Remember Gears 1? Epic’s accident. But why was it so successful? Because it wasn’t like any other game on xbox live. Fact is, if back in the day you released a montage of only host plays, everyone would think you were garbage. If you manage to find a g1 montage of all only host plays, the comments & mass amount of dislikes say it all, so why Epic created every future release for badkids, I’ll never know. Leading your shots was what made Gears one of the best accidents ever achieved. Beating a team with host advantage was the best feeling, & it’s a feeling you won’t find ever again. It’s what hooked so many of you to gears. I’m sorry Epic, but you completely got it backwards. You thought making everyone host fixed the host problem, when nobody even liked hosts. A person who only hosted was considered garbage, but I get why you catered to garbage players. Money. You said it yourself at E3, describing Gears 1 being created for the “skilled gamer”, but for future releases you wanted to create games “anyone could play”. Children, you catered to children. Fact is if Gears 6 came out tomorrow & everyone had to lead their shots, you’d have the next #1 game. Why? Because like before, it would separate your game from every other. Why you refuse making another game for the skilled gamer makes me wanna pluck my eyeballs out one by one. But don’t believe me, what do you think? Either way the controversy following this post will sell it for me.
So you’re saying that we should throw aside technological development of more than a decade, while it improves the experience of everyone, just because it was apparently done because of “making bad players feel good”?
And I thought I’d heard it all. But as @Bleeding_Pepper would say…
“Gears fans. The gift that keeps on giving.”
No, dedicated servers weren’t introduced because they “wanted to make bad host players look better”. It’s literally just there to improve the gameplay experience for everyone, and to remove the problems of P2P connection. I highly doubt that it was very “skillful” either. Here’s a hint, giving 9/10 players in the match an inherent delay based off of the host’s connection isn’t what makes skill in a game, but how it’s balanced does.
Not everything has to be like Gears 1. There. I said it.
Gears use to be a top game. It’s not anymore because it’s like every other game. Leading was what made it good & leading takes more skill. Fact is, if they made a game where everyone had to lead their shots it would be one of a kind & we’d all buy it but slowly but surely the badkids would run away to their hitscan games, and the skilled players would remember how much fun they had on gears 1 again. Did you play Gears 1? Do you play now? If you don’t, you won’t get it. Was Gears 2345 not created for hosts? Did anyone like people who only hosted? Every games the same to me these days, G1 is one of a kind and it’s all because of leading shots, so why not make a game where everyone has to. The only people I could see oppose to the idea are the ones who couldn’t play off host or children. I imagine the game would be 1 of a kind again if they did something no one else has. It would be another successful accident, and there’s not a single G1 player who doesn’t agree.
As I’ve seen time and time again, there’s always going to a post that tops the hottest Gears take I’ve ever seen.
I just wanna game different from the hitscan takeover like gears. I like leading honestly, cuz it does take more skill & based on that it feels better winning or getting kills.
For players that want to lead their shot i suggest Apex or Battlefield.
What you mean? I probably don’t understand cuz I’m old like every g1 diehard, and maybe that’s the solution. Make a game for the adults & not children. G1 was so unique. I played the ■■■■ outta Halo 2 from sunrise to sundown. I was pretty good, yet when I first saw gears 1 multiplayer, I literally never played halo again.
I’m 24 and played Gears 1 a month after it came out and have been playing ever since.
LOL GOW’06 Vet etc etc.
It just wasnt
I read that and was just like “this is the first person I’ve ever seen say this” lol
This person is talking as if Gears 1 is like 50 years old. Its like 15 lol
I don’t even need to explain how bad of a take this is:
I think @AmicableWall421 couldn’t have said it any better.
Say what you want about Gears 4 and 5, but having dedicated servers made those two games playable at least. Coming back to Gears 2 and 3 where it was P2P was so awful. Really the only good thing that came from coming back to them was how hilariously unhinged @RelaxingKoty was on the mic lmao. The only reason why you had to lean your shots in was because of how horrendous the netcode was thanks to these older games relying on Peer-to-Peer connection instead of dedicated servers. If anything Gear 4 comp tuning was the closet thing we’ve gotten to leaning your shots in recent years. The lancer did so little damage and the gib range of the gnasher was so small in that specific tuning.
I genuinely have socks that are older than that. I mean, they’re not in great condition but they still function. Just about.
You can have shot leading with dedicated servers, and you can have no shot leading on P2P servers this thread is embarrassing all around.
Because it is in internet years lmaooo. I’m 22 and I feel so old referring to the year 2006.
Also @AmicableWall421 why did you have to tag me? I was having a lovely lazy Sunday involving people of above average intellectual prowess and you drag me into… this?! Shame on you.
Leading shots because every shot is a projectile but otherwise has consistent and predictable characteristics is fine. I don’t think it’s necessarily best for Gears, but I’ve played games where that’s how shooting works, and again, it’s fine.
Having to arbitrarily lead shots due to ping differences while using an otherwise hitscan weapon is cancer. I’m only in favor of this as a punishment for particularly bad connections. In most circumstances, client side hit detection lag compensation is the way to go.