Gears 5 might be in a Good Place

If you pay attention to a lot of industry standards, the terrible model of making “games as a service” and monetization on every item to make a quick Buck is common nowadays. Even Gears 4 featured this system to an extent, although not as predatory or greedy as Fallout 76 or more recently Anthem.

I sort of guessed that 5 might get worse from where it is now at 4, becoming much more predatory and ready to squeeze unsuspecting wallets…but now I think Gears 5 might not have that choice.
Because if you look at games that Aren’t like this (The Witcher, Metro, Mortal Kombat) they are free from most big publishers. Gears isn’t like this, but the only games that stay true to these Goodwill systems are console exclusives. SO, Godow. And Gearsow. I think it might be safe that Gears 5 might be consumer-friendly, because imagine what it might do if Xbox’s flagship title is hated as much as 76 or Anthem?

Anyways, a shity gaming rant more than Gears related, but I think being a flagship title, Gears 5 CAN’T screw with players, so maybe it won’t.

Just a thought.
Buster Out!

You r trippn if u dont think microsoft has business schemes for gears5 to squeeze money out of suckers…
Anyone who buys any microtransaction from any game is a fool and is why greed js in the industry

1 Like

Curious to know how Anthem is “predatory and greedy”. I think you may be confused. The complaints about that game have been mostly about bugs and that there’s not a lot to do once you reach the upper levels of the game. That’s a definite issue. You don’t really need to spend any money in game though.

Fallouy 76 is a good example. RDR2 Online is a great one too.

As for Gears 5, I’m not overly concerned about loot systems and monetizing. My real concern is playability. Every time I step away from this game and come back, I’m reminded how awkward it is. Between clunky mechanics and the inherent delays in online multiplayer, I feel there’s a lot of room for improvement. The fact that TC largely ignores the community and can’t seem to offer a lot of fixes for common problems really concerns me.

The fact that TC largely ignores the community?

You may have forgotten how Gears 4 was when it first shipped:

No pre game lobby, packs with horrible credit costs, no objective based challenges for characters or skins, the list goes on.

Now look at it. We have lobbies, we have balanced credits per packs, we have gild Ramm challenges, ruby scion challenges, griffin challenge etc, weekly developer streams to discuss new updates or issues with with game, etc.

Countless nerfs/buffs to weapons.

All this was based on community demand and TC listening. They can only do some much post launch with a game. But compared to EPIC, I think TC has done an excellent job at LISTENING to the community. Again there are some things they can’t change or may just not want too change, but they listen.

They could very well address some of those in Gears 5, but then the question becomes why couldn’t they take the time to do so in Gears 4?

Would giving more attention to addressing folk’s lingering issues be such a drain of resources? Would slowing down to deliver higher quality maps have been such a burden on Gears 5’s development? If these are true, then why not just delay Gears 5?

Would it not be in everyone’s best interest for development of that game be reasonably paced – with more time given to test new ideas, give it more polish, and, ideally, less of the god-awful crunch placed on its employees?

Apparently their answer is that it is better to “stick to the schedule,” which, without further context, isn’t very reassuring.


You’re delving into fantasy. “Countless nerfs and buffs”??? Actually, they would be pretty easy to count. Especially compared to other games I play that are balancing monthly.

And, did you actually use Ruby Scion as an argument for TC listening to the community??
I can’t have a conversation with you… :pensive:

I feel the same way. The areas of focus are concerning. How long has the getting kicked and suspended thing been going on? The game not working on pc?
There are serious problems that simply aren’t acceptable in a AAA title.

Listening but at the same time ignoring the biggest issues for over two years now.

Anthem? Lets keep Anthem off these forums please that game does not deserve to be mentioned anywhere Gears related

@II_Dyers_Eve_II it’s true TC has listened to the community sometimes but they have also ignored the community on things that are far more important than lobbies and cosmetics

Admittedly the things I’m looking to be addressed are far grander than what everyone else is concerned with, and I am unconvinced that only 2 years of full-scale production is enough time to address them.

TC seems to be capable of creating games pretty quickly but it’s their decision making once the game is functional that concerns me the most.

Well if you remember Anthem originally planned to have 20$ skins, and we thought 3.99 for a weapon Set was bad.

It might not be as bad, but if the initial launch was bad it probably would have.

I’d love to be wrong, but I doubt it. I think you can expect more of the same when it comes to unlocks and skins. Another long, boring grind for credits with a few tweaks here or there that at first seem like an improvement over the old way.

The only thing I see them doing is adding character unlocks and skins through activities like beating Horde, Campaign or other tidbits.

Yeah sadly. Just trying to stay somewhat optimistic after watching the launches of Anthem, 76, Red Dead Online…other AAA releases in the industry rn.