Network now...MAGAZINE
Review: Gears of War 2
By Edge Staff
November 25, 2008
See also:
Related Articles:
"Even by the standards of the original, Gears 2 is a titanic game. Leaving the stop-and-pop combat system largely untouched, it doubles its efforts elsewhere, piling thrills upon thrills, fan service upon fan service, and surprises upon expectations."
When sniping Locust battalions from an assault derrick, high above a forest that stretches as far as the eye can see, it’s easy to forget that Epic Games is anything but an epic company. Indeed, as the credits roll, pretty much everyone in that close-knit outfit gets a chance to sign off, usually with a few kind words to their “other family”.
Perhaps, when all the heads have been stomped, asses hauled and cities felled, that will be the final word on Gears Of War: that a developer so small could think and act so big. Even by the standards of the original, Gears 2 is a titanic game. Leaving the stop-and-pop combat system largely untouched, it doubles its efforts elsewhere, piling thrills upon thrills, fan service upon fan service, and surprises upon expectations.
There’s an analogue to almost everything in the first game – a driving section, a colossal cavern, a hailstorm (made of glass this time, not bats), an abandoned factory, a crumbling palace. But those are just the bones. When it hits its stride, this is compound action at its absolute finest – a masterclass in escalation.
Case in point: the aforementioned third chapter. Coming early in the first of five acts, it cannonballs from air defence to ground skirmish, from its giant vehicles to the forest floor, into and out of an NPC convoy, through a siege, into an ambush and quickly into battle with an entire Locust army and its quarterback, the Brumak. Helicopters spiral, derricks tumble, contrails coalesce and the action revolves enough to make you spin-dizzy.
Forget Achievements, difficulties and co-op – just taking it all in requires playing it twice. The controls are still bliss, the rhythm of the active reload as tight as the under-steer of the roadie run. The plot isn’t, its spuriously pitched themes of loss and retribution sending Dominic Santiago off-mission to find his wife, held somewhere in the bowels of Locustville.
There are slave barges, metal sarcophagi, hideous experiments, torture chambers and, worst of all, acting. Then, with a “HOO-RAH”, an apparent bout of post-traumatic amnesia and a collective sigh of relief from the audience, the game regains its senses, the camera returning to its true love, Marcus Fenix. Just as before, it’s his griping, un-American answers to every bloody nuisance that comes along that keeps the jingoism at bay.
And if not those, then this: “They’re sinking cities with a giant worm!” It’s thanks to the prodigious talents of Tim Sweeney and his fellow engineers that Gears 2 really does sink a city with a giant worm. It does more than that with it too, though telling you would mean greater spoilers than how Space Marine X dies a pitiless death in Embargoed Cutscene Y.
Whatever the series’ myopic eye for influences – its grandest crowd scenes come fresh from the multiplex – that can’t undermine levels that seem oblivious to terms like ‘ceiling’, ‘floor’ and ‘technical limitations’. The stragglers may peddle last season’s God rays, but Epic seems determined to show you where they come from, with backdrops stretching all the way from Heaven to Hell.Quite enough, then, to keep the eyes busy when the thumbs might otherwise twiddle, which can arise in that default state of normal difficulty and singleplayer.
The tooltip for that difficulty reads: ‘You enjoy playing the occasional shooter’ – and if you don’t want a tactics-free ride through battles that almost end before they begin, you might want to take that seriously. So too the news that co-op is being so heavily promoted this time that, in some later battles, the AI Dom is all but useless. Thankfully, the party atmosphere of co-op seldom has to shoulder flagging levels, and reliably makes the game twice as good in almost every respect.
But the penultimate act has its share of makeweight arena battles, culminating in a boss fight that falls flat on its face. Still, even the low points make the entire first game look prostrate. In multiplayer, thanks in no small part to some overdue online matchmaking, the package feels complete. The winning philosophy of Unreal Tournament III was to assume less and provide more, especially when considering newcomers; with its decent bots, tutorials, offline-friendly Achievements and system link support, Gears has carved itself a lucrative but also noble niche.
This is a game that wants to be played and enjoyed by all, its maps and modes striking an improved balance of camaraderie, instant gratification, match turnover and the sense that anyone can be champion no matter when they sign up. Not very hardcore, you might say, but as rewarding an alternative as Team Fortress 2.
Having long positioned itself as never taking gamers for granted, Epic has, with its best game to date, called for that to be recognised. That it thinks and acts so big is just half the equation, as Gears 2 gains just as much from its intimate online play, dexterous set-pieces and modesty in knowing it’s not the deepest, smartest game out there. Instead, at a time when everyone wants to turn the entertainment world on its head – or at least be seen to – it proves that the entertainment itself, whichever way up it may be, is what matters most.
9/10
GOW 2 is to GOW what Terminator 2 was to Terminator - big budget, explosion-filled spectacle replacing tightly constructed sci-fi horror. I played GOW in Harcore on first play through, and found it a throughly enjoyable experience, with the set-pieces and environments allowing full control over the action - i.e. if I died, it was my own fault. GOW 2, however, I've played on Normal, simply because the new focus on grand spectacle set-pieces provides less control - its all to easy to die now through no fault of your own. This isn't to suggest the game is broken, far from it, but it is more confusing and less tightly constructed from a pure gameplay POV. However, it does offer a fairly thrilling rollercoaster romp, and you're presented with gob-smacking giant ememies and genuinely exciting moments that just keep coming in a breathless rush. Graphically, the game really does shine, though it seems less gritty and grungy than the first. That said, the use of colour is fantastic and really opens the game up for some brilliant and varied location design. This game is pure popcorn, but its really good popcorn that never gets boring or tiresome to consume. There are very few games out there that offer such a bombastically bold spectacle and I just can't wait to see what the rest of the game offers.
The thing about gears is that once youve played the first 5 minutes youve pretty much played the whole game, You have the same limited arsenal throughout and you pretty much do the same thing right through to the end. sure the environments change and there are a couple of spectacular on rails moments but there there are no upgrades or changes. nothing to reward progress in the game except getting to the end it self and on top of this the route from start to that end is a long tedious straight line with a couple of fake alterative routes the lead to dead ends just to annoy those who dared to ask why that door wasnt blocked with rubble, ah thats because its blocked further on down the corridoor, what the point of that, its so linear and thinks its players are so dumb that it dosent even care what you were doing before the cut scenes. oh look at that big gun up there, im going to go up that ladder and man it as something big is going to go down. cut scene "marcus, somethng big is going down, go and man that big gun up there" then after the cut scene you are back down the ladder in a predefined position and have to go back up the ladder to man the gun. also that electric guitar sound that plays every time to tell you that youve killed all the enemies that kills tension wouldnt it be better to not know that everything is cleared to be thinking hey maybe theres another grunt around that corner. also there is no quiet moments this time around, gears 1 at least had some atmosphere, conveying a feeling of futility, helplessness against this enormous brutal enemy, but this time its just set piece after setpiece after...
yea i played it through but not something im proud of. if this is the direction gaming is going then count me out.
I've yet to see any compelling reason to see Resistance 2 as anything more than a generic first person shooter. Apparently this sentiment is shared by quite a bevy of people, seeing how the sales figures for R2 are quite dismal relative to the game you compare it to the most -- Gears of War 2. It's not a leap to see that the only reason anyone's bothering to compare these two titles is because they happen to somewhat coincide in date, and both are suppose to be blockbuster titles. It would make mor esene to compare MGS4 to Gears, IMO, since MGS4 is far more the triple A title than R2 ever was. But the facts are these: the PS3 just didn't provide this season like the 360 has. it isn't a bias or prejudice, it's just a fact. If we were having this conversation 3 years ago, everyone would be claiming there was a Sony bias and xbox fans would be complaining...truth is, the 'best' console or software lineup changes year to year, and this year it's just the 360's time to shine.
So suck it up and look forward to next year. Maybe Sony will makeup for the lagging titles, maybe not. Maybe the Wii will finally deliver on the hardcore promise not delivered this year (on that note, though, NInty did us good last year). It's hopeless to attach yourself so strongly to a title that is, as far as I can tell (and consumers at large), is going to be forgotten in a few months...as much as the original was. That's not to say it or its predecessor was a bad game, but let's get real here -- it never had the sales fury or critical buzz of other AAA games. So stop the weak comparisons and move on with your video game lives!
You speak the truth man.
Compare MGS4 to Gears of War? Dumbass. Enough said.
Because a low-key first person shooter re-labled as a triple A title due to a vacuum of competent software is somehow a better title to compare, critically?
Yeah, "dumbass" is definitely what comes to mind.
mechanics are too identical to those of the first, 9 absolutely does not deserve.Then the graphic appears to be worse ... is a disappointment, as the vote which was given
I have to say.....what? This game is so much more beautiful than the first gears, the artistic design alone is several notches above the original, tech tweaks aside. I've had more fun with this game than any other this year, outside of Rock Band.
Yeah I didn't understand that comment either. GOW2 art design, set peices and overall graphic quality just blows away the first one. There is so much more variation as well.
Of course edge likes it, they're all 360 fanboys. Just look at the score they gave the brilliance that was Resistance 2 - one of the best games to come out in a while and they pull down their pants a shit all over it.
They did give Fallout 3 a 6/10, that game is on the 360. And R2 is only averaging like 85-87 on metacritic, doesn't sound THAT brillaint. Good, not brilliant.
http://www.edge-online.com/magazine/littlebigplanet-the-edge-verdict
I wasn't a fan of Gears of War. The single player, was fun for what it was, but nothing special, and the multiplayer was very unbalanced. I'd shoot a guy point blank with a shotgun, and he'd just run up and chainsaw me without anything happening to him.
However, I've heard Gears of War 2 fixes a couple of these issues, so I might have to check it out once I'm finished with Fallout 3 and Gran Theft Auto IV.
Gears of War 2 is by far the best Third-Person Shooter ever released. The graphics and gameplay of Gears of War 2 are incredible. I have never seen any other game with graphics as good as Gears of War 2. When you have a weapon and zoom in on an enemy, you can see every wrinkle on their face; it is amazing! The lighting, shading, and overall look of the textures is fantastic.
And the gameplay is better than ever, because there are many new weapons, plus there are new ways to use the old weapons. Getting into chainsaw duels, and having multiple options for killing a downed enemy are FUN!...And being able to pick up a downed enemy and use him as a shield adds a brand new element to gameplay!
All I can say is that if you like shooters, you will LOVE Gears of War 2. The replay value is absolutely unlimited because of the new Horde Mode where you work together with five teammates, the Online Co-Op, and Online Multiplayer. The game branches off into different directions and has items you are looking for. You would need to play Gears of War 2 all the way through several times before you were able to see everything in the game.
Gears of War 2 gets a 10 out of 10 from me.
Your first post I'd totally agree with, congratulations. (It was a hard and bumpy way.)
GoW 2 is amazing, hands down. However, for me it's not the be all end all of 3rd person shooters.
It's a strong nine if Resident Evil 4 is a ten.
While i'll freely admit to being a fan of shooters i found Gears 2 to be an outstanding game, certainly the most enjoyable shooting game i've played on the 360 and perhaps the most fun with a gun i've had since Doom way back in 1993.
It's true that if you didn't like the first one (i loved it) then you probably aren't going to like the second, but that said Gears 2 delivers on every one of it's pre release hype promises, and how many games can truly make that claim (i'm looking at you Peter Molyneux).
Rushing from one fantastic set piece and stunning vista to the next Gears 2 never forgets it's core gameplay but always manages to throw something new into the mix. It really does make me wonder how they are going to be able to raise the bar for Gears 3.
The whole business of getting upset over EDGE scores is weird. The basic idea, surely, is that if you find you largely agree with a publication's reviews and opinion then you can choose to refer to it for guidance? I like EDGE and take it seriously, as I think it hopes to be taken. If you don't, fine. Why the stress?
Gears2 though; I played the first 3 scenarios on co-op with a friend. We played the split screen version. Maybe it was the reduced visible area that did it, but although it's technically superb and the controls are very finely weighted, I felt, I can only say 'un-moved' by the whole experience. It was too much, I seemed to shut it out. Crashing from one 'awesome' moment to the next rapidly desensitised me from the whole thing, plus I find it difficult to avoid feeling that the whole undertaking can be summed up by the un-ironic use of the word 'badass'...
It's not at all bad but the 9/10 surprises me. I'll give it a longer try at some stage.
When discussing Resistance 2's review score in EDGE, Rider_on_the_Storm said "Does it really matter that Edge gave the game a 6? If you enjoyed the game then who gives a f**k what Edge thinks!"
Yet when EDGE gives Gears Of War 2 a 9/10 gives enough of a **** to post a comment saying that the Gears games are for "meatheads".
I am a meathead who hasn't a chance to play Gears Of War 2 yet, currently playing L4D and Fallout 3, but certainly looking forward to it when I've got time off work over Xmas. EDGE's review was well written and covered all the bases enough to guide my decision to purchase the title.
I predict within 24 hours the whinging that has filled the comments section of Resistance 2 spills over in to here...
Of course I really hope I am wrong about that.
I'd actually like to know what makes GeoW2 a better game than Resistance 2 by three whole points. From reading both reviews, I can't really tell.
It is an amazing game but I felt while playing it that the stop and pop gameplay was getting a bit tired and had maybe reached an apex. I wonder if the majority of xbox players would be satisfied with more of the same and not much else for the money making prospect that is GOW3.
let's try and remember that this is their OPINION, people. these scores aren't decrees to be passed into law or scientific fact.
the last thing we need is another slew of diatribes from whiny kids crying how "Edge is stupid blah, blah, blah, they didn't like the game I like so I don't like them anymore, waahhh".
there are no right or wrong's here, just opinions and your reasons behind them. that's the whole point of Art. it's subjective.
I hate FPS. I'm just glad that Epic wisely chose to change the unreal game engine from FPS to a 3rd person shooter ala Resident Evil 4. It's 2008. Get with it developers, this isn't 1997 anymore and frankly, FPS look dated and a bit silly at this point. On a PC - sure FPS makes sense with the mouse keyboard combo - but on a console, it just doesn't work right. Games like Gears 1 & 2, Resident Evil 4, and Deadspace have shown the way. Good job Epic, I expected to hate both Gears games and instead they are among my favorite coop online games bar none except of course Rock Band.
It appears as though the reviewer actually played the game, I guess that's a start.
I always thought that Gears was a game for meathead's. Personally, i thought the first game was trash. Gears 2 didn't change my mind.
Edge seem to like it though...