Gears of War: Review

[McLaren]

Gears of War, what can you say besides it sucked ass...opps, must have been reading too many Prey reviews. I meant, it kicks ass, and when I say it kicks ass, it KICKS MAJOR ASS!

*SPOILERS MAY FOLLOW!*

The story line is actually kind of unique. And the AI...whoowee (Texas accent), are they frickin' smart. Even chainsawing them can lead to your own death. But when you get it, you'll love it (if you love blood).

So, let me start it off a bit.

You start in Prison, and will soon learn the controls. No lie, the game WILL take about 10 minutes to finally get in as you learn everything. But when you do, you'll love it. This part is pretty simple, and you'll go through it fast.
If you're like me though, you may have a worry about 5 Acts....No worries guys. They are seperated into about 4-5 chapters, and you'll spend quite a lot of time in them.

Anyways, when you reach the end of the first Act, you have had the chance to use that chainsaw or at least watch one of your teammates use it. If not, don't fret. You'll still see it sooner or later. Now, as I was saying, a lot of enemies kind of remind you of Halo guys. Wretchs are like those little anooying aliens from Halo, with grubs as the Elites, and Boomers (you'll love these; my favorite) as the Cannon guys from Halo. But you will see there's more. At the end of Act 1, you'll meet a Berserker. You may think this is a boss, but this girl isn't. You'll meet 2 more. They can kill in one hit, so dodge asap! The only way to kill these girls though is nifty little gun called the Hammer of Dawn. It can only be used at certain points in the game, but it's a lot of fun ro roast grubs.

Once you get to Act 2, it does get intense. You'll learn that you need to stay in the light as much as possible. The bat-like creatures will kill you as soon as you're in the dark. One thing you'll also learn is that you always have Dom with you, and pretty Cole and his bud. This is the 2nd longest part of game, and is actually a bit scary. The end leads to you driving the Junker. My advice on this part is too floor, shoot, floor, shoot a little later, and then just floor it since the Junker can slowly outrun the "bats".

Act 3 is somewhat boring really, as you must go into the nest, and plant a reactor to copy the Locust Tunnels. You will encounter the first boss, a spider like creatur. She's a push over though as long as you shoot her in the neck. The last part where you meet the Theron Guards is probably the hardest because they have machine guns, and that exploding bow gun. Plus, they can chainsaw your ass from behind. I've also heard the best one-liner during this scene.

"Do you think they know we're here?"
"Well, we're not here to sell cookies! So they know something's up." - Marcus. This guy has the best one liners.

Afterwards, it's daylight, and a constant showdown of enemies that gets pretty intense. This is the part I'm at right now.

Now earlier I said I loved the Boomers. They wield gernade launchers, and shout Boom before they shoot. And I love the way they say it. I believe once during tonight, right after they shouted, "Boom!", I believe I said, "Boom this mother *******." Not a lot of games get me pumped and make me laugh at the same time.

Seriously, if you have a Xbox360, get off your ass, and BUY this game. This game blows Halo away. It's harder, better guns (Halo ain't got nothin' on that chainsaw, better AI, and a LOT of blood. Oh yes, there is A TON of blood to be seen with flying limbs and more. If you at the sight of blood, SUCK IT UP.

Though I don't like the fact I'm beating it so fast, it is still a tough game. It may take 10 hours, but it'll feel like days of enjoyment.

My rating:
10/10. Even if the 1 vehicle scene has sucked so far, the advanced AI, unique little monsters, beautiful enviroments, terrific gameplay, and the fact that EA is jealous of it makes it deserve the best score.

 

[Jeremy Ricci]

Hmm...I don't konw about "advanced AI". Many many many times I've been able to flank the AI, and it simply doesn't respond if it doesn't see me.

In fact, as a whole, it seems the AI has been programmed for the most part to simply take cover if shot. I haven't seen a lot of flanking and tactile movement.

And I am also particularly underwhelmed by the multiplayer, which basically is 4 modes of glorified deathmatches, with no real purpose aside from killing the other guy. I would have liked to see a bit more depth and focuse on a "goal". Assassination is decent, but aside from that, the other modes are lacking significantly. I guess the gore and visuals make up for that though.

Still, I think the game is great, but definately not a 10/10. 9/10 IMO.

 

[Jedi2016]

Hmm...I don't konw about "advanced AI". Many many many times I've been able to flank the AI, and it simply doesn't respond if it doesn't see me.

Why would it? If you were walking down the street in real life, would you expect someone to respond to your presence if they didn't know you were there?

That's the whole point of flanking.. to surprise the enemy. And yes, the Locust will flank you, I've had them do it to me on a number of occasions. One of them even hit me with a chainsaw before I even knew he was there. I didn't see him, does that make my "AI" bad?

Multiplayer is simplistic for the simple reason that games like Capture the Flag don't lend themselves to the situation. Humans vs Locust is a full-out war, kill the other side, end of story.

Somehow I expected you of all people would have negative things to say about it.

 

[iceburns288]

I think the game is a 9/10. After playing the Rainbow Six: Vegas demo twice through and then coming straight to this, I can't get over how good the cover system in Rainbow Six is. The controls in RB6V are perfect; the controls in Gears can get annoying and finnicky. On the whole, the game is fantastic and I really love it, but I don't know if I'll like it as much as RB6. I think I will though, and I'll explain in detail when I get back from work (leaving in 2 minutes, so I'm rushing through this post).

I gotta say Cole is my favorite by far! He's hilarious and I've laughed out loud at him several times. The Cole Train is a smooooooooth ride baby!

 

[LaBounti]

I rented it but haven't played yet.

If a middleware game can look better than everything else on the 360 these guys(360 developers) aren't really trying. OR maybe its the fact that UNE 3 is more than 2 years old and very polished with time.

 

[Jedi2016]

If a middleware game can look better than everything else on the 360 these guys(360 developers) aren't really trying. OR maybe its the fact that UNE 3 is more than 2 years old and very polished with time.

What do you mean 2 years old? This is the first released game to even use UE3.. I'd call that "brand new".

And the "middleware" thing doesn't really apply here.. Epic made UE3.. Epic made GoW. They didn't "borrow" the technology from anyone except another department in their own company. Which is true of pretty much any company that makes it's own game engine.

You're right about developers not trying, though. Even other UE3 games look pretty paltry compared to GoW. And Cliffy B even said that GoW doesn't really push the system all that hard, that it's capable of a lot more. That's one of the reasons why my 360 purchases have been pretty light.. not too many games that I would classify as truly "next-gen".

Hell, if EA.. EA of all people... can make Fight Night 3 look as good as it does, just imagine what a real developer can do with a fighting game.

We ain't seen nothin' yet. Hell, based on Cliffy B's statement, even with Gears of War, we still ain't seen nothin' yet.

 

[McLaren]

I think the game is a 9/10. After playing the Rainbow Six: Vegas demo twice through and then coming straight to this, I can't get over how good the cover system in Rainbow Six is. The controls in RB6V are perfect; the controls in Gears can get annoying and finnicky. On the whole, the game is fantastic and I really love it, but I don't know if I'll like it as much as RB6. I think I will though, and I'll explain in detail when I get back from work (leaving in 2 minutes, so I'm rushing through this post).

I gotta say Cole is my favorite by far! He's hilarious and I've laughed out loud at him several times. The Cole Train is a smooooooooth ride baby!

I haven't had the chance to play RB6V, but I will soon. Been hearing terrific things about it too.

 

[LaBounti]

Jedi. Unreal engine 3 has been in development since the end of 2003. It was revealed at E32004 running on a GeForce 6800Ultra. Being the first game out has nothing to do with how long the engine's been developing over time.

Unreal Egine 3 is middleware reguardless if Epic makes a game on it. They license the very same tools. It is middelware. To me Gears of war is like Syphon Fliter for PSP, A game that started development before the systems release. But ends up being a second gen title that looks better than most other games out for it.

 

[Jedi2016]

Jedi. Unreal engine 3 has been in development since the end of 2003. It was revealed at E32004 running on a GeForce 6800Ultra. Being the first game out has nothing to do with how long the engine's been developing over time.

That doesn't make it "old". What about UE4? That's already in development. Does that mean when the first UE4 games come out on the PS4 and XB720, will they be using "old technology" too?

 

[Jeremy Ricci]

Why would it? If you were walking down the street in real life, would you expect someone to respond to your presence if they didn't know you were there?

That's the whole point of flanking.. to surprise the enemy. And yes, the Locust will flank you, I've had them do it to me on a number of occasions. One of them even hit me with a chainsaw before I even knew he was there. I didn't see him, does that make my "AI" bad?

Multiplayer is simplistic for the simple reason that games like Capture the Flag don't lend themselves to the situation. Humans vs Locust is a full-out war, kill the other side, end of story.

Somehow I expected you of all people would have negative things to say about it.

I guess I should have been more specific. If you flank an enemy and begin SHOOTING, it doesn't respond. They'll take a great number of shots before making any response to your actions.

As for multiplayer, I see no excuse for the deathmatch focus.

Easily they could have added a 2 on 6 mode where two players must work together to defeat the other players (who can respawn) and make it to their "base" and destory it. The 2 players would have slightly higher defense, to balance out since it's 2 v 6.

Or maybe a mode similar to conversion, basically all players start off as human, you die once (by curbstomp or chainsaw) then you turn locust, you die again, you're out. Last man standing wins (be it man or locust).

Or maybe a mode called defender. give one side a base to "defend" while the other 4 must get in the base and say, plant a bomb. after 2 rounds, regardless of win / lose streak, teams switch sides to keep it even and fun. This gives teams the opportunity to learn form the first round, and apply in their own two rounds.

That's 3 modes in itself that would change multiplayer and give it more of a twist, rather than just a simple death match. If thought out, and fleshed out, it could work. But, all I'm saying, is more thought could have gone into it, considering everyone is saying how "revolutionary" this game is...when it's not. It's awesome, fun, and a blast to play...but very very very far from "revolutionary".

 

[GJB93]

The game is very very very close to being revolutionary

 

[Jeremy Ricci]

What? You need to go play Kill.Switch. While not as fluid, the gameplay mechanics are nearly ripped straight from a last gen title. Add better visuals and lots of gore, with good presentation, and you've got gears of war.

 

[DuckRacer]

What? You need to go play Kill.Switch. While not as fluid, the gameplay mechanics are nearly ripped straight from a last gen title. Add better visuals and lots of gore, with good presentation, and you've got gears of war.

Jeremy, I have not seen you make ONE compliment about Gears of War. Not ONE. How is the framerate? Does it dip down to 15FPS like you said? How are the graphics? Are many PS3 titles' graphics better than Gears? If so, name them.

 

[Jedi2016]

Jeremy, I have not seen you make ONE compliment about Gears of War. Not ONE. How is the framerate? Does it dip down to 15FPS like you said? How are the graphics? Are many PS3 titles' graphics better than Gears? If so, name them.

He's got a point there, Jeremy... Wrong on both counts, I'd say.

I say the comparison to Halo is apt. Not as in the type of game, but how it's executed. Honestly, Halo didn't really do much that was new to FPS. But what it did was take the best elements of FPS, from all the best games that had come previously, and combined them into a single game that was executed flawlessly. It's not what it did that mattered. It was the fact that what it did, it did right.

Gears of War is the same way. Sure, there's nothing "revolutionary" about it beyond the graphics. But what it does, it does right.

Whether or not you like it personally is beside the point. Everybody else loves it. It's flying off the shelves left and right. Almost all the reviews rate it at near-perfect. And you're going to try to convince us that they're all wrong? That we're wrong? I don't think so, bub.

 

[CFM]

It rocks. Excellent graphics and fun online play. I have yet to see any framerate drop on or offline.

 

[Jeremy Ricci]

He's got a point there, Jeremy... Wrong on both counts, I'd say.

I say the comparison to Halo is apt. Not as in the type of game, but how it's executed. Honestly, Halo didn't really do much that was new to FPS. But what it did was take the best elements of FPS, from all the best games that had come previously, and combined them into a single game that was executed flawlessly. It's not what it did that mattered. It was the fact that what it did, it did right.

Gears of War is the same way. Sure, there's nothing "revolutionary" about it beyond the graphics. But what it does, it does right.

Whether or not you like it personally is beside the point. Everybody else loves it. It's flying off the shelves left and right. Almost all the reviews rate it at near-perfect. And you're going to try to convince us that they're all wrong? That we're wrong? I don't think so, bub.

Thanks for being able to read You guy's are so awesome!

"Still, I think the game is great, but definately not a 10/10. 9/10 IMO."

"It's awesome, fun, and a blast to play"

Certainly seems like I'm giving it high marks. Fun to play? Check. Awesome? Check. 9/10? Check.

I just stated some of my problems. But, of course, since you all are blinded by your idea of "perfect" you'll only notice the shortcomings I may have mentioned and immediately think I'm bashing it right?


Duck - The frame rate does dip on occasion, though not often. Most noteably, it drops during certain cutscenes, but that's fine, as long as the gameplay is consistant.

As far as the graphics, Gears is a compeltely different type of game. It focus's on small instense battles with few characters on screen and minimal overall action.

I could name games that look as good, IMO MotorStorm and MGS4 look as good from a technical standpoint. But, of course, like everyone else on the face of the planet, you're going to compare this game immediately to Resistance.

Fact: Resistance has 5 times as many players on screen. This, combined with the amount of "odd ball" action (such as trash, fires, smoke, birds, NPC jets and planes, etc) make it very impressive. Not the "visual powerhouse" that Gears is, but it's intended to be something different, not just another pretty game. I'm positive if Resistance only had 8-10 enemies or characters running around, it would be possible to look JUST as good as Gears.

Fact: Resistance has twice as many Online modes. THe main reason this is possible, with 8-40 players (maps are scaleable) is because the visuals were not needed to be ground breaking, and keeping them consistent was easy. This allowed much more time for developers to focus on multiplayer and network code. 40 PLayer online with no noticeable lag is just as impressive as the visuals in Gears, in my opinion.

Is Resistance revolutionary? Definately not. Is it new? Hell no. What it is, from what I've read, is fun. Just like Gears of war. ANd when Resistance releases, you'll be destined to read the same gripes more than likely. That the AI will be shabby and sub par. There will be parts of the online I'm disappointed with (specifically that only 4 maps support 40 players, with the others supporting 32 and lower). The fact that the game lasts around 12 hours (though you unlock 4 new weapons in your second playthrough).

But, since you guy's really don't care much for the PS3, you won't read that, and you'll continue to think that I'm just bashing gears...I hold every game to these standards, and regardless of how good it looks, or how amazingly fun it is to play, I'm still going to speak my mind about what I don't like about it. Is that a crime?

Also, might I add, like you said, most reviews rate it as NEAR perfect. As did I. In fact, youl'l find most of my gripes in reviews like IGN, GameSpot, and 1up. But, of course, again, since "I" siad it...it's a bash.

 

[LaBounti]

That doesn't make it "old". What about UE4? That's already in development. Does that mean when the first UE4 games come out on the PS4 and XB720, will they be using "old technology" too?

Before I respond i need to know the point you are trying to make and what it is your defending. I never said anything bad about GoW or UE3. just that its been refined, polished optimized and anything else thats gives them an advantage over other 360 games visually. I never said the engine was old, its refined and more polished that any other system. Its been in development for a while, its not an old engine. Probably the best non DX10 engine(for games like this) until Id Software reveals thier new engine that's based on DX9.

 

[Jedi2016]

Also, might I add, like you said, most reviews rate it as NEAR perfect. As did I. In fact, youl'l find most of my gripes in reviews like IGN, GameSpot, and 1up. But, of course, again, since "I" siad it...it's a bash.

Actually, yes it is. It's in the execution, you see. When IGN says there's something wrong, it typically goes something like "Yeah, it's there, but it doesn't get in the way and nobody really cares." When you say the same thing, it's "Yeah, it's there, and it's annoying and (insert PS3 game here) is better because it doesn't have that." It becomes a bash for the simple reason that you're biased towards PS3. Heavily biased towards PS3, and it gets your panties in a twist when we even hint that the best next-gen game of '06 is on the 360 and not your precious PS3.

Oh, and those framerate dips you're talking about? It's called "Loading". And considering how much information they have to load (those textures can't be small files), it's a wonder they do it at all without loading screens.

And don't give me any of that "you don't care about the PS3" BS, either. It's called "multi-console gaming", maybe you've heard of it? Where someone can own, and actually enjoy, multiple consoles at the same time? Just because I'm not getting a PS3 at launch doesn't mean I don't care about the console. It just means I don't want to deal with the frustration of trying to find one, when there aren't any games that are worth that much money to me. Not yet. If that makes me a "Xbox fanboy", so be it, but I'm pretty sure that's not the case.

 

[Jedi2016]

Before I respond i need to know the point you are trying to make and what it is your defending.

I don't know. I got the impression from your original post that you were insinuating that UE3 was "old technology". Going back and reading it again, I think I misunderstood. My bad.

Besides, I'm arguing with the fanboy now.. lol.

 

[LaBounti]

The game is very very very close to being revolutionary

At what point in the game did you draw this conclusion?

I rented it to see what all the hype was about. Playing it on hardcore to boot and it has a nice learning curve, i was totally lost on how to get past the first area until i started doing what the aI was doing. The chainsaw killing is fun the first 5 times then its just when you need to use it.

I cant figure out why a can't connect to online co-op games. it bugged me all night. I like the game just like a liked Halo2, but i wouldn''t buy either one because I'm just not that into these game but i'll play them.

 

[DuckRacer]

Thanks for being able to read You guy's are so awesome!

You're very welcome JR, you just made my day.

"Still, I think the game is great, but definately not a 10/10. 9/10 IMO."

"It's awesome, fun, and a blast to play"

Certainly seems like I'm giving it high marks. Fun to play? Check. Awesome? Check. 9/10? Check.

I just stated some of my problems. But, of course, since you all are blinded by your idea of "perfect" you'll only notice the shortcomings I may have mentioned and immediately think I'm bashing it right?

Okay, you proved me wrong about you not praising it. However, IMHO, it just seems like you just don't like it, and I don't get the feeling that you really think it's awesome game that's fun to play. Hopefully, you can prove me wrong (for like the hundredth time).

Duck - The frame rate does dip on occasion, though not often. Most noteably, it drops during certain cutscenes, but that's fine, as long as the gameplay is consistant.

Okay then.

I could name games that look as good, IMO MotorStorm and MGS4 look as good from a technical standpoint. But, of course, like everyone else on the face of the planet, you're going to compare this game immediately to Resistance.

Of course we are. Do you think we'd compare Gran Turismo 4 to Halo 2? No, we'd compare it to Forza. Do you think we'd compare Battlefield 2 to World of Warcraft? No, we'd compare it to Halo 2.

Fact: Resistance has twice as many Online modes. THe main reason this is possible, with 8-40 players (maps are scaleable) is because the visuals were not needed to be ground breaking, and keeping them consistent was easy. This allowed much more time for developers to focus on multiplayer and network code. 40 PLayer online with no noticeable lag is just as impressive as the visuals in Gears, in my opinion.

40 player online without lag? Please. The only reports I've seen of the 40-player having no lag is at a Sony convention on T1 with everyone playing in a single place (almost like LAN). And IMO, that's a lot different than 40 people around the world with varying cable/DSL connections.

Is Resistance revolutionary? Definately not. Is it new? Hell no. What it is, from what I've read, is fun. Just like Gears of war. ANd when Resistance releases, you'll be destined to read the same gripes more than likely. That the AI will be shabby and sub par. There will be parts of the online I'm disappointed with (specifically that only 4 maps support 40 players, with the others supporting 32 and lower). The fact that the game lasts around 12 hours (though you unlock 4 new weapons in your second playthrough).

My guess is that your review of Resistance will be filled with all the pros on it, and a few sentences on the cons, which would be the opposite of your Gears review. Hopefully you can prove me wrong (again).

But, since you guy's really don't care much for the PS3, you won't read that, and you'll continue to think that I'm just bashing gears...I hold every game to these standards, and regardless of how good it looks, or how amazingly fun it is to play, I'm still going to speak my mind about what I don't like about it. Is that a crime?

1. Of course I care about the PS3, or else I wouldn't post in the PS3 thread. Plus I said about 31 times that I'll probably get one several years down the road when GT5 and many other good games come out.

2. No, it's not a crime to speak your mind. However, it is illegal to annoy someone on the internet (), which you could be doing.


...



Aw, come on, I'm just pulling your leg! I won't call up my lawyer. Seriously!

Also, might I add, like you said, most reviews rate it as NEAR perfect. As did I. In fact, youl'l find most of my gripes in reviews like IGN, GameSpot, and 1up. But, of course, again, since "I" siad it...it's a bash.

There's a difference. They act like the problems are minor and they really don't ruin the game. IMHO, you act like those problems make the game seem like crap. Yes, I know you said that the game it great, it gets a 9/10, etc etc, but I honestly don't get that feeling from you.

 

[Tornado]

The game is very very very close to being revolutionary

That depends on how you are using the term. If you mean like Halo was (not revolutionary at all, but very good in execution), then yes. If you mean like revolutionary as "new" than I can't agree, as I've seen the concept of blind fire before.
The difference is that, barring perhaps Goldeneye, Halo took most of the great things about PC FPS's and put them all together into a pot of awesome before anyone else was able to do so (though one could argue that it was only the multiplayer part missing in a couple console FPS's before Halo came, not to mention Goldeneye).
GoW is different in that the games that featured things such as blind shooting before (particularly Kill.Switch) did it to little fanfare, because the features other than the innovation were not done very well; so the fact that GoW does more-or-less everything very good makes it, in a way, more "revolutionary" than Halo was. In fact, while I doubt it, GoW may be able to turn into a bigger franchise than Halo.
My quick play through (20 minutes or so) at my friends house tells me that the game was pretty fun, to boot.

 

[Jedi2016]

That depends on how you are using the term. If you mean like Halo was (not revolutionary at all, but very good in execution), then yes. If you mean like revolutionary as "new" than I can't agree, as I've seen the concept of blind fire before.
The difference is that, barring perhaps Goldeneye, Halo took most of the great things about PC FPS's and put them all together into a pot of awesome before anyone else was able to do so (though one could argue that it was only the multiplayer part missing in a couple console FPS's before Halo came, not to mention Goldeneye).
GoW is different in that the games that featured things such as blind shooting before (particularly Kill.Switch) did it to little fanfare, because the features other than the innovation were not done very well; so the fact that GoW does more-or-less everything very good makes it, in a way, more "revolutionary" than Halo was. In fact, while I doubt it, GoW may be able to turn into a bigger franchise than Halo.
My quick play through (20 minutes or so) at my friends house tells me that the game was pretty fun, to boot.

That's exactly what I was saying before. Both Halo and Gears of War do a lot of stuff that's been done before. But unlike other games, what they do, they do right.

 

[iceburns288]

You're very welcome JR, you just made my day.
Okay, you proved me wrong about you not praising it. However, IMHO, it just seems like you just don't like it, and I don't get the feeling that you really think it's awesome game that's fun to play. Hopefully, you can prove me wrong (for like the hundredth time).
Okay then.
Of course we are. Do you think we'd compare Gran Turismo 4 to Halo 2? No, we'd compare it to Forza. Do you think we'd compare Battlefield 2 to World of Warcraft? No, we'd compare it to Halo 2.
40 player online without lag? Please. The only reports I've seen of the 40-player having no lag is at a Sony convention on T1 with everyone playing in a single place (almost like LAN). And IMO, that's a lot different than 40 people around the world with varying cable/DSL connections.
My guess is that your review of Resistance will be filled with all the pros on it, and a few sentences on the cons, which would be the opposite of your Gears review. Hopefully you can prove me wrong (again).
1. Of course I care about the PS3, or else I wouldn't post in the PS3 thread. Plus I said about 31 times that I'll probably get one several years down the road when GT5 and many other good games come out.
2. No, it's not a crime to speak your mind. However, it is illegal to annoy someone on the internet (), which you could be doing.
Aw, come on, I'm just pulling your leg! I won't call up my lawyer. Seriously!
There's a difference. They act like the problems are minor and they really don't ruin the game. IMHO, you act like those problems make the game seem like crap. Yes, I know you said that the game it great, it gets a 9/10, etc etc, but I honestly don't get that feeling from you.

Can you, ya know, kinda stop? I'd like to talk about Gears of War. In peace.

 

[CFM]

I got a bunch of achievements online already - First win, highest scorer in a match, 10 match win streak without losing a round, Around the World, Mix it up, etc. I almost have the series of pipes one also for hosting 50 matches. I found 2 other guys that kicked ass and we all worked together as a team, which made the game the most fun I've had on XBL so far. I think I was at position 2000 or so out of like 85,000 when I logged off. It sucks I have to work tomorrow.

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

Yes I agree this game kicks ass!!!! I can easily say that GOW will probably get game of the year for 2006. I never ever expected this to live up to the hype but I sure was wrong. Heather and I have been playing the heck out of this since wednesday the 8th. We have already beat it on Casual and on Hardcore. Now we are on level 3 set at insane. Nothing touches the graphics in GOW not even the best games on the PC.
The online is way more fun than I ever imagined considering its only 4vs4. Heather and I even found a way to play online together in ranked rooms.
Overall I would have to give this at least 9.8 out of 10. The co-op is 10/10 which is the highest review I think I have ever given for a game. 👍 👍

 

[G.T]

Nothing touches the graphics in GOW not even the best games on the PC.

Wow, it must be quite something if you say that! Not until the DX10 stuff comes long anyway.

How hard is it on Insane difficulty? I'm just curious because I remember how hard Halo was on the hardest difficulty - VERY hard indeed...

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

Wow, it must be quite something if you say that! Not until the DX10 stuff comes long anyway.

How hard is it on Insane difficulty? I'm just curious because I remember how hard Halo was on the hardest difficulty - VERY hard indeed...

Yeah as you know it takes a lot to impress me and GOW is easily the best looking game out right now on any system.
It is not too bad on insane with a co-op partner. To do it by yourself I would say would be VERY hard on insane. But as a co-op it is managable.
I talked with a guy in voice chat on my friends list yesterday and he was playing the entire single player by himself on casual. He was stuck on the last guy and needed help. He tried several times and just could not beat it by himself. So here comes the coolest part of this game....I told him to send me a game request so I could join his game. Then I jumped in, took control of Dom, and helped him beat the last guy. Thats just one of the coolest things I have experienced in any game. The fact that you can join anyone any time and help them play the game. I even played through a couple levels with Driftgod and we were up until 4:30 in the morning. GOW is just so sick!! 👍
The online graphics are just as good as the co-op. Out of 250+ games online I only saw lag 2 times and it was only for a brief second. That is amazing.

 

[DRIFT GOD]

the last co-op game i played was DOOM 3 with camaroboy and we beat it in 4 hours. saterday night we played through 3 levels of G.O.W and it took us over 5 hours !!! this game is increadible and i cant wait to play through the rest of the game 👍