Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
Gears of War 4 - Easy Allies Review
Vložit
- čas přidán 16. 10. 2016
- Gears is back, looking better than ever, with a campaign that ushers in new heroes and villains. There are many ways to play it, but is enough of it new and improved? We get our boots dirty and turrets overheated looking for the answer.
Closed captions available in English and Spanish.
Our ratings: 5 Stars - Masterful, 4 Stars - Excellent, 3 Stars - Decent, 2 Stars - Inferior, 1 Star - Terrible
Written by Brandon Jones
Reviewed on Xbox One
Available on PC and Xbox One
Support us through Patreon: / easyallies
Schedule: easyallies.com/
Merchandise: shop.spreadshirt.com/easyallies
Live streams - / easyallies
Stream archives - / easyalliesplays
/ easyallies
/ easyallies
/ easyallies
I must be the only one that thinks the campaign is fucking brilliant! 9.5/10 for me, and I'm not new to gears but I'm definitely not a hardcore fan, something in between.
I am glad split-screen is there.
No, I play the campaign with my GF splitscreen on XBox One
Oh, the story wasn't Oscar-worthy in an action game? It didn't "do enough" to "move the series forward." The same hight bar always set for MS sequels that never get applied to Sony ones. What a shit review.
Easy Allies This review was WAY harsher than a lot of us were expecting, Blood. You guys are of course entitled to your opinions. It's just that this review seemed like you were criticising it for what it's not far more than praising it for what it is. Isn't that generally a bad tactic?
Opinions differ. No need to blatantly call them fanboys or something. And why should the review bother you if you're enjoying the game in the 1st place. They think its the same old gears. For some thats good enough, for some it isnt. How difficult is that to accept?
^ Lol exactly. It is sad how people can't get over the fact that others will have a different opinion as them. If you're having fun playing the game then why are you bitching? Don't let a freaking review make you salty, Jesus. Oh well... It's the internet.
Aaron Starks what a load of tosh, this is a fantastic review. EZA are rightfully criticising the game for its subpar story and dialogue. I can't help but agree that Gears 4 doesn't do anything to evolve the series for current-gen. That said, I'm enjoying the game for what it is, but the criticism in this review is sound.
If you're already so set in your own opinion why are you even watching reviews on the game?
I feel like anyone doubting this review should go look at other noteworthy critics and see what they're also saying about Gears 4. Gamespot and Jim Sterling both gave the game around the same score (though using a 10 point system instead) for the same criticisms.
The fact of the matter is that Gears had 5 years from 3 to evolve itself into something better and it didn't, it didn't even improve upon the weakest part of the first trilogy. 3.5 is a completely fair score to a game that is pretty good but doesn't push the limits or go to length to differentiate itself from its predecessors, more of the same is not always a good thing. If FFXV released after a 10+ year development cycle and didn't do something drastically different then it would get similar scores, deservedly so.
+Ivan What I was trying to get at was that the opinion in this review isn't unheard of, and even a lot of the higher scoring reviews also concede that Gears 4 isn't doing anything new and playing it too safe.
"Character motivations are yelled, rather than explained."
Doesn't that just explain Gears of War in general? I've never understood what people saw in Gears' story.
All those salty X1 fanboys here acting as if someone offended them for thinking different about this game. (and the same thing would´ve happened if ... let`s say UC4 would´ve gotten a lower score)
Jesus christ.
at the end of the day, scores are subjective and irrelevant. it's the review that matters if someone isn't sure about the game. and this review isn't shit.
MrYuntu I don't even own an Xbox one (PC here) yet the past few weeks easy allies has made it obviously clear where their bias leans to.
Theyr're not bias, Forza Horizon 3 got a 4 and a half stars.
As someone who follows these guys since the gametrailer days, I don't think they're biased. Before the ps4, everyone said they were biased towards the xbox. It wasn't true then and it isn't true now. They just like good games.
William Jones
Where do you see the bias? Wtf why are you people deluded lol
Wow! That was an excellent review! Seems like we gravitated towards a lot of the same shots Brandon. Good work!
The day Gears of war and Forza stop being made, will be a great day.
e efilysp Forza Horizon is utterly brilliant you simpleton.
More like a shit day.
e efilysp we NEED Forza horizon to keep the driving game genre relevant for the casuals. driving games are already declining.
fuck you Gears and Forza are great you pathetic fanboy
redfred004 As great as your syntax :)
For me its the worst time for a Gears to come out, so many games have been out recently that I have no money for Gears but frankly it seems like the only thing I'll be missing is that classic multiplayer, not a fan of the micro-transactions and it's sad that every game feels like it has to be Overwatch/CSGO now. Maybe if the Windows Store has a sale on it I'll get it then, thanks for the review it was like a mini explosion of valuable information to tell me exactly what my experiences would be with this game and that's what you guys are always really good at in your reviews, in other game reviews I never get a sense of "okay well... what exactly am I paying for?" but you give that in such a genuine way and I'm so happy you are continuing to do this as a job because I don't know who else can compare
i feel like its still better than judgement. But I agree that its hard to be wowed again as with the first ones
It is better than Judgement. Judgment was a good TPS game, but the problem with it was that it didn't feel a Gears game. The game focused more on action than it did it's story which was a strong point for the previous Gears games (seriously the story in gears 3 was amazing!). Not to mention altering the multiplayer and horde was not a smart move. At least in this game, Horde 3.0 in Gears 4 is what Judgement should've been.
It's strange that video game reviews have become a list of people's opinions, not necessarily a review of what's included in the game. I know that every review will have some opinion in it (it's part of our nature), but this video felt a lot more like someone's recollection of what they liked and disliked about the game, not a non-bias collection of facts surrounding the game.
Then again, I guess that's why reviews have become less and less popular recently, especially when there are a hundred different ways to see the game in-action without someone's opinion potentially clouding the viewer's perception.
If you want a collection of facts for a game, read up the wikipedia article. If you want to hear what someone thinks about the game, read up a review. Learn the difference, mate.
+FlasherOfWangs By the very definition of the word, a review SHOULD be a collection of facts and/or an unbiased collection of facts. It should cover how the game looks, runs and plays - and like I said before, I get that every review well have some opinion in it, but that shouldn't be the basis of it.
Oh, and putting in one snarky little sentence at the end of your comment because you didn't agree with my statement? It makes you sound like a child. It you want to debate something, do so as an adult.
is this a joke? you re-defined what a review is and then complained that people are still using the original definition. This has to be a joke
3 stars should be "good" and not "decent". But I'm nickpicking... you guys are the best reviewers in the biz! Great Review Brandon!
Depends on the test. :)
But ok, I see your point. But 3&1/2 stars = 70. That's good ain't it?
Anyway... like I said, I'm just nickpicking...
Review scores aren't on a linear scale the way a test score would be. The 10 points to get you from 70 to 80 on a test are worth the same as the 10 points to get you from 90 to 100. But with reviews, it's much easier to get from a 7 to an 8 than it is to get from a 9 to a 10.
over run mp mode on GOW judgement was so underrated
it was the only redeeming feature in that awful game
b tampa 24 It's such a waste to not bring that mode back!
Have to agree on this score. Was starting to think im just a jaded gamer when i saw all the other sites giving it a 9 and even 10. Its just a decent well made game but it dosnt innovate or surpise in any way at all. Im on the final act and i have no real desire to see it though. I have been playing tons of horde mode though so this review hits the nail on the head for me.
Great work.
solid review as always, just wish u wouldve put more of an emphazis on the microtransactions and how it seemingly screwed up a lot of the horde mode to many people
Like if you want Easy Allies to Review Pokemon Sun and Pokemon Moon :)
It's half a star away from being excellent and people can not handle it. What a strange world.
The only review that I can say really gets people juices flowing was Huber's Quantum Break 4.5 stars / 9 out of 10 For comparison sake.
i know, it's just a score! the review was very informative and makes the game look and sound like 6 stars to a fan, thats what matters.
There ya go, Agreed!
Thank you. Its like people can't handle fucking fractions or something.
Xbox one people rarely get a tast of good games, if any at all. No wonder they can't accept valid criticism when half of their games are filled with it and the ones whoch are not, are also released in other platforms.
Man Brandon u are awsome. It felt like I was watching a review on gametrailers again. Great!
Is there split screen on the campaign on the PC version?
3 1/2 stars ain't bad!!!! Thanks for the review, will you be doing one for dragon quest builders or the ps4 port of tomb raider?
Amid all of the salty comments, I want to propose some constructive criticism - you *may* want to reconsider calling 3 stars "decent." I know what you mean by that and it makes sense in the literal use, but the "decent" has a negative connotation. Something more akin to "Solid" like a "Worth Buying" or "Good" may be more in line with what you actually mean 3 stars to mean. Assuming that is what you mean in this case.
Galaxy40k not really. decent is decent.
I think "decent" really is the best word for what they are trying to convey. A "decent" game is by no means a spectacularly great game, it just does enough to avoid being inferior. "Decent" tells the consumer that they should look twice before they consider buying the game, as unless you're a fan of the franchise it might not be for you.
I personally think that changing it to "good", "solid" or "worth buying" would give it more positive connotations than the score system is trying to convey. That said, I feel like they could change the scoring system for games that have half stars, for instance, a 3.5 is inbetween "decent" and "excellent". Perhaps 3.5 stars could be "good" score? I don't know.
Gears 4 did their pic port amazingly with almost no problems. They have split screen coop, a great campaign great horde mode and multiplayer with free maps coming every month for a year! Also where was all this innovation in uncharted 4?
Sans split screen Uncharted has pretty much all of those things.
I always considered Uncharted 4 as a one and done game
The story is alright but not worth replaying (especially when harder difficulties makes doing all those flashy things useless) and the mp was always really bad
I usually don't replay games like uncharted or Gears story modes more than once. Especially since they don't have a new game plus just a harder difficulty. I don't know how you could find the multiplayer in uncharted to be boring. The verticality alone makes that game so much fun. I still remember the temple map in uncharted two. They always have some really well designed maps and the gameplay is so quick and fluid. At least for me it was. Gears MP is great as well especially horde and with the inclusion of split screen it made linking xboxs up with your friends a blast.
lol split screen, horde, and new maps are innovating?
remember when call of duty kept innovating? now where are we?Bruce
This might be little off topic but I'm wondering why u guys haven't reviewed Tokyo mirage session and SMT IV: A yet?
Random loot boxes, the future of the gaming industry. Get used to it boys, it's tried and true and microtransactions are here to stay.
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Well people are apparantly used to it already, otherwise we wouldn´t get 'em.
Because devs/publishers do that stuff ... well because it works and sells well :p
I'm not used to them, usually avoid stuff like this. Shame it had to be included in any game this year
If it means not having to pay 15 dollars for maps that should be free and split up the community then im ok with it. They did say they would support with free maps for a year.
...we're used to it... I just don't buy games with "features" like that. There's plenty of other shit to play.
Nice review, Jones! No pulling any punches with it!
Thanks Brandon!
You guys NEED to change it to a 10 Star System
Not to be a smart ass but 3.5/5 = 7/10.
That is not how it works actually
Pol arity Actually one of the EA guys made a video and he talked about this problem. what does 3/5 mean? it could be a 5, 6, 7 hell it could be an 8 if 4 means 9 and 5 always means 10 or does 4 mean 7 & 8 and 5 can be 9 & 10 there's just so many problems because stars dont necssisarelly translate to points and are subjective to what an individual thinks a star means
William Aguilar nah
Points are pretty useless as a decision making tool, I think. I'm not sure why anyone gets worked up over them, rather than the actual words said about a game. A review is here to discuss the ins-and-outs of a game as it is seen by the reviewer, the numbers are just an (extremely) imprecise way of quantifying a subjective opinion. When I watch a review I focus first-and-foremost on whether what is being said sounds like something I'm interested in. To see if I'm intrigued by the positive points made, and don't think the negative points raised would bother me. I've found plenty of games an absolute hoot, that reviewers gave only a 3.0/5.0. Do you really think a 6.0/10 and a 6.5/10 game are *objectively* different in quality?
I thought the story was alright, pacing was fine but it wasn't memorable. What always bugged me was why no one never told the cogs "ayy it wasn't us who took your people", a majority of the beginning would've been avoided.
And its great they didn't change the gameplay, in an age of shitty walking simulators with a mediocre 2deep4u story or jet packs, it's refreshing that they kept the arcade like gameplay
I found it weird that nobody noticed monsters running around sooner. Don't they have video cameras? Or some satellite coverage? Aren't COGS connected to their base? Can't they call for backup? It did not look like Swarm simultaneously took out everyone. Someone would manage to get the call out.
Valshiirs it was still too early for that type of stuff. the cog cities were just giant walls and the rebel cities were literal midevil villages but with backup generators for opening/closing doors. the COGS were so lazy they didn't even bother reclaiming other parts
Dudebros swarming the comment section in 3,..2,.1:
as to prove my point :)
From a personal view, I think I understand where you´re coming from with your experience, but in a way, it seems like you have your stance on GoW pretty clear. I think its a decent review, even if I personally would say that GoW 4 is a really really good game that I think I´ll put a lot of fun hours into.
Whats not decent is the comments I read here. The review states a good argument for why Jones thinks the game is good, but not perfect. Or as he puts it - "decent". It doesnt mean that he hates it. Please dont go that route people, you are better then that.
Looking forward to the next chapter from Coalition. Keep em coming!
Great review again.
My goodness, so many people who clearly love the game getting mad about a world where people can have opinions that boil down to a 3.5... I'd be mad that I wasted 5:30 watching a review for a game that I already played, and clearly have a stronger, most objective opinion about! People, if you don't like a score, then don't pay attention to it, and instead try and decide for yourselves whether the content of the review (the positives *and* the negatives) are things that you would be concerned about as a gamer. Don't care about story, but love shooting things while lightening and wind scream around you? Heck, this game is for you, dummy!
Solid review, EZA.
was not expecting that
besides bioshock what other fps series has a story on the level they are suggesting?? we came for the action and game play not really for a heavy story. check bioware for that
Gears 4 feels like Stars Wars Episode 7: The Force Awakens: it was made during a new generation and long time fans aren't used to the new characters while the old ones only return to play more of a mentor role. Long-time fans may or not may not like this game, but as for myself I love it. The multiplayer is as excellent as it ever was, the campaign is great, despite it shortcomings with some things I've seen in the previous games, and horde is great as well. It's a 4 or 4.25 out of 5 stars for me. I don't think it manages to hit the high bars like Gears 3 did, but it's a worthy addition to the series.
No offense but if you suck at a game you're not going to like it I guarantee Jones played like 2 online matches got his butt kicked and never again touched it. Multiplayer is the BIGGEST focus of this game. Nobody played past gears for their amazing story telling it's an action thrill ride but I do feel this one knocks out campaign horde and multiplayer all very well the gears packs are stupid though
Same old argument about a reviewer giving a lower score than anticipated and boiling down the criticism to getting their arses handed to them in multiplayer or something else. I doubt any of the Easy Allies crew would be so petulantly simple minded.
I think it's worth mentioning the AI in Vs.; before in GOW3 the bots that had to step in if you didn't have enough players or if someone left, felt completely incompetent and just a hinderance. In GOW4 they feel far more capable if you really need them.
how can I take anything you say about gears seriously if you can't even hit active reload?
lol, didn't catch that one but it's something to note : ) I mostly feel like Ben is not a gears fan, he played the games like anyone did, but he's not the target for this type of game.
Terence Caron This was written by Brandon.
how can you take a game with micro-transactions seriously?
821lancevance To be fair you don't need those at all and campaign is without those. Unlike deus ex for examble.
821lancevance uncharted 4 has micro transactions and that got a perfect score
I was pretty let down by the story. The first Gears had this gripping feeling of desperation, humanity heavily outnumbered scrambling to survivie against an extremely hostile enemy seeking absolute destruction. Replacing that with robots and mutants feels stunted.
Gears of war 4 is "decent" ? Come on guys, if you find this game only "decent" you weren't a fan of the series in the first place. It's at least a great gears, if not more (the graphics are amazing, not "solid", really amazing). It's a classic gears with a few tweak, but what other game did Gears better than gears ? Not a single one... Multiplayer has tons of modes, horde has a new class and perks systems that changes radically how you approach it. New maps are amazingly detailed...
I'm starting to feel like EZA is really not a client of xbox franchises, and that shows when you look at Uncharted 4's review and this one. Uncharted 4 played it completely safe apart from a few more open parts, the same MP as Uncharted 3...
You mean two weeks after they gave Forza Horizon 3 a excellent rating with 4.5 Stars?
Yeah that´s why they are praising Forza. And note: Just because Brandon feels this way doesn´t mean every single one of them completly agress with it.
They don´t write their reviews together sitting in a room.
I'm talking in general, if you watch podcasts, you see their interests lies on the PS4/PC, Brad Ellis and Huber often mocks the xbox one. They didn't care for Halo 5, barely covered Inside (apart from Ian), same goes for Rekore.
Forza is the exception in every media, everybody loves forza, even when they don't know what changed since the last one (watch the last frametrap/podcasts to see what I'm talking about).
I like these guys, but soon as they talk about xbox franchises, I know they don't follow/or they're not fans.
Terence Caron reviewer's opinion is reviewer's opinion
Yes this Gears game is good, but its like call of duty, more of the old and nothing much is new. You can't blame them for wanting more out of a game that is supposed to be one of xbox's top franchises. Inside is a good but short game, so i don't understand why you would want more than one person covering such a small game, and from what i heard Rekore sucked. They are fans of the xbox, but you cannot expect them as consumers, to just look the other way when i game has potential, but settles for "good".
Cool ta vidéo :)
This might the first gametrailers/easy allies review I ever disagreed with. 3 and a half stars? That score is worth of Gears Of War Judgment. 4 is at least 4 stars for me
Too add on to my original comment the reviewer failed to mention splitscreen support, the amazing visuals, the consistent frame rate and 60fps multiplayer as well as many other things. Also the locust returning is suppose to be a surprise for players that is spoiled by this review.
JDMSG 3.5 isn't bad. 2.5 is mediocre so a 3.5 puts it as a pretty good game.
Spaghetti God I didn't say it was a bad score. It's also not a good score. That translates to 70%, 7/10, C-. It means it just barely ascends past mediocrity by the skin of its teeth when it's a solid experience all the way around.it suits sp fans, coop fans, hardcore and casual mp fans.
All I'm saying is if they score IW 4 stars I'm going to start losing faith in Easy Allies as activision has been releasing the same COD yearly for over a decade.
Coalition releases a proper quality return to form game with plenty new and it warrants a 3.5?
JDMSG Pretty sure it doesn't work like grades do. Imo and according to them a 2.5 is a decent game. Average. So a 3.5 is way above average
Spaghetti God where do they say 2.5 is a decent game? The math speaks for itself. It added up in game trailers I expect it to add up on easy allies.
Wonder what goes wrong with the campaign, the 90 minutes or so that I have seen looks great.
Hey Brandon, Red Dead has revealed itself.
i remember watching the group try to play Gears ultimate edition online.. it was hilariously bad (like.. they couldnt even move) so i am not surprised they dont enjoy this game as much, since MP is a big part of it
been waiting for this
After "improved" in the description, there should be a question mark.
I forgot I was subbed to this channel
Christ, Xbone fanchildren can't understand that basically releasing the same game again is a valid criticism. I loved Gears but I got tired of the series in the middle of the Gears 2 campaign.
Sony has been doing it for years and their games get praise when they make the most minimum of changes.
King Artis Like what? Uncharted 4? I'm not a big fan but that game at least took chances with the story and gameplay. Gears 4's opening is really cool but ultimately the game is just more Gears with a shittier main character.
TinyDancerX99 Uncharted has always been fantastic with story, but the gameplay mechanics has more or less always been the same. Yes there are improvements, but it's never a major improvement to make the game feel fresh.
Agreed, JD is just okay as a character. I myself don't see anything wrong with a sequel wanting to play safe though.
King Artis I agree there's nothing wrong with playing it safe but there also isn't anything commendable. I'm not an Uncharted fan at all but Uncharted 2 is a HUGE leap in quality from 1. Uncharted 4 isn't a massive step forward but it is an improvement with some new elements. The games have improved. I can't really say the same about Gears.
gears has improved drastically in gameplay even from 3 to 4.
Sorre EA, but if it ain't broke, don't fix it! Also holy crap some of the comments are vicious lmao I don't consider any of the GoW games to be setting any standards in quality or breaking any ground myself, but they're fun and they work! Again, if it ain't broke, don't fix it but some of these comments, oh gee wiz!
yes
It scored 3.5!! prepare for the arrival of the Salty.
Without a shadow of a doubt, the best reviewers in the biz, keep them coming Easy Allies!
Someday I'll be able to play 2 and 3, then I can check out 4.
I am enjoying the game a lot so far, I feel the campaign story has been decent so far. I wouldn't call it boring or anything like that. I am right about at the end of the campaign. Hope to finish it in the next couple of days. Horde mode so far is an absolute blast with friends. Graphics are probably the best to date so far on XB1. (I also have PC and PS4 just saying for XB1 not PC or PS4). I'd put the game at 4/5 right now.
This sounds like an awesome game.
Only problem I have with this video is that you guys censored some comments, but left others that were offensive, aimed at offending others etc. Either leave the comments alone, close them off, or moderate more.
Video was great though, keep up the great work :)
***** I completely understand your position, I wasn't saying moderate EVERYTHING but if you guys do work on trying to moderate what you can than that is very good.
I'm glad you guys are active in the comments that's a pretty cool thing to see that a lot of other channels don't bother doing. Thank you for your response as well, you guys are great.
I feel so alienated. I enjoyed the story and purchased it just for campaign, just like Battefield 1 where Gamespot said "story mode is a good training mode" it seems like gamers who just care for story mode are dissapearing.
Isn't this the reviewer guy from GameTrailers?
When I played Gears 1 back when it came out it was epic. Replayed 2 years ago and the story overall didn't hold up. But as it progressed, it got better. So I was expecting this have a solid campaign. But after watching my friend play the first Segment of the game, I noticed how bad the script was so I decided to hold off. I will forsure be getting it eventually. Hope overall the story is great, because thats all I buy it for.
Great review. The game does run extremely well. Playing on win 10 i7 4790k gtx 1070 16gb ram and it runs and looks amazing. I have not exp any crashes, so far with 6 hours in the camping. It does fall very very short on the campaign. The camping sucks compared to gears of war 1 and 2. i miss the caverns of the first 2 gears games, the air ship battle in the second one, the cool armored vehicle part in the first one where you had to use the search light to ward off the bats, the cool part in 2 when you rode on that thing that looks like on of the tentacle monsters in the matrix, the characters 1 and 2 are awesome compared to the emo style characters in 4. the graphics are great in gears 4, the graphics and game play of the first two are awesome and will withstand the test of time. I'm over the campaign of gears 4. I'm sick of the robot shit, the robots that drop out of the c 130 repetitively. The same looking robots for over half of the campaign. There is a lack of serious creativity in gow 4. gow 1 and 2 had cool enemies and environments that smoke gow 4. i have replayed gow 1 and 2 a handful of times. i don't see myself replaying this one or even going past act 4 part 2. i put it on hardcore difficulty and it still feels to easy on top of me sucking at video games.
This is a game for Gearheads and third person shooter enthusiats through and through. You'll either love that they stick to tradition or be bored cus it's to similar. Clearly Brandon wanted something more unique out of this entry which is understandable. I appriciate its decsion to stick to tradition cus we haven't had a true gears of war game in 5 years, and Gears does thrid person shooting and action on a level that no other franchise can even compare to. Except maybe Vanquish, pls Platinum give us Vanquish 2 plsssssss
It's no secret that the EZA crew has never really been fans of the Gears of War franchise. Sure the story is nothing outstanding but for me Gears always had just enough story to keep you going. It's basically a great action movie type of game with great action and set pieces with a simple story to tie everything together. But Gears has always been a blast to play which is the most important for me. Personally I think this is one of the better Gear games and if you're a fan it's definitely 4 stars. (Also can we praise the people who made the pc port into high heaven or something, a pc port this well made is like finding a unicorn XP)
Not sure who did the review, but Gametrailers gave Gears of War 3 the score 9.2
Matthew Schell That's actually not bad, I was just going by anecdotal stuff i heard on the various podcasts they did.
great review feels exactly where gears of war is at for me. Would of been better for microsoft to keep them as black tusk working on the stealth game in china.
This game deserves 3 stars just cause the microtransaction system
So with that logic might as well deduct half a star for every game they review considering nearly every game that comes out has microtransactions. As long as it doesn't rip out noticeable chunks of content and is just mainly small things (like xp boosts, cosmetics, etc.) it isn't worth reducing a review in a system that doesn't really take into account DLC unless it is an egregious offense.
Uncharted 4 also has micro-transactions. I'll give that 2/5.
1080p60 is niiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiice
Oooh, seems pretty harsh Brandon. Personally I thought the campaign was pretty good.
I totally agree that it didn't do anything very revolutionary or different but it delivered a great, solid Gears of War game which I was very satisfied with.
Everyone's got a different opinion though of course - be interested to know what some of the other Allies made of the game.
love you Easy A, but you're wrong. I have the PC version and it doesn't work for about half of the PC's out there.
I agree about the campaign. Its worth playing, but there are just so many things wrong. JD is one of the most generic characters I've seen. There is nothing interesting about him. In fact, the whole trio is boring. When the old Gears meet up, for a moment the magic is back.
Despite it being a stuttering mess on PC(they kind of fixed it), I enjoyed UE way more. It had more diversity.
Well, at least the AI are smarter this time around.
But that aside, its a great game filled with content.
The taste of salty tears.
wow comments, i don't think you guys understand the star system. if it was shit, they'd give it less than 3 (not
Well, thank goodness Gears 5 delivered
Gears 5 is going to be amazing
So for the ones who played this game would you say GOW4's story is the weakest in the series because that's been the only true complaint about this game at least to me that i've heard reviewers talk about at length.
Visuals straight out of 2006, was expecting better :| Also robots :/ Only interested in the sp campaign so this feels like a step back
Felt like a early last gen game to me. I don´t think I will need more gears of war again.
This review is total BS. Brendon clearly went into this review with set expectations unfair to the game.
Gears 4 is a blast. If you like Gears or even new to it you'll find lots to love here. Its the most fun I've had with Gears since the first. The set pieces are awesome, the atmosphere is engrossing and the sound design is impeccable. A few surprises in the Campaign also. However I could have done with one less Hoard sequence in the Campaign but on the flip side its a great introduction to that mode for those intimidated by it in previous gears.
I applaud the developers for sticking so closely to the previous games. Its been some time since the original trilogy and this was a great reminder of why those games were so fun. They needed to prove that Gears was in the hands of a studio worthy, which they did, as did 343 with Halo 4. Now for better or worse they can evolve the franchise further with Gears 5. I"m excited to see that.
Great comment. Actually backed your opinion up.
Mark S on the flip side Huber stated he was going to give uncharted 4 a perfect score months before it came out..perfect example of a self-fulfilling prophecy
Sadly true : ( !!!
Forza Horizon 3 it is! Had to choose between one or the other.
I just loved it. Its the most fun I head this year. I loved Uncharted 4, but Uncharted was a better experience while this, for ME, is a better game. I do understand the criticism though...it is simply more gears without anything new.
I think Brandon as the open world guy should have reviewed Mafia III, and Huber should have reviewed this. I knew when I saw Brandon's name as the reviewer, it wasn't going to be high score. Brandon is great, but he can be very nitpicky.
I feel like this review was entirely too nit-picky. Hardly any game these days offers such a "complete" package as Gears 4. Not even Halo 5 was this content-rich at launch. Also, personally, I enjoyed the campaign even more than Uncharted 4 (which is easily a 5* for me).
I feel like you guys need to work on this scale some more. I know it's someone else reviewing each game, but your publication gave Quantum Break a 5 and Gears 4 a 3.5. Don't get me wrong, I think QB was a fine game, but those scores just don't add up and put your entire scale into question.
yes, I am saying if you applied the same criticism to another game, in this case Quantum Break, the scores don't stand up to scrutiny.
Plus, there's a lot of (good) content here, which gives Gears a leg up over most games these days.
They only gave 5 stars to Uncharted 4!
Ben is often nit-picky on games, but the other thing is he seems to not like Gears that much, in the last Frametrap he talked about how "Gears dialogues and story are always ridiculous" as if the cheesyness wasn't something the studio aimed for from the start.
There are tons of multiplayer modes in Gears 4, I don't understand how you could say "Well it's lacking, cause I feel like playing the same MP I did 5 years ago". It's gears of war, not a single game does TPS multiplayer like this one, maps are incredibly detailed, 60 fps on xbox one (well he reviewed on pc it seems), new weapons... Horde mode has a new class system, perks to unlock...
Damn, just detailing the new stuff they added shows it's not "just the same as before".
trollololoooooo it's almost like it's an opinion
Huber reviewed QB. Brandon reviewed GOW. expecting both scores to "make sense" in your own personal view is just stupid, doesnt make any sense
Eh, this is as bad as an IGN review. Gloss over certain points without any focus on say details like AI on hardcore or insane, sound design on the guns, etc...
Based on the writing of the review I expected 3/5.
hhmmm worth a try
its a solid AAA game but the trend of fucking microtransactions/skins hurt this game too :(
Did this people play the same gear4 I play because from this review I can tell they dint play the game
just lie after lie after lie
xKaoticPanter opinions you poor little child
good review. too bad the fanboys will take it as an offenses to their people lol.
I've been a hardcore Gears fan since the 1st game, i've loved the story throughout mainly due to the larger-than-life characters of delta squad, so it's a real shame to hear the campaign has gone downhill in 4. But then again Gears 1 was the weakest of the original trilogy (though still really good) and it got better with each installment so maybe we'll see something similar in the new trilogy
Nah gears 1 was the best in every way
Gears 1 was the best and the Ultimate Edition is probably the best 3rd person shooter we have.
Damn a 7? That's by far the lowest score I've seen!
I like the game but I hate that I had to fight robots in the first 2 acts..robots in a gears game..really?
I can't understand why people have to make out this "MS vs Sony games" bs. The lack of a real argument to back the game sounds like frustration for it not receiving more praise. 3.5 stars isn't even bad.
Worth mentioning ; 30 fps campaign on X1. Made me stay away from the game.
I love there is another honest review out there. I feel like everyone was too afraid to admit the campaign was not to par.
I don't know why they made this game if the story is so inconsequential. If Gears is all about game mechanics, why not make a new IP that expands the mechanics without the limitations of this series? Oh right, because a Gears game makes more money and Microsoft hates risk when it comes to their games. That's the one thing I think Microsoft needs to improve, almost all of their in-house "exclusives" are sequels, I'm sure that their games would get better scores if they were more unique. Gears today is a little generic, it's a cover shooter with buff dudes and a gray color palette, though I'm not trying to sell it short, it definitely has quality shooting.
Saying that the story is inconsequential and that it only has a gray color palette are just straight up wrong. The story in Gears 4 sets itself for a sequel by establishing the current state of a post-war Sera and a new threat that can be amassing and without going into major spoilers teases the audience with the significance of a certain character's origin. The gray color palette criticism hasn't even been applicable since Gears 3 and also is untrue for Gears 4 whether it is day or night time environments.
I... I liked the story though :(
do wwe 2k what the fuck are you waiting for
it's a cash grab, folks
I thought uncharted 4 felt like more of the same, yawn inducing gameplay. But this game gets ripped for it but uncharted doesn't?
People are scared to give Naught Dog real criticism. Fantastic developer but they get a pass on a lot of shit.
You clearly never played Uncharted 4. Uncharted 4 is the most different in the series, so much so, that it actually turned off long time fans. For one thing, there's a greater emphasis on stealth. You can hide in stealth plants, and mark enemies. Features that didn't exist in past games. You can also utilize the rope mechanic in puzzles and in combat. Again, something that wasn't present in past games. It's not similar to past Uncharted at all, actually...
The entire gameplay loop in U4 is completely different. In past Uncharted games, it was a constant action. U4 slows down the pace with TLOU style story-telling within the gameplay.
On top of that, not only is there stealth mechanics now, and rope mechanics, but the areas you combat in are much bigger. The larger areas combined with stealth and rope mechanics result in more dynamic gameplay scenarios. In other words, the way I tackled a gameplay section could be completely different from someone else. That dynamic gameplay was non-existent in past Uncharted games, but it's in U4. So there's a huge leap in that sense.
While I haven't played Gears 4 yet, it seems the gameplay loop is largely the same. And unlike U4, it isn't exactly dynamic.
It's pretty clear that you haven't played Uncharted 4 because they have implemented interesting mechanics in U4, and they put much greater care into game design and gameplay scenarios.
I'm not going to waste my time with you, though. It appears World End is correct in his assessment of you being a troll.
None of what you are saying is true. I read you said Uncharted 2 and Uncharted 4 aren't much different in this comment section. You're clearly saddened by the fact that this outlet gave Uncharted 4 a higher score than your precious Gears of War. Get over it. What you are saying about Uncharted 4 is objectively false. There's no other way around it.
In the genre of third person shooters, there is no bigger bang for your buck package than Gears of War. The only thing "decent" is the story, the rest is simply outstanding. And no TPS on any console offers more improvements on each outing than this franchise.
don't forget about those great and friendly micro transactions
I don't see how that's relevant to anything. Yeah you could buy packs, but you don't have to.
VanHellington games should always lose points for bad micro transactions. They took points off of bravely default for this reason too.
But they aren't bad microtransactions, most of them are just for cosmetics, atleast the expensive ones are. And they can be bought with ingame currency. So I don't see how this is a problem?
VanHellington gears made you pay 100 instead of 60 to play the game early plus there micro-transactions are pay to win.
The microtransactions are totally optional! Except they’re not if you want to have the highest damage weapons and in-game buffs for Horde mode. So, just spend. The alternative is grinding with little reward or progression so it’s better to open your wallet. Spend! it would take someone 500 hours of grinding to get weapons unlocked and even those are not a great as the bought ones.
you are the problem sir
campaign was painful to play!
using multiplayer strategy in campaign and repetitive boring sections