Metareview - Gears of War (Xbox 360)
by Blake Snow 
{ Nov 7th 2006 at 1:45PM }
Positive review scores; Epic's Gears of War for the 360 is getting them in spades, and not just with the early birds. The game is being pitched as a tactical action/survival horror third-person shooter heavy on the co-operative side. Oh, and from what the reviews have implied, you've never seen better console graphics before. With a current average review of 95/100, here is some launch day praise for the game:- DailyGame (90/100): "It's not nearly as epic as we would have liked, but the gameplay provides some fantastic moments and introduces some new aspects to a mainstream shooter. The graphics and online co-op are simply phenomenal."
- IGN (94/100): "There is a healthy learning curve to the cover system, but those who master it will find Epic's twisting and turning and rolling an exciting change-up in the shooter genre, a blend of fast-arcade action and basic, tactical maneuvering. The Insane difficulty level gives Gears legs months after you've finished the relatively-short campaign, and even with a friend it is an impossible, irresistible challenge."
- Game Informer (95/100): "This is one of the best co-op games I have played, especially when you crank the difficulty past Casual and up into the Hardcore and Insane levels. Working with your buddy to flank and outwit the enemy is a blast."
- 1UP (100/100): "Each stage is memorable...They all combine for an unforgettable adventure through 36 hectic, desperate hours of a group of soldiers' lives...A visual and visceral masterpiece."
[Thanks to all who requested our copy and paste skills!]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
thrall @ Nov 7th 2006 1:49PM
PC VERSION PLEASE!
Epic seriously needs to bring a game with Unreal 3 engine to PC!!
Nick @ Nov 7th 2006 1:51PM
Gears of War!!!
Meh @ Nov 7th 2006 1:51PM
Sounding superb but I recall similar reviews about Halo 2. I found that to be a dull experience other then online.
daver @ Nov 7th 2006 1:53PM
93/100 and falling on metacritic actually.
Should settle high 80's. Maybe 87.
BB @ Nov 7th 2006 1:55PM
Wow...I really can't wait to pick up my copy from Gamestop later today. I was thinking about making a review for my blog, but what's the use, there are so many reviews out there, one more won't make a difference (unless I find something really wrong about the game)
Unimental @ Nov 7th 2006 1:58PM
This one's going to be so much fun to play through online with friends. The co-op experience is getting a resounding thumbs up... fantastic news!
RoroCo @ Nov 7th 2006 2:01PM
Gamespot gave GoW a hirer score than IGN???? Wow... pigs must be flying or this game is really that good...
VampireHunter Z @ Nov 7th 2006 2:02PM
Just picked up mine. Didn't know the lines would be so long. I didn't think that many people preordered but I was wrong. Can't wait until later when I get home from work to cap some fools.
derrick @ Nov 7th 2006 2:03PM
I went to my local Toys R Us at lunch to pick up a copy and they didn't have any. Not that they were sold out but they hadn't gotten any. Both GoW and CoD3 weren't in stock and were only expected sometime within the next two weeks.
Todd H. @ Nov 7th 2006 2:02PM
Can't wait to pick this up tomorrow at GameStop. Anyone getting there copy today?
Todd
http://www.proxbox360.com
Tom @ Nov 7th 2006 2:06PM
I have to say even though GoW looks fantastic I don't like it getting scores that high. The voice work in all the videos I have seen is awful and the character design is just horrible. It reminds me of a spoof Jhonen Vasquez did of your typical action hero. The characters just look stupid. Maybe the actual game builds a really clever plot and has brilliant character development but I just can't see that being too likely.
Im more inclined to agree with the reviews around 90% than 100% (which is just stupid, 100% should be perfect in every single way)
Coggie @ Nov 7th 2006 2:07PM
LOL, Sony and the PS3 FanBoys will not like this..... Nice Work!
gamerx @ Nov 7th 2006 2:08PM
Another great reason to own the 360, along with movie and TV downloads!
This gen its Wii-360-DS Combo for me.
Batman6288 @ Nov 7th 2006 2:09PM
for probably being the only person that does know much about this game... is their any multi-player on this game ? ? ? i know there is on-line co-op... but i really like mutli-player.
Daniel @ Nov 7th 2006 2:10PM
I've been playing this since last night ;) And it truly is as good as the reviews are showing.
In response to Meh, I felt the exact same way as you about Halo 2, and this is in my opinion a much better single player experience as Halo 2. PLUS, GoW has online co-op - a glaring omission from Halo 2.
One more thing - I really enjoy Halo 2 multiplayer, and I could honestly see GoW multiplayer taking it over in terms of fun. I was having a blast playing it online last night. It really is the shiznit.
> @ Nov 7th 2006 2:11PM
"The voice work in all the videos I have seen is awful and the character design is just horrible. It reminds me of a spoof Jhonen Vasquez did of your typical action hero. The characters just look stupid. Maybe the actual game builds a really clever plot and has brilliant character development but I just can't see that being too likely."
It suits the demographic just fine; kinda like how JRPGs are full of pasty-skin, androgeneous characters with pointy ears.
Pete C @ Nov 7th 2006 2:12PM
"Should settle high 80's. Maybe 87."
Why do you say that? Why should the scores get lower over time?
DG @ Nov 7th 2006 2:13PM
And I thought grade inflation was bad at school. I remember when it was rare for a game to receive a 9.5 out of a 10.0 scale. But a perfect 100? 1UP can find absolutely zero flaws in this game? I find that very hard to believe.
Guitar Hero 2, also, was given a perfect 100. Amazing.
For what it's worth, I can think of only a very small handful games I would actually consider perfect, and fancy shooters/gimmick controller games wouldn't be there.
nootau @ Nov 7th 2006 3:02PM
Welp, now i guess we wait for that "Super Boost in sales" that every fanboy was screaming lol
Actually, personally, i wont be waiting...i'll be playing Gears, Vegas and call of duty 3... lol
Austin @ Nov 7th 2006 2:23PM
Gamestop had the nerve to ask me to preorder Halo when i was there. The line was long but i got it without a preorder. F U gamestop.
epluribus @ Nov 7th 2006 2:23PM
More Blake Snow cheerleading for the 360 - Woo hoo!
Javi @ Nov 7th 2006 2:25PM
1UP = 1Down -- This just proves that 1UP is getting paid or at least free stuff from some people.
It's a fine game but not 100. Yeah, I'm talking to the fanboys
Nossy @ Nov 7th 2006 2:28PM
Modern day version of Contra in 3D I presume? I'll pick it up after work.
boy @ Nov 7th 2006 2:31PM
HOW is anyone getting the game today? I was told it would be available but all local stores in Portland, regon have not gotten it yet....WTF? Store manager at EB Games in Pioneer Place, Portland Oregon ASSURED me they would have it today and now they do not....thanks for wasting a day of wages for me! I took a day off of work for NOTHING! GRRRR.
Captain Awesome @ Nov 7th 2006 2:32PM
i went to 6 stores In Michigan, Eb games, game stop, another Game Stop, Best buy, Target, And C-City.... They all had them in stock but would not sell them until tomorrow- all cited today (the 7th) as the "ship date". WTF. I want this game NOW.
Rask @ Nov 7th 2006 2:34PM
@daver - Some of those 8/10's are reviewing only the single player portion of the game. (Eurogamer admits as much and will be re-reviewing the multiplayer next week when they get a full copy of the game)
Getting my copy tomorrow and I can't wait.
iceclimber @ Nov 7th 2006 2:34PM
Granted, the game is getting awesome reviews:
http://www.gamelemons.com/xbox_360/reviews/2006/11/gears_of_war.php
But I'm still a bit skeptical of the 3rd person control scheme. I remember Brute Force on the original Xbox, which promised to be this innovative squad based shooter. I got all excited, but ended up hating the way that game handled 3rd person, and the play mechanics just sucked.
Here's to hoping GOW is as good as they're saying.
crono141 @ Nov 7th 2006 2:42PM
today brings 2 more reasons to own a 360. I need just one more, smaller, cooler cores (65nm), and maybe a bigger harddrive.
jharr @ Nov 7th 2006 2:35PM
Only two gamestops in Phoenix are getting them today. Every other store in the area doesn't have it and won't until tomorrow. i am picking it up after work at Gamestop.
Scott @ Nov 7th 2006 2:35PM
Captain Awesome,
What cities were those stores in?
dubz @ Nov 7th 2006 2:35PM
To number 11....
This is a game not a movie. Plot and character developement? I'm so sick of people wanting games to be movies or novels. It's all about the gameplay folks...got it?
Captain Awesome @ Nov 7th 2006 2:37PM
Lansing and East lansing
Coggie @ Nov 7th 2006 2:38PM
PS3 FanBoys are spitting there dummies out!
Can you guys just say that its a good game and get over it. I would about a good PS3 Game, Just waiting for one to come out..! LOL
Dirk Dorkelson @ Nov 7th 2006 2:42PM
DG,
I don't think most people understand 100 to be "perfect." If you look at most publications' rating scales, none of them mention "perfect" anywhere in the explainer text. Obviously, it is the highest score a game can receive, but if it were really "perfect," the highest score a game could receive would be somewhere in the 90s. You can find at least a half-dozen faults with any game. If perfection was the criterion, what would be the point of even having a 100-point scale? These are handy signposts for readers; they're not grades in school.
Flit @ Nov 7th 2006 2:42PM
@30: TOTALLY AGREE
Everyone Hails RE4 as one of the greatest games of recent history, with it's 3rd person control scheme and boring story (it was, admit it, zombie plague? come on, real original story), it was the major inspiration for CliffyB to make Gears of War. Nobody complained about RE4's 3rd person view, i'm sure the same goes for this game. SOO many of you are Sony fanboys who want this game to fail. Honestly, it's a game, try it before you cry about how much it sucks. You complain about people Harping on Final Fantasy without playing it for 10 hours, try playing GOW for 10 hours before you do the same.
rulyblue @ Nov 7th 2006 2:42PM
IGN said it's a short campaign, but 1UP details that the game sports 36 hours of shoo-em-up fun. Which is it?
crono141 @ Nov 7th 2006 2:56PM
Man, I'm like 7:30 hours in (FFXII) and I'm only out of the 1st set of dungeons.
zer06ame @ Nov 7th 2006 2:49PM
Captain Awesome: Same here, I went to four different stores in Farmington Hills/Novi, MI and they all refused to sell it until tomorrow. The Gamestops said official release date was the 8th and they weren't going to break it. You can't find GoW, CoD3, or THProj8 anywhere around here, all being released tomorrow. Damn it.
Intentless @ Nov 7th 2006 2:51PM
stories are more than just the overview... Yes RE4 is a zombie plaque issue but what happens is the story... Princess in distress is the main idea but there is still more involved with Zelda than that... Killzone is planet invasion but there is a lot more to it than that... I'm sorry I'm getting a little too upset over someone saying that RE4 had a "boring story." To say RE4 is just about a zombie plaque would be like saying The Lord of the Rings was simply a story about some midgets throwing a ring in a fire...
Keeko_ca @ Nov 7th 2006 2:50PM
But wait...
What does Sony have to say about this game? I find Sony's opinions of what Microsoft is doing with the 360, ultra informative.
eM @ Nov 7th 2006 2:53PM
These high scores and the NWN2 debacle lead me to wonder: Should genre-games be rated differently than more general-appeal games? More specifically, should they even be rated on the same scale?
For example, let's say Madden 2008 [somehow] turns out to be an absolutely flawless football game. Is it fair for reviewers give it 100%s (or close enough) across the board, making it "THE best game ever" (by the Metacritic/GameRankings) approach, even though most gamers couldn't care less about it? What does that score really mean?
Feel free to replace Madden with GoW or WoW or NetHack or whatever genre-piece you wish; the question still stands.
Intentless @ Nov 7th 2006 2:53PM
unoriginal and boring are two different concepts... you can always say something is based on something else. There is always something older that already covered the idea. Stories of monsters have been around since the beginning of time. Aliens are monsters just not from under your bed...
ts8lemonade @ Nov 7th 2006 2:55PM
rulyblue, I think what they meant was the span of time you play in the game takes place in 36 hours. So you play for as Marcus in his life for 36 hours of his life. The whole game takes place in the span of 1.5 days, game time. Whereas the actual length of the game from what I've been reading is relatively short, which is sad I was hoping around 30 hours or so 20 being the very least. Get it now?
PS: Sorry if this comment got posted twice Firefox has been acting weird lately.
lupos @ Nov 7th 2006 2:57PM
@33
36 hours in a soldiers life. the story occurs in a 36 hour period. They didnt say the game was actually 36 hours long.
I for one am greatfull. Having a girl friend a and a job and freelance work to deal with i never get to finish epic games any more (no pun intended).
Intentless @ Nov 7th 2006 3:00PM
a good time frame for an FPS or general "twitch" game is 10-12 hours... imo... RPGs 20-50 depending on if it can keep my interest with plot. 100 hour RPGs are great but I imagine there are not too many individuals that can stomach playing that same game for so long...
chimp o death @ Nov 7th 2006 3:05PM
To #18 and #22:
If you read the actual reviews (especialy 1up) no one says that this game is PERFECT. Hsu starts his review by listing what's WRONG with the game, and it's not a small list either. But he goes on to explain that his score reflects the total ammount of fun and enjoyment that he got out of the game.
It's a similar situation to the GTA series' high scores. Bad targeting $ other control issues, whack missions, etc. Everyone admits this, but usualy will give GTA games a high score based on the fact that they're so much fun overall.
But it seems that the overall consensus in the gaming community is that the game has more or less delivered on the hype, crafting a game that has scored 90+ from most major outlets and not less than 80 everywhere else. Even the "bad" reviews are quite good, with most complaints being that the actual gameplay isn't completely revolutionary.
So let's summarize what I've learned in the review:
*Many have called this the best looking console game, not only of the year but "ever". Sure, the PS3 isn't out yet, but at least the bar is set pretty high.
*The game is not another Brute Force. And it's supposedly way better than kill.switch.
*Very few technical issues. VERY FEW frame rate or texture complaints.
*Difficulty levels may have needed tweaking, although opinions do vary. Difficult can be changed when you load your saves if you want to change up.
*Single player has decent replay value with the different difficulty levels, and especially the same-system, linked or online co-op. Online co-op opens up new areas for the second player.
*AI, especially on the higher dificulty is quite good. Occasional issues, but not many.
*Story included in-game is passable, most wanted more. Voice acting can be dicey, but some actually liked it.
*Multiplayer is a solid and engaging experience at (yes) 8 players.
*Almost all of the reviews emphasize how much fun the game is. All other issues aside, the fun factor for most is through the roof.
Now, I'm sure we'll see a few reviews that'll drag the average down. Some will hate the idea of Gears. Some don't like shooters much. Some won't like the fact that after the hype the game is a complete revolution (not that anyone following colsey expected that). And even though the overall opion seems fanboy proof (i.e. nothing really wrong with the game), some will bash the crap out of it on general principles.
Chalk up a win for Microsoft and Epic, so far. Only a week or so untill we start seeing the Resistance:FOM revies and the inevitable comparisions. For the record, I think that game looks great right now, in terms of graphics and gameplay. Insomniac hasn't really let us down yet, and I don't think they will this time.
But as a 360 owner, it sure is nice to finaly play Gears (tomorrow for me, sigh), and have it live up to expectations.
TwilightKnight @ Nov 7th 2006 3:05PM
Hey, captain obvious lives pretty much exactly near me. I love how we have that dense collection of stores just a few miles from MSU. Will make it real easy to get a Wii.
These reviews are what I expected. All of the major review sites tend to agree with each other, yet they are all way too high up on the grading scale. One of these days someone needs to figure out a bias constant to multiple onto gaming scores to get a better understanding of what the game actually is.
Lefty @ Nov 7th 2006 3:08PM
this game is 8-10 hrs on easy. its much much harder on hardcore and dran near impoosible with out a good co-op partner on insane. thats fromt he reviews. on hardcore the game is 10-12 hrs even longer. thats the avg length for a shooter. halo 2 was 8 hrs on normal for me and my daughter beat it in a lil over 20 hrs on normal over a 3 day period (i regulate how long she can play a video game cause hse is young and all)
the key si this game has tons of replay ability. many say as soon as you beat it your ready to play it again.
on that note just finished Fear and must say that is a game that got forgotten about cause ot was a year old port but its a very good game as well.
and to the haters eithe ryou play it and decide for yourself or you continue to hate. Any one who has played it sayus it lives up to the hype. its a good game that simple. Not perfect but a fun enjoyable game that you can enjoy many ways. and the realtime co-op over live makes it that much better.
and my gamestop in Northern Va said i can pick it up when they open in the morning. how they torture me so
rulyblue @ Nov 7th 2006 3:08PM
Thanks lupos and lemonaid!
daver @ Nov 7th 2006 3:09PM
Scores generally go down because people have more time with the game and find more flaws in the design etc. The reviews that were posted the minute the embargo went down were the hyperbole reviews, the gushing omg chumps like the guy from 1up.
Now that guy is entitled to his opinion just like the rest of us but in saying that 1up took down a review last week because the developers complained (i'm specualating )so they didnt respect that reveiwers opinion enough etc .. . . . . .
No game with flaws should get a 10. NO GAME. No game that does not bring something new to the table should get a 10. No game should get a 10 based on eye candy alone. The trend of giving beautiful looking games high marks will cause a disaster in the merit of reviewing as time goes by because all games will look like the best game ever etc.
The one player game in G Of War is 8 to 10 hours long ! That is not very lengthy.