So I played Gears of War for the first time in my life.

[Rad Party God]

The series itself is not bad, they're pretty good and sometimes even great, I've only played 1 (PC) and 2, but I seriously still haven't found a better "chest high wall third person shooter" than Gears of War, or at least one that's as satisfying as Gears, not even Mass Effect 2/3 come close to it.

The story is downright laughably bad, but the monster design and the gameplay itself is pretty stellar, I finished Gears 1 like 3 times and Gears 2 like 5 times. Yup, it was that good.

 

[Naeras]

I've played parts of GoW1 and most(I think?) of GoW2. If you liked the first one and want more of the same, you're guaranteed to like the others. I personally got bored with both of them after a while, but I'm no big fan of cover-based shooting in the first place.

That being said, Horde mode with a friend or two, some popcorn and preferably excess alcohol is a fun evening no matter how it goes. Also, the unintentionally hilarious dialogue is pretty fun when you're playing with a friend that thinks the one-liners are exactly as laughable as you do. <3

 

[Zeras]

If you pay attention to the story in Gears 3 it has an environmental message, and it turns out you're the bad guy.
I still can't figure out if it's meant to be a parody or not.

It's not that we/they're the bad guys, it's just that no-one thought to see if imulsion really was just an inert source of energy, though you find out a ton of information that is implied with a certain segment of Gears 2.

 

[MindFragged]

Glad to hear you liked it. Story-wise, I found it a lot more fun to treat the series with a degree of irony (kinda like how I enjoy Commando or Raw Deal, for example).

If possible try and get a mate involved for when you get 2 (which you should probably - you won't be disappointed if you enjoyed 1). Some of my fondest gaming memories are playing through it with my housemate. Also, the Gears of War drinking game will see you straight:

Rule 1:
Two fingers every time your character uses a profanity.

That proved enough to get me and said housemate Chris riotously bladdered in a very short space of time.

 

[Ravinoff]

Eh...the mechanics are solid, but I always found the story really lacking, particularly in 2 and 3. You get the feeling they're always about to reveal something big about the Locust, but they never really do. I mean, if you liked 1, 2 and 3 are definitely worth playing, as the gameplay is pretty similar and works just as well. It's just the story and characters are kinda lame.

I thought the story was fine for the game. I didnt really focus on it that much, just saw it as a bit of fluff, enough to tell me why I want to use the chainsaw bayonet of my Lancer on that ugly fucker over there...

All I needed from the franchise.

Maybe it's just me, then. But I'd really like to know where the race of reptilian hive-dwellers came from, and why nobody noticed them before (they live underground, there's loads of Imulsion mines, you'd think someone would see one). It particularly bugged me in 3, because there's this whole sequence in 2 that you go through in the labs, the part where

Spoiler

it's heavily implied that the humans either knew of and were experimenting on, or actually created the Locust.

But then 3 comes along and basically says "hey so forget about all that, Marcus's dad is alive and nebulously involved with the Locust, and here's some Lambent!"

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Never played it but it's refreshing to hear someone actually liked it.

 

[MindFragged]

Never played it but it's refreshing to hear someone actually liked it.

I wasn't aware there was that much stigma attached to it, but perhaps that's naive of me. It was really popular after all....

 

[skywolfblue]

So guys, if I liked this game, will I like the sequels ?

Yes.

2 is IMO the best campaign, and 3 has the best mechanics/gameplay. The Third's Horde mode is the highlight of the whole series for me, the rolling movement and sticking to cover is nigh flawless, the bosses are hard as nails, but never unfair, the tower-defense style stuff where you can set up turrets and wires with the money you've earned is excellent.

I'd highly recommend them!

 

[Dosbilliam]

I liked the game mechanics. Marcus, however, is literally the worst character I've ever seen in a game, even worse than Duke Nukem. If he had an emotional range beyond anger, if the game actually had some levity, it might be good, but as it stands, I don't plan on playing the rest of the series because the characters are just terrible...except for Cole. He's cool.

 

[Maeshone]

Eh...the mechanics are solid, but I always found the story really lacking, particularly in 2 and 3. You get the feeling they're always about to reveal something big about the Locust, but they never really do. I mean, if you liked 1, 2 and 3 are definitely worth playing, as the gameplay is pretty similar and works just as well. It's just the story and characters are kinda lame.

I thought the story was fine for the game. I didnt really focus on it that much, just saw it as a bit of fluff, enough to tell me why I want to use the chainsaw bayonet of my Lancer on that ugly fucker over there...

All I needed from the franchise.

Maybe it's just me, then. But I'd really like to know where the race of reptilian hive-dwellers came from, and why nobody noticed them before (they live underground, there's loads of Imulsion mines, you'd think someone would see one). It particularly bugged me in 3, because there's this whole sequence in 2 that you go through in the labs, the part where

Spoiler

it's heavily implied that the humans either knew of and were experimenting on, or actually created the Locust.

But then 3 comes along and basically says "hey so forget about all that, Marcus's dad is alive and nebulously involved with the Locust, and here's some Lambent!"

Spoiler: About the Locust

They do actually clear up where the locust come from, but they do so in a really shitty way. The games really gloss over the facts, and you need to read the books to get the proper answer (Which is really shitty storytelling when you're talking about a video-game franchise), but basically, humans exposed to Imulsion radiation mutated into the Sires (Those wierd things in the research facility in Gears 2) sometime before Emergence Day. Apparently, some of the Sires then either were pregnant or became pregnant, and their children were the first Locust Drones. These children are mentioned in Gears 2 in one audiolog where they talk about moving the children to a second site underground. This is basically all the explanation ever given, but the gist of it is that humanity created the Locust through exposure to Imulsion radiation, and then hid them away underground.

 

[barbzilla]

I only made it through 1. I enjoyed 1 quite a bit (with the possible exception of how easy the final boss was, even on the hardest difficulty), but I couldn't get through 2 or 3. It just felt like more of the same. That tends to be normal of me though, if a game comes out, is new and fun, and I haven't tried the style before, I tend to have quite a bit of fun with it. However, if no innovation is made to help expand on the concept, and it isn't a genre breaker, I grow tired of it after the first installment. As such I tend to wait till later games are out for a series before I pick it up. That way I can find out which of the installments are the best (tends to be the first, but not always true), and then play that one.

 

[Mikeyfell]

I'm sorry, but you're on the list now.

I will make this world pure eventually.


Actually that's not fair. I don't have that much against the first Gears of War. Except that it's the game that jaded me to every perfect 10 score given by any ranking system.
Gears 1 was a 7.0 at best. Acceptable but not a 10.

It wasn't until Gears of War 2 where Epic showed their dedication to making shit.
If you're hell bent on playing it I won't spoil the specifics but let's just say that one of the main character's sole motivation is to murder a defenseless, traumatized woman because she's in no condition to fuck him.

The gameplay is just as slightly above average as the first game was, but you never get over the niggling sense that if you were to look at the game from the Locust's perspective Marcus would just be a terrorist.


Then in Gears 3 you find out that the Humans were the bad guys the whole fucking time, and the game expects the player to cheer at that fact. Like "Yay! We're going to commit Genocide to end a war we started! Earth Fuck Yeah!"


But, if resoundingly "meh" combat and the most despicable appalling cast of characters ever created is your thing, knock your self out

 

[WanderingFool]

Maybe it's just me, then. But I'd really like to know where the race of reptilian hive-dwellers came from, and why nobody noticed them before (they live underground, there's loads of Imulsion mines, you'd think someone would see one). It particularly bugged me in 3, because there's this whole sequence in 2 that you go through in the labs, the part where

Spoiler

it's heavily implied that the humans either knew of and were experimenting on, or actually created the Locust.

But then 3 comes along and basically says "hey so forget about all that, Marcus's dad is alive and nebulously involved with the Locust, and here's some Lambent!"

Well, for me at least, its the feeling of Catharsis. Games like Bulletstorm and Gears are a fun little way to get my murder on after a stressful day... or after playing a few bad rounds of COD...

 

[tippy2k2]

I really liked Gears of War 1 and I liked Gears of War 2. However, I ended up just quitting Gears of War 3.

Gameplay-wise, there is almost no difference between the three (and I haven't touched Judgement so I presume it's the same). If all you are looking for is the gameplay, go for it since there is minimal change.

However, 3 became kind of goofy to me. It introduced a bunch of new enemies and characters that evidently Marcus knew but didn't bother to introduce to me, the player. I had absolutely no clue what these tentacle creatures were and who this dude in the cowboy hat was or this chick but the game just set it up for me to care about these random people that I know absolutely nothing about. By this point, the gameplay not changing all that much combined with the "Who the hell is this guy and why should I care if he's in danger" caused me to give up on the series.

 

[bug_of_war]

Mechanically, definitely a solid and fun game. Can't being to detail the amounts of fun I have with 3 mates playing Horde online.

Story wise, always a buggering failure, not to mention Cliffy B's penchant to talk up his games.

Let's be honest though, Gears isn't the game you go to for an enriching story. You got to Gears for a hyper testosterone filled bloody co-op bro game. It's basically the video game equivalent of The Expendables.

 

[josemlopes]

who this dude in the cowboy hat was or this chick but the game just set it up for me to care about these random people that I know absolutely nothing about. By this point, the gameplay not changing all that much combined with the "Who the hell is this guy and why should I care if he's in danger" caused me to give up on the series.

Wait, Dizzy? He was in the second game, he kind of saves Marcus and Dom before they go underground. Jace and Sam were the new characters that came out of nowhere but I honestly didnt saw any problem with them, they were just soldiers that were part of your squad, you didnt necessarily need to feel anything for them (and the game never really asks you to care either).

OT: I actually like the "story", not exactly what it is about but mostly the story of the squad, its a bromance about camaraderie.

The gameplay is fantastic although in the third game they could have spiced up the enemy variety, mix different types of enemies together more often. Only near the end you get to see a bigger amount of enemy types in each combat.

 

[tippy2k2]

who this dude in the cowboy hat was or this chick but the game just set it up for me to care about these random people that I know absolutely nothing about. By this point, the gameplay not changing all that much combined with the "Who the hell is this guy and why should I care if he's in danger" caused me to give up on the series.

Wait, Dizzy? He was in the second game, he kind of saves Marcus and Dom before they go underground. Jace and Sam were the new characters that came out of nowhere but I honestly didnt saw any problem with them, they were just soldiers that were part of your squad, you didnt necessarily need to feel anything for them (and the game never really asks you to care either).

...that actually explains a lot. I guess I wasn't paying enough attention in 2 for I don't remember cowboy hat at all (yes, dizzy). I figured I would have remembered him but I can see why he actually mattered now (I still got bored with the game but at least that explains that issue

 

[daveman247]

Aaand it's really freaking good !

I mean it has amazingly well done shooting mechanics, the guns are fairly varied, the encounters are really well designed, the emergence hole mechanic is a stroke of genius in my honest opinion, not to mention the amazingly well crafted pacing, wow I can't believe this is actually really good and deserves the hype.

So guys, if I liked this game, will I like the sequels ?

Yes you will. As many have already said the story is complete crap - just there to justify the killing. The "serious" and "dramatic" moments always fall hilariously flat.


But the gameplay just gets more and more well refined as you go, with some new (and violent) weapons to go along the way.

Having terry tate along for most of the ride is always good in my book.


In gears 3 they actually make the mutliplayer REALLY good ^_^

 

[Altorin]

the sequels get better and better, although you should know that the functionality of the guns varies.. the main fire-arm of the locust, at least in gears 2 is what my friend and I like to refer to as "Poison".. as in, if you pick it up, you will immediately want to not pick it up.. I don't think it was so bad in Gears 1 or 3, but iirc, in Gears 2 it was horrible.

Yes you will. As many have already said the story is complete crap - just there to justify the killing. The "serious" and "dramatic" moments always fall hilariously flat.

The story's not crap. It's just... not told very well... and the human element (the characters themselves) are kind of bad.. But the backstory and the setting, and the conflict at hand is actually pretty good.