I canât say Iâm very optimistic for this update given TCâs track record. The rest of you should also calm yourselves down, thereâs still plenty of glorious issues that will make the game continuously tedious. But hey, why not, letâs hope they actually fix their horribly broken 4 1/2 month old disaster of a game and give most of us a reason to come back to it properly.
The Gnasher shouldâve been fixed from launch, thereâs no excuses for this. TC can type all these paragraphs until the end of time but theyâre known for being able to talk a good game as opposed to actually successfully fulfilling their plans.
Iâm beginning to question how much of this is their fault as opposed to the unfortunate consequence of the complex nature of these systems developing into something unrealistically tenable over timeâŚ
I donât think epic could do much better. Gaming has changed, and this game has more systems then ever.
There was a phrase that will stay with me till I die which was told to me by a coach in highschool-
Whenever you change your strategy to something more optimal, you will always get worse before you get better.
Perhaps we are seeing this here, wherein there are so many complex systems interacting unto the end effect of this gun that the potential for smooth outcomes across the board is now higher, but the path to that point has become rockier?
I donât know man. I have faith. They seem to at least understand the complex systems interacting, so maybe they do simply need time.
At the very least we know it is in their interest to revive this game, and gears is one of those few games with the potential to be revived if it is fixed. IMO
I tend to stay away from the multi in this gears but isnât cranking up bullet magnetism a bad thing? To me if they make something easier itâs lowering the bar. If anyone can do it then those that are actually skilled are getting killed by newbs. Thereâs a ton of games where players who get the highest k/d scores, you turn off bullet mag or aim assist and suddenly they canât hit the broad side of a barn.
Being able to rev the chainsaw and lunge like with melee
Every patch seems to introduce a new bug. As for executions I donât see the point. They are cool to watch but in multi you donât have to time to down someone and finish them off. Youâll get blown to bits during the animation. Which is why I hate the totem challenges that require executions. I remember in gears 1 you used to be invincible when you chainsawed someone until the animation was finished. I do not want that to come back. The timing to one shot them was so small odds are they got to roll away just in time to avoid being one shoted.
Your logic makes sense, but I canât share that same optimistic view of the situation.
Gears 4 was their chance to perfect the tuning, movement, etc. They essential did to an extent and itâs for that reason that for Gears 5 to have launched in any state other than total perfection is bizarre.
The game shouldâve been released September of this year, it clearly wasnât ready.
It was their fault for all these unnecessary and unwanted changes to a formula thatâs been very similar and enjoyed for 14 years. As a result of that they get no sympathy and deserve every bit of criticism they get.
Iâve been saying that for awhile. I wonder if the terminator movie had something to do with itâs release? Maybe there was some fine print that stated the game had to be out before the movie released(cause after the release it wouldnât have done the movie any good)
I doubt it wouldâve been related to the Terminator film, but Itâs certainly plausible that Microsoft pushed TC for the release date. Iâd like to think so because if they genuinely thought it was readyâŚtheyâre in the wrong job.
I canât speak to 4 largely because I skipped it, electing to enjoy horde 2.0 on G3 for the duration of its lifespan ( I was very unimpressed with horde 3.0. Nuff said.). However I actually donât think it is bizarre at all.
It comes down to a coding matter really. Would the compound code, added onto update by update from the last game, be able to be copy pasted over into a new game? Maybe. Not without some tweaking, but maybe.
Likely though what they elected to do instead is to attempt to create an optimized base code that incorporated the feel and function of the end result of 4âs code. Obviously, and we can all agree, even myself who skipped 4 by virtue of simple video comparison, they missed that mark. Hell, they werenât even in the same state.
That goes back to that highschool coach quote- They made it worse before it had the potential to be better. Iâm sure the highly complex code at the end of 4 was a virtually untenable mess they felt comfortable abandoning out of either necessity or ambition.
Whether or not the ambition of the new code can be lived up to or not, we have to see. You have your outlook, and I hold to my positive one. I think in the end we all want them to succeed at this.
I have to disagree with you based on the factual nature of these things.
Itâs easy to point the finger, blame, and say âWhy change it, why?â
In reality, software code, and especially gaming code- itâs not as simple as people imagine.
Thereâs really not a 2+2=4+8=12x5=60.
Itâs more like coder A creates a 2+2=6+10=25x4=55. Coder B creates 2+2=8+7=119x7=23.
You see each coder/dev team has their own touch/approach to the code, and the thing itself can develop into its own language of complexity that is almost illegible to all but the creator of the complexity.
It would be, for instance, nearly impossible for you to go back to the code of G1, and simply understand it from a coding perspective. There are likely shortcuts, workarounds, and band-aids of code laced throughout that are only decipherable with information from the original architect of those changes in the code.
In short, it would have been nearly impossible to preserve the code-work of epic, when the code was being handed off from one team who understand and knew the history of that code, to another team that had none of that history or understanding of it.
They would have been dealing with a foreign language, with no translations. Deciphering it one step at a time.
Such a thing simply isnât possible, and itâs why remakes often fall short of the feel of the older game they remake. Simply remaking the old code isnât a possibility. Itâs not a language they know.
Now as far as the release date, and sending out a beta test game essentially. Yea Iâm totally behind that. This standard/practice in the industry is a cancer upon the gaming community.
Kudos with sticking with Gears of War 3, a legendary game and my personal favourite.
I shouldâve probably clarified that by âchangesâ I was meaning in regards to the new Omen, the Execution being moved to B, the chainsaw, etc, as opposed to the codes relating to the Gnasher and general movement.
While I understand it would never have been a simple âcopy and pasteâ job, my point was Gears 4 was their guinea pig, so to speak, in which they could (and did) tweak the game in response to community feedback to achieve the perfect tuning, or code.
Gears of War 4 most definitely did not start in a good state. It was horrific, but in itâs current form itâs certainly enjoyable. Gears 5 is such a mess that it looks like they threw all coding knowledge gained over the predecessorâs lifespan in favour of building a fresh and more generally appealing code for the majority. That quite clearly fell flat on its face, which begs the question:
Was it worth that risk?
Rod himself said they planned on taking risks with this sequel, but nobody expected for the base gameplay to be in such a terrible state to the point weâre expecting our fourth Title Update already and barely anything has been addressed.
Theyâre certainly doing a good job of making it worse by the day but, if your Coachâs point ends up being valid here, in time it should be the best game to ever exist.
I have my severe doubts though.
Bottom line, for a sequel this is one hell of a downgrade.
Did TC admit it ? I didnât watch the last dev stream so I am not aware of it.
If bullet magnetism is the only reason why the gnasher feels inconsistent I totally understand but I donât think so.
But anyway, wouldnât it be a good idea ?
Wouldnât it allow gnasher to be more consistent and accuracy to depend less on bullet magnetism in theory?
Yeah, it seems like the post release support only purpose was to give the hardcore fan base hope and to hype it for Gears 5 release.
Now, even if G5 ends up being a good game (which is not sold at that point), I am sure I wonât buy Gears 6 day one and I will wait several months after its release to see if the game really is enjoyable and finished.
Gears was one of the only ip I bought without waiting for feedback but the experience with Gow has been so frustraring recently, it has taken away almost all the passion I had for this game and itâs the same for 90% of my friends list.
Condolences for the KBM crowd, but hey congrats on your Masters rank on TDM despite it.
Iâm personally excited for the 4-frame window getting fixed. I wondered why my shots felt incomplete when I pulled out the Gnasher before a duel and this explains plenty.
Thereâs hope for the game, I just hope most of the issues are resolved sooner so the game can actually breathe easy for a few years before Gears 6 comes knocking.
A larger origin point blast with lower spread would not fix this, as they will still fling wide in the wrong direction as a result of the multiple interacting systems not being countered by the magnetism.
But anyway, wouldnât it be a good idea ?
Wouldnât it allow gnasher to be more consistent and accuracy to depend less on bullet magnetism in theory ?
I donât believe so. Such a mechanic would make it too smooth. There would be instant QQ about how op the gnasher is for how forgiving its misses are.
What magnetism counters isnât human error, itâs system interaction faults that would cause the shot to partially or fully miss when human aim did not that it attempts to counter, to my understanding.
You see all they are changing is WHEN magnetism activates, and a couple instances of up-a combo shots being wall-blocked.
It is currently broken, functioning off of the camera as an origin point instead of the barrel.
Did TC admit it ? I didnât watch the last dev stream so I am not aware of it.
They put out a semi-in depth discussion of the changes linked in the OP of this thread where they stated as such.
Well, with a larger point blast and reduce spread angle there would be less system interreraction faults since the mecanism would not rely on bullet magnetism as much as it is right now. So I donât understand why it wouldnât solve a big part of the problem.
And I get the magnetismâs purpose is not to carry bad aiming in theory, but remember we are talking about point blank range inconsistency, thatâs why I came with the idea of a larger point blast and a reduce spread ANGLE and not a reduced spread in general, the idea being at point blank range it would be more consistent, while it would feel almost the same at close/medium range.
Because -correct me if I am wrong - at point blank range, when you are shooting at your opponent, there is no such thing as human error, unless the opponent is not even close to the center of your screen.
If it doesnât connect at all or at least around 75% although your gnasherâs end literraly touch your opponent, itâs the systemâs fault.
Thatâs why Iâd rather go for a better mecanism in general instead of just an algorithm that tries to make the experience feels consistent but that actually makes it worst âŚ
(Sorry if I am being repetitive and too insistant but I donât get why it wouldnât be something that could make the experience better)
Maybe I should try, even though I was not found of Gears 4 in general, the experience is surely better.
Now that we are talking about it, I remember members of the forum reporting problems with the matchmaking system since Gears 5 release, is it really worst than before ?
Same here, and thatâs why I wonât purchase it before months, I donât care to play solo games months and even years after their release.
The only reasons I will bought it in the first month is if most of this community praise the game, and if the beta or âTech Testâ or whatever is playable, if meta is not boring and maps are great.
