Zero Punctuation: Gears of War 3

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

sravankb:

Metalrocks:
good thing that the game is not available for pc. cant say i will miss it.
since he is playing hard reset, maybe he will review it next week. its a good game. played it already twice. just the story is not really amazing but gameplay wise its fun.

I'm surprised people actually use these videos as reviews. Yahtzee himself said that his videos are not reviews; they're critiques. If you followed his advice, you'd end up playing 2-3 games every year.

Believe it or not, there are plenty of people that could afford maybe 2 or 3 brand new games a year.

I, myself, get most of my games years after their release, for $5-20.

Good review, I think I'll end up borrowing this from a friend rather than buying it. I'd like to finish up the trilogy but from what I've heard so far Gears 3 doesn't sound all that stellar.

TheNaut131:
...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?

Dragon Age 2 wasn't that bad, used games are killing the industry, something inflammatory, and X platform is superior to Y platform.

OT: I played the first one enough to say I got my $60 worth of entertainment and then some. But both Gears 2 and 3 have come out during a time where I'm just not that interested in picking up either at launch. I'll wait a bit till the price drops since it seems I'm not missing out on anything extraordinary at this time.

You know, I'm pretty sure at least one person here was one of those fanboys who went to a GoW3 midnight release or probably got the chainsaw replica thingy. Yet, they're all being "Oh, quite so, Yahtzee good ol' chap! Glorious and most wise review as always, pip pip!". It's like...the tru fanboys are scared of telling everyone that GoW3 made their life. It's not a bad thing, you know. if you like the game, you like the game. I like FFXIII despite all the negative feedback towards it. I'm not afraid to say it either because that doesn't make the game any better or worse.

I, too, agree with Yahtzee on this review. I would like to see a FPS where the world isn't about to end or where the main character isn't a macho, buff guy (Or an abstract interpretation of one). I might just buy that game.

I gott a admit for the most of the franchise I was a dangerously obsest fanboy of Gears of War.

Loved it mainly because it was doing for me what other shooters bloody well weren't.

My hopes were dropped like a kick in the nuts with Gears 3 mainly because I had hoped it would be as badass as the first. Which I now realise is impossible because that part in GoW1 near the end of act 1 is unbeatable in its' brutality.

Also I was hoping for more story in the realm of the locust origins and motivation, the deal with Queen Myrah and what the fuck was up with the sires in the second game. The first game ended with Myrah saying "They do not know why we wage this war" which I assumed was going to be a big twist.

Unfortunately however the so called big twist of Gears 3 was its' "immulsion is the problem". I mean c'mon we knew that in the pendulum wars and we weren't exactly introduced to the lambent properly imo. All we got were wretches in the first game and a war in the background of the second that we didnt get to crash... which sucked btw.

Anyone remember the big reveal of the berzerker in GoW1?... Dang that was kickass... Didnt get that though... Didnt even get an interesting fight with the final boss of Gears 3... Wasn't really implementing enemy class traits with combat like with the first where not shooting or staying out the dark was the key.

You didnt even go underground in this one... And characters were just dropped on us. That major character death wasn't necessary in the situation... Granted I'm happy they did kill the character off but better, more fubar circumstances could've been happening.

On the bright side Baird is 5x funnier in Gears 3, should've had a origins story for him just like with Cole. And horde 2.0 is an epic game mode now that just blew my mind with the enemies you can now get in it.

sravankb:

Metalrocks:
good thing that the game is not available for pc. cant say i will miss it.
since he is playing hard reset, maybe he will review it next week. its a good game. played it already twice. just the story is not really amazing but gameplay wise its fun.

I'm surprised people actually use these videos as reviews. Yahtzee himself said that his videos are not reviews; they're critiques. If you followed his advice, you'd end up playing 2-3 games every year.

Man you sure took his opinion of the game rather personally didn't you? I've read through all 8 pages of the comment section and you constantly pop up and announce how wrong yahtzee was and how right you are. You really love the game don't you? And don't say you aren't a fanboy, you really seem to care about the game to comment all the way to the eighth page

I too have been thinking about making an extension on the cleavage department, maybe now I can spend my time doing that instead of playing Gears 3.

This game is such a lazy cash cow. It was a total blur for me, there weren't any standout moments and it wasn't even challenging. I only played GoW2 a couple of times at a friends place like a year ago and I still smashed GoW3 on Hard difficulty, on the day it was released, and without any trouble or remembering any significant plot updates, so I took it back to EB and now I've got store credit to blow on something equally shit like MW3 of BF3

Not the best review, but then again choosing to talk about a game like GoW3 of any other '3 is kind of redundent, cause fans of the serie have in most cases already made up there mind before the game hits the streets and new players who becomes interested or just remoutly curious about it, should make it a habit to checking a trailer on UT before buying if in doubt.
Really hope Yahtzee reads this cause in my opinion he needs to review games where we, as consumers and gamers, can't estimate from the cover and/or gametrailer alone, but need a closer look in to the game itself with a fair but critical eye and that's why we happelly await Wednesdays and the Wrath of Yahtzee c",

I only played GOW1 (pc gamer). I thought it was good. It had a cool setting and cool gameplay. This review seemed to be about GOW2 more than 3 and about hte franchise in general. I bet it is still a cool game.

Still obligated to play this, since it's a ritual my friend and I go through for every new instalment. I hate myself for funding this atrocity of a series, albeit only in rental fees.

CaptainCash:

sravankb:

Metalrocks:
good thing that the game is not available for pc. cant say i will miss it.
since he is playing hard reset, maybe he will review it next week. its a good game. played it already twice. just the story is not really amazing but gameplay wise its fun.

I'm surprised people actually use these videos as reviews. Yahtzee himself said that his videos are not reviews; they're critiques. If you followed his advice, you'd end up playing 2-3 games every year.

Man you sure took his opinion of the game rather personally didn't you? I've read through all 8 pages of the comment section and you constantly pop up and announce how wrong yahtzee was and how right you are. You really love the game don't you? And don't say you aren't a fanboy, you really seem to care about the game to comment all the way to the eighth page

If you've read all my posts, you must've noticed that I've also mentioned that his review of Silent Hill: Origins was incredibly negative, and I loved that game (one of my top 10 games). Hell, even if I wanted to, I couldn't counter his points back then because they were true; he knew the series well, and it was good and funny criticism as a result.

This review, on the other hand, was absolute drivel. He really has no idea what he's talking about, and hell, he even admitted that in this review several times. For the same reason, it wasn't funny either because he has no knowledge of the subject material. The video wasn't an opinion. It was misinformed, and that's the reason why it's wrong. Trust me, I'm not one to argue against someone's opinion on a matter if it disagrees with mine. It's like if someone posted a movie review based on the trailer.

And nope, not a fanboy. I'm just surprised this man is getting paid for posting this sort of crap. His reviews were fairly accurate and insightful before, but recently he just seems to spend his time bashing stuff without a good foundation.

I enjoyed the first Gears of War, got bored halfway through the second one, and will likely wait to see if I want to pick up Gears 3 when it's not $60. Pretty solid shooter mechanics, terrible walking speed (even slower than Baldur's incredibly slow movement speed in Too Human, or as Yahtzee said, Baldur's "Gait"), so-so story.

Took me a while, but here is my discussion provoking comment: I (RE: me personally) cannot take Yahtzee's opinion on shooters seriously anymore.

Clarify: He expects too much out of them.

I remember him complaining that the action paced in CoD: Black Ops was to frantic. What the hell do you expect in a FPS.

Maybe it's because I can appreciate the story. It's awkwardly convenient that the whereabouts of Marcus's dad are imperative to the survival of the world, but I enjoyed that. I enjoyed the Gears series in general (even though the multiplayer in Gears 2 was poorly structured). I enjoyed navigating cover to skillfully murder my foes with whatever weapon I had equipped

And I hate the often toted "gray-brown" trope. The boat was made of steel and had crops growing on it. There was on level that took place in the ocean, and then a rainstorm. And yes, sand is brown. But mark my words, I will play a shooter that makes a point of avoiding gray-brown to appease gaming snobs.

Shooters have a unique narrative, "if there all going to be the same", than the narrative relies on character and context. Sure, these are "big, 'manly' men" but what do you expect out of guys fighting a war? I like Marcus, I have empathy for all of his trials.

What I agree with Yahtzee on: "The sacrifice" was touching, but reeks of deus ex machina (I think I'm using that phrase wrong); Sam was useless, you don't really learn anything about her, along with a few other characters, the "implied romance" with Marcus and Anya at the end was really stupid.

Apart from that, I don't get what his problem is.

A movie or game is what you bring back of it in your memory lane.

Im happy as long as they don't make gears 4. Let it die in peace

Existential Banana:
I enjoyed the first Gears of War, got bored halfway through the second one, and will likely wait to see if I want to pick up Gears 3 when it's not $60. Pretty solid shooter mechanics, terrible walking speed (even slower than Baldur's incredibly slow movement speed in Too Human, or as Yahtzee said, Baldur's "Gait"), so-so story.

FYI, Gears 3 is much faster and in my opinion, the story and mechanices are much stronger than the second one.

But no matter what, the GoW serie will still be a second hand duck toy, compared to Metal Gear Solid 1

RedHighwind07:
This game is such a lazy cash cow. It was a total blur for me, there weren't any standout moments and it wasn't even challenging. I only played GoW2 a couple of times at a friends place like a year ago and I still smashed GoW3 on Hard difficulty, on the day it was released, and without any trouble or remembering any significant plot updates, so I took it back to EB and now I've got store credit to blow on something equally shit like MW3 of BF3

lazy cash cow?

*sigh*

seems that any sequel to any game that sells well (And yes, i think GOW deserves high sales) is instantly branded as this.. if anything is lazy its you and the thought you put into that post

GOW3 is highly polished - the graphics on some of the set pieces are stunning

Ill admit, there are very few "stand out" moments.. i cleared it on co-op and am now replaying it on single player, and yeah, it is difficult to remember what happens at times, but so what? its quite a long campaign - and i genuinely think forgetting what happens increases the replay value! Im tempted to replay the campaigns in 1 and 2..

tbh GOW3 is all about the multiplayer.. horde mode, the new (and very fun) beast mode... i dont usually play online, but GOW has a massive online gamer following, and this is the best one to play online.. if you dont have XBL or a friend you regularly play with, i wont fault the trade in, but it is not a BAD, nor "lazy" game.

Jkudo:

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.

First off my point was not that putting an emphasis on better story telling is what's wrong with gaming, putting an emphasis on presentation while neglecting gameplay is the problem. ( sorry if i didn't make this clear) You said yourself the gameplay in Enslaved is "frustrating" which it is. The control isn't responsive either( Heavenly Sword had the same problems) I have zero problems with games telling great stories, and having great presentation. I agree with you that it's part of the over all package. The problem arises when it's the only thing the devs seem to have put any care into. Like i said before your game could have one of the greatest stories ever told, but if the gameplay itself isn't compelling and i don't have fun playing it then what is the point?

This is my problem with Ninja Theory, i love the art direction of their games and their presentations but it's wasted on bad gameplay because they don't put as much care into it as the story.( oh and BTW yeah they are handling the gameplay in DmC, it's also using Unreal engine instead of Capcom's MT Framework) This is not a DVD movie i am buying for 20 bucks , where i just sit down and watch. It's a 60 dollar VIDEO GAME. If i don't feel the game is polished, responsive or fun to play i feel that i have wasted my money.

As for Gears story as i have said before if you've ever played the Gears games from the original to the last it has a decent story it's just not told as well as it is in the expanded fiction. Funny thing is the first Gears didn't have much emphasis on story and people complained about that, so in Gears 2 there was greater emphasis on story like people wanted, but then it was made fun of for being too serious. (Sometimes i wonder if "gamers" these days really know what they want. I also wonder how much flack Gears would be getting if it were a PS3 game or multi plat but that's for another thread)

And for what it's worth Gears 3 story attempted to do everything that you claim it doesn't. many of the many characters had their stories expanded on and it attempted to deliver actual character development and in many ways actually succeeded. For example Augustus Cole going back to his hometown and reliving his past glories as a thrashball star ( Serra's version of Football) they even incorporate it into gameplay at one point. Dom's sacrifice IMO was actually well done. Marcus's reaction to it wasn't overblown at all. He didn't shake his fist in the air and vow revenge , he didn't drop to his knees and yell "NOOOOOOO" or any such thing. He reacted as one would imagine to a close friend getting killed, sucked it up and kept on with the mission. In fact all of the squads reactions to Dom's death were well done. I like how the end is bittersweet, they won the war, the locust and lambent are dead. But the government is gone , half the human population is dead, everything is still fucked, and Marcus is like "what the fuck are we supposed to do now?!"

The reason for the Locust Hoard attacking humanity was basically out of necessity rather than the usual alien invasion schtick in these kinds of games. (I also like the fact that the Locusts aren't "aliens" they are native to Serra, it's their planet and the humans are the "invaders".) The story didn't succeed in every way though, their are some things they left open. Like who Queen Mirrah really was and why she looked human. Did she turn her back on humanity, if so then why?

They also didn't continue the story of the creature experiments in that lab in Gears 2. Those complaints aside it's funny that you people accuse Gears of not trying to tel a story then when Gears 2 and 3 were VERY story heavy. (Maybe most of you would realize this if you'd actually played it as opposed to just hating on something popular to seem cool. (You're not impressing anyone) Even with it's flaws i feel that they have gotten a lot better with the story telling going from one to three and i applaud Epic for at trying to better the story and characters, unfortunately everything i said just now will be dismissed since you've already got it in your head that "lol GEARZ HAZ NO STORIES".

Whatever though Gears is a total package, they delivered on nearly everything. Vastly improved the gameplay, the graphics , the performance, and added a fuck load of features to multi and SP. Listen to fan complaints about Gear 2 and fixed everything that was wrong with the game, Lazy release my ass. This so far is my personal GOTY ( we'll see what happens with UC3 and Batman: Arkham City) and just an all around great game. Fuck the haters....

JSRT:

Jezzascmezza:
Harsh review, but then again, it is a brown space marine shooter filled with chest high walls, 3 of Yahtzee's pet peeves...

Yeah except for the part about Gear 3 being a "brown shooter" (seriously did you people even look at this game?) and having "space marines" ( Cogs are not marines, the game doesn't take place in space, the locusts are not aliens etc) but it does have chext high walls so thats one thing.

I'm actually really enjoying Gears 3, I think it's great.
What I posted were kind of supposed Yahtzee's words, not mine, so I guess I should've put some inverted commas (" ") around "brown space marine shooter filled with chest high walls."
Sorry about that. :)

Fuck sake.......i love your videos but stop spoiling them!!!!! or at least say spoiler alert!! youve been doing this alot lately and im not happy about it!

Just a comment on Claudia Black's voice.

Maybe her voice doesn't appeal to Yahtzee, but to me it always seems like when she's talking my pants are in danger of spontaneously unzipping and yanking themselves down. So that's why.

to understand the story you need the books by karen travis,

only mentioning the story singles player seems a bit lazy yahtzee, what about the awesome if repetative horde 2.0 ?

and the shotgun rape that is online multi player ?

and to be fair gears 3is a lot brighter and more colourfull than gears 1 and 2

and in all seriousness who actually takes these reviews as 'legit' it's one guy rambling on....with humour

me thinks the choice of austrailian accents was a bad choice claudia should just of done her normal voice, like she did in farscape/ stargate sg1

and bernie mataki she sounds totally wrong as an ozzy

Hm, can we expect a review of Hard reset? Or just a paragraph? I'd like to hear what Yahtzee thinks of the game

JSRT:

First off my point was not that putting an emphasis on better story telling is what's wrong with gaming, putting an emphasis on presentation while neglecting gameplay is the problem. ( sorry if i didn't make this clear) You said yourself the gameplay in Enslaved is "frustrating" which it is. The control isn't responsive either( Heavenly Sword had the same problems) I have zero problems with games telling great stories, and having great presentation. I agree with you that it's part of the over all package. The problem arises when it's the only thing the devs seem to have put any care into. Like i said before your game could have one of the greatest stories ever told, but if the gameplay itself isn't compelling and i don't have fun playing it then what is the point?

This is my problem with Ninja Theory, i love the art direction of their games and their presentations but it's wasted on bad gameplay because they don't put as much care into it as the story.( oh and BTW yeah they are handling the gameplay in DmC, it's also using Unreal engine instead of Capcom's MT Framework) This is not a DVD movie i am buying for 20 bucks , where i just sit down and watch. It's a 60 dollar VIDEO GAME. If i don't feel the game is polished, responsive or fun to play i feel that i have wasted my money.

As for Gears story as i have said before if you've ever played the Gears games from the original to the last it has a decent story it's just not told as well as it is in the expanded fiction. Funny thing is the first Gears didn't have much emphasis on story and people complained about that, so in Gears 2 there was greater emphasis on story like people wanted, but then it was made fun of for being too serious. (Sometimes i wonder if "gamers" these days really know what they want. I also wonder how much flack Gears would be getting if it were a PS3 game or multi plat but that's for another thread)

And for what it's worth Gears 3 story attempted to do everything that you claim it doesn't. many of the many characters had their stories expanded on and it attempted to deliver actual character development and in many ways actually succeeded. For example Augustus Cole going back to his hometown and reliving his past glories as a thrashball star ( Serra's version of Football) they even incorporate it into gameplay at one point. Dom's sacrifice IMO was actually well done. Marcus's reaction to it wasn't overblown at all. He didn't shake his fist in the air and vow revenge , he didn't drop to his knees and yell "NOOOOOOO" or any such thing. He reacted as one would imagine to a close friend getting killed, sucked it up and kept on with the mission. In fact all of the squads reactions to Dom's death were well done. I like how the end is bittersweet, they won the war, the locust and lambent are dead. But the government is gone , half the human population is dead, everything is still fucked, and Marcus is like "what the fuck are we supposed to do now?!"

The reason for the Locust Hoard attacking humanity was basically out of necessity rather than the usual alien invasion schtick in these kinds of games. (I also like the fact that the Locusts aren't "aliens" they are native to Serra, it's their planet and the humans are the "invaders".) The story didn't succeed in every way though, their are some things they left open. Like who Queen Mirrah really was and why she looked human. Did she turn her back on humanity, if so then why?

They also didn't continue the story of the creature experiments in that lab in Gears 2. Those complaints aside it's funny that you people accuse Gears of not trying to tel a story then when Gears 2 and 3 were VERY story heavy. (Maybe most of you would realize this if you'd actually played it as opposed to just hating on something popular to seem cool. (You're not impressing anyone) Even with it's flaws i feel that they have gotten a lot better with the story telling going from one to three and i applaud Epic for at trying to better the story and characters, unfortunately everything i said just now will be dismissed since you've already got it in your head that "lol GEARZ HAZ NO STORIES".

Whatever though Gears is a total package, they delivered on nearly everything. Vastly improved the gameplay, the graphics , the performance, and added a fuck load of features to multi and SP. Listen to fan complaints about Gear 2 and fixed everything that was wrong with the game, Lazy release my ass. This so far is my personal GOTY ( we'll see what happens with UC3 and Batman: Arkham City) and just an all around great game. Fuck the haters....

I'm at school so i don't have time for a long post, but i didn't mean to imply "lol GEARZ HAZ NO STORIES" I dont think i said that. And do you know why an emphasis on story made people say gears 2 was too serious? Well it's because gears has ridiculous violence. They intend for it to be slapstick but when you take yourself very seriously the violence is just off putting and unnecessary. Gears is slapstick violence done wrong, bulletstorm is slapstick violence done right.
I dont think there is a focus on presentation over gameplay. I don't think there is any shift away from gameplay. And i know it's being done with unreal but capcom already said they are handling the gameplay. Capcom is working WITH Ninja theory. The devil may cry team is working on dragon's dogma. Ninja theory was hired not because of their gameplay, they were hired because of capcom admired there characters and art.

What's wrong with unreal engine anyway? I'm not an expert on the engine so i have no idea why it couldn't be used to make dmc.
As for gears it's not that yahtzee just found the story forgettable, he found the gameplay sub par as well. He claims the game is inferior to both hard reset and resistance 3. That's not hating, he may enjoy pissing people off but disliking gameplay and finding the story forgettable is just his opinion. I found the gameplay extremely boring in gears 2 but gears 3 looks more enjoyable, playing as monsters anyway.

theriddlen:
So, Hard Reset next week?

i hope he reviews Tag the power of paint.

Jkudo:

JSRT:

First off my point was not that putting an emphasis on better story telling is what's wrong with gaming, putting an emphasis on presentation while neglecting gameplay is the problem. ( sorry if i didn't make this clear) You said yourself the gameplay in Enslaved is "frustrating" which it is. The control isn't responsive either( Heavenly Sword had the same problems) I have zero problems with games telling great stories, and having great presentation. I agree with you that it's part of the over all package. The problem arises when it's the only thing the devs seem to have put any care into. Like i said before your game could have one of the greatest stories ever told, but if the gameplay itself isn't compelling and i don't have fun playing it then what is the point?

This is my problem with Ninja Theory, i love the art direction of their games and their presentations but it's wasted on bad gameplay because they don't put as much care into it as the story.( oh and BTW yeah they are handling the gameplay in DmC, it's also using Unreal engine instead of Capcom's MT Framework) This is not a DVD movie i am buying for 20 bucks , where i just sit down and watch. It's a 60 dollar VIDEO GAME. If i don't feel the game is polished, responsive or fun to play i feel that i have wasted my money.

As for Gears story as i have said before if you've ever played the Gears games from the original to the last it has a decent story it's just not told as well as it is in the expanded fiction. Funny thing is the first Gears didn't have much emphasis on story and people complained about that, so in Gears 2 there was greater emphasis on story like people wanted, but then it was made fun of for being too serious. (Sometimes i wonder if "gamers" these days really know what they want. I also wonder how much flack Gears would be getting if it were a PS3 game or multi plat but that's for another thread)

And for what it's worth Gears 3 story attempted to do everything that you claim it doesn't. many of the many characters had their stories expanded on and it attempted to deliver actual character development and in many ways actually succeeded. For example Augustus Cole going back to his hometown and reliving his past glories as a thrashball star ( Serra's version of Football) they even incorporate it into gameplay at one point. Dom's sacrifice IMO was actually well done. Marcus's reaction to it wasn't overblown at all. He didn't shake his fist in the air and vow revenge , he didn't drop to his knees and yell "NOOOOOOO" or any such thing. He reacted as one would imagine to a close friend getting killed, sucked it up and kept on with the mission. In fact all of the squads reactions to Dom's death were well done. I like how the end is bittersweet, they won the war, the locust and lambent are dead. But the government is gone , half the human population is dead, everything is still fucked, and Marcus is like "what the fuck are we supposed to do now?!"

The reason for the Locust Hoard attacking humanity was basically out of necessity rather than the usual alien invasion schtick in these kinds of games. (I also like the fact that the Locusts aren't "aliens" they are native to Serra, it's their planet and the humans are the "invaders".) The story didn't succeed in every way though, their are some things they left open. Like who Queen Mirrah really was and why she looked human. Did she turn her back on humanity, if so then why?

They also didn't continue the story of the creature experiments in that lab in Gears 2. Those complaints aside it's funny that you people accuse Gears of not trying to tel a story then when Gears 2 and 3 were VERY story heavy. (Maybe most of you would realize this if you'd actually played it as opposed to just hating on something popular to seem cool. (You're not impressing anyone) Even with it's flaws i feel that they have gotten a lot better with the story telling going from one to three and i applaud Epic for at trying to better the story and characters, unfortunately everything i said just now will be dismissed since you've already got it in your head that "lol GEARZ HAZ NO STORIES".

Whatever though Gears is a total package, they delivered on nearly everything. Vastly improved the gameplay, the graphics , the performance, and added a fuck load of features to multi and SP. Listen to fan complaints about Gear 2 and fixed everything that was wrong with the game, Lazy release my ass. This so far is my personal GOTY ( we'll see what happens with UC3 and Batman: Arkham City) and just an all around great game. Fuck the haters....

I'm at school so i don't have time for a long post, but i didn't mean to imply "lol GEARZ HAZ NO STORIES" I dont think i said that. And do you know why an emphasis on story made people say gears 2 was too serious? Well it's because gears has ridiculous violence. They intend for it to be slapstick but when you take yourself very seriously the violence is just off putting and unnecessary. Gears is slapstick violence done wrong, bulletstorm is slapstick violence done right.
I dont think there is a focus on presentation over gameplay. I don't think there is any shift away from gameplay. And i know it's being done with unreal but capcom already said they are handling the gameplay. Capcom is working WITH Ninja theory. The devil may cry team is working on dragon's dogma. Ninja theory was hired not because of their gameplay, they were hired because of capcom admired there characters and art.

What's wrong with unreal engine anyway? I'm not an expert on the engine so i have no idea why it couldn't be used to make dmc.
As for gears it's not that yahtzee just found the story forgettable, he found the gameplay sub par as well. He claims the game is inferior to both hard reset and resistance 3. That's not hating, he may enjoy pissing people off but disliking gameplay and finding the story forgettable is just his opinion. I found the gameplay extremely boring in gears 2 but gears 3 looks more enjoyable, playing as monsters anyway.

Let me just insert a little something here, Bulletstorm was a tad like GOW for me, except while I liked GOW, Bulletstorm felt off and I only played through once or twice. Maybe it's because everyone was swearing like it was going out of season, maybe it's that Ishi kept jumping back and forth in terms of personality, maybe it's because Gray smashed the General's ship in a drunken rage and then Ishi gave this great big speech about how he was doing it to avenge those they had killed, but I had a hard time taking it seriously. Personally while Gears tried to play drama after you run around chainsawing people, Bulletstorm tried to do it after electrocuting people, throwing them off cliffs, kicking them into spikes and shooting them in the balls. Frankly Bulletstorm seems like it has twice as much testosterone pumped into it as GOW and frankly I bought the violence in GOW. But then again this whole thing is opinion based.

Just in case you're worrying, no you don't have to read the books to know the story. I checked the wiki to learn about one graphical glitch I found annoying to see if I could fix it and ended up learning enough about Sera's story from surfing. Mainly because I'd be damned if I was gonna read anything by Traviss-ty that wouldn't have an entire dev team hanging around to keep her on track.

In regards to this review I will say Yahtzee might as well not have even put it up there. It's a rage-fest with many of his points not even being applicable to the game. I suspect he needed to balance out his rage ratio because of his fairly nice review of Resistance 3.

As for his points on the game the world isn't about to blow up, humanity is being pushed to the point of extinction. This has been in every single game, book, and comic. So saying that it was pulled out of Epic's ass for the third game is freaking dumb as hell. It wouldn't be so annoying if he hadn't played the second one through to the end and it had the same theme of humans going extinct.

As for the Lambent not being any different from the Locust in any practical way I again disagree to a degree. The Lambent drone fight like regular drones with the charming addition of exploding whenever they die. As for the rest, Polyps rush you fast and hard and try to claw you to death and explode when shot. Drudges will either explode in a rather large fashion when shot enough or mutate with most o the mutations giving them enough reach and height to fire over your cover so staying on the move is a good idea. And the lambent boomers aka Gunkers aka the sole reason why I'm not playing through on insane again anytime soon require stupid amounts of ammo to down, possess a lethal ranged attack that they are far to accurate with and with which they expertly lob right over cover and into your face. Melee is a horrid idea as once you're within 30 feet of them they go Alex Mercer on your ass with the extendo-tentacle of doom that will down your ass on normal and murder you out right on harder difficulties.

As for Marcus acting aggrieved I will say I agree with Yahtzee right there. That's one point he got spot on as Marcus is stuck permanently on Grizzled, angry war vet mode. SPOILERS SPOILERS I really didn't get the feeling of Marcus being sad when Dom and Adam Fenix die. I did find both deaths sad, but really that was more of how the game set it up, and how the others characters reacted, and the music choices.

Another point Yahtzee got was Marcus does have a fetish for yelling "Move Out""come one" or some variation. It's kinda annoying but nothing too bad.

As for his stuff on the callbacks to previous games, the lambent were introduced in the first game.

Again the planet isn't going to explode, it never was and the only things that could even count as such happened before the first game when the COG decided to go with the "If we can't have it, you can't either* mindset and used their orbital beam death weapons to burn about 80% of the planet. This has been mentioned in the openeing cutscenes of the first two games so you can't say they don't tell you.

Heck you even visit one of these sites in the third game. It's the blown up city with all the flash-fried statues of ash that were once the local populace. It's one of my lead theories of why the series has alot of brown in it ie the strikes threw up a bunch of ash and dirt and now it's gotten everywhere so hey an actual justification for something I don't give two-lumpy turds about. I like the graphics in all the GoWs, with each new installment it only got better. I loved the Gothic architure of Nexus and I loved the almost Orgrimmar feel of the Savage Locust outpost in the Deadlands area.

As for the rest of his call back points, No, Sam, the Claudia Black character, was a character from the books they included like Jace and Tai from the second game. Thankfully they don't die as Tai's death in the second game held no emotion for me at all. Apparently Epic learned their lesson that people that only play the games do not give a damn about the death of someone whose exploits and characterization is done in a book they didn't read.

The blonde female Anya has been in every game and talked to you all the damn time so how Yahtzee forgot her and yet remembered Adam Fenix is beyond me. Him being alive is hinted at a few times but nothing really solid about him.

Again I watch for the humor mostly as sometimes Yahtzee seems to mail it in on some reviews when it actually comes to the game. He missed several key plot holes he could have torn apart and have a funny review while lambasting the game for stupid or confusing points. Like how did the Locust invade the place that required a submarine to get in when they've never been shown to possess the tech. Or confusing as hell fuel problem for the sub. Took me awhile to figure that one out. I'm kinda disappointed he didn't try Horde or Beast modes which are really fun. You'd think he enjoy bashing through fortifications and Gears alike as a Beserker.

Sudenak:
It boggles the mind that this game has any fans.

I watched my roommate play while I was cooking dinner. He was at some part where they were fighting some big monster (I'm sure this is vague enough to not require a spoiler, as I imagine there were plenty of big monsters). Every second or third hit he would fall down, limping away, waiting for someone to pick him up. The repetitive battle theme in the background would have put Quest 64 to shame. Their terrible, guttural voices barking out "manly" lines grated against my ears. When I finished cooking dinner, he was still fighting the same big monster. When I finished eating, nearly thirty minutes later, he was done.

Granted, my forays into shooters in general have been limited, with Heretic being my shining example of a great, fun shooter. Is this....is this abomination considered good? With the awkward, clunky chest-high walls everywhere, the hilariously disproportionate bodies, the clunky manly-man dialogue...is this good? There was some multiplayer thing where he played as the bad guys, and 60% of the fight was reduced to him breaking down fences so he could kill stupid AI.

Is this fun?

I think the same thing. GoW seems to have the same fanbase as the Madden series and the group of people who lauded Halo like the second coming, blissfully unaware that the PC has "been there, done that". To note: I have nothing against the latter game. Halo was really only innovative in essentially bringing what PC FPS games had been doing for years to consoles, and doing it correctly - namely controls and networked multiplayer. There's no denying that. The ignorant fanbase, however, is what I'm getting at.

I don't get the insane amount of adulation Gears of War, especially Gears of War 3, has been getting. Namely the lead developer/designer/brain behind the series Cliff Bleszinski getting time on Late Night with Jimmy Fallon, and Fallon seems to be the exact type the game caters to. If I have to explain that point further I will, but it's fairly obvious to me what kind of audience he addresses.

The mere fact that the mind behind the game was put on a widely watched national talk show is baffling to me. It implies that the people behind that appointment really think this game "has something" and is breaking new ground or doing something so innovative and progressive that it deserves national attention and, if possible, reverence.

I played the first game on PC because I got it from someone who bought it for me as a gift. Another friend of mine, hearing this, decided to purchase the game as well because he wanted to see how good the co-op single-player experience was. So we jammed the game for a while. Sure, it was alright fun, but I was far from impressed by it. The gameplay was somewhat repetitive, especially concerning the cover mechanics - that was such a core part of the game that it literally held the experience together. The story was completely forgettable so the plot, and our character's involvement in it, was blurry at best. The co-op system was however fairly well executed and gave positive reinforcement to continue, but that's all that held the reason to play the game together - the fact that another human being was also playing the game in the same vein as you, getting a similar experience and (somewhat) dependent on you to complete it.

I suppose it's preferable to another Call of Duty...

Jkudo:

JSRT:

First off my point was not that putting an emphasis on better story telling is what's wrong with gaming, putting an emphasis on presentation while neglecting gameplay is the problem. ( sorry if i didn't make this clear) You said yourself the gameplay in Enslaved is "frustrating" which it is. The control isn't responsive either( Heavenly Sword had the same problems) I have zero problems with games telling great stories, and having great presentation. I agree with you that it's part of the over all package. The problem arises when it's the only thing the devs seem to have put any care into. Like i said before your game could have one of the greatest stories ever told, but if the gameplay itself isn't compelling and i don't have fun playing it then what is the point?

This is my problem with Ninja Theory, i love the art direction of their games and their presentations but it's wasted on bad gameplay because they don't put as much care into it as the story.( oh and BTW yeah they are handling the gameplay in DmC, it's also using Unreal engine instead of Capcom's MT Framework) This is not a DVD movie i am buying for 20 bucks , where i just sit down and watch. It's a 60 dollar VIDEO GAME. If i don't feel the game is polished, responsive or fun to play i feel that i have wasted my money.

As for Gears story as i have said before if you've ever played the Gears games from the original to the last it has a decent story it's just not told as well as it is in the expanded fiction. Funny thing is the first Gears didn't have much emphasis on story and people complained about that, so in Gears 2 there was greater emphasis on story like people wanted, but then it was made fun of for being too serious. (Sometimes i wonder if "gamers" these days really know what they want. I also wonder how much flack Gears would be getting if it were a PS3 game or multi plat but that's for another thread)

And for what it's worth Gears 3 story attempted to do everything that you claim it doesn't. many of the many characters had their stories expanded on and it attempted to deliver actual character development and in many ways actually succeeded. For example Augustus Cole going back to his hometown and reliving his past glories as a thrashball star ( Serra's version of Football) they even incorporate it into gameplay at one point. Dom's sacrifice IMO was actually well done. Marcus's reaction to it wasn't overblown at all. He didn't shake his fist in the air and vow revenge , he didn't drop to his knees and yell "NOOOOOOO" or any such thing. He reacted as one would imagine to a close friend getting killed, sucked it up and kept on with the mission. In fact all of the squads reactions to Dom's death were well done. I like how the end is bittersweet, they won the war, the locust and lambent are dead. But the government is gone , half the human population is dead, everything is still fucked, and Marcus is like "what the fuck are we supposed to do now?!"

The reason for the Locust Hoard attacking humanity was basically out of necessity rather than the usual alien invasion schtick in these kinds of games. (I also like the fact that the Locusts aren't "aliens" they are native to Serra, it's their planet and the humans are the "invaders".) The story didn't succeed in every way though, their are some things they left open. Like who Queen Mirrah really was and why she looked human. Did she turn her back on humanity, if so then why?

They also didn't continue the story of the creature experiments in that lab in Gears 2. Those complaints aside it's funny that you people accuse Gears of not trying to tel a story then when Gears 2 and 3 were VERY story heavy. (Maybe most of you would realize this if you'd actually played it as opposed to just hating on something popular to seem cool. (You're not impressing anyone) Even with it's flaws i feel that they have gotten a lot better with the story telling going from one to three and i applaud Epic for at trying to better the story and characters, unfortunately everything i said just now will be dismissed since you've already got it in your head that "lol GEARZ HAZ NO STORIES".

Whatever though Gears is a total package, they delivered on nearly everything. Vastly improved the gameplay, the graphics , the performance, and added a fuck load of features to multi and SP. Listen to fan complaints about Gear 2 and fixed everything that was wrong with the game, Lazy release my ass. This so far is my personal GOTY ( we'll see what happens with UC3 and Batman: Arkham City) and just an all around great game. Fuck the haters....

I'm at school so i don't have time for a long post, but i didn't mean to imply "lol GEARZ HAZ NO STORIES" I dont think i said that. And do you know why an emphasis on story made people say gears 2 was too serious? Well it's because gears has ridiculous violence. They intend for it to be slapstick but when you take yourself very seriously the violence is just off putting and unnecessary. Gears is slapstick violence done wrong, bulletstorm is slapstick violence done right.
I dont think there is a focus on presentation over gameplay. I don't think there is any shift away from gameplay. And i know it's being done with unreal but capcom already said they are handling the gameplay. Capcom is working WITH Ninja theory. The devil may cry team is working on dragon's dogma. Ninja theory was hired not because of their gameplay, they were hired because of capcom admired there characters and art.

What's wrong with unreal engine anyway? I'm not an expert on the engine so i have no idea why it couldn't be used to make dmc.
As for gears it's not that yahtzee just found the story forgettable, he found the gameplay sub par as well. He claims the game is inferior to both hard reset and resistance 3. That's not hating, he may enjoy pissing people off but disliking gameplay and finding the story forgettable is just his opinion. I found the gameplay extremely boring in gears 2 but gears 3 looks more enjoyable, playing as monsters anyway.

Fir the record i have no problem with Unreal engine, as Gear 3 has shown it is a beast, in the right hands. Problem is NT when it comes to these kind of things are anything but, not to mention DMC games tend to be dependent on 60fps combat. Something UE3 isn't known for and off the top of my head i can think of only one game that runs at 60 fps on the engine.( MK9 i believe) Also while Capcom has a lot of input on how the game plays out, it will be Ninja Theory that handles the actual gameplay. You can already see it in vids of the game where the combat is a lot slower and they added crappy slow mo finishers. Sorry but when it comes to action games NT just can't hang with the likes of Kamiya and Itagaki, as Heavenly Sword proved. Luckily i have Bayonnetta which is the closest thing to a new DMC game as one can get, as well as the best action game out. IMO.

As for your assertion that Gears takes itself too seriously i have two points: First i must once again point out that it was the gamers them selves who complained that it wasn't story heavy enough in the first place which Epic made an effort to do. How can you talk about games needing to focus on story and character development and then shit on Epic ( and i am not talking just about you but in general) for doing just that? I thought that was what you wanted out of gaming.

Secondly you say that, because of the "ridiculous violence" that Gears shouldn't take itself so seriously? Ok fair enough. But then my question becomes this, why does Gears get called out for that when God of War gets a pass for doing the exact same shit? GOW has ridiculous ultra violence, big muscle head character that is always angry, and a story that takes itself waaay too seriously.( in part 3 it got to the point of damn near parody) Yet it gets nothing but praise for everything that Gears of War get's condemned for. Not to mention thought of as the best action game when gameplay wise it's vastly inferior to the holy trinity of action games. ( DMC 3, Ninja Gaiden Black, and Bayonetta) Funny how that works isn't it?

Also it's story was pretty damned forgettable , as i remember it's pretty much Clash of the Titans but EXTREME! Bet half the people that are hating on Gears ( including Yahtzee) love that game...

I have three words to explain how epic this episode was.

Pink. Jizz. Cannons.

Shraggler:

Sudenak:
It boggles the mind that this game has any fans.

I watched my roommate play while I was cooking dinner. He was at some part where they were fighting some big monster (I'm sure this is vague enough to not require a spoiler, as I imagine there were plenty of big monsters). Every second or third hit he would fall down, limping away, waiting for someone to pick him up. The repetitive battle theme in the background would have put Quest 64 to shame. Their terrible, guttural voices barking out "manly" lines grated against my ears. When I finished cooking dinner, he was still fighting the same big monster. When I finished eating, nearly thirty minutes later, he was done.

Granted, my forays into shooters in general have been limited, with Heretic being my shining example of a great, fun shooter. Is this....is this abomination considered good? With the awkward, clunky chest-high walls everywhere, the hilariously disproportionate bodies, the clunky manly-man dialogue...is this good? There was some multiplayer thing where he played as the bad guys, and 60% of the fight was reduced to him breaking down fences so he could kill stupid AI.

Is this fun?

I think the same thing. GoW seems to have the same fanbase as the Madden series and the group of people who lauded Halo like the second coming, blissfully unaware that the PC has "been there, done that". To note: I have nothing against the latter game. Halo was really only innovative in essentially bringing what PC FPS games had been doing for years to consoles, and doing it correctly - namely controls and networked multiplayer. There's no denying that. The ignorant fanbase, however, is what I'm getting at.

I don't get the insane amount of adulation Gears of War, especially Gears of War 3, has been getting. Namely the lead developer/designer/brain behind the series Cliff Bleszinski getting time on Late Night with Jimmy Fallon, and Fallon seems to be the exact type the game caters to. If I have to explain that point further I will, but it's fairly obvious to me what kind of audience he addresses.

The mere fact that the mind behind the game was put on a widely watched national talk show is baffling to me. It implies that the people behind that appointment really think this game "has something" and is breaking new ground or doing something so innovative and progressive that it deserves national attention and, if possible, reverence.

I played the first game on PC because I got it from someone who bought it for me as a gift. Another friend of mine, hearing this, decided to purchase the game as well because he wanted to see how good the co-op single-player experience was. So we jammed the game for a while. Sure, it was alright fun, but I was far from impressed by it. The gameplay was somewhat repetitive, especially concerning the cover mechanics - that was such a core part of the game that it literally held the experience together. The story was completely forgettable so the plot, and our character's involvement in it, was blurry at best. The co-op system was however fairly well executed and gave positive reinforcement to continue, but that's all that held the reason to play the game together - the fact that another human being was also playing the game in the same vein as you, getting a similar experience and (somewhat) dependent on you to complete it.

I suppose it's preferable to another Call of Duty...

Halo was lauded as the "second coming" eh? Guess i was absent on that day, could have sworn people just said it was a really good game.( which it was, go figure) As for the PC having "been there done that" ,i'm not seeing it. I played more than a few FPS's on the PC ( Doom 1 and 2, Quake and Unreal to name a few) and none of them play anything like Halo. Well there was Marathon, but that was made by Bungie.If you are talking about the whole multi player thing, PC's "doing it first" has fuck all to do with consoles, what matters to most people is who did it first there.

Also i love the whole "Halo has an ignorant fanbase" crap. I love how "gamers" these days when they don't like a series feel the need to throw insults at it's fans, you come off far more ignorant than any Halo fan ever could. I guess i could call those who enjoy games i don't like a bunch of fucking idiots, but i lack that overwhelming need to be an asshole. I think a lot of you forgot why it is we play games in the first place. This thread can pretty much be summed up in one phrase, "haters gonna hate"...

rickicker:
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.

And sadly "BAYONET CHAINSAW VASECTOMY" now gets exported and ruins other games by dumbing them down go get that audience. Mass Effect 3 being the most recent example.
Thank you guys for ruining video games...

am i the only GoW fan who would use the plot as a reason to support the quality of the game? damn. i dunno about you guys, but i followed the plot pretty well, and even then you don't really need to; humanity is sucking hard, government collapsed, bad guys going through the same problem, why? glowy monsters made of the world's primary fuel source! the world's gonna explode, so go on quest to find guy who can solve all the problems, chainsaw everything and create massive carnage, then watch MLP :D

now take a look at this; the lambent are made out of imulsion. imulsion is sera's equal to oil, the people use it for almost everything and countries fight for it. at the end of GoW2, a giant monster comes from the imulsion after hearing about the lambent. SO, it's an allusion!

people of sera ---> they fought each other for imulsion and now they're paying for it
mankind on earth ---> we kill eachother for oil in the middle east and look how that's gone over

then something about trading women for bacon, an excellent offer.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here