Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

New Gears of War 2 Details, No PC Version

Soulskill posted more than 5 years ago | from the so-many-platforms,-so-little-time dept.

Games 63

IGN has an interview with Cliff Bleszinski, design director for Epic Games, in which he discusses the achievements and unlockable content in Gears of War 2. He mentions that the game won't be getting a PC version as its predecessor did. Gamasutra has a related interview with Epic's Rod Fergusson, who talks at length about developing the new game after experiencing the popularity of the old one, and how he manages the franchise's growth into other forms of media. He also explains the decision-making process behind issuing Title Updates.

cancel ×

63 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

No PC version? (5, Interesting)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 5 years ago | (#24805713)

He mentions that the game won't be getting a PC version as its predecessor did.

Yeah, right. They said Gears 1 wasn't going to have a PC version, either. Bungie said that their next project after Halo 2 wouldn't be Halo 3. Game companies lie about their future plans all the time. Gears of War 2 will have a PC version, it'll just be after they've wrung all they reasonably can out of the 360 version. Mark my words.

Re:No PC version? (1)

Vectronic (1221470) | more than 5 years ago | (#24806071)

Which words exactly? cause, you know...

Yeah, right. They said Gears ... wasn't going to have a ... version, either. Bungie said ... their ... project ... wouldn't be Halo ... Game ... their future plans ... War ... will have a PC version, it'll just be ... wrung ... out ... Mark.

Thanx Mark.

Re:No PC version? (1)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 5 years ago | (#24806157)

Which words exactly?

Those.

Re:No PC version? (3, Insightful)

Cathoderoytube (1088737) | more than 5 years ago | (#24806281)

Yes I see your point. It's completely logical to pay to have a game that's no longer making any money ported to another platform where piracy is commonplace. It's not like game developers are beginning to focus on consoles because of higher sales and no piracy.

Re:No PC version? (3, Insightful)

bigstrat2003 (1058574) | more than 5 years ago | (#24806367)

From what I understand, it takes relatively little effort to port from the 360 to the PC. So, it really boils down to: "small" chance of making money > zero chance of making money.

And plenty of developers are still making games for the PC. The market isn't going to die just because some doom and gloom prophets say so, they've been saying that for a while now.

Re:No PC version? (1)

drsquare (530038) | more than 5 years ago | (#24808529)

On the contrary, for someone with a 360 and a PC, if they can pirate the PC version, they no longer need to buy it for the 360. So ruling out a PC version may increase sales.

Milking the PC after milking the 360 (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24809303)

On the contrary, for someone with a 360 and a PC, if they can pirate the PC version, they no longer need to buy it for the 360.

Yup, but the OP predicted that they'll do the PC port probably once they've sold most of the 360 copies they could have sold.

Once all the money that could be made by selling the "exclusive" has been earned, mayber then they re-compile the game for PC and see if they can catch a few more bucks easily.

Re:No PC version? (2, Insightful)

Mex (191941) | more than 5 years ago | (#24810569)

"The market isn't going to die just because some doom and gloom prophets say so, they've been saying that for a while now."
Yeah, at least 10 years. I remember Evil Avatar saying "PC games are dead! Dying soon! " a few years ago...

Re:No PC version? (1)

Bios_Hakr (68586) | more than 5 years ago | (#24807621)

PC games also don't have rentals. I know a lot of people who rent games for 360 and Wii.

PC gamers also tend not to let people borrow copies of games. I know a lot of Wii gamers that share pretty openly. In my community, there is even an unofficial co-op for the Wii. I buy one game and my neighbor gets another. After a weekend, we switch.

Thats moronic. Please stop and think (2, Insightful)

Werthless5 (1116649) | more than 5 years ago | (#24807785)

You are wrong on so many levels.

1) Piracy is commonplace on consoles, too, you just don't hear about it as much

2) Very few game developers have completely abandoned PC - these developers were gemerally butt-hurt from poor sales after producing a few shitty titles. See Valve, Blizzard, and Stardock, for a few big names

3) If porting the game generates some profit, it will be done. Since porting the game costs effectively nothing, doing so will churn an enormous profit.

Yes, it is completely logical to have a game that's no longer making any money ported to another platform where it can generate additional profit.

It is completely ILLOGICAL to not port the game.

As we've seen time and time again, 360 exclusive games are eventually ported to PC 90% of the time

Re:Thats moronic. Please stop and think (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24808349)

A PC port of GoW2 would generate some profit, but I think spending their resources on a different, console project would generate even more profits. Gears of War PC didn't sell well. That and the PC port had many bugs. Not so easy and cheap to port, is it? Half-assed ports and games tend to piss off your buyers and would decrease future sales. For example: EA.

All in all, a PC port is not as logical as you make it out to be.

PS: Did you even buy the PC port of GoW? I'd venture no. You just seem to be "butt-hurt" over developers abandoning the PC.

Re:Thats moronic. Please stop and think (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24809435)

I didn't buy the PC port of GoW and after playing it at a friend's house for a bit, I'm thankful I didn't.

All in all, good riddance if it doesn't come to the PC but in all likelyhood, they'll just release it for PC's a year later and then bitch and moan when people that have completed it on the X360 (theirs or their friends) don't want to buy the new and improved (!!!) PC version and end up saying "OMG PIRACY DRIVES AWAY OUR SAELS!!!".

Mod up (1)

Endo13 (1000782) | more than 5 years ago | (#24811697)

This post needs some up-modding.

Re:No PC version? (1)

SuperDre (982372) | more than 5 years ago | (#24809115)

But 'porting' GoW2 over to the PC isn't any real problem as GoW2 is being developed on the PC with UE3, so there will be no significant time to get it out for the PC, only a little bit of tweaking.. That's also how they did it with GoW1, and they will sell enough to recoup their costs for the PC-version, and with that they keep their pc-fans a little happy... Let's not forget that games on the xbox360 are also pirated a lot...

Re:No PC version? (2, Informative)

Walter Carver (973233) | more than 5 years ago | (#24810425)

You said "no piracy", aren't there mod-chips for Xbox360?

And you speak of the common misconception that there is no profit on the PC because people can pirate games.

Re:No PC version? (1)

Cathoderoytube (1088737) | more than 5 years ago | (#24812497)

I didn't say there was no profit to be had with PC games. That's your strawman. I just said consoles are more attractive to game developers because of the distinct lack of pirating.

And yes there are apparently mod chips for the 360. I haven't met anybody fool enough to actually install one though. Considering the failure rate of the console, if you send a modded console into get fixed, Microsoft will send it right back to you with a voided warranty. God help you if you try to log onto Xbox live with a modded 360. So there *is* piracy on the 360, but you have to be a fairly uncommon smuck to bother with it.

Re:No PC version? (1)

Walter Carver (973233) | more than 5 years ago | (#24818347)

Nah ah ah, you are trying to change what you said! Quote: "a game that's no longer making any money ported to another platform where piracy is commonplace".

Everyone you know hasn't moded their Xbox360 and anyone I have met have the Xbox360 modded because it is economically better to just through the console away and get one than buy the games.

Re:No PC version? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24811769)

Solution: download service (like Steam or Direct2Drive). Many companies already are employing soft copy distributions because it's easier to combat piracy this way. Either that, or the game must make periodic calls to the company itself. Although if there's something wrong with the CD-Key system, it's why do they use an algorithm to generate a key? Why not use a noise-generated key, have server full of these keys, and then do a one time online activation.

And it's not like piracy is rampant among consoles anyway. I'd imagine the PS3 is the hardest to pirate because of the cost of the medium (smart move maybe?)

Re:No PC version? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24814297)

Don't know if troll, Pretty obvious if so.

Re:No PC version? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24815113)

http://thepiratebay.org/browse/404

I'm sorry, what's that? No piracy you say?

Re:No PC version? (1)

not already in use (972294) | more than 5 years ago | (#24810447)

Perceived console exclusivity == more hardware sales. That's really all there is to this.

PC Version 100% Guaranteed (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24805839)

I guess this game is supposed to be something special on the 360 but it was pretty much laughed at by pc gamers with a huge variety of fps/shooter games with cutting edge graphics like Crysis and others.

I know that the 360 is essentially just three year old pc parts in a console but it is shocking that such an outdated engine even by those standards is the best the console can handle.

The everything covered in shiny and bumpy normal maps craze got old years ago. I guess there are still quite a few 360 owners who go ga-ga over bright lights on shiny metal.

Microsoft really needs to get back to focusing on pc gaming and just give up on their disasterous efforts in the console market.

Re:PC Version 100% Guaranteed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24806117)

I thought Microsoft was the Office PC.

Three game press releases in a row? (2, Insightful)

xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) | more than 5 years ago | (#24805859)

Three game press releases in a row? C'mon editors - got anything for the dozen or so real geeks still reading this site every other day?

Re:Three game press releases in a row? (2, Informative)

HappySmileMan (1088123) | more than 5 years ago | (#24806165)

All from the same guy (SoulSkill) too. (Yes I went and checked who posted them all when i noticed it.

Re:Three game press releases in a row? (1)

NoobixCube (1133473) | more than 5 years ago | (#24807087)

Well, that's kind of what the Firehose is for, assuming these went through it. People mod up the story they want to read, though I just use it as a way of getting early articles, and mod down the slashvertising and spam.

Re:Three game press releases in a row? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24807113)

Is that because 'real geeks' don't play games now? Or because 'real geeks' can only like things that aren't 'mainstream'? Help me out here. This geek is 46 now and I'm unsure what kind of uncool you think I need to be to be cool now.

Re:Three game press releases in a row? (0, Flamebait)

mgblst (80109) | more than 5 years ago | (#24818237)

Yeah, you probably should have stopped playing game by now. If they still are providing more excitement than your real life, you are doing something wrong.

n/a (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24805895)

No seal of Windows Vista certification, no deal.

No PC version (3, Funny)

RichPowers (998637) | more than 5 years ago | (#24805943)

And nothing of value was lost.

Business Model (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24806147)

Not porting GoW2 to PC is like NOT selling crack in a Black/Hispanic neighborhood, the potential profitability is eclipsed by short-sightedness.

Oh, wait, this is /. car analogy or nothing.... ...is like selling Escalades in da hood...oh wait...

Re:Business Model (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24806643)

It's like not selling your mom valtrex...

Not coming to PC (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24806191)

Oh no, a 2-hour long generic GRITTY bloomfest of a rail shooter isn't coming to the PC? EVERYONE PANIC

Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (4, Informative)

AbRASiON (589899) | more than 5 years ago | (#24806555)

My opinion FWIW

I was under the impresion that Gears is an awesome game, I heard it on podcasts, I heard it on shacknews, I heard it EVERYWHERE, this game is more awesome than god of war, this game is 9/10'ths as good as GTA, this game is just fun, dumb, kickass bullshit - it's the predator of video games!
Unlike my normal skeptical self, I went with the flow "Fuck yeah gears is awesome" - I think I've even recommended a few people to check it out, since I try to stay on top of the news in the gaming scene and what's hot, despite me not seeing it myself.

Any time someone critisized Gears, you would see a response saying 'you've gotta try co-op dude' well,....I did.
I actually purchased it about 5 months ago but left it on the shelf, saving it for when a friend would come over so I could play it co-op, I just let it age like a fine wine, after all it was a foregone conclusion that it's a wicked game, right?

So a pal came over and I popped in gears - we played co-op for about 90 minutes.
I was forcing myself to like it, infact I was forcing my pal to like it, he was bored shitless and I felt the same but I kept saying stuff like oh sweet and hey look out and all that shit - but in the end I could convince neither of us it was good.
So I figured my friend was busted, or maybe out mood was wrong.
I tried the same thing with another pal a week later, we played for about 60 minutes, I did the same thing, tried to like it and... no - it just didn't click, it wasn't really fun to be honest.
I've since tried a 3'rd friend - again about 90 minutes and guess what - it felt boring, un-inspired and meh. :( I was crushed, I got this awesome awesome game which couldn't possibly be bad and it was well boring, like really boring - the only exciting thing was that cool camera angle / cinematic feel when running.
I have to wonder if half the hype for the game is the graphics? At the time they rocked but I missed out on them. I'd seen Crysis, GTA4, Heavenly Sword, Mass Effect, Quake 4 all before I saw gears - maybe that's why it didn't impress.

Definitely a very very over rated game and yes I love my dumb action crap like God of War etc.

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (1)

Irish_Samurai (224931) | more than 5 years ago | (#24807027)

You're not the only one.

I don't hate the game - it does look kinda pretty and chainsawing aliens is cool for about 2 minutes, but it never really motivated me to keep playing. I could never get past the "tutorial" level.

My brother loves it, his friends love it - and I say good for them.

Yet, if I am being honest, GoW doesn't do shit for me. I can't exactly nail down what it is either. From a marketing perspective it has everything I like viscerally: Explosions, weapons, swearing, gristly death - but its just damn boring.

If I were to equate it to something old school I would compare it to Kangaroo. Technically all aspects are there, but it just lacks soul.

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (1)

Endo13 (1000782) | more than 5 years ago | (#24811763)

but it just lacks soul.

Yeah, I think that's because they sold that way back when they came up with UT2003.

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (4, Insightful)

dunezone (899268) | more than 5 years ago | (#24807515)

You got caught up in being spoiled by the hype. Its a great game but when you hear nothing but people saying its amazing, and awesome, you kind of psyche yourself out. You expect every part of the game to be the best of the best. And instead of actually enjoying the game, you are forcing yourself to enjoy the game cause everyone else did.

Ill bring up a recent experience I had. The Dark Knight. I was told by many people this movie was amazing, that this would be "The Empire Strikes Back" of my generation. I didn't see the movie till about three weeks after its opening. By the time I saw it, my head was filled with so many people saying how great it is, how amazing, and the fact that a few people were comparing it to one of the best sequels ever made, that I psyched myself out. I was now sitting in a seat in a movie theater trying to enjoy movie instead of actually enjoying the movie. I expected every scene to be amazing. I felt as if the movie was spoiled because everyone said it was amazing and instead of judging it myself, I let others judge it for me. And instead I was criticizing the movie all the way through.

The other issue is aging a game. Some games just don't age properly. Some last years and years, some only a few years. Goldeneye was amazing back in 1997/1998. But try getting someone new to play it now for the first time and they wont get it. Try getting someone to play Half-life now for the first time, they wont get it(and I am talking original build not the Source stuff). Now yes, Goldeneye is from 1997 and Gears of War is from 2006. Its only been two years, but there are so many games that carried mechanics (gameplay, graphics, etc) from it since then, its nothing special anymore. The reason gamers go back to old games is not to play them for the first time, its to play them again. Its tough to go back in time and attempt to play a game with graphics that are considered laughable today. With AI that is simple look and shoot. For a lot of games, there's a window of opportunity to play them, and if you miss that window, you've screwed yourself.

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24808089)

It's worth mentioning that in comparison to other Unreal 3 titles Gears is impecibly balanced. Mass Effect in particular shares "glitches" with Gears, but the party members are completely moronic in a not hilarious sort of way (The squad members are near useless in all of the games, at least in Gears they do unintentionally stupid and funny stuff). In addition to that, and the map get-outs whatever, Mass Effect has a number of other serious problems, inventory management, some wonky mechanics, and completely under delivering on its own hype. Ultimately, you're probably running around space in pretty much the same way one would run around Oblivion, only with much rougher and repetative details, doing more or less the same mindless quests except for the number of times you convince people to suicide (which can be a surprisingly common occurance).

Gears on the other hand shines on-line in the forge of the competitive enviroment which takes no small amount of effort to enjoy. When you finally do get decent the real game opens up for you. The enemies on the campaign aren't particularly challenging, but there are people on line for that. But in the context of the campaign you can create for yourself a challenging and very visceral experience. On line, versus the living, it's a never ending game. It can be frenetic intense and extremely humbling and competative, or very chill and relaxed.

What seperates GoW from say COD4 is the play control. Where COD is more about sharp eyes and sharp reflexes (which don't hurt in Gears at all) Gears can be more about the setup: Exploiting and crafting the limitless nuanced advantages offered by cover and obsticals and how those advantages can be broken down. For those so inclined, it can offer moments that border on the sublime.

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (1)

AbRASiON (589899) | more than 5 years ago | (#24809793)

Comparing Mass Effect to Gears is .... I don't even know if I can put it into words, I'm sure the holocaust would be mentioned though.

Gears of War is a pretty game which is repetitive, boring, grey and well 'dumb' and not in the cool way Predator or God of War are, it's just plain not fun, the same mechanic over and over with a storyline that you simply just don't care about.
All they had to do was make the gameplay mechanic very very fun, the feel of the gun, the recoil, the noise, the death animations, there's something simply missing.
If that formula is correct, even a repetitive but pretty game is fun, especially in co-op, ultimately though, it is not, it's genuinely painful for me to play.

Mass Effect is not only a different genre but it too has amazing graphics, a very very good storyline, brilliant voice acting and possibly some of the best and most moving music in a video game in a long long time, it too suffered overhype but it's certainly a top 200 all time game for me (I've been gaming for 17 years now and likely thousands of games, top 200 is brilliant)

I know it's all opinion and such but really, Gears is for your Halo loving frat boy to sink beers, smash cans on his face and grunt while playing other grunts.
Infact I can honestly say I've sat next to a buddy, sank some beers and TAKEN TURNS playing single player god of war and had MORE FUN than playing co-op gears of war (no, I'm not lying)

meh.

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (1)

GhaleonStrife (916215) | more than 5 years ago | (#24813509)

I believe that he was comparing them based on their sharing of the same engine, and then kinda went off on a tangent.

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (1)

Blimey85 (609949) | more than 5 years ago | (#24808365)

I actually think The Dark Knight is the best movie ever, but that's just me. I've seen it three times... opening night was regular cinema and then the other two were both Imax. I'm going again sometime this week to see it again on Imax and I would have already seen it a couple more times on Imax but the closest Imax theater is 60 miles from here and I don't particularly like driving through San Fran.

If you really want to be blown away, check it out on Imax. The whole thing looks impressive and sounds damn good, but the scenes filmed with Imax equipment, there are six of them, look unreal. It's incredible. Then again, I'm comparing a film in a particular format to other films in the standard format so that gives TDK an unfair edge. If everything was in Imax I'd pay at least double to see them, even older films.

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (1)

anss123 (985305) | more than 5 years ago | (#24813185)

I actually think The Dark Knight is the best movie ever

It's guys like you that ruins movies for us late comers. Hearing so much good about it I actually went to the cinema, hyped up and all, and almost fell asleep. Bastard, you!

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (1)

AaronLawrence (600990) | more than 5 years ago | (#24815339)

I just don't see what is so visually amazing to look at. As far as I can remember it's mostly just driving/running/fighting in dark urban areas. What does imax add to that? This was for me one reason I enjoyed Begins more, because it had the great scenery and general visual experience of the training sequence.

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24892933)

I actually think The Dark Knight is the best movie ever, but that's just me.

uh huh... best movie ever... Dude, seriously. You need to get out more.

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24807969)

The story in gears sucked. If you want to experience gears of war, get online and play against other people in some tactical team-based combat.

The co-op only lasts a few hours, so why are you focused on it so much? I've probably played gears more days than not since it came out and the versus remains a pretty solid experience.

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (2)

AbRASiON (589899) | more than 5 years ago | (#24809813)

I am a single player gamer, we still exist believe it or not.
MP DM does very very little for me, I want to be sucked into a deep and rich story with a start and a finish.
That being said co-op can be fun, I don't really like Halo but I've played that co-op, it was ok.
Left 4 Dead looks good in co-op, even Quake 1 and Doom 1/2 (which I played not more than 3 months ago at a lan) in co-op are substantially more fun than Gears.

The formula is just broken to me and MP is the last thing I care about.

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (2, Insightful)

johannesg (664142) | more than 5 years ago | (#24808139)

Well, major hype is part of the market isn't it? I had the same reaction with Halo: "it's ok". Not a bad game by any means, but not a revolution either. The level design was pretty crappy with its endlessly repeating identical corridors and floors. The two-weapon system was in my opinion just a workaround for not having a lot of keyboard keys to easily select weapons, rather than a wicked strategic choice. The enemy AI didn't really seem all that much smarter than that in other contemporary games.

So, not a bad game, but just one of a great many similar games, with no particular outstanding features. The thing I enjoyed most was driving the warthogs. But it is way, way overhyped...

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (1)

AbRASiON (589899) | more than 5 years ago | (#24808327)

I got seriously hyped for Oblivion, GTA4, Doom 3 and all those games kicked ass as far I'm concerned (I admit D3 is only good, not stellar)

Halo is probably the most over-rated game of all time, it's not a bad game but it's really, really nothing special in any way, Gears however is a genuinely boring game to me.

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (1)

Khuffie (818093) | more than 5 years ago | (#24810313)

The two-weapon system was in my opinion just a workaround for not having a lot of keyboard keys to easily select weapons, rather than a wicked strategic choice.

You not liking Halo is your choice, but you really can't believe that? Firstly, there's been lots of great systems for consoles to select more than two weapons easily (hold a button, get a circular menu popup which you navigate with the analogue stick, voila), so saying Halo limiting you to two weapons as a lack of work around to lack of keyboard is...well, naive. Secondly, how is it not a strategic choice? Everytime you come across a new weapon you have to decide whether you should stick with what you have or swap it for a new one. Also, the fact that lots of other games copied Halo's two-gun system seems to contradict your statement that it isn't a revolution (which would indicate it didn't have an impact on other games). Let's not forget it's auto-healing system and checkpoints, so you were more focused on playing than hunting for medkits. Sure, you may not like those features, and that's your prerogative, but you can't see Halo wasn't a significant game.

I'll give you the repeating corridors and floors. Though they fixed that in Halo 2...

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (1)

johannesg (664142) | more than 5 years ago | (#24816661)

Checkpoints? ***Checkpoints***? You really believe they were invented by Halo?

I take it back what I said earlier: the worst problem with Halo is it fanboys who, never having played any games before, now think Halo is the be all, end all of games. Checkpoints, recharging health, and limited choice of weapon were all features of 2D shoot'em ups a decade or more earlier. First person shooters had been done _far_ better before Halo ever came along.

You may like it, nothing wrong with that, but the only thing special about Halo is the unbelievable hype it received. That was significant alright. It's just that I buy my games for enjoyment, not for being part of the Microsoft hype machine.

And as I said, it was ok. Just not quite as special as everyone made it out to be.

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (1)

Khuffie (818093) | more than 5 years ago | (#24819233)

Did I say Halo invented checkpoints? I was just alluding to the fact that it's checkpoint system was well-implemented. I can see where you could have mistaken what I meant though, since I didn't make that clear.

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (1)

MaWeiTao (908546) | more than 5 years ago | (#24809553)

For me the problem comes down to Gears of War being yet another violent guy-with-gun game. I'll hear about how great a particular game is, play it and come away feeling like I've played the same thing 100 times before. I might be impressed by some aspect of the game, but ultimately that's irrelevant when I'm left feeling developers have little creativity. And these developers need to stop being afraid to use colors other than brown and grey.

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (1)

QAPete (717838) | more than 5 years ago | (#24809563)

Agreed. There's very little replay value in GoW, and I doubt sincerely we'll see much in GoW 2. Epic started going down a road where eye candy is king way back with UT2003, and has never looked back. They also make a ton of cash off licensing their engine and tools to build games.

What they've forgotten is how to make a fun game with great replay value. The original Unreal, while unpolished, accomplished the former, knocking the gaming world on its ass with incredible immersible gameplay. UT circa 1999 accomplished both, by offering a much less buggy environment plus a much more polished multiplayer. In addition, Epic was very community-focused back then, helping the community create incredible mods to the game like no other game developer I've ever known.

Don't get me wrong: GoW2 will be a hit. It will sell a gazillion copies, and those people who buy it will play it a lot. For a month. Then, like GoW, it will be yet another game that gets set aside while people play Halo or the latest fad game that comes along.

The fact that it may not be released for PC just puts another nail in the coffin of PC gaming. It's so much easier for Epic and other developers to develop for a single hardware platform rather than for the myriad of PC configurations. In the end, nobody will care.

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (1)

MikeBabcock (65886) | more than 5 years ago | (#24813305)

Black was a game that I played many moons after it came out and you know what? It did it for me. It was fun, and gritty and loud and great fun to play. Not to mention hard at points.

That was a great game I'd play over GoW any day. Here's hoping Criterion make another Black game.

Re:Gears of War? More like Gears of Snore. (1)

LarsWestergren (9033) | more than 5 years ago | (#24819507)

I tried the same thing with another pal a week later, we played for about 60 minutes, I did the same thing, tried to like it and... no - it just didn't click, it wasn't really fun to be honest.

You are right. There are simply lots of better shooters on the PC.

Also the port was awful - forcing you to sign up to Microsoft Windows LIVE service and constantly be online in order to save the game? A single save slot per player profile? A server implementation so buggy, that if the client crashes while saving the game (not unusual) the save is corrupted server side and you have to restart the whole game from scratch? That's awesome.

Gears of War 2 console only? No big loss.

It was the same at release as it was in testing (2, Informative)

dmhorus (968775) | more than 5 years ago | (#24806837)

I play-tested Gears 1 for Microsoft as I live in the area and I have to say I had the same "meh" conclusion even then. Ive been an Unreal Tournament junkie since the original unreal and before them, Doom and Quake. I assumed that since Id be testing a project made by the same guys that gave me my cherished UT, I would be in for a treat of combat-science. Sadly this was not the case. I tested a portion of the campaign and then a map that was essentially a circular arena with short walls about the size of freeway dividers sprinkled around the perimeter to provide cover. The object was to test the cover system, which at that time was very buggy. The combat seemed fairly nailed down so I assume not much changed because I was so put off by the simplistic combat that I was never interested in purchasing it. The campaign amounts to running down a hallway shooting whatever comes at you. I felt like an extra in a revolutionary war battle re-enactment. Stand at attention in the open and simply unload on the things marching toward you. There was no point in taking cover since the enemy would always find you or simply throw grenades, so taking cover only limited your rate of fire and accuracy - no point in wasting the effort. At the time the gfx were sleek and this was the only attractive part of it. Combat is weak and unexciting, even if the bad guys are hard to kill it doesnt make it thrilling.

Re:It was the same at release as it was in testing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24809339)

How is this informative? If you stand and unload in Gears you'll be slaughtered. I'm not a big fan of GoW, but I've at least played the retail build as opposed to just some "buggy" play-test portion.

Now that they've said "No PC version"... (1)

Werthless5 (1116649) | more than 5 years ago | (#24807811)

That means that there will definitely be a PC version, perhaps up to a year after the console version's release.

There's no reason to keep it 360 exclusive when they'll earn more profit by also releasing it on the PC. That's obvious.

Their strategy of delaying the PC release is also obvious. There are consoles to sell after all, and more hot exclusives = more sold consoles. A year after the game's release, no one will care about GoW2 anymore and that's when the PC version will be released.

It's a great strategy

I tried GoW for PC (1)

DragonTHC (208439) | more than 5 years ago | (#24810483)

what a bore. I could barely get past the first level without thinking, wow this sucks! and I was playing with mouse and keyboard.

You can't make a game good with marketing. Since I have gamefly I will probably give GoW2 a try. Though I can't say it seems any better than the first game.

I agree that GoW was way overhyped.

Thank you for not having a PC port (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 5 years ago | (#24811603)

I'm glad there is no PC version because the original GOW was not that good and came out too late. Plus PC gaming in general is in a sad state right now. Just keep it on the consoles where it belongs.

No loss there (1)

sr. bigotes (1030382) | more than 5 years ago | (#24812259)

I played GoW for PC and for 360, and I must say, the PC version was completely useless. They prettified the graphics and made it 'harder' by making your weapons useless. No thanks. I'm not one to argue for 'realism' in games, but come on: it takes 40+ rounds to take down the first guys you fight in the game. That doesn't make the PC version harder, just repetitive. Those stupid holes in the ground from which enemies appear are just disheartening, because you know you're going to have to take about 5 or more enemies, and since each enemy takes upwards of 30 seconds to kill, you've got minutes of stock-still pointing and shooting on your hands.

I wasn't a fan of the 360 version, but at least you didn't have to try so damn hard for so long to hit the enemies. That fact improved the gameplay 10-fold.

Re:No loss there (1)

Sorny (521429) | more than 5 years ago | (#24812403)

Never tried throwing a grenade into an emergence hole, eh?

Demo... (1)

DanWS6 (1248650) | more than 5 years ago | (#24812983)

I was going to check out the first one on the PC but with no demo I'm just not that interested.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>