Speaking at E3, Epic boss Mike Capps expressed dismay at the fact the PC version of Gears of War scored lower than the 360 game, saying the desktop outing was "much better" and the fact it achieved lower marks was "bulls***."
Prepare to be shocked. Becuase I have something to share: Gears of War scored lower on the PC, becuase the 360 really needed a great game at the time it was released. In this way the quality of it became skewed, as it was a relatively unexpected title. Nothign more nothign less. Let's hope Gears of War 2 can still impress. It certainly shall on a purely extra content standpoint.
I think the reason it scored lower was because of the time discrepancy between the two games. An amazing game today will not be as amazing tomorrow. Also PC reviewers tend to be more objective with their reviews so it made it almost impossible to see gears get 10's
I partially agree though I would like to point out that most games already looked better than Gears on the PC when it was first released for the 360. Probably was further exacerbated by the long conversion time. Gears was forefront technology for consoles, but run-of-the-mill for personal computers. Plus the pacing is definitely for console play. If i had to put up with the aiming reticle speed and one button does all function on my pc... I would want to throw the game in my food processor. There's a reason why FPS or TPS reaction time is faster on PCs.
Well thats just how things are. Xbox exclusives gets higher score then they would get if they were on another platform. 360 was first out of the nextgen consoles and naturally most of the worlds game journalists bought one. Its quite obvious that some of the people owning a console becomes a fanboy, something this site is a testament to. PS3 has much of the same games as 360 and not every game journalist bothered buying one when they already had a 360. PS3 also had a slow start on the game front and there was alot of negativity in the media surrounding the console. I think this is the main reason why there are more biased sites in favour of the 360 then the ps3, and naturally while a game like gears of war is a great game and deserved a good score it got the score it deserved when it was released for the pc
I think the bigger issue here with the decreased reception is that it's a port. Game companies can't expect to be lazy and simply lead-develop a blockbuster title on one platform, and then simply more-or-less do a port over to another platform and expect equivalent ratings. When ports are involved, quality is always diminished one way or another, and one party or another will be alienated, and not feel tailored to.
@Statix shut up the 360 and the PC are more or less the same thing. the reason y gears scored so low is because it deserves that score. the only reason y 360 games get high ratings is because of fanboys.
I was going to make the same points as Pudding and Sonarus. The strength of the game is its technical prowess (graphics and gameplay). PC is an arena with a much higher technical benchmark, so Gears is less impressive there. Also, the time between releases makes an impact, as games get technically better over time.
Gears isn't THAT good to start with. It's a good game, don't get me wrong, but I believe it was fairly over-rated.
So Sonarus, what you're saying here is that because what once was fresh with this game is now old, and that Gears of War 2 looks to be pretty much the same thing again, with a few minor tweaks to the core gameplay, does that mean that GoW 2 deserves a lower score?
"The 360 version was overrated".I honestly wonder what PC devs have been drinking for the past few weeks,they've been more honest and open than we've ever seen before
Does the PC version have framerate problems, pop-in (or whatever it's called), and loading in-level? Because my 360 version sure did. Maybe that's why this PC developer feels that way.
I never noticed any.
It's clear that Multi-Platform releases will greatly under perform on the Xbox 360 due to the lack of a Hi Def storage Medium and lack of a Hard Drive as standard,Compression Technology has hit its limits with DVD 9,and this is why Developers such as John Carmack are now laughing at the inferiority that is the Xbox 360 platform
I'm reporting every one of your posts as Spam.
And everyone knows that. But this media war is controlled by pro 360 people and they will ALWAYS do anything in their power to either: 1) make sure the 360 version is always getting the better news/ scores/ grades 2) do anything in their power to discredit the other versions like the 5.7 GB MANDATORY install for SC4 (how retarded is that? Who thinks up of that stuff lmao). 3) bash the PS3 and anything Sony related into oblivion no matter how insignificant and trivial So you see EPIC, those guys were just trying to distort reality and make it seem like as if the 360 losing GOW exclusivity to the PC is no big deal. Its a disgusting reality.
No way can Games for windows be better on a 2005 PC jammed in a case and called XBOX2. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$-always the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$.
Zerodin, for heaven's sake you are such a crybaby. If Viktor annoys you so much, then why don't you slam the ignore button? You slam the disagree button a lot so how about ignoring him?
Yo XFart, I just reported your comment as a SPAM!!
360 games get special treatment when it comes to reviews. I'm not saying they're not great games but some of the praise and reward watered down on the likes of Halo 3 is a little surprising.
with movies like MGS4 right? Sorry, but leave the bullsh!t at the door, a comment like that isn't in any way constructive. Halo 3 is a great title and very deserving of the scores it received, even if you personally don't feel that way.
its been that way since this gen started. I've accepted it now so I rely on me.com for truthful reviews as they KNOW what i like. Halo 3 graphics 10 = FAIL, great game? maybe, great graphics ..........get the fcuk outta here @CadDad well put Just think if you controlled a magazine or website. You may not be able to control the others scores but you can fairly or unfairly manipulate the average or metascore. How did MGS4 with the most perfect scores EVER still get a lower 'meta' score than other games. They use the wrong average method and that method of the 3 (mean, mode, medium) is easily manipulated To be fair to the original score of gears though i'd say that at that time there was nothing close to it from both the technical or graphical standpoint but games do age and the score for gears would be lower now because of the advances in gaming since. If the PC had more than just better graphics and longer game then maybe but ultimately the gameplay is the same. Gears2 will add new mechanics and fix the little things that needed fixing and will probably deserve a great score IF its not just a 1.5 .
that the games scores are inflated, but I will say that there are flaws with metacritic and how people here view AAA games. Example 1: Ratchet and Clank TOD for PS3 70 review scores with an overall 89 score. Of those 70 review scores 65 were 80 and above, with the bottom score a full 10 points lower than the next lowest score. That score alone brought the game down under a 90 overall, thereby making it non AAA to the masses just looking at raw scores. http://www.metacritic.com/g... Example 2: Uncharted for PS3 65 review scores with an overall 88 score. Of those 68 review scores 67 were 80 and above, with the bottom score a full 13 points lower than the next lowest score. That score alone brought the game down under a 90 overall, thereby making it non AAA to the masses just looking at raw scores. http://www.metacritic.com/g... It's not a conspiracty theory, it just happens to be something that happens far too often with Metacritic on certain games. Also, it seems metacritic doesn't include some review scores for other games in order to maintain the high score. I'm fine with this though, because I don't go by review scores to know what games I like, but honestly you have to see how skewed this perspective is. -CadDad
I agree completely. It's so obvious that reviewers are much harsher on PS3 titles.
I agree with you Meus, and I was actually thinking about that. The same thing goes with multi-platform titles as well. That's why 360 owners are always bragging about how they ahve the *best* games. I won't deny that there are good games in the 360 library but it always comes down to the bragging. You're also right icogneato. There are some really good games on the PS3 and yet they don't receive enough recognition. And Xi, excuse you? If you're implying that MGS4 got high marks because of Kojima, then you are dead wrong. I dare you, to buy a PS3 (or if you have one, get a copy of MGS4) and play this game to it's fullest. Then I want to see you call this game a movie after doing all of that because I can guarantee that this game is AMAZING. From the minute it went in my PS3 to the minute I finished installed it, my mouth dropped when I saw the kick ass cutscenes and gameplay. On top of that, I was more than happy with my Dualshock 3...to hear it rumble with the sound of every single gunshot. You must be out of your mind.
im not sure Xi has the capacity to understand MGS4 let alone play it.
doesn't take a genius to figure that out. In the end, who really cares what review a game gets. Does it make the game any better or worse? Review scores on websites are almost meaningless, a very small amount of people give them even a second thought.
what is the difference between Gears1 and Gears2? -Edit- From what we all have seen there isn't any big differnce between Gears 1 and 2,but I am sure Gears2 will be one of the highest rated game of this gen,we'll see.
if gears 2 is exactly like gears 1, it wont score as high. Who cares though, reviews are a bad way to judge video games now in days.
how many times review scores and metascores are used as some type of 'matter of fact' on this site.
yeah i see it all the time, but it makes little sense and I never see it happen for anything but video games.
Because the game was already done. The same thing happened with halo, it's just as good for PC as it was for the Xbox but it scored lower because the game isn't significantly better to warrent a better score. And gears feels better with a gamepad for some reason.
Gears on the PC is a "Games for Windows" title, that means it allows seemless pug and play with a 360 controller. I actually linked my PC to my HDTV (1080p) and played it with the pad. It was basically exactly the same as the 360 apart from the improved visuals and the Brumack fight. Review wise, Gears on the 360 was the first game to make people say WOW look what this gen of consoles can do, where as on the PC those visuals werent ground breaking enough. Both versions were great, but at the time of release the 360 mversion made a much bigger impact. Either way, who are Epic to say whos opinions are right or wrong. Whats next, the devs review their own game? Less moaning please Epic.
i agree with fishy fingers. it didnt have the impact on the PC that it did have on the 360. Maybe the PC reviewers expected more as they were used to PC games and the other reviewers were used to console games. I dont care at the end of the day the game was still awesome and my favourite game this gen. Bring on Gears2!
this guy has obviously never made a PS3 game or he would be used crap like that by now.
AGREED on that
Also,, bots overrate all of their games. Did Epic really think gears is better then it really is? I guess so.
On X360 the game was important for MS,On PC it wasn't that much,Money talks!
Maybe because it came out at a later date, with standard higher. Gears scored it did at THAT TIME FRAME, because it was something visually brilliant and fun, 12 months is a big gap, so naturally they wouldn't have the OMG factor..since its been played and seen b4. Yeesh!
This article is made up off pure Sony-fanboyism Seriously how does it feel to suck off Sony? liking dat Jism?
But playing it with a mouse and keyboard was no fun for me. It is just so much better with a controller.
and that windows or vista recognises and fully supports it.
Seemless Plug and Play between the pad and keyboard/mouse.
Sounds like someones feeling's got hurt :)
maybe the online was better or something...
Or the entire gameplay experience...
Oh noes, teh score, teh scoooooooore! Suck it up Capps. Be a man about it.
its funny when ppl get mad over reviews Happy i have a brain and it works well enough to form my own opinions on what i play
I just wish there were a feature that would allow us gamers to rate the game ourselves once completed.
and the PC version running on my Radeon HD4870 512MB DDR5 puts the 360 version to shame, its a muddy mess on it compared to PC. I also dont see why this game got the reviews it did on both system, too me its just and "OK" game. Sometime I would feel like I'm playing Space Invaders when on higher difficulty just sittin behind a wall and shooting them before they make it pass.
why don't you people post something worth looking at once in awhile.
Gears of War PC had better graphics and more content then the inferior Xcrap 3fixme version. It got low review scores because of cry baby bots who we're jealous that Gears of War PC was better then their Xcrap 3fixme version. Keep on crying bots! AHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA
I lag out, the frames skip and overall I keep crashing because of memory leak. If I could give GeoW PC a score; I'd wouldn't because I can't even play the damn thing. Did anyone also know that the PC version of GeoW was a port from "People Can Fly". I have no idea of their past projects but this one is a PoS on arrival with nothing but problems for it. Hell even after 2 performance patches the game is still a PoS. The problem is that a memory leak issue that's causing the stuttering. Also before anyone says, I have a "very capable PC" - "Crysis 'Very-High' Capable"
I always believed it was because instead of gradually loading textures, the game threw them all at you at once causing microstutter at key points (unless that is what you meant by memory leak).
GeoW PC is a PoS. Hell I should've just posted in here in the first place. Most buggy game I've ever tried to play.
haha poor xbots, even the game devs knew the PC version was better than your version.
i love the way he insulted the wii hahaha
the vastly superior PC version of Gears 1 and look forward playing the vastly superior PC version of Gears2. There really is no reason to own a 360 if you have a PC is there?
Er, PC port was done horribly in some aspects. Instead of streaming levels, the game loads it all up at once at key points in the game, causing some horrible microstutter. So yeah, maybe that was one of the reasons why it would it score lower.
The PC has better maps, controls, graphics, features, etc. The 360 version fails compared to the PC.
PC will always be better than consoles wethers its the graphics, game play or content, why because PC is the only format were you can get them at the same time. such as: Game play because the user created content e.g Mods/map creation Content because the only limation is the customers computer Graphics because video cards come out all the time
Have a much better resolution Video Cards now will out perform the 360's easily Mods Free Online There isnt really a reason other than 360 scores are biased. We've all known that. This can also be showed by the 93 Too Human just received. Whatever, i definitely stopped paying attention.
HYPE! Reviewers rate based on hype. When the PC game is better they give it a lower score simply because there'sn't as much hype for it. For Example, look at that piece of crap site 1up.com, they gave the PC version of Devil May Cry 4 C+ while the consoles had B+, even though the PC version was better.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.