whats the deal with microsoft not releasing gears of war 2 and 3 for pc?

i know for a fact that every pc gamer i know has played gears of war 1 and its by far one of the best 3rd person shooter out there and (correct me if am wrong) probably the pioneer in the cover system/tactics !!! and man it looks gorgeous in high settings!!!! so whats the deal with microsoft ignoring pc for the 2nd and 3rd games???? :cry:bloody hell !!!! a friend of mine says that gears 1 was released for pc as marketing gimmick to show pc users how great the game is and force them to buy the xbox for the 2nd and 3rd titles by not releasing it for the pc gggrrrrrrrhhhh :evil: any chance the 2nd and 3rd games might come as a bundle for the pc like the orange box ? who cares about fable 3 microsoft bring gears 2 & 3 and halo 3

Its why i bought the xbox as my console..Having both has its advantages..If the ps3 drops i may pick that up..Ive got the new slim its not a bad system..Im just a heavy gamer who likes the pc an xbox..Just to play games like gears if it doesnt come to my pc..

Give people a reason to buy a 360 over a PS3.

The official story is piracy, the truth is that they first did not sell well on pc and why would it? Windows live was not free back then and MS late pc ports are a joke. It is clear MS does not care about pc but their precious xbox.dakan45

they release a mediocre game like bulletstorm for which no one cares :? while gears eludes us fans!!!! sob sob :cry:

poovannaorcbane

bullet storm was goodl3ol3

[QUOTE="poovannaorcbane"] they release a mediocre game like bulletstorm for which no one cares :? while gears eludes us fans!!!! sob sob :cry:

dakan45

Bulletstorm good Gears of War also good.

Gears of war for pc needs fixing ? yes it needs to be patched properly, screen tears, slowdown depending on rig may be irritating. never the less good game.

So I guess I agree with half of each statements.

Also agree its about the 360 why its not on PC, console needed big title exclusives.

I thought GoW was an average 3rd person shooter (smooth gameplay, but I got bored with it quick). I don't really care to see 2 or 3. My gaming time is limited, and there are far better options on the PC in my opinion.

As for why, it's fairly obvious, xbox 360 exclusivity.

[QUOTE="poovannaorcbane"] they release a mediocre game like bulletstorm for which no one cares :? while gears eludes us fans!!!! sob sob :cry:

dakan45

MS are strange when it comes to PC release dates, Fable 3 is not due for release until the end of the year, by this time no one will care at all.JTWibble

[QUOTE="poovannaorcbane"] they release a mediocre game like bulletstorm for which no one cares :? while gears eludes us fans!!!! sob sob :cry:

dakan45

another ms hater because gears is exclusive
both are awesomeJohn_Read

[QUOTE="dakan45"]:evil:bulletstorm was fun and original, gears of war is mediocre and generic.Elann2008

[QUOTE="John_Read"]

Lol, i trully feel sorry for people who think like that. Gears story is crap, bulletstorm actually has one with good moments and characters. I wont even go on the terrible weapons, chansaw under a rifle? Seriously what the hell was he drunk? Shotgun is useless in SP. The sniper has only one shot and one headshot on the boomer is not enough, Same goes for the grenade launcher. I wont even go to the terrible crossbow and the grenades, seriously who made those grenades? Finally the campaign is utterly unepic and borring and the "take cover" gameplay is the WORST i have ever seen and gears is famous for that garbage.

Also go ahead and label me as a MS hater because i also think halo and fable are mediocre as well as Alan wake, and trust me it has nothing to do with exclusivity but the games themselfs. Alan wake for example is pretty borring with simplistic gameplay and small linear maps. FAR from what it was supossed to be when it was on pc.

[QUOTE="Elann2008"][QUOTE="dakan45"]:evil:bulletstorm was fun and original, gears of war is mediocre and generic.dakan45

This argument agian. How the heck would Alan Wake's story have worked if it was a big open environment? Your being chased by the fbi and you have to find your wife. It's not all, lets drive around and go fishing and talk to the towsfolk (who by the way tuned into the taken).

And really? Criticizing gears of wars weapons? It's a damn sci-fi video game dude, chill out.

"Take-cover" gameplay? Which first off gears didn't invent. If you started gaming before this gen you would probably know that it was killswitch that started that off. And I love how you say gears invented it and then say that it is generic. WHAT? How does that work?

All in all, you just seem to hate these games just for the sake of hating.

[QUOTE="JTWibble"]MS are strange when it comes to PC release dates, Fable 3 is not due for release until the end of the year, by this time no one will care at all.DanielDust

those are your counter arguments^ Really? I wont argue with you then. Feel free to assume more stuff about me. Because i never said gears of war "invented" cover system and infact i have praised killswitch for it about a thousand times till now. Now killswitch is 10 times better than gears on everything, combat,story,everything apart from graphics. Flashbang grenades. So feel free to assume more stuff about me and IGNORE everything i have said in the past. Very nice. Last, gear IS generic, its just a crappy cover system and thats the whole game. Bulletstorm is clearly not generic and story could work fine on alan wake on open world, but thinking about it, the story in that game becomes crap after a while soo..... By all means choose to argue about that aswell, about alan wake that was pulled off pc and changed to suit consoles and FLOPPED. Choose to argue about that. I know i wont because i am only dignifying that game. Keep believing that i hate just for the hate of hating, but some of us dont have to like every mediocre crap it pops up on the x360, some of us got standards and good tastes....and halo with guns from mattel and aliens from disney and gears of war with bulky guys with chanisaws under their guns have enough to be hated the way they are, let alone their mediocre gameplay.dakan45

ha ha ha ha ha ha h aha ha lol guys chill outtt !!!!!! my friends think i am a crazy gaming junkie/addict but if i show them these comments their opinion about me will definitly change for the better lmao :P- chill guys no need to get so serious !!!!!

poovannaorcbane

[QUOTE="poovannaorcbane"] they release a mediocre game like bulletstorm for which no one cares :? while gears eludes us fans!!!! sob sob :cry:

dakan45

Indeed, I had way more fun with Bulletstorm than with Gears Of War. I don't understand all the hype about it.

[QUOTE="John_Read"]

Lol, i trully feel sorry for people who think like that. Gears story is crap, bulletstorm actually has one with good moments and characters. I wont even go on the terrible weapons, chansaw under a rifle? Seriously what the hell was he drunk? Shotgun is useless in SP. The sniper has only one shot and one headshot on the boomer is not enough, Same goes for the grenade launcher. I wont even go to the terrible crossbow and the grenades, seriously who made those grenades? Finally the campaign is utterly unepic and borring and the "take cover" gameplay is the WORST i have ever seen and gears is famous for that garbage.

Also go ahead and label me as a MS hater because i also think halo and fable are mediocre as well as Alan wake, and trust me it has nothing to do with exclusivity but the games themselfs. Alan wake for example is pretty borring with simplistic gameplay and small linear maps. FAR from what it was supossed to be when it was on pc.

[QUOTE="Elann2008"][QUOTE="dakan45"]:evil:bulletstorm was fun and original, gears of war is mediocre and generic.dakan45

why playing gears for story ?

it's like playing ID games for story :lol:

what's point of bringing those games ?

heavy rain was garbage even PC game gray matter,sherlock are miles better and it there is nothing to investigate and lame things do this and that

so you like B grade movie like MGS:P

those are your counter arguments^ Really? I wont argue with you then. Feel free to assume more stuff about me. Because i never said gears of war "invented" cover system and infact i have praised killswitch for it about a thousand times till now. Now killswitch is 10 times better than gears on everything, combat,story,everything apart from graphics. Flashbang grenades. So feel free to assume more stuff about me and IGNORE everything i have said in the past. Very nice. Last, gear IS generic, its just a crappy cover system and thats the whole game. Bulletstorm is clearly not generic and story could work fine on alan wake on open world, but thinking about it, the story in that game becomes crap after a while soo..... By all means choose to argue about that aswell, about alan wake that was pulled off pc and changed to suit consoles and FLOPPED. Choose to argue about that. I know i wont because i am only dignifying that game. Keep believing that i hate just for the hate of hating, but some of us dont have to like every mediocre crap it pops up on the x360, some of us got standards and good tastes....and halo with guns from mattel and aliens from disney and gears of war with bulky guys with chanisaws under their guns have enough to be hated the way they are, let alone their mediocre gameplay.dakan45

Why are you taking this all so seriously? Kust because you don't like a game it doesn't make it bad.

I don't have taste? Why do people keep telling me this? So what, I like CoD and these so called "bad" games but I also like games like Demon's souls and the like of more "deeper" games (just a word to make people feel better about themselves, they're all "video games" at the end of the day people). So I guess in you books people can't enjoy games without being labled by you.

Lol, i trully feel sorry for people who think like that. Gears story is crap, bulletstorm actually has one with good moments and characters. I wont even go on the terrible weapons, chansaw under a rifle? Seriously what the hell was he drunk? Shotgun is useless in SP. The sniper has only one shot and one headshot on the boomer is not enough, Same goes for the grenade launcher. I wont even go to the terrible crossbow and the grenades, seriously who made those grenades? Finally the campaign is utterly unepic and borring and the "take cover" gameplay is the WORST i have ever seen and gears is famous for that garbage.

Also go ahead and label me as a MS hater because i also think halo and fable are mediocre as well as Alan wake, and trust me it has nothing to do with exclusivity but the games themselfs. Alan wake for example is pretty borring with simplistic gameplay and small linear maps. FAR from what it was supossed to be when it was on pc.

[QUOTE="Elann2008"][QUOTE="dakan45"]:evil:bulletstorm was fun and original, gears of war is mediocre and generic.dakan45

The first game did not sell well on PC and MS wanted to keep it an Xbox exclusive.Secret-Face

Mainly due to the xbox live fee that the pc gamers had to play to play this game online when it first came out... Now Windows live is free.

This is Microsoft we are talking about here. They behave more like they want to kill PC gaming than aid it, they aren't going to release big hit 360 franchises on another platform.

Why do people keep telling me this?Hatiko

Perhaps there is a reason and its not my fault that i go nuts when someone says that a generic mediocre shooter is better than something unique with obvious better design.

You didn't even justify YOUR answer. Unless giving opinions automatically means justification? :roll: Bulletstorm might be unique but it totally copied the Gears of War look. Yeah I know it's made by People Can Fly, a division of Epic Games but everything from the armor to the characters all looked like they were ripped straight out of Gears of War. But yes, Bulletstorms gameplay was unique, although I couldn't help but to feel I was playing Gears of War in first-person.. Explain to me how Gears of War series isn't unique? Which games came before it that looks the way it does? And plays the way it does? I think it was the first game to really nail the cover-based system and refined it really well. And as far as it being generic, I haven't seen a game that looked like Gears of War before.. and I've been gaming since the NES days. The story isn't perfect but it does create its own universe. And you cannot argue that Bullestorm's story was any better... especially with it's one-liners that are far and away WORSE than Gears of War's. Now justify THAT. :roll:Elann2008

Are you kidding me? I explained why, dont ignore that. Also i was not informed that big bulky guys with sci fi armors and weird guns belong to gears of wars

So ALL your points are invalid :D Unreal tournament looked like gears of war, ut3 is the proof, its just the graphic limitations in the game levels that did not gave you the same perspective. The gameplay of gears is generic, just a cover based shooter and a BAD one. KIllswtich nailed the cover system along with blind fire and grenade throwing, imo 10 times better than gears. So what is left for gears? graphics Epic's st-yle with a linear generic take cover system and a BAD one mind you with a terrible story.

WAIT, how is bulletstorm story not any better? Are you kidding me? First of it starts and you know what the hell its going on, you are not totally lost. Second it has much better characters and dialogues, atleast bulletstorm is funny. While gears dialogues are forrgetable and it is all about going somewhere undeground to do something that will somehow will change the tides of war. Also Marcus father and his imprisonment have "something" to do with all that but you never figure out why....and dont try to tell me that i did not understand the story because the truth is, there wasnt any to begin with.

Finally i fail to see "how" you thought bulletstorm "played" like gears of war in first person, because gears is all about blind firing or die and bulletstorm its about skill shots and forget all about cover. Also i hate everything that feels like gear of war and one of the reasons i will never bother again with epic games. But the sole reason i gone for bulletstom is because to me, it feels nothing like it.

So i think my point is proven, thank you very much and goodbye.

[QUOTE="Hatiko"]Why do people keep telling me this?dakan45

Perhaps there is a reason and its not my fault that i go nuts when someone says that a generic mediocre shooter is better than something unique with obvious better design.

"Generic mediocre shooter" = your opinion.

And there is no reason. Taste is someones opinion. It's like saying that someone who like neil diamond has bad taste. I liked bulletstorm and gears of war. So what I still have bad taste? Thank you for being the person that defines what is good and bad. :roll:

Lets be honest here. MS sort of needs Gears 3 for their exclusive lineup. Hoefuly for their fans, they have something big in store for E3.

"Generic mediocre shooter" = your opinion. And there is no reason. Taste is someones opinion. Hatiko

In other words you dont agree with the usual criteria about being a generic mediocre shooter without being great or anything apart from graphics and x360 controller use. Because lets face it. Thats why gears became popular and high rated. For controlling and looking well back in 2006 on xbox. Everything else was poor. When it came of pc it was out of place and out of time. It had nothing that pc did not already have and it was pretty bad both campaign and story wise along with crap guns. In the end the only thing remained was the multiplayer which no one played. The sequel improved on most of those things such as story, weapons, cover system and gunplay but messed up the mp.

I fail to see what was above average in gears of war with normal criteria that define what is good and what is bad. At one hand people bash stories and generic gameplay and praise gears of war who is terrible on those things. Pretty much proves whats wrong with ratings, games like this and halo get them for not doing much. Now that bulletstorm tried to do something diffirent and have higher quality resources in the game, people say its mediocre because its not another generic shooter with the mediocre gameplay gears had. I fail to see the logic here.

[QUOTE="Hatiko"]"Generic mediocre shooter" = your opinion. And there is no reason. Taste is someones opinion. dakan45

In other words you dont agree with the usual criteria about being a generic mediocre shooter without being great or anything apart from graphics and x360 controller use. Because lets face it. Thats why gears became popular and high rated. For controlling and looking well back in 2006 on xbox. Everything else was poor. When it came of pc it was out of place and out of time. It had nothing that pc did not already have and it was pretty bad both campaign and story wise along with crap guns. In the end the only thing remained was the multiplayer which no one played. The sequel improved on most of those things such as story, weapons, cover system and gunplay but messed up the mp.

I fail to see what was above average in gears of war with normal criteria that define what is good and what is bad. At one hand people bash stories and generic gameplay and praise gears of war who is terrible on those things. Pretty much proves whats wrong with ratings, games like this and halo get them for not doing much. Now that bulletstorm tried to do something diffirent and have higher quality resources in the game, people say its mediocre because its not another generic shooter with the mediocre gameplay gears had. I fail to see the logic here.

The second one was a major letdown, didn't have near the atmosphere or immersion qualities that the first gears had... Mechanicly improved or not.. Gears 2 was more of a letdown for me than the first.

I fail to see the atmosphere and the immersion in the first. Especially without a good story, you are pretty much lost in terms of atmosphere. The second game fixed that. Also i couldnt be immersed with the terrible cover system, stand upt to aim and shoot, get blasted to red screen and back, take cover to heal, try again. That was the gunplay in the game. Atleast in the second the ai does not auto aim on you every time you stand up, more immersive. Also better maps.dakan45

Taste I guess, the second game had no atmosphere couldn't even finish it, it was very boring. Then again these are our tastes and opinions, to try and argue them as facts is a waste of time.

Campaign was more epic and engaging but it did not have that "alone" factor the first game had. Mostly because you were in combat more often.dakan45

It was just boring to me...

[QUOTE="dakan45"]Campaign was more epic and engaging but it did not have that "alone" factor the first game had. Mostly because you were in combat more often.Lach0121

It was just boring to me...

See, two different tastes, two different opinions.

[QUOTE="Lach0121"]

[QUOTE="dakan45"]Campaign was more epic and engaging but it did not have that "alone" factor the first game had. Mostly because you were in combat more often.Hatiko

It was just boring to me...

See, two different tastes, two different opinions.

[QUOTE="Hatiko"]

[QUOTE="Lach0121"]

It was just boring to me...

dakan45

See, two different tastes, two different opinions.

The fact that you said you liked it and he said it bored him? Those my friends are opinions, and I was just stating that. You sir, just made no sense at all.

[QUOTE="dakan45"][QUOTE="Hatiko"]

See, two different tastes, two different opinions.

Hatiko

The fact that you said you liked it and he said it bored him? Those my friends are opinions, and I was just stating that. You sir, just made no sense at all.