PDA

View Full Version : Gears of War Update Tomorrow


bapenguin
06-13-2007, 08:01 AM
There's a new Gears of War Update (http://gamerscoreblog.com/team/archive/2007/06/13/551259.aspx) coming tomorrow. The update will fix some of the roadie running issues, fix multiplayer exploits and...drum roll...add achievements. The new achievments are for the Annex gametype and recent multiplayer Map Pack.

GigaFuzz
06-13-2007, 08:20 AM
I'm going to have to compile a list of exciting things that have come out on 360 & Xbox Live while I've 'been away'. I'll have forgotten them all If I'm not careful.

Hopefully this will really fix the roadie running issue, rather than seemingly make it worse like the last one did.

51|RandoM
06-13-2007, 08:48 AM
If you're in the roadie run, you shouldn't stick to anything, imho. Seems pretty simple to me. Let off the A button briefly while running and tap it again to initiate docking procedures with the nearest vertical surface.

Montolio
06-13-2007, 08:50 AM
bapenguin,

If you get a chance to speak with anyone at Epic, could you please ask them if they would give any thought to changing the multiplayer achievements from ranked only to more of what I feel should be the norm - ranked or player matches?

It's never been clear to me if this was Epic's doing or Microsoft's. A straight and even final answer sure would be appreciated.

I mean, I love getting achievements in the game, but it's much more fun playing with friends while doing it vs. almost grinding with people I may not want to know in ranked matches. We've all been there I'm sure.

Telefrog
06-13-2007, 09:05 AM
So, what are the new achievements? It didn't say in the linked article, and it only points you to www.gearsofwar.com which is a fountain of useless.

DaedalusFolly
06-13-2007, 09:44 AM
I mean, I love getting achievements in the game, but it's much more fun playing with friends while doing it vs. almost grinding with people I may not want to know in ranked matches. We've all been there I'm sure.
It wouldn't much of an achievement if you could get them playing non ranked matches. You could just round up some friends and take turns earning achievements against players purposely helping you.

DriveALW
06-13-2007, 10:49 AM
It wouldn't much of an achievement if you could get them playing non ranked matches. You could just round up some friends and take turns earning achievements against players purposely helping you.


But... so what? The achievements mostly ask for 100 kills with various weapons, stuff like that. If people want to waste their time shooting a torque bow at their stationary friend for 10 extra nerd points, let 'em. Or, make it 500 kills and make it player + ranked matches. It's not like you couldn't play King Kong for an afternoon and get more points than that, anyway. I agree that player matches should count in these situations.

Veregon
06-13-2007, 11:07 AM
Here's the list:

http://gearsofwar.com/News/news_6-14-+title+update.htm

Montolio
06-13-2007, 11:09 AM
It wouldn't much of an achievement if you could get them playing non ranked matches. You could just round up some friends and take turns earning achievements against players purposely helping you.I'm sure some would do just that, but that isn't how everyone plays, so I'd still like to ask.

Also for those looking for the list of the new achievements . . .

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/community/news/2007/0613-gowachievements.htm?WText.camp=TS2-GearofWar&WText.campSrc=Home

Wolvie
06-13-2007, 11:11 AM
But... so what? The achievements mostly ask for 100 kills with various weapons, stuff like that. If people want to waste their time shooting a torque bow at their stationary friend for 10 extra nerd points, let 'em. Or, make it 500 kills and make it player + ranked matches. It's not like you couldn't play King Kong for an afternoon and get more points than that, anyway. I agree that player matches should count in these situations.


The point is, they want you to earn those points, not get them using cheap tactics. Thats why they're called achievements, because you have to WORK to ACHIEVE them.

Aslo, it's up to the dev team that made the game to set the rules on how the achievements are earned. King Kong was a quick cash in movie game, and they knew people wouldn't be playing it long, thus a quick easy 1000 points. Gears on the other hand, they knew people would play the crap out of it while they waited for Halo 3 and beyond, so they made it harder to get the achievements, so you'd be rewarded for all those long hours of play time.

Spigot
06-13-2007, 12:05 PM
I'm with DriveALW.

I like having multiplayer achievements but don't make all of them on the Ranked servers. Shadowrun doesn't force you to play on the ranked servers.

OR they could have a "Put UpWith A Bunch Of Morons" acheivement for those who only play the ranked matches.

Mista Mafiosi
06-13-2007, 12:21 PM
So you can earn the achievements playing with just bots?

DriveALW
06-13-2007, 12:45 PM
King Kong was a quick cash in movie game, and they knew people wouldn't be playing it long, thus a quick easy 1000 points. Gears on the other hand, they knew people would play the crap out of it while they waited for Halo 3 and beyond, so they made it harder to get the achievements, so you'd be rewarded for all those long hours of play time.


I understand your point, but look at it this way. 100 points is 100 points, whether you get it from Call of Duty or Prey. Points from a ranked match in Gears aren't *worth* any more; it doesn't matter if it's more challenging to get them. Additionally, no one looks at your gamercard and is impressed by which achievements you have. There is no standard for difficulty or time invested to gain an achievement point. True, the developer can make those achievements as easy or as hard to get as they want, but forcing you to play ranked matches seems unnecessary when no standard exists from one game to the next. Furthermore, if someone wants to do the GoW equivalent of grinding levels to get the achievement, wasting hours killing their friends, it could be argued that *that* is truly work, while getting them in the course of play is merely a bonus that accompanies the fun you were already having. I don't know why I'm debating this, but it's kind of interesting to consider the nature of points that have no inherent value. Thoughts?

Spigot
06-13-2007, 12:53 PM
So you can earn the achievements playing with just bots?That's a good question. Maybe not. But what I was saying is that I can just join a player room with all the EvAv guys and still get all or most of the achievements in Shadowrun. Gears forces you to play on the ranked servers.

Telefrog
06-13-2007, 01:56 PM
I think my new favorite is "THIS! IS! ANNEX!"

Spigot
06-13-2007, 07:09 PM
Speaking of achievements, just look at some of the casual games like Bejeweled 2 and Hexic. Their achievements are mind-numbingly insane!

ReaverX
06-14-2007, 09:25 AM
Wait.. so does this mean you shmuckfaces will stop playing Shadowrun and come back? cause I kinda miss GOW tuesdays.

Mista Mafiosi
06-14-2007, 09:48 AM
Wait.. so does this mean you shmuckfaces will stop playing Shadowrun and come back? cause I kinda miss GOW tuesdays.

It's going to be hard, but if they get rid of all the glitches I'll think about coming back.. So far I haven't spotted anyone glitching in Shadowrun.. seems like they just made the glitches part of the game. haha

RyanRaven
06-14-2007, 10:18 AM
This update made my console very unhappy:( it freezes now. Anyone else having this problem?

Mista Mafiosi
06-14-2007, 10:30 AM
oh.. it's one of those updates... thanks for the heads up.

UWCrash
06-14-2007, 11:43 AM
I understand your point, but look at it this way. 100 points is 100 points, whether you get it from Call of Duty or Prey. Points from a ranked match in Gears aren't *worth* any more; it doesn't matter if it's more challenging to get them. Additionally, no one looks at your gamercard and is impressed by which achievements you have. There is no standard for difficulty or time invested to gain an achievement point. True, the developer can make those achievements as easy or as hard to get as they want, but forcing you to play ranked matches seems unnecessary when no standard exists from one game to the next. Furthermore, if someone wants to do the GoW equivalent of grinding levels to get the achievement, wasting hours killing their friends, it could be argued that *that* is truly work, while getting them in the course of play is merely a bonus that accompanies the fun you were already having. I don't know why I'm debating this, but it's kind of interesting to consider the nature of points that have no inherent value. Thoughts?

Generally I couldn't care less about my total number of gamerpoints. I have friends that I know tend to rent a lot of games, and it gives them a hell of a lot more points getting easy, random achievements in games I'll never touch. As for individual games, I consider it a sign of how much of the game I've beaten, even if some of the achievements are wildly unbalanced. In general I don't condone boosting (http://evilavatar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31147) because it doesn't have any tangible value. The only time a friend and I ever considered it was Doom on XBLA because I'd finished everything else and I thought it would be nice to see the 12/12 200/200, but ultimately it didn't happen because we have better things to do than frag each other 100 times in a 12 year old game.

As far as multiplayer achievements go, I'd prefer to see the GoW ones be available in non-ranked matches. I didn't bother getting "Always Remember Your First" until a couple weeks ago, and when I did there were 4 guys with names like xXx Ph4t B1unt xXx telling everyone to move to Locust (after the game I also saw that all 4 of them had Seriously...). Despite countless hours playing GoW with friends in private matches, that's the only multiplayer achievement I currently have unlocked. GRAW2 seems to have a much more sensible solution, where the achievements for "kill XXX players" require at least 5 gamertags in the room. If you can assemble that many people just for some useless geek points, more power to you.