Mike Capps Upset About Lower Gears PC Scores

[Sir_Brizz]

Wow, I completely disagree with you.

[zynthetic]

GearsPC did poorly because everyone that wanted it already had it for 360 and everyone who got it on PC (self included) knew what to expect.
"Hi Res" is less a bonus and more "it needed to be done or it would look terrible on pc". The additional MP content and finished SP campaign was a nice touch but it's hardly any different than buying a "Director's Cut" version of a dvd you bought the year before.

[elmuerte]

I played GoW only on PC and I loved it. It had an ok story, but what appealed to me most was that it was a constant flow of action and entertainment. A **** load of things in that game were very well executed.

As for the ratings, I don't believe in arbitrary number giving. What does 9 out of 10 mean, how is it different from 10 out of 10. Some reviewers (well magazines) are very arbitrary. For example 1up gave GoW for xbox360 a 100%, but for pc a 70%. 30% less for absolutely no good reason.

At the time of release GoW might have been the best thing ever to happen on the XBox360. For the PC is was just a very good game.

The point of this whole thing is that review scores are bull****. Reviews are completely useless you know the person reviewing it well enough. (i.e. how the reviewer feels about other things). For the rest the reviews is only interesting on the objective side.

[Armagon917]

I think the lower reviews for Gears 1 is that could many of these reviewers possibly wanted to see the game come out on PC day one? possibility...
Also something I mentioned before, the keyboard and mouse controls were not well implemented. An example is that while you make wide turns in a roadie run on 360 with the PC version using keyboard and mouse those turns were at leasr 30% wider. That causes a problem for those who picked the game up for competative play online. Plug in a 360 controller and it works perfect. I think many people were looking forward to keyboard and mouse functionality and that was not implemented well.

Games for Windows LIVE. HUGE problem. No ingame chat to be found in multiplayer and you have to pay for a gold membership to get voice over IP which is a standard free feature PC gamers expect. So I call Bull**** on that one. Gears multiplayer was very team oriented, "two over by sniper!" and then you run over to help out or flank your opponent. We also need to see what ping we get with servers. Where was that? I would often get into a server and find that I would have to lead my shots 10 feet.

The netcode seemed to be pretty crappy to me as I could never find a server that would give me a solid packet transfer rate (whatever you call it) but one second shotgun fire would be dead on then I would have to lead my shots 10feet and this was an inconsistent thing throughout the match I experienced.

More chapters for the PC version is great but for many people that isn't enough to get them to buy the game a second time if they picked it up for 360. I bought it for multiplayer and was let down. If Capps really doesn't know why it did worse on PC then he's either lying to us trying to make an argument to make reviewers seem unreasonable, or he's completely out of touch with the PC market. We aren't console gamers and we know when a game has been given care. PC gamers can spot weaknesses easily while the majority of console gamers just know the game wasn't as fun.

Its 50.00 I would like back. Anyways it seems if you want to get a good gaming experience from EPIC then you're going to have to go to consoels from now on which is what I'm doing. Crappy port.

Those who enjoyed it more power to ya.

[haslo]

The gameplay is just not PC compatible. It's made for a game pad, with relatively low interactivity (some auto-aim, displayed flight paths for grenades). And the speed is way too slow for a PC game. I was bored before I finished the first level.

Really, there are console games, and there are PC games. While TF2 is a PC game that also runs on consoles, GoW is a console game that also runs on PCs.

But I'm fairly certain that Mike Capps sees that indeed and just feigns ignorance in the interview to be a good Epic president, as others have pointed out.

[Armagon917]

Originally Posted by Sir_Brizz

Oh, come on. The game was PUBLISHED by Microsoft. That means it was FINANCED by Microsoft. That means Epic couldn't have released a PC version if they wanted to, that was up to Microsoft.

I know what you're saying but at some point EPIC made a choice to choose Microsoft as the publisher and I'm sure the game being an xbox 360 exclusive was discussed. So while after signing whatever contract EPIC couldn't release a PC version along side the 360 one immediately but I'm sure EPIC got a big fat check for that. EPIC decided to do business with Microsoft and that is what I blame them for. EPIC knew what they were getting into.

So allowing it to happen is just as bad when greed sets in. COD4 has sold a lot more then Gears hitting all platforms so Gears became a system seller. Good for EPIC bad for fans.

[MonsOlympus]

Originally Posted by elmuerte

As for the ratings, I don't believe in arbitrary number giving. What does 9 out of 10 mean, how is it different from 10 out of 10. Some reviewers (well magazines) are very arbitrary. For example 1up gave GoW for xbox360 a 100%, but for pc a 70%. 30% less for absolutely no good reason.

Yeah thats it hey, it is pretty arbitrary, whats a 10/10 from 10yrs ago worth vs a 10/10 these days for eg or someone could give a 10/10 to a game today just ot have it trumped by a 10/10 tomorrow, saying this game is better than the previous 10/10 game.

Really 10/10 means to me just a game I should check out, it doesnt even mean a must buy, anything over 7/10 should be decent but Ive seen games that have rated lower then that but are still games I would recommend

[Armagon917]

Originally Posted by haslo

The gameplay is just not PC compatible. It's made for a game pad, with relatively low interactivity (some auto-aim, displayed flight paths for grenades). And the speed is way too slow for a PC game. I was bored before I finished the first level.

Really, there are console games, and there are PC games. While TF2 is a PC game that also runs on consoles, GoW is a console game that also runs on PCs.

But I'm fairly certain that Mike Capps sees that indeed and just feigns ignorance in the interview to be a good Epic president, as others have pointed out.

I have to respectfully disagree on a point you made. There is no reason why a gamepad would work better for Gears. Maybe the one driving sequence. Its just a matter of taking the time to make it work well. Substitute the right anolog stick for the mouse and W A S D for the left analog stick. Then you are left with I believe 8 keys. Mouse take care of aiming, space bar is the "A" button equivalent. Everything is there to make it work. Holding down the space bar for running and tapping it for other functionality the "A" button had.

my opinion is that it just wasn't implemented correctly.

[r1esG0]

Most of you can like or dislike the game, but that is up to you.
I personaly liked, at the moment the last patch was released, and the savegame issue was fixed, but thats another story.

We are talking here about the difference on the score of the game between versions, being the same game.
It its very curious the game was god on 360, and is evil on pc. Its the same game.

I simply dont believe on reviewers. They lost their credit.

[elmuerte]

Originally Posted by haslo

The gameplay is just not PC compatible. It's made for a game pad, with relatively low interactivity (some auto-aim, displayed flight paths for grenades). And the speed is way too slow for a PC game. I was bored before I finished the first level.

That's a load of bull****, so such thing as PC compatible gameplay.

I played the game with mouse and keyboard, and didn't have any control issues. Didn't play it with a gamepad so I don't know if the roadie run works better using a gamepad. But again, didn't have issues controlling the game.

Originally Posted by r1esG0

It its very curious the game was god on 360, and is evil on pc. Its the same game.

That says more about the other xbox360 games (i.e. they're **** compared to gow).

[UBerserker]

It was one of the most worthwhile games I ever played on my PC.

/fix the editor if GOW2 ever comes for PC.

[MaestroMaus]

Originally Posted by StreetPreacher

I think the fact that he's so upset may show...you could loose a few pounds.

Originally Posted by StreetPreacher

Glad my comments are well received, but ...sing the praises of your product.

He's just doing his job.

I agree 100% with these statements. They are exactly my opinion.

[Sijik]

I think the compatibility issues, the crashing, freezing, system restarts, constant hitching, unstable editor, limited modding abilities, and loss of progress and saves may have had something to do with its sales, too, as well as constant bashing from selfish Xbox owners who were upset about the new content but too cheap to wait 'till it went down to $10 and grab it.

Originally Posted by NitrousUser

I think gears on PC is the bomb diggidy shiznit...if you have a 360 controller.

Honestly I prefer mouse and keyboard infinitely more, as long as you remember to turn off that double-tab garbage.

Originally Posted by -=WolverinE=-

Can't agree with you more. The game was epic fail for me on the PC, but I guess some people who had a 360 and not many good shooters (if at all) could enjoy it. It was uber boring with very weak plot. I felt like I'm in Uwe Boll's movie ffs!

Do some research. The plot was deliberately kept out of the game itself to avoid the excessively obnoxious trend of beating people silly with the plot bat. Back-story and explanations are there in abundance if you seek out ansilary materials.
Personally, as I sit back and tend to my lingering bruises and lacerations from said bat at the hands of HL and others, I applaud them for this action, and mourn its abandonment for Gears 2.

Give me story, sure, but stop smashing me over the head with it. I don't care how good devs think their story is, it's never anything more than your standard summer action flick. It may be a great story *for a shooter* but until they literally win a f'ing Pulitzer for ther game story, I want devs to keep it in the background and let me seek it out if I want it.

Give me a rich, engaging universe with strong backstory, atmosphere, and beautiful art direction, and let me make my own stories in it.

[TheSomian]

Originally Posted by haslo

The gameplay is just not PC compatible. It's made for a game pad, with relatively low interactivity (some auto-aim, displayed flight paths for grenades). And the speed is way too slow for a PC game. I was bored before I finished the first level.

Really, there are console games, and there are PC games. While TF2 is a PC game that also runs on consoles, GoW is a console game that also runs on PCs.

But I'm fairly certain that Mike Capps sees that indeed and just feigns ignorance in the interview to be a good Epic president, as others have pointed out.

The gameplay is good, and i love to play with gamepad. The problem is just that they cut out the splitscreen mode for absolutely no reason, and this is what could make like 25% difference. Split screen lifts a game from average to ireallyneedthis because it's so much better to play co-op with your friends.

EDIT: example:Kane&lynch. the reason for me to play this game is the great co-op splitscreen mode.

[Sijik]

Who plays split-screen on a PC?
granted I used to use it in Sam to get respawns, more enemies and infinite ammo, but that's not really the intended purpose...

[Ignotium]

jamon iberico ftw

lol

[MonsOlympus]

Originally Posted by Sijik

Give me a rich, engaging universe with strong backstory, atmosphere, and beautiful art direction, and let me make my own stories in it.

****in oath, well said

[Grobut]

Eh, is there really anything to argue here? Gears may be a good console shooter, but it is nothing special at all on the PC market, and dare i say it, the fact that it is 3'rd person and not 1'st really hinders it in this market, PC players are not that keen on 3'rd person shooters.

They are different markets, and you will be up against different expectations and competition on thease markets, you cannot expect any game made for one market to do as good in the other market, infact it is fully possible for a title to be a smash success in one and a total failure in the other.

[-=WolverinE=-]

Originally Posted by Sijik

Do some research. The plot was deliberately kept out of the game itself to avoid the excessively obnoxious trend of beating people silly with the plot bat. Back-story and explanations are there in abundance if you seek out ansilary materials.
Personally, as I sit back and tend to my lingering bruises and lacerations from said bat at the hands of HL and others, I applaud them for this action, and mourn its abandonment for Gears 2.

Give me story, sure, but stop smashing me over the head with it. I don't care how good devs think their story is, it's never anything more than your standard summer action flick. It may be a great story *for a shooter* but until they literally win a f'ing Pulitzer for ther game story, I want devs to keep it in the background and let me seek it out if I want it.

Give me a rich, engaging universe with strong backstory, atmosphere, and beautiful art direction, and let me make my own stories in it.

I don't need to do any research, because the game HAD to deliver the story, not some article on the internet or a fancy colored book. If I want to make up my own story, I won't be playing THEIR game. Instead, I will make my own, but since that's not a one man's job and it's certainly not something I am capable at the moment, I am playing other people's games just like anybody else. The only point of GoW to be ever played is the multiplayer.

I can name quite a few games where you can skip the cut scenes and go directly to the action if you're not interested in any of it, but that kills half of the game really. But hey, maybe the reason why we see lower scores for the PC is because we have TONS of games with awesome multiplayer!

"Can't stop the train, baby!" ... Yep and it's going to crash real bad next time, Epic.

@Grobut: I don't think third person view is the problem here. There are many games like that for the PC that were more attractive to say at least.

[elmuerte]

Grobut: I absolutely don't agree, and I think it's rather small minded to think in these small boxes. PC has a much longer history and more competition. Saying that GoW is nothing special is just weird. I guess you think Half Life 2 or Mass Effect wasn't anything special either. Also, why do things have to be special. Can't they just be entertaining?

Who are you do say PC players are not keen on 3rd person shooters? I don't think it's up to you. I've enjoyed quite some good 3rd person shooters on the PC, sure, there have been more 1st person shooters. But that it mostly due to the fact that creating a 1st person shooter is much easier in the early days.

Thinking in boxes is what hurts the whole computer gaming market. "Console" systems are becoming much more like ready to use personal computers. Just plug in the system, start it, adjust some settings and ... play a game, watch a movie, check your email, browse websites, etc ...

For example, if you compare a PS3 with a personal computer from the 80s you'll notice that they are not much different in terms of provided functionality.

The PS4 might even start to compete with systems like the Apple iMac. It could be an easy to use all round system. All Sony has to add to the PS4 is a decent webbrowser and email client.