Gears of War has defined the tactical shooter, but is not the perfect game it is described as.
fightgarr wrote this review on .
Gears of War has the distinction of being one of the first big next-gen tactical shooters. Other than that, the game is fairly lacking.
The game has excellent graphics, and the lighting is excellent, but while being done well, it lacks any interest. All the colours are either gray, brown, or bluish gray. What isn't that is a low key gradient of reds and browns to represent the over-used and overrated gore of the game. Yes the chainsaw is awesome... the first three times.
You can tell that the game makers TRIED to make some effort in the gameplay innovation area, but it was a feeble attempt, adding only slightly different elements, that manifest themselves in almost inconsequential ways. The kryll is a neat addition, but it does very little to make the game any different, and the vehicle section, though a nice change, lacks enough of a change to save the game (I would also like to mention how f*cking retarded it was that I had to drive AND shoot, as if my two allies were too f*cking thick to realize there was a f*cking gun there).
The result is a tactical shooter that involves a great deal of repetitive pop-and-shooting. As much as this gets boring, its never quite enough to make the game truly bad, and the game's short length is a good thing considering the lack of change.
Story-wise, Gears of War is pretty simple. Its a fairly standard shooter plot, with some half-assed side stories that may or may not become intriguing in the next game. The plot is enough to drive the game forward, but is never enough to have any real effect on gameplay (which is a key element in the perfect plot).
All-in-all, Gears of War is a dull, but temporarily intense, tactical shooter. For all its flaws, it is never a bad game, but it is definitely not the god-like game it is made out to be by some balls-in-mouth reviewers.