First of all, the thing that all gamers know but don't actively acknoledge - It's all subjective, you think it's fun and interesting then fine. Cool, good for you, great even! You have an opinion that differs from the majority and you're sticking to it, I geniunely applaud you for doing so.

Next, your conclusion is erroneous, sorry but it is, this isn't an either or scenario, gaming is subjective like I said, but subjectivity isn't black and white, it's a spectrum like with all things. Holding your view point, sure people can do that, they can minorly agree with you too, wrong however is an odd word to use - by what definition would you be wrong? Because the majority deem it so?

So far this has all been pretty pompous crap I've written but people aren't great at debate on the internet and often fallacious logic creeps in.

SO! Starting with the answer you most probably want.

Is the game about macho meatheads with space marine (who already have chainsaw lancers btw) bros? Pretty much, it's pretty typical in that regard, maybe not douche type bros who are on some crap thing like 90210, but it's pretty much that regard in terms of like 'Army Bro'.

The Ezio thing we'll have to agree to disagree on, I think Ezio's stuff was a lot more awesome and explored some really interesting stuff - the overacrching 'current timeline', maybe (boy I wish we saw an end to that stuff, I'm sad that just essentially scraped it :( )

Sadly the main protagonist does fit the stereotype of 'Army Bro', you might not think he does because he's reserved but when you see war type atroscities I'm willing to bet you clam up alot and become quite inward. However just because he's not throwing out Hi-5s doesn't stop that, but this is more an issue with the overall writing not him specifically.

In a game like gears of war, there is no real place for the serious and solomn amongst the outrageous and comical. Popping loctus' heads off, turning people into hamburger meat with a shotgun, CHAINSAWING SOMEONE! It's all stuff that's just totally outland-ish and comical given that this is written with some sort of 'gritty-apocalpyse' back drop. They don't gel together very well. If you're playing the game on Insane as I did with 1 & 2, you don't get to do that because everything is alot more serious, it isn't so much a comical abattoir but an actual war-zone where you do care for the life of your avatar, so play-style comes into this a great deal.

Gears Of War falls down not because people fit these sterotypes but because of the larger writing. The game-world they've written and the actions you can perform do NOT match because it's not, and I hate to use this word in this regard, realisitic. Yea I get it, there are locusts, there's super high-tech, for some reason everyone's arm is the size of a tree trunk and I'm fine suspending disbelief for that. BUT! maybe if Marcus wasn't so stern, wasn't so grim, maybe if the world didn't try and act out this "TAKE ME SERIOUSLY" attitude, THEN the actions would fit and the game would be more well regarded on the whole.

Sadly I feel the mechanics and writing are opposed, they don't instill the same thing, trying to have a serious world and comical fighting are diametrically opposed, they can't co-inside happily without it becoming a joke. Add in 2 sequels, an odd spin-off thing with Baird & Cole (I think?) and people get tired of it, they label it very lazily and then there are people like you who enjoy it who are upset by the label.

This is a lot of writing, I'm sorry, but maybe it's helped you realise why it is in the standing that it's in. It also doesn't help that Gears was a big game when online was becoming mainstream too and everyone with an xbox who got live with a 360 in the early days has a teenager calling them a 'fag' story.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, fuck those teenage kids, they ruined it the most! :)