Comments on: gears of war 2 (****)

By: spidder

spidder — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 04:20:49 +0000

stop masturbating over bald space marines and review persona 4 you fucking faggot

By: DoctorJekyll

DoctorJekyll — Sat, 10 Jan 2009 20:14:25 +0000

According to Wikipedia, “swill” can “refer to the act of applying cosmetics in haste” and also mean “a poor throw in the game of Ultimate [Frisbee]“.

They say you should at least learn one new thing every day, and hey, there you go. Unless, of course, you knew already.

By: CubaLibre

CubaLibre — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 07:44:28 +0000

Tim I will not abide antirural sneering from a yankee gaijin like yourself.

You can claim you weren’t sneering, but I know better.

By: 108

108 — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 06:43:39 +0000

yeah, for the record, glitches do not = poorly put together game.

i was looking past the glitches, and just talking about the structure of the game!

also:

swill!

that’s a hell of a word!

where are you from, kentucky?

By: diplo

diplo — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 02:36:17 +0000

you’re writing off tim forever because of one review you disagreed with? that’s . . . almost kind of funny.

also, it’s = contraction
its = possessive

thanks!

By: slop101

slop101 — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 22:16:50 +0000

“Looking back on the Gears of War 2 campaign after it’s all over and dozens of hours of online deathmatch and Horde play have evaporated, it’s apparent that it really is a perfectly put-together videogame, built with meticulous care and a common-sense knowing love of videogames.”

Okay, wow – I used to respect your reviews, but after playing though GoW2, along with the failure of it’s online portion, I have to say that I can’t ever trust your reviews again. How can you not see all of it’s glitches and problems (all well-documented by now) and think this was meticulously crafted? At least there’s a supposed patch coming that should fix a lot of the problems, but you wrote this swill before the patch.

By: hal5000

hal5000 — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 08:09:13 +0000

Tim I have one question and one hat-tip:

1. What scene reminded you of japanese 8-bit games? I had that feeling throughout a bunch of the campaign actually. Dude-huge always bows to the great ones.

2. I have believed for the last four years the greatest war film would involve following men in war, but depicting the slaughter of war by killing the “hero” off ever so often or at random. After the “hero” was killed the film would instantly cut to a new “hero”. Who could die at any moment. This would happen throughout the film barely skipping a beat. Someone needs to take this concept and put it to film or code. I just love how the concept diminishes the enthusiasm to live in the viewer. You get no connections. Only glimpses. It would be a very selfish game/film. I love ambiguity!

The interesting bit of applying this idea to a game would mean the player could have a certain input into his death. Either jumping into his own demise or vainly fighting to live.

I’m just tipping my hat for the like-minded thought.

By: boojiboy

boojiboy — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 21:21:10 +0000

I actually loved Unreal Championship 2. It was an interesting way for Unreal to go.

By: CubaLibre

CubaLibre — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 16:28:46 +0000

“If anything, the only real purpose to the 3rd person perspective in Gears is to simplify things and make it easier for inexperienced gamers (read: usually fratboys) to understand what’s going on in the game. Sure, there’s silly novelties like blindfire and curbstomping animation, but is that really worthwhile and crucial to the game? I don’t think so.”

I do think so.

You already admit that third-person Quake 1 is sloppier than its first-person counterpart, that Unreal Championship 2 sucks (and you leave out its focus on melee combat which made third-person a necessity), etc. I don’t really know what else to say.

By: Mr Ill Intent

Mr Ill Intent — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 14:58:18 +0000

Ah!

The old “fratboys are dumb” argument.

You clearly have to be trolling. Or haven’t played Gears past the Casual difficulty setting.