Gears of War 2 "All Fronts" Map Pack


Recommended Posts

Allfathers Garden: Honor the sacred grounds of the Coalition founders in this explosive map, where powerful weapons catalyze fast and furious action at this COG landmark.

Memorial: Set near the Eternal Flame, which pays tribute to the fallen soldiers on the battlefield, a hard-fought battle ensues at the Tomb of Unknowns. Putting their flank formation and evasive skills to the test, players will fight to control the Boomshot.

Sanctuary: Once a peaceful ground for reflection and remembrance, all that remains of the Sanctuary is the chill of death. Feast your eyes on the arsenal of weapons available as you make your way through the tight paths and blind corners of the Locust-damaged temple corridors.

War Machine: In the abandoned train station that once served as a hub for travel, players will need to master the Longshot, Mulcher and Boomshot weapons to advance the fight while evading fire from the platforms above.

Highway: Take the fight deep into the Locust Hollow in the complex passages of this underground highway system brimming with enemy vermin. Stick together, separate the enemy and have an exit strategy ready or it?ll be a one-way trip.

Way Station: Sitting in limbo between death and ?processing? are Locust way stations filled with fallen COG soldiers. Tread lightly and practice patience as it?s better to sacrifice firepower for stealth while navigating this minefield of hidden grenades.

Nowhere: Set in the middle of what was once a destination for weary desert travellers, the land is now barren and devoid of life. Pick off your enemies with the Longshot sniper rifle and make your way to the stairwell with a well-fortified team during this intense firefight.

Warmachine isn't a new map and why have they got rid of the torque bow?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

$20????

No thanks.

Also, they could release a billion new maps and it still wouldn't fix the broken multiplayer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure why this is going "Retail Only" but I guarantee people eat this up regardless. They really are pushing to get more people playing this which I admire. It is never going to beat out COD4/5 though, just two distinctly different kinds of multiplayer environments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

$20!?

Funny thing is the same Epic delivered the Titan Pack for UT3 and that had 16 new maps... wait for it.... for free.

I'm sorry but including 7 maps shouldn't mean charging $20. That's DLC for you but, I think it would have been better staggering this release as not to make it "seem" like you're paying $20.

edit: Sorry I seen it's in addition to older map packs, what happens if you already own those maps but? You do essentially end up paying $20 for 7 or can they be bought individually?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just started playing this game, good to know that it's got a bit more longevity. I do have to admit that the multiplayer isn't as flowing as the COD series. But it does have some good points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

$20!?

Funny thing is the same Epic delivered the Titan Pack for UT3 and that had 16 new maps... wait for it.... for free.

I'm sorry but including 7 maps shouldn't mean charging $20. That's DLC for you but, I think it would have been better staggering this release as not to make it "seem" like you're paying $20.

edit: Sorry I seen it's in addition to older map packs, what happens if you already own those maps but? You do essentially end up paying $20 for 7 or can they be bought individually?

Aaand ?

This isn't UT3 though, GoW is actually fun to play :p UT was great but ort of stagnated back in 2003 and never got moving again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aaand ?

This isn't UT3 though, GoW is actually fun to play :p UT was great but ort of stagnated back in 2003 and never got moving again.

My point was it's the same company releasing the updates, Epic have always been known to release lots of free content for their gamers.

Consoles come along, Microsoft publish GoW and that's all mowed down, charges for everything. There was already a dispute between gears of war 1 maps with Epic and MS, from Mark Rein himself:

Epic thinks the way to maximize the return on Gears of War is to give the maps away for free and Microsoft thinks the way to maximize the return on Gears of War is to sell the maps. So what we’ve agreed to do is to put these maps on sale at a reasonable price then make them free a few months later. They did this with the original Halo2 map pack and it was a huge success. Lots of people bought the maps and lots of people downloaded them when they became free. That’s what is going to happen and it seems like a fair compromise for both companies and a win-win for Gears players.

Why does Epic not have control over this even though we created this content on our own time and our own dime? Quite frankly Xbox Live Marketplace isn’t our store. It’s Microsoft’s store. Like any retailer they have the right to figure out what goes on the shelves of their store and what price they sell it at. They spend the money to operate the store and deliver the content. They’ve also spent billions of dollars to create and build Xbox and subsidize it’s the price so you can afford it and we can make games for it. As our publisher, they also invested tens of millions of dollars marketing Gears of War, and have done an awesome job for us, so they have a right to a good return on that investment.

Source: http://www.evilavatar.com/forums/showpost....p;postcount=172

However I'm biased, console DLC does my head in in general.

Good to see a game supported, not so good to see it monetized out it's ass. Not to mention early adopters are screwed unless these 7 maps get released separately. Epics forums are ablaze apparently.

Although the next issue on the plate, has Gears of War 2 been patched with a server browser or at least have the ability to specify a map for matchmaking? I don't understand why console devs think it's a great idea to ramp a game up to like 15+ maps then not let you have any control over what you play on.... That just sucks when you want to play something specific or get right into new maps.

Edited by Audioboxer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its not retail only and it will be available for 1600 points on the same day.

I just read "available exclusively at retail worldwide on July 28th" and missed the last paragraph, my mistake.

Although the next issue on the plate, has Gears of War 2 been patched with a server browser or at least have the ability to specify a map for matchmaking? I don't understand why console devs think it's a great idea to ramp a game up to like 15+ maps then not let you have any control over what you play on.... That just sucks when you want to play something specific or get right into new maps.

Doubt we will ever see that be changed on the majority of console games right now with the current system in place.

COD4 had a nice approach to this though. The weekend where it's DLC came out, they had several game types (like Halo 3) where just the DLC maps were played.

While I wouldn't mind playing the extra campaign mission, I'm not spending $20. :p

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doubt we will ever see that be changed on the majority of console games right now with the current system in place.

COD4 had a nice approach to this though. The weekend where it's DLC came out, they had several game types (like Halo 3) where just the DLC maps were played.

Can someone more knowledgeable with Live answer me this then?

Do any Live enabled games have server browsers, or is it just all built around MS' matchmaking system?

Quite a few PS3 games have server browsers (Warhawk/Socom/Killzone 2/UT3) or others where you can at least specify specific matchmaking maps/game options (Resistance 2).

I'd really like to see more devs do it with 360 games, I know you can veto in Halo but you still have a chance of getting stuck on something you can't be arsed playing.... like shotty snipers :/

I'm a PC gamer at heart though, the console noobs love matchmaking and know no different :p It's pretty essential for most of the console audiences, but I'd still really like to see more customization so I can play what I want to play and not leave it all up to some automated system.

The biggest problem is definitely when DLC hits and you want to try it but some matchmaking system keeps putting you on old maps.

Take TF2 on the PC, I've probably played like 500 hours of that, about 80% of that on Dustbowl because I constantly choose it :laugh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gears of War (1) had a server browser. F.E.A.R. 2 has a server browser. Team Fortress 2 does, too, I believe, though I haven't played it in a while on the 360.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take TF2 on the PC, I've probably played like 500 hours of that, about 80% of that on Dustbowl because I constantly choose it :laugh:

I love matchmaking and I'd call myself a pretty hardcore PC gamer. It's a great way to play some maps you'd not usually get to play. Sick of letting users pick the maps, then you always end up with a seriously one-sided ratio. Example is Counter-Strike, everyone was playing freaking Dust and Dust 2. Dust 24/7 servers, Dust 50 times in the ratio etc. It's so annoying! Same happens with many other games, it's lame.

And yes, Rainbow Six: Vegas 1 & 2 had a browser where you could specify options, probably more but those are the ones I remember.

I do agree with Halo though, 'forcing' game-modes is over the line for me, ruined Halo multiplayer for me, biggest bunch of BS I have ever seen.

But no, I don't want to see developers remove the basic matchmaking system. It's brilliant and fast, pick the mode, wait a maximum 30 seconds and you're playing without looking through a long list of games. Not having to browse through almost empty servers, weird user defined options and all that crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sethos I never talked about removing matchmaking and never will.

I'm talking about adding a server browser to supplement matchmaking or at least making the matchmaking system more robust than "click here to find game". I want to tell these games what map I want to play on, what game mode I want and how large a server I want for basics.

That's all. With games on consoles few and far between having dedicated servers, matchmaking is a must. Not criticizing the existence of it, more the implementation.

In the PC realm it's not really needed as the servers you regular on exist "forever" so you just favourite them. Or you refresh a server list, sort by ping then put in any additional requirements you have like game mode/map size/map name.

What I can't get my head around is shelling out for map packs then infrequently getting to play on said maps. It's bad enough you have to pay for just about every map on a console, but it's even worse you have to sit hoping you get on the maps. Making people pay for every map pack lessens your chances even more with these systems as maybe only 25% of the people who bought the game even buy the maps...

That's easily remedied by the devs.

Edited by Audioboxer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sethos I never talked about removing matchmaking and never will.

I'm talking about adding a server browser to supplement matchmaking or at least making the matchmaking system more robust than "click here to find game". I want to tell these games what map I want to play on, what game mode I want and how large a server I want for basics.

That's all. With games on consoles few and far between having dedicated servers, matchmaking is a must. Not criticizing the existence of it, more the implementation.

In the PC realm it's not really needed as the servers you regular on exist "forever" so you just favourite them. Or you refresh a server list, sort by ping then put in any additional requirements you have like game mode/map size/map name.

Let's take Call of Duty for an example, perfect example of a matchmaking system on the console that just works. You choose the gamemode you want to play and then you're thrown in a game that is matched to your connection in no time at all, perfect. No point in defining how many players the servers should hold because all the public servers have the same maximum depending on the gamemode. So basically we have maps left which is exactly what I'd want to avoid, then people will just go looking for the 'popular' maps and the less popular maps will just get thrown aside, like seen in many if not all FPS games these days, it's annoying. Not that it's a big problem in Call of Duty considering the rounds are too short to care but the point still stands.

Last night I tried to play some Killzone 2, which we know features this lame server browser, it took over 5 minutes to find a server for me because the default settings, look for people in my region in a certain gamemode and my rank gave me zero results, then I constantly had to tweak and change settings to be able to find a server with the gamemode of my choice, in my region that wasn't 32 players and wasn't a 16 player server that was full ... It was pathetic.

Servers browsers just need to stay away from the consoles in my opinion, the console is supposed to be a "jump in and play" experience without having to jump through hoops.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's take Call of Duty for an example, perfect example of a matchmaking system on the console that just works. You choose the gamemode you want to play and then you're thrown in a game that is matched to your connection in no time at all, perfect. No point in defining how many players the servers should hold because all the public servers have the same maximum depending on the gamemode. So basically we have maps left which is exactly what I'd want to avoid, then people will just go looking for the 'popular' maps and the less popular maps will just get thrown aside, like seen in many if not all FPS games these days, it's annoying. Not that it's a big problem in Call of Duty considering the rounds are too short to care but the point still stands.

Last night I tried to play some Killzone 2, which we know features this lame server browser, it took over 5 minutes to find a server for me because the default settings, look for people in my region in a certain gamemode and my rank gave me zero results, then I constantly had to tweak and change settings to be able to find a server with the gamemode of my choice, in my region that wasn't 32 players and wasn't a 16 player server that was full ... It was pathetic.

Servers browsers just need to stay away from the consoles imo.

Yeah, COD works.

Unlucky with KZ2, I haven't had an issue getting into servers from the start - Occasionally I do get told server full however if something is at 30/31 players when it's found, that's the only annoyance I've had.

Server browsers are still far better than having no choice at all with a feature gimped matchmaking system, the best solution though is just a matchmaking system that works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love matchmaking and I'd call myself a pretty hardcore PC gamer. It's a great way to play some maps you'd not usually get to play. Sick of letting users pick the maps, then you always end up with a seriously one-sided ratio. Example is Counter-Strike, everyone was playing freaking Dust and Dust 2. Dust 24/7 servers, Dust 50 times in the ratio etc. It's so annoying! Same happens with many other games, it's lame.

I think that is the only reason I am against full bore server rooms etc is I don't want something like that. Consoles are supposed to be more casual so when everybody is stuck playing only a couple of maps against people who only play those maps, the playing field is dramatically tipped.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO:

Server browser > Matchmaking

Just my personal opinion. I like picking which games I want to play, which maps, which settings, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That is acutally really worth it for those people who don't have any of the maps. Think about it. $20 gets you : Flashback (5), Snowblind (4), Comubstible(3) and Dark Corners (7). Then ontop of that you also get a whole new chapter for SP, a stratagy guide, a XBL premium theme and a poster. I don't count on Belzsinski's introduction is worth anything.

I am probably going to buy this, because I only have the flashback maps, (which I got for free). So for me that's 14 new maps , one new single player chapter and the rest of the goodies. If the single player alone is worth $20 on XBL, that means the rest of the maps are free, and I"m not even talking about the rest of the goodies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO:

Server browser > Matchmaking

Just my personal opinion. I like picking which games I want to play, which maps, which settings, etc.

I share the same opinion. However I'd like server browser and matchmaking implemented into games. Like Sethos said, the matchmaking system in COD is brilliant, however I'd love to just chose what map I want to play and the game type - much like COD3 :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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

    • No registered users viewing this page.