Gears of War Ultimate Edition Review - Giantbomb

Giantbomb: The campaign has aged pretty poorly and the graphical updates to the campaign side of Gears of War feel half-baked, so unless you're really excited for the competitive part of Gears of War, there's nothing for you here.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
trywizardo1240d ago

now that's just absurd ...

Rimeskeem1240d ago (Edited 1240d ago )

Based on what the reviewer said it seems it may not be COMPLETELY. I guess the remaster focused on the graphics and not the AI :/

I usually trust Giantbomb but this time Im going to buy the game or at least rent it to get the campaign in.

Automatic791240d ago

I just played for hours and I can tell you that this game feels brand new and that is rare for a 9 year old game to make me feel that way.

StanLee1240d ago

It's a remaster, not a remake. Gears of War while it can, was never intended to be played with the AI. It was and still is meant to be played cooperatively. Complaining about the AI is silly! For God's sake, your AI companions can't even revive you!

Septic1240d ago

I'm all Geared out I'm afraid. Even the new one does nothing for me let alone this Remaster. I think the formula got stale at the end of the third game, although Horde and Beast modes were great.

This and the Gamespot reviews are in the minority however.

chrisco84au1240d ago (Edited 1240d ago )

The review is well written and fair. It's simply an opinion.

This reviewer rated it on their enjoyment, the same as reviewers who rated it 9+ did so on their enjoyment.
Neither is right or wrong, nor is one more correct than the other. Different people, different opinions.

N4G users should know this all too well with the amount of 'opinions' passed of as fact around here, that's hypocritical. I don't expect the fanboys/trolls to understand but just remember, Giant Bomb giving this a 2/5 does NOT change YOUR enjoyment of the game. If it does, that's your own issue.

I am loving Until Dawn, easily a 9 so far for me, I saw one reviewer gave it a 4 or 5. Is he more correct than me? NOPE. Am I more correct than him? HELL NOPE!!! Does that low review take ANY enjoyment away from my first play through? NOPE.

Simply differing opinions with and arbitrary number tacked on.

chrisco84au1240d ago

3:1 disagree rating and no replies.......

I know it's N4G but come on, I love a good conversation where I can be impartial while voicing my simpleton opinion.

It's easier to blindly disagree than discuss in a mature manner.

WowSoChill1240d ago

AI? AI?????????? AIAIAIAIA?????????




breakpad1239d ago

nice to see some honest reviews for pseudo-quality games

WellyUK1239d ago

The AI? who cares. Gears 1 is basically a MP only game... Anyone who buys this for SP is 100% stupid.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1239d ago
XanderZane1240d ago

Yeah and it's funny that GiantBomb and Gamespot are the only sites that gave it a bad review. lol!! I can understand some of his points of view, but a 40 score for this game is just ridiculous. Most of the reviews for this game are very positive, so I would take this review and GS with a grain of salt. I already got my copy of the game and will be installing it tonight so I can play it in the morning.

meganick1240d ago

Gamespot's 7 out of 10 is not a bad review. A 7 from them is good.

Darkwatchman1240d ago

A 7 on any scale is a GOOD score

XanderZane1240d ago (Edited 1240d ago )

@meganick & Darkwatchman
I mean a score lower then all the other reviewers who reviewed the game. I completely agree with you both. Yes a 7 score isn't bad at all, but it's not an 8 or 9 score that everyone would expect from this games. The game is definitely better then a 40 score, that's for sure.

LifeInNZ1239d ago

So many disagrees. Can those that think the game is only worth a 2/5 please state why they feel that is? A 2/5 would suggest to me the game is a mess, broken, damn near unplayable and not worth its asking price.

A 2/5 for this game smacks of opinion and not an objective review.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 1239d ago
shloobmm31240d ago

So all the changed and improvements they made feel half baked but they didn't feel that way about God of Wars simple up rez. That's ridiculous.

YodaCracker1240d ago

Dan Ryckert reviewed God of War. Jeff Gerstmann reviewed Gears. Different people, different opinions. And Jeff hates God of War so if he had reviewed that remaster it certainly would have gotten a lower score.

its_JEFF1240d ago

I would only agree with your statement about God of War if every game aged exactly the same... but unfortunately some games age much worse than others. One of the most beloved games ever, FF7, hasn't aged very well at all. It's ridiculous to think every game will age well. And TBH Giantbomb is usually pretty tough when it comes to reviews.

garrettbobbyferguson1240d ago


How has FF7 not aged well? Because the graffix aren't at "Uncharted" levels of fidelity? The game plays as well as ever.

MoveTheGlow1239d ago (Edited 1239d ago )

We're reaching a pretty logical conclusion here. GB does rely on its reviewers to do their own thing with scores and opinions - you know what happened with Kane and Lynch 2, and that's why.

I think it's pretty clear from reading most reviews that if you really want your Gears of War 1, you'll love this, and if you think it doesn't hold up, nothing in the remaster changes what was originally here. I mean, if this were remastered Crackdown 1, it would probably be a higher score from Jeff, because he still likes that game - he probably thinks it holds up today.

Contrast something like this with Mega Man Legacy Collection, for example, where so much stuff was added and critics were mostly picking on the things that *weren't* true enough to the original. All valid points, but different approaches, as your approach would be when buying or not buying this game.

pyroxxx1239d ago (Edited 1239d ago )

God of War,.. maybe uprezed,.. but it is up-rezed perfection (graphically,..It is simply hard to imagine looking even better,..because even PS3 version is still one of the best looking games ever made),.. Game simply holds up better on it's own,.. It is it's own game and a different genre,.. Maybe comparing it to remastered DMC or Even Bayonetta2,..would be fair,.. and it is still one of the best action adventure games out there

Gears 1 ,.. apparently in Jeff's opinion has not aged all that well,.. ( I maybe a bit biased,..Only played the PC version back in the day,.. and did not click with me then either,..and always thought it was overrated a lot)

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 1239d ago
spicelicka1240d ago

LOL and they gave God of war 3 remaster a 4/5 LMAO wtf I've never seen that much hypocrisy in my life.

Don't get me wrong, God of war 3 is one of my favorite games, and one of the best action games ever. But Gears of war is also one of the best TPS games ever made.

And this is judging straight by the points in the review. How can they possibly give and HD remaster a 4/5, and the complete remake with multiplayer in 60 fps, and 4 free games...a 2/5?

If he's really reviewing a 9 year old game (that's still better than many games today) by 2015 standards then I'm at a loss for words...

MoveTheGlow1239d ago

Every outlet's different, dude. GB doesn't collectively decide on a review score - it's author by author, and they're hired and brought in because they're all trusted to do their own thing. Jeff reviewed this and Dan reviewed GoW.

1239d ago
thisismyaccount1239d ago

This is absurd? Those f~# gave DriveClub a 2/5 ... with no flaws but an agressive AI and not working online multiplayer.

A remake to a 9 year old game has to run at 60fps, period. It does not look better, in some areas the 360 has some "minor god rays" in place, whereas the XB1 has none, it dips rarely during combat and overall, well ... pers. i would wait until you can replay part 2 and part 3 through the restricted Backwards Comp. App coming this november or can we already play the second and third installmenet?

otherZinc1239d ago


Giantbomb you're a pos.

BinaryMind1239d ago

Eh, most of these reviews seemed way too generous for something that was just a facelift and a few additions to the multiplayer anyway.

smashman981239d ago

its not just a facelift the multiplayer runs 60 fps and includes weapons and maps from 2 and 3 of course in this guys review he all but completely dismisses the mp which makes no kind of sense

BinaryMind1239d ago

As someone who doesn't play Gears multiplayer aside from Horde, that makes no difference to me.

trywizardo1239d ago

I just want to say this , gears are ultimate game (like halo , uncharted and TLOU) so even if they didn't upgrade the graphics and didn't make it 60fps , this is a 3 games in one deal and a great opportunity for those who didn't play them on 360

+ Show (8) more repliesLast reply 1239d ago
Genuine-User1240d ago (Edited 1240d ago )

I don't agree with the score but I can understand his frustration.

Reading the review, I agree with:

"Nine years later, Gears of War's encounters feel simple-minded and very one-dimensional"

"The rest of the time, you're crouching behind conveniently placed obstacles and popping out to shoot at the Locust foes until a gong sounds, informing you that the encounter has been completed"

"The AI in Gears of War: Ultimate Edition can be profoundly dumb. Your squadmates have a habit of just, like, stopping in the middle of a path and not bothering to catch up, even if you issue any of the game's rudimentary and ultimately meaningless squad commands."

"Lastly, the campaign runs at around 30 frames per second, but even then it still takes some hits during some of the larger encounters. That it can't even maintain a rock-solid frame rate while also not looking especially great for 2015 seems like pure madness."

I remember when I mentioned that I had noticed frame-drops below 30 in the campaign direct-feed, not many agreed/believed me.
Well, there you go.

tuglu_pati1240d ago

This are fair points and its good they are pointing them out. Hopefully the developer take notice and improves on it in Gears 4.

Dee_Cazo1240d ago

I'd imagine they would. In 2004 the cover system was in its infancy and now reviewers are coming back to the game and attacking these mechanics?

That's like playing PONG and reviewing it and talking about how it doesnt have a career mode or online multiplayer, and the gameplay is very simple and you can master the few moves available to you after only 5 games.

If this wasn't a remaster and someone was just visiting old games, would it receive the same criticisms? Or would they highlight how far we've come since then with these type of features in various games?

1240d ago Replies(2)
Sureshot1240d ago

So funny how none of these commentors comment on reviews praising this remaster yet flock to the lone negative one and say "seems legit".

Not really sure Giant Bomb appreciates that this games campaign is just a remaster. Every remaster ever released has maintained the original mechanics. Changing AI, even though maybe warranted, is changing too much. You don't buy a remastered movie and cry that there haven't been any improvements to dialogue you just appreciate how much nicer it looks.

MRMagoo1231240d ago

6 comments is "flocking" now. Some of you guys need to eat some cement and harden up, it's like a baby cryathon in most articles now.

Rookie_Monster1240d ago (Edited 1240d ago )

Compared to the zero comments of all those 30 plus 8-9 reviews so far...yup, it is flocking when this article and a review from an unknow radio station in Toronto thar gave a 6.5 have tons of negative comments and is at the front page.

Gears of War: Ultimate Edition Review | Digital Chumps. 8.6
Comments (0)

Gears Of War: Ultimate Edition Review | XboxOne UK. 9.9/10
Comments (0)

VGS Review: Gears of War: Ultimate Edition – A Nearly Broken Experience. 6.5/10
Comments (53)

Gears of War: Ultimate Edition CheatCC. 4.6/5
Comments (0)

See a patten here?

Don't forget this article just got approved, so expect many more haters will comment within the hours. You been here long enough to know how the deal goes around here.

Rimeskeem1240d ago

@ Rookie

Giantbomb is a very trust worthy reviewer IMO. Also, that happens to every game, especially when the reviewer is well known.

Sureshot1240d ago

So how many other Gears review articles have you visited today? Only this one? Cuz it's a low score? I thought so.

insomnium21239d ago

It seems that rookie should've been here back in 2006-2009 to see what the word flocking really means. Believe me there was a clear pattern back then.

Rookie_Monster1239d ago

Yup I was right,

Guess what are the 2 current hottest and most responded news on N4G is? Yup, the 2 lowest scores from the entire 75 reviews of the game on N4G.

Gears of War: Ultimate Edition

-- All Platforms -- PC Xbox 360 Xbox One 

Average Score8.5 Reviews(75)

Seriously guys, when 70 plus other reviews gave it 80 and above, these 2 are the only ones that matter? K

insomnium21239d ago


Where is the correlation between the amount of comments and how much it matters? Most people agree with the 8s and 9s the game got and when you agree with something there is not that much reason to comment. Same goes with all the other 70 good reviews the game got. Should people be flocking to each and every positive review iyo?

This flocking to the negative news is nothing new. If you truly are new to this site (joined in 2015) then I can understand your stance but to everyone else this is nothing new. The media absolutely SHAT on the PS3 for YEARS and people had their fights and arguements in every single negative news. Houndreds of comments in every single one.

Are you sure you are not portraying this site as pro PS4 and Sony on purpose cause everyone else knows that once Sony makes the smallest of mistakes all hell will break loose once again.

MS lost this gen in the initial DRM-ridden console reveal. That is what killed the competition from this gen and Sony secured the win by making the right moves and capitolizing on MS's eff up. Case closed. Better luck next gen MS. The third console is always a tough cookie. Happened with Nintendo twice now (N64 and WiiU) and Sony went through hell with PS3. Now the Xbone is the third console from MS and is continuing this odd pattern.

Foehammer1239d ago

"Same goes with all the other 70 good reviews the game got."

lol, show me all the 70's?

Right now Metacritic has 49 reviews.

45 are 80 or higher

17 are 90 or higher

There 2 in the 70s, a 70 and 78

Along with the 2 lowballs that's 4 lower than 80 out of 49.

insomnium21238d ago


FFS he said "70 plus other reviews gave it 80 and above" and I said same goes with all the other 70 good reviews. I have no idea how many good reviews there really are but I think I can use his number at face value given the context I'm using it. You read too hastily it seems.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 1238d ago
jb2271240d ago


Controversy generates'll find more fans of the game bashing the review on those threads than you will detractors praising it. No one pays much mind to yet another standard 8 level review.

Remasters have uniformly dropped scores from their original on every outing this gen, that's just the way the tides are heading. I'm sure one would expect the UC collection to get around a 9-9.5 based off of a composite of the 3 games metacritic but I guarantee it'll sit around an 8, with multiple outlets most likely giving it anything from 4-7, regardless of whether or not there are true improvements. We have access to more opinions than ever, and some of those are likely to be biased or uninformed or containing some hidden agenda. The days of reviews only coming from a handful of outlets and sticking close together in opinions based solely off of the quality of a title and a comparison of similar titles are in the rearview there will be a lot fewer unanimously praised games going forward. It's up to the gamer to make up their own minds, and their best interests would be to pay no mind to sites that don't share their opinions or tastes.

FlexLuger1240d ago

"So funny how none of these commentors comment on reviews praising this remaster yet flock to the lone negative one and say "seems legit". "

Bingo! funny how the countless reviews that gave this game 9 and above didnt seem to sit at the top of the page, yet the two reviews that gave it low scores did...and with it a boat load of comments from PSfanboys who were absent in ALL of those other positive reviews.

How do people think this goes unnoticed on N4G? I dont recall a flock Xbox gamers in until dawn's numerous bad reviews, never mind the positive ones. Pretty obvious whassup....