Lookie, there's a game called Kill.Switch that plays IDENTICALLY to Gears of War.
Oh except this is outdated trash because the graphics and AI of 2003 don't cut it these days.
[URL="http://youtube.com/watch?v=tiEXrvhjA9M"]http://youtube.com/watch?v=tiEXrvhjA9M[/URL]
Ignore the crappy music, it's a fan made music video. The the best video I could find because it has the most gameplay footage.
Rammstein suck
Looks cheesey too
Maybe it only appears to play the same, like comparing all of today's war games and saying they're all the same. The reviews were pretty average on that game. My guess is that it just didn't have a good gameplay setup for the hours of play needed to complete the game.
They seem to play pretty similar to me. You hide behind stuff and shoot. Maybe its over simplifing. Maybe not.
[COLOR="Yellow"]Not only are you comparing a next-gen game to a previous-gen game. But this game also came out more than 3 years ago and for the Xbox, PC, and even Game Boy Advance lol. What's your point? That Gears of War is a rip-off? Or that a 2003 PS2 game doesn't look as good as a 2006 next-gen game? Wow, point made laddy!
What's the point of this thread?[/COLOR]
[quote=Aioros]Not only are you comparing a next-gen game to a previous-gen game
Meaning what?
Wait, so Speedy cant say it is simialr to an older game? You might want to read some of your own posts.
[COLOR="Yellow"]Of course he can retard.
But what's the point of making a whole thread just to make fun of a game from 2003 because it doesn't look as good as one from 2006?
BTW, what's it feel like to be a bigot?[/COLOR]
I'm a bigot because.....I don't like Rammestein? Lol ok Pedro.
Paul, the reason this thread was made is because Speedy doesn't like the fact that Red Steel was rated 8.5, a game I assume he expected to get higher or something along those lines. He says that a game (Red Steel) that tries something new got lower scores than a "generic shooter" like Gears of War, rumored to be given a near perfect score in EGM. He's making a correlation between games that he thinks play exactly alike but have wildly different scores. I pretty much implied that no matter how games can be alike, it's the chemistry of every working feature in a game that makes each experience different.
Stop with the racism and/or bigotry, Bebop.
[quote=Fate][COLOR=skyblue]Paul, the reason this thread was made is because Speedy doesn't like the fact that Red Steel was rated 8.5, a game I assume he expected to get higher or something along those lines. He says that a game (Red Steel) that tries something new got lower scores than a "generic shooter" like Gears of War, rumored to be given a near perfect score in EGM. He's making a correlation between games that he thinks play exactly alike but have wildly different scores. I pretty much implied that no matter how games can be alike, it's the chemistry of every working feature in a game that makes each experience different.
Stop with the racism and/or bigotry, Bebop.[/COLOR]
Wrong.
I don't like the fact that Gears of War got 10/10 in so many magazines when it's a totally unoriginal shooter from the king of unoriginal games, Epic. I'm annoyed by the fact that I just know, somehow, that 1up and EGM will find their way to rating Zelda less than 10/10 despite the advances in arguably the best installment of the worlds most highly rated franchise.
This thread makes fun of those critics, it shows they'll rate anything highly as long as it has a lot of hype and has great graphics. EGM and 1up are a joke.
I was annoyed further by one of EGMs reviewers giving arguably the most innovative FPS since Half-Life five out of ten, despite all the extremely positive previews of the past 3 months. I made up my mind about EGM with their Gears review, this only confirms their total bias.
I'm annoyed that games journalism has come to this. No matter how unoriginal a game is, if it's shiny it gets high scores. No matter how absolutely novel, interesting and refreshing a game is, if it isn't as polished as a standard template that's existed for over ten f[COLOR=lightgreen]u[/COLOR]cking years then it deserves to be cast into the pit of mediocrity.
F[COLOR=lightgreen]u[/COLOR]ck EGM.
They liked the game an awful lot, so they gave it a high score. End of story.
Does a game have to be absolutely rid of imperfections to be perfect? Yes. Is being a ripoff a major imperfection? Yes.
Wind Waker was different to other Zelda games and didn't get a perfect score anyway. Gears is identical to KILL.SWITCH and did get perfect scores. There's a crucial difference there.
Critics agreed on Halo 2, but that doesn't stop it from being the most overrated game of all time. There's probably less than a thousand professional game critics on the planet, at least less than that in the 3 major markets. Their opinions are insignificant compared to the opinions of the people that actually buy the games. Sales might not be an indication of quality, but I don't think the opinions of a small group of people lucky enough to be paid to review games are the be all and end all either.
Spoilers: Gears of War is a really good game.
lol I said it was flawed twice in there woosh!
understatement: truth, which is why Red Steel isn't on my list of must get Wii games.
Scorpion > All.
[quote=Gamespot]Stellar graphics reset the bar for what consoles can do visually; great soundtrack and killer sound effects; satisfying gameplay in single-player mode; very addictive online play; best use of a chainsaw in any game, ever.
This isn't the first time that taking cover has been a focus of gameplay--the mechanics work very similarly to a fairly obscure PlayStation 2 game from Namco called kill.switch. But no game has made this sort of gameplay quite so exciting. One of the greatest feelings in this game is that when you pop out to take a shot, you immediately feel like you're taking your life into your own hands, because the enemy is very good at opening fire the second they see you and you'll see those bullets heading your way. This formula remains thrilling from start to finish, though boss fights and a pretty neat vehicle section help to break up the action.
While there have certainly been plenty of similar shooters before it, the game's great weapons, amazing graphics, and absolutely thrilling action make it stand out from the pack in a big, big way.
There ya have it.
It's not the exact same game, though. So people need to stop talking like it is.
Dumbest thing I've ever read, and the most stupid thing Speedy has ever posted. Good lord.
How about playing the game?
This has GOT to be the biggest PILE OF S[b]HI[/b]T I have ever read. Good f[B][B]uck[/B]ing G[B]od[/B], it got good scores and everyone loves. GET THE F[B]UC[/B]K OVER IT.
I'm not even going to bother and try to respond to this. You're getting you panties in a bunch over a f[B]uck[/B]ing review score. Not even the most rabbid fanboys on TeamXbox or Ps3forums are acting like this. [/B]
Then he should really shut up until he can actually know what he's talking about.
Now, I don't think that was very necessary.
Why can't wii be friends? Why can't wii be friends?
Funny, Bebop and Speed****tard don't consider themselves fanboys. But if a game on another console get's a good review, they ****ing flip, hate the magazine, hate the reviewer, and read the biased Nintendo magazines. Which is also where they get their opinions on games not created by Nintendo.
Gears of War is an excellent game. Now shut the **** up.
Wii blows btw, no games look promising except maybe Twilight Princess, which I'd prefer on the Gamecube. Of course, this is only my personal opinion, but it really has no good games coming for it.
I dont think Ive said anywhere I hate Gears of War. Just I wouldnt give it a 10, or any game a 10 really, and that I want to play it to find out why its so raved about.
As for EGM, I dont value the opinion of a magazine where AC: WW is rated lower than AC.
Funny you slam me for being a fanboy, yet youre last 2 sentences make me question you.
Nah, I like the PS3 also, I'm all for Nintendo Wii's controller, it's just that I see no games to warrant the purchase of the Wii, other than Twilight Princess.
Oh sorry. It's just you said "Wii blows". Sorry. How could have have possible mistaken that as a fanboyish remark. Tell me brownostercult, every tried bleach? I recommend it.
Uh, I never said you hated the game. I said, "They flip, hate the magazine, hate the reviewer, and read the biased Nintendo magazines."
Never ONCE, in there did I state you HATE the game. You pansy *** fanboys just can't stand a good review, because nothing is better than "Zelda".
Are you completely illiterate, or just a ****ing retard?
Also when you people say it doesn't deserve a "10", a "10" doesn't necessarily mean the "perfect game" on every website/magazine. It usually represents an "Outstanding", or "Classic". Which is very fitting with the game. I don't know about EGM, but I haven't seen a review that stated this was the perfect game.
Where did I say you said I didnt like the game? I just said I dont hate it. Considering you used an imaginary post of mine for your 'argument' it was quite obvious you were making assumptions. I thought that would have helped clear things up. Please dont breed.
Besides, you pretty much implied I hated the game anyway. Freaking out and accusing me of a fanboy would imply I hated the game for its platform. LOL hate. I think its a fair to say it was easy to assume that from what you had written. Either way my argument works in my favour. Talk about having your arse handed to you in a hat.
And if a game gets full marks it means there were no mistakes. It's full marks you know. Like the most it can get with no room for error. Sounds like a perfect score to me. If a reviewer gives a full score without really meaning it they shouldnt be reviewing.
Win. Lock thread.
Honestly, saying 10/10 doesnt mean perfection is just stupid. It's sound spretty dumb to me. Then again I'm used to reivew publications actually meaning their scores. I've read some which adopt that 10/10 philosphy you've stated Addict, but frankly because they dont think too much about scores its thrown around to much. Makes it hard to judge a game based on review score if so many are awarded the same thing. You get? And also seeing every 'ver good' game get 10/10 gets annoying.
Or maybe since their are a crapload of games, it's more than likely that they're gonna have the same scores, and there are going to be multiple games deserving of that 10.
Also, it makes perfect sense that saying 10/10 doesn't mean it's perfect. Since no game will probably ever be perfect. It certainly doesn't mean perfection if the magazine states, "Classic, not to be missed." I don't see any thing about OMG DIS IZ DA MOST PREFECT GAME EVAR RAAAGH
Id prefer too games got roughly the same score (say 63% and 65%) than both have their scores rounded up and matched. Thats just me. I like to compare.
Then you must love GameSpot.
Love is a strong word. I like Gamespot. But I wont forget the mistakes theyve made in the past.
Like giving Sword of Mana a low 7.1 :mad:
Never played it. But Jak and Daxter a high score? Get out of heeeerrrree......
Jak and Daxter was a really good game.
[quote='me, you idiots'][FONT=Tahoma][COLOR=#90ee90]Again, for the record the game does look awesome and it will be one of the first games I get on 360[/COLOR][/FONT]
So after quite a few people IMing me and having the following converstion:
"Gears of War is a bad game because it's not totally original?"
"No, I didn't say that. I actually think it looks awesome and want to play it"
"You are so wrong on this one"
"...okay then"
I've pretty much decided that most people in this thread can't even grasp what I'm saying (although it's really quite simple), have jumped to conclusions and are basically impossible to have an intelligent arguement with.
Can't blame people when you compare a ****ty game with similar mechanics to a fantastic game that completely refined said mechanics, calling them "identical" in terms of gameplay. Which, in itself, is actually quite wrong.
So yeah.
Wait Speedy, you posted that quote in this thread? Because it like looks you didn't. And you if posted it in another thread, then you probably should have done so in this. Because not all of us go around reading every thread on the board.
Good lord, this is pre-emptive bias. You're going on a rant because of what you think someone else's opinion might be in a few weeks?
[quote=Wings]Good lord, this is pre-emptive bias. You're going on a rant because of what you think someone else's opinion might be in a few weeks?
Don't get smart with me, sonny. You agreed.
Besides, I can still complain of their bias based on existing reviews.
Answer my question.
or, you simply have a different opinion than the vast majority of people who enjoyed the game, including myself.
Which is basically what I said earlier? Lol wut
I dont care if lots of people like the game. That doesnt mean I should. I found it unenjoyable on every level, in every sense of the word and without a doubt I would consider it one of the worst games I played of the last generation.
If it was one of the worst you've played, then I don't know what you've been playing!
Better games? I cant understand why people like it so much. As far as 3D platformers go its below average at best. All I can think is that those who loved it so much had a poor 3D platformer diet. I grew up on a healthy daily dose of Mario 64, Banjo Kazooie and Conker. Its an insult and a lie when Jak and Daxter (who is easily one of the most annoying characters in history) is placed alongside these brilliant titles.
Conker was, too.
Those 3 games may have been Nintendo exclusive but thats irrelevant. They are 3 of my favorite platformers which is why I mentioned them. You cant change my opinion on this so stop trying. I was completely disappointed when I bought the game and even said to myself "It'll improve! It must do! Maybe the level design will pick up!". The only time I got any enjoyed out of that game is when I removed from my PS2 and never touched it with my bare hands again.
WHY ARE PEOPLE ARGUING ABOUT OPINIONS?!
Im not. I said so striaght away. Its Pit and Fate that are droning on about it.
Hence "people" not just "Bebop"
I wasn't droning. I go off on Bebop because he throws in a serious hyperbole in a lot of the posts he makes. Stuff like "I can't honestly believe" or "I just can't bring myself to understand". I can understand if he said he didn't like the game, but to say that it was one of the worst he's ever played seems pretty dumb, only because of his posting style history.
A lot of people think Final Fantasy is the best series ever, an equal amount of people think it's absolute trash. The reasons for both are pretty legitimate, it shouldn't be that hard to accept that you can get vastly differing opinions.
[quote=Axis]Wait Speedy, you posted that quote in this thread? Because it like looks you didn't. And you if posted it in another thread, then you probably should have done so in this. Because not all of us go around reading every thread on the board.
I have posted it in other threads, and I've mentioned this issue in passing on boards outside of VGC with the same disclaimer. Guess I just forgot this time. Still, I did make it quite clear that I merely don't think it's perfect.
Yeah, but you were saying "identical" when comparing it to a game that was trash and largely ignored by everyone. =/ Hence possible confusion.
I was more making a point about the fact that KILL.SWITCH was largely ignored because it didn't have uber graphics and a ton of hype surrounding it, but gameplay so similar it's uncanny.
It was ignored for more than just that. I actually have the game. The problems with it were quite endless. The settings were terrible and repetitive, the character was just lame, the controls were finicky and unrefined, the gameplay was uninteresting and got boring real quick, and the game in general felt really rushed and a first-attempt at a failing series.
The only thing GoW has in common with this game is that you can blindfire and hide behind cover. Guess what, you can do the same in GRAW and a few other games. The difference between them is what you can do behind cover in GoW, and how you do it. That on top of everything else the game has going for it and... yeah, you can't even compare them.
no, you're not a nintendo fanboy because of that. However, I do find it strange that whenever a game that is within the same genre, ie, lets say platforming, that the only ones you seem to enjoy happen to be on a nintendo console.
Never said you were a fanboy, JUST AN OBSERVATION I'VE MADE.
Well it did sound like thats what you were implieing. Surely you can see what U mean? Even so, the titles I mentioned are excellent and, whether you agree with the platform they are on or not, easily the best some of the best platformers to date.
I THOUGHT WE DROPED THIS.
Quit arguing about Jak and Daxter. You like it, he doesn't. That's been made painfully clear.
I quit pretty much as he questioned my opinion on it. I thought that was made painfully clear.