So why are all the "hardcore" Gears 1 fans calling Gears2-J scrubby? If anything the others you had to adapt and learn more things. Gears became really balanced after a patch or two in Gears 2 and on. While Gears 1 is unbalanced. Everything was improved in the next entries. Movement, balance, and weapons. The only thing that may have missed a step or two were the maps, but they were still good.
I love all the Gears games even Gears 1 and Judgement. I think I would have prefered a Gears 2 or 3 remaster with all the maps. Judgement weapons weren't bad, but I don't think they need to be in Gears.
Let me tell you right now, gears 1 was the most balanced out of all the games. Gears 2 was never balanced, gears 3 is at an alright point now but I still wouldn't play it (I did give it a long shot though), and I'm not even gonna talk about J... Adding more things into a game and "adapting" to them doesn't balance a game. Especially when ur adding things a large majority of the players don't even want in the game.
From a competitive point gears 2-J are ass. Wall tagging, shotgun inconsistent as fuck, made the shotty slower (and they changed it back do to the backlash), characters have diff hit boxes so some characters ate bullets (skorge, kantus) gears 2 wasn't even somewhat fixed until patch 5,then they fucked it up even more with patch 6. Everything they added just made the game more campy, less aggressive. Who wants to adapt to camping? Leave that for call of duty. Gears 2 even shipped with the shotgun hitting the floor when u blindfired with it... Game was ASS.
Don't get me wrong, I loved gears 2 but definitely not because of its gameplay. (Played because of my xbl friends and we played competitively) I can go even further explaining why 3 and J are ass but just from what I said about gears2...you get the idea why 3-J sucked.
I'd rank the games gears1, 3, 2, and then J.
So I'm happy they chose to remake the best one.
Holy shit I forgot the worst thing of them all, FUCKING RAGDOLL SMOKES. HOLY SHIT. They really made SMOKE nades have a ragdoll effect. Then later games, they made it so smokes just make u cover yourself. Like really bruh? It's called a fucking smoke grenade... Not a stun nade. Worst addition to gears games imo.
As Sigmaah pointed out, adding more features, mechanics and weapons to the game's sandbox doesn't automatically make it more balanced. All that does is make balancing far more difficult and far less likely to be achieved.
Gears 1 was very basic and pretty bare bones, but that's what people loved about it. No crazy weapons, no perks, or special abilities, items or anything like that. Both teams spawned with the same weapons, on relatively small maps, all designed for close quarters combat, with one, if not two power weapons at strategic choke points on the map. That's it. Very straight forward. Simple, yet very challenging and highly competitive.
Gears 2 and 3 had many changes and additions that the community did not ask for at all. Epic insisted on making the game slower, where players would engage in a war of attrition, firing rifles, at a distance, from behind cover, just as you would in campaign. That's not what the community wanted, especially since the Gnasher was the primary weapon of choice, due to the game's intimate style of combat and small maps. Unfortunately, once maps got bigger, more open, movement speed got reduced by 15% and stopping power was introduced, that close quarters combat that we loved, became unnecessarily difficult, in favor of those who just want to sit behind cover and shoot from afar. Thank goodness movement speed was increased in Gears 3
Now, really skilled players could fight against all of that. However, it doesn't make sense that skill is heavily undermined and bested by some someone who simply has to shoot, while the other has to carefully manuver through cover while trying to time shots with a weapon that's very difficult to use in a normal situation anyway. Also realize that there could be hidden grenades planted anywhere, that are almost impossible to dodge unless you tip toe around the map, defusing them with your pistol, smoke grenades that can stun you, and of course, your opponents using an assortment of three different rifles, all of which can and will drop you in a heart beat with little effort, especially the Retro Lancer. Why should the player who exerts far less effort have easy methods of beating someone who has honed the game's deeply rooted fundamentals? Sure, the skilled player could use the same weapons and tactics too, but it is far less exciting, engaging or satisfying. A lot of Gears players love the adrenaline rush and that sense of accomplishment you get from each kill. You really have to fight and earn them, but that all goes away when you can simply blow fools up with a planted grenade or stop them dead in their tracks with a Retro. Even worse when now, someone who barely grasps the meta game of Gears has a higher likelihood of killing you, all because the game gives them easy access for them to do so.
Anyway, the overall problem is the steep skill gap, imposed by Gears 1's simplicity, was lowered with the inclusion of new weapons and new mechanics. It didn't make it more strategic, but more difficult for players who had already mastered the game, but far easier for those who haven't. That isn't balance. Catering to those who would otherwise get annihilated in the game isn't balance. The word "adapt" gets thrown around a lot in the community. Gears 1 fans have had to adapt, when for the most part, they have been the most loyal, and the ones who supported a game that eventually became a franchise. What makes us mad is that Epic wanted to cater to a group of people who weren't interested in Gears to begin with. You can't establish longevity by creating a game for Call of Duty fans, that also alienates your existing fans. You're just gonna end up with nothing in the end.
With the release of Gears Ultimate, those who prefer Gears 2 and 3 (lol if you like Judgement) will have to "adapt" to it as we did with those two games. It only makes sense that a remaster of Gears 1,play look and feel like Gears 1. I would expect, understand and deal with remasters of Gears 2 or 3 to play like their respective originals. It doesn't make sense and isn't fair, that once again, new and casual players get their way. Gears 1 fans have been thrown to the side and have had to deal with unwanted changes since 2008, the year Gears 2 released. It's only right and only fair that we have our turn to get a game we want and a game we've wanted for so long.
