Ironcreed, that reason why it is vastly underrated and underappreciated is because the game sucks man. I bought it, played it, traded it. There is no way you can compare Gears Of War to Quake 4. The game wasn't even fun to play. There's not a whole lot to say about it. In my opinion Doom 3 was better. Q4 did not look like a 360 game nor did it play and feel like one, playstation 2 at best. Graphics were weak and there was about 12 weapons you can carry all at once, c'mon. Gears Of War got raved reviews cuz it is a badass game. Everyone who owns a 360 played GOW, and I'll bet you out of 10 people who played it, 10 liked it. I bet hardly anybody has played Q4, I wished I hadn't spent $60 on a weak game like that. It's probably the worst 360 game I played, that and Battlefield 2, absolutley horrible.mr_tobizzle
Well, that is your opinion, my friend and I respect that because you just like what you like, right? I never said that I did not like Gears of War, I just think that it is highly overated because the only real stand-out things that it has going for it is it's graphics and online play. At least Quake 4 was more than 6-7 hours long on casual/normal. As far as the "12 weapons" that you carry around at once, hell....to me that is a plus. More variety of ass kickery in the arsenal, man. How is that a bad thing?
I guess some people just get too confused by all of the weapons, but I think it just makes your character more of a bad ass, and I for one considered it a plus. Anyway, sorry you hated it, but your sour opinion of Quake 4 does not make it FACT that "it's weak". In that regard, neither does my opinion make it a fact that it is better than Gears of War as far as single player campaign goes. It is just my opinion, that's all, and which I am entitled to.... so sorry if it bothers you, lol.
Log in to comment