So, How' s Vegas Two?

I see some of you guys have the game already.

Review it already for us dammit!

SURPRISE! It' s shit.

That was my conclusion, as you know already. I' ve decided against renting it for a review myself unless the folks here can convince me it' s anything worth playing.

I wish they would have released a demo.

Im loving it I just wish they implemented CODs spawn system. Aside from that its a good alt to the Call.

I take it you haven' t touched the campaign since you got it.

Who does in these types of games?

You bitch alot about how crappy single player in fps are, well WHY DO YOU THINK WE ALL SKIP IT AND GO STRAIGHT TO MULTI PLAYER? We get it, single player is pure shit in most FPS, thats the way the genre is, move on with your life.

You' re ***ing stupid for wanting to play a multi player game by yourself anyway, get a life.

hahahaa,but the SP co-op is allright on realistic.

Even if you break 2 legs from a crab it still runs!
What you gotta do is find its weak spot and do massive damage at it.

stfu quez

You cant put me down,I finished LO :) and Viking battle for asgard is out next week+ GTA4 soon here ,im happy.

:)

Even if you break 2 legs from a crab it still runs!
What you gotta do is find its weak spot and do massive damage at it.

You' re ***ing stupid for wanting to play a multi player game by yourself anyway, get a life.

The Rainbow Six series has never been considered multiplayer centric. For the most part, the story modes have always met or exceeded the entertainment level of the multiplayer, especially so with the original Rainbow Six: Vegas.

As for the petty insults? Quit trying to bait me. It' s evident you' ve just come down off your mary-jane high, and are looking for someone to vent your spleen on. Take it elsewhere.

You bitch alot about how crappy single player in fps are, well WHY DO YOU THINK WE ALL SKIP IT AND GO STRAIGHT TO MULTI PLAYER? We get it, single player is pure shit in most FPS, thats the way the genre is,

The claim that " we all skip story mode and go straight to multiplayer" is unfounded, and a little ridiculous. Games like Bioshock would be absolute commercial and critical failures if everybody skipped the " pure shit" story modes and only played multiplayer.

move on with your life.

I love you too.

I been jumping between all the modes so far.

The Rainbow Six series has never been considered multiplayer centric.

Yes it has , and yes it is, get over it.

The claim that " we all skip story mode and go straight to multiplayer" is unfounded, and a little ridiculous. Games like Bioshock would be absolute commercial and critical failures if everybody skipped the " pure shit" story modes and only played multiplayer.

Right thats why I used keyword *MOST* games because I know you' re a little bitch and would get technical, I' ve already prepared for it.

i' m playing vegas 2 right now, ans so far i really like it, the graphics are more or less the same as the original which is very disapointing ... your Ai team mate can get stupidly stuck, once i was goin,g ahead, then suddently i turned back , " where the hell are those cockheads " i went back and i found them stucj between a van and a barrel... otherwise they do a decent job helping you..

if you loved the original , you can' t hate this one , its pretty much identical, and i love those outfits.

Listen to the wise

Right thats why I used keyword *MOST*

GRAW - 9.2 IGN
" the missions are long, multifaceted, and seamlessly woven together "

Call of Duty 2 - 9.0 IGN
" The missions are fluid and multi-tiered; they keep you moving at all times, something that the AI works to do well, and they' re complex."

Resistance: Fall of Man - 9.0 IGN
" From start to finish, Fall of Man is one hell of an outstanding roller coaster ride that every last PS3 owner needs for day one. Epic boss battles (the final few are crazy!), ever-changing scenery, addictive weaponry, and a unique thematic are just a few of the reasons Resistance stands out."

Rainbow Six: Vegas - 9.3 IGN
" Rainbow Six: Vegas returns to form as an excellent tactical shooter, but is much more accessible for the average shooter fan with streamlined controls and a simple health system. The sprawling levels like the glowing Fremont Street or the Hoover Dam open up Rainbow like it' s never been before, and the result is a balanced shooter that is as much close-quarter combat as long-range head shots."

Brothers in Arms - 9.1 IGN
" Offering up engaging, squad-based battles and presenting it all in an authentic yet undeniably cinematic setting, Brothers in Arms is a game that, to borrow a phrase from General Patton, " grabs you by the nose and kicks you in the ass."

Gears of War - 9.4 IGN
" Epic' s twisting and turning and rolling an exciting change-up in the shooter genre, a blend of fast-arcade action and basic, tactical maneuvering."



Right... most.

That list can easily continue if you' re so inclined.

ORIGINAL: Eddie_the_Hated

Right thats why I used keyword *MOST*

GRAW - 9.2 IGN
" the missions are long, multifaceted, and seamlessly woven together "

Call of Duty 2 - 9.0 IGN
" The missions are fluid and multi-tiered; they keep you moving at all times, something that the AI works to do well, and they' re complex."

Resistance: Fall of Man - 9.0 IGN
" From start to finish, Fall of Man is one hell of an outstanding roller coaster ride that every last PS3 owner needs for day one. Epic boss battles (the final few are crazy!), ever-changing scenery, addictive weaponry, and a unique thematic are just a few of the reasons Resistance stands out."

Rainbow Six: Vegas - 9.3 IGN
" Rainbow Six: Vegas returns to form as an excellent tactical shooter, but is much more accessible for the average shooter fan with streamlined controls and a simple health system. The sprawling levels like the glowing Fremont Street or the Hoover Dam open up Rainbow like it' s never been before, and the result is a balanced shooter that is as much close-quarter combat as long-range head shots."

Brothers in Arms - 9.1 IGN
" Offering up engaging, squad-based battles and presenting it all in an authentic yet undeniably cinematic setting, Brothers in Arms is a game that, to borrow a phrase from General Patton, " grabs you by the nose and kicks you in the ass."

Gears of War - 9.4 IGN
" Epic' s twisting and turning and rolling an exciting change-up in the shooter genre, a blend of fast-arcade action and basic, tactical maneuvering."



Right... most.

That list can easily continue if you' re so inclined.

LOL

You go by reviews?

All of those games single player modes suck ass, especially Gears of Wars. Go play them before you argue with me.

Reviews don' t make or break a game. I understand that. If you want I could explain personally why I think those game' s single player are worthy of my time.

Vegas was the first R6 game that had a decent storyline. The games, especially 3 we' re ultimately about the online modes. Vegas' s singleplayer mode was pretty decent, but again, the focus for most people has been the multiplayer and co-op modes.

You might not like it, but most first person shooters are mutiplayer centric. GRAW and Gears arent first-person anyway, but it' s no lie that their multipayer modes are still the focus for most buyers. The Ghost Recon games have decent enough plots, but the storyline in Gears was lame, as were the cutscenes and voice acting. But then, the cutscenes and voice acting in UT3 is even worse... so that' s just Epic for you.

Most singeplayer modes in most first person shooers are pathetic. It the most overdone genre now and the gems are few and far between. BioShock and Call of Duty 2, Call of Duty 4, Crysis, Halo 3 and Orange Box (which shouldn' t really count) are the only first person shooters this gen so far that have " good" singleplayer campaigns.

The rest...

Frontlines: Fuel of War
Turok
Call of Duty 3
Turning Point: Fall of Liberty
The Darkness
Unreal Tournament 3
Perfect Dark Zero
Far Cry Instincts Predator
Medal of Honor: Airborne
History Channel: Battle for the Pacific
BlackSite: Area 51
TimeShift
Conflict: Denied Ops
Prey
Call of Juarez
Quake 4
Hour of Victory
Soldier of Fortune: Payback
Resistance: Fall of Man

...all blow goats for quarters.

The first Rainbow Six, actually had a way better storyline than Vegas, though it wasnt told as fluently since it was a tactical game, with structured missions.

I almost bought the collectors edition today just for the poker chip key chain that comes with it.

The rest...

Frontlines: Fuel of War
Turok
Call of Duty 3
Turning Point: Fall of Liberty
The Darkness
Unreal Tournament 3
Perfect Dark Zero
Far Cry Instincts Predator
Medal of Honor: Airborne
History Channel: Battle for the Pacific
BlackSite: Area 51
TimeShift
Conflict: Denied Ops
Prey
Call of Juarez
Quake 4
Hour of Victory
Soldier of Fortune: Payback
Resistance: Fall of Man

That' s an interesting point, but I don' t see how you can list those games in defense of FPS' s being multiplayer centric, when for the most part, those aren' t games with good single player or multiplayer. With bold titles being the exceptions, debatable by taste, they suck on all fronts. As a general rule, a piss-poor developer will turn out piss poor code, whichever mode they work with.

The FPS genre is littered with trash games. Always has been, always will be. There' s no denying that, and there' s no stopping it, but to say that first person shooters are multiplayer centric just doesn' t add up.

Using the 360 as an example, in 06 only 60% of all Xbox 360s (boxes, not gamers) had been signed on to Xbox Live, with even fewer opting to purchase Gold. The numbers are old, and I' m sure the Live attach rate has grown since then, but it would make sense that the general demographic still stands. A large minority of people not signed into Live, the majority with Live Silver, and a large minority with Live Gold. (Feel free to correct me if more recent numbers have been released. That' s speculation, and nothing more)

There are staple franchises like Halo, and more recently Call of Duty, that come across very strong in single player, but there are plenty of titles I could list that came across very strong in single player, and very weak in multiplayer. FEAR and Prey being the first two that come to mind. Those two certainly didn' t get critical acclaim for their online modes.

Vegas was the first R6 game that had a decent storyline.

I have to side with VX on this one. The original had a solid plot, though flawed in execution.

though flawed in execution.

I disagree with this, it was just a design option. The game was more built up as a strategy game than an action game, the story was optional.

ORIGINAL: Eddie_the_Hated

The rest...

Frontlines: Fuel of War
Turok
Call of Duty 3
Turning Point: Fall of Liberty
The Darkness
Unreal Tournament 3
Perfect Dark Zero
Far Cry Instincts Predator
Medal of Honor: Airborne
History Channel: Battle for the Pacific
BlackSite: Area 51
TimeShift
Conflict: Denied Ops
Prey
Call of Juarez
Quake 4
Hour of Victory
Soldier of Fortune: Payback
Resistance: Fall of Man

That' s an interesting point, but I don' t see how you can list those games in defense of FPS' s being multiplayer centric, when for the most part, those aren' t games with good single player or multiplayer. With bold titles being the exceptions, debatable by taste, they suck on all fronts. As a general rule, a piss-poor developer will turn out piss poor code, whichever mode they work with.

The FPS genre is littered with trash games. Always has been, always will be. There' s no denying that, and there' s no stopping it, but to say that first person shooters are multiplayer centric just doesn' t add up.

Using the 360 as an example, in 06 only 60% of all Xbox 360s (boxes, not gamers) had been signed on to Xbox Live, with even fewer opting to purchase Gold. The numbers are old, and I' m sure the Live attach rate has grown since then, but it would make sense that the general demographic still stands. A large minority of people not signed into Live, the majority with Live Silver, and a large minority with Live Gold. (Feel free to correct me if more recent numbers have been released. That' s speculation, and nothing more)

There are staple franchises like Halo, and more recently Call of Duty, that come across very strong in single player, but there are plenty of titles I could list that came across very strong in single player, and very weak in multiplayer. FEAR and Prey being the first two that come to mind. Those two certainly didn' t get critical acclaim for their online modes.

Vegas was the first R6 game that had a decent storyline.

I have to side with VX on this one. The original had a solid plot, though flawed in execution.

Yes and why do they suck? Because of piss poor multiplayer.

The single player in Perfect Dark is just as bad as the single player in Halo 3

Yes and why do they suck? Because of piss poor multiplayer.

I heard Frontlines: Fuel of War' s multiplayer was pretty decent??

The single player in Perfect Dark is just as bad as the single player in Halo 3

this makes me think that you played neither!

I heard Frontlines: Fuel of War' s multiplayer was pretty decent??

Frontlines is similar to an updated Battlefield Modern Combat. If you played the former, no use buying this one.

It' s not bad mind you, it just came out about 6 months too late. If it didn' t have halo 3 and CoD to compete with it most likely would have held up better.

I disagree with this, it was just a design option. The game was more built up as a strategy game than an action game, the story was optional.

That' s what I mean. Though not the case, I know, It felt like they created missions, and managed to tie them together in a cohesive well-written plot.

Well the first two Rainbow games were pretty hardcore niche products anyway. It wasn' t until Raven Shield was released that the series found real success, and Raven Shield (and it' s expansions) was all about the multiplayer.

The stories in the Rainbow Six games are meh at best, and only Vegas managed to convey it properly. Vegas 2 looks really weak, ...but it might be worth picking up for the online modes

SURPRISE! It' s shit.

Enough said. This game sucks I just got the ps3 version ( Thank god I did not pay for this.) and let me make this clear do not buy this game. I hope it rocks on the 360 because the ps3 version is worst than the first vegas. How the hell can they release stuff like this. Don' t they have a process they have to go through before they release games like this. I mean come on somebody had to play this before it came out. What a waste of money.

Man talk about drooping the ball. Now I can send this back to gamefly for dark sector.

Vegas 2:WTF (Code Name The Let Down)

ORIGINAL: mikayd2

SURPRISE! It' s shit.

Enough said. This game sucks I just got the ps3 version ( Thank god I did not pay for this.) and let me make this clear do not buy this game. I hope it rocks on the 360 because the ps3 version is worst than the first vegas. How the hell can they release stuff like this. Don' t they have a process they have to go through before they release games like this. I mean come on somebody had to play this before it came out. What a waste of money.

Man talk about drooping the ball. Now I can send this back to gamefly for dark sector.

Vegas 2:WTF (Code Name The Let Down)

What is so bad about? Can you be a little more specific?

"If you knew how good I am you would think I'm modest."

What is so bad about? Can you be a little more specific?

My thoughts exactly!

What is so bad about? Can you be a little more specific?

The Graphics are just terrible. The hit detection is all over the place. The frame rate seems to slow down when the fighting gets heavy. Also this game runs slow as hell.
The controls are jack up no there is no more sprint button. Also there seems to be a delay in the controls . I have to press the grenade button way ahead of time.

Vegas looks a little better but man the game play is shot to death.

I hope this helps Sorry for being so vague.

The Graphics are just terrible. The hit detection is all over the place. The frame rate seems to slow down when the fighting gets heavy. Also this game runs slow as hell.
The controls are jack up no there is no more sprint button. Also there seems to be a delay in the controls . I have to press the grenade button way ahead of time.

Vegas looks a little better but man the game play is shot to death.

I hope this helps Sorry for being so vague.

graphics are more or less the same as Vegas 1, for some (including me) it' s disapointing

Hit detections are exactly like vegas 1, which is great.

Controls are the same as vegas 1 with some minor additions, this is still great.

What do you mean by " there is no sprint button" ? yes there is, it' s a new feature which makes the game feel fast.

Slowdowns are seldom while tearing issues are frquent.

i play the game on 360.

Listen to the wise

Slowdowns are seldom

are bad in the ps3 version.

Slowdowns are seldom

You get them all the time on the ps3 version.

Is it hard to join a game on the 360 .

This game could have been great . Why do they release things in such a condition Is it a money thing or a time frame thing I just don' t get it.

I got it yesterday(360 of course) and I have to say that the single player is much better in this one than the first so far. I haven' t touched the multiplayer, but I can' t see it being worse than the first one. Teammates AI was done excellently. The only bad thing is it seems like they haven' t done much to the game, but why fix what isn' t broken. I highly recommend this game if you liked the first. So far, 9/10 for me.

Is it hard to join a game on the 360 .

?

Hardly. Got quite the list when I search up my very specific match settings. Doesnt take long to choose a game and join in at all. Even the less played Attack and Destroy with no respawns is easy to jump into. Lag free and everything.

My problem is the easily campable respawn system. CoD4' s mobile spawn system was hard to camp the other team, possible, but hard. Which is why I play Rainbow with limited or no respawns in team based games. The few additions have sped up the gameplay and but its still very very tactical. It accents CoD4. Meaning it will be hard for me to grow tired of either one now.

ORIGINAL: mikayd2

Slowdowns are seldom

You get them all the time on the ps3 version.

Is it hard to join a game on the 360 .

This game could have been great . Why do they release things in such a condition Is it a money thing or a time frame thing I just don' t get it.

My guess for this situation is that fixing those issues would have took a long time to do and they were going for a simultaneous multiplatform release and didn' t want to delay the other versions. I' m sure the developers wanted to fix it, but the publishers decided it was good enough to ship.

"If you knew how good I am you would think I'm modest."