First Gears of War 2 Footage


Recommended Posts

Check out the analysis video, they do a good job of detailing many of the new features:

http://www.gamevideos.com/video/id/18777

Sweet! cant wait

"heres the new carmine - he got killed in the first one but ehm...now hes back" wtf? :huh:

Will it have more than 2-player coop through LIVE?

I take it that was directed at my post :laugh:

Well to me his face looks a little bit "broken" :p

I hope your a virgin otherwise I'd be making sure you haven't been making love to Cliffe's face all these years if that's what you think a vagina looks like.

Sweet! cant wait

"heres the new carmine - he got killed in the first one but ehm...now hes back" wtf? :huh:

Will it have more than 2-player coop through LIVE?

What number were you exactly thinking? There is a reason why it was set to 2 for GOW, it balanced the gameplay. I think anymore than that and the challenge is gone.

I have more friends with an xbox than 1 :s

The more the merrier

Yes and so do I. The point is that if you would try to play a Co-op Live campaign with more than 2 people it would be greatly unbalanced in your favor. People would then complain, it isn't hard enough and want a higher difficulty when it wasn't meant to be played like that in the first place.

Yes and so do I. The point is that if you would try to play a Co-op Live campaign with more than 2 people it would be greatly unbalanced in your favor. People would then complain, it isn't hard enough and want a higher difficulty when it wasn't meant to be played like that in the first place.

So add more enemies? up the difficulty?

So add more enemies? up the difficulty?

As I said before, no matter how high of a difficulty you have, people will always want more. When you have that many people, any difficulty would be destroyed by those numbers.

Besides that, the fact that having that many enemies using a better AI script (higher difficulty) is eventually pushing what one game could do.

Once again, this is a reason why 2 person Co-op hasn't been changed much in the last 2 years, its right where it is.

What number were you exactly thinking? There is a reason why it was set to 2 for GOW, it balanced the gameplay. I think anymore than that and the challenge is gone.

Yes, for GoW1 it would imbalance the gameplay, but I'm sure that now Epic is showcasing their updated engine to handle more enemy AI (hundreds if not thousands of enemies on screen at once) that it would actually make more sense to have more than 2-players in Co-Op mode.

So add more enemies? up the difficulty?

Exactly. Epic has already stated that there are a lot more enemies in GoW2.

As I said before, no matter how high of a difficulty you have, people will always want more. When you have that many people, any difficulty would be destroyed by those numbers.

Besides that, the fact that having that many enemies using a better AI script (higher difficulty) is eventually pushing what one game could do.

Once again, this is a reason why 2 person Co-op hasn't been changed much in the last 2 years, its right where it is.

I'm not so sure about that. Look at Halo 3, having 4-players in a Legendary campaign with a few difficulty skulls turned on is, for lack of a better term, epic! It is a lot of fun and I'm sure that Epic has the capability of pulling it off just as well as Bungie, if not even better (since they can look back and see what worked and what didn't in Bungie's campaign).

I'm not saying multiple co-op is definitely coming to GoW2, but I'm saying it's very possible and I wouldn't be so quick to rule it out as you have.

Yes, for GoW1 it would imbalance the gameplay, but I'm sure that now Epic is showcasing their updated engine to handle more enemy AI (hundreds if not thousands of enemies on screen at once) that it would actually make more sense to have more than 2-players in Co-Op mode.
Their updated engine can handle more enemies, but if you look in the video shown, when Marcus fires at the enemies, he doesn't hurt them. The shooting reticule shows up white instead of red. So yes you could have more enemies on screen, but if you can hurt/kill them in a battle, what's the use? In the video, it is effective for creating a deeper sense of a battle, but if you can't shoot them, that's just it, they are there for the looks not the game play.
I'm not so sure about that. Look at Halo 3, having 4-players in a Legendary campaign with a few difficulty skulls turned on is, for lack of a better term, epic! It is a lot of fun and I'm sure that Epic has the capability of pulling it off just as well as Bungie, if not even better (since they can look back and see what worked and what didn't in Bungie's campaign).

I'm not saying multiple co-op is definitely coming to GoW2, but I'm saying it's very possible and I wouldn't be so quick to rule it out as you have./quote]Halo can be compared, but I am not sure how great of a comparison it is.

First, Halo is no where near the graphics of Gears. The detail put into Gears (into smaller settings) is enormous. Many of the Halo stages were sent in large more open battlefields, thus making it viable for more than 2 players. Putting 4 players into certain aspects of Gear's campaign would just be insane, because its just too small. I can see why Bungie had so many enemies in Halo 3, because it was more spread out, giving the enemies more angles of attack. The close quarters in Gears just don't allow that.

Putting the amount of enemies required for a 3-4 co-op, enough so people don't complain, added with the graphics of Gears is just too much for a 360 to handle right now. Maybe I'm just spit balling, but for Gears, it just won't work.

^ Again, you're assuming way too much.

The fact that the reticle was white instead of red could simply mean that the enemy was "out of range" of that particular gun that Marcus was using at that point it time. It does not necessarily mean that those enemies are just for show, although that is a possibility. But in that case, if they were just for show, why would the player have bothered to shoot at them? We don't know for sure either way.

You're also assuming that GoW2 will be the same close-quarters combat as GoW1. Who is to say that Epic hasn't expanded on the battle gameplay and made it more open, etc?

Unless you know for a fact because of some inside source or something or other, I wouldn't be so quick to rule out certain things. I think you're assuming way too much here.

First off, I should have said I am a realist. It means I don't always assume, but I try to keep things in perspective.

The fact that the reticle was white instead of red could simply mean that the enemy was "out of range" of that particular gun that Marcus was using at that point it time. It does not necessarily mean that those enemies are just for show, although that is a possibility. But in that case, if they were just for show, why would the player have bothered to shoot at them? We don't know for sure either way.

I agree, it could mean there will be more on the screen that are shoot-able, but not to the extent that he saw running on the ground (4 man team versus all that...yea right :p). I think the player shot at them because he is normal. If I were in his spot, I would have shot too, why wouldn't we. :p

You're also assuming that GoW2 will be the same close-quarters combat as GoW1. Who is to say that Epic hasn't expanded on the battle gameplay and made it more open, etc?

Epic had a winning formula on their hands when they made the original Gears. They aren't going to drastically change an essential element to that formula if they want to innovate in other areas of the game.

Unless you know for a fact because of some inside source or something or other, I wouldn't be so quick to rule out certain things. I think you're assuming way too much here.
That is the key. I didn't say something would never happen, I am just trying to keep people's expectations in perspective. People get over-the-top hyped up for something, and it doesn't deliver every hype exception (but is still an awesome game), people will predictably yell.
Glad we could reach some sort of agreement. :p

:p For the record, I wasn't disagreeing with you. I just felt like you were assuming way too much and I decided to play devil's advocate.

Either way, I'm sure GoW2 will be a great game regardless of whether or not Epic decides to introduce 2+ player co-op.

Their updated engine can handle more enemies, but if you look in the video shown, when Marcus fires at the enemies, he doesn't hurt them. The shooting reticule shows up white instead of red. So yes you could have more enemies on screen, but if you can hurt/kill them in a battle, what's the use? In the video, it is effective for creating a deeper sense of a battle, but if you can't shoot them, that's just it, they are there for the looks not the game play.

QUOTE-SNIP

Halo can be compared, but I am not sure how great of a comparison it is.

First, Halo is no where near the graphics of Gears. The detail put into Gears (into smaller settings) is enormous. Many of the Halo stages were sent in large more open battlefields, thus making it viable for more than 2 players. Putting 4 players into certain aspects of Gear's campaign would just be insane, because its just too small. I can see why Bungie had so many enemies in Halo 3, because it was more spread out, giving the enemies more angles of attack. The close quarters in Gears just don't allow that.

Putting the amount of enemies required for a 3-4 co-op, enough so people don't complain, added with the graphics of Gears is just too much for a 360 to handle right now. Maybe I'm just spit balling, but for Gears, it just won't work.

But there was always 3 other NPCs with you in the game? :huh:

I cant see why real human beings cant take their roles?

But there was always 3 other NPCs with you in the game? :huh:

I cant see why real human beings cant take their roles?

Are you kidding me? NPC's aren't even closing to an actual human being that thinks.

NPC's will never provide the same amount of intensity (bullets, strategy, actually doing something, etc.) that a human would. NPC's may put up "cover fire" or fire, but I don't think much of a comparison can be made.

Are you kidding me? NPC's aren't even closing to an actual human being that thinks.

NPC's will never provide the same amount of intensity (bullets, strategy, actually doing something, etc.) that a human would. NPC's may put up "cover fire" or fire, but I don't think much of a comparison can be made.

But that's the thing. The skeleton is there, adding human players just means you'll need harder AI. The transition really is not all that difficult. I really think you will be surprised. But, who knows, we'll see...

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • For some reason I suddenly have the urge to go shopping at Sears.
    • So I did a quick test based on 3+ different public instances from the litany at searx.space ... and it spins everything rather differently. It seems that SearXNG is a meta-search engine (queries multiple search indexes rather than only Google's or Bing's or Wikipedia's or Reddit's) that operates in two modes: > public instances ... each instance opens itself to outside users who piggyback on its cached search history; this instance's own identity becomes known/tracked but end-users are hidden similar to an anonymization proxy; this instance's querying of major search indexes may be API based [rated limited, blocked, etc.]). > private instances ... your private install/instance that itself queries multiple (configurable) search indexes of crawled web content; every major Search Engine associates all traffic to your private instance (so your traffic is tracked via network usages) but client-side tracking (your own browser/computer specs) is flushed because it's a "server" doing the querying rather than your browser. My test asked the same 1 question to the 3+ engines and they all returned vastly different results: some had CAPTCHA failures against Google, some had failures against Wikipedia, and the actual results were also different -- some had auto-complete enabled, others returned a wikipedia highlighted excerpt despite the Wikipedia failure (hinting at results being cached from previous keyword matching), and others just gave an Are-You-Human non-CAPTCHA loop before returning random results. So this begs the caveat: Search query results will vary based on which instance is used because every instance queries the other search indexes separate (and thus its results are influenced on that instance's aggregate search history and index-access limitations). The major distinctions for SearXNG versus DDG or Brave: > The search UI is 'untracked' since no UI trackers are baked-in which would phone home or lay cookies into your browser (for DDG/Brave usage stats), > There is no 'crawler' that canvasses the Internet to discover fresh content (it leaves that to the major search indexes), > Queries multiple search indexes ("meta-search engine") based on the configurations and usage history of the server instance, > Privacy-friendly due to its ability to shield user tracking via standing up a non-local server instance connectable to major VPN providers: queries would all appear to come from general VPN/Proxy providers rather than your private instance (whether installed locally or on your own VPS in the cloud). PS: I've previously come across specialized search engines of this nature that indexes searches across media assets like YT, OF, etc. SearXNG seems to be a good backbone...if the rate-limiting/captcha/etc. issues were resolved.
    • For a guy who claims to hate Farage and the ignorant, gullible, rightwing racist skinheads sponsored by Putin that his lies represent, you sure are quoting them time and time and time again, mate. I guess you're conveniently ignoring the fact that your country and commonwealth just happened to work much better when it was still part of the E.U.? Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.
    • Do you live in the U.K? Do any of the people here that are against the UK leaving the E.U, live in the U.K? If not then why are you bothered? If you do live here then it is a different thing . Brexit was a good idea, should have done it years before, it was done badly, but the idea was good. You are saying the same thing as remainers do, oh we did what Putin wanted, we listened to the lies and Farage. I hate Farage and never believed most of what he said, certainly did not believe the £350m a week for the NHS. But we did pay a lot of money to the E.U and yes some of it came back, but what is the point of paying it out for only some of it to come back? Get out of the E.U, no money to them and in theory we can use the money to do things in the country. I said in theory, but our governments are a total and complete waste of space. No matter what colour rosette they wear. You and others say it was a mistake and yet the two main parties in the U.K are not looking at rejoining the EU, I wonder why that is? I was not tricked by anyone. Makes no odds now, we are out and have been for 10 years, what we need is a decent government to run the country. All they do is shout at each other like a load of kids and seems to do nothing and make this country more into a police and nanny state. Getting more like China all the time.
    • 4TB TEAMGROUP MP44Q, 2TB T-Force G50, and 2TB WD My Passport SSDs drop to great prices by Fiza Ali Prime Day may be over, but there are still worthwhile storage deals available, including discounts on SSDs for shoppers who missed the event or are looking to upgrade their storage solution. Particularly, 2TB Western Digital My Passport, 2TB TEAMGROUP T-Force G50, and 4TB TEAMGROUP MP44Q SSD are selling at great prices with up to 23% off. The 2TB TEAMGROUP T-Force G50 is an M.2 2280 PCIe 4.0 x4 NVMe SSD with sequential read speeds of up to 5,000MB/s and sequential write speeds of up to 4,500MB/s. The drive has an endurance rating of 1,300 TBW (terabytes written) and features a DRAM-less design. The company specifies a mean time between failures (MTBF) of 3 million hours. The drive includes an "ultra-thin" graphene heat spreader that helps dissipate heat without significantly increasing the drive's thickness. It also supports S.M.A.R.T. monitoring, allowing compatible software to monitor drive health and operating status. The SSD is rated for operating temperatures from 0°C to 70°C, with a storage temperature range of -40°C to 85°C. The drive is backed by a five-year limited warranty as well. 2TB TEAMGROUP T-Force G50 SSD: $269.99 (Amazon US) The TEAMGROUP MP44Q is an M.2 2280 PCIe 4.0 x4 NVMe SSD that delivers sequential read speeds of up to 7,000MB/s and sequential write speeds of up to 5,900MB/s. It uses 3D QLC NAND flash memory to provide 4TB of storage capacity for games, applications, media files, and other data. The drive has an endurance rating of 2,000 TBW and an MTBF of 1.6 million hours. The SSD features a DRAM-less design and supports TEAMGROUP's S.M.A.R.T. monitoring software, allowing users to monitor drive health, temperature, and remaining lifespan. For thermal management, the MP44Q also includes an "ultra-thin" graphene heat spreader. It is designed to operate at temperatures between 0°C and 70°C and can be stored at temperatures ranging from -40°C to 85°C. The SSD is also backed by a five-year limited warranty. 4TB TEAMGROUP MP44Q SSD: $478.99 (Amazon US) The 2TB WD My Passport SSD connects via a USB-C port using the USB 3.2 Gen 2 interface. It delivers sequential read speeds of up to 1,050MB/s and sequential write speeds of up to 1,000MB/s through NVMe technology. In terms of security features, the drive includes password protection with 256-bit AES hardware encryption. The SSD is also designed to resist shock and vibration and is rated to withstand drops from heights of up to 6.5 feet. The recommended operating temperature range is 5°C to 35°C, while the non-operating temperature range is -20°C to 65°C. This drive is also backed by a five-year limited warranty. 2TB Western Digital My Passport SSD: $279.99 (Amazon US) Good to know This Amazon deal is U.S. specific, and not available in other regions unless specified. We only use first-party seller links (at the time of article publishing); ensure that you purchase from a first-party seller link only. Check out Today's Deals on Amazon | or our recent tech deals. Become a Prime member (for Students or SNAP) via Neowin Get Prime Access - Prime for half price (for qualifying Medicaid, EBT, SNAP) Subscribe to Prime Video, Audible Plus, Music Unlimited or Kindle Unlimited via Neowin As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Woland13 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Woland13 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      bernmeister earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Scoobystu earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      491
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      225
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      147
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      71
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!