Oh come on! There's no need for bashing.

I don't mind games having few colors. Just look at Resident Evil 4. But most of times it gets boring. Videogames should display a more rich environment and atmosphere. Is obvious that games like GOW and COD try to emulate not real life battlezones but movie like battlezones (like saving private ryan and black hwak down) and that's cool.

In any case, is just an old-school taste ^^ the game is pretty good.

That's interesting! ^^

I am amazed how the MIDI's in Twilight Princess were. They did such an excellent job that it doesn't matter if it wasn't orchestral or not.

On the contrary, it's a solid gameplay experience with a B-grade story and dialogue - and I may be too kind on the story and dialogue.

Only in the videogame world could an average pubescent production such as this be confused with high art, or in this case a game with "theatrical production values". That's broadly in line with claiming GTA IV had an Oscar-quality plot.

Gears is a good game, with very pretty if somewhat bland graphics and a storyline that couldn't be any more generic if they'd tried. Lets not pretend it is something that it is not, even if they existing standards are low.

Actually, claiming something has 'theatrical production values' does not imply anything artistic.  Who said anything about high art?  Does a Michael Bay theatrical production imply high art?

Fair point but you'll note that I never said that "theatrical production values" implies anything artistic. The artistic comment was a comment made about the industry in general, with the thread specific statement coming after the comma.

True, but then you say that it is in line with claiming GTA IV had an Oscar-quality plot(which is implying that Oscar awards mean quality, but as we all know, this is not always true).  Either way, I am pretty sure the point the poster was trying to make was that they spared no expense in getting high quality personalle to be in charge of the content of the game.

Well the GTA comment merely shows that using hyperbole to describe games is rather silly. I found the description of the game as having "theatrical production values" as equally silly, as both the story and dialogue was hilariously bad and were clearly developed to appeal to the lowest common denominator. Anyway, its all largely irrelevant as I though Gears was a good, if unspectacular game, and the sequel looks like an improvement.

 Considering they called gears 1 a demo compared to gears 2...yes, I do think it will be an improvement. They said gears 1 had theatrical value? Gears 2 looks to have it, but not 1.

Theatrical production value does not mean anything other than than top notch people working on it. Kangaroo Jack had theatrical production values.