-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Next Gears game to have more open world levels, RPG elements and choice based story
- Thread starter Deleted member 19924
- Start date
So your using the first 2 weeks as a barometer now? It fell like a rock by end of September. It's got the biggest drop off, and since MS isn't sharing actual sales for the game, we have no clue now because GP muddy's the numbers.
Open world levels, and choice based story... things I dont want in a gears game.
The open levels in 5 seemed like just there to waste time and say "we have big levels", and they need to work on getting you invested in more than a few characters if they want choices to feel like they matter. The choice in 5 was probably my most disliked part.
The open levels in 5 seemed like just there to waste time and say "we have big levels", and they need to work on getting you invested in more than a few characters if they want choices to feel like they matter. The choice in 5 was probably my most disliked part.
Yeah I agree really liked them. I think they will be something really special in the next game now that they have the time to properly build them out and make them feel inhabited. Its part of the reason I think 5 has the best lore and allows you to connect with Kait and Del so much. Each section has some great backstory of the universe that you're rewarded with and they learned from God of War and TLOU that traversal is a great opportunity to establish the relationship between two characters through their conversations. Some of my favorite moments were the things Kait and Del would bring up while on the skiff
You're kinda contradicting yourself here about a games success being based on a "narrative"
Whatever point you're trying to make about Gears 5 multiplayer has nothing to do with this article about the campaign of the sequel
I can't even imagine because on hardcore it was such a nightmare.
The only thing I didn't like about Gears 5 was all of ACT 3.
HATED ACT 3
Hasn't changed for me. Loved it then and still do now. Beats out Gears of War 2 by a hair for the best entry in the series.
meh. I feel like the Tomb Raider games did a good job adding open world and rpg elements to their games and wish they would do something in that style.
Having played 4 right before 5, 5 is definitely the far better game.
Having played 4 right before 5, 5 is definitely the far better game.
After the awful dialogue in Gears 5 I'm inclined to agree. Best moments were the opening and ending levels. Everything else was none for the better. Gears is best linear.
Gears 4 is dreadful yes, so I don't disagree that 5 is the far better game of those two.
I thought the open world bits were fine in Gears 5, because they helped give a rest between the frantic linear shooting sections. But they could have been way better too.
I'm on the fence tbh for future installments. I'm not usually a fan of open world and RPG stuff being shoved in to a game, but they weren't exactly intrusive in Gears 5. But if the next edition of Gears was a spin off, rather than Gears 6, and mixed things up a bit with more of a RPG focus, that would be fine. As long as we eventually get a Gears 6 too. But also would beg the question: why not a new IP instead?
I'm on the fence tbh for future installments. I'm not usually a fan of open world and RPG stuff being shoved in to a game, but they weren't exactly intrusive in Gears 5. But if the next edition of Gears was a spin off, rather than Gears 6, and mixed things up a bit with more of a RPG focus, that would be fine. As long as we eventually get a Gears 6 too. But also would beg the question: why not a new IP instead?
I thought they were excellent additions, that if anything they didn't lean in to hard enough. I definitely welcome more of a focus on these elements. Hopefully despite more open environments etc, they still keep the pacing and engagement balance tight or constantly interesting.
I think they should stick to action. I don't think the open-world areas were well executed in 5. God of War did it great but they had to change a lot of the core gameplay while Gears didn't. Just my 2 cents.
I am currently enjoying Gears 5 a lot but so far the open world sections haven't really added much to the experience for me. It's just ok. I hope they improve on this with the next game.
^ This.
I have nothing but respect for Rod and his team, but honestly so far he pales in comparison to Epic with Cliffy at the wheel in terms of campaign, and iterative changes for the series.
I'm in the same boat. I think when I first played it i was blown away by the controls how good it felt campaign wise. But after act 2 the entire ride kind of ended for me.
I feel they are trying to turn gears into something it's not and should honestly either go all the way with it, or just make something new, and leave gears alone for a while.
Last edited:
More Open than 5 would be a mistake, especially when they failed to capitalise fully on the open hub structure of Gears 5.
Keep the same level of openness as Gears 5, just fill the world with more richness of content, e.g. the Witcher 3. I don't mind taking inspiration from RPGs if you're actually taking the elements that really matter.
Openness for the sake of an appearance of a non-linear structure just feels hollow. Openness that actually packs the world full of things to discover is great.
RPG system elements in a shooter like Gears, however, is undesirable. Focus more on creating and fine-tuning more interesting and creative weapons (and even use those as rewards to incentivise exploration in your more Open World game structure — but make sure you have the content to back it up).
Keep the same level of openness as Gears 5, just fill the world with more richness of content, e.g. the Witcher 3. I don't mind taking inspiration from RPGs if you're actually taking the elements that really matter.
Openness for the sake of an appearance of a non-linear structure just feels hollow. Openness that actually packs the world full of things to discover is great.
RPG system elements in a shooter like Gears, however, is undesirable. Focus more on creating and fine-tuning more interesting and creative weapons (and even use those as rewards to incentivise exploration in your more Open World game structure — but make sure you have the content to back it up).
I think them working on remastering/remaking gears 2 and 3 in Unreal 4 engine would give them a good idea of how good those games with the modes they had still are. Beast mode was so fucking cool, and horde was simple and fun using power weapons all over the map like the mortar.
I mean i didn't mind some changes like the fabricator i just didn't like that they regulated people to roles.
Horde was about figuring shit out on what worked, without needing special abilities tied to characters.
I mean i didn't mind some changes like the fabricator i just didn't like that they regulated people to roles.
Horde was about figuring shit out on what worked, without needing special abilities tied to characters.
That choice option in gears 5 was so rushed and stupid 😂😂. It didn't even make me care for any of those characters in the game due to it being mediocre. So I just said eh you die. So no just give me the regular story fleshed out properly. Without any halfway done none sense. Every game doesn't need player voice options.
I really liked the gears 5 campaign. I didn't feel compelled to explore much but had a blast playing. Granted I'm not near as invested in Gears as I am Halo. But if 6 was just more of 5 a couple years from now I'm on board. I am curious of how they will start 6 after that choice. I don't think the movement in gears lends itself to being even more open than 5 tho.
Rpg mechanics in action games are trash, pls no. If anything free up the movement some more in gears, try to reinvent some challenges for a cover shooter. It's too bare bones of a combat loop to carry a single player game. It works in mp because of map control n shit like wall bouncing n wall cancels.
Ending the game right after the choice was laaaaaame
It just ends.
They need to go full bore and just make ba spinoff franchise open world west rpg. Outer worlds on steroids. The same roids the cog use
Please... That is garbage.
Gears of War is something relatively simple and the last thing this (another franchise!) needs is production/vision bloat. I'm tired of AAA being so high-risk that developers start to throw everything into the kitchen sink to justify its production in some misguided catch-all ideal of "now we ensure ANY type of gamer wants to play!".
Gears doesn't need "choices".
It doesn't need "Open World".
It's not an RPG, COME ON! xD
Gears of War is something relatively simple and the last thing this (another franchise!) needs is production/vision bloat. I'm tired of AAA being so high-risk that developers start to throw everything into the kitchen sink to justify its production in some misguided catch-all ideal of "now we ensure ANY type of gamer wants to play!".
Gears doesn't need "choices".
It doesn't need "Open World".
It's not an RPG, COME ON! xD
Though I have not played the story yet, I do know about the decision you have to make and yes, I too wonder how are they going to continue that in the next Gears. Will our choice have an impact or will they just say, "This is what happened..."
And I would be totally fine with that. Let them make a new IP where all this open world RPG stuff with player choices will be natural. Trying to shoehorn something loved and proven into a different thing just because you're tired of making the old game again is the wrong way to make a sequel.
As usual, either they'll ignore your decision (pretty much like Gears 5 story ignored everything what happened in 4) or they'll write off both ways beyond that decision off screen, between 5 and 6.
How is the choice you had to make going to tie in with the sequel is what I want to know. Will you have to tell Gears 6 at the beginning what choice you made in order to get the 'right' story?
So, they wanna double down on 2 of the worst aspects of 5? The open areas in 5 felt completely unnecessary and the mission design in the optional areas are just garbage tier. The "branching narrative" in the end was so lame I couldn't help but laugh. I already wasn't expecting much of 6 so they saying that just gives me even less confidence.
I like to replay Gears games every now and then.
I'm replaying Gears 5 now on insane difficulty and it really sucks having to check every corner for the upgrade parts again.
I don't know if they stay upgraded if you play again on the same difficulty but it's really slowing me down - those Jack upgrades are really useful and a fun addition to the Gears gameplay loop.
But I don't see why they needed to put those upgrades behind collecting parts. Especially since you can respec at any time. I understand trying to reward exploration but there has to be a better way of doing it in future games.
I actually enjoyed the exploration first time through. Just replaying it is a drag
I'm replaying Gears 5 now on insane difficulty and it really sucks having to check every corner for the upgrade parts again.
I don't know if they stay upgraded if you play again on the same difficulty but it's really slowing me down - those Jack upgrades are really useful and a fun addition to the Gears gameplay loop.
But I don't see why they needed to put those upgrades behind collecting parts. Especially since you can respec at any time. I understand trying to reward exploration but there has to be a better way of doing it in future games.
I actually enjoyed the exploration first time through. Just replaying it is a drag
There's no RPG elements. This is silly. Gamingbolt is using that term to refer to the dev's mention of Jack's upgrades, but even calling that thing "RPG lite" is a stretch.
I didn't know about "player choice" 'cause I haven't finished it yet, but that's also idiotic and completely unnecessary. Let Gears be the excellent arcade coop shooter it always and iterate and improve on what made it great, stop making it Ubisoft-lite. Ugh.
Agreed 100%. I didn't even mind the hub sections that much, but IMO they should really limit this to maybe one such area, because otherwise it's just padding. I hated controlling the skiff too and let my SO handle that, because it was just so annoying.
I didn't know about "player choice" 'cause I haven't finished it yet, but that's also idiotic and completely unnecessary. Let Gears be the excellent arcade coop shooter it always and iterate and improve on what made it great, stop making it Ubisoft-lite. Ugh.
Ugh. Story choice and open worlds largely felt shoehorned and incongruent with what had been established with the prior 5 games.
Honestly, I'm fairly exhausted with the franchise and wish TC would pursue a new IP. Gears 5 was well-produced and mechanically rock solid, but the franchise might be the most creatively boring among the big 3's tentpole franchises. When they talk about the 'future' of Gears, just how much longer are they going to dedicate one of their best first party developers to this? We're definitely getting 6. What about 7? 8? 9? Tactics 2? I just don't see the justification for this being such a long-lasting franchise. It's got an AAA fanbase to be sure, but one that has significantly declined from its heyday and in absolute terms doesn't really appear that large. 5 didn't really seem to have a big impact on Gears' mindshare or really elevate the opinion of Xbox first party offerings.
Honestly, I'm fairly exhausted with the franchise and wish TC would pursue a new IP. Gears 5 was well-produced and mechanically rock solid, but the franchise might be the most creatively boring among the big 3's tentpole franchises. When they talk about the 'future' of Gears, just how much longer are they going to dedicate one of their best first party developers to this? We're definitely getting 6. What about 7? 8? 9? Tactics 2? I just don't see the justification for this being such a long-lasting franchise. It's got an AAA fanbase to be sure, but one that has significantly declined from its heyday and in absolute terms doesn't really appear that large. 5 didn't really seem to have a big impact on Gears' mindshare or really elevate the opinion of Xbox first party offerings.
Yep. I just finished 3 before playing 5, the leap in story, gunplay, pacing, chaos and creativity is ... generational (ofcourse), but it didn't feel that way with 4.
5 >>>>> 3,2,4,1.
Best TPS this gen along with RE2 Remake.
I'm using recognised data yes. MS (the financiers) deem its success, not you, only applying sku sales is invalid, so if MS business is to increase GP numbers + player numbers and it does, that's what matters. What's the difference between 3 million paying & playing vs 3 million playing and subbing? Gears still brings in 3 million players for MS. It'll continue to get funding and resource based on its GP performance, so it's a defining metric for future investment. On the MP side, expect to see a spike when they release info about the next drop, more then likely holding back info for X019.
Last edited:
I liked the game but they are giggling down on issues it seems.
Gears hub areas were completely useless and felt really fake instead of being a part of larger world. Also all the side missions played exactly the same. Go in shoot enemy get upgrade and return to skiff. Plus the skiff and open ended missions were so buggy.
RPG elements were again completely useless it was more like getting all the upgrades instead of choices suiting your play style.
Finally as much as people claim gears 5 had great graphics it lacked micro details which make the world feel grounded along with strange choices with perspective. In some of the areas you felt midget in a world designed for bigger creatures. Also most of the world detail seems like it painted on instead of being real objects
Gears hub areas were completely useless and felt really fake instead of being a part of larger world. Also all the side missions played exactly the same. Go in shoot enemy get upgrade and return to skiff. Plus the skiff and open ended missions were so buggy.
RPG elements were again completely useless it was more like getting all the upgrades instead of choices suiting your play style.
Finally as much as people claim gears 5 had great graphics it lacked micro details which make the world feel grounded along with strange choices with perspective. In some of the areas you felt midget in a world designed for bigger creatures. Also most of the world detail seems like it painted on instead of being real objects
Really don't think narrative choices belong, and I hated it when it showed up in 5. Stick to gameplay choices, both in how you approach encounters (ie: Weapon loadouts & player engagement) and map progression (ie: Open world or branching choices like G1).
In the moments I liked the Open World segments, but they killed the pacing and intensity. It doesn't help that they put the two big Open World segments back to back. Gears 5 was the first Gears game that I didn't finish the campaign for in the launch week (took me a month).
In the moments I liked the Open World segments, but they killed the pacing and intensity. It doesn't help that they put the two big Open World segments back to back. Gears 5 was the first Gears game that I didn't finish the campaign for in the launch week (took me a month).
Just because "you" didn't like the changes, doesn't mean everybody else hated it too. The story in 5 answered more questions about the Locust than the original trilogy did.
Call me crazy but I loved gears 4, didn't particularly like 5.
Would prefer linearity in gears, not everything needs to be open world
Would prefer linearity in gears, not everything needs to be open world
Nah chapters 2 and 3 were such a drag by the end of them.
And the rpg lite shit is so overdone in games now.
Kinda frustrating they'd go down this route.
And the rpg lite shit is so overdone in games now.
Kinda frustrating they'd go down this route.