Is it just me or did those animations look smoother? Not to mention the new content. I'm buying this. And I'm using it with my 360 gamepad :D.

No surprises here.. except that it's Vista only. I'll wait for the XP patch.

Live anywhere? Sorta surprised w/ the Vista thing. Didn't think Epic would be jumping on that bandwagon so soon.

Guaranteed a patch will come out that makes it work on XP -- just like Halo 2 and Shadowrun.

Well this is the weird ladder like situation with the 360. MS wants that to sell, so they're pouring resources into making it look as good as possible for as long as possible, then they step IN THE FACE of 360 consumers to propel Windows forward, because at the end of the day that is vastly more important for them.

I think this kinda practice will become more and more common, and with Gears it was super obvious. Everything in that game catered to a mouse/keyboard setup from the very beginning with no sign of analogue input anywhere and actions pretty much focused on a single button.

A = space
RT = right mouse button
LT = left mouse button
RB = r
left analogue = w a s d

At least it'll play just as well.

Personally, in regards to Microsoft's first party games - shooters in particular - I'm gonna freeze my heart Han Solo Star Wars style and hope they don't invent an elaborate scheme of breaking it anyhow.

Action focused on a single button is a distinctive console trait, not a PC trait Simon!

Hopefully for 360 owners they either get free DLC for the new content or GOW2 includes it as an extra pack in. Of course 360 owners got the game a year ahead -- and didn't have to buy Vista. And PC owners probably need some updated hardware and will have to shell out $50 for Live. Don't look for this to be a huge seller by any means! Old game, limited install base.

If anything this is a slap in PC gamer faces. I am not quite sure why console gamers are upset: Does this detract from the value of Gears in 2006? Nope.

@ Grift: On Live, I am sure Epic had little choice with MS being the publisher.Because they wanted to ship in 2006 ;)You would buy Vista, updated hardware, and shell out another $60 for a couple new levels 0_oGOW is UE3 which makes porting easier. I doubt we will see Halo 3 in 12 months, let alone 2! And seeing as Bungie is probably doing a lot of "close to the metal" stuff and utilizing a tricore PPC with VMX units I doubt we will see a quick port.

I'm not talking about strategy games here though. Not about Mechwarrior or RPGs with tons of clicking everywhere and binding macros.

The reason the core gameplay of first person shooters hasn't branched out more is because the PC setup of controlling your character with wasd locks down your hand to a certain, *digital*, area for actions woven into the game. A game like Gears if developed with traditional console means, spacing out actions for diving, taking cover, and sprinting all over the gamepad would never have worked on the PC properly, and the fact that despite the analogue nature of console pads, Marcus either walks slowly or shifts to running - both at a set pace - pretty much gave it away long in advance.

This isn't about an inventory interface or having loads of buttons all over for turning on flashlights or toggling other things out of the heat of battle. I actually applaud the fact that Epic have created a game that'll show that even PC shooters can break away from the mold in terms of that core action mechanic and not just rely on environmental differences and whether you can blow up this or that.

Analog movement is so damn over rated.. WASD FTW. BUT this game is perfectly suited to a gamepad -- if there's any shooter I'd hook use a joypad for on the PC (which would make me feel dirty) it's this.The game is shipping at least a year later. Didn't the PS2 version of RE4 have editional content, etc? I don't see what the big deal is here..Ah, good point.

You're right. Things went horribly wrong back in 1996, we should send out a memo and get everyone to start using the d-pad for games again.

Who said anything about a d-pad? If you think WASD translates to d-pad controls, you need to play more PC games. Perhaps in the most basic fashion, but thankfully, PC games aren't stuck in the mid-90's either.

Input wise it totally translates. They're both digital, as in not "over rated analog controls".

I also know that the difference is as significant as button input on an arcade stick. The fact that you have your fingers hovering over the keys means it's more precise than a d-pad would be.

However, discrediting analogue movement is a pretty major statement, and one I disagree with on the most fundamental level. It has an impact on animation in games, precision in games, and gives birth to entire genre defining mechanics. MGS and Splinter Cell both illustrate the difference their roots in input mehods made.

So, by this reasoning...

Thumbstick = Flightstick

Just because WASD is digital doesn't mean it is the same as a Dpad. First off with WASD you have immediate access 15-20 keys and quick access to a host of other (e.g. 1-9). Further, WASD is layed out for multiple contacts simutaneously.

Of course I do NOT want WASD for a racing game... but for a shooter? Sure. Absolutely. Typically you have a key to function for walk and as well as super sprint, so you have 3 speeds of movement. Since all fine motor skills are done with the mouse it works well... because lets be real: Do you aim a gun by shuffling your feet? NO! That is completely unnatural!

Feet = Gross, coarse movements
Hands = Fine grained movements

Hence digitial movement is excellent for shooters, especially when you start inputting design constraints. e.g. Most games give a sense of weight as well as accelleration. So even a normal run speed has a balance of acceleration and inertia.

As for shooters and gamepads... I wasn't talking about RPGs or Mechwarrior.

Again, I was talking about FPS/Shooters (which essentially, GEARS is a dumbed down FPS in 3rd person in terms of mechanics).

Take a game like Battlefield 2 (or any other progressive FPS). The lack of percision analog aiming is gonna kill you... but it goes deeper. You need to be able to switch between a host of weapons and secondary functions -- quickly. You have to be able to chat in your squad as well directly to the commander. You have your quick 'Q' radio context system. And we haven't even engaged your ability to crouch, jump, go prone, sprint, or walk or the need to pull up your larger map and dynamically zoom in and out the small map radar. Toss in the ability to hop into vehicles and other contextual tasks and ...

You want to map this to 1 trigger, 1 bumper and 1 Dpad?

The left hand is MUCH better served with WASD than it is with a Controler+Dpad for a complex shooter.

Hence the point: Gears is the ultimate gamepad game.

It requires very few buttons -- a strength of WASD and a weakness of gamepads -- and with the context single button cover system you have a "one button does everything" approach -- and importantly, you limit the weakness of a thumb manipulated analog stick and improve accuracy.

GOW is a great example of adapting a shooter to a gamepad.

Battlefield, and company, are what they are because WASD can be very simple -- and work with GOW perfectly -- or can be very complex offering DOZENS of inputs on a single hand instead of 6 (gamepad).

I see no distinction between Halo on Xbox and Gears on the 360. The "hold for precision aim" mechanic instead of chucking grenades on the left trigger doesn't change anything. Gears is very much - like you yourself campaigned for in a thread a while ago - a first person shooter in another perspective.

It never took advantage of the fact that moving across the plethora of buttons on a gamepad, loads of which have analogue input and thus can enable way more subtle controls than the bold strokes of a digital setup, is completely natural. Instead it focused all its attention on as small a space on there as possible - which indeed lead to a very unique playing, brilliant shooter - and that means it'll translate PERFECTLY to PC.

Unlike for instance Splinter Cell. Or Ghost Recon/Rainbow Six Vegas, both of which employ analogue movement in everything they do, like peeking over crates seamlessly by pressing little or a lot on the triggers.

I think you're understanding me a bit backwards here. I'm not saying consoles are better for multiple buttons, but if you had to do basic maneuvers like dives or taking cover (which is the norm these days when you move into third person perspectives) on buttons on the keyboard that sit away from the normal movement buttons it'd feel awkward. There's a reason Max Payne can't walk nor crouch.

Ask Starbreeze why Riddick turned out like it did too.

EDIT: I should also point out that I did recognize the difference between a d-pad and wasd in my last post. I used arcade sticks as an example. Four buttons on an arcade stick are way more precise than the way you generally hold a gamepad, because your fingers rest on all four simultaniously.

How do you think PC gamers feel?

Because they neutered it for the mainstream and for consoles? Irrational would be a good one to ask how you screw a PC game up by trying to accomodate console limitations. (Acert93 adds fuel to PC gamer hate with such reminders)

Grift and I play enough PC games, specifically shooters, to be safe in this: PC exclusive shooters are on average far more complex in terms of button usage than multi-platform and ports.

There is a reason we got BF2 and you got BF2:MC. There is a reason a game like BF2 has your left hand doing dozens of tasks and you cannot do such on a console and have yet to see a game like it on the consoles.

And WASD isn't as limited as a Dpad in number of inputs for core keys (fingers on or easily slipped onto from a medial position), immediate access (no more difficult than moving from up to down on a dpad), and quick access (keys that can be reached quickly and easily).

Core Keys (9 keys): W, A, S, D, Q, E, Spacebar, Shift, Control

Immediate Access Keys (9 keys): Caps, R, F, C, X, 1, 2, 3, 4

Quick Access Keys (7 keys): T, G, V, Alt, Tab, ~, 5

While never moving your middle finger from the central WASD axis you have access to 25 distinct keys of acces.

9 of which your fingers essentially rest on/between and another 9 that are as easy to access as slipping your thumb from "up" on a dpad to "down" on the dpad (e.g. D-to-F, Shift-to-Caps, etc).

At worse, at worse, you are stuck in the same boat as a gamepad for instant "finger on" access:

Gamepad w/ 6 inputs w/ left hand: UP/DOWN/LEFT/RIGHT + TRIGGER + BUMPER

WASD w/ 6 inputs w/ left hand: WASD + Shift + Spacebar

The difference being, of course, with a dpad you will ALWAYS only have 6 buttons.

With a KB you can keep your fingers hovering over the WASD access, even using them, and access up to 25 keys.

25 > 6.

Hence why we get BF2 and you guys get BF2:MC. We get fancy RTS and you get simplied RTS.

Gamepads are better for a lot of games -- sports, racing, etc -- but for shooters, most shooters work better with a WASD because it gives more access to more keys quickly. Higher learning curve of course.

And that is the beauty of GOW: Complex user output with minimal user input. So while a typical PC game says, "Ok champ, if you want to run, duck, crawl, etc you push the botton for it". GOW says, "Just push the big A button champ and we do the rest!"

There is a reason why us PC gamers stereotype console games as simplified and dumbed down because more times than not they have been dumbed down from the more [excessive!] input schemes [and control!] for streamlined and more accessible formats.

Anyhow, I totally disagree with the GOW being PC oriented. The game SCREAMS console; and traditional PC shooters, like BF2, just cannot be mapped to a console well and we get crap like Modern Combat.

:(

I'm not taking the piss with PC games here, I'm not saying one is better than the other. I realise that PC FPS are more complex. You just have to be seeing my point here but ignoring it.

Some games suit the different platforms less, respectively. Games like Splinter Cell was never a good fit for PC because it took advantage of too many console specific features. It wasn't just restricted to the number of buttons on a gamepad, it took advantage of the fact that triggers were analogue, that the sticks were analogue, and the different buttons' vicinity to one another.

Meanwhile, Gears does NOT use any console specific features, and its conservative, digital wasd nature aswell as limiting its core movement input to a select few buttons means that the transition to PC will be absolutely seamless. The difference, the sole difference, will be increased accuracy.

I'm not even saying this is a bad thing, I dunno why using examples of poor PC games screwed up by consoles is neccessary. I'm just saying it was telling that they'd want to put it on PC down the line.

I don't think it's without any merit, I just think there are certain instances where it's hardly necessary and where the keyboard can be the superior input method, that's all. I think in third person games, especially ones designed around that paradigm, it can function pretty smoothly. Though I do think Splinter Cell has controlled pretty smoothly on the PC in the past.

Gears has PLENTY of gamepad love though, it's just not so easy to nail it down to one little thing, like analog movement. It's perfectly adjusted to the pad, if you ask me. The way the turn speeds are tuned with your gun at your hip versus actual aiming is a perfect example of something they did specifically to make this game handle extremely well in that setting. Movement comes down to a very short set of keys, all very accessable with one hand and one finger.. well, two, including the actual movement stick :)

It may not be analog movement that makes it fit so well, but it's certainly just as well off on a gamepad as any other method of input, and you can tell that they put a lot of effort into making that happen. So I'll have to disagree. In my opinion Gears is the best example of how well a shooter can control on a dual analog setup. They may not have catered to that specific feature, but they don't cater to the keyboard and mouse either.

Just look at UT. Movement is relatively simple in that game as well, but it's pretty obvious which one functions better on a gamepad and why. The use of "few buttons" has very little to do with making this function on the PC -- and everything to do with making it a console game.Thank you. Try mapping that all to a damn joypad. You forgot "Z" though -- You don't use Z?