking over like some sort of invasive foreign mushroom. The planet's not going to explode, it's just going to turn into a big glowy yellow mass full of big yellow glowy aliens.

You want some real areas that could have used some criticism?

THE ENDING WAS A DEUS EX MACHINA.

THE FINAL BOSS FIGHT WAS INSIPID.

ONLY TWO PEOPLE DIE, AND ONE OF THEM ISN'T EVEN A MAIN CHARACTER.

THE CHARACTERS TAKE TURNS PLAYING "Captain Fucking Obvious" AND HOLD THE PLAYER'S HAND AT ALL TIMES. "Hey, let's look for a door. Hey, that looks like a door. Hey, kick down this door. Alright, everybody go through the door!"

Seriously.

You want something to critique? Crack penis jokes about that shit, please.

I mean, at least I actually felt legitimately sad when (CENSORED) died, and at least Epic took the time to spend three years building the game and jam it full of three other high-quality game modes. Even without the campaign the damn game is still worth 60 bucks. And for god's sake, the campaign is 12 fucking hours long, and it'd still be about 10 hours long if it wasn't for the damn padding during the submarine levels. You call that a cash grab?

Hell, even the MULTIPLAYER works. What's that, you say? Multiplayer in a Gears game, actually working for once? Unbelievable! People really die when you shoot them, and the Sawed-Off Shotgun alone provides for hours of endless, cheap entertainment.

If you're going to positively review Gears 2, which was shitty and broken on nearly every level, and then trash Gears 3 off-hand despite it being far superior to said shitty-broken-game, there's something wrong. I've got a shitload of problems with Gears 3, and I can't fucking stand it sometimes, but at least I can take a look at it and see that Yahtzee rushed this review just to appease everybody asking for it.

BTW, the thing about the fans screaming from the rooftops? Well, I don't care if you disliked the Campaign, I thought it was quietly brilliant and insanely badass in turn, with a shitload of exceptionally clever design mechanics and original ideas. Sure, if I'd had it my way it would have been entirely different, but goddamn. Can we even be sure Yahtzee played it through to the end? There was no mention of the damn Deus Ex Machina ending, which I was hoping he would tear the hell out of.

But I digress. Yahtzee doesn't like Gears of War, and that's fine by me. But don't let that stop you from trying the game, because YOU might actually like it. And especially don't go around parroting everything he's said, because that's not only lazy, it's regurgitation of shit that (for the most part) isn't even present in the game.

TL;DR

This review was subpar. Yahtzee, please, in the future... if you're just reviewing a game because everybody's telling you to review it, just don't review it. It's not worth your time.

Everybody else? Half the points Yahtzee raised in this review aren't even in the game. You'll probably hate the game (even I, a rabid fanboy by my own admission, dislike several important parts of the game), but maybe you won't. You might think it's the best thing since sliced bread once you've tried it. So at the very least, play it at a friend's house, borrow it for a day, or rent it some time.

And finally... "relic?" Seriously? A new sequel to a game that came out in 2006 and created its own genre of shooters cannot be considered archaic when it's not even had time to age yet. We're still in the same console generation, for god's sake. Hell, the game is meant to cap off the series and put an end to Gears of War, at least until Epic figures out how to make a bunch of prequels or a spin-off out of it, ala Halo 4 (AND THEN AND ONLY THEN will the term "cash grab" be allowed).

(PS - the story of Gears 3 caters to the fans who've read all the books and comics, so if there's any reason why Yahtzee didn't give a damn about what was going on, it's because he doesn't have time to go through four novels)

immortalslayer90:
Gears 3 is the first Gears game I have ever bought, and I honestly don't understand what is so great about these games. Seems pretty average to me. It certainly doesn't seem all that special. Great review by Yahtzee as always.

I suppose it was due to it being the 1st game to have a heavily polished cover system that was a core part of gameplay, and the chainsaw assault rifle certainly gave it some oomph. When follow the leader kicked in, Gears lost what was mostly unique to it.

Sure the plot was derivative and unoriginal, what with the lambent essentially being a volatile version of the Flood, but I thought it was OK. Yahtzee's preemptive on the fans about the story is utterly true, but I could at least follow what was going on.

I do really like the Gears of War Trilogy, but I couldnt help but laugh at his review and the many points he brings up.

I was slightly disapointed by some of the plot though as a lot of it is explained in the book series that is written on the side, such as where the lambent come from why the locust are here who Bernie and Sam are as well as a lot of Character development for everyone.

The books are actually a really good read by Karen Traviss who does the story for the game as well, along with quite a few Halo and Star wars books and I have to say I haven't picked up a book of hers that I didn't like.

In conclusion I am still a huge fan of Gears of War in all it's forms even with all its chest high walls.

I was really hoping for the line:

"At least they're only wearing HALF a car now."

But sadly, nothing. Just something about people wearing refrigerators.

Anyway, as I said earlier, this review is seriously lacking any review-ness. I feel as though Yahtzee forced himself to slog through the game on the lowest difficulty just to get this review done for the fans, and the game fell victim to that review-style.

Nobody seems to realize that Gears is a theme-driven series, not really character or event-driven like most games. And that theme is loss, death, and grief in a world of destroyed beauty. In this regard it is truly a powerful narrative experience. The characters are just means to an end.

(but dammit, Epic Games... it's "Brothers to the End", could you at LEAST have killed off a few more people? Don't get all stingy with your characters now)

One of my mates was so taken in by the story he actually cried in Act 3. Bastard won't lend me the game though.

Above all else, Gears is fun. You can go in whining about everything you don't like, or you can enjoy the visceral pleasure of blowing a bad guy's brain out his arse with a shotty. Put scientifically.

Anyone else feel like his reviews seem to written based on gameplay videos and cutscenes rather than actually playing the games?

The Monster Hunter review comes to mind here. Ask anyone who has played that game to watch his review. He's clearly not played more than half-an-hour of it.

I think the entirety of Gears of Wars series runs on bayonet chainsaw vasectomy, because of the whole "HOLY SHIT BAYONET CHAINSAW VASECTOMY LOLOLOLOLOLZ!!" mentality of both the producers and the audience who bought them. It was only when they see the later games that comes after GoW that they go, "Hmm...you know, this 'plot' thing might not be such a bad idea after all!"

Well done, boys. Well done.

Lol every exclusive game the bias argument pops up

I'm rather taken back by this...but ah well it'll please a lot of Escapists

Waaghpowa:

I played the crap out of the first one, the second one was ok, and the 3rd one I thought was the worst one. I played the 3rd one because I played the others and enjoyed them to an extent, never once did I say that the whole series was bad, simply that this was the worst one.

You don't need to disagree with Yahtzee to be a fanboy, simply replying to every person who didn't like it. If you like it so much and think it's so great, why aren't you playing it? Must be a better use of your time than telling people their opinion is wrong.

I'm playing it right now! well...no taking a food break atm. but I'm not here to argue lol

funny tho, I say the same thing to lotsa people online. "if you think your ___ is so much better than my ___ then why aren't you playing it instead of arguing about it with me?!?!"
but only when I get too tired to game and just sit at my computer haha

not sure why we're all still accusing each other fanboyism...we all love something soooo...I offer my simplest of respects to your opinions and will look away

duchaked:
I'm playing it right now! well...no taking a food break atm. but I'm not here to argue lol

funny tho, I say the same thing to lotsa people online. "if you think your ___ is so much better than my ___ then why aren't you playing it instead of arguing about it with me?!?!"
but only when I get too tired to game and just sit at my computer haha

not sure why we're all still accusing each other fanboyism...we all love something soooo...I offer my simplest of respects to your opinions and will look away

I have no problem with someone enjoying the game, I have a problem with people telling me that I'm wrong for not liking it. Apparently thinking that Gears of War 3 is boring compared to the other ones is some deep offensive heresy that some people take personally.

And it's like I said in previous posts, he can't, or wont accept that some people don't like it and has made it his duty to go and tell them they're wrong and furiously defend it. Which is the loose definition of a fanboy.

I went into this review thinking "I'll probably agree with whatever Yahtzee says, but will still love the game regardless of his critiques."

Yeah, I still pretty much have that opinion. Yahtzee's seen too many games that stuff like GoW 3 just really seems to fall into the background and doesn't stimulate much for him, but I still enjoyed GoW 3 for all that it's worth. It's certainly not a bad game, but by Yahtzee's standards, and of which I will agree with, it's certainly not winning any Game of the Year contests or any contests for Innovation.

JSRT:

I am honestly wondering if most of the people here have actually payed this game. The AI is stupid? lol. How are the bodies "Disproportionate" exactly? Even in the first Gears where they wore heavy bdy armor the only really big guy was Cole, Marcus only really got bigger in the third game. If you'd actually played it ( which clearly you didn't) you could see the difference with the "classic marcus" Gears 1 skin in multiplayer is smaller that the newer version. It's funny nearly all of the complaints here seen pretty damned baseless and i bet if Gears was a PS3 exclusive it wouldn't be getting as much flak. You could harp on the story all you want, the FACT of the matter is gameplay wise Gears is a cut above 90% of the shooters out now. Most TPS this gen including the all mighty sacred cow, Uncharted 2 copies mechanics that Gears of War perfected. It was as influential to shooters this gen as Halo was last gen. This is fact....

I'm sorry, but the AI that I physically watched him fight against was running against a wall, getting stuck on objects, and standing around.

Also, call me when you meet anyone that isn't pumping obscene amounts of steroids that fits that body size. Even if the armor is bulking him up, it's really doubtful that he's a stringbean underneath that; that thick tree trunk of a neck isn't going to be supported unless he's also built like Chris Redfield from RE:5.

I'm also sorry that I hurt your delicate fanboy mindset. I don't own a PS3, I have no interest in a PS3, I hate all modern FPSes for being cover-hugging, generic, brown, unoriginal, manly testosterone fests.

Just because a steaming pile of crap was influential in creating an ocean of crap, doesn't mean it's good. It's crap, and it's to blame for this mountain of crap called modern FPS.

I watched a friend play it. It looked boring. There was nothing that caught my eye. No interesting gameplay that made me wanna try it. I'm sorry that this offends you so badly. I'll stick to my Heretic, thank you very much. Metroid Prime's pretty good, too.

...welp, way to outdo yourself Yahtzee. This review has brought up one hell of a shitstorm in the comments.

People who don't like "brown, dull games," people tired of pointlessly having their games called dull and brown, crappy plot that isn't crappy, pointing out Yahtzee's own misinformation, lashing out at fanboys, accusations of this and that and pattywacks, people not actually playing the game, everyone just taking a bite of the pie, opinions, opinions, opinions, HELL we even have teachers giving their 2 cents about the American education system!

...wait, what?