Conclusion
As you can imagine, little new ground is being broken in R6 Vegas 2. But that's ok. The old ground is as solid as a stone. The average player will complete the single player campaign in roughly 8 to 10 hours. This may seem a bit on the short side, but it's a really fun experience from beginning to end. Plus the developers of the game made sure that gamers could continue their experience, thanks to the great multiplayer and numerous modes of gameplay. Don't expect a flawless experience though. The game has its share of graphical, AI, and performance issues that can add some frustration to your experience. However, none of these are earth shattering and most players will have a blast playing the game despite the occasional hiccup.
 |
Since a good number of first person shooters have entered the market within the last few months, it may be tough deciding which game(s) deserve your money. A few of these titles that qualify as a similar type of game include Soldier of Fortune: Payback, BlackSite Area 51, Frontlines: Fuel of War, and what many have called the "perfect shooter", Call of Duty 4. While most of these shooters provide a fairly mediocre run-and-gun experience, Frontlines: Fuel of War rises above the bulk of this pack with its use of high-tech gadgets and big team online battles. However, it lacks the punch of Call of Duty 4, which is the clear winner in this group. So how does R6 Vegas 2 stack up? Quite favorably, as the Rainbow Six and Call of Duty series' can easily be referred to as frontrunners in the first person shooter genre of games. R6 Vegas 2 will not only satisfy the shooter fan, but those who simply enjoy a good all-around action game.
If you specifically have a distaste for tactical shooters and prefer straight forward running and gunning, or if you simply did not like the previous Vegas game, your money might be better spent on something else. If you enjoyed R6 Vegas, you're bound to enjoy this game too. After all, the intense gameplay that made the previous game great is still here, and it's equally as satisfying. With this in mind, not a lot was done to enhance the experience this time around. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but gamers do tend to seek a higher level of improvement as games progress in a series. Still, R6 Vegas 2 is a great game that gives its players every reason to keep it in their collection of games for a long time to come.
Note: A quick word on our intended game ranking system. You'll notice that we don't give a specific score. After much debate, the AnandTech staff feels it best to avoid a fine-grained score. What makes an 8.2 vs. an 8.5, for instance? Many games are roughly equal in terms of overall quality, and when you get down to the details, it's all personal opinion. We recognize that fact, and our verdict is meant to convey our feelings towards the game, supported by the text in the rest of the article. Since we have different perspectives, we will strive to provide sufficient information for you to determine whether you'll like or dislike a particular game.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
29 Comments
View All Comments
Omega215D - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
I'm still waiting for the PC version to come out with its mouse and keyboard goodness. I would hope it's a little more refined than the console versions. I'm still enjoying the first game but the graphics seem to have gone downhill after the first 3 levels.Calin - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
"You can also order your team to repel down the side of a building "Rapelling is descending a rope under control. Is used to climb down a building, or to descend from an helicopter when the helicopter can't land (like in C&C Generals).
Repelling is to drive or force back (an assailant, invader, etc.):
"All hands repel boarders", this would be the order on a sail ship in the great age of sail.
nerdye - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
Much grief has been given to ign and all of the game ratings coming from different online/print publications for as long as games have existed. I love anandtech for the analysis on hardware and technology that I can't find anywhere else to such a degree of quality. But rating a game on the fact that its "sweet", or "good", or "crap" for that matter is not revolutionary, actually its a step backwards from the ratings systems we have grown accustomed to.Sure you can argue that I can read 5 pages of info and it will fill me in on your "personal opinion", but I have no time for such with so many other resources available on the topic.
Forgive me anand as I have the utmost respect for you and your site and enjoy your articles more than anyone else's, but I must say my part my friend, game ratings systems are fine as they are.
tuteja1986 - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
Good start :!A little pointer :
* Review is too long
* Review system will face problem when reader start to question why every game you review is "Great game" & "Recommended" & "Must play". Best review scoring system is A - F as its most accepted standard everyone gets.
* You start to review with PC games 1st as your majority of reader don't like console
* You should review game based on how fun it is and the experiences you had while playing the game. You should see GFW's Shawn E reviews as i would consider him one of the best PC game review editor. less technical more emotions.
AcydRaine - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
Just because you don't like consoles doesn't mean that most other readers do not. I have a PS3/360 and mid-upper tier gaming PC and love them all. I see nothing wrong with a console review at AT.Great review Eddie. Keep it up. :)
pomaikai - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
I prefer anands rating system. I am not gonna pick up a game because it got a 8.7 instead of another that got an 8.2. I dont see how you can give a score if the scoring system is not laid out in plain terms. What equates to a 10 in graphics? What gets a 10 today might get a 8 two years from now. All I really care about is if the game is good and worth playing. If a game gets sweet that means that is was really fun to play and thats all I really care about.JarredWalton - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
The conclusion should give you ample information to determine if the game is something you'd like to play or not. If it sounds interesting, then you can read the rest of the article to find out more details on the various aspects of gameplay, graphics, etc.We will basically categorize games as "Excellent", "Good", "Okay", "Subpar", and "Lousy". That's all a game score really tells you anyway. A game that one reviewer gives a 7.7 might receive an 8.7 by another person; there's a lot of room for opinion, and rather than getting tied down in the details we're going to take a step back.
Personally, I used to love Computer Gaming World (R.I.P.) and the fact that they didn't give scores. Maybe that's how I ended up as a writer: I enjoyed reading the page or so of text to find out what a game was like, and then I'd try to decide if it sounded like something I wanted to try. I still take that approach in most of my articles, even if I have nothing to do with CGW.
Omega215D - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
Any chance of you guys reviewing the PC version when it comes out, hopefully in the middle of April?Lonyo - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link
Hopefully it'll support multi-core this time round.