CliffyB: Gears of War 2 co-op will be "bigger and better" etc.

R2 will dominate GOW 2 in every possible way. Book it

i love how people just compare bullet points without taking GAMEPLAY into consideration. seriously, gears shits on resistance, even if the graphics are completely equal (which they arent). resistance is a typical fps, gears is the best 3rd person shooter around, with an amazing camera and cover system.

anyway, back to my point..

maybe if they arent including a many player coop mode that would alter the single player experience, they might do.....COUNTER OP.

who remembers perfect dark? good times.

immagine spawning as a locust officer trying to stop 2 other human players. They could implement a scoring system like halo 3's campaign metagame for achievements and unlockables. Do it on a chapter by chapter basis with less health given to locust, and if the locust team kills all the human players and there are no more revives possible, the locust team wins. if the cog team gets through the level they win.

i really dont see how you can compare GOW gameplay-wise to Resistance.

at all.

2 totally different experiences.

Resistance is a pure FPS large-scale FPS experience, gears is more close-combat, brutal 2-man team style.

The only reason people are comparing GOW2 and R2 is because they are supposedly slated to release around the same time, both exclusive, and shooters.

Thats where the similarities end. Pojo and his funny comment, anybody with an ounce of intelligence will tell you Gears2 will rape the shizz outta R2 in sold units in its first week, month and overall.

Hey, all I was doing is commenting on a thread. If you guys are immature enough to bust out the personal slander over an opinion, thats fine with me.

My opinion will be confirmed soon enough

I really liked both GoW and R1 and I have high hopes for both sequels. I agree with those saying that it's hard to compare the two. I am really looking forward to 8-player co-op in R2. I hope Insomniac can pull that off.

@ Embassy

THen why is Shane Kim doing it?

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=140503

Don't be retarded, Gears with big online rooms would be awful. It's a very deliberately paced tactical game and with the ability to stun, down, etc it would just be god-awful with tons of people running around. It's the type of game where by communicating with your teammates you should know where the entire other team is positioned and flanking is meant to be difficult, because its rewards are huge. Having a bunch of people running around that are too many to keep track of is the exact opposite of the way this game is meant to be played.

I was scared to death that they were going to enable 8v8 or 6v6 gameplay for Gears 2 as 4v4 was absolutely PERFECT. We'll see how 5v5 goes, it's close enough that I'm not too worried but I would have rather just left it at 4v4.

cuz those are the 2 "big guns" for the fall, and hes trying to sell systems and games, and frankly, that's his job.

but after that fact, the comparisons end, i think others have pointed that out.

I'd expect more along the lines of 5 players...

Enough with the fanboy stuff indeed. They are different games for different consoles. One is cover and shoot and the other is an FPS. Both will be fun. Lets all just be friends =)

that way they could break out into a game of pick-up basketball if they felt so inclined.

Ill bet some $$$ its 4 player co-op. Fenix and Dom with some missions based on splitting up into groups with a partner each like in the first one, but only this time with 4 co-op players.

Where does anyone get the idea that more players is better? That is whats so unique about Gears, its up close, personal and in your face. Not...die respawn, die respawn, die respawn. End match. You actually make a great effort to stay alive, communicate and help your team win.

I think 20 players in multiplayer is the way to go
more than that is just annoying and laggy.

Well said Fenix, at least somebody gets it. Gears with a ton of players would completely ruin the game.

But, unfortunately most around would rather look at some bullet points on a sheet of paper than actually play the game and think about how that would work with it.

Saying that Gears lacks enough players is just as fanboyishly retarded as saying that the 360 version of GTA4 is graphically superior because it has more pixels when we all know that it has no real world effect. But some hypocrites still choose to castrate people making one of those arguements while joining in with people making the other.

I think 8v8 multiplayer would be great. I hated how matches were so short in the first one. And I think the destructible scenery will really add to the experience too.

Exactly, Chris posted this exact interview basically...

Chris' interview didn't address 4-player co-op specifically. This was CliffyB's nudge-wink answer to whether it would be in the sequel.

If you say something is badass, then the teeny bopper target audience will eat it up in a heartbeat.

Sadly, host advantage will always be a problem to some extent due to Xbox Live's P2P setup...although I will say that it can be lessened if the code is tightened up. Regardless, four-player co-op possibility has me stoked like no other for this game. I still play 2-player co-op with my brother every now and then just because the action is so visceral...it's like playing a cheesy Hollywood blockbuster with some semi-realistic elements thrown in. Bring on the 4-player co-op!

Well, I don't see Halo with host advantage. And even if it does, it's not that big of a problem as it is in gears. Seriously, when I'm host, i shoot someone in the stomach at point blank range and their fucking head explodes.

Yes, it looks awesome, but i pisses people off to the point that they start glitching and use the excuse "I can glitch because your host!" It's ridiculous if you ask me.