Honestly. Games that came out after late 2001 and have less than 5 weapons have no business getting sequels. That said, I feel like we’re ignoring some more important criteria here. Like the amount of main characters named John. Gears of War didn’t have any! Can you believe that??
Comment on One hour into Gears 5 and I feel its a lot better than 4
Linktank@lemmy.today 4 months ago
Shocked this game had any sequels at all. Came out sometime after the original halo and it had like 4 weapons. Did they add more?
scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 4 months ago
Some would say weapons aren’t the only thing that makes a game good
rafoix@lemmy.zip 4 months ago
Super Mario Bros - 1 out of 10 “not enough weapons”
scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 4 months ago
Mass Effect 1? Trash, not enough weapons
rafoix@lemmy.zip 4 months ago
“Not enough effects. False advertising”
B0NK3RS@lemmy.world 4 months ago
I’m not sure what Halo has to do with it? Also from what I remember Gears was a huge franchise back in the peak Xbox 360 days so of course it got sequels
VerseAndVermin@lemmy.world 4 months ago
I think you just noted why they compared them. Both were huge.
Kinda sad to see the state of them now.
NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Yes, there are some pretty fun weapons in the Gears sequels. I like the torque bow.
acosmichippo@lemmy.world 4 months ago
wouldn’t it be crazy if they could, i dunno, add weapons in sequels?
Linktank@lemmy.today 4 months ago
That WOULD be crazy! It might even prompt some people to ask if it had been done! Crazy!