Enter thread again. LOL

I will just point out, There is absolutely nothing wrong with either Gears 1 or 2 story. I can bet that every person saying Gears story sucks are the same people that miss the point of why Die Hard 1-4 are so good. It isnt meant to make philosophy turn in it's grave.

The story is there to get the job done, same as it is in Die Hard or Bad Boys. Think about this.

War is usually fought for stupid reasons anyway, why do you expect some deep twisted story from a war film or game? The most you can do is have a relation to the characters and what they are fighting for (for which will change person to person). Gears 2 did a great job of providing a story for a game hell bent on war and destruction.

People need to learn that not all games are rated so highly for having intricate stories. I am so glad that Gears didnt have some MGS style story because it just would not fit. Epic did a great job and provided a story and game that was an adreneline ride to the end.

If I wanted a complex story I'll play MGS4.

Voice acting is seriously lacking in videogames. I don't know why some developers feel it isn't part of their budget needs, but it should be.

Look at Heavenly Sword. That game was successful largely because Andy Serkis was fucking brilliant as Bohan. The rest of the game is pretty mediocre - other than Aftertouch - and even the story is rather dull. Anna Torv also did a pretty good job as Nariko. Without that voice acting, that game would have dropped way down in my eyes.

@ selnor

I cant help but be suspect about you being in this thread. After all the threads saying how Gears 2 is a bloody awesome game and it's the leader in graphics for consoles at this moment in time. You show up in the only thread for Gears 2 with the word dissapointment in it. Hmmmm.

Anyways your allowed your opinion. But I strongly disagree. Gears and Die Hard are very similar. Both cliche, both have corny one liners and both have corny VA. Thats the beauty.

I swear that you have to be a troll. You just described MGS4.

I agree with Selnor, I wouldn't want to mix MGS and Gears. I'd rather seperate my philosophy lessons and brain dead fun when you blow people into pieces. Both are great. However, I do disagree that Gears 2's story is good because it's in a game that doesn't need one. Just because the story should suck doesn't mean that a sucky story automatically becomes good. But like I said, you shouldn't play gears for the story just like you shouldn't see die hard for it's story. you see it for the action, because frankly, we all like to blow shit up.

I haven't played Gears 2 and I doubt I will ever play it enough (if at all) to provide a proper full perspective on the sequel. But I have finished Gears 1, back then I stated Gears 1 was visually impressive, but IMO it was very lacking in terms of depth and had many other weak points which IMO didn't justify its hype. I imagine Gears 2 is visually an improvement over Gears 1, I wasn't commenting on that at all.

I think you missed the point of what I was saying. After all the threads praising the game (prob 20 or more) you enter the first that doesnt and you didnt enter any of the others.

But then Story is Gears weakest point (if you call it that). Everything else in Gears 2 is brilliant. Level design, Production, graphics, AI, Multiplayer and pure gobsmacking wow power. It truly is a breathtaking game. Which is why it's my top game this gen. And as I said before, it's better than any Halo game in my opinion. (And I'm a huge Halo fan. You should see my Halo collection).

@ Selnor

What it seems like Epic was trying to do with Gears, was take it into the "epic saga" realm that worked commercially for the Halo franchise. Considering that it is taking the place of the Halo franchise this year as MSG Studios halo game, it's fairly easy to understand why.

The whole idea to differentiate Gears 2 from the original was to step everything up a notch. It seemed to me like that was their primary mission statement rather than to create an entirely new experience. And if the latter was the goal, then I'd have to say they missed the mark. But, no point in messing with a working formula.

Visually, while improved over the original, the difference isn't nearly as radical as the pre-hype made it out to be. Much improved lighting and less blobbish texturing that still doesn't hold up under close scrutiny (even on the character models).

I found the whole "humanistic" element of the Gears 2 plot to be contrived and misplaced. So it inevitably showed in the voice acting. Yes, it's a fact that most military personal have spouses or at least SOs left behind during combat deployments, but no, it's not something that keeps them from focusing on anything other than the mission at hand. For a story about a group of 'roided up killing machines, I found the whole "softer side of Dom" sub-plot to be offputting.

Gears was born as a straight action franchise with a simple, kill the alien invaders under overwhelming odds plot. No need to try and make it anything more complex than that. It's pretty hard to explore the soldier's dilemna/angst over killing a whole lot of people when those "people" are giant, hulking monsters hell bent on wiping out humanity.

No point in making any film comparisons either. It is what it is. And I've seen more than my share of bad movies that rival the worst and thinnest of video game plots to say that the comparison is pretty pointless. I've practically turned watching really bad movies into a hobby. The kind that are so bad, it makes one wonder how they were ever even green-stamped in the first place.

Personally, I blame MST3K.