Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Games Entertainment

New Gears of War 2 Details, No PC Version 63

Posted by Soulskill
from the so-many-platforms,-so-little-time dept.
IGN has an interview with Cliff Bleszinski, design director for Epic Games, in which he discusses the achievements and unlockable content in Gears of War 2. He mentions that the game won't be getting a PC version as its predecessor did. Gamasutra has a related interview with Epic's Rod Fergusson, who talks at length about developing the new game after experiencing the popularity of the old one, and how he manages the franchise's growth into other forms of media. He also explains the decision-making process behind issuing Title Updates.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Gears of War 2 Details, No PC Version

Comments Filter:
  • No PC version? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by bigstrat2003 (1058574) * on Friday August 29, 2008 @11:00PM (#24805713)

    He mentions that the game won't be getting a PC version as its predecessor did.

    Yeah, right. They said Gears 1 wasn't going to have a PC version, either. Bungie said that their next project after Halo 2 wouldn't be Halo 3. Game companies lie about their future plans all the time. Gears of War 2 will have a PC version, it'll just be after they've wrung all they reasonably can out of the 360 version. Mark my words.

    • Which words exactly? cause, you know...

      Yeah, right. They said Gears ... wasn't going to have a ... version, either. Bungie said ... their ... project ... wouldn't be Halo ... Game ... their future plans ... War ... will have a PC version, it'll just be ... wrung ... out ... Mark.

      Thanx Mark.

    • Re:No PC version? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Cathoderoytube (1088737) on Saturday August 30, 2008 @12:17AM (#24806281)
      Yes I see your point. It's completely logical to pay to have a game that's no longer making any money ported to another platform where piracy is commonplace. It's not like game developers are beginning to focus on consoles because of higher sales and no piracy.
      • Re:No PC version? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by bigstrat2003 (1058574) * on Saturday August 30, 2008 @12:24AM (#24806367)

        From what I understand, it takes relatively little effort to port from the 360 to the PC. So, it really boils down to: "small" chance of making money > zero chance of making money.

        And plenty of developers are still making games for the PC. The market isn't going to die just because some doom and gloom prophets say so, they've been saying that for a while now.

        • by drsquare (530038)

          On the contrary, for someone with a 360 and a PC, if they can pirate the PC version, they no longer need to buy it for the 360. So ruling out a PC version may increase sales.

          • by Anonymous Coward

            On the contrary, for someone with a 360 and a PC, if they can pirate the PC version, they no longer need to buy it for the 360.

            Yup, but the OP predicted that they'll do the PC port probably once they've sold most of the 360 copies they could have sold.

            Once all the money that could be made by selling the "exclusive" has been earned, mayber then they re-compile the game for PC and see if they can catch a few more bucks easily.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Mex (191941)

          "The market isn't going to die just because some doom and gloom prophets say so, they've been saying that for a while now."
          Yeah, at least 10 years. I remember Evil Avatar saying "PC games are dead! Dying soon! " a few years ago...

      • by Bios_Hakr (68586)

        PC games also don't have rentals. I know a lot of people who rent games for 360 and Wii.

        PC gamers also tend not to let people borrow copies of games. I know a lot of Wii gamers that share pretty openly. In my community, there is even an unofficial co-op for the Wii. I buy one game and my neighbor gets another. After a weekend, we switch.

      • You are wrong on so many levels.

        1) Piracy is commonplace on consoles, too, you just don't hear about it as much

        2) Very few game developers have completely abandoned PC - these developers were gemerally butt-hurt from poor sales after producing a few shitty titles. See Valve, Blizzard, and Stardock, for a few big names

        3) If porting the game generates some profit, it will be done. Since porting the game costs effectively nothing, doing so will churn an enormous profit.

        Yes, it is completely logical to have a

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          A PC port of GoW2 would generate some profit, but I think spending their resources on a different, console project would generate even more profits. Gears of War PC didn't sell well. That and the PC port had many bugs. Not so easy and cheap to port, is it? Half-assed ports and games tend to piss off your buyers and would decrease future sales. For example: EA.

          All in all, a PC port is not as logical as you make it out to be.

          PS: Did you even buy the PC port of GoW? I'd venture no. You just seem to be "butt-hu

        • This post needs some up-modding.

      • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

        by Walter Carver (973233)

        You said "no piracy", aren't there mod-chips for Xbox360?

        And you speak of the common misconception that there is no profit on the PC because people can pirate games.

        • I didn't say there was no profit to be had with PC games. That's your strawman. I just said consoles are more attractive to game developers because of the distinct lack of pirating.

          And yes there are apparently mod chips for the 360. I haven't met anybody fool enough to actually install one though. Considering the failure rate of the console, if you send a modded console into get fixed, Microsoft will send it right back to you with a voided warranty. God help you if you try to log onto Xbox live with a modde

          • Nah ah ah, you are trying to change what you said! Quote: "a game that's no longer making any money ported to another platform where piracy is commonplace".

            Everyone you know hasn't moded their Xbox360 and anyone I have met have the Xbox360 modded because it is economically better to just through the console away and get one than buy the games.

    • Perceived console exclusivity == more hardware sales. That's really all there is to this.

  • by xxxJonBoyxxx (565205) on Friday August 29, 2008 @11:16PM (#24805859)
    Three game press releases in a row? C'mon editors - got anything for the dozen or so real geeks still reading this site every other day?
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      All from the same guy (SoulSkill) too. (Yes I went and checked who posted them all when i noticed it.
      • Well, that's kind of what the Firehose is for, assuming these went through it. People mod up the story they want to read, though I just use it as a way of getting early articles, and mod down the slashvertising and spam.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Is that because 'real geeks' don't play games now? Or because 'real geeks' can only like things that aren't 'mainstream'? Help me out here. This geek is 46 now and I'm unsure what kind of uncool you think I need to be to be cool now.

      • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

        by mgblst (80109)

        Yeah, you probably should have stopped playing game by now. If they still are providing more excitement than your real life, you are doing something wrong.

  • by RichPowers (998637) on Friday August 29, 2008 @11:26PM (#24805943)
    And nothing of value was lost.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 30, 2008 @12:04AM (#24806191)

    Oh no, a 2-hour long generic GRITTY bloomfest of a rail shooter isn't coming to the PC? EVERYONE PANIC

  • by AbRASiON (589899) * on Saturday August 30, 2008 @12:51AM (#24806555) Journal

    My opinion FWIW

    I was under the impresion that Gears is an awesome game, I heard it on podcasts, I heard it on shacknews, I heard it EVERYWHERE, this game is more awesome than god of war, this game is 9/10'ths as good as GTA, this game is just fun, dumb, kickass bullshit - it's the predator of video games!
    Unlike my normal skeptical self, I went with the flow "Fuck yeah gears is awesome" - I think I've even recommended a few people to check it out, since I try to stay on top of the news in the gaming scene and what's hot, despite me not seeing it myself.

    Any time someone critisized Gears, you would see a response saying 'you've gotta try co-op dude' well,....I did.
    I actually purchased it about 5 months ago but left it on the shelf, saving it for when a friend would come over so I could play it co-op, I just let it age like a fine wine, after all it was a foregone conclusion that it's a wicked game, right?

    So a pal came over and I popped in gears - we played co-op for about 90 minutes.
    I was forcing myself to like it, infact I was forcing my pal to like it, he was bored shitless and I felt the same but I kept saying stuff like oh sweet and hey look out and all that shit - but in the end I could convince neither of us it was good.
    So I figured my friend was busted, or maybe out mood was wrong.
    I tried the same thing with another pal a week later, we played for about 60 minutes, I did the same thing, tried to like it and... no - it just didn't click, it wasn't really fun to be honest.
    I've since tried a 3'rd friend - again about 90 minutes and guess what - it felt boring, un-inspired and meh. :( I was crushed, I got this awesome awesome game which couldn't possibly be bad and it was well boring, like really boring - the only exciting thing was that cool camera angle / cinematic feel when running.
    I have to wonder if half the hype for the game is the graphics? At the time they rocked but I missed out on them. I'd seen Crysis, GTA4, Heavenly Sword, Mass Effect, Quake 4 all before I saw gears - maybe that's why it didn't impress.

    Definitely a very very over rated game and yes I love my dumb action crap like God of War etc.

    • You're not the only one.

      I don't hate the game - it does look kinda pretty and chainsawing aliens is cool for about 2 minutes, but it never really motivated me to keep playing. I could never get past the "tutorial" level.

      My brother loves it, his friends love it - and I say good for them.

      Yet, if I am being honest, GoW doesn't do shit for me. I can't exactly nail down what it is either. From a marketing perspective it has everything I like viscerally: Explosions, weapons, swearing, gristly death - but its just

      • by Endo13 (1000782)

        but it just lacks soul.

        Yeah, I think that's because they sold that way back when they came up with UT2003.

    • by dunezone (899268) on Saturday August 30, 2008 @03:03AM (#24807515) Journal
      You got caught up in being spoiled by the hype. Its a great game but when you hear nothing but people saying its amazing, and awesome, you kind of psyche yourself out. You expect every part of the game to be the best of the best. And instead of actually enjoying the game, you are forcing yourself to enjoy the game cause everyone else did.

      Ill bring up a recent experience I had. The Dark Knight. I was told by many people this movie was amazing, that this would be "The Empire Strikes Back" of my generation. I didn't see the movie till about three weeks after its opening. By the time I saw it, my head was filled with so many people saying how great it is, how amazing, and the fact that a few people were comparing it to one of the best sequels ever made, that I psyched myself out. I was now sitting in a seat in a movie theater trying to enjoy movie instead of actually enjoying the movie. I expected every scene to be amazing. I felt as if the movie was spoiled because everyone said it was amazing and instead of judging it myself, I let others judge it for me. And instead I was criticizing the movie all the way through.

      The other issue is aging a game. Some games just don't age properly. Some last years and years, some only a few years. Goldeneye was amazing back in 1997/1998. But try getting someone new to play it now for the first time and they wont get it. Try getting someone to play Half-life now for the first time, they wont get it(and I am talking original build not the Source stuff). Now yes, Goldeneye is from 1997 and Gears of War is from 2006. Its only been two years, but there are so many games that carried mechanics (gameplay, graphics, etc) from it since then, its nothing special anymore. The reason gamers go back to old games is not to play them for the first time, its to play them again. Its tough to go back in time and attempt to play a game with graphics that are considered laughable today. With AI that is simple look and shoot. For a lot of games, there's a window of opportunity to play them, and if you miss that window, you've screwed yourself.
      • by Blimey85 (609949)
        I actually think The Dark Knight is the best movie ever, but that's just me. I've seen it three times... opening night was regular cinema and then the other two were both Imax. I'm going again sometime this week to see it again on Imax and I would have already seen it a couple more times on Imax but the closest Imax theater is 60 miles from here and I don't particularly like driving through San Fran.

        If you really want to be blown away, check it out on Imax. The whole thing looks impressive and sounds damn
        • by anss123 (985305)

          I actually think The Dark Knight is the best movie ever

          It's guys like you that ruins movies for us late comers. Hearing so much good about it I actually went to the cinema, hyped up and all, and almost fell asleep. Bastard, you!

        • I just don't see what is so visually amazing to look at. As far as I can remember it's mostly just driving/running/fighting in dark urban areas. What does imax add to that? This was for me one reason I enjoyed Begins more, because it had the great scenery and general visual experience of the training sequence.

    • Re: (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      The story in gears sucked. If you want to experience gears of war, get online and play against other people in some tactical team-based combat.

      The co-op only lasts a few hours, so why are you focused on it so much? I've probably played gears more days than not since it came out and the versus remains a pretty solid experience.

      • by AbRASiON (589899) *

        I am a single player gamer, we still exist believe it or not.
        MP DM does very very little for me, I want to be sucked into a deep and rich story with a start and a finish.
        That being said co-op can be fun, I don't really like Halo but I've played that co-op, it was ok.
        Left 4 Dead looks good in co-op, even Quake 1 and Doom 1/2 (which I played not more than 3 months ago at a lan) in co-op are substantially more fun than Gears.

        The formula is just broken to me and MP is the last thing I care about.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by johannesg (664142)

      Well, major hype is part of the market isn't it? I had the same reaction with Halo: "it's ok". Not a bad game by any means, but not a revolution either. The level design was pretty crappy with its endlessly repeating identical corridors and floors. The two-weapon system was in my opinion just a workaround for not having a lot of keyboard keys to easily select weapons, rather than a wicked strategic choice. The enemy AI didn't really seem all that much smarter than that in other contemporary games.

      So, not a

      • by AbRASiON (589899) *

        I got seriously hyped for Oblivion, GTA4, Doom 3 and all those games kicked ass as far I'm concerned (I admit D3 is only good, not stellar)

        Halo is probably the most over-rated game of all time, it's not a bad game but it's really, really nothing special in any way, Gears however is a genuinely boring game to me.

      • by Khuffie (818093)
        The two-weapon system was in my opinion just a workaround for not having a lot of keyboard keys to easily select weapons, rather than a wicked strategic choice.

        You not liking Halo is your choice, but you really can't believe that? Firstly, there's been lots of great systems for consoles to select more than two weapons easily (hold a button, get a circular menu popup which you navigate with the analogue stick, voila), so saying Halo limiting you to two weapons as a lack of work around to lack of keyboard
        • by johannesg (664142)

          Checkpoints? ***Checkpoints***? You really believe they were invented by Halo?

          I take it back what I said earlier: the worst problem with Halo is it fanboys who, never having played any games before, now think Halo is the be all, end all of games. Checkpoints, recharging health, and limited choice of weapon were all features of 2D shoot'em ups a decade or more earlier. First person shooters had been done _far_ better before Halo ever came along.

          You may like it, nothing wrong with that, but the only thing spe

          • by Khuffie (818093)
            Did I say Halo invented checkpoints? I was just alluding to the fact that it's checkpoint system was well-implemented. I can see where you could have mistaken what I meant though, since I didn't make that clear.
    • by MaWeiTao (908546)

      For me the problem comes down to Gears of War being yet another violent guy-with-gun game. I'll hear about how great a particular game is, play it and come away feeling like I've played the same thing 100 times before. I might be impressed by some aspect of the game, but ultimately that's irrelevant when I'm left feeling developers have little creativity. And these developers need to stop being afraid to use colors other than brown and grey.

    • by QAPete (717838)

      Agreed. There's very little replay value in GoW, and I doubt sincerely we'll see much in GoW 2. Epic started going down a road where eye candy is king way back with UT2003, and has never looked back. They also make a ton of cash off licensing their engine and tools to build games.

      What they've forgotten is how to make a fun game with great replay value. The original Unreal, while unpolished, accomplished the former, knocking the gaming world on its ass with incredible immersible gameplay. UT circa 1999

    • Black was a game that I played many moons after it came out and you know what? It did it for me. It was fun, and gritty and loud and great fun to play. Not to mention hard at points.

      That was a great game I'd play over GoW any day. Here's hoping Criterion make another Black game.

    • I tried the same thing with another pal a week later, we played for about 60 minutes, I did the same thing, tried to like it and... no - it just didn't click, it wasn't really fun to be honest.

      You are right. There are simply lots of better shooters on the PC.

      Also the port was awful - forcing you to sign up to Microsoft Windows LIVE service and constantly be online in order to save the game? A single save slot per player profile? A server implementation so buggy, that if the client crashes while saving the g

  • I play-tested Gears 1 for Microsoft as I live in the area and I have to say I had the same "meh" conclusion even then. Ive been an Unreal Tournament junkie since the original unreal and before them, Doom and Quake. I assumed that since Id be testing a project made by the same guys that gave me my cherished UT, I would be in for a treat of combat-science. Sadly this was not the case. I tested a portion of the campaign and then a map that was essentially a circular arena with short walls about the size of fre
  • That means that there will definitely be a PC version, perhaps up to a year after the console version's release.

    There's no reason to keep it 360 exclusive when they'll earn more profit by also releasing it on the PC. That's obvious.

    Their strategy of delaying the PC release is also obvious. There are consoles to sell after all, and more hot exclusives = more sold consoles. A year after the game's release, no one will care about GoW2 anymore and that's when the PC version will be released.

    It's a great stra

  • what a bore. I could barely get past the first level without thinking, wow this sucks! and I was playing with mouse and keyboard.

    You can't make a game good with marketing. Since I have gamefly I will probably give GoW2 a try. Though I can't say it seems any better than the first game.

    I agree that GoW was way overhyped.

  • I played GoW for PC and for 360, and I must say, the PC version was completely useless. They prettified the graphics and made it 'harder' by making your weapons useless. No thanks. I'm not one to argue for 'realism' in games, but come on: it takes 40+ rounds to take down the first guys you fight in the game. That doesn't make the PC version harder, just repetitive. Those stupid holes in the ground from which enemies appear are just disheartening, because you know you're going to have to take about 5 or
  • I was going to check out the first one on the PC but with no demo I'm just not that interested.

Contemptuous lights flashed flashed across the computer's console. -- Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Working...