« PREVIOUS ENTRY
Octopus yoga

The sonnetry of Gears of War: My latest Wired News gaming column

When is a gore-soaked video game like a Shakespearean sonnet? When it’s Gears of War, my friends. Or so I argue in my latest Wired News column. Check it out online free at the Wired News site, or archived below, and see if you agree!

Why Gears of War rocks

by Clive Thompson

Why is Gears of War so insanely awesome?

Technically, it’s just the same old, same old. You’ve seen stuff like this a bazillion times before. Gears of War is yet another run-and-gun shooter in which you blunder through the post-apocalyptic boneyard of civilization, repetitively slaughtering a bunch of hulking, gibbering aliens. Creepy things lurk in the dark; fresh ammo packs are scattered improbably in open sight; and as the guts paint the hallways red, your teammates curse like a bunch of Tarantino wannabes. Name every single war-weary cliche of the run-and-gun genre, and Gears of War dutifully ticks it off.

Yet the game really is awesome. Indeed, it is staggeringly, derangedly so. I popped Gears of War into my Xbox 360 and sat in a cybernetic haze for three straight hours, emerging with my stomach in fist-size knots, so emotionally and cognitively depleted that I had to consult the instructions on the side of the box before I was able to cook a bag of microwave popcorn — which, come to think of it, was my only meal for the rest of the evening because I had to go back and play until I collapsed.

Normally, I am the first guy to complain about the lack of creativity in today’s games. I’ve argued many times that games are being held back by publishers who refuse to experiment — and insist on sticking to the same five or six numbingly familiar genres. Shouldn’t we be breaking ground with risky new forms of play? Do we really need yet another run-and-gun shooter?

Well, Gears of War convinces me that jeez, maybe we do. That’s because creativity does not come only from a daring, new art form or weird new genre. It also comes from a dog-eared, well-worn genre that is proven to work — and is constantly tweaked by artists who love it.

Consider the sonnet. It’s been around ever since Italian poets invented it in the 13th century, and it’s deeply formulaic. But it’s never gotten boring, because poets keep on finding surprising new ways to hack it. The Earl of Surrey remixed the sonnet’s 14 lines into a new stanzaic structure, turning it into a four-part argument and spurring Shakespeare into an orgy of creativity. Then e. e. cummings tore the sonnet into tiny shreds, splaying the words across the page while using the rhyming structure to hold each poem together.

A more modern example is the three-minute pop song. The verse-chorus-verse structure is as repetitive as you can get. But for music fans, part of the fun is wondering how a band will do something unique and fresh with it. Lame songs fail to surprise; superb ones somehow manage to push the cultural glacier forward an inch or two. The point is, the music relies on our longstanding familiarity with its tropes.

Thus it is with Gears of War. Every element is simultaneously totally familiar and a bit surprising. Sure, you have to dodge enemy fire, just like every shooter in history. But the mechanics of hiding behind objects are executed with iPod-like elegance. A single button lets you feint from object to object, and a single trigger lets you pop out to fire off a shot before ducking back again. The ease of dodging transforms each rubble-strewn scene into a spatial puzzle: What can I hide behind? Where can I scootch over to get a better shot?

Virtually every element in the game has been similarly torqued. You know how the aliens in most shooters always sound like the squealing demon-pig noises of The Exorcist? Well, that’s precisely how the Berserker sounds in Gears of War … except that the audio engineers have somehow produced an acoustic atrocity that scrapes like Satan’s own fingernails across the blackboard of your mind. I pretty much wet myself.

I could go on. The camera work is nifty: When you break into a tuck-and-run military dash to scurry across an open plain, the camera zooms out low beside you, as if you were being tracked by a panicked CNN videographer. And there’s a machine gun with a chainsaw on the end, which transforms the gun into a clever, metaphoric gloss on the age-old bayonet … as well as, y’know, transforming it into a gun with a chainsaw on the end. Hell yes. It’s the little things, people, the little things!

So forgive me if I suspend, for a few weeks, my strident insistence that games break new ground, innovate new forms, revolutionize the nature of play. Gears of War doesn’t, and it doesn’t need to. It’s the same old, same old — made wonderfully new.


blog comments powered by Disqus

Search This Site


Bio:

I'm Clive Thompson, a writer on science, technology, and culture. This blog collects bits of offbeat research I'm running into, and musings thereon.

Currently, I'm a contributing writer for the New York Times Magazine and a columnist for Wired magazine. I also write for Fast Company and Wired magazine's web site, among other places. Email or AOL IM me (pomeranian99) to say hi or send in something strange!

More of Me

Twitter
Tumblr
Flickr


Recent Entries

A long German word for “noticing when ads are being customized based on your surfing history”

Gay squid sex

“El Ajedrecista” — an analog chess-playing computer from 1912

Hacking the Model T

“How did you find my site?” and Vannevar Bush’s memex

» visit the Collision Detection archives

Clive Thompson's Tumblr
a bunch of stuff

May 20, 2011 » 02:28 PM

From Christopher Kennedy’s very droll book “Neitzsche’s Horse”.

July 28, 2010 » 07:35 AM
“Wr” - S

July 06, 2010 » 10:05 AM

My Xbox broke, and I was trying to Google some possible technical solutions, when I noticed that Google appears to be encouraging me to make a typo. I suppose it’s possible that Google’s algorithms know that typing “wont” instead of “won’t” would produce better results.

June 29, 2010 » 05:00 PM

On the other hand, when I tried the test for multitasking, I was pretty abysmal. I performed worse than people who identify themselves as heavy multitaskers, and those who identify as low multitaskers.

June 29, 2010 » 04:58 PM

I finally got around to trying out the interactive “test your distractability and multitasking” page at the New York Times, which they put up alongside their story earlier this month about how computer distractions are eroding our lives. 

According to the test, I guess I have good focus — I’m not very distractable! 

» visit my Tumblr

Recent Comments

Photos

» see all of my photos on Flickr

Collision Detection: A Blog by Clive Thompson