I have lost respect for the Coallition now that I know their business methods

So A lot of us here are Geard of War Veternas from Day one. We had a story and some multiplayer.
We have seen the changes to loot boxes in Gears of War 4 become prevalent
In Gears of 5 we see an iron system.

What we also have seen is the time for completion of the entire game and what the Coalition set for us to do to complete the game as such. From 40-50 hours in Gears 1, to 120 hours in Gears 3, 220 hours or more in Gears 4 and Gears 5 i projected to be more than 500 hours.

In Gears of War POP you would need to either spend $3500 to buy 35 legendary boxes to get all Pins needed or play every day for 3.5 years at 2 hours of play per day completing all tasks to get crystals to play.

How would you feel if it said for 10G or one of the achievements being Win 5000 Versus games?
Some may not care and some might. Everybody has a different opinion about what a game takes to complete. Are they ever to be completed? New games come all the time and time advances.

But For Gears 6, I will be playing some Campaign, enjoying the story, playing some king of the kill from time to time to have some fun on the odd occasion but what they expect people to do for the achievements now is incredibly time consuming. I just dont agree with what they want to do in this age of “woke”. A lot of us are thinking about life in lockdown/corona/george floyd era.

P.s. next month aliens are definitely coming.

1 Like

Eh… pardon?

On the other points, the community are constantly asking for new things to be added so that games have more longevity.

“Completing” a game differs from person to person. The thing is, we don’t have to completely 100% max out all of these things like achievements, TOD etc. But many players want to do as much of this as possible.

It does bring up an interesting question which to me, clearly goes beyond just GOW, but gaming generally and the whole “games as a service” concept where the game is played out as a series of seasons where new things are constantly added. I mean, whatever happened to just playing the game for fun? It seems that gaming has changed, and we the gamers have changed with it. In GOW2 we obviously didn’t have this model but I still pumped in massive amounts of time into both Horde and Versus. GOW3 had some very grindy medals to work toward, but aside from a few character skins, bringing Guardian back and the RAAM’s Shadow DLC there wasn’t that much added post-launch. Nowadays there are constant changes and additions every few weeks.

I’ve noticed that since GOW4 I’m much more pre-occupied by GOW and spending less time on other games. I have to admit I’m feeling the burnout at this stage because the whole thing is just getting a bit boring. I’ve got stacks of games I haven’t had a chance to play yet. I had bought Alien Isolation about 2 years ago and only started playing this a month or so ago! Trouble is I’m still working with some friends toward the Ally achievements so whenever they’re online I want to make the effort to play with them to make some more progress.

But I guess this is how developers make extra money. There’s real-life psychology behind this area - there is a direct link between excessive grinds and monetisation. If they can hook players into focusing the majority of their time on their game, then there’s a higher chance of them spending extra money on it because they’re exposed to it all the time, and they are also more invested in it as well. I mean, I play some other games like Assassin’s Creed and The Division but haven’t spent a penny on them because I’m not as invested. But GOW is something I feel more invested in (despite its flaws).

2 Likes

What this means is that as a society, we are realizing the inner workings of things e.g. that every app made that is free exists by selling our data that we agree for it to have access to including phone books, photos, friends access and Facebook for marketing,

So now we can see the business element of mobile gaming creeping into main stream games and revolts against loot crates occurred in certain countries like Belgium. So if the next game requires so many hours like before again then you may stand there at the beginning of your journey and think…

Not again, thanks

I think it’s something we’ve been seeing to varying extents for a few years now. That’s capitalism for you. Without sidetracking this thread too much, what I think we’re seeing right now is a cultural war of sorts where the old status quo is being challenged. And I mean this across alot of society - economics, gender politics, the way we look at race and ethnicity etc.

In gaming, we’ve had an evolution in how games is delivered to us. Gaming is a big money maker now comapred to say, the 1990s. I think broadly we have the Playstation and Playstation 2 to thank for that beause it really propelled gaming into the mainstream. It used to be something for slightly geeky and nerdy people, but the PS and PS2 was a bit like the console for dude-bros. Plus games became larger and more complex and it can be used to create and tell these incredible story narratives which would previously have been something for cinema or TV.

Some developers and people in the gaming industry have done presentations on the games-as-a-service model; microtransactions; and how to hook players. They’re totally aware of it and you can probably find many of these presentations online somewhere. It’s just marketing from a new different angle.

The question for me, is will this result in a mini-crash in the industry? The official line is that games are increasingly more expensive to create. It’s clear that shareholders don’t want to give up any of their precious income, and I kinda get the sense that for the AAA industry they are taking fewer risks than previously with new IPs and there seems to be a big push in marketing on existing titles like COD, Halo and the usual sport titles like FIFA, Madden etc. I wonder if we will get to a point where the AAA industry cannot sustain itself as players get more and more fed-up with samey titles lacking in creativity and variety? The indie developer side of gaming seems to be doing pretty well and is growing.

On another note, if so many developers are trying to hook us with crazy grinds and large libraries of content so to monopolise our time, we then in theory at least, spend less time and money on other games. From a selfish point of view this is choking out the competitor, but this could potentially contribute toward a crash as well.

120 hours to complete gears 3? I think not. The “seriously” achievement was colossal. All those onyx medals took serious grind, but at least you could rack up your match count while out at work. Gears 4 didn’t seem that grindy to me because I liked grinding wings in horde. But 5 doesn’t quite have the same appeal as it’s predecessors in my view. The horde is quite dull and repetitive I feel, so there is no way I will be doing 20 reups or more for “seriously” and beyond.

3 Likes

I’m not looking forward to Gears 6 and MAY skip it completely and be finished with the franchise altogether.

Something has to change,

1 Like

That’s interesting. I can’t imagine not playing a new Gears.

I wonder how much the fan base can influence the model of the next Gears. I feel certain feedback from 4 helped shape Gears 5. I also feel the trends in gaming had the most impact.

1 Like

This is a vast underestimate of the money necessary to complete that game, assuming someone is trying to pay for the completion versus playing it for years on end.

2 Likes

I can’t either as I’ve played since Gears 1.

One day I expect to hear them say things like, we didn’t get some things right or we messed something up and they will not make the same mistake in Gears 6. This will be followed by the release of Gears 6 which will have the same BS in a different form.

For me as a completionist, the grind is excessive. Don’t get me wrong, I can handle the grind but it has to be within reason. Also, the RNG is absurd - rewards don’t match what we’re supposed to get such as in Master Horde or Escape.

2 Likes

I’ve already made up my mind for Gears 6. I’ll start it up on an alternate account, blast through the story on Easy, and forget it even exists afterwards. I love 100%ing Gears games but the grind is just too much for me these days.

2 Likes

I love Gears too. I have the greatest fun in Horde.

Why give them your money at all? Just rent the damn thing or borrow from a friend.

Yeah, I’ll queue it up on Gamefly and send it right back when I’m done.

1 Like

There you go.

Time versus meaning (or reward of what you get).

I put down Gears of War 5 and opened up Dark Souls Remastered and geeeez. I completed it with 100% on 3 playthroughs but wow… It was amazing and a genuine masterpiece. I have neglected Assassins Creed that I was working through. 1,2,Brotherhood,Revelations,3,LIberation,Black Flag, Rogue and now onto Unity. I started last year 1.

I’ll get Gears 6 no matter what. I usually tackle the Campaign first then jump to Horde. This time around, it was mostly the campaign with a few hours of horde only. Hopefully they take our feedback and make Gears 6 great. Horde back to how it should’ve been.

1 Like

SCHWARTZ ol’ boy…I agree man. The grind is horrible for Gears. Only Gears i ever 100% was Judgement. Never gave the seriously achievements a look at.

The main issues I have with Gears 5 right now are basically the hero system and all of its problems and how stupidly slow everything takes to get done with this dumb “service” approach. I would hope TC has learnt their lessons from trying the hero mess in Gears 5 but the pessimist in me thinks they’ll try doing it again in 6 after it failed in 5. Hopefully they’ll at least keep it away from Horde this time around. If it isn’t in Escape, assuming that mode makes it to 6, that would be a bonus.

But unless Gears 5 dramatically improves in the rest of its lifetime, the main reason I would get 6 is the story. Everything other than the Campaign has been decent at best, or not great.

I have gone back to playing the Campaigns of the older games.

Gears of War 1, and Gears of War Judgement (although stylistically controversial with so many small broken up segmented pieces with individual objectives), it still had in building fighting like we are used to in Sera.

This feeling was the best but of course, story wise it has moved, but the atmosphere is the main key factor here. Camera shake when running also is better than no camera shake like on new games. This “following” camera motion is a great part of the roadie running.

But this thread isn’t about the difference between games and learning.

It is the investment in time versus the rewarding feeling after. It just isnt there.

I have to admit, the Hero system has grown on me and I don’t dislike it as much as I did at launch. It’s certainly a flawed concept.

I appreciate the theory behind it. In theory, it provides more variety in gameplay options because you have a larger range of “classes” (for use of better word) whereas GOW4 featured just 5 (although you could build them in slightly different ways - like the Scout had a tank/conbat build, a power gatherer build). The way it’s designed means that you can (in theory, again) have different kinds of “scouts”; “engineers” and “offence” characters, and within these singular characters, you have a few more options based on their roster of cards.

The reality we got is that it’s far too imbalanced and some combination of cards are so obviously more powerful that it renders the theory of more variety moot. I won’t go into the character balancing which you’re aware of. That’s another matter altogether.

Plus it obviously takes far too long for TC to produce enough Heroes to keep players engaged with the game.

But then again, maybe it’s just because I’ve invested alot of time and effort into the hero system?

2 Likes

My issue with the hero system is that it is just unnecessary. What stops the creation of classes without locking them to characters to create more variety? And I don’t see what the appeal is in forcing players into a character they may not like or want to play because the Sniper/Scout/whatever class has been tied to them, when Gears, to a degree, has always been about its characters being more than just “cosmetic”. Imo that concept by itself simply does not lend itself well to a hero system, especially when it was not brought in until the fifth main game in the franchise.

And there’s also the attribution of some classes that makes no sense. As well as the balancing issues you mentioned. Some of this is also due to TC excessively nerfing a lot of weapons so much they are effectively useless without damage boosts and some even with. Like, why can’t a Torque Bow or Dropshot kill a simple Hammerburst Drone or even an Elite variant with a single headshot after 2x health on Master?

2 Likes

The problem I had with Gears 4 is that people who weren’t Scouts would run around picking up power which hurt the team because Scouts get more when they pick it up. Then you have people building fortifications when they shouldn’t be.

I accept and like the fact that certain classes can only do certain things. This really lends to team play. Have a role and stick to it. I might be bias since I love RPGs,

What’s the saying,… it takes a village to…?

1 Like