My last review covered Resident Evil 5, the game tasked with officially succeeding a landmark title in gaming. But that task took three whole years and a new console generation to bear fruit, a timespan so huge it allowed hundreds of games to deliver their own takes on RE4's incredible groundwork in the meantime. The combined successes of Halo, RE4 and Call of Duty set the stage for blockbuster gaming's future – a future of cinematic, ebb-and-flow, health-regenerating, tension-filled cover shooting action. A future that, the longer we've been in it, the more its become derided. "Hide-and-seek" shooters have effectively dominated the gaming landscape to a boiling point, forcing either complete reinnovation or stagnation in the franchises still using it. It almost seems as if the cover shooters that have stuck around for any long period of time only do so due to putting so little emphasis on it, from Uncharted's big focus on high-octane spectacle and story to Resident Evil's joyride of horror setpieces and ever-changing core gameplay formula. A game focused solely on making the best cover-shooting action possible just doesn't seem sustainable for a brand anymore, with the ones still stubbornly holding on getting labeled as stale and tired. The age of pure cover shooting is, for all intents and purposes, ending.

Which puts the original Gears of War in a very strange spot, doesn't it? Its arguably the franchise that truly kicked the formula's use into high gear, the game cited by Uncharted's developers and more as the direct source for their own gameplay. Its held as one of Xbox's most popular and critically loved franchises, yet as the times have changed, Gears has stuck to its guns – Gears 2, 3, 4, and 5 have kept the foundation laid down by the game that started it all, despite all the games it influenced having now grown tired of it. The reputation of Gears of War now seems to be that of a stagnant time capsule, a franchise not able to move on into the modern day and forever haunted by the smell of Doritos and mountain dew.

This entire tale of moving on with the times breaks my heart, because the reason Gears of War never moved past its initial gameplay foundation, is because its a damn near perfect foundation.

(Yes, its finally time to talk about the game itself!)

The most common issue I've experienced with cover shooters, both inside of Gears and out, is that there's little to no tension to be found when both parties are just sitting in a camp taking potshots at each other. Part of what makes shooting so interesting in games is how you manage your own position in relation to the enemy alongside having to aim, but when it essentially just becomes a waiting game – either for the enemy or your own health – there's no engagement left anymore beyond pointing and clicking. The issue here is simple: If both camps can get away with just sitting safely in their bunker until they win, there's no reason for either of them to want to move out. The brilliant thing about Gears of War is that, in contrast, it feels like EVERY design choice is made with the idea of making you want to further approach the enemy. The series' most iconic weapon, the chainsaw-riding Lancer, is the perfect demonstration of this. Despite being the go-to long range Assault Rifle of the game, it takes an entire magazine of bullets to down a single average enemy Locust, who usually come in hordes of a dozen and can take cover just like you. Yet get close to one, and you can use that beautiful chainsaw to destroy any single foe with a delicious glorykill animation. No ammo cost, no cooldown, no conditions. The only drawback to using it is that it requires you move right up to the danger yourself.

What Gears is saying through this design is that you can usually survive by staying safe, unloading Lancer bullets into enemies one by one... BUT you'll be showered in rewards and dopamine the more you dare to assert your dominance over enemies. The game commends long-range play, but celebrates close-range play. The controls also feed into this: You're not an acrobatic speed demon, but can still sprint, dodge roll, and most importantly enter cover from several feet away by sliding into them. It creates a genuinely brilliant balance, where the ability to go fast is limited only by your skill and ability to assess your situation, yet the movement controls themselves are so simple – they only use one button – that anyone can start experimenting with them whenever. And what gives the game's best firefights so much excitement is that you're not the only one affected by all the design above. Enemies, too, come with shotguns, Lancers, and a carnal wish to come as close to you as possible. That's one of the main reasons why I think the auto-regenerating health actually works for Gears, as the intensity of battle means that you often need to actually earn those calm moments of regenerating health back, find those pockets of time when nothing is approaching you. If you sit in cover for too long, the enemies will start advancing, and before you know it you'll be swarmed.

This entire rock-solid foundation is what Gears as a franchise has been using for 16 years now, and I hope you understand just what makes it so appealing compared to the cover shooters that later wound up stagnating the formula. But then...what is it about the first game in particular that makes me think of just it so fondly?

I mentioned it briefly earlier, but the game has a very uniquely spooky vibe, which is where the RE4 influence is felt the most. The actual story of the game really doesn't matter so much as the world it sets up, one completely void of hope, where everyday people hate both the Locust monsters and the tyrannical government that allowed them to emerge to begin with. It's commendable that despite having "of War" in the title, Gears doesn't really celebrate the act of warfare, yet also doesn't try to make you feel guilty for participating in it. Marcus Fenix, our protagonist, never feels sociopathically trigger-happy or like a patriotic soldier, because he's essentially forced into his position, and lets his bitter distain for the government be known at every turn. He's a bitter grump with a dark sense of humor, which contrasts really well with the rest of the crew keeping their chin up more often. He wants humanity saved as much as anyone else, but won't shy away from pointing just how much everyone has fucked up to get to this point.

I think the overall pacing is also a huge part of why this first game really lands with me. Despite its limited pool of weapons and enemies (8 and 6 respectively), the game is still entirely about its shooting gameplay. Instead of breaking the pace up with vehicles or platforming, almost every firefight in the game has something about it making it stand out. For instance, Act 3 takes place in the Locusts' home caves, leading to stuff like shooting enemies in a moving minecart, or the spooky abandoned mining base above ground with ambushes at every corner. Act 2 is easily my favorite – vampyric bats called Kryll devour anyone who stays in the dark for too long, including in the middle of firefights. This means that as you're fending off Locust, you also need to find ways to literally light a path ahead, usually by shooting explosive tanks tucked away in nooks around the arena. Its extremely impressive how much confidence the game has in its core gameplay, that it never feels the need to break it up with dumb minigames or side activities completely detached from it. All the variety in the game still exists WITHIN the excellent gunplay, and there aren't many games I can think of that succeed at that. The closest the game gets to breaking the pace up with something else is when characters talk between segments, which'll sometimes force you to slow down to focus on the dialogue. Given the dialogue is written so well, and that conversations tend to be as snappy as possible with little fluff, these really aren't as intrusive as you might think. If anything, they're the perfect tiny breather you need inbetween firefights.

The original Gears of War is at its absolute best when it feels like a big strategy game played in real time over-the-shoulder. When maps are laid out in a way that lets you approach them in a zillion different ways, when you need to manage enemies far off and close by, big and small, your own health and the health of your teammates...and when you finally figure out how to make all the pieces fit using whatever tools you happen to have available to you, without dying once, it feels bloody fantastic. Be it the Imulsion Rig in Act 3, the stairs to the Fenix estate in Act 4 and then later the horde-esque defending of that same house later in the story, or the many encounters with the terrifying one-shot Boomers, the game keeps finding ways to engross you in absolutely mastering its combat. The problem then, as discussed before, is that its sequels, the genre and rarely sometimes even the game itself, seems to want nothing to do with that.

Yes, a big selling point for the series and genre as a whole ever since this game released was the ability to play through the entire campaign in co-op. Having the exact same game available to you in cooperative play doesn’t sound like a huge deal, but it can’t be overstated just how much that affects the fundamental design of the games in this series. If the single-player story is about tactically managing yourself and your relation to a slew of different enemy positions, weighing the pros and cons of which weapons to bring and which enemies to approach, then co-op slices all of those decisions in clean half. Two persons means two full sets of weapons for every situation, two meatbags drawing enemy attention in different directions, and – crucially – twice as much firepower against those enemies. After having played the entire series in singleplayer, getting to play this original game in co-op really opened my eyes to just how much duller the experience becomes once the tension of dying is almost entirely sapped away. That, of course, isn’t exactly helped by the literal revival mechanic that co-op exclusively features, basically ensuring that as long as the two players communicate, progress would eventually be guaranteed. It was surreal, seeing each of those legendary fights I described just a moment ago, some of which took me up to half an hour of genuine strategic planning and execution, breezed through in the second attempt.

I don’t want to make it seem like I think co-op ruins the game or was poorly thought through, because its evident it was something the developers were aiming to design the game around from early on, shown evidently in how the level design has tons of clever cooperative moments scattered throughout. But it changes the entire dynamics of play from an intense, masterfully designed tactical shooter, to something you play with your pal over a bowl of popcorn and casual conversation. As the Gears of War entries went on, and more shooters were released to chase its coattails, this second playstyle seemed to become the desired ideal, reaching a boiling point with Gears of War 3’s entire campaign being woefully designed around four person cooperative play. And while Gears of War 3 is a fantastic, well-produced, entertaining and beautifully directed end to the trilogy, it’s also a game with a whole new enemy type specifically designed to one-shot players with little warning, so that any of their three co-op buddies can revive them. This design meant that even in the single-player, now the AI has to act as a substitute for co-op players and work to revive you too. What once was an option select between two playstyles, to play either seriously on your own or casually with your friends, has effectively become just one.

That tactical brillance of the original Gears of War has technically not gone away, as even the developers seemed to have realized how the third game was a step too far and reverted back to the more traditional design of the first two games come Gears of War 4. And thankfully, for those few nerds out there like me, every game in the series includes an option to reload each individual firefight from the start, allowing me to at least simulate a challenge like the original game had. It’s because of this that I’m able to appreciate the design brilliance still left in games like Gears of War 4 and Gears 5, enhanced greatly by just how polished and robust the combat has become over the years. But just that I have to fight to recapture that feeling at all – that the industry has simultaneously oversaturated yet completely distanced itself from the kind of shooting gameplay that Gears of War established so perfectly…while I do find it kind of funny, I also just find it kind of sad.

[Play Time: 4 Playthroughs (Original/Co-op/Ultimate/Ultimate Co-op)]
[Difficulty: Hardcore]
[Key word: Overshadowed]

(CAMPAIGN ONLY)

Its showing its age a lot more than Gears 2, especially in comparison to Ultimate Edition, but...god damn the game is still fun. What it obviously lacks in scale compared to its sequels, it makes up for in spades with consistency and pacing. All five acts of the story (except maybe 1 and 4) feel very distinctly their-own in terms of visuals, level design, and atmosphere, and the game does an excellent job keeping itself varied without forgetting why you bought the game, to shoot alien guys. Act 2 is the standout: As night falls, a horde of the bat-like Kryll swarm the sky, and they kill you near instantly if you stay in the dark for long. So mid-combat you'll need to light up specific safe areas by shooting bombs, whilst also avoiding being overwhelmed by the locust horde. Later in the game you ride minecarts in a cave system, effectively turning it into a rail shooter but still letting you take cover.

Basically, its a very "small" feeling game that implements variety in a way that really really works, never once bogging the game down (thats a lie, theres one chapter at the end of Act 2 sucks) and instead just being plain fun throughout.

The Co-op is pretty fun too, I really like how its a lot more lax due to the ability to revive your teammate. You can sink a lot of time into grinding out every shootout in the single-player strategically: What guns do you bring, which do you swap mid-fight, when do you use your Frags, what enemies do you prioritize...but you can also just turn the volume down and beat it at a lax but still challenging pace with your bud!

Overall, I really love Gears as a franchise, but out of the original trilogy I still think Gears 1 reigns supreme.