Is gears of war a better game than twilight princess?

The answer is yes.

as you can see from my avatar im a huge zelda fan, but gear of war blows tp away and won goty with good reason.

tp is a good game that i believe deserved a 9.0 because its a very polished game aned an extremely enjoyable experience. however while playing the game there are tons of disappointments that you have to overcome to find the good game underneath.

you have to overcome familiarity, you have to overcome the gamecube graphics (not a huge deal but something you dont have to  complain about in gears, i mean, at least push the wiis capabilities), combat is easy and bosses are cool but not hard at all, osunds on the speaker are either hit or miss, and the list goes on and on...

 my complains about gears........................................................................... maybe that the campaign is somewhat short...but you get multipplaher, coop, 4 difficulties, etc.

to sum up, zelda tp is full of dissapointments which can be explained( but these explanations are just excuses, its a port etc)

gears has nothing to make up for... just sit down, play and enjoy the game... 

Impossible to tell. One is an action/adventure. The other is an over-the-shoulder shooter. There can be no comparison.foxhound_fox

just what i was about to say

I've never played GOW, so i don't know.

And please stop acting like you speak for the rest of the world here :roll: 

Or you could just ask this question...

What's better soap or Chicken Chow Mein. They have as much in common as those two games.

You can't compare a action adventure to a shooter.

The answer is yes.

as you can see from my avatar im a huge zelda fan, but gear of war blows tp away and won goty with good reason.

tp is a good game that i believe deserved a 9.0 because its a very polished game aned an extremely enjoyable experience. however while playing the game there are tons of disappointments that you have to overcome to find the good game underneath.

you have to overcome familiarity, you have to overcome the gamecube graphics (not a huge deal but something you dont have to  complain about in gears, i mean, at least push the wiis capabilities), combat is easy and bosses are cool but not hard at all, osunds on the speaker are either hit or miss, and the list goes on and on...

 my complains about gears........................................................................... maybe that the campaign is somewhat short...but you get multipplaher, coop, 4 difficulties, etc.

 

to sum up, zelda tp is full of dissapointments which can be explained( but these explanations are just excuses, its a port etc)

gears has nothing to make up for... just sit down, play and enjoy the game... 

amtentori

Wait, GeoW won GOTY from gamespot, but TP won GOTY from other major gaming sites/magazines.  TP got GOTY from gamespy, 1up, EGM, and X-play.  TP got GOTY for a reason too.  Both great games, both have "they say" 9.5 Stop trying to pick a fight.

You can't compare a action adventure to a shooter.

Kev_Unreal

In mechanics, NO, but in overall entertainment and technical polish as well as pacing and attention to gameplay.  Yes.

Zelda: TP is the worst 3D Zelda game I played, that is all....SpaceDragonMan

Word as Wintry Put it

[QUOTE="ColonialMustard"]Based upon what? In my experience with Zelda games the stories have always been very basic. It was always the gameplay that pushed the player to the end of the game. So I'm curious, what zelda game has got your standards up so high?? I'm guessing Ocarina, which I'll agree has a better story, but it still isn't that great compared to some of the Final Fantasy's and Metal Gear Solid's. Then again it's all a matter of opinion, isn't it? Wintry_Flutist

Exactly, Zelda usually is about the gameplay. But Nintendo decided to put a story, to make a more complex fighting system (hidden skills), to have a parallel world mechanic, the wolf mechanic, etc... They wanted to have everything. Obviously they'd never exceed in all aspects, yet it was pretty clear they wanted to have everything, which is just impossible. If they had focused in one aspect (what happened to the whole animal interaction they were bragging about when 'Zelda 2005' was announced? It's barely there) and almost inevitably exceeded, which is what Nintendo usually does, there wouldn't have been an OK story, an OK fighting, a mediocre parallel world... There's even some gimmickish gameplay in the main quest (Goron sumo, saving the carriage, flying with the beast) in a very Metal Gear like fashion. In the end TP tends too much to a Jack-of-all-trades-master-of-none.

Impossible to tell. One is an action/adventure. The other is an over-the-shoulder shooter. There can be no comparison.foxhound_fox

Uncomparable. :|

Uncomparable. :|

Impex

Read my first post.

I enjoyed TP a lot, even compared to OoT. OoT was great, but I was in the mood for another great "realistic" Zelda. (WW was fun, but not "realistic" by any stretch of the imagination).

Gears of War was very fun, but a lot of the intensity was from all of the gore and blood. Without that, I might not have had a lasting impression.

[QUOTE="Impex"]

Uncomparable. :|

callmewaffle

Read my first post.

I have both games and Gears is played more than TP

Love both games

dont know if I would call Gears the better game

but I do play it alot more

[QUOTE="callmewaffle"][QUOTE="Impex"]

Uncomparable. :|

Dahaka-UK

Read my first post.

Personal bias aside, its possible to compare the two based on the categories I've presented.  Also, you may want to play a game before you comment on its value.

My personal opinion is that though the games are comparable right now, 20 years from now people will not still be playing Gears but there will be people playing Twilight Princess. Twilight Princess is just a charming, epic adventure that you'll want to relive over and over again, Gears however is a short campaign which I've heard some complaints about and a multi-player that will be abandoned once Halo 3 comes out. It isn't just a shooter thing, Doom, System Shock, and Half-Life 2 will be played 20 years after launch. They just have that magical charm to them. Gears appeal comes mainly from the graphics which in 10 years will not be considered anything special.Zerostatic0

QFT. I STILL play System Shock 2....highly underrated.

[QUOTE="Zerostatic0"]My personal opinion is that though the games are comparable right now, 20 years from now people will not still be playing Gears but there will be people playing Twilight Princess. Twilight Princess is just a charming, epic adventure that you'll want to relive over and over again, Gears however is a short campaign which I've heard some complaints about and a multi-player that will be abandoned once Halo 3 comes out. It isn't just a shooter thing, Doom, System Shock, and Half-Life 2 will be played 20 years after launch. They just have that magical charm to them. Gears appeal comes mainly from the graphics which in 10 years will not be considered anything special.Maelkav

QFT. I STILL play System Shock 2....highly underrated.

Twilight Princess is just a charming, epic adventure that you'll want to relive over and over againZerostatic0

[QUOTE="Zerostatic0"]Twilight Princess is just a charming, epic adventure that you'll want to relive over and over againproject343

Agreed, but in ten years, I actually see more people playing Wind Waker than TP.  WW's graphics can't be judged by the standards that TP is, and as a result, the superior of the two will get its day in the sun.

Impossible to tell. One is an action/adventure. The other is an over-the-shoulder shooter. There can be no comparison.foxhound_fox

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]Impossible to tell. One is an action/adventure. The other is an over-the-shoulder shooter. There can be no comparison.footballstar07

Off topic, but do people even read the threads they post in?

[QUOTE="Zerostatic0"]Twilight Princess is just a charming, epic adventure that you'll want to relive over and over againproject343

Lots of Zelda fans would disagree with you, and lots of Zelda fans would agree with you. There really isn't a good comparison on the other systems (other than Final Fantasy) that you can hold up to Zelda. Zelda has a very long-running track record. Some  Zelda die-hards will say they loved TP; others will say they hated it. Zelda has a lot more to live up to than other games. Think of Halo 2. It's story sucked, let's just be honest with ourselves. Will Halo 3's story be good? Who knows?

Zelda manufacturers have had a huge legacy to live up to for the past 20 years.

The same thing with FF. Some swear by FF7, some loved FF8, some loved FFX. All of those will last for years to come, however, just like TP.

[QUOTE="footballstar07"][QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]Impossible to tell. One is an action/adventure. The other is an over-the-shoulder shooter. There can be no comparison.callmewaffle

Off topic, but do people even read the threads they post in?

[QUOTE="callmewaffle"]

[QUOTE="footballstar07"][QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]Impossible to tell. One is an action/adventure. The other is an over-the-shoulder shooter. There can be no comparison.footballstar07

Off topic, but do people even read the threads they post in?

Wow, you just answered my question, Because I said on the first page:

[QUOTE="Kev_Unreal"]

You can't compare a action adventure to a shooter.

callmewaffle

In mechanics, NO, but in overall entertainment and technical polish as well as pacing and attention to gameplay.  Yes.

Which I clearly said is the way to compare two unlike games.

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]Impossible to tell. One is an action/adventure. The other is an over-the-shoulder shooter. There can be no comparison.DDX2

just what i was about to say

Same here. I mean why not compare Forza Motorsport with Final Fantasy while we're at it. About the only way in which GeoW beats Twilight Princess is in the graphics department. Both I'm sure are fun to play.

[QUOTE="Zerostatic0"]Twilight Princess is just a charming, epic adventure that you'll want to relive over and over againproject343

[QUOTE="footballstar07"][QUOTE="callmewaffle"]

[QUOTE="footballstar07"][QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]Impossible to tell. One is an action/adventure. The other is an over-the-shoulder shooter. There can be no comparison.callmewaffle

Off topic, but do people even read the threads they post in?

Wow, you just answered my question, Because I said on the first page:

[QUOTE="Kev_Unreal"]

You can't compare a action adventure to a shooter.

callmewaffle

In mechanics, NO, but in overall entertainment and technical polish as well as pacing and attention to gameplay.  Yes.

Which I clearly said is the way to compare two unlike games.

The "familiarity" argument is pointless, really.  Has there never been another third person shooter made in such a manner?  The fact that it didn't have the name "Gears" doesn't make Gears original. 

Now, which was the better game?  In my opinion, I believe TP's design and controls were more polished and appropriate.  Gears' graphics were more impressive (even in respect to which system it was on.  Gears was better than anything before it.  TP is not the best GC has to offer).  But, overall, Zelda is exactly what everyone knew it was going to be, and that is GREAT.

Some people might like Gears better, and that's fine with them.  Preference is different than what game is actually better, though.  It's tough to distinguish between two games of this caliber, but if you're going to try, you have to come up with something better than, "It's just like all the other Zeldas" to bring Zelda down.