Graphics
The graphical quality in R6V left a lot to be desired when compared to other games that utilize the coveted Unreal Engine 3, such as Gears of War and BlackSite Area 51. Both of these titles were released after R6 Vegas, yet they still manage to outshine what we see in R6 Vegas 2. Two main concerns that come to mind are the game's textures and aliasing, both of which are fairly lackluster.
 |
The textures that are applied to objects in the game are fairly flat. The closer you get to an object, the more its appearance is reminiscent of those found in games released in the late 1990's. Even though the character models look great, seeing your character in an over-the-shoulder view is not nearly as pleasing to the eye. Jagged edges, or jaggies, are also very evident in the game and affect the majority of your surroundings. While this may be annoying early on, it is easy to ignore once you get sucked into the game. Although some anti-aliasing is present, additional smoothing of these jaggies would have made for a much richer visual experience. However, increased anti-aliasing comes with the cost of increased strain on the 360's GPU, which may have been a factor in the developers' choosing to use a low setting.
One area where the graphics show some real improvements is in the destructible environments. You also get the ability to shoot through most cover objects (with the appropriate weapon), which is a nice addition - no more hiding behind that wooden crate. In particular the levels with glass have some cool effects, and you can entertain yourself while waiting for opponents by shooting windows and watching the glass shatter and fall. As you can imagine, one of our favorite levels is the one with a large glass-walled building.
Despite the graphical capabilities of Unreal Engine 3, it seems overall that very little was done to enhance R6V2's visual experience beyond that of its predecessor. Apparently there is no accounting for time spent utilizing the engine. Still, the overall presentation of the game is by no means average. The developers have succeeded in creating lush environments with realistic lighting effects. Just don't expect any awards for graphic detail.
 |
For the most part, the game carries a steady and desirable frame rate throughout the campaign. However, at least one of the firefights that you'll engage in proves to be more than the Xbox 360 can handle. During this segment, the frame rate slowed to a crawl. Slow frame rates are usually attributed to a large amount of on-screen activity. In many games, large explosions lend themselves to this performance degradation due to their size and transparency effects. However, the one slow down period that was detected had no such explosions. Instead, it occurred inside a rock climbing center with an extremely high ceiling - four stories high to be exact. So there was a lot of info being processed during that portion of the game. Needless to say, more is expected from a 2007 blockbuster title; especially one from the highly regarded Tom Clancy series. Even so, the subpar graphics and the occasional drop in frame rates do not kill the game. Also, these issues appear to be nonexistent while playing online. This is a good thing since the multiplayer modes appear to be the main attraction for many players.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
29 Comments
View All Comments
JarredWalton - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
The simple answer is, we review a lot of hardware that is primarily of use to gamers. Not surprisingly, a large number of gamers read our site. This isn't the first gaming review we've done, and it almost certainly won't be the last.I know Eddie - he's an avid gamer, with PC, Xbox360, and PS3 consoles in his house - and asked him to try writing some game reviews for us. Since he was in the midst of playing R6V2, that seemed like a good place to start. If you haven't noticed, the pickings are a bit slim for new games right now - at least games worth a try.
We would have done the PC version if it were available; we will try to have Eddie do a follow-up with the PC version when it's available. Right now, at least we have a good idea of what the Xbox 360 version offers, so we will better be able to say how the PC version compares.
Maybe next we can have Gary discuss his feelings on C&C3: Kane's Wrath? :)
Hardin - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
The gameplay was pretty good, but I had to stop playing it because of the frame rate issues. They were happening much more frequently than most console games. If the 360 version has frame rates issues then I wonder how the pc version will turn out.thartist - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
It's odd how you intend to avoid personal opinions but end on a mere "SWEET!"I understand very clearly you intention, but the solution will be between the result you hit and those shitty 8.347 ratings out there.
Rating suggestion: Try the five stars rating which you could divide in halves too, try 1-10. That scale gives a good sense of higher and lower quality.
GOLDEN HINT: a significant evolution of the rating system has been the addition of a resume explanation on what's GOOD and what's BAD in the game, including technical problems. It adds that layer of un-bias and clearness to the reader. Implement it please.
(always below 50% is unbearably rotten. Simplify like that too, those games don't deserve attention.)
cmdrdredd - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
Yep, for which I will use IGN. Nice try, but you're way too late here and there's reviewers on other sites with a bigger track record so that you can base their opinion off of what they liked before. So say if they gave Splinter Cell a 8.2 and then Metal Gear Solid a 9.1 and both are similar game types by the same reviewer, it's easy to pick the better one of the two.cmdrdredd - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
Oh, and calling a game sweet tells me nothing. You can be paid by EA or UbiSoft or any other developer to post a positive review. Using the number system is far better to tell a game's worth.whatthehey - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
"Sweet" tells you nothing, eh? Sort of like "8.4, Impressive" tells you nothing, right? (That's what IGN says.) God forbid you read the remaining 6 pages, or even the conclusion. What I gather is that the game is good, and many FPS fans and particularly tactical FPS fans will enjoy it. Since I don't particularly care for the tactical shooter genre, I'll pass. I tried the original Rainbow Six a long time ago and didn't care for it.All that a number system would do is give all you pissers somewhere to complain about how Anandtech is wrong because they gave it an 8.2 instead of an 8.3 or 8.4. But then, you've got shit like Bully getting an 8.7 compared to this game's 8.4 at IGN; I can definitely state that I would rather try this game than Bully, aka "Let's sell lots of games through controversy!"
I wholeheartedly support the AT rating approach. Either a game is great and everyone should try it, it's good an most people will like it, it's decent and will appeal to fans of the genre... or it's not worth the DVD its printed on. Outside of the general evaluation, we're all going to have to read a bit to determine if a game is our cup of tea or not. OMG! Reading! On a website! HOW WILL WE EVER SURVIVE!? Congrats on proving you have the reading comprehension skills of a 4th grader.
Spivonious - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
Like the ratings system. I don't need a number, just a "Avoid", "Play the Demo First", or "Buy It".What I'm confused about is why a console game is reviewed on a computer site. Why not review the PC version once it's released?
gaakf - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
I played the original Rainbow Six: Vegas between breaks from Gears of War for a few months. I achieved a rank of Staff Sergeant/E-6. When I read that people returning to Vegas 2 would get EXP points depending on their rank in the first game, I thought that was really cool.So when I booted up Vegas 2 for the first time, I saw I was awarded Specialist/E-4 rank. That was nice.... until I saw that there was an achievement for getting Private First Class/E-3 rank.
Because I can not go down in rank, I can never unlock this achievement. How did Ubisoft miss something as blatantly obvious as this? The achievement should have unlocked once I was awarded rank. Stupid, just plain stupid.
bill3 - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
Game reviews on Anandtech? I like it.BTW, interestingly, I once came across a rumor that R6V at least on consoles DOESNT use UE3, but actually a souped up UE2. Apparantly if you looked at all the licenses on the box, UE2 and NOT UE3 was the only logo to be found. Might explain the game's alledged poor graphics.
ap90033 - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
Console? Dont care, what I want to know is how will the REAL version for PC be. Wonder if the graphics will be better since the XBox360/any console is weak.