GOW V RFOM

Yeah i think GOW is rubbish online single player was ok but all u seem to do on GOW online is run upto someone and press B the fastest player to do this is the winner.
 
McDaniel said:
i havent played Rfom, or even seen any screenshots - but it wont take much to bit the disapointment that is GoW - amazing graphics, no denying.... but crap stroy, crap weapon balance, crap online.... :o
Click to expand...

There was a story in GoW? i musta missed that :p

RFOM gives you your moneys worth with the single player story, should take a good 12-14 hours, compared to GoW's 7 hours.

GoW online suffers the same problem as most xbox games these days. If you want to play ranked games it is a pain whilst you find a game every 10 minutes, and can't play with your mates.
Would a decent lobby system kill them?
 
After playing both I don't really know which one I like best :p. I like the way you run and the little details like that in GOW but it was just too short. RFOM, I've got quite far and something tells me it's going to be along time before I complete it.

Online on RFOM is far better than GOW. It's fast and it never gets boring. The rank system is cool (I'm a Sergeant :D).

Graphics wise I coudln't really say as I haven't played GOW for quite a long time now but all in all I've enjoyed RFOM more.
 
Last edited:
People who complain about the story in gears seem to be the same people who complained about it in half life 2. I.E: they expect the story to be spoonfed to them, like a character telling your character about it, which would make no sense as the characters have lived through the war and know whats going on.
 
Haven't tried R:FoM yet, it's still in it's wrapper - having too much fun with F1 at the moment.

As for GoW - apart from the GFX, I thought it was no better than countless other shooters (in fact, it was worse than quite a few).

People who complain about the story in gears seem to be the same people who complained about it in half life 2.
Click to expand...
There was a story in GoW?!! :p
 
Last edited:
Gerard said:
People who complain about the story in gears seem to be the same people who complained about it in half life 2. I.E: they expect the story to be spoonfed to them, like a character telling your character about it, which would make no sense as the characters have lived through the war and know whats going on.
Click to expand...

Quite the contrary(sp?)

Loved HL and HL2, i would say story in HL2 not as strong as HL - but it kept me wanting to play and find out at least :)
 
I'd say graphically GOW edges it, but for variety of weapons I'd say R:FOM takes the cake on that one.

Agreed, the lack of rumble lets this title down but I still feel it more than makes up for it with incredible attention to detail and duration of the story mode (GOW seemed to short and rushed to me)
 
wedgie22 said:
The last thing I would call GoW is rushed.
Click to expand...

The actual game is not rushed at all - the sound, animations, environments - everything physical is superbly polished to the degree that is so very rare these days. However, I think it's obvious parts were cut out of the game - like the big dinosaur thing with guns on its back; feels like a fight with that was completely skipped there.

I've not played RFOM so I can't really pass judgement on it. Can't say I'm going to pay that much for a PS3, so I reckon only way I will is if I borrow someone's PS3...

-RaZ
 
The thing about GoW online was that they didn't go for the usual deathmatch, team DM thing. They went for a very specific 4on4 which is not going to be to everybody's taste.
 
RFoM is the only real 1st person shooter that I've been able to get into on a console.. I really enjoyed every minute of it.

GoW I tried and tried so hard to get into it, cos i knew there was a blinding game in there somewhere, but never found the pull.

RFOM is the winner for me.. easily.

I was actually amazed that GamesTM only gave it a 6? This game definately deserves a 9... ok so it's doing nothing original, but they've made the playability 2nd to none. I was just gutted i wasted my money on CoD3 cos RoFM outshone it by a country mile.
 
Very unfair comparison really, GOW is more like a second gen game on the 360 give the ps3 time and am sure this time next year when they had time to get the best out of the console you will see better games, GOW came a year after the consoles launch bit harsh to compare really.
 
Jabbs said:
Very unfair comparison really, GOW is more like a second gen game on the 360 give the ps3 time and am sure this time next year when they had time to get the best out of the console you will see better games, GOW came a year after the consoles launch bit harsh to compare really.
Click to expand...

RfoM/Motorstorm started development at the same time (or possibly earlier) as GoW/Lost Planet and a few others..

GoW is based on the Unreal Engine 3, which no doubt helped, does not actually exploit that much of the 360's hardware features, and Lost Planet needed a whole new engine developing, as did RfoM, in the same timescales, etc...

Remember RfoM and Motorstorm where supposed to be launch titles, in Spring 2006 (the original PS3 release date) and where shown running at E3 2005.. but the PS3 was delayed due to BR related component shortages etc..

So it's entirely fair to compare games for the PS3 released in late 2006/early 2007 to games released for the 360 in late 2006/early 2007 in my book..

Sufficed to say that RfoM and GoW are both stunning in their own right, and things will only get better and better on both consoles..
 
GoW looks better and has a better sp game imo but the multiplayer on Resistance is great. Classic deathmatch game with great weapons. I love that shield gun.
 
well in my opinon.

Gow = Visually pleasing.

RFOM = a lot more substance to the game.

Out of both, I prefer RFOM, Because i felt i got my moneys worth, With GOW, i was a little upset as I completed it in 1 day. But don't get me wrong, It's a nice game, and i'm still to complete it on insane.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom