In our continuing effort to bring you fresh and interesting content, X3F presents Would You Rather ... a weekly feature that asks you the hard questions. The point? If you had to choose one or the other, which would you go for?
You may have heard that a little game called Gears of War is getting a sequel this November, so in the spirit of that shocking announcement we're going WUR Gears-style! This week's question is all about the connected experience.
Gears of War had a great co-op mode and a solid online multiplayer, but some people bashed Gears for a shoddy matchmaking system and wondered why Gears didn't adopt the Halo 2 play list formula. So, with that in mind, if you had to pick one of these features for Gears of War 2 which would it be?
Feel free to share the reasons for your vote in the comments. We'll share the results of the poll during the next edition of Would You Rather ... which hits X3F every Wednesday.
Last weeks WUR results can be find after the jump ... Ensign!
Last week's results weren't all that surprising, but there does seem to be an interest in the fabled Halo MMO. With 54.7% of our readers picking Halo 4 as their next want in the franchise, it looks like there is still quite a lot of steam behind Master Chief's adventures.
Reader Comments (Page 2 of 3)
2-27-2008 @ 1:20PM
Bravo6 said...
Talk all the shit you want about Halo, but the matchmaking setup is second to none, and GoW's sucked ass.
2-27-2008 @ 1:20PM
mattclarkie said...
I hated the 1 death and you have to wait for the next round, especially as it was nearly 1 hit kill.
2-27-2008 @ 1:24PM
matt mcclard said...
this is basically why i never played Gears, i hated the matchmaking.
2-27-2008 @ 1:25PM
ccc said...
@Toro
Careful what you wish for, or at least be more specific about it. Asking for vehicles will get you machines we can ride in but only fire light, heh.
But you are right, multi is where the game will truly shine brighter and longer.
2-27-2008 @ 1:39PM
chris said...
Go take a flying F at a rolling donut you Halo3 rednecks, you're vote does NOT count !
2-27-2008 @ 1:40PM
Amber said...
Four player co-op because Halo 3 matchmaking is RETARDED. And completely confusing. My friends and I first played Multiplayer Halo 3 this weekend and we all agreed that the matchmaking was easily the most retarded part of Multiplayer. COD4 is way superior.
2-27-2008 @ 2:09PM
The Dolphin904 said...
really? please explain...
2-27-2008 @ 2:09PM
ZEBRA NINER said...
Retarded? Check the operator. ;)
2-27-2008 @ 2:51PM
DjDATZ said...
I agree with Zebra. The matchmaking system in Halo 3 is second to none. Not even COD4 can compete with it. Its really really easy to understand and use. And obviously, only the party leader has control of what will be played. DUH.
2-27-2008 @ 2:30PM
ccc said...
GOW was flawed by the seriously achievement and the lack of match making. Everyone wanted to play in ranked to work toward the cheevo, but in ranked it was hard and sometimes impossiable to find friends to play with. But when you could get together on a team it was unfair battling guys on the other side that had never played together before and lacked just about any stradigy. We always plowed them down with little effort and maybe 1 out of every 100 matches we would actually play against a decent team where no one quit and knew what was up.
2-27-2008 @ 2:36PM
ZEBRA NINER said...
oh teh noes! You said CHEEVO! *queue cheevo police*
2-27-2008 @ 4:00PM
George Arauz said...
Halo 3 system needed
2-27-2008 @ 4:01PM
Triforceowner said...
I'll take the Halo 3 matchmaking if instead of "Lone wolves" I get to select my map and game type.
2-27-2008 @ 4:11PM
dylan said...
Why do we have to pick? You can do both in Halo...
2-27-2008 @ 4:55PM
Xav de Matos said...
You don't have to, but the point of this feature is IF you had to which would you pick.
2-27-2008 @ 4:42PM
Ryan said...
I'm fine with no matchmaking in player matches since you can send invites to get your friends in and only had to fill up the room once since the room stayed alive from map to map.
Waiting 10 minutes for a ranked room to fill up only to have to do it all over again after the match ends and it kills the room was seriously lame though, so there needs to be matchmaking at least for ranked matches even if player matches stay the same as before.
2-27-2008 @ 4:42PM
Jayslacks said...
How about both. Yeah, I said it. Both. And, for the love of all that is holy, FIX THE HOST SHOTGUN!
2-27-2008 @ 4:47PM
Ryan said...
Oh, and all I REALLY want from Gears 2 is for them to put the Lancer back the way it was before the last update. Or at least make it a power weapon that you don't spawn with.
2-27-2008 @ 5:26PM
wickedpheonix said...
Excuse me if I put for co-op - not necessarily because co-op is better, but because IMHO Halo 3 matchmaking sucked - yeah, you heard right. Coming from a PC gamer, not being able to choose which map I'm playing and what gametype and with how many people and instead leaving it up to the developers and chance sucks some serious balls. Give me a couple choices - throw me in the server best for my TruSkill and connection, throw me in the server with X number of people, or let me decide the map and gametype and just let the game find me a server that fits that and then best meets my TruSkill etc. Failing that, just create a server and fill it up a la Halo 3. Add a decent party system and we're set.
In any case, it should not take me more than 20 secs after entering the main menu to get thrown into a multiplayer game - something Halo 3 sorely lacks at.
2-27-2008 @ 6:06PM
Zeus.:God said...
Fuck Matchmaking. Matchmaking seriously sucks cock.
Leave it the way it is but keep the host name in there.