I can't take a review of just a campaign seriously. Especially if that shit goes on metacritic and you half assed your job. No MP? No review. Wait goddamnit
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Gears 5 Review Thread
- Thread starter NovumVeritas
- Start date
Because someone said that Gears should change its controls and cited UC4.
Still a good number to see if people still wants this kind of game I think.
Man this review thread is great. All the things you expect. Console wars, saying if it wants to score more it should play more like this other game, "I only give my time to games with x score or above", gotta love the reset era tropes. Game looks beautiful and I love gears gameplay. So satisfying and visceral. Even better it's on game pass the value on that service is unmatched. Looking like a great start to a fun fall lineup of video games.
Lol, what a disingenuous poster u are.
Please don't lie about what I say.
Pretty sure it's against the rules here.
As long as I get my Heaven smashing 90+ Doom Eternal I'm happy.
Nope, because its not a flop, thats factually incorrect. It should be pointed out as it has no purpose but to derail and misrepresent its critical reception.
MP playerbase in pre-release is pretty small and scattered around the world so what do you want reviewers - the people so many posts in this thread say suck at MP and it doesn't matter what they say about it - to do?
A man of great taste, new review scores is the dream! Make people read reviews to get a sense of what you think is the way forward.
HYPE! Excited for all, but the PC video is the one I'm really looking forward to. I want to see the game running with all the bells and whistles.
Gears controls extremely tightly, feels great to play.
The only problem I ever have had so far is a conceit tons of games have that map a single button to multiple actions based on context. A couple times I would pick up a weapon instead of doing something else I wanted to do.
IMO, a game designed around a keyboard would not have that happen.
From Game Rant on Horde mode:
Oh my god, this sounds amazing. I love Horde mode, my favourite mode in Gears.
Oh my god, this sounds amazing. I love Horde mode, my favourite mode in Gears.
GOW was early 2018, though. By your logic, there's no 'hot streak' from Sony since Spider-Man landed at 87, lower than the 88 that Ori sits at, Detroit and Days Gone are in the 70s. But ask many here and you'll hear that many of these games are much better than the pictures their metacritic scores paint them as. Days Gone and Detroit have tons of fans here.
Read reviews. Decide which one falls more in line with your tastes. And then play the game for yourself and judge. Especially when you see the common theme in these reviews is that many critics wanted the gameplay to change drastically just to be new.
What's wrong? You don't put food on your family? How do you expect them to eat?!
It's not a bad score, but...the first three games scored in the 90's. Hopes were high that this would bring the series back to those glory days.
I mean look at the prediction thread. Over 70% of people thought it would score higher than this.
Booo!! Boo this man!!!
Lol, looking forward to your guys' work. Is that interview with Rod and team you guys mentioned around the preview coming with the breakdown? Or is that gonna be separate?
Just to add on,I'm starting to take most of these reviews as for the campaign and other modes are just icing. Imagine halo multiplayer was just a mode that you can ignore.
Plus the idea of big or overhaul change is never good on an established franchise that have a larger multiplayer fan base . Halo 4 was the biggest departure with load outs and perks (reviewers said it was a great change for the multiplayer) and look at what happen. What if counter strike went for a more realistic shooting model, imaging the outrage of that.
For the people saying look at god of war. It was one of my most disappointments of last year. Yeah the combat was fun and different in the beginning but it just became dull later on. Solve a puzzle, fight mobs rinse and repeat. The boss fights were ehh due to some the repetitive fights (looking at you trolls). The story was fine but the journey to it was unfulfilled.
Plus the idea of big or overhaul change is never good on an established franchise that have a larger multiplayer fan base . Halo 4 was the biggest departure with load outs and perks (reviewers said it was a great change for the multiplayer) and look at what happen. What if counter strike went for a more realistic shooting model, imaging the outrage of that.
For the people saying look at god of war. It was one of my most disappointments of last year. Yeah the combat was fun and different in the beginning but it just became dull later on. Solve a puzzle, fight mobs rinse and repeat. The boss fights were ehh due to some the repetitive fights (looking at you trolls). The story was fine but the journey to it was unfulfilled.
I don't think it's true at all that they would need to revamp the MP. Why would it force their hand to do that? And what if they did? Why is that a sacred untouchable thing? I don't get your train of thought at all here. And yeah, it's always better to play the game to judge for ourselves, but that's not an option at the moment. The reception can be disappointing in and of itself. It sure is disappointing to me! I wanted this to make an impact. I thought the marketing campaign was very lackluster, and knowing Gears 4 didn't sell quite well enough last time, I was rooting for them to learn from the mistakes on that one and make a big impact with this. After low-key marketing and buzz, the previews seemed to reverse the steam and I was excited. Reviews are like a cold shower, even if it's true that the game might still be great. I just don't think these reviews will help it much.
It was clearly a bait/troll post so giving it attention doesn't help at all. That's worse than people focusing on Gamespot genuinely giving the game a 7.
I rather think review scores are a commentary on current thinking rather than a relative measure of a game.
Trends move and shift. I think Gears has evolved which probably irks those who loved the old games but seemingly hasn't moved enough to warrant a return to former glory for those looking for more.
Its scoring really well and looks a solid game - which is what you'd expect of something that has been iterated on over 3 years. I think HI will need to be bolder given the time it has had.
Pretty much this.
I don't trust reviewers one bit. And after the MGSV fiasco, Damn. That game didn't deserve a 10 nor a 8.
Finished GOW when it came out and my brother couldn't finish it. Beside the graphics I didn't get what the fuss was about.
I buy games because I like them, not because someone else's like or dislike them.
What? Stagnation, which is what the "It's Gears" comments are getting at, is a perfectly valid criticism, and it's not exclusive to Gears either. It's especially weird this is brought up because we are talking about a game that is reviewing very well.
Those were different times. It was inventing/re-inventing the cover shooter genre at the time. People expect more now
Multiplayer should be adding more than that considering it's what keeps the game alive past month 1
No. It'd need a bunch of 10's and nothing below a 9 from here on out to even have a chance.
Score is great as is though, so it's all good
Yikes this quote killed my hype:
"Gears of War 5 isn't a bad game, it's just the worst game in the series (I quite liked Judgement). It promised to bring new ideas to the series, and it does, but to the detriment of the game as a whole with how poorly designed they all are. The open-world levels are empty and boring, the story is lackluster after a great first act, and the new Escape mode is a fleeting distraction at best. Gears of War needs changes, but not like this."
"Gears of War 5 isn't a bad game, it's just the worst game in the series (I quite liked Judgement). It promised to bring new ideas to the series, and it does, but to the detriment of the game as a whole with how poorly designed they all are. The open-world levels are empty and boring, the story is lackluster after a great first act, and the new Escape mode is a fleeting distraction at best. Gears of War needs changes, but not like this."
2016 sits at an 85% so judging by the resetera metacritic judgement scale I'd say that game is just alright lol. Excited to jump into all the modes tomorrow night. Gears hype is back in full effect.
Shouldn't have read so many pages of this thread :p
I think game reviews should always review the full game, and yes, this includes multiplayer. How is this not a standard? It's simply because people want to get the scores out to generate the clicks. Why not call it a 'review in progress' then? Too little sites are doing it. The multiplayer an important component of the game after all. Gears 5 is launching with a LOT of content and if games can get lower scores for 'too little content', shipping with such a complete package should also be praised.
Also, I've been saying again and again that a score system of 0-5 is much, much better. Gears is obviously a clear candidate for 4/5. It's a great game, way above average, but probably not an ultimate game of the gen 5/5 contender. That being said, I hope Gears 5 can still creep up a little towards the 90s mark on MC. I can't take that 6/10 score seriously, for instance.
I think game reviews should always review the full game, and yes, this includes multiplayer. How is this not a standard? It's simply because people want to get the scores out to generate the clicks. Why not call it a 'review in progress' then? Too little sites are doing it. The multiplayer an important component of the game after all. Gears 5 is launching with a LOT of content and if games can get lower scores for 'too little content', shipping with such a complete package should also be praised.
Also, I've been saying again and again that a score system of 0-5 is much, much better. Gears is obviously a clear candidate for 4/5. It's a great game, way above average, but probably not an ultimate game of the gen 5/5 contender. That being said, I hope Gears 5 can still creep up a little towards the 90s mark on MC. I can't take that 6/10 score seriously, for instance.
Then publishers needs to set som conditions so that the game to be reviewed as a whole.
Last edited:
That's the only review that has said it's worse than 4, so I wouldn't exactly put all your eggs in that basket.
Hmm, see I hold new IP to a different standard than existing franchises. If the new GOW got an 85 and was following the same formula as the previous ones, I would have called it disappointing, because the room temperature was that people were tired of that franchise and that it needed a shakeup. If the general word was "heh, it's more GOW", that would have been disappointing. Now, if we're looking at Spider-Man or Horizon as new IPs (and I agree about Detroit and Days Gone not being part of that hot streak), I think it's more impressive for those to be in the high 80s. It just doesn't come with the sting of "it's good but we're tired of these", basically. I don't think the score alone is what you need to look at, of course, but context really matters. I'm more worried about the reviews saying it's just more Gears than I am about the score.
I don't trust them at all but that's because they over score virtually all big AAA franchise games, not because they underrate them. Gears 4 is a prime example, a safe Gears game that was nothing special is sitting at 84.
Well, we're different.
I cannot imagine how the character animated having a massive impact on how engaged I am in the world and action around my character, but to each their own.
Lol, talking as if a game dev is earning the same as a waitress.
Any mention on whether we can switch shoulders for aiming on the fly or is the only way I'm gonna aim left handed gonna be when I pop out of the left side of cover?
