StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Irony

EA: 'Gears of War Lacks Innovation' [Uros "2Lions" Jojic]
10:03 am EST @ November 10th, 2006

Listen to this. EA, that's Electronic Arts, folks, is saying that Gears of War lacks innovation. Now, I certainly wouldn't blame you if you jumped on EA for this statement straight away, but the fact remains that every two or three years, EA does innovate with one of their titles. The original Sims and Battlefield 1942 (to a lesser extent) are good examples of this.

On the other hand, as we all know, EA then has the nasty habit of viciously milking successful franchises dry while not adding a single new thing to any of the subsequent sequels and expansion packs.

And that's why many will find the following statement to be laden with irony.

Speaking in a panel discussion at the Montréal Games Summit, Tascan said, "What is Gears of War? I mean Gears of War brings nothing in terms of innovation to the shooter... Like, zero.

"Only two very brave UK-based journalists said, 'You know what, Gears of War is a great game but it's like what Quake was a few years ago.

"Why are people loving it so much? It's like added production value, incredible cutscenes and the best ever graphics ever. I'm sure it's going to be a great success, I can't wait to play it, but let's face that graphics are still number one," Tascan continued.

Gears of War may be far down the list of my all-time favorite games, but I just have to say: EA Games is right on the money.

EA Games is on the cutting edge of innovations: they've managed to make patches for games that can actually require you to reformat your PC, or just generally fuck up your BF2 experience. EA actually blacklisted servers that unlocked the extra content in BF2 when they didn't include the server cvar they said they would. That's innovation.

Spyware in a retail product? Sony may have started it with their CDs, but EA took it to another level with BF2142. Cutting edge.

Where would we be without innovation? Probably buying a new Madden game every year. Or buying more BF2 expansions when the core game is still fucked.

It's just more justification why I avoid EA Games whenever possible. Sure there's nothing really new about GoW, but it's implementation is rock solid. Epic can get away with re-releasing UT because, let's face it, it's fucking aces.

I never did understand the Quake phenomenon: "Oh shit, 3D Sprites and TRENT REZNOR. ROXOR!" Too bad you could barely see all the cool 3D objects with the 60,000 different shades of brown the devs decided to skin everything in.

Hey, if another bleh console shooter can make the Vietcong cover thing standard, that's good enough for me.

Stark wrote:Hey, if another bleh console shooter can make the Vietcong cover thing standard, that's good enough for me.

So, what didn't you like about Gears of War, Stark? Not that I think you're wrong or that this is another "Stark hates everything!" post, or anything. I'm honestly curious. I haven't heard much criticism about this game aside from "no story" and "wonky difficulty curve."

I've never played it. Call me nuts, but XBox games that get piles of hype, suspiciously perfect early reviews, but which everyone I know describe as 'a pretty shooter and that's all' shit me to tears.

But none of that matters. Circa '94 crouching needs to go the way of the dodo.

I can't figure out the hype over "Gears of War" either. I've seen the gameplay videos, and apart from the natural evolution in graphics quality, so what? What's so special about it? Ho hum, another shooter. Character voices griping at each other all the time. Everything looks sort of gritty. Is there some fantastic appeal this game has which I'm not getting? Is the story something special?

I actually had to laugh during one of the gameplay videos when the soldier uses a couch for cover, and sure enough, the couch is bulletproof. I've got to find out who makes that model of couch.

It the risk of seeming presumptuous, no. XBox games do this quite a lot. Huge hype which works very well, making hordes of people decide a game will be awesome before it comes out... and it's just a regular game.

A regular game with Vietcong 'dynamic crouch level to keep your head below nearby cover' crouching.

Darth Wong wrote:I can't figure out the hype over "Gears of War" either. I've seen the gameplay videos, and apart from the natural evolution in graphics quality, so what? What's so special about it? Ho hum, another shooter. Character voices griping at each other all the time. Everything looks sort of gritty. Is there some fantastic appeal this game has which I'm not getting? Is the story something special?

The only thing I can imagine ease of control(it is one of the few console shooters that finally gets the idea of ten thousand buttons a game is not) and one of the few games that do not make most the fans go "Next wha?".

The game is nice, it looks pretty, and it has fun cooperative. Other then that, the hype is just hype and the ones who bought into it thinking it's the second coming are in their own world.

Erik von Nein wrote:I haven't heard much criticism about this game aside from "no story" and "wonky difficulty curve."

Call me crazy, but that sounds like some pretty major criticism there...

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:

Erik von Nein wrote:I haven't heard much criticism about this game aside from "no story" and "wonky difficulty curve."

Call me crazy, but that sounds like some pretty major criticism there...

The problem I have is...

No Story? And? It's a shooter. Do I care beyond "You are grunt A, kill enemy B with Super Gun." The people complaining about the story is expecting Shakespeare out of a dung hill. The story in the game is just to make cinemas and pay VAs.

Wonky Difficulty is because people are pussies. The game is about not thinking you have god mode on and absuing the cover system.

I'd actually listen to the yabbering babbons if they were "Accuracy sucks" because that's something vital in a FPS. The game is not the second coming but the people screeching how bad are just as bad as the people cumming all over it.

Indeed, they're probably the SAME people. It really sad to watch people jump on the hype bandwagon, and then turn around and start whining about 'faults' (ie, not being the game they wanted) once it comes out.

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:

Erik von Nein wrote:I haven't heard much criticism about this game aside from "no story" and "wonky difficulty curve."

Call me crazy, but that sounds like some pretty major criticism there...

Well, what I meant about the wonky difficulty was that people were complaining that it took a long while into the game to finally get the controls down. So far as the story is concerned, they didn't really care all that much. It was more just a side note about the whole thing.

Darth Wong wrote:I can't figure out the hype over "Gears of War" either. I've seen the gameplay videos, and apart from the natural evolution in graphics quality, so what? What's so special about it? Ho hum, another shooter. Character voices griping at each other all the time. Everything looks sort of gritty. Is there some fantastic appeal this game has which I'm not getting? Is the story something special?

It seems to be a number of reasons, the two top ones seem to be the fact that yes, it's really pretty(both in graphical quality and overall visual design), and the fact that the gameplay is centered around use of cover and tactics, even in multiplayer. I've also heard good marks for story and A.I.

Mainly, it's just the fact(opinion) that the game's strong points and fun factor outweigh the low points. Also, it's been one of the first next-gen games to actually look next-gen, not just an X-box game with a shinier paint job.

possibly, yeah, if it had come out later in the 360's lifetime, it wouldn't get raved about so much, but it's not a later game, so it gets the big pop.

It's undeserved hype from what I can tell. The promotion it's getting here, you'd think it was Duke Nukem Forever coming out or a battery operated machine that causes instant orgasms whenever you want and for as long as you want.

It's Halo redux, it seems. This stuff is standard fare on the PC.

So far, every report I've seen says that it plays a lot differently than Halo...

...you know, as much as a shooting game can be any different from the next... Hence why I don't play them much(other than Ratchet & Clank).

Darth Wong wrote:I can't figure out the hype over "Gears of War" either. I've seen the gameplay videos, and apart from the natural evolution in graphics quality, so what? What's so special about it? Ho hum, another shooter.

I've been thinking the same thing.

It's your standard FPS, with a nice cover system and good online multiplayer, and fancy graphics.

Yes, it's nice, but worthy of the level of hype I've been seeing? No.

Praxis wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:I can't figure out the hype over "Gears of War" either. I've seen the gameplay videos, and apart from the natural evolution in graphics quality, so what? What's so special about it? Ho hum, another shooter.

I've been thinking the same thing.

It's your standard FPS, with a nice cover system and good online multiplayer, and fancy graphics.

Actually.... It's third-person. It's closer to Metal Arms and R&C than Halo, looks aside.

I don't even know whats special about the covering thing other than, since its 3d person, you get to watch an animation. The covering has been done since forever in FPS, you just don't have to press a specific button for it and instead actually place yourself behind it.

Otherwise, GoW is a pretty solid shooter, but not great by any measurement, except for the graphics. If it needs to be compared to any given shooter the best match would be Doom 3. It's fun and all but its basically an Engine demo only the gameplay consists on pressing the cover button 100,000 times.

It has co-op that you can join and leave at any time. That's a feature that not many console shooters have.

EA is just being bitter. Innovation != good game. You can make a game that doesn't do anything innovative, but does what games of the genre usually do exceptionally well, and it will be a good game.

Having just played a few hours of 'Execution' on-line with some friends, EA is full of shit. It's fun as hell taking a chainsaw to someone's torso, or finishing them off by stomping your boots on their heads

Darth Wong wrote:I can't figure out the hype over "Gears of War" either. I've seen the gameplay videos, and apart from the natural evolution in graphics quality, so what? What's so special about it? Ho hum, another shooter. Character voices griping at each other all the time. Everything looks sort of gritty. Is there some fantastic appeal this game has which I'm not getting? Is the story something special?

Gears of War differs from the usual shooter because it's not a 'circle-strafer'. In most shooter games, you can stand out in the open and get several kills in a row without dying. Gears of War forces you to take cover (well, you don't have to, but if you don't, you're in for a serious beating).

I actually had to laugh during one of the gameplay videos when the soldier uses a couch for cover, and sure enough, the couch is bulletproof. I've got to find out who makes that model of couch.

Couches, other furniture, and wooden objects are completely destructable in both mutli-player and single player.

I'm not saying the game isn't a revolution in game-play - it's far from it. I'm just saying that it's a hell of a lot of fun to play. The animations are VERY polished, and it's just a thing of beauty when you're moving through cover and you utilize all the different animations like they were meant to be used.

Excuse me while I whipe my ass at their latest battlefield game

I agree that Gears of War isn't the most innovative game and the plot isn't exactly memorable.. but I ask so what? Its gameplay is some of the most polished and rewarding experiences I've had in years and imo that trumps everything. Zany new gametypes and plot heavy Japaneses rpgs/cg movies with spiky-haired male protagonists are fun once in a while, but most of my favorite games of all times are refined and polished version of game types that have been around forever.

When I replay a game for the 5th time, it is for the gameplay and not the story

I remember one of the Halo developers once commenting that Halo is 20 seconds of fun, repeated over and over with slight variations. I'm sure he didn't mean it that way, but it's a pretty damning comment, not just on Halo but on shooter games in general. And it's pretty damned true, too. As far as I can tell, the only special thing about Gears of War is that the canned animations for taking cover behind objects look better than previous iterations of the genre. Excuse me while I yawn.

I havent´t played it but from the trailers and video reviews it looks like really fun game.
Its basic mechanics sure have been around for a while but so what?
The camera is amazing the covering action seems to be quite cool and i like the gore level. The multiplayer function seems nice, too.

I don´t like the main character. He´s one of those typical American clichee tough guys. Now don´t get me wrong i´m not saying that i don´t like good clichees i just don´t like this one.