This Game compared to Gears: Judgement | Forums

[Charity Diary]

IT'S A DIFFERENT LABEL!! DO YOU SEE GEARS OF WAR 4 ON IT? NO, IT'S AN INSTALLMENT IN A FRANCHISE!!! I'M SICK OF THIS GOW FAN BOYS!!! Yeah, annoying huh? So just shut the **** up with that ****, they have every right to say that, as we have every right to defend FS.

Games have to evolve, and evolution, with natural selection, takes the basis of the species and keeps the aspects that makes variations of that species survivable. Video games need to do the same. When making a sequel, whether it has a different label or not, the developers need to stick with what makes the game good. They need to keep the foundation of the game, but EVOLVE the game to improve on what they do right.

What People Can Fly did with Gears: Judgement was take what makes the Gears games good and survivable and just completely remove those aspects. They added some stuff in that they thought would be a welcome change, but it's obvious that they don't really know how to make multiplayer video games. It's not really an evolution in the franchise - it's more of like, taking the porcupine's spikes away and replacing it with some beautiful fur patterns that scream "Eat me!"

What People Can Fly should have done is improve on what the Gears games got right, and add more of that. They should have focused on the executions, the intensity, the gore, the strategy, the uniqueness that makes each weapon different. Instead, they took all of that away and focused on streamlining the gameplay and making every weapon almost equal.

Ubisoft needs to learn from People Can Fly's mistakes. When making Future Soldier 2, they should stick with what the game got right, stick with what makes Future Soldier different from other adversarial games.

[BS PALADIN]

Games have to evolve, and evolution, with natural selection, takes the basis of the species and keeps the aspects that makes variations of that species survivable. Video games need to do the same. When making a sequel, whether it has a different label or not, the developers need to stick with what makes the game good. They need to keep the foundation of the game, but EVOLVE the game to improve on what they do right.

What People Can Fly did with Gears: Judgement was take what makes the Gears games good and survivable and just completely remove those aspects. They added some stuff in that they thought would be a welcome change, but it's obvious that they don't really know how to make multiplayer video games. It's not really an evolution in the franchise - it's more of like, taking the porcupine's spikes away and replacing it with some beautiful fur patterns that scream "Eat me!"

What People Can Fly should have done is improve on what the Gears games got right, and add more of that. They should have focused on the executions, the intensity, the gore, the strategy, the uniqueness that makes each weapon different. Instead, they took all of that away and focused on streamlining the gameplay and making every weapon almost equal.

That's exactly how we feel about GRFS.

[Cons72]

Well your post more or less exactly describes how the old GR community feels about this game.

Indeed.

[GR90]

omg... This game is clearly labeled future soldier!! It is a different installment in the franchise!!! It does not reflect whatever the hell people think ghost recon should be!!! It is a different part of the franchise. This is not graw. This is not gr 1 or 2!! This is future soldier. Do you hear me gr fanboys??? Future. Soldier. Do you see a label that says graw 3 on it??? Do you??????? No!!!

I'm sick and tired of hearing people say "this isn't ghost recon idiot. Last i remembered there was not a intel loop in graw.." and just vented 10 months of anger at the fools that think this should be as boring as the multiplayer in graw 2...

Back onto the topic.... I am a huge gears fan (even still play 3) and i have no idea why epic thought things in the game needed to taken out. Although i will give it a try. Who knows, maybe it'll be fun. I'm picking it up later this evening and i'll give it a shot, so i wont be a hypocrite about what i just stated about grfs. It's a different installment in the franchise. It's supposed to be different. If it's not to my liking i wont hang out on the forum and ***** all day about the game for 10 months straight because i expected it to be a gra - ahem, gears 3...

And charity the word your looking for is cog of duty: Judgment warfare. ;d

loud noises!!

[Phoenixmgs]

I only played a tiny bit of Gears a few times at a friends. The game comes off like Uncharted to me meaning the competitive multiplayer is not to be taken seriously but just to hop on for a few hours here and there and have some fun as Uncharted (and Gears) are both pretty bad TPSs control-wise. Plus, I remember reading about how Gears multiplayer on at least one game was pretty much broken due to all the glitches.

[Ubi-MoshiMoshi]

I have had GOW: Judgement since last Friday and not had a chance to play yet (I am a MS Xbox MVP/ run my own site)

[PublicVermin]

Games have to evolve, and evolution, with natural selection, takes the basis of the species and keeps the aspects that makes variations of that species survivable. Video games need to do the same. When making a sequel, whether it has a different label or not, the developers need to stick with what makes the game good. They need to keep the foundation of the game, but EVOLVE the game to improve on what they do right.

What People Can Fly did with Gears: Judgement was take what makes the Gears games good and survivable and just completely remove those aspects. They added some stuff in that they thought would be a welcome change, but it's obvious that they don't really know how to make multiplayer video games. It's not really an evolution in the franchise - it's more of like, taking the porcupine's spikes away and replacing it with some beautiful fur patterns that scream "Eat me!"

What People Can Fly should have done is improve on what the Gears games got right, and add more of that. They should have focused on the executions, the intensity, the gore, the strategy, the uniqueness that makes each weapon different. Instead, they took all of that away and focused on streamlining the gameplay and making every weapon almost equal.

Ubisoft needs to learn from People Can Fly's mistakes. When making Future Soldier 2, they should stick with what the game got right, stick with what makes Future Soldier different from other adversarial games.

I didn't mean that, Charity, i was making f un of Reaper, lol.

[Charity Diary]

I only played a tiny bit of Gears a few times at a friends. The game comes off like Uncharted to me meaning the competitive multiplayer is not to be taken seriously but just to hop on for a few hours here and there and have some fun as Uncharted (and Gears) are both pretty bad TPSs control-wise. Plus, I remember reading about how Gears multiplayer on at least one game was pretty much broken due to all the glitches.

Yeah, Gears of War 2 was practically unplayable due to all the problems. Apart from coding problems and connectivity issues, there were massive oversights in the design choices made by the developers. What's even worse about Gears: Judgement is that they actually brought back some of these design choices that they had previously corrected! Things like the dreaded two-piece and the old Gnasher bullet origin point were put back into play, as if the developers simply forgot about their previous mistakes.

Even the "professional" Gears players agree that they really dropped the ball on this one. They even took out the beloved Locusts as playable characters so they could simply make armor sets for the COG team and sell them as microtransactions. Terrible. Just terrible.

And four multiplayer maps? Really? FOUR!

[Charity Diary]

Made this video to show what the game's multiplayer is like:

youtube has been deactivated.
Do you accept the use of cookies to display and allow you to watch the video content?

Makes Future Soldier seem like rocket science. I mean, just look at that. Pressing the B button gives you a free kill practically every time you do it. Can't believe developers keep making bank on games like this while Future Soldier struggles.

[lImaRobotl]

Made this video to show what the game's multiplayer is like:

youtube has been deactivated.
Do you accept the use of cookies to display and allow you to watch the video content?

Makes Future Soldier seem like rocket science. I mean, just look at that. Pressing the B button gives you a free kill practically every time you do it. Can't believe developers keep making bank on games like this while Future Soldier struggles.

I've always hated Gears, but to be honest Charity, atleast you have to shoot them afterwards. Name one game now adays that doesnt give you a free kill when you run up to melee someone. Press one button to melee someone on GRFS and it kills them instantly, Same goes for COD. I have not played BF yet so I wouldnt be able to say.