Something went wrong. Try again later

Gears of War: Judgment

Judge not, Vinny, lest ye be judged by Jeff's sawed-off shotgun.

Embed
Click To Unmute

Want us to remember this setting for all your devices?

Sign up or Sign in now!

Please use a html5 video capable browser to watch videos.
This video has an invalid file format.
00:00:00
Sorry, but you can't access this content!
Please enter your date of birth to view this video

By clicking 'enter', you agree to Giant Bomb's
Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

Giant Bomb Review

292 Comments

Gears of War: Judgment Review

3
  • X360

Judgment's campaign twists the Gears formula in some interesting ways, but the rest of the package feels pretty thin for a full-priced retail product.

You'll see a lot of human-on-human chainsaw fights--most of the competitive multiplayer doesn't have any Locust characters.
You'll see a lot of human-on-human chainsaw fights--most of the competitive multiplayer doesn't have any Locust characters.

Gears of War 3 provided a relatively satisfying conclusion to the trilogy, wrapping up the events well and giving Marcus Fenix and his crew a much-needed chance to sit down. So it makes sense that another Gears of War game would be set as a prequel. Rather than taking the obvious route and showing you why Fenix needed to be broken out of jail to open the first game, the focus is put on the side characters, Baird and Cole. Don't take that to mean that Gears of War: Judgment has a deep, engaging story that makes you look upon the whole franchise in a brand-new way or anything, but there's just enough exposition there to keep things moving and just enough of a gameplay tweak to make you wish they had made these changes two games ago. It's a fun but feature-light shooter for people who already enjoy the basic style of Gears of War. Nothing more, nothing less.

The bulk of the story is told in flashback, as the four soldiers of Kilo Squad find themselves as defendants in a hastily-assembled trial. Their testimony runs throughout the game--they tell the story, you run from point to point, chainsawing and shooting Locust enemies all the while. There are no surprises along the way, either. Kilo Squad sets out to take down a big bad guy in the area and, by the end of the game, they'll have completed their task. You'll also unlock a second campaign called Aftermath, which is set during the events of Gears of War 3. In Aftermath, you'll take Baird and Cole back into an area from the Judgment campaign as they search for a boat to help with the final assault on Azura. Throughout both campaigns, the characters seem a little subdued when compared to the proper Gears trilogy. There are fewer "woo!" moments out of Cole and less machine fixing and complaining out of Baird.

That Aftermath campaign is missing the thing that actually makes Judgment cool in the first place. At the start of every section, you'll find a Gears of War logo glowing on a wall. If you run up to it and hit X, you'll be given the option to "declassify" some additional details. These act as modifiers for the gameplay that force you to play Gears of War in different ways. Sometimes you'll have to start a section with very little ammo. Other times you'll be forced to use less-than-ideal weapons for the entire section. Sometimes you'll get time limits, and sometimes you'll encounter dust or gas that makes it hard to see and aim throughout the entire area. It keeps you on your toes and gives you a reason to change up your style and stop chainsawing your way through everything that gets in your way. Each section also has a set of three stars to earn, and enabling the declassified option makes it easier to earn all three of those stars. The tradeoff is that the entire game is broken up into very tight, defined sections, which makes the whole thing feel a little artificial. You're practically given a Left 4 Dead-style safe room between every single combat section, packed with guns, ammo, and the declassification icon. It gives the game a herky-jerky feel that can be a little off-putting.

The class-based nature of OverRun lets engineers plant turrets and scouts toss auto-tagging grenades.
The class-based nature of OverRun lets engineers plant turrets and scouts toss auto-tagging grenades.

Most of the enemies are guys that you've seen before, from bloodmounts to lambent versions of various creatures, and you'll fight them with the same basic arsenal. There are a few new weapons, like the Marksa, a semi-automatic rifle with a good scope that makes for a lighter, friendlier gun in medium-range sniping situations. The biggest gameplay change is a control change that makes weapon-switching more like Halo or Call of Duty. Instead of using the D-pad to switch between four different weapons, you can now hold two, and tapping the Y button swaps between them. Grenades are now dedicated to the left bumper, rather than being something you have to select before you can use. This change may come down to personal preference, but playing Gears this way makes me wish it was like this all along. Grenades become a lot more useful when you can just toss one out at will instead of having to stop shooting just to switch over to your grenades. It's a nice change that some people will probably hate.

The multiplayer end of Gears Judgment offers a few modes, with the two new ideas based around the same concept. OverRun pits attacking Locust players against defending humans, like a melding of the co-op-only Beast and Horde modes of the past into one competitive mode. It's a fine mode that makes you wonder why it took the developers this long to get here, since all the pieces for this were in place for Gears 3. Survival mode replaces Horde mode, and it's little more than a single-team, co-op-only version of OverRun, with the AI taking up the Locust faction. Both modes are class-based on both sides of the action, so humans can choose a Soldier role, which lets them dispense ammo to teammates, a Medic role that can toss healing grenades, and two others. Locust players use a class-based system similar to Beast mode in Gears 3, with personal points unlocking the ability to spawn as more extreme enemies. OverRun is cool... but Survival isn't as good as Horde mode was in the last game.

The members of Kilo Squad.
The members of Kilo Squad.

In addition to those, you can play the campaigns cooperatively or play Deathmatch, Team Deathmatch, or Domination games. The game is still packed with ribbons and medals to earn as you play, and as you level up your character you'll earn prize boxes that randomly give you character or weapon skins. Like Gears 3, the game is also packed full of purchasable skins, and these are marked in such a way that makes it look like you'll never be able to unlock a buyable skin via the game's prize boxes. Also on the microtransaction front is the ability to straight-up buy double XP bonuses that last for a set number of matches. What, no soda or chip company wanted to kick down and print codes on their packages? Players that purchase the Season Pass DLC pre-order get access to a "VIP" matchmaking option that includes all of that DLC and generates more XP than the standard matchmaking option. It's... a bit much, especially because the game only ships with four maps for OverRun/Survival and four for TDM and the other competitive modes. The multiplayer side of Judgment just feels thin.

Despite my feelings that Baird is the most extraneous character in the Gears universe and a general feeling after Gears 3 that I was probably done with this franchise, Judgment is still a good time. It doesn't let its story get in the way of its action, and the declassified modifiers had me playing Gears in ways that I normally wouldn't, making for a more interesting challenge than the typical difficulty settings offer. But the lack of maps just sucks every last bit of life out of the multiplayer, regardless of its new modes.

Jeff Gerstmann on Google+

292 Comments

Avatar image for fiberpay
fiberpay

284

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

@red12b said:

@fiberpay said:

@xeirus said:

@fiberpay said:

Yea figured this would get 3 stars. I don't really trust Jeff to review this game he bashes on the "dude bro" stuff way to much. Also, just for comparison Simcity got 3 stars lol, gtfo.

Simcity was reviewed by Alex, so what the fuck is your point again?

Have you even played Simcity? It's a joke of a game with enough lies and baggage to warrant a 1 star review.

Also, maybe Jeff bashes on the "dude bro" stuff because that shit is dumb as hell and not entertaining?

Opinions, go figure.

That's my point, Simcity is a joke and yet it gets the same score as a perfectly competent game.

You should take your own advise, opinion's go figure, just because you and Jeff think they are "dumb as hell and not entertaining" does not mean that they are. Opinion huh. My point is Jeff hates on them so why would I trust his review, not that Jeff should like dude bro shooters.

how old are you?

for reference...

Age has nothing to do with an opinion. Just because one person thinks something is dumb does not make it FACT.

Avatar image for younglink
YOUNGLINK

641

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

No "Candy Mode" No sale.

Avatar image for toug
Toug

668

Forum Posts

452

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

Edited By Toug

To be fair, I mostly only ever played on 2-3 maps in previous games.

But then, I only played Horde mode, so the point is kind of moot.

Avatar image for red12b
Red12b

9363

Forum Posts

1084

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Edited By Red12b

@fiberpay said:

@xeirus said:

@fiberpay said:

Yea figured this would get 3 stars. I don't really trust Jeff to review this game he bashes on the "dude bro" stuff way to much. Also, just for comparison Simcity got 3 stars lol, gtfo.

Simcity was reviewed by Alex, so what the fuck is your point again?

Have you even played Simcity? It's a joke of a game with enough lies and baggage to warrant a 1 star review.

Also, maybe Jeff bashes on the "dude bro" stuff because that shit is dumb as hell and not entertaining?

Opinions, go figure.

That's my point, Simcity is a joke and yet it gets the same score as a perfectly competent game.

You should take your own advise, opinion's go figure, just because you and Jeff think they are "dumb as hell and not entertaining" does not mean that they are. Opinion huh. My point is Jeff hates on them so why would I trust his review, not that Jeff should like dude bro shooters.

how old are you?

for reference...

Avatar image for willtron
Willtron

254

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Willtron

Ugh. Gears fanboys. Jeff said he really liked the campaign, but the lackluster multiplayer made for an average game. And the story was completely forgettable. He is very "anti-dudebro", but he loved Gears 3. So it's not like he's against Gears. Christ. He wasn't overly-cynical. He proved his points in the review.

It's like God of War: just unnecessary, and further proof that the generation has gone on too long.

It was a completely average game. It wasn't bad. It was average.Fucking deal with it. Christ.

Seriously, comparing this game's review to OTHER games, reviewed by other reviewers? Fucking dumb. Compare it to other Jeff reviews if you think Jeff has an inherent bias, or compare it to, you know, other Gears reviews. And Alex wrote about his SimCity review. It works now. And the review relates to a game that works--which is completely average even without server issues. Design decisions get in SimCity's way, just like design decisions got in Gears' ways. Shit multiplayer in Gears vs. forced multiplayer in SimCity.

Avatar image for epsilon82
Epsilon82

47

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Pretty much what I expected to hear; honestly, I think we're just pushing up against the edges of generationally-rooted sequel fatigue or whatever they called it last year. Both this and God of War: Ascension just seem like last-second cash grabs before the new consoles reshuffle the deck, so to speak, and even if the games were really good, that's a big burden to overcome at this point. $60 for yet another game in a well-entrenched series that doesn't bring much new to the table is getting harder and harder to swallow, especially since there are so many fresh experiences that can be had for a song now unless you've somehow managed to keep up with all of the releases over the last few years.

I don't think it's a coincidence that I've started to get a lot more budget-conscious about my gaming spending while basically adding dozens of highly regarded new games to an already hugely "oppressive" backlog over the last few years.

I might pick this up at some point, but only if I can find it for around $10-15 or so. Even then, it just doesn't seem like something I find remotely urgent to play.

Avatar image for lind_l_taylor
Lind_L_Taylor

4125

Forum Posts

6

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

Edited By Lind_L_Taylor

I sort of stopped after Gears 1, when Gears 2 failed to be worthwhile.

Avatar image for gaspower
GaspoweR

4904

Forum Posts

272

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

Edited By GaspoweR

@minipato said:

@fiberpay said:

@nights said:

@fiberpay said:

Yea figured this would get 3 stars. I don't really trust Jeff to review this game he bashes on the "dude bro" stuff way to much. Also, just for comparison Simcity got 3 stars lol, gtfo.

Uh, except for the fact that he reviewed Gears of War 2 and 3 and gave them both five stars. But hey, let's bash Jeff...

I'm not bashing him, I just don't trust his review of a game like this because how much he bashes on dude bro stuff. Also he had to give those other games high scores because they got high scores from everyone else. Also, this got the same score as a game that did not fucking work(simcity) lol.

Except that his main complain ISN'T the dudebro stuff, but the lack of maps and horde mode in multiplayer.

As @minipato pointed out, Jeff didn't even give the game that score because of some anti-dudbro bias but compared to the previous game (Gears 3), this game didn't even provide as much content wholesale because on the MP side it's lacking a variety of maps and all. If he did have that bias, he probably would have scored all the other Gears games the same way and he never once mentioned the dudebro mentality being something of detracting point in all of the reviews. Also as an anecdote, despite the review I'll probably still get this game at some point, just like when I bought Dead Space 3 and Crysis 3, which are games that got 3 stars from GB as well.

Avatar image for lockeyness
lockeyness

233

Forum Posts

8618

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 5

@fiberpay said:

@nights said:

@fiberpay said:

Yea figured this would get 3 stars. I don't really trust Jeff to review this game he bashes on the "dude bro" stuff way to much. Also, just for comparison Simcity got 3 stars lol, gtfo.

Uh, except for the fact that he reviewed Gears of War 2 and 3 and gave them both five stars. But hey, let's bash Jeff...

I'm not bashing him, I just don't trust his review of a game like this because how much he bashes on dude bro stuff. Also he had to give those other games high scores because they got high scores from everyone else. Also, this got the same score as a game that did not fucking work(simcity) lol.

You're missing the point. He's a Gears fan. He gave those other two games five stars because he felt they deserved five stars. He gave this game three stars because he felt it didn't stand up to the previous entries. Clearly he's all about some of this dude bro stuff. Saying that he gave the game a similar score to other review sites is just grasping at straws, just like comparing this review of a third-person shooter to his review of a city building simulation. Don't be ridiculous.

Avatar image for geraltitude
GERALTITUDE

5991

Forum Posts

8980

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 17

User Lists: 2

Edited By GERALTITUDE

Sound like this is a pretty alright game for peeps who like Gears of War, too bad the multiplayer is so thin, probably for sake of DLC (gross). 4 maps... is... not very many.

Avatar image for minipato
MiniPato

3030

Forum Posts

3

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@fiberpay said:

@nights said:

@fiberpay said:

Yea figured this would get 3 stars. I don't really trust Jeff to review this game he bashes on the "dude bro" stuff way to much. Also, just for comparison Simcity got 3 stars lol, gtfo.

Uh, except for the fact that he reviewed Gears of War 2 and 3 and gave them both five stars. But hey, let's bash Jeff...

I'm not bashing him, I just don't trust his review of a game like this because how much he bashes on dude bro stuff. Also he had to give those other games high scores because they got high scores from everyone else. Also, this got the same score as a game that did not fucking work(simcity) lol.

Except that his main complain ISN'T the dudebro stuff, but the lack of maps and horde mode in multiplayer.

Avatar image for mistercrow
MisterCrow

69

Forum Posts

11

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

So if the most Gears you played was 1 and a super tiny bit of 2, would you recommend 3 or Judgement?

Avatar image for meatsim
MeatSim

11201

Forum Posts

150

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 23

Edited By MeatSim

It seems kinda crazy that they skimped on the multiplayer/co-op considering it's a big part of why Gears is so popular.

Avatar image for iamjohn
iamjohn

6297

Forum Posts

13905

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By iamjohn

@fiberpay said:

@xeirus said:

@fiberpay said:

Yea figured this would get 3 stars. I don't really trust Jeff to review this game he bashes on the "dude bro" stuff way to much. Also, just for comparison Simcity got 3 stars lol, gtfo.

Simcity was reviewed by Alex, so what the fuck is your point again?

Have you even played Simcity? It's a joke of a game with enough lies and baggage to warrant a 1 star review.

Also, maybe Jeff bashes on the "dude bro" stuff because that shit is dumb as hell and not entertaining?

Opinions, go figure.

That's my point, Simcity is a joke and yet it gets the same score as a perfectly competent game.

You should take your own advise, opinion's go figure, just because you and Jeff think they are "dumb as hell and not entertaining" does not mean that they are. Opinion huh. My point is Jeff hates on them so why would I trust his review, not that Jeff should like dude bro shooters.

Ignoring the stupid comparison to SimCity that is both meaningless and irrelevant, you've still yet to justify how Jeff is unfair to or has it in for "'dude bro' stuff" (what a meaningless term, by the way) when history (and the myriad 4/5 star ratings for previous Gears, Call of Duties and practically any of the game people accuse of being dudebro) proves otherwise.

Avatar image for fiberpay
fiberpay

284

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By fiberpay

@nights said:

@fiberpay said:

Yea figured this would get 3 stars. I don't really trust Jeff to review this game he bashes on the "dude bro" stuff way to much. Also, just for comparison Simcity got 3 stars lol, gtfo.

Uh, except for the fact that he reviewed Gears of War 2 and 3 and gave them both five stars. But hey, let's bash Jeff...

I'm not bashing him, I just don't trust his review of a game like this because how much he bashes on dude bro stuff. Also he had to give those other games high scores because they got high scores from everyone else. Also, this got the same score as a game that did not fucking work(simcity) lol.

Avatar image for fiberpay
fiberpay

284

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

@xeirus said:

@fiberpay said:

Yea figured this would get 3 stars. I don't really trust Jeff to review this game he bashes on the "dude bro" stuff way to much. Also, just for comparison Simcity got 3 stars lol, gtfo.

Simcity was reviewed by Alex, so what the fuck is your point again?

Have you even played Simcity? It's a joke of a game with enough lies and baggage to warrant a 1 star review.

Also, maybe Jeff bashes on the "dude bro" stuff because that shit is dumb as hell and not entertaining?

Opinions, go figure.

That's my point, Simcity is a joke and yet it gets the same score as a perfectly competent game.

You should take your own advise, opinion's go figure, just because you and Jeff think they are "dumb as hell and not entertaining" does not mean that they are. Opinion huh. My point is Jeff hates on them so why would I trust his review, not that Jeff should like dude bro shooters.

Avatar image for gogosox82
gogosox82

459

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By gogosox82

@zevvion said:

@gogosox82 said:

Wait there's only 4 maps? I thought the whole point of this thing was the multiplayer(at least that's the impression I got from all of the trailers and such) and they only have 4 maps? That's kind of a bummer if you were looking forward to this.

It's not just that.

As far as I understand it the dedicated servers that Gears 3 had, are now being used for Judgement solely. That means Gears 3 doesn't run on dedicated servers anymore which was a huge bonus.

Essentially, you're trading in a great multiplayer experience in Gears 3 in for a multiplayer component short on content in Judgement. You can continue playing Gears 3 without dedicated servers, but allot of people don't like that.

Wow gears had dedicated servers? I'm not a big gears fans (but try to follow the news surrounding it) but that's pretty messed up if your big into playing gears and don't wanna buy judgement. Your basically stuck playing gears3 in an inferior way and its being supplanted by an inferior product.

Avatar image for bkbroiler
bkbroiler

1739

Forum Posts

438

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 11

This is actually a pretty positive review. He just says it's light on content and nothing new, really. I can totally see that warranting 3 stars.

Avatar image for ptc
ptc

640

Forum Posts

106

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

I wish Giantbomb had a policy of not considering price when doing a review. It makes it hard to interpret overall review scores after the initial release date. By the time I get around to buying/playing most games, they're significantly reduced from their original price, so that's not a factor for me.

Avatar image for expensiveham
expensiveham

394

Forum Posts

7275

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Disgusting that there is no People Can Fly logo on the box.

Avatar image for deerokus
deerokus

996

Forum Posts

16

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

@sikboy1029: He gave both previous games 5/5, didn't he? Doesn't sound like someone who wasn't a fan.

Avatar image for honkyjesus
honkyjesus

140

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

Microsoft first party development. The home of Lococycle.

They couldn't even get Epic to helm this one, and MS still wanted it.

Avatar image for derekdanahy
DerekDanahy

891

Forum Posts

129

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Really liked the review Jeff.

Avatar image for cptbedlam
CptBedlam

4612

Forum Posts

7

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By CptBedlam

I wish GB would use actual ingame screenshots as opposed to PR-provided bullshots for their reviews. Those really don't tell me a lot about how the game actually looks.

Avatar image for tayls
tayls

30

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By tayls

This series really needs to be over.

Avatar image for cloudnineboya
cloudnineboya

990

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By cloudnineboya

@sooty: god your an idiot sometimes.

Avatar image for sikboy1029
Sikboy1029

180

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Sikboy1029

Just remember Jeff wasn't the biggest fan of the series. I imagine if you liked the past games you'll still enjoy this one.

Avatar image for tigusvidiks
TigusVidiks

22

Forum Posts

15

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 7

Edited By TigusVidiks

kinda expected this. Not gonna try it for now, maybe later when the price drops. Never really liked Baird, and a Gears with small, more contained maps will likely seem awkward.

Avatar image for ez123
ez123

2166

Forum Posts

170

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 12

Why would anyone think that making a game around the most hated character in the franchise it a good idea..

Exactly. No one thinks that's a good idea. That's why Epic made a game around a well-liked character that was missing in large portions of Gears 3.

Avatar image for mordeaniischaos
MordeaniisChaos

5904

Forum Posts

-1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 5

Edited By MordeaniisChaos

@mordeaniischaos: Nah, that's silly. My guess is that the poor selection of maps is what's keeping the game at a 3 instead of a 4.

huh, that doesn't show as a quote. Also, yeah, I do. I don't think it's what's getting it a 3 instead of a 5. Which is not a 4. That's the difference.

Avatar image for mezmero
Mezmero

4107

Forum Posts

420

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 16

Gears 3 was a game I meant to own after playing it but just ended up renting it. This campaign sounds kind of bland and taking out Horde mode seems like a mistake. Yet another shining example that this generation has gone on too long. Thanks for the great review.

Avatar image for mr_skeleton
Mr_Skeleton

5195

Forum Posts

7918

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 15

Edited By Mr_Skeleton

Why would anyone think that making a game around the most hated character in the franchise it a good idea..

Avatar image for dallas_raines
Dallas_Raines

2269

Forum Posts

45

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By Dallas_Raines

Positive review = YOU GUYS ARE PAID OFF BY THE EVIL CORPORATIONS

Bad Review = YOU GUYS ARE JUST PISSING ON THE GAME FOR PAGE VIEWS, IT'S WEIRD, THOUGH, THAT YOU WOULD DO THAT TO THE COMPANIES THAT PAY YOU OFF REGULARLY!

Fuck the internet.

Avatar image for colourful_hippie
colourful_hippie

6335

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

@mordeaniischaos: Nah, that's silly. My guess is that the poor selection of maps is what's keeping the game at a 3 instead of a 4.

Avatar image for mordeaniischaos
MordeaniisChaos

5904

Forum Posts

-1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 5

Edited By MordeaniisChaos

@gasparnolasco:

Actually, because of how assets are generated this generation, not much is going to change all that much. Things are already created with more polygons and more pixels than you end up seeing in the final game, either because it's easier to start big and compress down or because of the nature of the pipeline to create content. For example, the reason a character looks so much more complex than he actually is is because of normal mapping, which is created from a high poly model that is baked into normal maps for a low poly realtime model. And texture work is pretty easy to scale up. And the architectures are very familiar next generation. So all in all, the cost of making games isn't really going to skyrocket like everyone's convinced.

And yes, there are a few very obvious next gen games announced. Most of the games at that PS4 event weren't Call of Duty/Killzone type games though. There were a number of riskier, more interesting titles being shown off. None of them were tiny, but that's not really what I'm saying.

This pattern has been repeated over the generations, it's one thing you can usually count on. And already, we are seeing games that are clearly more than just clones of the popular shooters. That's just a few announcements for one of the two consoles coming. And not all of the announcements we'll see for that platform.

Avatar image for mordeaniischaos
MordeaniisChaos

5904

Forum Posts

-1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 5

@iamjohn said:
@colourful_hippie said:

@mordeaniischaos: You are operating under the presumption that Gears of War Judgment would have earned a five-star review otherwise. Jeff repeatedly iterates that he found the story kind of bland and that the constant attempt to sell you DLC and microtransactions is frustrating. Especially due to the lack of content in the multiplayer, but the point is made before the number of launch maps are mentioned.

If the game felt content-complete, I still believe it only would have earned four stars. But the multiplayer portion feels especially thin, so three.

Also, scores are less important than one's actual feelings on a game, so.

This is what I think too.

Seriously this. Did these people who think that the lack of maps is the only thing making this a three-star game read the same review as me? Everything Jeff has written sounds like a four would have been generous.

I'm going to respond to all of the above pretty quickly: I never said I thought it read like a 5 star review other than that, I just got the feeling it was what everyone in the comments was sort of under the impression that the maps were the only reason that the game was getting knocked down.

Avatar image for bushpusherr
bushpusherr

1080

Forum Posts

2

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

@squidraid: As the site grows, so too the undesirables.

If you seriously have any doubts about Jeff's integrity (I think you're an idiot), then just wait until the bombcast where he'll certainly elaborate on his experience.

Also, if you disagree with the staff's reviews, that's perfectly ok, because they designed the Giant Bomb experience expressly so that you could evaluate a review based on what you know about the reviewer. If you think Jeff is too cynical, then great, you know how to interpret his reviews for yourself. But stop fucking bitching about it.

Avatar image for zevvion
Zevvion

5965

Forum Posts

1240

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 2

Wait there's only 4 maps? I thought the whole point of this thing was the multiplayer(at least that's the impression I got from all of the trailers and such) and they only have 4 maps? That's kind of a bummer if you were looking forward to this.

It's not just that.

As far as I understand it the dedicated servers that Gears 3 had, are now being used for Judgement solely. That means Gears 3 doesn't run on dedicated servers anymore which was a huge bonus.

Essentially, you're trading in a great multiplayer experience in Gears 3 in for a multiplayer component short on content in Judgement. You can continue playing Gears 3 without dedicated servers, but allot of people don't like that.

Avatar image for mildmolasses
MildMolasses

3200

Forum Posts

386

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 16

Cynicism is a great quality in a game reviewer and it's baffling to me to suggest otherwise. I want someone to be harsh on a game because I want to know everything that is -wrong- with the game and decide whether to buy it after the Pros and Cons have been weighed. People are putting WAY too much stock into the rating system without actually reading the points in the review that actually matter.

This exactly why I look for the reviews on the lower end of the scale. I want to know what issues people are finding with a game and weigh that against my personal tastes. With this game, for example, the negatives seem to relate to MP and a lack of Horde. As I am one of those rare single-player-only types, I'm not bothered by this, and the changes to the single player sound interesting. Thus, the lower end review benefits me the most

Avatar image for rahulricky
rahulricky

335

Forum Posts

10

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Sounds worth a rental I suppose, I'd like to see what Tom BIssell has done for the story.

On an unrelated note can I say I'm a bit disappointed that layouts for GB haven't really changed since the move to the new site. I was expecting them to be fancier and easier on the eye, but nope, nothing.

Avatar image for squidraid
squidraid

139

Forum Posts

7

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

It's pretty disappointing to see the comments on a Giant Bomb review degrade into rating bashing this bad. I thought we were better than this.

Avatar image for linkster7
linkster7

1371

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Goddamn it. I wanted this game for one reason, horde mode. I do not like the sound of this survival mode shit

Avatar image for countpickles
CountPickles

639

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

oh man, Brad isn't going to like this. He's been waiting so long for this game :(

Avatar image for gasparnolasco
GasparNolasco

365

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@mordeaniischaos:

It's all about the money, the business. New hardware means a much much smaller game library, and that means games require less marketing and hype to do well. Look at Oblivion. If that game had launched on the original Xbox, it would have just been a cool sequel for ES guys. Because it was out very early on the 360, it was one of the few high profile games on the system, which launched them into being incredibly successful to the point that they were able to make a whole other franchise with a similar design philosophy and structure that also sold super well. Some times, all a kick ass game needs to be a phenomenon instead of a middling success is a lack of competition. Skyrim was the most anticipated game I could think of that year, and Fallout 4 is something people are salivating for, especially with the idea of it being a next gen title.

Plus, hardware absolutely enables new cool things. Like bigger games with scale and scope closer to ArmA. A big scale on consoles means Dynasty Warriors or Halo's campaign (at least later titles like Halo 3), but on PC it means hundreds of intelligent entities and "maps" that take you 30 minutes to drive across. That kind of stuff enables the sort of experience that is WILDLY different than any console game has yet to offer.

TLDR: New consoles make risky investments much less risky. Yes, the install base is smaller, but they are also much hungrier for games, and will try new things they normally wouldn't have, allowing publishers to put games on shelves that are less like the current champ in the hopes of discovering the next big thing, such as when Bethesda skyrocketed to success, having only enjoyed mild success in the past despite excellent critical reception.

Agreed, the start of the generation offers a window for new ideas, but let's not forget that the mentality of the industry was very different 7 years ago when the generation started, they may not be willing to take that opportunity window this time. Most previews of next-gen games that we've seem in the last E3 and the Sony event are notably similar (or sequels) to what we have now, just with better graphics.

With each successive generation the risks are higher just for the sheer value of time and money needed to generate assets. Game companies will be willing to bet less in the novelty value of new titles or genres since it is established that the best selling games are 1st and 3rd Person Shooters.

Avatar image for iamjohn
iamjohn

6297

Forum Posts

13905

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By iamjohn

@mordeaniischaos: You are operating under the presumption that Gears of War Judgment would have earned a five-star review otherwise. Jeff repeatedly iterates that he found the story kind of bland and that the constant attempt to sell you DLC and microtransactions is frustrating. Especially due to the lack of content in the multiplayer, but the point is made before the number of launch maps are mentioned.

If the game felt content-complete, I still believe it only would have earned four stars. But the multiplayer portion feels especially thin, so three.

Also, scores are less important than one's actual feelings on a game, so.

This is what I think too.

Seriously this. Did these people who think that the lack of maps is the only thing making this a three-star game read the same review as me? Everything Jeff has written sounds like a four would have been generous.

Avatar image for toug
Toug

668

Forum Posts

452

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

Baird is the best Gears character.

That.... doesn't really make me any more inclined to play this one, but I'm reppin' Baird anyway.

Avatar image for colourful_hippie
colourful_hippie

6335

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By colourful_hippie

@mordeaniischaos said:

@colourful_hippie: I never said it wasn't, just that its not the end of the world and not worth two stars. I get it's not the optimal thing, but at the same time, it feels like the number impact is not at all the same as the actual impact, so people will see "only four maps!" and freak out.

I also never got the impression that Gears game types needed special maps to really work. 4 good, diverse maps is fine. It's not awesome, but it's plenty to get by on, especially in a game that seems, as I've said before, to be more focused on the campaign.

3 stars and you're talking like someone from the outside looking in. The numerous, diverse maps have been the norm for the franchise. 4 just seems crazy especially when they are planning on selling you a lot more but for extra.

EDIT: Thought you meant the review score, I know what you mean by 2 stars now.

@little_socrates said:

@mordeaniischaos: You are operating under the presumption that Gears of War Judgment would have earned a five-star review otherwise. Jeff repeatedly iterates that he found the story kind of bland and that the constant attempt to sell you DLC and microtransactions is frustrating. Especially due to the lack of content in the multiplayer, but the point is made before the number of launch maps are mentioned.

If the game felt content-complete, I still believe it only would have earned four stars. But the multiplayer portion feels especially thin, so three.

Also, scores are less important than one's actual feelings on a game, so.

This is what I think too.

Avatar image for kohe321
Kohe321

3569

Forum Posts

1444

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

Think I'll pass on this one, good review!

Avatar image for gogosox82
gogosox82

459

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By gogosox82

Wait there's only 4 maps? I thought the whole point of this thing was the multiplayer(at least that's the impression I got from all of the trailers and such) and they only have 4 maps? That's kind of a bummer if you were looking forward to this.