Mike Capps Upset About Lower Gears PC Scores

[Hyrage]

I don't think that we should just talk about what game is great, but what made them truly great. You talked about the AI and it's a very great point.

Halo 3 & Gears of War both have a very great Co-op game in Campaign. Halo 3 & Gears of War multiplayer are simple crap. Halo 3 got the same problem than Halo 2 with a bad strike system & Gears of War is way too laggy, simple & buggy. The biggest thing is, they were both made first exclusively for the 360, it also affects the max possible quality of the game.

Call of Duty 4 got a solid linear Campaign, but his multiplayer is stunning in matter of content. Even if a few perks and stuff aren't perfectly balanced, fair or well designed... the game offers so much possibilities for the players that it is a game "made for them".

- CoD4 Game of the year 110%

If Epic Games truly want to sell games with UT3, better do more than just making an Engine (build and used for GoW), some maps, some cool AI, make a few gametypes (less than in the previous UT2k4???), make a Campaign that is bsically using everything from the Multiplayer assets... so it's basically the same thing, a few cool customization & characters (seriously, they are very cool), but basically... UT3 is a multiplayer game like Shadowrun. We aren't going to say "Oh thx Epic, you gave us the UT3 tools to build the old gametypes ourselves and new gametypes that you didn't do in this new UT Game, including new maps and customizable features in the HUD?"

Gears of War on PC ... think about it.
Jump in the game... kill everything... finish the level. 10 000 other shooter games are using that game structure. It's way too old without any fresh touch. The COG tags were great, but the game would need soemthing deeper than that. GoW has a so great Game Universe, there is a lot of stuff to be done with that. The Coop was a great feature, but not enough. The GoW multiplayer is something between Halo 2 [control the power weapons] & R6 Vegas [cover system] and something lower than Counter-Strike in term of strategies and complexity. It doesn't help... even with more hours of gameplay.

Gears of War 2 from the E3 2008 previews and vidz seems to aim in the right direction with the old school formula (game structure, new enemies with very cool gameplays, etc) and a better use of the Game Universe (story, dialogues, etc).

[Jackal]

You thought COG tags were great?

ok.

[Sir_Brizz]

Yes, every UT game should have everything that was in the last one AND MORE! That has been a successful business model since UT2003!

[Jackal]

Originally Posted by Sir_Brizz

Yes, every UT game should have everything that was in the last one AND MORE! That has been a successful business model since UT2003!

While this is correct (UT2003 selling more copies than GoW), I think that they shouldn't include EVERYTHING in the new games. Do they really need Nali War Cows in GoW2?

[Hyrage]

Originally Posted by Jackal

You thought COG tags were great?

ok.

Was that supposed to be constructive in any ways?

Aren't these interesting; "collectibles, achievements, 360, gamerscore, map exploration, more content, more variety, more stuff, re-playability, play the game for another reason & a more enjoyable coop experience"?

I'll let you figure it out alone.

[Jackal]

Originally Posted by Hyrage

Was that supposed to be constructive in any ways?

Are you serious? Did you read my post? It contained like 5 words max. Nothing constructive can come from 5 words.

Unless it's like "Your mom needs more practice"

[Sir_Brizz]

"Your mom needs potty training"

[Hyrage]

Originally Posted by Jackal

Are you serious? Did you read my post? It contained like 5 words max. Nothing constructive can come from 5 words.

Unless it's like "Your mom needs more practice"

Well I think that we can make a constructive sentence with "Better take a look here."

Originally Posted by Jackal

You thought COG tags were great?

ok.

6+1= 7 words...
I made the practice for both you & my mother, thumbs up ^^

Seriously, I just think the post wasn't constructive enough to be posted.
Maybe you just do not care about COG tags, but for the majority of players it's a great thing.

[Jackal]

Originally Posted by Hyrage

Well I think that we can make a constructive sentence with "Better take a look here."



6+1= 7 words...
I made the practice for both you & my mother, thumbs up ^^

technically COG isn't a word. It would be 3 words, but it's an accronym. So what now?

I fail to see how "COG" tags can be a great thing. "Run around collecting necklas from the ground" That does not in anyway make or break the game, nor does it make the game any "deeper" or more betterer.

Besides, what are you talking aboot eh?

[Kantham]

Originally Posted by Sir_Brizz

"Your mom needs potty training"

Yaaaaarrrrrrrrrr!!!








Actually I'm just doing this because the thread sucks now.

[Sir_Brizz]

Originally Posted by Kantham

Actually I'm just doing this because the thread sucks now.

Are you suggesting it was better before?

[Kantham]

It was, at page 1.

[Jackal]

The thread does suck. 3 birds flew next to the screen and got sucked up.

Now they seem to be trapped in this screen going in cricles. Just look below.

[MonsOlympus]

Originally Posted by Anuban

It really bugs me when ONE person out of millions says they can run something fine of their PC ... so what ... that is not the point ... many PCs can't run the game and yet you still have people who will cling to this argument. And usually its a PC gamer so they know that in PC gaming just one difference in a component can mean the difference between a game playing or not. And again let me repeat ALL 360 owners can play Gears 360. So it would seem if there is a significant portion of your installed base that cannot play the game on a certain platform the ratings for the game on that platform are going to take a hit. Don't bitch. Instead make the game run as smooth as UT2K4 or even Bioshock for the vast majority of your PC users ... if you can't do that then don't expect stellar reviews.

Okay so in a recent article I read, Nvidia said there are 70million GF8/9 users worldwide! Ofcoarse there are other factors which go to being able to play a game, so while youre right not everyone can run the game on their PC, I think you are unstating the market share PC holds. You wouldnt be the first though so I'll let you off

To note: this is 70 million "Nvidia" GF8/9 users, it doesnt say cards, it doesnt mention Ati etc etc.

[elmuerte]

Originally Posted by Hyrage

Aren't these interesting; "collectibles,

real world collectables? yes
virtual collectables that give you nothing in return? no

Originally Posted by Hyrage

achievements,

no

Originally Posted by Hyrage

360

I prefer turns of 180 or less, the rest is just waste of effort

Originally Posted by Hyrage

, gamerscore,

not really

Originally Posted by Hyrage

map exploration,

absolutely, but not much of that existed in GoW

Originally Posted by Hyrage

more content,

more != better
for example Mass Effect's DLC was more, but it was tedious

Originally Posted by Hyrage

more variety,

absolutely, games shouldn't become tedious (looking at you Assassin's Creed).
The game should gradually introduce new things.
I think GoW did this quite well.

Originally Posted by Hyrage

more stuff,

more != better
I don't like inventory micro management (looking at you Mass Effect)

Originally Posted by Hyrage

re-playability,

Yes, sort of. It's just that my memory is too good and most games do not have enough variation to make them properly replayable.

Originally Posted by Hyrage

play the game for another reason & a more enjoyable coop experience"?

coop is great, but online gaming isn't always.
too much people that see online gaming as a job

[-=WolverinE=-]

Originally Posted by elmuerte

Anyway, Halo, FAKK 2, Unreal, ... there are not non-stop action. The action is stopped quite often. For example in Unreal 1. No action until the second level (wasn't a bad thing, even a good thing because it build up quite some tension, but there were a lot of other places where nothing really happened or where the player was stopped in his track).

There are places in GoW where the action stops too. For example the level before driving the vehicle. But yes, Unreal had more stops if we have to be honest, but you had to get to places etc. Anyway, here's some

[elmuerte]

your right.. the refugee camp is quite a hard stop in the action

[UBerserker]

Noes, Hyrage is in this thread O_o

[Sijik]

Originally Posted by -=WolverinE=-

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.

What you get out of a game is entirely dependent on what you put into it. You can drop it in their lap and say, "well, they didn't spoon-feed me everything, so it sucks," or you can take your experience into your own hands. It's too bad they've taken down the old oficial website; there was a lot of good stuff there.

I don't skip the cutsenes every time. I get their story once or twice and then I watch if I want to. Usually, if I'm still playing a game by this point, it's because the world is engaging enough in and of itself that I don't need to have someone else's story shoved down my throat to enjoy it. This is how I can still play Stalker even though I worked on it at THQ for damn near a year. I know every last nook and cranny of that game, but it's still very engaging and interesting. Gears, of course, is a very different game, but its art direction, atmosphere and backstory are a terrific place to just get lost in. I can just take a moment and look around at the environments and let it sink in.

I don't play games to hear the developer's amazing storyline. I know it's nothing more than a hollywood special effects movie will give me. I play them for immersion and escapism.

I do not think that I will ever be capable of understanding this "MP is all that matters" idiot mindset. It's a completely backwards approach to gaming from what I'm used to, so don't expect that to do any convincing for you. If you want a game just so you can prove you're better than random idiots at specific actions, go play basketball or some real game where story and art direction and immersion and atmosphere don't exist and you won't have to worry about them at all; then read a good novel so you'll get an actually engaging and interesting story if you aren't able or willing to use your imagination toward that end within a given world to create one for yourself. To make a game MP only is to strip out its soul.

The only way I'm able to play UT is because the mp is also the sp, and has a backstory behind it that I can use to premise botmatches. Even more so with the approach they took with UT3. With faction wars and the ghost-in-the-shell-esque rogue Liandri bots and such.

[-=WolverinE=-]

Originally Posted by Sijik

What you get out of a game is entirely dependent on what you put into it. You can drop it in their lap and say, "well, they didn't spoon-feed me everything, so it sucks," or you can take your experience into your own hands.

Well let me tell you this, I put a lot of effort when it comes to achieving something and in games that means unlocking stuff and beating hardest difficulty. This game though is not the case. I did put efforts in it, but I didn't get what I "put in". I also didn't expect anything to be spoon-fed to me. The fact is, the whole plot was absent.

Originally Posted by Sijik

...I don't need to have someone else's story shoved down my throat to enjoy it.

Originally Posted by Sijik

...then read a good novel so you'll get an actually engaging and interesting story if you aren't able or willing to use your imagination toward that end within a given world to create one for yourself.

Now that's a contradiction right there. Every novel has a story, but some (if not most) have an opened ending for the reader to finish the way he sees fit. If you didn't care for someone else's story in the first place, you wouldn't read any novels. And I wouldn't use my imagination to create a world when I'm already presented with one. That would change the whole point of the game/novel. But anyway, why the hell did you compare games to novels? You can't play novels and you can't read games. You can experience both though, but not in the same way so they aren't compatible for comparison.

Maybe you should play some Silent Hill and then talk about what I expect from a game or not. Silent Hill has a deep story in every sequel and there's more on the internet if one's interested. The fact is, the way they present the story and history of SH is what moved people. In GoW, there's no such thing and if you can't realize that I'm sorry for you. I am not playing games just to watch a building and imagine something that it isn't there to satisfy my needs and expectations. I want to see someone else's creativity, because that's the way the author wanted it to be. But I don't expect you to understand any of that.