• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Gears of War 4: Review Thread

Yeah, he was banging on about how good FH3 was and then ends up giving it 4 stars in his review, surely if he likes the game as much as he was talking it up it should have been a 5 star game for him!?, i guess he'll give Gears of war 4 4 stars as well

This is why I don't like numbered or star reviews. Giving a game a 5 should be nearly impossible.
 
This is why I don't like numbered or star reviews. Giving a game a 5 should be nearly impossible.

Well not really, just because it has a 5 stars doesn't mean its the perfect game surely, i just look at it as its one of the best type of games in it genre. I mean whats the point of having a 5 star rating if no games is ever going to get that rating...its pointless having it in that case

1 Star = Poor
2 Stars = Disappointing
3 Stars = Average
4 Star = Good
5 Star = Outstanding
 
Okay, so this thread is trash tier now. Time to abandon and move to the OT.

About on par with all review threads. Generally starts swell if a game is getting good reviews, but then a few shills come in saying a game getting 85 on metacritic is disappointing or mediocre and then it goes to shit. OT is the place to be now.
 
Mmm, a brand new Gears of War game coming out for my birthday that's getting some great reviews.

Happy birthday to me! Thanks, Coalition!
 
I can never take 85-86 games seriously. It's like it's not good enough to be considered an amazing game, and not bad enough to be considered a very good game. It's in that limbo no game wants to be where it's just "great".

giphy.gif
 
wow only an 85?
that's it, time to cancel my pre-order. i only buy games that have at least a Metacritic rating of 94, because the higher the score, the better the game is. 85 seems mediocre at best.
 
Yeah, he was banging on about how good FH3 was and then ends up giving it 4 stars in his review, surely if he likes the game as much as he was talking it up it should have been a 5 star game for him!?, i guess he'll give Gears of war 4 4 stars as well

Pretty sure the deducted one start has a lot to do with the PC version.
 
Predicted 85 in the first post based on the showings. Expected a bit lower honestly. Very happy with the reception so far. I'm in it for the multiplayer and that seems better than ever. Campaign will probably be a decent romp too. Ratchet & Clank is mid 80s too and it's one of my favorite games this year, way ahead of stuff like Uncharted and Overwatch. You guys need to stop with the 90MC obsession.
 
To you is not, to me it is

need your eyes [and hands] checked then.

halo SP has always been shit [story-wise, maybe with the exception of the first, but that was more "woah what's going on" then "i'm so wrapt by this engaging story"].

halo 5 MP is the best the series has ever produced.

glad to see gears getting generally great reviews, props to the coalition - definitely must have been feeling the pressure on this one.

bit strange to see game spot hand out a 70 and most others throw out 80s to mid 90s... but whatever, that's reviews for ya...

tempted to splurge on the ultimate so i can play this tonight... tempted...
 
Never had problems with the Halo 5 SP really. To be fair like you said no Halo SP has been crazy good. Halo 5 was the same for me. I enjoyed it tho. 4 player coop was fun, with the great gameplay and it had some good setpieces. Story was oke for me also. Even intrested how it goes further with Halo 6.
 
I'm bringing it up because this argument was seemingly started by people trying to defuse the low scores it got. Afaik there haven't even been that many really good linear shooters this gen, which is why I can't get behind the notion that it mattered that much.

What games did you have in mind?

I'm not the poster who made the comment but two of the most well regarded "linear shooters' this gen, Wolfenstein TNO and Doom, have Metas of 81 and 85. And looking at the top of the generation list the only similar title with a higher meta score is UC4.
 
Well not really, just because it has a 5 stars doesn't mean its the perfect game surely, i just look at it as its one of the best type of games in it genre. I mean whats the point of having a 5 star rating if no games is ever going to get that rating...its pointless having it in that case

1 Star = Poor
2 Stars = Disappointing
3 Stars = Average
4 Star = Good
5 Star = Outstanding

A 5 or 10 to me implies there is no flaw. There is usually a flaw.
 
need your eyes [and hands] checked then.

halo SP has always been shit [story-wise, maybe with the exception of the first, but that was more "woah what's going on" then "i'm so wrapt by this engaging story"].

halo 5 MP is the best the series has ever been.

You have your opinion, others disagree. Halo SP may not have been oscar worthy, but 1-3 tell a decent story and have good variety in set pieces. Halo 5 has neither in my and many others opinions. The vehicle sections in particular feel weak to me.

As far as the MP goes, the movement never felt right to me, the lack of features at launch was puzzling, and the insistence on microtransactions turned me off from the MP. If others are havibg fun with it, fine, but best in the series? I can't agree with that. To each their own I suppose.
 
A 5 or 10 to me implies there is no flaw. There is usually a flaw.

Yep. Personally speaking, no game should get a perfect score. I appreciate review sites that have a decimal system in place, because it gives more nuance. Like you can have a 9.5 or a 9.2 and really sell that its a must play game, but has certain flaws or nitpicks that hold it back.
 
Yep. Personally speaking, no game should get a perfect score. I appreciate review sites that have a decimal system in place, because it gives more nuance. Like you can have a 9.5 or a 9.2 and really sell that its a must play game, but has certain flaws or nitpicks that hold it back.

I think that's just fuckin' stupid. Just call an Excellent game an Excellent game. Not "oh I'm gonna give this a 7.6 or a 7.2 hmm"
 
I am of the opinion that outstanding games that fully achieve their intended purpose are deserving of a 10/10, 5/5, A+, whatever.
 
Yes they're definitely one of the most talented team of the industry but their last game is pretty average and I don't think it deserve 90+ meta, a 7.5/8 out of ten is more realistic to me for UC4.

Well, I'm afraid you're in the minority. To myself and many others, it's a masterpiece and the best game in the series.

Which is not particularly relevant, the point is that ND have a history very few other studios can sniff at. A new studio making Gears 4 and getting nice reviews is highly impressive.
 
Sounds solid overall. Some have negatives about innovation. But that was expected. Damned of you do damned if you dont. Happy they didnt went the 343 road. First show that you can make Gears and understand it. Then go further.
This is a good way to look at it and I'm going to agree. I didn't spend much time with Judgement after finishing the campaign so it feels like quite some time since I've had a real, solid Gears experience and if that is what this team delivered here then I'm all good.
 
Is Forza REALLY going to be the only game with a above 90 meta critic for MS? That's just crazy. But i don't care so long as Gears is good, which it looks like it definitely will be.
 
My internal rating system is: Excellent-Very Good-Good-Okay-Eh-Awful-Crap

Excellent means just that, one of the very best games of the year, not "perfect", but an exceptional example of the form(for this year, I got two of those: Overwatch and XCOM 2). Very good could have or two major things holding it back, or maybe it just didnt have that one x-factor that put it above and beyond, but it has a lot of really fuckin' good things going that make it one of the highlights of the year(Inside, Hitman, Ori and the Blind Forest). Good is just that, a solid, quality video game that maybe only does one or two REALLY great things really well and/or has some issues but ultimately its a good game(Star Fox Zero, Furi, Abzu). Ok is like...the good outweighs the bad, but there's a lot of bad here(Mighty No. 9, Mirror's Edge Catalyst, Quantum Break). Eh is just no strong feeling one way or the other(Homefront 2...that shit goes through one ear and out the other its so completely unremarkable in every area), these are kinda the worst products. Awful is just bad, like you can see some good ideas in here, but it didnt work(ReCore, sorry). And Crap is some of the worst shit you've ever played in ya life. They should be as rare as the Excellent games. Happily I've avoided any Crap games this year.

Most games end in the Okay-Eh-Awful range, just the law of averages, most work in any creative medium is gonna be mediocre at best. So when I say a game is GOOD, thats exactly what that means. Not "ok", but a better-than-most games, solid enough project. Very Good are games that fill out most of my top 10 lists, and Excellents happen like a handful of times every year and are legit GOTY contenders.
 
Is Forza REALLY going to be the only game with a above 90 meta critic for MS? That's just crazy. But i don't care so long as Gears is good, which it looks like it definitely will be.

Forza Horizon 3 is a masterful refinement of the open-world racing genre. It's practically a perfect game. Its 91 metacritic is too low I'd argue. The game is a 10 across-the-board in my opinion. I'm surprised Forza Horizon 3 doesn't have a 97+ metacritic honestly.

This just goes to show you that we need to step back a minute and think about what metacritic really means. It doesn't always tell you the quality of a game, or more importantly, how one person will perceive the quality of the game. It just gives you the consensus on a title. Gears 4 may very well be an incredible game - for me. I'll be playing it tomorrow and I could easily see it cracking my GOTY list.

So far my GOTY list is:

1) Forza Horizon 3 (91 metacritic)
2) Inside (92 metacritic)
3) The Witness (85 metacritic)
4) Quantum Break (77 metacritic)
5) The Turing Test (81 metacritic)

These games are all near perfection for me, despite the wildly varying metacritic. In fact, The Witness is only 85 metacritic on XB1 and yet it's 87 metacritic on PS4. They're the same game! I'll admit I was really really happy that Forza Horizon 3 became MS's first 90+ metacritic title, but at the same time, I've played 100+ games on XB1, and it's been the best gen ever so far. I'm drowning in incredible titles, so I've been enjoying myself immensely, no matter what the games are being rated.
 
Is Forza REALLY going to be the only game with a above 90 meta critic for MS? That's just crazy. But i don't care so long as Gears is good, which it looks like it definitely will be.

Well, i mean, if we count only new games made for this gen, Sony only has 2 90+ games on metacritic (Bloodborne and Uncharted 4). Nintendo has 3 (Mario 3D World, Super Smash Bros and Bayonetta 2)

All 3 of them have a lot of games coming up, though, so i can see this changing.
 
Is Forza REALLY going to be the only game with a above 90 meta critic for MS? That's just crazy. But i don't care so long as Gears is good, which it looks like it definitely will be.

A 90 MC score isn't some ethereal barrier that has distinct properties compared to average scores below it. 90 is no better compared to 89, than 89 is to 88. It isn't, and shouldn't be (for many reasons), a target for publishers, or seen as some incredible achievement by the public.
 
Office closed because of the Tropical storm beyoncegodisreal.gif Time to retire gears 3 and cross over tonight to 4. Cannot wait till it unlocks!!!
 
Join us brother... ;) I wasn't going to but Play Anywhere pushed me over to team Digital Ultimate Edition. I think its going to push me over the edge a lot down the road, haha.

http://www.xbox.com/en-CA/games/xbox-play-anywhere

yeah play anywhere is going to make me buy a lot of games i wouldn't be tempted to otherwise [or AS tempted to, at least].

just super exciting to get to play new console releases on my PC day one... just the best.
 
I can never take 85-86 games seriously. It's like it's not good enough to be considered an amazing game, and not bad enough to be considered a very good game. It's in that limbo no game wants to be where it's just "great".
What is this 🤔. You can't be serious 😐
 
Is Forza REALLY going to be the only game with a above 90 meta critic for MS? That's just crazy. But i don't care so long as Gears is good, which it looks like it definitely will be.

Do you mean just this generation? If we're just looking at new games this gen (re-releasing a past hit is not the same as making a new game), Sony has a whole 2 (Bloodborne and UC4) and Nintendo has 3 (Bayonetta 2, Smash Bros, Mario 3D World). Which part of that is crazy? 90+ games are hard to come by these days.

Edit: Beaten to death with my own arm
 
I havent played a gears game since 2, but im actually getting kinda hyped for this! Glad to see it got good scores, the coalition seem like they really do give a shit. Might grab this around christmas time! Does it seem gears 3 is integral to this story? I dont know if I should play that first
 
Do you mean just this generation? If we're just looking at new games this gen (re-releasing a past hit is not the same as making a new game), Sony has a whole 2 (Bloodborne and UC4) and Nintendo has 3 (Bayonetta 2, Smash Bros, Mario 3D World). Which part of that is crazy? 90+ games are hard to come by these days.

Got 'em.
 
I'm gonna pull the Ultimate trigger.

Need to get in whatever group or whatnot going for this game. Need to get in on that co-op goodness.
 
Top Bottom