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!

Gears of War 3 Released

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the dudes-with-guns dept.

First Person Shooters (Games) 69

The third installment of Gears of War was released yesterday, ending the story arc that began almost five years ago. Early response to the game has been favorable, and most reviews agree that it's the best of the series. The Guardian's write-up says the story and the voice-acting got some needed attention this time around. Eurogamer praised the improvements to multiplayer and highlighted the intensity of the action sequences, but also mentioned the "annoyance" of being rather rigidly limited when it came to exploring and deviating from scripted events. The Digital Foundry blog examined the tech underpinning Gears of War 3, finding all the advances you'd expect out of a big-budget title, and a few spots where it bumps up against the hardware limitations of the aging Xbox 360.

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

Comparisons (4, Interesting)

RogueyWon (735973) | more than 3 years ago | (#37465928)

I just got back from the US on Monday morning and, having the rest of the week off work, I've been catching up on the three big console shooters that were released while I was away (or immediately after my return); Gears 3, Space Marine and Resistance 3. So far, I've sunk about 3 hours into each of their campaign modes (maybe a little more into Space Marine) and it's been interesting to note some of the similarities and differences.

What really struck me about Gears 3 so far is the insane level of polish that's been applied. This isn't a game that has given any indications (so far) that it plans to do anything that Gears 2 didn't. Weapons, situations, characters and gameplay mechanics are all changed in only the tiniest and most subtle of ways. What's happened, however, is that each of them have received a few little tweaks and minor improvements. Whereas the first Gears of War felt like a really good idea in need of polishing, the third installment is all polish and no ideas. That's not really a criticism - this is an excellent game - just an acknowledgement of the limitations inherant in what Epic decided to do.

Space Marine, on the other hand, is trying really hard to throw some new ideas into the third person shooter space - or at least to do away with some of the recent conventions of the genre. There's no cover button - indeed the game generally seems to regard cover as for wusses. As befits the fiction it's based on, the correct playstyle seems to be based around near-rabid levels of aggression. There's some really neat stuff in there; the transitions between ranged and melee combat are flawless, the animations are excellent and it's nice to have intelligent, articulate characters in one of these games rather than the usual grunting troglodytes. That said, there are also problems; despite the aforementioned animation, the graphics are a bit basic in places. Worse, there isn't really much variety to the enemies and combat tends to feel quite samey - not helped by the generally imprecise feel of the ranged weapons.

And Resistance 3... if Resistance 3 had mouse and keyboard controls and a quicksave button, it would be an old-school PC shooter. Seriously - its an fps where the player character has a high movement speed, can carry as many weapons as he wants, has a health bar that doesn't regenerate until he grabs a health pack and umpteen ludicrous secondary fire modes. I love it. This is Insomniac at their insane best - rather than Insomniac trying to force themselves to be sensible (which ruined Resistance 2). If the game were on PC, it would be near perfect.

What's really amused me is the review scores controversy [destructoid.com] that Gears 3 has generated. I mean, you do expect fanboys to get upset over review scores for games which are strongly identified with a single platform (it's not just on the MS side - check out some of the Killzone 3 review comments). But CliffyB really does come over as a prize arsehole through those comments. Particularly since the Eurogamer review in question felt... well... perfectly fair to me.

Obviously, I can't score the games properly myself yet, having not finished any of them. But on the basis of what I've seen so far, I think I'd say that Space Marine is a 7, Gears 3 is an 8 and Resistance 3 is a 9. What playing all three games side by side has really brought out to me is how desperately the industry needs to shed some of the cliches that have dogged shooters in recent years. Gears 3 is the absolute embodiment of those cliches - 2 weapon limit, regenerating health, cover based combat - but it feels to me like that's about as far as that particular subgenre is going to evolve. I'd love to see a Space Marine sequel that brought some more polish to the first game's new ideas. And I'd really love it if more devs could follow in Insomniac's footsteps and allow themselves to just go crazy a bit.

Re:Comparisons (1)

Dark Lord of Ohio (2459854) | more than 3 years ago | (#37466046)

Space Marines, Gears of War, Resistance... they are nothing - N-O-T-H-I-N-G- compared to Halo 3, Reach or Halo Combat Evolved Anniversary Edition (november 2011). Not to mention about Halo 4, next year. Just my humble opinion :) suit up Spartans and brace for carnage!

Halo Game Review Bribes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37466080)

Journalist to MS: Take your $800 Halo 3 bribe back, Halo 3 isn't all that
http://www.maxconsole.net/showthread.php?81352-Journalist-to-MS-Take-your-800-Halo-3-bribe-back-Halo-3-isn-t-all-that [maxconsole.net]

Yeah, those Shiny Green Bunny Hopping Power Ranger Halo games are so 'amazing' Microsoft is forced to bribe reviewers with 800 dollar 'gift bags'...

Re:Halo Game Review Bribes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37466092)

Gift bags are not free, you have to pay the tax in them. Maybe he didn't want to pay $150-$200 tax on something he doesn't want?

Re:Comparisons (1)

dougisfunny (1200171) | more than 3 years ago | (#37466144)

I think you forgot to mention Halo 1, Halo 2, Marathon, Halo and Halo. Oh and don't forget Halo.

Re:Comparisons (1)

Dark Lord of Ohio (2459854) | more than 3 years ago | (#37468510)

I think you forgot to mention Halo 1, Halo 2, Marathon, Halo and Halo. Oh and don't forget Halo.

Nope, I did not. About Halo Wars too. And Halo book, Fall of Reach, Halo First Strike, Halo Contact Harvest, Halo Cole Protocol, Halo Ghost of Onyx, Halo Evolutions... there are sooooo many Halos.

Re:Comparisons (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37468876)

I think you forgot to mention Halo 1, Halo 2, Marathon, Halo and Halo. Oh and don't forget Halo.

No he didn't. None of those are HD, and as well all know, if a game isn't available in HD resolution, it's crap. You'll note, though, that he did mention Halo Combat Evolved Anniversary Edition. That's Halo 1 in HD, so it's good.

Re:Comparisons (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471862)

Does it count as HD resolution if the game is actually rendered in sub-HD resolutions and upscaled to 720p because the game's too taxing for the console?

Gears 3 has severe framerate issues in cutscenes. To the point where I'm thinking I need to upgrade the graphics card in my Xbox.

Re:Comparisons (1)

RogueyWon (735973) | more than 3 years ago | (#37466166)

I confess to having played - and completed the campaign of - every Halo game released and still not "getting" the series in the slightest. Low detail graphics, silly, imprecise weapons, bland level design and a few interesting plot ideas marred by dialogue so terminally stupid that it makes my ears bleed just listening to it (yes, even worse than Gears's). Oh, and a serious fixation with instant-death mechanics, which is seriously irritating in a game that has no quicksave and as as checkpoint-averse as most of the Halo games seem to be.

I'm not saying I hate the series; there are some interesting bits in there and I like the fact that the Halo games tend to have a few levels that are more open than is the norm for the genre. I just don't think I've ever had a moment of what I would call actual enjoyment from the games. I feel the same way about the Killzone series - people rave about those, but I've never found them anything but soulless, joyless trudges.

Re:Comparisons (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#37466220)

I've enjoyed the Halo games more than any other console shooter except Lost Planet. Keyboard and mouse forever! But on the console, for some reason I can be basically competent at Halo after only a few days of thrashing (not enough for multiplayer, but I have a dodgy WAN link anyway) whereas most other titles I just get massacred. I'm perfectly competitive on the PC, so there must be something different about Halo. I really enjoy the enemies, too. Maybe it's just because I played Marathon as a child and there is something inherited, I don't know what it is. Maybe a color scheme :)

FAIL (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37466234)

You're like listening to some who celebrates Michael Bolton's entire catalog...

You fail at gaming.

Re:FAIL (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#37466278)

You're like listening to some who celebrates Michael Bolton's entire catalog...

You fail at gaming.

So, which of my trolls are you? I always feel so sorry for you, hiding behind your mask, afraid to come up and join in the conversation, resorting to posting flyers about "have you seen my sense of humor" and so on.

Re:FAIL (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37467918)

you are literally the only slashdot poster whose name i recognize because you never stop posting.

take a break once in a while, little fella. slashdot will continue without you frantically mashing the post button ten seconds after an article is posted.

Re:FAIL (1)

Stubot (2439922) | more than 3 years ago | (#37468916)

I don't remember user names I remember signatures...

Re:Comparisons (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37471262)

>>I've enjoyed the Halo games more than any other console shooter except Lost Planet.

You actually liked the Lost Planet series?? That's the one with the wind-up dolls making such idiotic comments to each other that the Delta Squad's lines sound like Shakespeare?

Well, I guess that explains why you'd really like Halo then.

Re:Comparisons (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471902)

The Wii's controls are pretty close to mouse controls, playing Golden Eye in multiplayer is like playing Modern Warfare 2 on the PC with a weapon balance that's more fun.

Re:Comparisons (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37476312)

The Wii's controls are pretty close to mouse controls

No, they're not. Not even remotely.

Re:Comparisons (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 3 years ago | (#37477998)

Even with motionplus the Wii jitters like a mad bastard. So even if I agreed with you (and I don't) it would be an inadequate input device for a first person shooter.

Sorry, I never got into Goldeneye. I had already been playing good FPSes with real input devices for years.

Re: Wiimote Pointer (1)

trdrstv (986999) | about 3 years ago | (#37537990)

"Even with motionplus the Wii jitters like a mad bastard. "

Motion plus does nothing to the pointer. If you are getting Jitter you are probably in a room with too much light (sunlight's the worst) washing over the front of the Wiimote. The sensor bar is nothing but 2 lights the wiimote uses as fixed points to calculate where it is in relation to the screen, if there are too many lights near it (or a window), the wiimote can't properly distinguish where those points are an jitters.

To test this Try playing a Game in complete darkness (only have the TV and Wii on), and stand between 3-10 feet away and watch how smooth the pointer is. From there look at anything that's generating IR light like a window, candles and other light sources. Not knowing your setup, I'd assume you have too much sunlight in the living room. My parents have a Big BAY window that needs the curtains drawn to be able to play anything.

Hopefully that helps, and even though I haven't played golden eye a FANTASTIC FPS game to try on Wii is Metroid Prime 3 (or the Conduit, or Medal of Honor Heroes 2), the controls are tight and it's well worth a play. happy gaming.

Re:Comparisons (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#37469452)

When Halo 1 first came out, it was the first game that I had ever played that controlled like that (left stick look/turn, right stick move--and you could do both at the same time). Of course now just about every game does that. But I remember being blown away at the time by how natural it felt. I also was blown away by the open spaces. Having played so many hall-running shooters to that point, the wide expanses were pretty awesome.

Of course, I'm sure that FPS enthusiasts can point out earlier console games that controlled the same as Halo before 2001, and I'm sure they're were other FPS's with wide open spaces before that. But for myself, and many others, Halo was the first really popular console game that seemed to pull all this together. And that it one of the big reasons it became such an enduring fan favorite.

Re:Comparisons (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 3 years ago | (#37466192)

Bullshit. Halo is tired. Halo Reach was the one release that pissed everyone off as it's a 20 minute storyline game and the rest is just for online play.

Black Ops kicks Halo's butt so hard that Master Chief is crying under his bunk wanting his mommy.

Re:Comparisons (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37466336)

"a 20 minute storyline game and the rest is just for online play"

Are you sure you aren't talking about Black Ops there?

Re:Comparisons (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37468442)

Agreed. I took a break from the Black Ops story to try some multi-player when I thought I was about half-way through the story. When I went back to it, I was half-way through the next to last level. Wow, really short. The entire campaign was awful. The only reason I even finished it was for the achievements.
I wasn't thrilled with the Reach campaign either, but I did enjoy the story. I still prefer the original (Halo 1) campaign the most, and the release of anniversary will be great.

As for multi-player, I put off CoD until MW2 and really got into it, but Black Ops got tiring. What seemed like improvements (Cod points for upgrades, contracts, etc.) just got old and didn't make up for crappy maps. Constant updates get really annoying as the game plays differently every month or two. I went back to MW2 and Reach.

Re:Comparisons (1)

Dark Lord of Ohio (2459854) | more than 3 years ago | (#37468604)

Bullshit. Halo is tired. Halo Reach was the one release that pissed everyone off as it's a 20 minute storyline game and the rest is just for online play.

Black Ops kicks Halo's butt so hard that Master Chief is crying under his bunk wanting his mommy.

well, apparently I am not everyone and I know few people who actually feel the same about Reach. Just great game. And black ops... well, it's just a game...

Re:Comparisons (1)

Mike Mentalist (544984) | more than 3 years ago | (#37468818)

I agree. Halo Reach may have been a bit shorter than I would have liked and they overdid it on the hunter enemies a bit, but it was a great game and a great end to the series at that point.

I have played through the entire campaign about six times now and looking forward to the anniversary release of the original Halo game.

Re:Comparisons (1)

ShakaUVM (157947) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470628)

>>Space Marines, Gears of War, Resistance... they are nothing - N-O-T-H-I-N-G- compared to Halo 3, Reach or Halo Combat Evolved Anniversary Edition (november 2011)

Halo sucks compares with Gears of War. And by that I mean both entire series, which I've beaten. Except for the one that's not out yet... which kind of makes it obvious you're just fanboing.

The plot is like the graphics, bland and muddy. There's a few moments of brilliance in each game, which is why I bother playing and beating them. But they're just not very good.

A college student could come up with a more entertaining shooter.

Re:Comparisons (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471836)

Really? I didn't enjoy Halo 3 at all with the two hits you can take before you have to hide and recharge your shields (i.e. downtime). Space Marine, on the other hand, is good fun. Especially in multiplayer with the way the assault space marines switch everything up (and that has to do with the specific jetpack implementation, jetpacks in Space Marine are FAST with their ground pound move but they don't allow hovering so they're a quick repositioning tool). There's also Hard Reset for the people who just want shooting, no chainswording. I'm looking at Renegade Ops as well but probably on the PC (cheaper, especially in the four-pack).

Gears isn't really doing it for me so far, I haven't played much of it yet though. It's not as engaging as Bulletstorm so far.

Gears 3 Graphics Are Embarrassingly Bad (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37466060)

I remember when Epic was putting out bleeding edge games. What the hell happened to them?

Everyone claimed Gears of War 3 would finally have a major update to the horribly outdated Unreal Engine. It's the same tired old:

> Low rez bumpy/shiny normal maps covering everything

> The same cheap and jerky low quality animations

> The same primitive lighting

> The same shareware quality particle effects

Absolutely embarrassing compared to what is being done on PCs and the PS3.

Re:Gears 3 Graphics Are Embarrassingly Bad (1)

alen (225700) | more than 3 years ago | (#37466528)

they do have this annoying hardware limitation of the current generation of consoles being 5 years old

Re:Gears 3 Graphics Are Embarrassingly Bad (1)

Mike Mentalist (544984) | more than 3 years ago | (#37467006)

Comparing older hardware to newer hardware and saying that what is being done on the older hardware is absolutely embarrassing compared to the newer hardware?

This must be the games section of Slashdot.

Graphics whore is whoring (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 3 years ago | (#37468352)

But if it's fun, who gives a shit? Is this a game or a Powerpoint presentation at Siggraph?

I recall someone back in the 2D era saying to test your game, replace all the sprites with simple squares and circles. If it's still fun, you're on to something.

Re:Gears 3 Graphics Are Embarrassingly Bad (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471948)

Dude, the Unreal Engine can do a whole lot more than you can see in a console game like Gears. They just aren't going to do better than the consoles on the consoles.

What the Unreal Engine 3 apparently cannot do is good online multiplayer, that netcode tends to screw with game balancing due to its lacking lag compensation. In some games that means you can pretty much nullify hitscan weapons by staying on the move, most players cannot adequately compensate for the lag themselves so they miss a lot of shots, greatly lowering their DPS. The saddest part about that is how the UE2 used in Duke Nukem Forever doesn't have that problem.

And before you blame the consoles, I've seen the fucking WII do proper lag compensation in Golden Eye.

Re:Comparisons (1)

moenoel (1897920) | more than 3 years ago | (#37466174)

There's no cover button - indeed the game generally seems to regard cover as for wusses.

A 40k Space Marine doesn't need to "take" cover; he's already wearing it.

Re:Comparisons (1)

Lumpy (12016) | more than 3 years ago | (#37466216)

And that is the answer. the latest WH40K game utterly kicks the butt of the ENTIRE halo series and Gears series hard. Sorry, but when I can give up on the high tech partical weapon picking off enemies at a distance and then spend 20 minutes swinging an axe in the middle of a horde heading for me and end up painting everything on screen red.... that game wins, it UTTERLY wins.

Re:Comparisons (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37466518)

I just wish the graphics didn't suck so hard. I mean, playing the demo, at one point the screen was all washed out, light grey and fuzzy. I couldn't tell if it was meant to be some kind of smoke effect or if it really was just awful rendering, either way after a couple of minutes it hurt my eyes so much I had to turn it off. I've heard it described as playing an RTS as an FPS in terms of graphic fidelity and I can 100% see what people mean, it looks like it would look great seen from 50 feet overhead, but up close it's all just a bit visually dated and tired.

Re:Comparisons (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37475482)

I have no fucking clue what you're talking about unless your video card is broken. Space Marine looked great.

Re:Comparisons (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37468196)

What's really amused me is the review scores controversy [destructoid.com] that Gears 3 has generated. ...CliffyB really does come over as a prize arsehole through those comments. Particularly since the Eurogamer review in question felt... well... perfectly fair to me.

And what comments are you referring to? I followed your link, and several other links from within that article (including the actual interview with CliffyB), and all I see is him saying he doesn't understand how they rated GoW2 higher than GoW3. I'm not sure how that equats to asshole. Is there something I'm missing...perhaps some forum discussion where he elaborated on his thoughts and made an ass out of himself? To me it looks like people are blowing this way out of proportion.

Re:Comparisons (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37469472)

I have only barely touched Resistance 3, and I was put off by the Space Marine graphics in the trailers (though I will at least try it at some point); however, I did spend a couple of hours doing a Co-op Standard Campaign in Gears 3 with a buddy of mine. Definitely strikes me as Gears 2 with polish, and the thing that stands out to me most about when we played Co-op Gears 2 campaign was that the game got better and better the further in we went. Plus, it was by far the longest co-op campaign that I have played in any FPS title. The co-op campaign for Halo Reach and Halo ODST were quite a bit shorter by comparison. Your Treyarch's and Infinity Ward's don't think co-op campaign is worth investing in (shame on you!). Epic have upped their co-op limit to 4 players with Gears 3 as well, bravo!. This is what co-op gaming should be like. Gears 2 was a lot of game for the money, and I fully expect the same thing out of Gears 3.

Penny Arcade's Take (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37466014)

Pretty much this [penny-arcade.com]

Gears of Wars for Playstation 3! (1)

G3ckoG33k (647276) | more than 3 years ago | (#37466074)

"Sony to include Unreal Engine 3 in PS3 dev kits
Published: July 21, 2005 11:01 AM PDT
by Punch Jump Crew"
http://news.punchjump.com/article.php?id=1118 [punchjump.com]

Epic demonstrates Playstation 3 power (video)
Published: May 16, 2005 8:02 PM PDT
by Punch Jump Crew
http://news.punchjump.com/article.php?id=803 [punchjump.com]

This is what should have been Gears of Wars for Playstation 3.

Unfortunately, Microsoft took over the role as the publisher, and one doesn't have to be too surprised that the PS3 was no longer pursued.

Those 2005 images from the video just screams that Epic should have pursued an all platform strategy.

Too bad that there is a Microsoft around.

The video itself http://downloads.punchjump.com/videos/epicgamesps3demo/Epic%20Games%20PS3%20demo.wmv [punchjump.com]

Re:Gears of Wars for Playstation 3! (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#37469524)

Unfortunately, Microsoft took over the role as the publisher, and one doesn't have to be too surprised that the PS3 was no longer pursued.

I've got a newsflash for you, Sony does the exact same thing with the development studios they own. You see Killzone or Resistance on the 360?

Re:Gears of Wars for Playstation 3! (1)

HAKdragon (193605) | more than 3 years ago | (#37470588)

Except for the fact that Microsoft doesn't own Epic Games.

Characters... (2)

chill (34294) | more than 3 years ago | (#37466154)

Interestingly enough, when I pointed out to my son that Gears 3 was out his comment was "I really can't get into a game where all the characters look like they munch steroids for breakfast, lunch and dinner."

IMHO, part of a good game experience is immersing yourself in the fantasy and identifying with the characters. If the characters are too far removed, it makes it harder.

Re:Characters... (-1, Offtopic)

SpiralSpirit (874918) | more than 3 years ago | (#37466314)

sounds like you need to buy your son some sterioids.

Re:Characters... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37467268)

Whose to say they don't munch steroids for breakfast, lunch and dinner? It's not inconceivable that Fenix and co are some kind of specially engineered super soldier, it's an alien planet, it's not beyond the realms of belief that their system of morality is perfectly fine with pumping their soldiers full of drugs to make them stronger (hell, it's not so long since we were doing that here on earth, and for all I know it still goes on).

Re:Characters... (1)

Schwhat (1993980) | more than 3 years ago | (#37467324)

Interestingly enough, when I pointed out to my son that Gears 3 was out his comment was "I really can't get into a game where all the characters look like they munch steroids for breakfast, lunch and dinner."

IMHO, part of a good game experience is immersing yourself in the fantasy and identifying with the characters. If the characters are too far removed, it makes it harder.

Yet you can get behind a game with a chubby short man that jumps like Jordan and takes shrooms to gain powers. Or an emo group of people who go adventuring to save the world for umpteenth time (not final) that wield weapons bigger than their bodies and beating final enemies that can shit you out for breakfast in one shot (with the power of love).

Not everyone (1)

Moraelin (679338) | more than 3 years ago | (#37467932)

Yet you can get behind a game with a chubby short man that jumps like Jordan and takes shrooms to gain powers.

I dunno, some of us never really got into Mario, though I can't say I ever got too philosophical about why. It could be the moustache ;)

Or an emo group of people who go adventuring to save the world for umpteenth time (not final) that wield weapons bigger than their bodies and beating final enemies that can shit you out for breakfast in one shot (with the power of love).

And, again, some of us don't find stupidly oversized weapons to be a turn on. In fact, some of us have donated a bunch of free time to make more realistically sized weapons for some games. E.g., for my part, stuff like the arming swords or Japanese weapons for Oblivion/Fallout 3/New Vegas. Though I'm probably not the best example, check out Adonnay's weapons for several games for some much better quality weapons.

And a bunch of people download such realistically sized weapons.

Don't get me wrong, though, I have occasionally done oversized stuff for lulz too, but still nowhere near such silly extremes as the Buster Sword or the 2 ft broad "Zanbato" in a certain anime. (Never mind that a historical Zanbato was 1.25 inch broad or so.) Think more like a 4 inch broad Zweihaender instead of 2 inch, for what counts as comically oversized for me. And more importantly it's supposed to be mostly a parody, and named and described appropriately to indicate parody intentions, and usually indicating in the description too that it's not historical and why. I don't see anything like that in the JRPG series you mentioned.

But at any rate, no, some of us don't find gigantic swords awesome, and some of us even spent many many hours modelling meshes to make more accurately sized weapons.

Re:Characters... (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 3 years ago | (#37472006)

Mario games establish a world that could only be related to reality if you were on some serious drugs. Gears on the other hand tries to be a serious artistic statement (that's what the developers say).

Re:Characters... (1)

CraftyJack (1031736) | more than 3 years ago | (#37467454)

Hmm. I don't buy it. I never had much in common with an overweight plumber in red overalls, but I had fun with the game. I've played as a monkey, a tentacle, a werewolf/dragon/bear, numerous aliens, whatever pacman is supposed to be, and a square. I've played as an "@" for longer than I care to recall, and I have felt terror when that "@" was threatened. I've played as Michael Jackson for crying out loud.

The easiest characters to identify with are probably those in the GTA series, and that's not my cup of tea at all. (Oh look, I'm driving a car...in a city I recognize...to go pick something up...ah, a new pair of pants, I'm shopping for pants...oh, now I'm going bowling...great.)

Re:Characters... (1)

Rude Turnip (49495) | more than 3 years ago | (#37467564)

I found the game incredibly immersive because you can relate to the humanity of the characters and their struggles. Quite frankly, the game deserves its "M for Mature" rating not because of the violence, but because kids simply won't appreciate the mature themes throughout the game. Your son's comments indicate as much.

Re:Characters... (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 3 years ago | (#37468498)

IMHO, part of a good game experience is immersing yourself in the fantasy and identifying with the characters.

Other than Cole, who is a former pro athlete, the other characters are so encased in body armor I don't think we even know what they look like underneath. And, wow, professional soldiers in some army of the future are buffed out. What an unrealistic idea!

Never got the whole identify with the character thing. I'm a boring person. I want to play a character totally unlike me. I'll often build female characters if it's an option, or other species, like the Kajiit, Argonians and Orcs in the Elder Scrolls series. I'm thinking dark elf babe for my first Skyrim charatcer. Game, take me as far from this shit filled reality as you can. Escapism, you savvy, mate?

Oddly, I go with the standard issue male Shepard in Mass Effect. Not sure why.

Re:Characters... (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 3 years ago | (#37472044)

You can see their body shapes pretty clearly in Gears 3, they're pretty much just wearing vests. Their arms are exposed and inhumanly thick.

Re:Characters... (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 3 years ago | (#37476572)

Yeah saw that today. OK, so they're super future soldiers. Not sure why that's a problem. This is another world and we don;t know how far in the future this is. Maybe Sera has higher gravity.

Re:Characters... (1)

trdrstv (986999) | about 3 years ago | (#37561796)

" I'll often build female characters if it's an option, or other species, like the Kajiit, Argonians and Orcs in the Elder Scrolls series. " Personally for Every 3rd person game where I build a character (Including elderscrolls since I play most of it in 3rd person) I prefer to have a female avatar, because given the choice I'd rather be staring at a chick the whole time than a dude. The only exception is Rock Band, my voice coming out of a woman is just weird, but for the rest of it yeah... I'd rather spend my idle time looking at women.

Re:Characters... (1)

StikyPad (445176) | more than 3 years ago | (#37469562)

Well that's what it takes when you have to administer steroids orally. Why do you think injection is the method of choice?

At any rate, steroids are both overrated and their negative effects are overblown. Used in moderation, they can be part of a solid training program, but they're not going to miraculously transform anyone into Mr. Universe. Neither will moderate usage give you bitch tits or "roid rage," (the existence of which is largely anecdotal to begin with).

When potentially beneficial drugs like steroids are demonized, it's no wonder why our population is suffering from an epidemic of obesity. God forbid we help anyone get in shape, but if you suffer from anxiety, we've got a whole spectrum of benzos so you can veg out on the couch in bliss. Good thing we have Hoverounds I guess.

Re:Characters... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37477006)

Every single Mr Olympia has used steroids. Steroids with absolutely no exercise will yield more muscle than exercising for hypertrophy without steroids.

Moderate usage will definitely shrink you balls while using. And could give you bitch tits permanently.

Re:Characters... (1)

smurfs187 (2464812) | more than 3 years ago | (#37474942)

GoW 3 does have the best character acting and development of any game on the market. I mean, when Dom's wife died in GoW 2 to the emotional scene with Cole in the beginning of GoW 3 at the supermarket. I'd like to see call of duty or halo do that. And that doesn't even take into account the action and suspense the game add during combat. All around these games are some of the decade (Behind Fallout 3 and Half-Life 2, of course). A definite must buy.

Helmets (1)

thopkins (70408) | more than 3 years ago | (#37466222)

I like the Gears series, but still can't get over the fact that they don't wear helmets?!?! (yes I know real life special forces don't wear them so they can hear better). One bullet to the head and they should be finished.

Re:Helmets (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37466878)

FWIW, there is a tongue-in-cheek joke about this early on in Act I.

Re:Helmets (1)

OutLawSuit (1107987) | more than 3 years ago | (#37467086)

There's another crack about it in the second game where they basically said they couldn't see snipers as well with one on.

Re:Helmets (1)

Quiet_Desperation (858215) | more than 3 years ago | (#37468550)

You don't realize that's artistic license so you can see the character's faces?

Mass Effect 2 had a bunch of special armors, and people complained that they couldn't turn off the helmets and see their character, especially during cut scenes where suddenly you were Boba Fett all the time.

Looks & sounds like a terrible series of games (1)

Legal.Troll (2002574) | more than 3 years ago | (#37466266)

Seriously, are there any redeeming qualities or are people just lining up to buy a pile of crap?

Re:Looks & sounds like a terrible series of ga (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37467580)

Seriously, why do people buy things I don't like?

FTFY

Team Fortress 2 (1)

ZorinLynx (31751) | more than 3 years ago | (#37469006)

I think I'll stick to TF2, the game that's STILL barrels of fun four years later, and never, EVER gets old.

Ya'll console people don't know what you're missing. :)

Re:Team Fortress 2 (1)

smurfs187 (2464812) | about 3 years ago | (#37505796)

True to that TF2 is amazing for never being a standalone multiplayer shooter, on the contrary, GoW 3 makes TF2 look like Dora Saves the Magic Mermaid.

oh boy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37469074)

dumb fuck brown shooter with chest high walls and 2 refrigerators as main charters, didnt they already release this like 100 times this year?

Whack a mole as another shooter (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#37469470)

Why is this a big deal? ad dollars influencing /.?? Aren't people sick of the same old shooters yet? Even if it was the biggest gameplay change to the type in a while its still whack a mole; how many times can they resell it. By making it more conventional they undermine its novelty... one which was minimal to begin with.

1 & 2 were enough; lasted longer than whack a mole did... I'm also sick of the action movie storylines which only beat out an action movie in that they are longer and you may see some scenes over and over - rarely are the things entertaining by themselves. For me, interrupting the story flow for long periods of pure action makes for a bad movie and interrupting a GAME for lame movie scenes harms the gaming. IF they could just go with Serious Sam or a movie with good writers and leave out the hybrid to try to please everybody I would be happy. Just say "your princess is in another castle" and let me go back to the game.

games suck lately (1)

Iniamyen (2440798) | more than 3 years ago | (#37471496)

Since I don't have the time (or the extra money) to try every new game that comes out, I've tried to use reviews to give me an indication. Let me explain: 1. Games that get good professional reviews are usually the large-budget "blockbusters" that often disappoint the actual gamers. When I see a game with high professional reviews, but low user reviews, I tend to steer clear. 2. Games that get terrible professional reviews but good user reviews, tend to be the "hidden gems"... hidden because for some reason the critics didn't like them (were they not paid enough?) but gems because everyone who actually plays games for fun tends to like them. These tend to be cheaper than the blockbusters. 3. Once in awhile everyone seems to love a game (Portal 2 for instance.) Even though I don't love Portal 2 that much, I can't say it was a bad game. so these are usually a safe bet too. 4. And then when everyone hates a game... it's probably a safe bet that you will, too. Seems to me that Gears of War 3 falls into the first category... which probably means that I'll skip it. Seems to be the same complaints against it that REALLY annoy me in modern games (mechanics, linear, scripted, etc...)
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?