Best Graphic EVER [Full Gears of War Vids]

Status
Not open for further replies.
please take a look to the screens that I've posted

you have to choose, do you prefer lose detail on gameplay or useless details on 'sky'?

4:3 is not natural, this is why wider screens are becoming the standard

The screens you posted are not what I'm proposing, for the vertical split you've created 8:9 ratio for each screen, far too narrow, I'm talking about creating two smaller 4:3 screens, maintaining a wider view.

it would look more like this:
split2.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The screens you posted are not what I'm proposing, for the vertical split you've created 8:9 ratio for each screen, far too narrow, I'm talking about creating two smaller 4:3 screens, maintaining a wider view.

it would look more like this:

in this way, not only you have less pixel dedicated to gameplay, but less pixel at all too (thanks to the two black bar)

no, please! :???:
 
another quote from cliffy b.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - there are not enough co-op games out there. Nothing makes me happier after a long day of harassing the team building Gears to come home, plop myself on my sofa, and kick ass with my girlfriend.

He said in a video somewhere that a coop player can join a single player game on the fly, and it automatically takes control of Dom.
 
Please, black bars are sooooo 90s! Let's ditch the tunnel vision and go with the wider FOV...kind of like how people have bi-lateral vision instead of bi-....vertical vision. ;)
 
I still see blackbars on my TV when I watch DVD's that are wider than 16:9, and many are.

Anyways, I just think it's a good comprimise as you get a fairly tall screen that's not completely squashed, but it's still wider than it is taller. You do lose screen space, but in my opnion, the game is more playable this way, and you feel much less 'boxed in"

That's just my own preference, like I say too bad it isn't user selectable.
 
I guess to each his own. I get the jibblies everytime I fire up 2 player splitscreen Doom on the Xbox. Especially on a big screen, I just prefer seeing all the stuff on the side ala Halo: CE's co-op. It might look boxed in, but it's not like the game was really designed with emphasis on aiming vertically.

I guess if you kept the view the same for your example scooby, but just extend the view to include the stuff that you wouldn't normally see, that'd be ok... it'd just be filling in the black bars with something. So basically, you get to see more of the character, floor and the ceiling.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's funny nobody is talking about it but Kotaku is speculating a possible Xbox Live DEMO resulting from the 48 hours Gears site!

Now, actually my guess is it will be a high rez trailer released on live, no chance of a demo, but either way it should be cool, and like I said nobody seems to be paying any attention despite the words "Gears" and "Demo" in the same sentence. Either way we'll find out quickly.
 
Cliffy B Answers:

Questions and replies:

AcidCat posted:

In the one multiplayer video I watched it seems characters can absorb a decent amount of bullets before dying. How do you find that sweet spot between taking too much damage - and the weapons end up feeling weak - and taking too little damage, where you're dead before you know what hit you and it gets frustrating?

A player who is good at aiming (and masters the active reload minigame which gives you a smidge of a damage boost) can drop a foe in 1.5 seconds of bullet fire.

I think the guys you were watching were newbs and had yet to really master the game.

Note that in SP the Locust DO take more damage than your typical human. They've got thick skin!


Likerock posted:

Because the game got so big was there ever any pressure for celebrities in the cast or anything like that?

Not at all. We cast whomever we feel is right for the role.


Ultimate Mango posted:

Any further response to some of the speculation that the cover based stop and pop gameplay might get repetitive?

I think the title looks great from a graphics and concept perspective (and you have made some solid all around design choices), but I am really worried that I am going to get sick of running form cover point to cover point after a few hours, let alone the entire single player experience. My main fear is that this (getting bored of the single concept play) will make multi-player less enticing.

Is there really variety to be found in this concept? I sure hope so, and that you have only begin to take the wraps off this beauty.

There's a lot of variety in the game beyond the core shooting dynamic. Just because we've shown a certain amount of the title to the public doesn't mean that's the entire game. If you think I'm going to start spoiling and outlining everything you're high.


Banano posted:

Same bloody difference.

Not at all. An enemy from the underground causes regular earthquakes due to their movement. They implode the ground next to you and start crawling out. Certain denizens of the underground dislike light. See where I'm going?

(...and I wonder what that underground looks like and contains???)


Lord Wexia posted:

Do I need an HDTV to play this like the folks who made Dead Rising seem to think or will I enjoy the environment on a standard-def TV just fine?

No, actually, it looks **** hot on a 4:3 low res TV.


Reddline posted:

Is your hardest difficulty setting similar to legendary in Halo 2 where other classes of enemies are tossed in for good measure? For instance, where enemies such as elites and grunts existed in legendary mode versus only grunts in normal mode in an area of the game.

Enemies are more lethal and cover is even more essential on "insane." We don't play with enemy count on the different difficulties. Insane co-op is a blast.


Fenarisk posted:

I'm hoping there's at LEAST two more than just machinegun/chainsaw and shotgun

There's a nice arsenal of guns. Multiple handguns too. Don't worry.


Banano posted:

Don't you think the american beefcake protagonist vs space aliens is a bit hackneyed? Not ****ting on your game (I do look forward to playing it) but shouldn't next generation mean more complex and in depth character development and story/dialogue as well as 'OMG 30,000 polys per gun!'?

I do realise this is a game primarily about blowing **** up and I ask these questions more with reference to the direction of the industry in general.

1. They're not space aliens. There's no space to speak of in this game. There's one pseudo-laser weapon and it's an orbital beam as the humans in this universe have had limited success with space travel or exploration. There's also no lava or caution striping or dropships. No GI-Joe beams flying around.

2. I'm quite happy with the dialogue. I ask that anyone play the final game a bit before making the call on it. If you judge the book by its cover then yeah we do look like some sort of meatheaded space marine experience. But I hope that when you really get into it you see that Marcus and Dom are boys and that the supporting squadmates have actually got some pretty damned good banter. Ultimately, it's the game version of an action movie, it's not "Lost in Translation."

Character wise, I knew this game wasn't going to be filled with feminine emo types. I'm not a fan of that style. Few of us are. One of the main reasons the characters are so damned big is for visibility. Everything was meant to feel heavy and mean and cool instead of thin and spindly and weak.

Question for CliffyB:

This is really clutching at straws here, but there's a track on the forthcoming Megadeth album called 'Gears of War'. Does it have anything whatsoever to do with the game, soundtrack-wise?

(ohplease )

MS just went "Hay guys we're doing this cool stuff with Megadeth" and we're like YEAH SYMPHONY OF DEEEESTRUUUUUCTION.

So, yeah.


Ghostship posted:

Are people really that excited about this game? I mean, it looks good and all, but I was a huge ****ing Halo fan when Halo 2 came out and I didn't even camp out for that. I'm going to go to EB games this week and pre-order it just in case.

Camp out! It shows our passion for the medium!

GOW_100.gif
 
If a demo did come out, I'd say it's be just a day or two before the 'ship' date. Ie, get everyone foaming at the mouth and clamouring for the game. A demo now could potentially hurt interest in the game (especially if there were problems with it)

Really I expect no demo till after release.

Preordered my copy today :)
 
I *tend* to agree with Rash (though to my defence, and before I get flamed, I really haven't seen enough of GoW to really form a valid opinion at this point):

Each game boils down to a design-decision: 30fps or 60fps? Better textures or less but more geometry? Simplistic buildings with high-res textures or complex buildings with low res textures? Very complex AI or rather more enemies with less complex AI?

Perhaps it's not a question of how impressive is GoW technically - but where did the team prioritise their goals?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I *tend* to agree with Rash (though to my defence, and before I get flamed, I really haven't seen enough of GoW to really form a valid opinion at this point):

That's a good point that I meant to put in my post and that is that NONE of us have really seen enough of GoW to really judge it. Epic has been consciously holding everything but the first level back until release. Probably a wise move if only for review scores. With all they hype this game has received it probably helps them to have a bunch of surprises up their sleeve for final review copies so those scoring the game still feel like there was something surprising and unexpected about it.
 
That's a good point that I meant to put in my post and that is that NONE of us have really seen enough of GoW to really judge it.

No one is judging it though - not on what the game will be, but this should be a discussion based on what we have seen from the game up to this point. If we were to limit discussions to have enough information about the topic we participate in, we probably wouldn't have much discussions at all since we have many participating in discussions of games they haven't completed/played and have only seen footage on.

I do believe there is enough footage outthere to be conclusive about what is impressive about GoW and what not at this point. ;)
 
Graphically absolutely but I'm not very impressed by what I have seen gameplay wise. Seems a bit too repetitive and linear but that's just my opinion.
 
Technically speaking, the game is as advanced as the UE3 can be. Looks good but it's middleware and based on a PC engine. Obviously not the best we'll see on X360.

Gameplay-wise, it's an action/shooting game with nothing exceptionally new about it from what we've seen.

The game is being hyped up because it looks really cool, not because of how amazingly it plays, which we're not sure about at the moment anyway.

Plus, reports are saying the game is very short, pretty much like any mindless action game. Lots of satisfying but short-lived fun.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top