So, awhile ago I made a poll about the best Command & Conquer game. With that poll having run its course (spoiler - not enough people voted Tiberium Wars. That makes me a sad puppy 
), I wondered, what next? Well, there is Gears of War. And having finally finished Gears of War 4, and Gearbox teasing a Duke/Gears crossover (or something), I found my next target.
So, Gears of War. I'll spare you guys some big lecture, but funny thing is, I've never really viewed it as a "badass" game. Incredibly gory, yes, but it doesn't fall into the realm of a power fantasy (well, mostly, but we'll get to that). Something like Doom I could call a "badass game," because the entire premise is a power fantasy. You're the Doomguy, the most fearsome warrior across dimensions, who fights demons who are terrified of you, and you're practically unstoppable. I'm not sure if I could apply that to any of the Gears of War protagonists though. Oh sure, they're gruff, and muscular, but the entire premise is that you're realtively normal, perhaps above average soldiers, fighting on a losing side, where you're outnumbered and outmatched, and you're only going to survive by taking cover, keeping your squad alive, and fighting well enough to see another day. Doomguy defeats Hell because he's that good. Marcus and co. defeat the Locust because of self-sacrifice and mcGuffins. That's not a flaw, mind you, but something I felt like commenting on.
So, anyway, ranking the games. In past polls I simply listed entries, but with only five to choose from, I figure I could give quick blurbs.
5) Gears of War: Judgement
Well, no surprises there. Entries 1-4 are probably up for grabs, but this is a game I rarely see getting any praise for, and I'm not inclined to buck the trend. Thing is, it's hard to say what's "off" about Judgement, for me. It doesn't have any glaring misteps, but...well, I can list gripes. First, the classified info system, how you can make the missions harder by showing "what really happened." Nice idea, but a lot of it feels arbitrary from a gameplay standpoint, and from a story standpoint, why these events would be classified is weird. I mean, the first optional difficulty spike is where Hammer of Dawn strikes nearly kill your own squad. Fine, that makes sense as to why the COG would want that covered up. Intel that corresponds to health regeneration being disabled to represent how tired your squad is? Yeah, doesn't help.
Also doesn't help that Karn is perhaps one of the weakest enemies in the series, and at the time of its release, WAS the weakest. Weakest, as in, completely bereft of character. I know, none of the Locust characters bar Myrrah have much personality, but Karn is "that guy who's invincible, who took out the entire Gorasnyan army, and is riding a giant spider." There's nothing intimidating about him, he's just, well, "badass." And Loomis is even more of a stereotype than Hoffman, who holds a court martial (that doesn't even give Baird and co. due process) less than 100 meters away from Locust forces. It also doesn't help that Baird is a great character, but only when he's taking the piss out of other people and the situation. Having him as the protagonist who's leading a squad detracts from that a bit.
So, no, not a bad game. But Judgement felt "off" when I played it, and feels "off" to this day. Maybe due to its new developers? Well, yeah. Not a bad game, but easily the weakest.
4) Gears of War 3
Gears of War 3 is a game I can list far more solid gripes at than Judgement, but I also feel it's still better than its prequel overall. But first, those gripes. First, the Lambent are boring. There, I said it. They were fine in the previous two games, but I found myself going through their fights on auto-pilot, waiting for Locust to show up. Heck, the fact that there's technically two Locust factions in Gears of War 3 (those loyal to Myrrah, and those who have gone savage), hammers home the point. The Locust are absolute monsters, true, but they're monsters with a social hierarchy, and elements of culture (e.g. religion). It's part of why I preferred the idea of the Locust always existing rather than being mutated humans. So, we see this in GoW 3 as we observe the Locust who have gone savage, and those who still follow their queen, and the subtle differences that emerge. The Lambent are just zombies. Very dangerous zombies that require different tactics to fight, but zombies all the same.
It also doesn't help that GoW 3 introduces scripted events into the series, and not in a manner I'm that happy with. There's a scene where you're controlling Cole, delivering a bomb, flashing back to a thrashball game. My first instinct was to hold A and run forward. I then realized I didn't need to do anything, that it was a pseudo-cutscene giving only the illusion of gameplay. Add on rails sequences with a truck, and Dom. Dom, who dies a death, because the game says so. "Oh no, Lambent...that the game tells me I can't fight this time, despite me having killed hundred by this point." I get that Dom probably wants to die at this point, but it feels like such an arbitrary death, as if the game said "okay, we need someone to die to up the stakes. No-one cares about Prescott, so...Dom. Yeah, let's kill Dom." And then the squad barely discusses him until Azura.
Still, Gears 3 is fun enough overall that it surpasses Judgement. It also helps that we have Myrrah as THE antagonist, who remains the antagonist throughout the game, and culminates in one of the series's most enjoyable (and difficult) boss fights. So, at the end of the day, Gears 3 is still enjoyable. Weakest entry in the original trilogy, but still enjoyable. But then came Microsoft, who handed the series off to "the Coalition," whose mission statement is identical to 343 Industries, only replace Halo with Gears. Given how much of a letdown Halo 4 was, I had little hope. Also didn't help that the last two Gears games had been weaker than their predecessors. So, one can ask, could the series get some of its mojo back?
3) Gears of War 4
Shockingly, yes, it would, and it did, and not in a way I was expecting. Not only is Gears of War 4 genuinely a good game (well, provided you like the style of gameplay at least), but it's a game that does so by being the most different from any Gears game previously. More in tone, than anything else - Gears of War 4 is easily the most light-hearted Gears game there is, ranging from its dialogue, to its tone, to its gameplay. I feel the best way to demonstrate this is how the game ends (yeah, spoilers). The first Gears game had you fighting under a tortured sky, defending a bomb that could take out the Locust. Gears 2 had you fighting in the remains of Jacinto in a desparate last stand. Gears 3 ended during the day, but with the fate of the Locust and humanity at stake, and both sides fighting tooth and nail to come up on top. Gears 4 ends with you in a giant mech, tearing off the rotor blades of a helicopter, using those blades as a shield, before using them as a chainsaw to cut off the limbs of the final boss, and being one step away from yelling "freedom is the right of all sentient beings!"
And you know what? It works. It wouldn't have worked during the Locust War period, but hey, new timeframe, new setting, new characters...Gears of War 4 knows that it wants to be a more light-hearted romp, and it succeeds. It also knows that cover shooting is fine and dandy, but you can do some things to make it interesting, such as taking cover behind shifting gears (forcing you to move), constructing gun emplacements (which is actually more fun than it sounds), to windflares severely limiting certain types of weapons, to lightning strikes, to robots. Actually, the robots aren't that fun, and they serve mostly as a way to ease new players into the game (as the Swarm are much harder), but hey, it's something. As I played, I thought to myself, "wow, this might actually surpass the first Gears game."
Except it doesn't, and paradoxically, it's down to its plot. Now, Gears 1, which we'll get to, flounders in this area as well, but the floundering done here is by a series's fifth installment, and in a way that is far more noticable. Lots of stuff is left vague, such as what exactly made JD and Del abandon the COG, why Anya died, what's causing the windflares, and the game just...ends, in its final cutscene, with vague promises of a sequel and a plot twist that makes me go "it's Myrrah." Also, the Speaker is the weakest villain in the series, ever. Like, even weaker than Karn, and that's a very low bar to get under. His boss fight is a lot of fun, and shows a lot of the game's creativity in approaching combat, but as a character, he's...nothing. He turns up twice, utters a few sentences worth of dialogue, is killed, and is never mentioned again. I will give it credit in that it's a generational story, with the "sins of the fathers," (or mothers, in one case...) is a bit of a theme, but, yeah. Good game. But not quite as good as the ones that come after it on this list.
I'll also give mention to the Swarm, in that they're not as interesting as the Locust, as they lack any form of culture, but they're still a lot more fun to fight than the Lambent.
2) Gears of War
I died a lot in this game. Partly because I was used to running around like a madman in shooters, partly because I think this is still the hardest game in the series. It's also fitting, because it's also probably the grimmest game in the series as well. It's the polar opposite of Gears 4 in terms of tone, even though it's its closest cousin in terms of scope (small focus, smaller stakes). Gears 4 has people who've lived somewhat peacefully kicking arse and taking names. Gears 1 has Delta being deployed into a hotzone in a last ditch effort to take out the Locust. It's also part of why I can't label the series as being "badass." Delta isn't deployed because they're "just that good," they're deployed because things are so bad for the COG that they don't have the manpower for large operations. Well, not yet at least.
So, Gears 1 is all around solid, and does give us the hardest, if not the best villain in the form of RAAM. It's easily the spookiest as well, with kryll, wretches, and beserkers who stalk you in a mausoleum. Like I said, polar opposite from Gears 4. And as much as I enjoyed Gears 4, Gears 1 is still my preferred game. Also, the plot. Gears 1 has the most barebone plot in the series, with the vaguest of worldbuilding. Granted, a lot of the series's worldbuilding comes from EU material, but even Gears 2 gives the player a sense of how the world works (we see Jacinto, we see the Hollow, etc.). Gears 1 is entirely broad strokes in its style of worldbuilding.
But still, pretty nifty game. So, as Gears 2 rolled around, the question had to be asked, could the sequel surpass it?
1) Gears of War 2
Short answer: Yes.
Long answer: Yes, and I'll say it right now - Horde Mode. This is the game that introduced it, and it's the Gears game I spent the most time playing multiplayer in. That the game introduced Horde Mode is reason enough to put it in contention for the top spot, but I'll bypass that, and get to why this works.
Gears 2 is the mantra of "bigger is better," and unlike Independence Day: Resurgence, actually validates that mantra. The world is bigger, the stakes are higher, the pace is handled excellently, we have chainsaw duels, new weapons, new characters, we actually have to wait a whole act before all of Delta's back together. It gives us the riftworm, it gives us the series's most heartbreaking moment in the form of Maria's death, it gives us the series's most sombre ending in the sinking of Jacinto, it gives us more Locust, more insight into their culture, it gives us Skorge (not as intimidating as RAAM, but still gets there), more, more...
And it works. Maybe I'm geeking out, but to be honest, I can't really think of any major flaws this game has. Maybe it being easier than its predecessor, but that's about it. I mean, if you don't like the gameplay of Gears 1, this game isn't going to sell you on it, but, yeah. Best story, best gameplay, best entry.
So, anyway, that took longer than I thought it would, so if I do a poll after this I might just use lists again, but anyway. Feel free to vote, or say that cover-based shooting is terrible. Fine with either.
), I wondered, what next? Well, there is Gears of War. And having finally finished Gears of War 4, and Gearbox teasing a Duke/Gears crossover (or something), I found my next target.So, Gears of War. I'll spare you guys some big lecture, but funny thing is, I've never really viewed it as a "badass" game. Incredibly gory, yes, but it doesn't fall into the realm of a power fantasy (well, mostly, but we'll get to that). Something like Doom I could call a "badass game," because the entire premise is a power fantasy. You're the Doomguy, the most fearsome warrior across dimensions, who fights demons who are terrified of you, and you're practically unstoppable. I'm not sure if I could apply that to any of the Gears of War protagonists though. Oh sure, they're gruff, and muscular, but the entire premise is that you're realtively normal, perhaps above average soldiers, fighting on a losing side, where you're outnumbered and outmatched, and you're only going to survive by taking cover, keeping your squad alive, and fighting well enough to see another day. Doomguy defeats Hell because he's that good. Marcus and co. defeat the Locust because of self-sacrifice and mcGuffins. That's not a flaw, mind you, but something I felt like commenting on.
So, anyway, ranking the games. In past polls I simply listed entries, but with only five to choose from, I figure I could give quick blurbs.
5) Gears of War: Judgement
Well, no surprises there. Entries 1-4 are probably up for grabs, but this is a game I rarely see getting any praise for, and I'm not inclined to buck the trend. Thing is, it's hard to say what's "off" about Judgement, for me. It doesn't have any glaring misteps, but...well, I can list gripes. First, the classified info system, how you can make the missions harder by showing "what really happened." Nice idea, but a lot of it feels arbitrary from a gameplay standpoint, and from a story standpoint, why these events would be classified is weird. I mean, the first optional difficulty spike is where Hammer of Dawn strikes nearly kill your own squad. Fine, that makes sense as to why the COG would want that covered up. Intel that corresponds to health regeneration being disabled to represent how tired your squad is? Yeah, doesn't help.
Also doesn't help that Karn is perhaps one of the weakest enemies in the series, and at the time of its release, WAS the weakest. Weakest, as in, completely bereft of character. I know, none of the Locust characters bar Myrrah have much personality, but Karn is "that guy who's invincible, who took out the entire Gorasnyan army, and is riding a giant spider." There's nothing intimidating about him, he's just, well, "badass." And Loomis is even more of a stereotype than Hoffman, who holds a court martial (that doesn't even give Baird and co. due process) less than 100 meters away from Locust forces. It also doesn't help that Baird is a great character, but only when he's taking the piss out of other people and the situation. Having him as the protagonist who's leading a squad detracts from that a bit.
So, no, not a bad game. But Judgement felt "off" when I played it, and feels "off" to this day. Maybe due to its new developers? Well, yeah. Not a bad game, but easily the weakest.
4) Gears of War 3
Gears of War 3 is a game I can list far more solid gripes at than Judgement, but I also feel it's still better than its prequel overall. But first, those gripes. First, the Lambent are boring. There, I said it. They were fine in the previous two games, but I found myself going through their fights on auto-pilot, waiting for Locust to show up. Heck, the fact that there's technically two Locust factions in Gears of War 3 (those loyal to Myrrah, and those who have gone savage), hammers home the point. The Locust are absolute monsters, true, but they're monsters with a social hierarchy, and elements of culture (e.g. religion). It's part of why I preferred the idea of the Locust always existing rather than being mutated humans. So, we see this in GoW 3 as we observe the Locust who have gone savage, and those who still follow their queen, and the subtle differences that emerge. The Lambent are just zombies. Very dangerous zombies that require different tactics to fight, but zombies all the same.
It also doesn't help that GoW 3 introduces scripted events into the series, and not in a manner I'm that happy with. There's a scene where you're controlling Cole, delivering a bomb, flashing back to a thrashball game. My first instinct was to hold A and run forward. I then realized I didn't need to do anything, that it was a pseudo-cutscene giving only the illusion of gameplay. Add on rails sequences with a truck, and Dom. Dom, who dies a death, because the game says so. "Oh no, Lambent...that the game tells me I can't fight this time, despite me having killed hundred by this point." I get that Dom probably wants to die at this point, but it feels like such an arbitrary death, as if the game said "okay, we need someone to die to up the stakes. No-one cares about Prescott, so...Dom. Yeah, let's kill Dom." And then the squad barely discusses him until Azura.
Still, Gears 3 is fun enough overall that it surpasses Judgement. It also helps that we have Myrrah as THE antagonist, who remains the antagonist throughout the game, and culminates in one of the series's most enjoyable (and difficult) boss fights. So, at the end of the day, Gears 3 is still enjoyable. Weakest entry in the original trilogy, but still enjoyable. But then came Microsoft, who handed the series off to "the Coalition," whose mission statement is identical to 343 Industries, only replace Halo with Gears. Given how much of a letdown Halo 4 was, I had little hope. Also didn't help that the last two Gears games had been weaker than their predecessors. So, one can ask, could the series get some of its mojo back?
3) Gears of War 4
Shockingly, yes, it would, and it did, and not in a way I was expecting. Not only is Gears of War 4 genuinely a good game (well, provided you like the style of gameplay at least), but it's a game that does so by being the most different from any Gears game previously. More in tone, than anything else - Gears of War 4 is easily the most light-hearted Gears game there is, ranging from its dialogue, to its tone, to its gameplay. I feel the best way to demonstrate this is how the game ends (yeah, spoilers). The first Gears game had you fighting under a tortured sky, defending a bomb that could take out the Locust. Gears 2 had you fighting in the remains of Jacinto in a desparate last stand. Gears 3 ended during the day, but with the fate of the Locust and humanity at stake, and both sides fighting tooth and nail to come up on top. Gears 4 ends with you in a giant mech, tearing off the rotor blades of a helicopter, using those blades as a shield, before using them as a chainsaw to cut off the limbs of the final boss, and being one step away from yelling "freedom is the right of all sentient beings!"
And you know what? It works. It wouldn't have worked during the Locust War period, but hey, new timeframe, new setting, new characters...Gears of War 4 knows that it wants to be a more light-hearted romp, and it succeeds. It also knows that cover shooting is fine and dandy, but you can do some things to make it interesting, such as taking cover behind shifting gears (forcing you to move), constructing gun emplacements (which is actually more fun than it sounds), to windflares severely limiting certain types of weapons, to lightning strikes, to robots. Actually, the robots aren't that fun, and they serve mostly as a way to ease new players into the game (as the Swarm are much harder), but hey, it's something. As I played, I thought to myself, "wow, this might actually surpass the first Gears game."
Except it doesn't, and paradoxically, it's down to its plot. Now, Gears 1, which we'll get to, flounders in this area as well, but the floundering done here is by a series's fifth installment, and in a way that is far more noticable. Lots of stuff is left vague, such as what exactly made JD and Del abandon the COG, why Anya died, what's causing the windflares, and the game just...ends, in its final cutscene, with vague promises of a sequel and a plot twist that makes me go "it's Myrrah." Also, the Speaker is the weakest villain in the series, ever. Like, even weaker than Karn, and that's a very low bar to get under. His boss fight is a lot of fun, and shows a lot of the game's creativity in approaching combat, but as a character, he's...nothing. He turns up twice, utters a few sentences worth of dialogue, is killed, and is never mentioned again. I will give it credit in that it's a generational story, with the "sins of the fathers," (or mothers, in one case...) is a bit of a theme, but, yeah. Good game. But not quite as good as the ones that come after it on this list.
I'll also give mention to the Swarm, in that they're not as interesting as the Locust, as they lack any form of culture, but they're still a lot more fun to fight than the Lambent.
2) Gears of War
I died a lot in this game. Partly because I was used to running around like a madman in shooters, partly because I think this is still the hardest game in the series. It's also fitting, because it's also probably the grimmest game in the series as well. It's the polar opposite of Gears 4 in terms of tone, even though it's its closest cousin in terms of scope (small focus, smaller stakes). Gears 4 has people who've lived somewhat peacefully kicking arse and taking names. Gears 1 has Delta being deployed into a hotzone in a last ditch effort to take out the Locust. It's also part of why I can't label the series as being "badass." Delta isn't deployed because they're "just that good," they're deployed because things are so bad for the COG that they don't have the manpower for large operations. Well, not yet at least.
So, Gears 1 is all around solid, and does give us the hardest, if not the best villain in the form of RAAM. It's easily the spookiest as well, with kryll, wretches, and beserkers who stalk you in a mausoleum. Like I said, polar opposite from Gears 4. And as much as I enjoyed Gears 4, Gears 1 is still my preferred game. Also, the plot. Gears 1 has the most barebone plot in the series, with the vaguest of worldbuilding. Granted, a lot of the series's worldbuilding comes from EU material, but even Gears 2 gives the player a sense of how the world works (we see Jacinto, we see the Hollow, etc.). Gears 1 is entirely broad strokes in its style of worldbuilding.
But still, pretty nifty game. So, as Gears 2 rolled around, the question had to be asked, could the sequel surpass it?
1) Gears of War 2
Short answer: Yes.
Long answer: Yes, and I'll say it right now - Horde Mode. This is the game that introduced it, and it's the Gears game I spent the most time playing multiplayer in. That the game introduced Horde Mode is reason enough to put it in contention for the top spot, but I'll bypass that, and get to why this works.
Gears 2 is the mantra of "bigger is better," and unlike Independence Day: Resurgence, actually validates that mantra. The world is bigger, the stakes are higher, the pace is handled excellently, we have chainsaw duels, new weapons, new characters, we actually have to wait a whole act before all of Delta's back together. It gives us the riftworm, it gives us the series's most heartbreaking moment in the form of Maria's death, it gives us the series's most sombre ending in the sinking of Jacinto, it gives us more Locust, more insight into their culture, it gives us Skorge (not as intimidating as RAAM, but still gets there), more, more...
And it works. Maybe I'm geeking out, but to be honest, I can't really think of any major flaws this game has. Maybe it being easier than its predecessor, but that's about it. I mean, if you don't like the gameplay of Gears 1, this game isn't going to sell you on it, but, yeah. Best story, best gameplay, best entry.
So, anyway, that took longer than I thought it would, so if I do a poll after this I might just use lists again, but anyway. Feel free to vote, or say that cover-based shooting is terrible. Fine with either.
