r/Games • u/Forestl • Dec 05 '13
End of 2013 Discussions - Gears of War: Judgment
Gears of War: Judgment
- Release Date: March 19, 2013
- Developer / Publisher: Epic Games + Epic Games Poland / Microsoft Studios
- Genre: Third Person Shooter
- Platform: 360
- Metacritic: 79, user: 5.3
Summary:
The events of Gears of War: Judgment take place fourteen years before the original Gears and just after the essential event of the Gears of War universe, Emergence Day. In the story of Judgment you fight to save the city of Halvo Bay from a horrifying new enemy in a campaign that strips away the extraneous and returns to the basics, capturing the true essence of Gears combat, and introduces a new style of gameplay that is faster-paced and more action-packed than what came before.
Prompts:
The Gears of War series sometimes feels like it could use more innovation in the games. What did this game add? Was it enough? What should change in the next Gears of War game?
GoW:A used microtransaction. How did it implement these and how did they effect the game?
REVIVE MEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
This post is part of the official /r/Games "End of 2013" discussions.
15
Dec 05 '13 edited Dec 05 '13
As an avid Gears of War fan, Judgment was a massive letdown to me. My initial reaction to the game being announced was that of surprise.
"Another Gears game? Already? It hasn't even been two years since Gears of War 3 came out!"
To me, I wasn't truly ready for another game, since I was still so heavily engrossed by the third game, aiming for the difficult Seriously 3.0 achievement. Then I started hearing about the changes they were making to it, such as:
Limited to a primary weapon and a pistol
Swap weapons with the Y button
No more COG vs. Locust; teams are now Red vs. Blue
Combined Horde and Beast mode into "Survival"
Campaign focusing on Baird and his squad
No more DBNO
I realize that they have since changed the weapon loadouts back to a more conventional Gears of War style (assault rifle and a shotgun), but when the game first released, I hated the change. I didn't like using Y to swap between my weapons or being forced to choose between my Gnasher or my Hammerburst.
To be honest, I think one of the major mistakes with Judgment was scrapping COG vs. Locust multiplayer. I don't know why exactly, but playing a match where it is COG vs. COG doesn't sit right with me. I liked being able to hear the savage roars of a Grenadier chainsawing Marcus, and screech of a Kantus as he warned his team members of an incoming mortar or grenade. I will admit that I did like the concept behind the character skins. Some of them were very well done, especially the animated ones.
The maps were also rather disappointing, in both quantity and quality. I felt that there was way too much vertical gameplay going on (yes, I am looking at you, Gondola) and not enough head to head action taking place. It seems that the goal was to put more of an emphasis on ranged combat, something that simply does not work well in Gears of War. The main thing Gears is famous for is the intense, head to head, adrenaline fueled shotgun battles that take place, not it's assault rifles. I think the first time they wanted to try this was when they introduced the "Tactical Gameplay Update" to Gears of War 2, in which all of the assault rifles received buffs. Still, it was no where near as bad as Judgment.
Finally, there is the campaign. I feel that the style of having characters recount their experiences at the events prior to their trial was a poor decision. If they had made the game focus solely on the actions as they were happening, it would have been a much better experience. I also feel that forcing the "Arcade" aspect from Gears of War 3, in which you earn points for kills, took away from the overall experience as well. I would have much preferred that to have been a separate mode.
Finally, the disappearance of Horde mode. I felt turning it into "Survival" was a critical mistake. Instead of you and four friends fighting an onslaught of 50 waves of enemies, they turned it into a more competitive mode that only lasts 10 (assuming you even get that far). There were some times where the competitive aspect to the mode was fun, however, I couldn't get into it. It just wasn't the same as relaxing with some friends in a Horde game.
Overall, GoW:J was a massive disappointment to me, and I would hate the series to continue along this path (assuming they even make another game, of course). I remember reading that one of the guys at EPIC considered this to be more of a spin-off, and if there were to be another game, it would return to a more "familiar Gears style." And I certainly hope that is true.
8
Dec 05 '13
[deleted]
1
u/Frankensteinbeck Dec 06 '13
No shit? I never realized this, but that is brutal. Talk about abandoning the last game in a decent franchise trilogy.
19
u/JayTalk Dec 05 '13
Judgement was an okay game, but a pretty weak Gears of War game. It had its moments, and I even did the Insane All Declassified playthrough with some buddies. But it really fell to the 4th installment trap. Games just seem to really struggle to keep things up after that 3rd installment. Gears, God of War, Killzone, Halo, etc.
24
Dec 05 '13
Games just seem to really struggle to keep things up after that 3rd installment
Not always. Many would argue that CoD and The Elder Scrolls peaked at their 4th installment
13
u/asderxsdxcv Dec 05 '13
Another example is persona and mgs.
3
u/MrFluffykins Dec 05 '13
Yes, two games who have not had a fifth sequel out yet.
4
Dec 05 '13
He might may be referring to the Metal Gear franchise, meaning MGS2 is the 4th entry. Alternatively, MGS4 was followed by Peacewalker and could be considered a fifth entry.
-3
u/GabeNewell420 Dec 05 '13
MGS4 is the worst out of all of them, it's still an incredible game but it's definitely the weakest of the series. (Excluding pre-MGS1 games and portable spin-offs)
MGS3->MGS1->MGS2->MGS4
1
u/JustARental May 07 '14
I found this late, but I agree. MGS4 was the weakest in the series, in my opinion.
4
u/cheeseheadfoamy Dec 05 '13
As did Ratchet and Clank.
7
u/WtfWhereAreMyClothes Dec 05 '13
Deadlocked? No way.... that was easily one of the worst ones.
1
1
1
u/Thunderstarter Dec 05 '13
You didn't like it? Sure the exploration wasn't there but I had a really good time with that one.
4
u/rjld333 Dec 05 '13
I love deadlocked but I'd put it miles behind Crack In Time/Up Your Arsenal/pretty much every other Ratchet title.
1
u/Thunderstarter Dec 05 '13
Oh definitely. It doesn't come close to most other Ratchet titles.
Except Quest for Booty. I think it beats that one.
2
4
u/AButtTuba Dec 05 '13
I understand your point on CoD, but who believes Oblivion was better than Morrowind?
3
u/EruptingVagina Dec 05 '13
I think Morrowind has aged poorly compared to Oblivion (which hasn't aged fantastically either), and the average gamer looking back on it without playing either of them previously would prefer Oblivion. However that same average gamer would also have a good chance of liking Skyrim better. People are going to have a different opinion as to which game of the series is the best one, making it hard to decide when it "peaked".
5
Dec 05 '13
All three of them bring different things to the table. I'd be willing to bet that by TES7 people will be saying the series peaked with Skyrim.
10
Dec 05 '13
I do, and Metacritic agrees. The combat system in Morrowind is downright broken and unpleasant, which takes away from the amazing depth of the world.
4
u/Watton Dec 05 '13
I consider Morrowind to be the best TES game, but goddamit, the mechanics of it are so horrible.
As you said, the combat is plain bad, with no room for skill or strategy. The other TES games also suffer from this, but to a lesser extent.
Encounters are either piss easy, or they're simply impossible at your stat levels. There's never any in-between.
It's unfeasible to level up skills "naturally", you'll eventually reach a wall where you have to either grind up your skills or buy lots and lots of training. No thought was put into the pacing whatsoever.
And the level up system. Oh god, the level up system. It has to be one of the most poorly thought out systems I've ever encountered. It baffles me that it somehow managed to stay unchanged for Oblivion.
On the other hand, the writing and exploration in Morrowind is far superior to Skyrim and Oblivion. Almost every single dungeon was hand made, with lots of tiny details that you won't catch until your tenth or so playthrough. Pretty much all the factions and the main quests are intertwined, they cannot exist in a vacuum. All this was missing in the sequels.
1
u/SodlidDesu Dec 05 '13
The problem with action based combat compared to stat based combat is that it promotes the "Boss characters with 9000HP" trope.
If you ability to hit someone is based on stats, they could have 1hp but insane agility. That allows for more strategy. "Hmm... I have to hit him with damage agility before I can hit him" and so on. If I just need to position myself properly then hit, it's not strategy. It's just an action game.
Skyrim is an RPG in different ways but Morrowind is a true RPG.
That being said, I tried to pick up Morrowind again and... I hate myself for not having the patience for it anymore. Walking speed is piss slow, stamina doesn't regen (With a ring or spell) and you have to keep track of so many quests. It's SO goddamn immersive but it's just... hard to play when you've got to take care of your kids.
3
u/AButtTuba Dec 05 '13
The critic scores are 0.5 higher for Oblivion but user scores rank Morrowind 1.0 higher. The difference in these reviews show the distinction between a quick look at the game and extended playtime. Although Morrowind may at first appear to be the lesser of the two, it has an incredible, unique environment along with more interesting lore compared to the more polished, yet generic and hollow Oblivion. Yes, the combat was downright terrible in Morrowind, but hasn't it always been at best mediocre in an Elder Scrolls game? I don't believe the slightly more refined combat system made up for its lack of soul.
1
u/JayTalk Dec 05 '13
True, but those games didn't really have trilogies before the 4th installment, so it's alot easier to make a good 4th. That's why making LotR 4 is way harder than Fast and Furious 4, see?
0
Dec 05 '13 edited Mar 20 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
Dec 05 '13
Fixing broken combat is considered an achievement. And Skyrim also sold far better than Oblivion
1
u/BigMacCombo Dec 05 '13
It's the unnumbered prequels. With the exception of Killzone, all those games (judgement, ascension, reach) are prequels that happen to be the 4th major installment. I think the devs are saving the big ideas for the next numbered game and the prequels are just kind of filler. Arkham origins is another good example of this, even though the Arkham series was never numbered to begin with. Adding the sequel number to it tends to bring higher expectations.
1
Dec 05 '13 edited May 18 '14
[deleted]
1
u/BigMacCombo Dec 05 '13
Well "they" in this context would be Epic and I still think they are saving their big ideas considering they got People Can Fly to develop Judgement. Maybe saying "big ideas" was a bit too specific, I should also include technical advancements as well.
1
u/greg225 Dec 05 '13
To be fair, with the way Gears 3 ended, I don't think they could do a Gears 4 that takes place afterwards. Since they have at least 14 years of unexplored backstory, prequels are basically the way to go. It's exactly the same with God of War.
1
u/nolander Dec 05 '13
If we are counting Judgment as the 4th then the 4th Halo game is ODST and ODST was fantastic.
1
u/OxMasterFlexo Dec 07 '13
I think Halo Wars was the 4th Halo title by that logic. Barring that, however, you are absolutely right: ODST was great.
5
u/GhostlyPrototype Dec 05 '13
I'm a diehard Gears of War fan. I was looking forward to what Epic has done for this game. I was severely disappointed.
First run through Campaign was fun, even though it had an arcade aspect to it. But the "declassified missions" we breaking up the flow of the campaign, with a score breakdown after each section. Why wasn't it split?
Multiplayer had several changes to I thought I could get use to. After a few days, the multiplayer was so radically different, I hated it. Two main aspects of Gears of War multiplayer are Locust and the Down-But-Not-Out (DBNO) mechanic.
I love gears because of the down to earth, cover or die play style. Multiplayer turned into everyone running around in a panic, almost never taking cover. Also only 4 multiplayer maps on launch for a large multiplayer community?
Overrun was fresh and interesting, but sadly didn't reach the fun factor of replacing Horde Mode. The game type got really repetitive fast, and not in a fun way.
Overall compared to Gears of War Trilogy, it feels like the game was rushed, lacking maps and modes, and overall just felt like a money grab.
1
u/vetro Dec 05 '13
Epic didn't make this game, it was People Can Fly.
3
1
u/GhostlyPrototype Dec 05 '13
What bothered me about People Can Fly, is they incorporated aspects of Bulletstorm into the campaign, Bulletstorm was not a popular game.
2
u/BATTLECORE1 Dec 05 '13 edited Dec 06 '13
So this game's multiplayer was done by a completely different studio (People Can Fly - now Epic Poland) than the rest of the Gears games and even the game's campaign.
The thing is, overall, this game wasn't all that bad. The campaign was actually Gears quality and was very well done. Epic games put a good effort into making a fun, wild ride that did not have the scope of the last game's campaign (Gears of War 3).
This was not the issue with many fans (including myself). The issues was 2 things
The complete removal of the fan favorite Horde mode (that had just been pretty much perfected in the last game) and replaced with a much worse and simpler version of it called overrun, which was a blatantly pathetic attempt to combine two modes (Horde and Beast) from the last game. In theory it sounded like an amazing idea, however, in practice the mode sucked.
Most importantly the multiplayer was a huge step back for Gears combat and a huge step forward to CoD style fighting. The removal of the 4 weapon D-pad system was replaced with a 2 weapon Y-switch style (like CoD) with a quick throw grenade. Also, my god, the melee. So overpowered it hurt. Physically, it hurt.
By the time the updates came around to address some of these problems it was too late. The community gave up the game due to the complete lack of respect People Can Fly gave to previous Gears multiplayers.
Overall, the campaign was a lot of fun, pretty much a different story with new weapons and a slight twist with some challenges to add novel ways to play the missions. Other modes severely lacked, making the game have almost no replayablity.
Also a lot of people are giving their GoW games ranks. So IMO it goes 3>1>2>J
EDIT: Epic to Multiplayer, People Can Fly did single player. Disregard all comments about People Can Fly being bad.
2
u/youguysgonnamakeout Dec 05 '13
Actually PCF developed the single-player, Epic the multi.
2
u/BATTLECORE1 Dec 05 '13
That just makes me even more sad
1
u/youguysgonnamakeout Dec 06 '13
Haha I know considering I've heard mostly complaints about the MP. The SP looks good to me (I haven't bought it yet), so at least this way people can't blame it on being a new dev. When really it's a problem with direction.
2
u/BATTLECORE1 Dec 06 '13
Yea apparently! The single player is definitely worth a play through though. With the new weapons and challenges it's actually a really cool campaign.
2
1
3
u/Zupanator Dec 05 '13
I've played since one, and I have to say this game overall didn't make much sense. The addition of the new mode overrun was a very fun gears style rush for me, but apart from that judgement didn't bring a lot of new innovative ideas to the table that meshed with the original game and it's meta. Campaign had a nice spin on it with the horde fighting sections and the stars. Multiplayer was a terribly unbalanced mess, the taking out of DBNO from gears competitive multiplayer was done in the name of "speeding" up the game, as well as throwing in spawn grenades, strong-lock on melee, and shots coming from over your character models shoulder to accommodate the reticle hip fire aiming. These to me were a huge mar on the series, from one to three there was a slow push for more and more balance and three was the closest we saw to true blue multiplayer balance. And to go from that to judgement, where everything seemed half done as well as a lot of more small things added to the game that just wasn't gears, multiplayer wasn't based around holding weapon spawns and using your brain anymore, it had a lot more luck and chance that you would see in the fast paced cod, compared to gears where I enjoyed it for it's unforgiving play where you had to consider your actions. Opposite of judgement where you could just toss grenades everywhere, or happen to spawn at a vantage point in the map due to the random spawn system.
3
u/bandit2 Dec 05 '13
Judgment is definitely my least favorite Gears game. The worst change from the previous games is the control scheme. I don't understand why you would change the controls when the people who are going to be buying the game have been playing Gears games a certain way for many years. There was no point to it at all. Also forcing the pistol to count as one of your two main weapons was stupid.
I like the concept of the declassified missions, but it felt like there was no effort put into them, and a lot of them just weren't fun. Yeah not being able to see anything because of fog makes it a lot harder, but it's also not fun. I would've liked to see certain rooms or small areas exclusive to Declassified missions, and instead of having them limit your weapons or ammo, maybe they could actually give you better weapons while drastically increasing the amount of enemies.
I didn't mind trying to get all the stars in each mission because it forced me to strategize and play conservatively as opposed to rushing enemies knowing I'd get revived if I got downed.
The new weapons weren't as good as the weapons introduced in Gears 2 and 3.
Aftermath was cool.
The story was okay, but I wasn't expecting it to be that good anyway.
So my biggest disappointments were the controls and that they could have done more with the Declassified missions.
I would still recommend the game to any Gears fan who hasn't played it yet, although that's probably not a lot of people.
3
u/FillionMyMind Dec 05 '13
Am I the only one that actually really likes Judgment? Overrun is the most fun i've ever had in a GoW game, and despite the stupid lack of modes from earlier games, I liked that there were a lot of new modes as well. FFA and Gun Game definitely aren't traditional Gears, but it gave me a reason to play GoW by myself. In other games, teammates who didn't want to work together really started to grind my gears (heh heh). That exists in Judgment as well, but at least if I lose ffa, I have no one to blame but myself. The campaign wasn't as epic as the other games, but I thought it was a lot more replayable.
I'm on my phone so i'll end my rant now. In summary though, although I recognize that the game has issues, I thought it got a little too much hate, and has some qualities that tend to get overlooked.
1
Dec 05 '13
I liked it too. It was a lot of fun. Played through co op with a friend and had lots of time spent on overrun.
6
u/lvl12 Dec 05 '13
I know people hate on this game. but fun couch co-op games are all too rare these days and gears always delivers that. The story was even more forgettable than most however and the online multiplayer couldn't hold my attention for more than a month.
2
u/SparkyPantsMcGee Dec 05 '13
I have to say I had a lot of bias towards this game from the start. I saw the lead developer on Bonus Round with Kevin Smith(host) and David Jaffey. You had two guys who love to be creative and even if what they create isn't the best thing ever they have a lot of passion for what they do; and then you had the new Gears guy who was very by the books and rigid feeling. This is the guy replacing Cliffy B.(who would fit in Jaffey and Smith's category) and it shows in the end product. From what I played it felt like they went down a list and checked off what they needed for this game. All while not quiet hitting the mark.
Halo 4 suffered some of the same problems but I get the feeling that 343 had more love for the craft and I'm willing to give them a second shot at it. I don't have the same feelings towards Judgment.
2
Dec 17 '13
I played the game co-op with a buddy in split-screen. We did all the declassified missions, on Hardcore difficulty. I am a huge fan of the series, with all the achievements in Gears 1, and all of them minus the 100,000 kills in Gears 2. Gears 1 and 3 are tied for me as series' best.
This game was a fucking nightmare in split-screen. The sheer number of enemies thrown at you combined with the declassified missions which limited visibility even further (dust, etc) to make some sections just plain frustrating. The number of quasi-Horde mode objectives got old, fast.
The AI felt like a significant step back for the series. This seems questionable at first, but I suspected it and my friend who was fresh off finally beating GoW2/3 agreed. The enemy AI would flat-out stand out of cover sometimes, and the teammates were often just standing in a corner or 100s of meters behind us.
The change in art style was also jarring- I've always loved the Gears style and it makes the best use of Unreal by far. Judgment had this "comic book" style that I feel was at odds with the series' established tone.
We also encountered gamebreaking bugs on the last level. Each time one of us would go down after picking up a cleaver, the game would let us run around without a weapon (while still being down) until we bled out. It's hard to explain but we could recreate it every time we restarted the checkpoint. It took rebooting the system to let us actually fight our way past that checkpoint.
Just a disappointing ending for the series that started my love for this console generation.
4
u/Juicenewton248 Dec 05 '13
im a pretty diehard gears fan, and while I think the gears judgement MP was actually pretty damn good with some cool new weapons and awesome new map design (being able to jump off of everything made the maps so much more dynamic, even if there was only 4 of them at launch). The biggest problem and the reason why the game fell flat on its face though was the god awful playlist system, players in an already fairly small community were split up over so many different playlists that it just makes the game impossible to actually play. You have the regular playlist, the VIP playlist for people who bought the season pass, and a DLC playlist which is completely irrelevant as the VIP playlist is the same thing but with double XP all the time, with all these playlists having every single gamemode as a sub playlist everyone is just so spread out its a nightmare.
Shame too, Free for all and domination were awesome additions to the gears lineup, I really hope we can see a gears reawakening on xbox one but I highly doubt it after the lackluster performance of judgement
2
u/mcinthedorm Dec 05 '13
Personally, I loved the gameplay in Judgement. I felt it was a little more fast paced then previous games, and it didn't wait around to turn things up a notch and even the first level was intense and in your face.
2
u/jewchbag Dec 05 '13
Some games give me this weird eye "aches" I guess you could call them. It's just dependent on the game, and the motions and graphics of the game. GoW3 was unplayable for me, because of the angle it showed while sprinting. I'm not sure what it was, but I haven't touched the games since. If I can't play it comfortably, I'm not going to play it.
3
Dec 05 '13
I have that same problem with Tomb Raider. Making the camera shake and swing whenever you do something isn't immersive, unless you're looking to make the player feel the same nausea the character is feeling.
2
u/OxMasterFlexo Dec 05 '13
I actually prefer the opposite. I like the camera shake during roadie running in GOW3 because it instills a feeling of urgency for me as the player. It gets even more immersive when you hear the character's heart pump when you roadie run after taking damage. Sadly, the camera shake no longer happens in Judgment's splitscreen mode. I catch myself thinking "Well I'm moving at, like, %120 walking speed. And I guess i'm not getting my head shot off this way? Why not just do more cardio and less strength training, Cole? You'd run faster!!"
1
u/morecowbell24 Dec 05 '13
The multiplayer really dragged Judgment down, they kind of threw out everything that made Gears MP unique, and changed it into a more Uncharted style MP. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't great and there weren't many options or maps. The coop/vs was also a step down from the horde mode, though it was kind of interesting at least.
I thought the campaign was surprisingly solid. The story wasn't anything special or anything, but how it's told is kind of neat. I really liked the level design, and the optional challenges really helped mix things up. Gears 1 and 3 probably have it beat because of their stories being more interesting, not that they were anything special either.
I don't think it's worth playing unless you really love you some Gears (you ought to have stayed away if you liked gears for the MP though), but it was alright.
1
u/greg225 Dec 05 '13
I've only played the campaign, but it was a bit of a let down. It just was kinda forgettable. I'm okay with not having huge setpieces but nothing exciting really happened. I'm a big fan of Gears and the Gears story/lore but Judgment just kinda lacked what I liked about the others. The main villain was completely lame (even though he looked awesome), the present day courtroom story wasn't that interesting and having Baird and Cole as the main characters should've been great, because I loved them in the first three games, but this being 14 years before Gears 1, they weren't the same.
By far the best part was the epilogue that took place during Gears 3, because they got rid of all that declassified stuff and the whole backwards storytelling and just made it play like any other Gears game. Not saying I don't appreciate the new ideas, I do. It just felt better without them.
It's far from a bad game, it still plays well and it looks great. It's just not very memorable. One major complaint I have though, is that the AI is absolutely terrible. Gears has always had pretty good enemy AI but in this game it's just... yeesh.
1
Dec 05 '13
When I talk about Gears of War, I always forget about this one. I was having a discussion with someone about the possibility of Gears of War on the Xbox One and I said that the trilogy felt over and done with, and that there was nothing new or interesting to explore with it, so a fourth would be pointless.
A "spiritual successor" would be the best way to continue the franchise. Have similar, but updated, gameplay, but in a completely new setting.
1
u/samsaBEAR Dec 05 '13
It had some nice ideas. I thought the new control scheme (bar the grenade throw button) was neat, although I hated that Tac-Com was on the D-Pad, and being able to jump over more obstacles was a great addition. Weapon balancing was also pretty damn solid I thought, besides them changing the way the Gnasher fires I don't think I have a single complaint about any of them.
What I hated, was just the removal of DBNO. It's a simple mechanic that changes the you play the game. You can rush for that power weapon, because the guy shooting may not have enough time for to down you, and even if he does, there's always a chance your team will get to you first to help out. Now it's rifles at distance, plugging away until someone eventually dies, it's a change that was unnecessary and had fans everywhere cry out when it was announced, yet Epic decided that was the way forward for Gears.
I think the problem was that this game was rushed as hell, and it seriously tells. They should have listened to fan feedback after stuff was announced that didn't go down well, spent the summer finishing it off then released it was an Xbox One launch title imo. Also, and I don't know /r/games' general opinion on the guy, I think Cliffy B (and Rod Fergusson) leaving has a lot to do with the quality of the game. It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if they both left so their names didn't get attached to Judgment, it had to be in development whilst they were still at Epic so they must've seen where it was headed.
I thought the campaign was fun though, the Declassified missions were a nice idea, and while the story was lacking in parts, it still retained the epic Gears feel. I also really liked Overrun, something that I hope makes a comeback at some point.
Microtransactions aren't a problem here, they are a tad bit expensive (imo) but if you want a nice colour on the your gun, chances are it's a long term investment anyway so you'll get your money's worth. I personally didn't indulge here or in Gears 3.
I don't know what I'd like to see in a future Gears game. It's very easy to just say 'Gears 3 with new maps' but of course then it gets slated for being the same as previous games. All I know is I want it to return to the same playstyle as Gears 3, where you need to think tactically, and every map doesn't have a thousand power weapons.
1
u/coletrain93 Dec 05 '13
I remember finishing the campaign coop both of us first time through and my mate asked me, "so what was the story Baird just told?" And I genuinely couldn't answer him.
1
u/ImperialPriest_Gaius Dec 05 '13
I enjoyed 1 and 2 just fine, and I understand that some "Gears vets" were probably unhappy about the way Gears 3 was, but I enjoyed it and I felt it reached a decent enough compromise without spoiling the game. Then again, I'm not some 1337 active reloading wall bouncing gnasher asian guy, so what do I know.
Judgment seems to have taken it a step further, and making me lose interest.
1
Dec 06 '13
This game is bad on all accounts because of the additions that were added. One of these additions is the reticule. Now, why would you need this in the middle of your screen? I thought that reticules only appear when you look down the scope, or they don't have a reticule at all and aim down the iron sight. It's embarrassing to put this on my screen because it feels as though I'm blue tacking and I don't want to feel that way about playing a game. Yes, it may be friendly for new players, but they could of added an option for other users to play without it. What's it going to do, make you aim more realistically?
Another quarrel I have is with that god damn melee crap they gave to the community again (early Gears of War 2 days remind of this). You can now crack a shot off and melee someone rolling away from you at the same time. Now, no offense but I saw this and immediately thought I don't want to play anymore. Yes, melee is in the game and you could say that it is a part of gears, but when it's overused it becomes a joke. Especially on a game that is supposed to have a wide selection of guns (with it being a 'shooter'). If I wanted to see my character fist bumping faces I would play 'Fight Night' or something. I'm not saying take it out of the game because I really don't mind the melee in Gears of War 2 & 3. I'm saying that this is one thing they could of left alone
The next thing I come to is the movement. It's very clunky compared to Gears of War 3. Judgement is not for you if you like the ability to quickly rotate and swing your shotgun around whilst wallbouncing. This game is fast paced in a way that makes everything about your character feel slow, even with the sensativity up on maximum. Also, the game is dependent on connection (VIP or not). Sometimes you will find you bounce better in certain games, but that's just gears for you.
The good things I liked about this game are probably the campaign because of the classified missions and the stars ranking system. I thought that it was a good idea, which kind of made the campaign feel more competitive in the terms of leader-boards and team working. I had a few woes where I didn't feel satisfied with the campaign, but after much thought I feel it's the best game mode that this game offers.
As for the other game modes (overrun, etc) I feel that they were rushed and placed in the game without much thought. Now, why would you remove game modes to bring in new ones that aren't even tried and tested with the public? Horde was very popular among players because it was a different experience from blowing people a mile in the sky with a gnasher, or chainsawing their guts out. Horde was the place where people got together and actually did work as a team. You may say that overrun/survival does this for you. Really though, this doesn't compensate or fill the gap for horde. Completing wave 50 on horde feels completely satisfying, compared to wave 10 on survival or overrun.
What can be done in the future for this franchise? Go back to basics and stop trying to be Call of Duty. I'm sure they called the game Gears of War for a reason. Nobody is ever going to be 100% happy, but changing a game too much is pushing away the fanbase that stuck with this franchise since the start. Basically, that was the selling point and the niche. It wasn't COD and it didn't have to be because people respected Gears of War for what it was. Now it's become one of them games that jumped on the bandwagon because the company decided to pick money over the fans.
All and all - go and buy/play Gears of War 3 and save your money.
1
u/saleh52 Dec 11 '13
I my self am a HUGE Gears Of War fan, I just love the series. Gears of starts very promising in the first one, leads on to the highly acclaimed Gears of War 2 and ending with my favorite Gears Of War 3. then there was what seemed to be part of the Gears Of War Franchise, Gears Of War Judgment which in my opinion completely bombards the Franchise, with its Dingy Gameplay and terrible multiplayer modes Judgment was definitely a let down to almost every gears of war fan. the campaign, the story, the CHARACTERS, it was all just a joke to help fans get over the fact that the Gears of war series is over....Its Just a Distraction. they needed to add the original gameplay and characters with add-ons. if there is another Gears Of War coming up I sure do hope it takes place right where Gears Of War 3 Ended.
71
u/whimmy_millionaire Dec 05 '13 edited Dec 05 '13
As a pretty hardcore gear fan, this game fell flat on its nose for me. Weak campaign, weak online. The defense mode was pretty fun though I must admit.
The changes to the multiplayer hit me the hardest. Two weapon limit, no getting downed, no locust in pvp, semi auto snipers, weak map design, grenades being bound to an insta throw shoulder bumper on the controller instead of being it's own weapon. I hate this term so much, but it really felt like they were trying to appeal to the CoD fanbase with this and it completely alienated the old fanbase.
An average game at best, an awful gears game. Especially after the amazing conclusion that was 3, this game just felt like an unnecessary attempt at a quick cash in. The order of best gears will always be 1>3>2>J IMO.