Jump to navigation

Table of contents

Page Previous 1 2 3 Next

Advertisement

Gears of War Review

Xbox 360 Review by Kristan Reed

17 November, 2006

Page 1 of 3. Page 2 ->

You can read what we made of the single-player campaign elsewhere on the site.

Gears of War's multiplayer could and should be one of the best online multiplayer gaming experiences around. Right now - when all the stars are aligned - it can be one of the most unique and entertaining, but also one of the most infuriating.

The raw material for you to go online and have a lot of fun is there in abundance. Key to this is the fact that the 10 multiplayer maps are so well designed and pleasantly varied. Based around various key environments that you'll be familiar with from the main campaign, there's genuinely not a bad one among them. Even if you're well versed with the story mode, the first time you play each one gives you that same feeling of wide-eyed awe that reminds us about that next generation we keep hearing so much about (but seeing so little of). But it's not just impressive in terms of stand-out graphical opulence (which is a given), it's the realisation of how well balanced most (if not all) the map are too, without ever resorting to lazy symmetrical designs.

Every map has a start point at opposing sides of the map, with the simple goal of taking out your opposite numbers. After every round you swap to the opposite side of the map, presumably to even out any possible advantage there might conceivably be, and so the match goes on until you reach the first to five - or however many rounds the host dictates. With just eight players supported, it's no surprise to find such tight, confined maps designed around columns and cover points. Encounters with the enemy usually take place within a matter of 10 or 20 seconds, so it's normal to find your opponents all rushing to take up the best spots to pick you off. Anticipation of that tends to be key, so the turnover of rounds can happen in a matter of a few minutes, and as a result you get a really good appreciation of the entire map in no time at all. By design, Gears of War's multiplayer experience is an instantly accessible experience, and yet tough to master.

Nice arsenal

'Gears of War' Screenshot youngman

Young man, there's no need to feel down....I said, young man, pick yourself off the ground.

Part of the reason it's tough to master is working out the best use of which weapon at the right time. Weapon loadout is the same for both the Locusts and the Cog troops, and no side has an real advantage in terms of better weapons or superior health or speed and so on. You all start with a single smoke grenade, the Snub pistol, the Lancer assault rifle (complete with chainsaw bayonet for super-satisfying melee kills), and the short-range Gnasher, and whether you choose to grab any of the other more powerful specialist weapons lying around the map is up to you, but definitely helps. Different maps offer specific weapons, such as the Boomer grenade launcher, the Longshot sniper rifle, or (most commonly) frag grenades, while others might allow you to wield the satellite-enabled Hammer of Dawn (that shoots down a particle beam from the sky) as well as others featured in the campaign mode. But, generally, every weapon has its own set of massive disadvantages. For example, the sniper rifle might be deadly enough to kill a player in one shot, but its load time leaves a player exposed for a dangerous amount of time. Similarly, the shotgun's useless at long range, but absolutely deadly from three metres away, and while the assault rifle is useful at long range, its chainsaw bayonet can catch a player off guard in grisly fashion.

One thing you'll also notice early on is how some maps are more suited to certain weapons than others. For example, the long, narrow Canal map with its various bridges makes it a popular choice for snipers, while others (like the one with the central decaying mansion) favour a more condensed multi-layered approach with doorways offering excellent choke point opportunities for you to lay in wait for the unsuspecting foe with the Boomer primed and ready.

'Gears of War' Screenshot wretchhorde

Marcus Fenix is a big hit at the Locust karaoke night.

Perhaps the thing that takes the most adjusting to is the fact that there's a much greater emphasis on close quarters combat in multiplayer - which simply wasn't such a big deal in the campaign mode where most enemies tended to sit patiently behind cover and pop out obligingly. For a while you might assume the same tactics will work online, where you could zoom in on targets and kill them with a few well-placed shots from your Lancer - but you'll come completely unstuck if you do. Suddenly you'll start to make much better use of blind firing that you ever did before, and appreciate the usefulness of the melee grenade attack, or how essential the Gnasher really is.

Morning glory

Because of the game's rather limited AI scope in campaign mode (even in Hardcore mode), none of these techniques were ever really called for that often (if ever), but playing it in multiplayer really starts to reveal how finely balanced the weapons are, and how using the environment properly is essential. In fact, the entire control system seems much more tailored to the demands of multiplayer conflict, where evasion techniques are paramount. In conjunction with the same recharging health mechanic, a skilful player can roll away from an attack, and perform cover slips and SWAT turns to their advantage. A beginner may make good use of cover, but in these desperate situations a good knowledge of the right weapons to use and how to get yourself out of trouble makes for an interesting battle.

'Gears of War' Screenshot dominator

No.1 Dom-inator.

It's perhaps here that Gears of War can truly start to assert its differentials over the online shooting herd, with a style of multiplayer gaming that does feel somewhat fresh in comparison to a lot of the done-to-death first-person shooters that have been trawled out endlessly. And even against more serious squad games like GRAW, it bothers to make use-of-cover an essential part of the gameplay - something Ubisoft bizarrely stripped out of the multiplayer after basing the entire single-player gameplay on exactly that. At least there's a real consistency in GoW, in that the multiplayer game doesn't feel annexed in any way from the campaign.

The controls, while by no means perfect and easy to get tangled in knots with, at least attempt new things that have a major impact on how multiplayer games play out. The active reload system, for example, is an excellent idea that gives players the chance to reload much quicker by mastering a very simple and effective technique of double-tapping the reload button at precisely the right time. Being able to do this in the heat of battle can make the difference between life and death, as can being able to exit cover and mount low walls in one fluid motion. Put these small things together and you have a game which offers something a little different in many areas. Other shooters have never really nailed that sense of physical interaction with the environment, resorting to crouch and lean options that never really felt right. I wouldn't quite go as far to say Gears of War feels right either, because Epic has introduced enough annoying quirks of its own, to be fair (such as how clunky the whole running mechanic is, for a start), but at least CliffyB and co have tried to offer a different approach.

To Page 2 ->

Advertisement

Are you excited about Gears of War on Xbox 360?
View Eurogamer readers most anticipated games

Thanks!

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

Comments: 1-50 of 207 in total | next 50 »

Poster
Comment Low-scoring comments hidden. Log in to see them!
smugla
17/11/06 @ 14:04
#1
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
first lol
disc
17/11/06 @ 14:04
#2
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
If people complain about this now they really need a new hobby.
lambtron
17/11/06 @ 14:05
#3
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
lol indeed.
Steroyd
17/11/06 @ 14:06
#4
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
uh oh Spaghettio's!!!
Mho7276501
17/11/06 @ 14:06
#5
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
lol again
KnickKnack
17/11/06 @ 14:07
#6
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
yeah yeah yeah, but WHEN does the REAL next gen start? :)
Mho7276501
17/11/06 @ 14:08
#7
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@KnickKnack, with the release of DX10 games?
alpha-0ne
17/11/06 @ 14:08
#8
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Steroyd
17/11/06 @ 14:09
#9
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
using my calculator Gears of War still Averages at about an eight.
rhinoxious
17/11/06 @ 14:11
#10
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
So as good as Halo
fizzer25
17/11/06 @ 14:11
#11
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Doesn't bother me one bit about the score I have already bought the game as I said I would regardless of the review as I like the look of it, however I foresee another few hundred comments protesting and chastising Tristan!! Feel sorry for him his opinion is different to every other reviewer I have read on the subject but so what fair play to him on being honest least he is prepared not to bow to the majority. When I have played the game over the weekend I will decide whether I agree with him or not!!
crazyhorse174
17/11/06 @ 14:11
#12
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
8?

Oh God...here we go...
spongebob
17/11/06 @ 14:12
#13
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
As good as GOW, then?
WooHoo!!!
17/11/06 @ 14:13
#14
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
After reading through which I doubt many will, seems fair.
rhinoxious
17/11/06 @ 14:15
#15
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Am still really looking forward to the online co-op, despite the noted flaws.

I'm amazed that they didn't take a leaf from Bungie's book in the organisation of competitive multi-player.
Batman2100
17/11/06 @ 14:16
#16
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
After the flaming he got for the SP review, I'm faintly surprised Kristan was willing to do this one... Bravo, I say, regardless of score, for overcoming fear of the fanboys...
Dr.Mott
17/11/06 @ 14:19
#17
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I just bought this today. I haven't had a chance to play an online versus mode yet, but the co-op thing is great.
gazareth
17/11/06 @ 14:20
#18
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
It seems a tad harsh to mark the game down because idiots play it. Welcome to online gaming!
Tonka
17/11/06 @ 14:21
#19
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Never eat Sushi for lunch. Sure it's nice and you feel healthy and full when you are finnished. It's a chimère though. 2hrs later and you WILL be starving. There is also loads of sugar in the marinade for the rice.

Did you know that Sushi means marinated rice? It does. Sashimi on the other hand means raw fish.

Eighthours
17/11/06 @ 14:21
#20
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I'm sticking to player matches. People are always far nicer in them than the idiots in the ranked ones... and this goes for most 360 games. So many idiots out there. But with your friends in a player match, this game is a joy.

Shame there aren't the clan options, hopefully they'll come.
krudster [mod]
17/11/06 @ 14:22
#21
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
You learn something new every day.
sickpuppysoftware
17/11/06 @ 14:22
#22
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Oh man, the trolls are going to have to multi-task today
Adam_T
17/11/06 @ 14:22
#23
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
A Good Review.

A let down on the clan thing, I only play pc games online with clans I'm in as I'm so sick of online retards, so I can understand how you feel, moreso as it's heavy reliant team play, akin to the likes of DoW on the pc.

Hopefully most of those issues will be fixable with a reworked stats/drop system and possibly how points are accumulated.
gazareth
17/11/06 @ 14:23
#24
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I should add that I spent several hours playing unranked games last night with friends and it was the most fun I've had on Xbox Live since I got my 360. I've gotten bored with every other game after a few rounds, but this held my interest all the way through.

It's a shame that they seem to have made a pigs ear out of the ranked matches system, and that there's no clan support, but the experience I had last night surpassed all my expectations.

P.S. I agree with the singleplayer review 100%.
therev
17/11/06 @ 14:24
#25
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Interesting. My multiplayer impressions, written earlier today, based on a mere two games so far -

"I jumped into a quick ranked match and chose to be on the side of the locusts. (As is the way of things, they look much, much cooler than the good guys. Less armour, more cloth, great big teeth and terrible skin. I think I want to be one when I grow up.) We started off outside an old house that had seen better days. The kind of spooky, ruined house kids would dare their friends to walk up to and just touch - because entering would be unthinkable, even in daylight.

And it was raining. And somehow, despite being almost devoid of colour, the house, the cloth flapping from my teammates' waists and the rain all added up to one of the most beautiful things I've seen in a videogame.

It was - and I really don't say this lightly - it was up there with leaving the castle in the Ico demo and walking out into the sunlight.

Then we were off, running towards the house. I followed a teammate, but lost him, found myself alone. Using cover, moving slowly, hearing firefights far off, inside the house. Unintentionally, I'd come up to the enemy from behind. Not sure if I killed anyone that first round, but I helped.

Soon I'd discovered I had a shotgun and I'd learned the layout of the small but perfectly-formed map. Two very important things.

I worked with a teammate to take down a sniper crouching behind an old sofa at the top of some stairs. I didn't have my headset, so I couldn't speak, but it's one of those games where you don't really need to. You know what needs to be done and you do it, instinctively working together.

The sides were evenly matched in numbers, but not skill, and my team won the match, getting to five wins first. I was the worst player on my team, but not by a lot and I got enough kills and downs to feel pretty pleased with myself.

It was glorious. I want to remember that match for ever.

The second match couldn't and didn't live up to it. Firstly, it took me about five minutes to get into another match. Then it was two against four and I was one of the two, which really showed up my weakness - the primary one being a weakness to chainsaws being forced into the back of my head. It was still great fun - the one kill I did get felt like a real victory - but it didn't reach the same heights. It was a first-to-ten wins match and after the first couple of rounds it was obvious how each round was going to go. I did feel some comradeship with my single teammate, though, and by the last couple of rounds we were really working well together. (The map wasn't as good, either, for the record. Just a square room with spawn points either end and various bits of cover lying around.)

You may have noticed that I've not mentioned lag. Simple reason - there wasn't any that was visible to me in either match. End of story."

The main point being, as someone currently headsetless I enjoyed the fact that it's possible to, effectively, communicate in-game with your teammates. Like I never felt the need to say anything when playing Counter Strike, beyond the odd quickly-typed "sorry" or "oops" or "cheers, bye".

As I say, though, first impressions only. I'll see how I feel after more play - though hoepfully I'll get my headset back some time today.
disc
17/11/06 @ 14:24
#26
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Tonka: I agree about the Sushi, it's a health risk.

If you want a better lunch you should take a look at some brown rice which fills you up for hours. Or maybe you should look at some pasta, though here you need to make sure it is made with the slower kind of carbs.
krudster [mod]
17/11/06 @ 14:25
#27
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The multiplayer isn't marked down based on idiots, it gets the 8 because Epic didn't implement a way to *stop* the idiots. Clan matches and so on would make this an awesome multiplayer experience, but right now it's a teenage dementia city...
gazareth
17/11/06 @ 14:25
#28
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Oh yeah, there's a bug where you can't hear people who join unranked games midway through. If you don't join at the pre-game lobby stage then no one can hear you speaking. A pretty unforgiveable bug really...
disc
17/11/06 @ 14:27
#29
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
If you dont have a headset will you still hear the teens?
bonker
17/11/06 @ 14:28
#30
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
/Reserves yet more hours tonight to suck this up along with the R:FOM thread :)
therev
17/11/06 @ 14:28
#31
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Without the headset you do hear people - I had to mute one guy last night in my brief play. He was playing fine, but just singing nonsense in a high-pitched voice the entire time.
krudster [mod]
17/11/06 @ 14:28
#32
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Before this point gets lost in the malaise - this is fantastic fun when you get a keenly contested match between two well-drilled teams. But you'd have to be blind deaf and dumb not to point out the issues that I, and probably thousands of others are having with it right now.
rhinoxious
17/11/06 @ 14:31
#33
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Anyone from this thread fancy a sensible team based game tonight?

If so my gamertag is: SEF

We can get together some eurogamer teams and play it properly!
Clive Dunn
17/11/06 @ 14:31
#34
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I'm not sure about the validity of including peoples online behaviour in a review. After all the biggest weakness with online gaming is usually the human element - which is exactly why many of us only play games with people on friends lists.
disc
17/11/06 @ 14:31
#35
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
krudster: Mark it down for other people? That's a very patchable offense you know.
krudster [mod]
17/11/06 @ 14:32
#36
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
MMUK: Try clans. Try offering all vs all deathmatch. Try giving % of DNF stats so you can avoid quitting retards. Try giving instant point penalties to users that host and quit. Try a quickmatch system that takes you straight into the lobby.

There are plenty of easy solutions of fixing what's wrong with this.
zErOb_cOOl
17/11/06 @ 14:36
#37
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
I'm sorry for the unoriginal comment, but lol (again.)
kangarootoo
17/11/06 @ 14:38
#38
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Please people. Lets try and keep this thread in good order, if only to show the outside world that gamers aren't all hormonal f'kwits with binary mood controls.

So who has played this online so far?
How did your experience line up with Kristans (no doubt it differed slightly, thats life, no-one is wrong ok)?
Has anyone had a ranked match that WASN'T full of annoying kids?

Is there co-op online BTW? Maybe you mentioned it (or its absence) in one of the reviews Kristan, but my eyes aren't what they used to be (they used to be ears, ahahahaha... sorry /fires self).
kangarootoo
17/11/06 @ 14:41
#39
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
@Clive Dunn

"I'm not sure about the validity of including peoples online behaviour in a review."

I think it is entirely relevant if it impacts enjoyment and COULD have been controlled by the developer. if you buy a game, and then it turns out to not be fun for whatever reason, you expect the review to tell you about it surely.


@disc

"Mark it down for other people? That's a very patchable offense you know. "

Surely you aren't suggesting that EG staff adjust their review opinions and scores based on what they presume might get patched at some point possibly in the future maybe?
Xerx3s
17/11/06 @ 14:44
#40
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
The multiplayer isn't marked down based on idiots, it gets the 8 because Epic didn't implement a way to *stop* the idiots. Clan matches and so on would make this an awesome multiplayer experience, but right now it's a teenage dementia city...

I doubt that you will find many game in the near future with those elements. Trueskill system. It doesn't allow things like groups. But both epic and ms said that they are working on it. I really think that ms should take a look at it's system. leaderboards/scores < fun with parties & clans.

All in all, fair enough. You can't judge something on what it will be but what it is (even though stuff like H2 went from good to fantastic by means of patches and upgrades later on).
rhinoxious
17/11/06 @ 14:47
#41
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
At least GOW is a big enough title that patches and improved online matchmaking are a definite possibility. Smaller titles often suffer from lack of post-release support, but I can't see that happening here.
sharpfish
17/11/06 @ 14:49
#42
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Gears of war 8 my hamster!


Great game, 8 or not. (actually 9.5 average and 14th best game of all time on gamerankings.com so far!)
DCrider360
17/11/06 @ 14:51
#43
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"The controls, while by no means perfect and easy to get tangled in knots with, at least attempt new things that have a major impact on how multiplayer games play out."

sounds like the eurogamer crew are just fuckin crap at the game basically!!!

gears shits on ALL shooters!!!!

jack_klugman
17/11/06 @ 14:52
#44
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
14th best game of all time on gamerankings.com

What a depressing statistic.
krudster [mod]
17/11/06 @ 14:55
#45
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
If this is the 14th best game ever, I'm Jesus.
pjmaybe
17/11/06 @ 14:56
#46
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
Had my first single AND multiplayer goes on this last night and it's absolutely rock solid multiplayer. In fact it's about bloody time a LIVE game came out for the 360 with good solid kick ass netcode as good as Halo 2's. No hassle joining a game, getting into it and it looks as good multiplayer as it does in single player.

I'm just hoping UT2007 gets a release on the 360 too...

Peej
hula hoops
17/11/06 @ 14:56
#47
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
If you are new to EG and are surprised about the score here are some guides for you:

1. Football Manager = 10/10
2. Zelda = 10/10
3. FPS game on non PC platform capped to 8/10
4. Xbox (or 360) exclusive games get -1 score penalty
5. Gamecube (or Wii) exclusive games get +1 score modifier

you get the drift ... :P
Steroyd
17/11/06 @ 14:57
#48
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
This is a crime how on earth did MGS 3 Subsistance rank 21 places behind MGS2. :/

...oops off topic.
kangarootoo
17/11/06 @ 14:59
#49
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
"14th best game of all time on gamerankings.com "

Just shows what a sack of bollox gamerankings actually is.

It sets out to compare all games as if they were the same, and simply demonstrates that assumption is fatally flawed.


@hula hoops

Well done, you qualify for membership of the "I don't understand it so it must be wrong" club.
Tonka
17/11/06 @ 15:02
#50
0
You buried this comment
Comment below viewing threshold
Show
There is an Indian restaurant not far from my office. I go there maybe 2 times a week. I love their food and it keeps me full for a long time. But it also makes me drowsy. Could it be that stuff they put in the rice?

The reason I'm thinking this is because I once had some fried rice with lotus buds in it. It made so relaxed I couldn't be bothered to move for 2 hrs. My hands went all warm and fuzzy to. It was great.

Anyways, indian food with Nan keeps you full.
Sushi won't.

Beware of the sushi. I also find it a bit distressing to order food from a girl in a restaurant that smells of raw fish.

My copy of Gears is lying next to me on my desk and I can swear that Feicks guy is smirking at me.

Comments: 1-50 of 207 in total | next 50 »

Want to comment on this article? Log in, or register!

X View gallery