So don't play on the easiest difficulty setting. /shrugs
Gears of War sweeps the AIAS awards..
- Thread starter EndR
- Start date
So don't play on the easiest difficulty setting. /shrugs
Personally my favorite was the headshots on enemy's that refused to find proper cover.
From what I remember though any shot that wasn't a headshot would just chip away at their health until eventually they ran out of health.
ah - Thanks mrcorbo - Didn't realize the game was like this on easy. (never tried)
You get it early on but some people ditch it as soon as they can for a repeater rifle. A tactic that I used until I went to a harder difficulty and discovered and 2 to 4 elbow shots don't work well against someone with a shotgun or a torque bow. I typically kept a shotgun, chainsaw gun a mag44 but I would drop one in a hot second and pick up whatever a enemy dropped or what was on the ground and use it until it was empty then simply pick up the my old weapon and move on.
How many games allow you to shot someone in the toe and watch as they ran or hopped around bleeding from their boot until either you shot them center mass or watch them pass out from the loss of blood? How about see a medic run across the screen, dress the wound and then having some comrades drag him off to the awaiting medivac?
I bet you would be hard press to find a shooter that doesn't allow you to kill someone with toeshots.
Last edited by a moderator:
If you are always playing with the same people it may explain why you always have lag and others have had none. I know a lot of people playing GOW and they haven't had lag issues. Online gaming can suck, sometimes you need to search out solid connections that work well with the game you are playing. I tend to limit online gaming to games where I know I can get people regionally.
It's funny. I read through some of these posts, and people say things, like they have played the game, but with some of the ridiculous comments, there is no way they played the game?
-Terrible lag in multiplayer when you play with the same people all the time?
C'mon now. Surely you jest right?
-Gears shouldn't of won for outstanding online play?
Again, this is funny. It has THE BEST co-op xbox live play of any game. And the 4x4 has perfect balance, and is pulled off very, very well.
-People in front of me don't die with 1 shot. I shoot people with 1 shot in foot and they die? Gears lacks any kind of strategy.
Once again, these are comments I would expect from someone who has only looked at screenshots and read reviews. The per target aiming is stellar. 90% of the enemies have some type of armor on. Your NOT going to get someone with 1 shot kill, unless you head them. And playing on hardcore and insane requires a nice amount of strategy to get through many portions of the game. Especially on co-op the strategy was off the charts.
Stunning. Simply stunning.
-Terrible lag in multiplayer when you play with the same people all the time?
C'mon now. Surely you jest right?
-Gears shouldn't of won for outstanding online play?
Again, this is funny. It has THE BEST co-op xbox live play of any game. And the 4x4 has perfect balance, and is pulled off very, very well.
-People in front of me don't die with 1 shot. I shoot people with 1 shot in foot and they die? Gears lacks any kind of strategy.
Once again, these are comments I would expect from someone who has only looked at screenshots and read reviews. The per target aiming is stellar. 90% of the enemies have some type of armor on. Your NOT going to get someone with 1 shot kill, unless you head them. And playing on hardcore and insane requires a nice amount of strategy to get through many portions of the game. Especially on co-op the strategy was off the charts.
Stunning. Simply stunning.
Shoot a Locus grunt anywhere with the sniper rifle and it will kill him. Armor sharmor, the sniper gun kill them with one bullet everytime. This is not true in multiplayer where I guess the players have armored boots.
I own the game, I finished the game. I've played co-op online and off and splitscreen vs.
I own the game, I finished the game. I've played co-op online and off and splitscreen vs.
Well, I'm not saying that I have lag issues ALL the time, but from one day to another, lag may vary a lot.
Even to the point of ruining the gameplay !
That's my average connexion figures, is it bad (seriously, I'm unable to judge) ? Ping to slow or something?
download : 2 002,5 Ko/sec
upload : 81,1 Ko/sec
ping : 45 ms
Even to the point of ruining the gameplay !
That's my average connexion figures, is it bad (seriously, I'm unable to judge) ? Ping to slow or something?
download : 2 002,5 Ko/sec
upload : 81,1 Ko/sec
ping : 45 ms
Ant, I'm not talking about single player !
And YES, when you host, you often kill people in one shot with the shotgun.
Gears is my favourite online game at the moment, it's really good, but most of my contacts complain about the lag issue. You may be right, there might be people with bad connexions among my usual partners.
And YES, when you host, you often kill people in one shot with the shotgun.
Gears is my favourite online game at the moment, it's really good, but most of my contacts complain about the lag issue. You may be right, there might be people with bad connexions among my usual partners.
The term 'lag' is a broad term with lots of different meanings. The big issue people have with Gears online is the way it handles, or more directly the way it doesn't handle latency. Hop into a game and shoot your gun at the ground, the time between when you see your gun fire and the time it takes to hit the ground is the the result the latency in your 360 sending off the information that your fired the shot to the server along with it acknowledging that shot and and sending that information back to you. In gameplay this means that if a client player shoots directly at a moving target, according to the server that shot will land behind his target's path. To hit the target directly client players as client players, we must lead our shots to land where it will be at the time when the server receives notice that the shot was taken. Most games disguise that latency though client side prediction of player movement, but Gears simply leaves it up to us players to adapt to on our own.
I haven't played "most" online games, but do most games go this route? Battlefield games don't; same principle you aim and shoot and the crosshairs light up if you register a hit. You frequently have to lead a bit when a target is moving horizontally, much more than when using a LAN. CounterStrike: Source, while not as touchy, also requires that you lead a bit to compensate for latency. Often I find myself shooting where the player isn't and registering hits. And this is even on <50ms ping servers. BF42 is an interesting example because it does have some client side prediction, but also updates with corrections which causes object "hopping" and teleporting so you have an object that is skipping around on your screen due to the prediction and sometimes even warping large distances (due to the target user lag or vice versa) so you not only need to compensate and guess where the server will register a hit but ALSO cannot absolutely assume the movement is completely accurate.
But that ain't nothing. And in the old days you had client side hit counting, so if I shot you on my screen I registered a hit even if your player on my screen is frozen and you are actually someplace else. That was always fun
I am not sure what "most" games use, but games that use some prediction also tend to need compensation as well can look very buggy. Outside of all users have stable pings and the server being able to adequately serve the load, as well as users having the right settings on their own PC to have a fluid experience, I have not seen many online games that solve these issues. But I have only played a dozen or two games online, mainly larger franchises.
Personally I prefer user movement to be fluid and have to compensate myself for where they "really" are. Kind of like shooting at an object with a slow gun, you are trying to judge their movement. Movement prediction with lag can make things worse at times. Hence I try to only play with people in the same geographic area on solid servers.
I'm sorry, that was poor wording on my part with the "most" as I didn't mean to suggest I have any definitive list or such, rather that is simply what I gather from all the games I've played. I can't rightly speak for the Battlefield series though as I've only spent a bit of time with the demos for those game and never got into them any more than that, but CS:S certainly does client-prediction as described in the 'Entity Interpolation' and 'Input Prediction' sections here. Also, he 'Lag Compensation' section explains why you find your shots connecting even when you see that your aim is off.
I'm afraid to say this but I think Wii Sports is multiplayer game of the last 5 years. At least when you see entire families playing Bowling together. Man that's truly something.... When a family member who would NEVER play a video game in their dreams is laughing their ass off playing Wii, you know you have something seriously special.
Not that I play it in my spare time alone, though. I actually don't play the Wii unless non-gamers are around lol. The machine lacks quality in a major way right now.
This awards deal is a rather narrow view of things, IMO.
Not that I play it in my spare time alone, though. I actually don't play the Wii unless non-gamers are around lol. The machine lacks quality in a major way right now.
This awards deal is a rather narrow view of things, IMO.
I agree on the God of War. Awesome game but not worth the crazy gushing I hear over it, imo.
But I don't get beat over the head all day with God of War..... Unlike Twilight Princess, when the similar and equally good Okami made a splash and just went away. Or Gears of War, when the equally good Lost Planet gets called "a solid shooter".
I think I'm especially bugged about Gears because I feel it's really about the graphics. For me, Gears is the "can do" game after seeing a year's worth of next gen games that look like last gen in high res. It's great to see graphics represent the leap we've been used to with new consoles. It's not just me, tho. The whole industry and community is gaga over the visuals, and noticeing that there's a pretty good game underneath. There's alot of pretty good games out there, tho.
Twilight Princess is a whole nother ball of wax.... ugh.
DuckThor Evil
Legend
Lost Planet is honestly not equally good to Gears, I know that's imo, but definately many people agree with me on this. I'm personally getting the feeling that Gears is underrated in some places, especially the talk that it's all about the craphics makes me gringe, it's not true. Gears has very solid gameplay and the cover system works like a dream after 1 hour of practise, the Live co-op is implemented perfectly. I think the only flaw in Gears is the plot, or the lack of it actually, but as for gameplay it's 100% gold juice.
I couldn't agree more. I'm still playing gears multi and I had an awesome time playing solo and coop.
Regarding the gameplay, one could criticize the fact that tere are too many things on the A button but otherwise, it's fine, IMO.
I was kind of disappointed by Lost Planet. The demo was awesome, the levels were difficult, while in the game, no matter how hard you may try, it's almost impossible to die. The boss are the only tough guys, sigh....
Regarding the gameplay, one could criticize the fact that tere are too many things on the A button but otherwise, it's fine, IMO.
I was kind of disappointed by Lost Planet. The demo was awesome, the levels were difficult, while in the game, no matter how hard you may try, it's almost impossible to die. The boss are the only tough guys, sigh....
TurnDragoZeroV2G
Regular
I agree with the comments regarding God of War. It was a good game, but certainly didn't live up to the expectations people created for me, not by a long shot. Also, what's up with the bladed pillar? Is Kratos a sick freak that likes to cut himself when he gets near one (despite getting near but not touching the bottom, top, or back of these blades)? Or is it just hot, and simply doesn't look that way? The person responsible for the damage zones on there should be slapped a couple times, and warned to never do something like that again.
As for Lost Planet: seriously flawed in a few big ways. Gear of War, too, is flawed, but not to nearly the same extent as LP. LP has some serious issues which become apparent when played on Extreme (and I'm not just bitter here, I've beaten Extreme mode). The primary offenders are juggling, boss battles, and AI. The right kind of enemy can juggle away 4000TE on the way to your objective (on the Ice Fields, facing down the really large armored Chyrsalis or whatever they're called). You can, of course, kill them, but then you'll still be down 1000s of TE, and then you'll have to face another one that pops up to replace it. The AI... it's just stupid. The game makes no attempt to hide the fact that the AI knows your exact position, and there's no kind of perception test. If you sit behind an unbreakable wall, enemies will fire exactly where you are (as opposed to say cover fire on the edge of the wall you're hiding behind). And of course, throw your tactics away. While we know that Wayne is the Greatest Threat On This Planet to Akrid and Humans alike, the Akrid give no impression of being intelligent enough to know this. And how is it that all your human enemies are able to identify you as the GTOTP? Regardless, enemies become friends before the GTOTP, and Wayne will have to battle his way through a battlefield formerly filled with two factions fighting eachother but now just filled with two varieties of enemies that have you pegged as Enemy Numero Uno.
Finally, the Boss Battles. Oh, boss battles, how I love thee! With your simple rules of target the weak spot and follow the pattern! The last boss is especially guiilty of this, as the difference in challenge between following the pattern and not is tremendous. One thing you'll do on Extreme is get his health to 50% without taking any damage. From here, it's all about the pattern. If you stay back, wait for a signature attack twice, wait for him to close in and strike twice, and finally maneuver above him for the third sword strike and then go for a counterblow against him, you can manage to kill him while losing just a 1/3 of your life (and this is with stupid mistakes like sitting still while he machine guns you from 8 seconds away!). If you try to go all ZOE on his butt, however, you might take away 1/4 of his health (half of the remaining total), for a spectacular show of your VS blowing up into tiny bits. I love multiple approaches to a situation such as this!
This is a big problem with LP, Gears, and Halo 2. Halo 1 is a good example of having multiple ways of dealing with a situation/enemy making for a more enjoyable game (of course, everything in this post is IMO, I remind you). There are multiple paths, and multiple weapons. Now, some paths and some weapons are the BEST course to take (in terms of making it easiest). However, there are still others that rank in as "better than average" and then everything else is "average" with a few "that's just stupid" ones. There's a wide range here. The easiest way to kill an elite at short/med range when he's aware of you is probable PP + Pistol. However, using an AR + grenaes, a rocket launcher, PP + Plasma grenade, etc. are NOT out of the question. Really, it's all about choosing the method that suits you AND the situation, and you don't often run into a situation where you can only choose something that fits into just one of those categories.
This is what Halo 2 messed up. There are multiple paths, but there's a "Good" one and then just a bunch of really stupid ones. (This is all a little exaggerated, but that's what the difference essentially boils down to). Unless you work against the game... such as roof-hopping in Outskirts! The Cheap Jackal Snipers are surely appreciative of my ability to pick each one of them off at my leisure or avoid them altogether. Gears falls into the same rut with weapons on a number of occasions. This includes both the second boss as well as lambent wretches in areas like the mine cart (all these on Insane/Legendary/Extreme mode, mind you). It really boils down to Machine gun or bust, IMO. Sure, you can go with other weapons, but they'll either make it much harder (the boss), or nearly impossible (wretches in the minecart). However, use the machine gun, and both of these are so simple, there is no proper analogy for them.
Just to kinda rant in general: There are two things a game should never do together if the intention is for me to enjoy it. It shouldn't break my suspension of disbelief, and it shouldn't frustrate me. The former alone isn't that big a deal, and is pretty hard to do most of the time. The latter sucks, but whatever. However, the synergistic effects created from doing both at the same time are simply spectacular. Not only do the Akrid have thermal vision, but so do the VS's! Wayne is just too stupid to find the switch for himself. Besides that, enemies are really good with calling out your position, either by radio or just yelling it out (minus the fact that there's no indication that anything like this occurs). I like to feel that I'm at fault for dying, not the game because of cheap tactics, nonsensical bosses (WHY for the love of god is a guy that's smaller than some other enemies so darned tough? And what's with having basically the AI of a dumb bug driving his movements? Is that the only way you could create challeng for Gear's final boss?) What it really boils down to is: I shouldn't be angry because I find your game to be completely cheap and nonsensical. It should be becasue I feel I wasn't good enough, wasn't fast enough or didn't have good enough tactics. Break this... and it's just frustrating. It's not fun, and rather than feeling I accomplished something great, I just feel like I overcame some cheap *******. Kinda funny, and like "Yeah, eat THAT.".... but the sense of accomplishment just isn't there. Or perhaps it is, but it's laced with extreme bitterness.
Speaking of which, I found exactly that in Lost Planet's 1st Mission Boss, 6th Mission Boss, and Second-to-Last Boss on Extreme mode. I was capable of perfecting my tactics, aiming, etc. by the 6th or so attempt, and so came through (I finished off the second to last boss on foot, no less--60% of his health or so!). This is similar to taking out the second and third bosses of Halo 2 with nought but a sword. Besides that, facing down and killing the two creatures that make up the _______ Hunter achievements was simply spectacular. Despite being simple, they weren't too cheap or challenging that they were frustrating. The game really needed more of these moments where you face really large, but (relative to the bosses) unimportant enemies on the way to your goal, rather than being immediate goals in of themselves like the bosses.
But, overall, Lost Planet is moderately fun playing against the normal enemies, but not REALLY fun, which is what truly separates it from Gears. If we were to compare just boss battles.... Lost Planet would come out on top. The last boss battle of Gears is a worse offender in my book than LP's, though they both suck. The Berserker is amazing, but the 2nd boss is wholly mediocre, and ultimately LP's many boss battles just balance out as better when taken all together. But it's that play against normal enemies which I find to be very entertaining in Gears, but for the most part average at best in Lost Planet. Couple that with splitscreen co-op and then compound that with online co-op, and I think the difference between the two is very pronounced.
Gears doesn't just deserve the awards for art and graphics, but also for gameplay as well. (see, it all came back to the original topic! =D )
Feel free to disagree, though. I'd like to hear what other people think. Regarding both LP and Gears, as well as games in general. I imagine that I might be in the minority with some of my views there, though we'll see. For humor's sake, I'll mention that I originally had this post starting with "I'll keep this short, at least for now" and then I ended up creating one of the longest posts I've ever made on this forum. Kudos to anyone who reads through 80% or more of this, because I know I wouldn't unless it had certain names attached to it.
As for Lost Planet: seriously flawed in a few big ways. Gear of War, too, is flawed, but not to nearly the same extent as LP. LP has some serious issues which become apparent when played on Extreme (and I'm not just bitter here, I've beaten Extreme mode). The primary offenders are juggling, boss battles, and AI. The right kind of enemy can juggle away 4000TE on the way to your objective (on the Ice Fields, facing down the really large armored Chyrsalis or whatever they're called). You can, of course, kill them, but then you'll still be down 1000s of TE, and then you'll have to face another one that pops up to replace it. The AI... it's just stupid. The game makes no attempt to hide the fact that the AI knows your exact position, and there's no kind of perception test. If you sit behind an unbreakable wall, enemies will fire exactly where you are (as opposed to say cover fire on the edge of the wall you're hiding behind). And of course, throw your tactics away. While we know that Wayne is the Greatest Threat On This Planet to Akrid and Humans alike, the Akrid give no impression of being intelligent enough to know this. And how is it that all your human enemies are able to identify you as the GTOTP? Regardless, enemies become friends before the GTOTP, and Wayne will have to battle his way through a battlefield formerly filled with two factions fighting eachother but now just filled with two varieties of enemies that have you pegged as Enemy Numero Uno.
Finally, the Boss Battles. Oh, boss battles, how I love thee! With your simple rules of target the weak spot and follow the pattern! The last boss is especially guiilty of this, as the difference in challenge between following the pattern and not is tremendous. One thing you'll do on Extreme is get his health to 50% without taking any damage. From here, it's all about the pattern. If you stay back, wait for a signature attack twice, wait for him to close in and strike twice, and finally maneuver above him for the third sword strike and then go for a counterblow against him, you can manage to kill him while losing just a 1/3 of your life (and this is with stupid mistakes like sitting still while he machine guns you from 8 seconds away!). If you try to go all ZOE on his butt, however, you might take away 1/4 of his health (half of the remaining total), for a spectacular show of your VS blowing up into tiny bits. I love multiple approaches to a situation such as this!
This is a big problem with LP, Gears, and Halo 2. Halo 1 is a good example of having multiple ways of dealing with a situation/enemy making for a more enjoyable game (of course, everything in this post is IMO, I remind you). There are multiple paths, and multiple weapons. Now, some paths and some weapons are the BEST course to take (in terms of making it easiest). However, there are still others that rank in as "better than average" and then everything else is "average" with a few "that's just stupid" ones. There's a wide range here. The easiest way to kill an elite at short/med range when he's aware of you is probable PP + Pistol. However, using an AR + grenaes, a rocket launcher, PP + Plasma grenade, etc. are NOT out of the question. Really, it's all about choosing the method that suits you AND the situation, and you don't often run into a situation where you can only choose something that fits into just one of those categories.
This is what Halo 2 messed up. There are multiple paths, but there's a "Good" one and then just a bunch of really stupid ones. (This is all a little exaggerated, but that's what the difference essentially boils down to). Unless you work against the game... such as roof-hopping in Outskirts! The Cheap Jackal Snipers are surely appreciative of my ability to pick each one of them off at my leisure or avoid them altogether. Gears falls into the same rut with weapons on a number of occasions. This includes both the second boss as well as lambent wretches in areas like the mine cart (all these on Insane/Legendary/Extreme mode, mind you). It really boils down to Machine gun or bust, IMO. Sure, you can go with other weapons, but they'll either make it much harder (the boss), or nearly impossible (wretches in the minecart). However, use the machine gun, and both of these are so simple, there is no proper analogy for them.
Just to kinda rant in general: There are two things a game should never do together if the intention is for me to enjoy it. It shouldn't break my suspension of disbelief, and it shouldn't frustrate me. The former alone isn't that big a deal, and is pretty hard to do most of the time. The latter sucks, but whatever. However, the synergistic effects created from doing both at the same time are simply spectacular. Not only do the Akrid have thermal vision, but so do the VS's! Wayne is just too stupid to find the switch for himself.
Besides that, enemies are really good with calling out your position, either by radio or just yelling it out (minus the fact that there's no indication that anything like this occurs). I like to feel that I'm at fault for dying, not the game because of cheap tactics, nonsensical bosses (WHY for the love of god is a guy that's smaller than some other enemies so darned tough? And what's with having basically the AI of a dumb bug driving his movements? Is that the only way you could create challeng for Gear's final boss?) What it really boils down to is: I shouldn't be angry because I find your game to be completely cheap and nonsensical. It should be becasue I feel I wasn't good enough, wasn't fast enough or didn't have good enough tactics. Break this... and it's just frustrating. It's not fun, and rather than feeling I accomplished something great, I just feel like I overcame some cheap *******. Kinda funny, and like "Yeah, eat THAT.".... but the sense of accomplishment just isn't there. Or perhaps it is, but it's laced with extreme bitterness.Speaking of which, I found exactly that in Lost Planet's 1st Mission Boss, 6th Mission Boss, and Second-to-Last Boss on Extreme mode. I was capable of perfecting my tactics, aiming, etc. by the 6th or so attempt, and so came through (I finished off the second to last boss on foot, no less--60% of his health or so!). This is similar to taking out the second and third bosses of Halo 2 with nought but a sword. Besides that, facing down and killing the two creatures that make up the _______ Hunter achievements was simply spectacular. Despite being simple, they weren't too cheap or challenging that they were frustrating. The game really needed more of these moments where you face really large, but (relative to the bosses) unimportant enemies on the way to your goal, rather than being immediate goals in of themselves like the bosses.
But, overall, Lost Planet is moderately fun playing against the normal enemies, but not REALLY fun, which is what truly separates it from Gears. If we were to compare just boss battles.... Lost Planet would come out on top. The last boss battle of Gears is a worse offender in my book than LP's, though they both suck. The Berserker is amazing, but the 2nd boss is wholly mediocre, and ultimately LP's many boss battles just balance out as better when taken all together. But it's that play against normal enemies which I find to be very entertaining in Gears, but for the most part average at best in Lost Planet. Couple that with splitscreen co-op and then compound that with online co-op, and I think the difference between the two is very pronounced.
Gears doesn't just deserve the awards for art and graphics, but also for gameplay as well. (see, it all came back to the original topic! =D )
Feel free to disagree, though. I'd like to hear what other people think. Regarding both LP and Gears, as well as games in general. I imagine that I might be in the minority with some of my views there, though we'll see. For humor's sake, I'll mention that I originally had this post starting with "I'll keep this short, at least for now" and then I ended up creating one of the longest posts I've ever made on this forum. Kudos to anyone who reads through 80% or more of this, because I know I wouldn't unless it had certain names attached to it.
Last edited by a moderator:
good post
I agree with you about LP in Single Player and almost use it as an excuse to look at the amazing graphics and to practice for multiplayer.
Because in Multiplayer online, all is forgiven of LP from my perspective.
scooby_dooby
Legend
See, I think you need to realize there are many people who geniunely enjoy the gameplay of Gears of War.
You keep writing everyone who likes gears of war off as a GFX whore, just because you yourself don't think the gameplay is all that.
I have both LP and GOW, and for me there's no comparison in the gameplay, LP is your standard shooter, very old school with not much progression in the genre at all, if any. I love the effects, I love the heart pumping battles, but Gears is a much better game at it's core, and is a much more unique experience to play through.
scooby_dooby
Legend
Not to nitpick, but the shotgun works excellent whenever battling wretches.
