Siege Has 56+ Characters - Unique Heroes/Villains - So Why Did The Coalition Not Deliver On A Successful Hero System For Gears 5 PVE?


Confirmed as of yesterday the hero system is being deleted in favour of classes. Something we had in a previous game. Gears 5 gave us something new and fresh. Heroes and Villains. From what I understand Both Arcade, Horde and Escape will take a step back to familiar territory instead of something brave and fresh.

It is of no surprise that The Coalition ripped off Siege. The scrap, the store, the fomo, the tour of duty, the heroes, the abilities, the load outs, the unique nature of character and their part in a team based game (sound familiar?).

The community is divided that heroes is now deleted. It’s unclear that pro and veteran players who put the work in will NOT get shafted by The Coalition for their time. For those that cheer this, I’d like to point out that Ubisoft Montreal has been able to balance, rework, and continue to add unique heroes, skins, abilities and load outs to the game on a consistent basis. Siege had a bumpy beginning but is still a strong game even now many years after. … 56+ characters and MORE to come all unique, Not classes!

… My point is, Coalitions back pedal of this, is not for you, the player.

(It’s a politicians excuse). It is simply their lazyness - unprofessionalism / inexperience (tell me what it is if it is not that) to develop a complex game that requires consistent, quality and regular gameplay content (No a Dom skin doesn’t count as gameplay content). - Gears 5 made $hundreds (maybe thousands?) of millions. More than most Hollywood movies make. So what is the issue?

Classes does not fix anything. You’re still playing the “meta” but with a different skin. The game needs balancing. You were duped.

It should be evidently clear Gears 5 is a long term game with operations and content, to be dripped over the years for $$$. The Destiny, Warframe, Siege model. Gears 6 is something way way way ahead.

While Horde/Escape didn’t follow lore properly, it is a huge missed opportunity to have done so and really deepen the Gears of War PVE universe.

PVE deserves, DESERVES to be a real, realised, universe.

A full game of it’s own - for those that give no ■■■■■ about VS. The VS community is equally a different community who give no ■■■■■ about you, the PVE community. PVE is massively sidelined. I think it is a missed opportunity we will never get a lore based character - team based PVE world to sink into.

The further news that Escape will get no love is also disheartening. Escape should be this awesome thing like the venom run map or like the play style of Dead By Daylight, it should have massive depth and longevity. A real game of it’s own. Not some copy paste map system where everything feels rushed and generic. The game doesn’t feel difficult, it feels cheap against you (teleporting enemies anyone? - please fix the game!!!).

In closing what’s done is done … and I sincerely hope The Coalition ACTUALLY delivers real gameplay content, updates, fixes, depth, longevity and new features over time to enrich the Gears of War PVE universe for all PVE casual and veteran.

Thank you for reading,


This is gona get good, tagging for reply feed :grin:

1 Like

I’ve been hearing this “GOW is copying such and such game” garbage since GOW3, most of the stuff you mention is something they either did long ago (before siege was a thing) or just natural evolutions of what was in GOW4. Gears has always pretty much stuck to its core formula.

Not sure what this means… What do you mean by “lore based character”? that’s literally like all the characters in GOW5 lol.

I would argue Escape is easily the most popular 4th wheel in Gears history, far more popular than Beast Mode or even Overrun was, so I don’t think it was a failure by any means, that being said I think the concept itself is really boring. Wouldn’t it be more fun if instead of escaping from a hive we went on a journey to somewhere more exotic each week/month? Escape as is is not exciting because it just feels like all the levels go together, and this is because TC’s focus was on destination not journey.

Edit: a more narrative focused experience could also be really fun, I imagine this could be done through world building and environment not necessarily character dialogue.


Locked characters should have a loadout and abilities based from their lore. Something to get invested in.

1 Like

Okay, I’ll bite.

What should JD be according to lore and what skills should he have?

What should Hoffman be according to lore and what skills should he have?

What should Anya have as skills?

What should Anthony have as skills?

The majority of characters in the lore, are generic soldiers and don’t have any aprticular expertise. For the sake of gameplay, TC have basically had to arbitrarily choose a role for them.

I mean, at what point was JD identified as being a demolitions type? At what point was Lizzie a Silverback operator? At what point was Fahz a sniper? At what point did Baird couple sniping with his engineering?

The answer? Nowhere. These are gameplay decisions. There’s only a handful of characters who have a lore-related defined role - the engineers (Del and Baird) do, Cole’s thrashball player role does, Kait was described as being a long-range fighter, Clayton at a push matches a bit because he defies the Carmine death curse thing, but even then fans are slagging this off because he’s the Grubkiller etc.

As I said, most characters are generic soldiers and Jack’s of all trade. How can you expect TC to translate this into what they were trying to achieve with the Hero system? Your criticism of this is asinine.


That’s for someone with experience to answer. Someone who reads the comics, books, and behind the scenes kinda stuff.

More of this? :roll_eyes:

This. While escape initially had my interest; it never grew on me. More than beast mode and overrun did. I see a lot more potential with Escape. As is though, the Hives feel repetitive and dull IMO.


And secondly, you’re criticising GOW5/TC for not having what you refer to as “lore based character(s)”, but now you’re claiming that someone with more knowledge of the lore needs to answer my question.

You’re basically acting like a politician right now, dodging questions.

You want lore-based Hero characters, and I challenged this notion that this isn’t entirely possible because not all characters have clear defined roles in the lore. You’re now deferring to other people who DO know the lore.

So if by your own admission, you’re not knowledgeable of the lore and hence why you’re deferring to someone else, then what made you feel qualified to make that uninformed criticism in the first place?

What I’m getting at is, by your logic, TC are damned if they do and damned if they don’t.

If they did make Hero characters based on the lore you’re have lots of generic Heroes who don’t stand out in any particular role like explosives, stealth, tank, scout etc and you’d have a moan at TC about how generic and unbalanced it is.

But for the purpose of gameplay, TC have given (arbitrarily) roles to characters which don’t entirely fit the lore, and you’re criticising them because it’s not true to lore.

So either way, TC are going to be in your bad books regardless. The way I see it, is that you just want a stick to beat TC with.

I’ve said it before many times - by all means criticise TC and GOW5 if you want, but for God’s sake, do it in a logical and honest way.


I really don’t. I was fanboy for this game and defended all the lame stuff they did for a long time. I’ll take pseudo-lore if real lore is not 100% applicable. Point being Siege can do this and create investment in a unique character.

I know extremely little about Rainbow Six: Siege, but I understand that this first came out back in 2015; and is still being supported, is that correct?

So these 56 operator characters have been released over the course of about 5 years…?

Do correct me if I’m wrong. I’ve never played Siege and know nothing about it.

If so, then how is it fair to compare Siege’s number of operator characters to the number of GOW5’s Hero characters? A fair comparison would be to comapre Siege at the same stage of GOW5’s lifespan - presently 10 months.


Yup. They do a store, fomo rewards, tour of duty style events, new characters (operators) as operation releases. sometimes even pve events. I actually hope to Gears 5 eventually get to this level of consistency.

Correct. Each character is unique. They play a role. Different load out, play style and a unique ultimate as it were. They get balanced and carefully considered against other characters (operators). There are no classes. There isn’t a story as such but each character has a background. The game is 5 vs 5, team based. Not lone wolf.

My point is Ubisoft Montreal didn’t back pedal and say here are limited classes and pick your skins accordingly. Siege is a shinning and successful example of how a hero/villain system can work. I point out that I suspect Coalition back pedaled cause they don’t want to work hard on PVE or whatever. I suspect “giving players choice” is simply an illusion for this excuse.

1 Like

So if this was your point, then why didn’t you make this point in the first place?

You’re initial post made a direct comparison with the number of operators that Siege has (which by your own admission is an unfair one given Siege is a 5 year old game). You also made reference to the lack of lore-friendly Hero characters.

TC probably underestimated the work that has to go into this Hero/Villain system. It also needs to co-exist with the game mechanics. TC have also said that alot of fans dislike the Hero system and this is them wanting to fix this and change it in order to give fans what they want.

In many ways, and in retrospect I’d be happy if they kept the current system and found a way to speed up the creation of new Heroes, but this change is what it is and I thought your criticisms didn’t make any sense at all.


Not disagreeing with all you’re saying but they have been making an effort to fit lore, and some do half-way fit lore, for the most part. For example, JD is a commanding officer in the campaign so it makes sense his ability is to call in an airstrike. Lizzie is said to be the best driver in the COG, so it makes sense she would use a silverback. Sure, the explosive bleed for JD was sorta tacked on, as was stim and cold finish for Lizzie though. Further examples, are well, we know Cole is “the” thrashball pro so his abilities fit him, even though it’s so over-the-top. Del and Baird are obviously the engineers. That should go without saying. Marcus is THE lancer guy, and THE living legend, so no problems there. I’ll give you Kait and Fahz are kinda made up. Most characters were half-based on lore, half over-the-top imagination, but so long as they were making an effort to “sorta” make them fit lore I was more than happy. I didn’t think it was a complete failure. Now they’re giving up on the project though. They’ve conceding the hero system was a failure because the vocal majority decided so, even though some hardcore PvE fans don’t see it that way. Also, it is known the complaints are mainly driven by PvP-only fans who want more skins. The concession also likely has to do with the game being an economic failure, and hoping a big change will help turn it around, but like others have stated, this particular change probably won’t bring in any new players at this point.

1 Like

Sadly, I completely agree with you.

I was so looking forward to gears 5 and to have a change in the way horde played compared to 4. There was nothing wrong with horde in 4, it was just boring after many hundreds of runs I completed.

Horde in gears 5 was different and looked good but was badly executed. It takes way too long and the player and enemy balancing is awful. I like the idea of characters having particular skill sets, it actually makes sense. It would have probably been better to have classes from the start. You would then pick from a group of characters to fit within 1 skill set of cards (class). Del, Baird or Kat would be the engineer class choices with dizzy being added later on for example but they all would have access to the same “engineer” cards. Then it might have worked to have max of 2 of the same class per match. Now I feel it will just be a big mess after people have got used to being able to identify which character is doing which role quickly and easily.

Posting on the forum will not get you much agreement as I’ve said before, most of the gears die hards (06 vets as they like to call themselves) and are sad, bitter, lonely, middle aged men who don’t like change and that’s why most got so upset with the changes in 5.

I played all gears games but only really got in to 4 because of its depth. I really hope the changes make horde enjoyable again and hope I do not have to sit through 2-3+ hours on master just to complete 1 horde match. If it wasn’t for escape, I probably would have stopped playing a few months ago.


How many threads are you gonna make about the SAME thing???

You keep bringing up Siege but heres some news for you. THIS ISNT SIEGE.

Also Siege has been out almost 5 years.

1 Like

I wanted to address this. I think with more dialogue this can be cleared.

I don’t want to pretend I am the biggest Gears fan ever and all knowing. In my other thread, [AmicableWall421] pointed out that Kait prefers long range attacks (correct me) not close range shotguns. There are people that point out character lore.

Anyway, heroes can still work loosely based on the lore. Give or take some far out / left field abilities like freezing and exploding. Examples …

Kat in Reach is like a Samanther Carter from Stargate SG1. The brains McGuyver soldier. Engineering combat makes sense for her role.

Sarah Conor while not a grenadier, has that iconic moment in T2 with the shotgun and it’s stopping power against the T1000. Her cards make sense. (Somewhat).

Marcus is a solider. His load out is fine. His living legend is perfectly complimenting him as the GOAT of the franchise.

Cog Gear while similar to Marcus is a support character. Although I feel an Onyx Guard should have something buff to separate him/her from a generic role. Cliffy B stated Onyx Guards were meant to have the cool toys above the regular COG soldiers.

Cole is a football player. His tackle and melee makes sense for him to do so with a traditional load out.

Baird is an engineer scientist. Like Kat he’s a combat engineer.

If I’m not mistaken wasn’t the Lancer GL made for JD? It’s his thing. If I’m wrong, I’m wrong and apologies.

I’m sure things can be corrected to fit inline with the books and comics better with a little wiggle room for fun. In Siege, some of the character has things that break the immersion of reality SWAT and that’s fine. They don’t cross the line too far removed. It’s just a way to create a unique feeling and combination of the team building gameplay. Something that is interchangeable with any characters just like Siege.

Anyway, I hope you get what I was trying to say.

Dude why dont you actually wait until all the info comes out? You are assuming a lot of things that might or might not happen.


Amen. I agree. Thank you for being a voice.

Thank you also. You get it.

That would be great news. I hope I am wrong. But the system has changed now. What’s done is done. I am documenting my opinion and a voice based on what’s happened.

But you dont actually know whats coming. So far all we were know is that its not character locked. Yet you keep making threads on what you assume and keep comparing this game to siege.