Gears of War wins another "game of the year" award
Gears of War took home another "game of the year" award, this time courtesy of GameDaily (who is also owned by AOL, Joystiq's parent company). The shooter edged out -- you guessed it -- Zelda: Twilight Princess (Wii) in addition to Guitar Hero II (PS2) for the honor. So as of right now, if GameDaily, Gamespot, and Next-Gen were all movie trailer voice actors, they would probably sound something like this (in a deep, overly-dramatic tone of course): "If you only play one game this year, play Gears of War!!!"
[Thanks, Dan]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Mikami @ Dec 28th 2006 7:45AM
Well, that would be all well and good if it wasn't so glitchy in the MP department. Rainbow Six: Vegas gets a patch for mic errors, but Gears doesn't?
Not to mention the amount of little 'cheats' that allow people to literally become invincible.
I'm sadly still in love with the game, though.
Mikami [ Gamertag: Argh No
FSK405K @ Dec 28th 2006 7:50AM
Not to mention Oblivion!
Brian J. Bouton @ Dec 28th 2006 7:58AM
The amazing thing about Gears is that even with the glitchy multiplayer; the single-player and co-op blow any other game out of the water by themselves. Let's pray other developers copy the co-op and make it a basic feature in all future games.
Brian (the REAL Brian) @ Dec 28th 2006 8:27AM
I hate how people say Gears' controls "rip off" RE4. That's exactly what SHOULD be happening. RE4 invented a fun way to play a shooting game, Gears' just made it work in a faster environment, which turns out is more fun.
hochiminh @ Dec 28th 2006 9:19AM
gears won game of the year? wow.... what a lame game.
after playing it for a week (15 hours) i managed to beat all 3 campaign settings. all of them were too easy, the multiplayer sucks. the online is horrible, (hard to get a game, w/o losing connection to the host.)this game got boring really quick, i wish i wouldve rented it instead of giving them my 60$. if you wanna play a real game, play Resistance: Fall of Man.
tituspullo @ Dec 28th 2006 9:24AM
no 5
your conection must be horrible. i manage to get into game after game after game with no problem at all.
don't hate becuase gears won another Game of the year. i'm sure one day sony will win an award.
Jedijoe9 @ Dec 28th 2006 9:29AM
After playing for only a few days, I am inclined to agree. It's just such an amazing experience. I haven't had this much fun with a video game for a long time. My heart stops every time I go into a "roadie run" while trying to get to cover in time.
As for Resistance, I played it and it just seemed like a nice looking FPS. I didn't really find anything spectacular about it.
hochiminh @ Dec 28th 2006 9:38AM
I must admit though, im more of a ps3 person, but even my friend who only owns the 360 thinks it was a waste of 60$. He also, has the same problem i do with the losing connection to the host. Obviously its NOT just my connection.
LMAO @ Dec 28th 2006 9:40AM
I do believe Gears didn't deserve my $60, since it has such a short campaign (So was the other GOW title for the PS2 which won numerous awards and was at best 8 hours). I say this because CliffyB and MS made such a big deal that the game is campaign driven and not MP driven (When it turned out the opposite). The co-op play is pretty fun. Hopefully Epic pump out downloadable contents (and hopefully they're not already on the disc)
Feels like a Contra in 3D.
HardScores @ Dec 28th 2006 9:49AM
I don't really enjoy games you can beat in two days. I'm extremely glad I rented it. And for everyone who said it was so new and innovative:
GRAW.
Wait, scratch that. How about f'n Kill.switch.
GoW would be innovative if it was released 4 years ago.
samfish @ Dec 28th 2006 10:07AM
Monkey LIKE shiney graphics!
*clap clap clap clap!*
Thryon @ Dec 28th 2006 10:39AM
I think this title is well deserved. In my gaming club, everyone has Gears of War. That is all we played for the first month after it was released.
hochiminh you managed to beat all 3 campains in 15 hours, how bout sending me your gamertag so you can help me finish it in Insane, as we experienced gamers still have not completed it in insane (actually we do keep starting over alot).Since you are such an ubergamer, you could kill the last guy all by yourself, and I will sit back and get the achievement.
Game of the year title should go to the game that most people think is the best, or one of the best games of the year, and given that out of my group of 11 members of our gaming club, 10 would say it is the best game of the year, then who can agree (I am the lone holdout, giving the nod to Dead Rising instead).
devi8i @ Dec 28th 2006 11:07AM
I enjoyed the hell out of Gears of War....was it short? Yes...is teh multiplayer innovative? No. But i havent had as much fun playing co-op since Serious Sam on the PC. Gears is a great game to pick up for an hour or so and have a lot of fun just killing stuff.
Personally I feel game of teh year awards should go to games that do something to push the envelope. Something that hasnt been done before in that genre and executes it very well. Or a game that creates a new game category. Does Gears do this, no. Is it fun as hell? you better believe it. If this game was released on another platform like the original xbox or ps2 it would still be fun as hell to play.
On teh harder settings it is really hard for me to even notice the great visuals because I am so engrossed in trying to not get killed.
J @ Dec 28th 2006 11:26AM
Wow...a 10 hour game deserves game of the year? I beat this so fast I couldnt even finish my Dr. Pepper I was drinking. I cant argue with the gameplay and the graphics but damn, it was more like a demo with multiplayer. My vote is a tie between Twilight Princess and FFXII. Now these two games have substance. Try beating one of those in 10 hours.
Jason @ Dec 28th 2006 11:29AM
after halo2, it's REALLY hard not to be at least a little disappointed with Gears.
Sure, it's pretty but I get excited by great gameplay and solid multiplayer lobby design and this game does fine in the gameplay department but the multiplayer...
come on...MechAssault had more exciting multiplayer...
def PD @ Dec 28th 2006 11:32AM
My vote for GotY is for Okami.
The single/co-op playing was fun, as is the multiplayer, but seriously, if it weren't for the ridiculously good-looking graphics the game wouldn't be all that. Riddle me this Batman, if this game had come out on the original Xbox (or any other platform), and EVERYTHING was the same, except the graphics, would everyone still be saying this is GotY material?
Agent MOO @ Dec 28th 2006 11:36AM
I've got GOW and Zelda:TP and I haven't been able to pull myself away from zelda.
Gears is more of the same shooter with a nameless race of enemies invading earth. Every level is the same grey mess of destroyed buildings.
Everyone bitches about the Wii graphics, but the visuals have so much charm and creativity.
Big beN @ Dec 28th 2006 11:45AM
I'm tired to see that the reviewers in nowdays, just pick graphics to rate a game.
That's the only reason why Gears of War won so many "Game of the year" titles.
Imagine the same game, but with Current gen graphics... I'm not sure it would have won the title...
SHAME ON YOU REVIEWERS "POST SNES ERA" ( it's reaaly that PlayStaion which mess up everything... That "Graphics or Nothing" thing )
Pete C @ Dec 28th 2006 11:47AM
WTF #5? You did not beat all 3 campaigns in 15 hours. That is a flat-out lie.
Brian @ Dec 28th 2006 11:53AM
I have both GOW and Zelda...
You have to be quite the hater to say that GOW on co-op is not one of the most exciting experiences on any console whatsoever. And it's funny to see how many people are citing Halo 2 as fantastic, at least as far as the campaign, because everybody was bitching that it was too short and the story cut off with no resolution. The MP on Halo 2 has definitely held up with no argument, though. GOW is the co-op achievement of the year hands down.
Zelda...overhyped and derivative of Ocarina, my favorite Nintendo game of all time. If this game wasn't "Zelda", game sites would be ripping it apart for the simplistic gameplay (all the enemies and bosses are ridiculously easy), pretty but hollow game world, and cut and paste elements from Ocarina.
I was so excited about the Wii controls in the game, but it's pretty tame and the sword swinging is largely unnecessary.
Hyrule field is a huge joke where you wander around and find nothing of interesting---this goes for most of the large areas in the game, too. And the rupee system is entirely broken since you will hear over and over "you found a 100 rupee" followed by "but your purse is full so let's put it back."
I'm no uber gamer, but I've beaten every boss in the first encounter. And none of the bosses so far have the imagination of Ocarina.
There just isn't enough to do in this game except follow the linear storyline. Don't respond with poe souls, bug collecting, or fishing since those are all interesting for the span of about an hour or two.
The biggest challenge in the game is trying to find where go next at some parts since your guide is of little help.
glitched @ Dec 28th 2006 11:54AM
I got the game and a 360 xmas eve, It was cool, and a good game, but I felt it was over-hyped and definately not GOTY worthy. I had more fun with the prey demo I downloaded, and seemed to find myself going back to playing ps2 and gamecube over the break as well (ff12, zelda, and GT)
Silver @ Dec 28th 2006 11:57AM
"I beat this so fast I couldnt even finish my Dr. Pepper I was drinking."
Yes, but it has chain saws. CHAIN SAWS!!! Now THAT'S innovation, Microsoft style!
Zelda kicks GoW's trash to the curb for creativity and depth of gameplay.
Space rangers. Alien invaders. Chain saws. I've played GoW about a million times before. Of course the games had different titles...
Shooter game fans are too easily impressed.
Agent MOO @ Dec 28th 2006 12:08PM
Doom had chainsaws, quasi-military protagonists, and humanoid monsters well over 10 years ago...
ihavenoideawhatisgoingon @ Dec 28th 2006 12:59PM
i'm surprised that nobody has mentioned the active reload. I've played many games, and haven't been able to do that. Now that's what I look for when I'm reloading on any other game...except it's not there, and I get sad. And I've never played shoooter type MP game where I can revive my friend when he's down. That's pretty innovative, and requires extensive teamwork.
Gears deserves all the credit it gets. Is it GOtY worthy. From the games I've played, yes. But I haven't played anything that was on the PS2 or gamecube, so I guess I wouldn't really know!
Ironhide Delta @ Dec 28th 2006 1:00PM
Sadly people are so blinded by shiny graphics that they fail to see exactly what lies underneath that spitshine exterior.
Real time lighting that plays a heavy role in various senarios.
A cover system that actually works which complements the overall gameplay rather than being the overall gameplay (Kill.Switch anyone?).
Strategy based enemies like the Berserker and the giant borrowing beetle thing that you can't just shoot to kill. Luring the Berserker through door after door to get it into the daylight makes for intense moments.
Extremely well designed co-op mode. This alone is worth the price of admission. Shades of Halo 2 co-op but with a beefier interaction between players. You really feel like you're covering your comrade in arms.
Ah but then again it's all been done before. Nothing innovative here at all then!
Folks, just take your attitude towards people down a notch. Yes the graphics are georgous, but there is oh so much more under that shiny coat of paint.
Mike @ Dec 28th 2006 1:42PM
wow most of u here SUCK MAJOR ASS now wii ps3 fans saying i have it..it sucks. Yo this game is the shit it has the best gameplay this year and great graphics. It is also very inavative. Also for sum of the wii fans out there zelda is clay akin dressed up the games on it are gay and ur gona get bored very soon playin those games and lookin like an ass hole through ur window. PS3 sadly there is alot of shit goin on with u but ill leave u alone
Silver @ Dec 28th 2006 1:46PM
"And I've never played shoooter type MP game where I can revive my friend when he's down. That's pretty innovative, and requires extensive teamwork."
Huh? Guess you've never played any of the WWII shooters where you can be a medic then...
dauthi @ Dec 28th 2006 2:26PM
definite heavy ps3/wii fanboy presence here that haven't even played the game yet :\... oh well
Jake @ Dec 28th 2006 3:03PM
The negativity here smells like envy. There wouldn't be any PS3/Wii fanboys out there that deep down feel like they are missing out on an awesome gaming experience, would there?
I mean, I know about 12 people who have played this game a good amount and responses range from awesome to best game ever.
And what's with all the people saying Gears "has totally been done before". I mean, could your envy and fanboyism be any more obvious? The comment is so far from reality you could just as well say "Gears graphics could have been done on N64"
joeybliley @ Dec 28th 2006 3:14PM
@16
I agree with Okami was a terrific game. And for those who only find value in long games, it was certainly that (50+ hours, almost none of it tedious).
But putting aside the question of whether Okami or GoW is better, you asked if "EVERYTHING was the same, except the graphics, would everyone still be saying this is GotY material?"
Well, probably not. But why is that a problem? Looks matter. I mean, take a $200K Ferrari that is gorgeous but also tears up the road, and it wins Car of the Year. What if you made a $200K Ford Taurus that was every bit as fast and cornered just as well, but it looked like a Ford Taurus? Would it win Car of the Year?
Or take two girls, with similar education, sense of humor, social graces, etc, but one is really average and the other is smoking hot. Which one will be prom queen? One guess.
I guess my point here is that while looks (graphics) are not enough to make a great game in their own right, as long as you have substance as well--and granted, part of the debate here is that some feel Gears is lacking in substance, although I disagree--then good looks are part of the complete package that takes what would otherwise be a "good effort" and makes it superlative.
Maylon @ Dec 28th 2006 4:39PM
A very very tired argument from most of the GOW haters. Don't any of you realize how pointless it is to argue taste?
hochiminh @ Dec 28th 2006 5:33PM
why does everyone think 15 hours is fake? the game is so easy, and after you play it on the first 2 campaigns you know exactly what do in INSANE, insane like all of the others, is still easy. whats is a gaming club? and 11 out of 10 people saying that gears of war should win game of the year IS the flat-out lie. All of my friends that own it/ play it. are leaning torwards zelda or guitar hero for GotY, but whatever. Maybe since some of you guys are 360 fanboys you wouldnt relise that.
hochiminh @ Dec 28th 2006 5:33PM
and to "24" active reload? why could you miss it? it's never been in a game before. and why should it be? i mean sure in real life you dont reload the same speed every time, but if ur a trained soldier im pretty sure you wouldn't mess up. (ur life depends on it.) and for everyone thats senses the presence of fanboyism of the ps3 and wii. i will agree. i prefer my ps3 to the other 2 systems, but i own all three, there hasnt been a good game for 360 yet other than Condemed. GoW wasnt innovative. and thank god im not the only one who thinks this way. sure the game had good graphics. but it was M$, i mean cmon i wonder how much $$ they put into it. well see who wins GotY next year, my money is going with assassin's creed. (ps3 & xbox game) (sry wii)
Autocrawler @ Dec 28th 2006 5:42PM
GOW is not innovative. Personally I believe the only reason it won the GOTY award is the hype. It is still very fun to play though, and the graphics are stellar.
"And I've never played shoooter type MP game where I can revive my friend when he's down. That's pretty innovative, and requires extensive teamwork."
LOL
http://wiki.bf2s.com/weapons/tools/defibrillator
devi8i @ Dec 28th 2006 6:12PM
prom queen FTW!
Thryon @ Dec 28th 2006 7:40PM
@ hochiminh
I run my own gaming club, where all members love games. Not just Xbox 360 games, but all games. While we do all own the Xbox 360, every member plays on other platforms as well, including the Wii, but mostly PC gaming.
Yes 10 of our direct members think that GOW is the best game ever....for any platform. I love GoW, but prefere Dead Rising.
the reason I find 15 hours to complete the game on casual, then hardcore, then insane not plausible comes from our own experience. Casual will take you about 1 hours per act, Hardcaore about 1.5 hours per act, and insane at least 2 hours per act, as you cannot just rush in like you can on Casual. Add that together and you have at minumum 22.5 hours of playing...given that you know all about the game, and manage to close most emergence holes as they appear. Even most reviewers indicated 6 hours to complete casula, and about 10-12 to complet insane....what happened to hardcore.So what is your gamertag so we can see if you actualy got the acheivements for GoW. No need to brag if you cannot prove it. Since it only took 15 hours, we should see all the achievemts for the same day, or at most, oever two days.
Shmil @ Dec 29th 2006 3:11AM
To everyone claiming that GoW sucks because you can finish the campaign in two days: Campaign isn't the only thing that should be considered. The multiplayer is the real reason to buy the game, hell the 360 would be nothing without XBL
To everyone complaining that GoW won because of its graphics: you're complaining that the gameplay should be considered...have you even played the game? Its a hell of a fun game, its something different from your standard counterstrike two shots you're dead game, or your Halo FPS typical shooter fighting aliens. it combines them well, if the game had "old gen" graphics it would still be a contender just because of fun gameplay
and finally to everyone saying Zelda should have won: Zelda is a lot of fun, i've just about finished the story, i've put over 30 hours into it and i can say its a wonderful game that plays very well. It's just that every Zelda is the fucking same you start off in a village, some shit goes down, you gotta go collect 3 things from some temples, you finish those 3 temples you get your new items then OH SHIT some more shit goes down now you've gotta go get the Master Sword, so now you either have to go repair the master sword, or you've got to collect a few more fragment or jewels or something, so you go do that, then you go fight Ganondorf and then Ganondorf transforms into Ganon, all the Zelda games are great, they aren't so much action as they are puzzle solving, its just we've played the same game for years now, its a good recipe for success and it will sell and play very well for every new version, but gears was just a fantastic looking game that requires online play to truly experience all of the gameplay
Finn @ Dec 29th 2006 9:35AM
"The negativity here smells like envy. There wouldn't be any PS3/Wii fanboys out there that deep down feel like they are missing out on an awesome gaming experience, would there?"
sigh,
you know I bought GOW a week before the wii came out, and played Gears everyday up until I put Zelda in. And after that I forgot about Gears and didn't come back to it once. In fact the thought never even crossed my mind. It's not that Gears is bad mind you I LOVEEEEE GoW, but active reload is really the only inovative thing in the game... everything else is just a perfection of a concept from some other game.
I'd say the campaign in Gears is good twice, once by yourself and once in co-op mode. And I've had lots of problems with the multi as well, so it's not just the few above me. I get no such problem when I play COD2, but Gears multi doesnt work right for me (and is limited anyway)
Zelda on the other hand is certainly NOT just another ocarina of time. It's one and only downfault is the lack of difficult bosses, but honestly that didn't make them any less FUN to fight. I'm not going to go into all the new things that are in this Zelda that arn't in any other one because that would take me a while. But I will say that anybody who thinks this is the same old same old Zelda clearly hasn't played through it any more than 2-3 hours.
In fact, has anybody ever felt like ANY Zelda was just another Zelda game... other than some of the handheld stuff each game always feels completly different to me. I assume that once somebody plays all the way through TP, then ocarina, the'll relize how HUGELY different they really are.
Ken Kutaragi @ Dec 29th 2006 10:12AM
HA HA!!!
"But, but, but what about resistance" $600 wasted!
http://img143.imageshack.us/img143/5665/fanboy1lu7.jpg
Go play your PS3s and get booted offline and your saved games corrupted on a system that can't scale you Sony suckers.
And for the Wii kids - not in the same league!
hochiminh @ Dec 29th 2006 11:48AM
i also tend to belive that EPIC and M$ didnt want to make GoW longer, because they wouldve had to use more than one disc. That right there wouldve been the first weakness in which sony could bask in glory with the 50gb blu ray :)
hochiminh @ Dec 29th 2006 11:48AM
wow... i said 15 hours over a week, there is no way they could be on the same day. your just jelous that a 15 year old kid can be good at a video game, its not hard at all. IF you know how to play a shooting game you relise things are easier to kill that expected, even though it may take a clip to kill each Locust, they are pretty dump, its alot easier to run up and chain saw them down. and whats witht he hating of the ps3? that right there is jelousy. seeing as other Xbox fans also agree with me that GoW isnt GOTY material.
Thryon @ Dec 29th 2006 12:17PM
@hochiminh
Still waiting for your gamertag to prove your claims. Actualy there is one listed under "hochiminh" with 0 points, so this would indicated the gamertag has been registered but you either are not connected to Live with your console, or you do not own a console and just got busted. End this debate will ya, and give us your gamertag....unless you have something to hide.
Zack @ Dec 29th 2006 1:59PM
"i also tend to belive that EPIC and M$ didnt want to make GoW longer, because they wouldve had to use more than one disc. That right there wouldve been the first weakness in which sony could bask in glory with the 50gb blu ray :)"
Your blatant fanboyism is showing here. The game is short because they ran out of development time; you can tell because one of the big monsters in the game is never fought, while you fight a Berserker twice. They didn't have time to put in the other boss, so they just subbed a berserker.
DVD's are extremely, extremely cheap to produce, ESPECIALLY compared to Blu-ray discs. There is no reason that, if they had the content for the game, they would hesitate to split the game across a couple DVD's. The game they took so many ideas from, RE4, did just that, and nobody complained about it.
You can complain about how short you think the game is all you want, but to say it's short because they didn't put it on Blu-ray is nothing short of idiotic.
hochiminh @ Dec 30th 2006 8:01AM
oh yeah did i mention # 43 is a newb? wether or not it's the case of having more discs. IF there were Sony could laugh at the 360 :O, o btw wii sux, i just returned mine. the controllers are either too sensitve or too jerky, waste of 250 :O hope to sell it for 350 infront of target.
hochiminh @ Dec 30th 2006 8:01AM
btw, i wouldn't help you get ur insane achievement because ur a xbox newb. All 3 systems, TWO (wii sux), Xbox has a few good games, but it's taking me a while to think of any of them other than Condemned? anyone wanna gimme a list of the good 360 games?
im thinking:
Condemened
F.E.A.R
Gears of War- dont think its baddd,but not(g00d)GOTY.
Oblivion
Saints Row (was ok, fun to kill people but not a GTA)
thats what came out so far? atleast in my opinion PS3 is looking better, only title i see for xbox is HALO 3.
PS3
MGS4
Killzone
Resistance
FF XIII
Devil May Cry 4
GTA 4
GoW 3 (God of War)
GT 5
Tekken 6
RE 5 (not sure if its multi platform, ive always gotten them for ps.
Ratchet & Clank
Ridge Racer 7.
These are either out or coming out in 2007.
hochiminh @ Dec 30th 2006 8:56AM
"you do not own a console and just got busted. End this debate will ya, and give us your gamertag....unless you have something to hide."
LOL, LOL, LOL, Newb.
smokin @ Jan 2nd 2007 10:38AM
You guys who only rented the game and played the campaign are idiots. And for those of you who lose your connection all the time need to learn how to play the game. When you search for ranked games it brings up a list of games ready to start. If ANY of those games start before you get in there then you can't get in and you "lose your connection" which in reality you waited too long to get into the game. If you attempt to go into a player match that is not ranked I guarentee that you will be able to get into a game. The problem with ranked games is that once the game is started then you can't join. All you morons that play the game for 5 mintues and then quick because you suck need to be a little more patient.