First reviews for Vanquish are in!

Gamespot gives it a9.0

Whether you're gunning through the seven-hour campaign (sadly, on the short side) or tackling the entertaining challenge rooms (there is no multiplayer), it's hard not to get taken in by the constant exuberance. Vanquish feels exactly right. It's fast and furious. It's totally entertaining. It's got styIe oozing from every pore. Vanquish is all game and no filler, and that's exactly what makes it one of the most gleeful and memorable experiences of the year.

Gamespot

IGN gives it an8.5

Vanquish is a stylish, spectacular looking game with great gunplay and some stunning set pieces. Although the game's story and character development pale in comparison to the action, I had a great time with Vanquish from the in-game tutorial all the way to the ending credits. Even though Mikami's latest creation is difficult at times, players looking for a highly entertaining shooter should look no further. Vanquish will keep you on the edge of your multi-thruster booster seat.

IGN

This sounds like a winner. It is a bummer that the campaign is a little short.

And it seems though IGN and GS are the only 2 that actually like it. Destructoid ripped it a new one.

And it seems though IGN and GS are the only 2 that actually like it. Destructoid ripped it a new one.

Vexx88

And it seems though IGN and GS are the only 2 that actually like it. Destructoid ripped it a new one.

Vexx88

didnt he give Castlevania a 5/10? and Ac2 a 4/10?

the majority of score's are 8+

[QUOTE="Vexx88"]

And it seems though IGN and GS are the only 2 that actually like it. Destructoid ripped it a new one.

gillri

didnt he give Castlevania a 5/10? and Ac2 a 4/10?

the majority of score's are 8+

I'm a little concerned about the game's length myself, but it won't really matter if I find the game to be highly replayable. I hate to measure my dollar value in the amount of hours I put into a game, but I think it's a legitimate complaint for a full price game if all it has is a short single player mode.

I'm a little concerned about the game's length myself, but it won't really matter if I find the game to be highly replayable. I hate to measure my dollar value in the amount of hours I put into a game, but I think it's a legitimate complaint for a full price game if all it has is a short single player mode.

_Dez_

[QUOTE="_Dez_"]

I'm a little concerned about the game's length myself, but it won't really matter if I find the game to be highly replayable. I hate to measure my dollar value in the amount of hours I put into a game, but I think it's a legitimate complaint for a full price game if all it has is a short single player mode.

Spirit_of_87

There's nothing inherently wrong with a game being short and sweet, but then that should be reflected in the price. But that doesn't happen in console retail so calling them out for a fully priced short game is only fair. Also, for me personally, high scores and 1cc playthroughs are completely meaningless.

Anyway, I played the demo so I don't need reviews. To my surprise, I liked it a lot more than I thought I would. The controls feel tight and the game encourages you to move as opposed to other cover-based third-person shooters which helps in making it fresh. However, the demo reminded me of Lost Planet too much (the boss battle in particular) and I question just how long will the combat remain interesting (and it seems some reviews raised that concern as well). It seems that Vanquish is probably better off by being short as I imagine it wouldn't be ably to carry its gameplay for over 10 hours. Which is fine, I guess, but I'm not paying full price for that. Bargain bin pick up for me.

My best friend claims that Walmart was selling Vanquish for $40.00 earlier today. I don't know if they still are, but if so, I'll probably have to pick it up.

Looks like I found the game that I would like to check out for my birthday then. A short game, it sounds like, but it sure sounds like a hell of a lot of fun!

Game looks absolutely rad. Problem is, $70 for a 4-5 hour long game is TOUGH TO SWALLOW, considering little replay value. This would have to be a AAA for me to buy it new, as much as I want to play it.

My best friend claims that Walmart was selling Vanquish for $40.00 earlier today. I don't know if they still are, but if so, I'll probably have to pick it up.

rragnaar

Wow, this could change everything. Hehe.

Just called Walmart. No go.. the game is the standard $60, and this guy sounded knowledgeable about their game promortions, he said he's heard nothing of it.

Thanks for getting my hopes up, Rrag! :P

[QUOTE="_Dez_"]

I'm a little concerned about the game's length myself, but it won't really matter if I find the game to be highly replayable. I hate to measure my dollar value in the amount of hours I put into a game, but I think it's a legitimate complaint for a full price game if all it has is a short single player mode.

Spirit_of_87

I agree. Some videogames may be short rides, but they are fun to go through at least a couple of times. With a game like Vanquish, I wouldn't mind it. If the action is as intense and challenging as some of the reviews claim it to be, then it will be awesome. Plus, there are challenge rooms of sorts. I like that - reminds me of the challenge rooms I've had to deal with in games like Metal Gear Solid VR Missions or even the TMNT game, for that matter.

It's just too bad that I have to wait a few months, but that's fine. :)

Just called Walmart. No go.. the game is the standard $60, and this guy sounded knowledgeable about their game promortions, he said he's heard nothing of it.

Thanks for getting my hopes up, Rrag! :P

Jbul

[QUOTE="Jbul"]

Just called Walmart. No go.. the game is the standard $60, and this guy sounded knowledgeable about their game promortions, he said he's heard nothing of it.

Thanks for getting my hopes up, Rrag! :P

rragnaar

Either he lied or he saw the $40 price tag on another game and confused one with the other.

What is nice about sleeper hits such as this one is that they will be subject to price drops quicker than most titles. I will probably wait since New Vegas is out and I just picked up Enslaved. I also want to check out the new Castlevania game as well.

[QUOTE="Spirit_of_87"][QUOTE="_Dez_"]

I'm a little concerned about the game's length myself, but it won't really matter if I find the game to be highly replayable. I hate to measure my dollar value in the amount of hours I put into a game, but I think it's a legitimate complaint for a full price game if all it has is a short single player mode.

UpInFlames

There's nothing inherently wrong with a game being short and sweet, but then that should be reflected in the price. But that doesn't happen in console retail so calling them out for a fully priced short game is only fair. Also, for me personally, high scores and 1cc playthroughs are completely meaningless.

Anyway, I played the demo so I don't need reviews. To my surprise, I liked it a lot more than I thought I would. The controls feel tight and the game encourages you to move as opposed to other cover-based third-person shooters which helps in making it fresh. However, the demo reminded me of Lost Planet too much (the boss battle in particular) and I question just how long will the combat remain interesting (and it seems some reviews raised that concern as well). It seems that Vanquish is probably better off by being short as I imagine it wouldn't be ably to carry its gameplay for over 10 hours. Which is fine, I guess, but I'm not paying full price for that. Bargain bin pick up for me.

I just don't ever recall the length of a game being a deal breaker before, this really seems to have become more of an issue this gen or maybe I wasn't paying attention. Maybe it's because I'm stuck in an era of gaming that is no longer a dominant factor in the industry. I think 10 hour campaigns are fine and 20 hour plus campaigns begin to annoy me and I start to wonder if the freaking game will ever end.... And then there are games that are long in the intial play through and are finished in two hours on the next play through. RPGs seem to be the most lengthy. But, even then you spend half your time looking for items, leveling up and basically just wandering around.... I like a good rpg on occasion. It just wasn't a problem back then in the Snes or Dreamcast era. Maybe it's simply because the technology has improved as well as storage and disc capacity that gamers demand more bang for their cash... Yeah, not everyone plays for high scores, 1cc's or perfect play. But, that's generally what arcade gameplay screams for. Again, you don't have to play these types of games that way but, that's pretty much where all your replay value will cone from.Spirit_of_87

I expect lasting value or lower prices, always did. I revel in turn-based strategy games that literally last me for years. RPG's are short in comparison. Naturally, action games are going to be much shorter, but if it's below 10 hours it simply doesn't resonate with me well. I don't mind 3-hour games like Portal or Sam & Max episodes if they are priced accordingly. That's how things should work and they kind of do in the PC market. Different type of content - different pricing. PC games are released every day with price models ranging from 5-50 Euros, free-to-play, subscription-based, ad-supported...in console retail everyone just slaps on the same price on every game regardless of lenght, budget, lasting value, etc. Doesn't make much sense to me, never did.

GOT IT! I have no impulse control when it comes to kick-*** action games.

Let's do this!

[QUOTE="UpInFlames"]

[QUOTE="Spirit_of_87"] I strongly disagree with this point of view. I really don't understand it. These type of games are meant to be short, and offer tons of replay value when playing for high score or 1cc. I'd rather have a short replayable game that I can enjoy over and over then some 40 hour plus snooze fest that I will only play through once. Length should never determine a games value and some of the best games ever are short and sweet in length.Spirit_of_87

There's nothing inherently wrong with a game being short and sweet, but then that should be reflected in the price. But that doesn't happen in console retail so calling them out for a fully priced short game is only fair. Also, for me personally, high scores and 1cc playthroughs are completely meaningless.

Anyway, I played the demo so I don't need reviews. To my surprise, I liked it a lot more than I thought I would. The controls feel tight and the game encourages you to move as opposed to other cover-based third-person shooters which helps in making it fresh. However, the demo reminded me of Lost Planet too much (the boss battle in particular) and I question just how long will the combat remain interesting (and it seems some reviews raised that concern as well). It seems that Vanquish is probably better off by being short as I imagine it wouldn't be ably to carry its gameplay for over 10 hours. Which is fine, I guess, but I'm not paying full price for that. Bargain bin pick up for me.

Game Length is somewhat important to me, but I've had experiences with short games that I absolutely loved -- Portal, Heavenly Sword, and the first Uncharted (took me about 6 hours) all come to mind. I'm curious if Vanquish will join this company.

A game's length is important to me, but it's not the most important thing I look for in games. I understand quantity is not always proportional to quality, but when charging full price for a game, I expect to get a lot of bang out of my buck, so when reviews consistently point out the game's short length, I can't help but be a little concerned that the game may be lacking in content. Who knows, if the game's short length is off set by being highly replayable, then this isn't going to be a huge problem for me. I guess I'll find out soon enough, my game came in the mail today, so I plan to spend some quality time with it tomorrow. Hopefully, I won't have the game finished by then :P

As a side note, I usually don't really look and compare quotes on the box with a gamesite's reviews, but I find it hilarious that Destructoid has a mediocre review score for Vanquish, yet they have their quote on the game's box, "bloody terrific!"

A game's length is important to me, but it's not the most important thing I look for in games. I understand quantity is not always proportional to quality, but when charging full price for a game, I expect to get a lot of bang out of my buck, so when reviews consistently point out the game's short length, I can't help but be a little concerned that the game may be lacking in content. Who knows, if the game's short length is off set by being highly replayable, then this isn't going to be a huge problem for me. I guess I'll find out soon enough, my game came in the mail today, so I plan to spend some quality time with it tomorrow. Hopefully, I won't have the game finished by then :P

As a side note, I usually don't really look and compare quotes on the box with a gamesite's reviews, but I find it hilarious that Destructoid has a mediocre review score for Vanquish, yet they have their quote on the game's box, "bloody terrific!"

_Dez_

I played the first 20 minutes...... and got my*** handed to me. :lol: I think I have "S0lid Snake Syndrome". O_0

Absolutely no learning curve in this game -- they just throw you in the **** from moment ONE. I had to go for my evening run before dinner so I couldn't play much, but I saw flashes of greatness in the midst of the confusion and "Game over" screens :P Once I figure out what's happening, I'm going to have a great time! :lol:

And it seems though IGN and GS are the only 2 that actually like it. Destructoid ripped it a new one.

Vexx88

I played the first 20 minutes...... and got my*** handed to me. :lol: I think I have "S0lid Snake Syndrome". O_0

Absolutely no learning curve in this game -- they just throw you in the **** from moment ONE. I had to go for my evening run before dinner so I couldn't play much, but I saw flashes of greatness in the midst of the confusion and "Game over" screens :P Once I figure out what's happening, I'm going to have a great time! :lol:

Jbul

Sounds awesome. I'm eager to dig into this myself, been looking for a nice challenge. Solid Snake Syndrome, ha, I like it.

[QUOTE="Jbul"]

I played the first 20 minutes...... and got my*** handed to me. :lol: I think I have "S0lid Snake Syndrome". O_0

Absolutely no learning curve in this game -- they just throw you in the **** from moment ONE. I had to go for my evening run before dinner so I couldn't play much, but I saw flashes of greatness in the midst of the confusion and "Game over" screens :P Once I figure out what's happening, I'm going to have a great time! :lol:

_Dez_

Sounds awesome. I'm eager to dig into this myself, been looking for a nice challenge. Solid Snake Syndrome, ha, I like it.

I'm coining the term right now.. let's call it "Triple S", or "S 3" for short.

S0lid Snake Syndrome -- when a gamer lacks the nessecary skills to play a game effectively and blames and berates the game and the people who make it as a result.

"Yeah man... he's got the Triple S really bad... I think he needs a box of Kleenex and a nap" Muhahahah!

I'll will probably give in and get this game. Currently making my way through a few others at the moment, though, so I don't know when that will be. Maybe 2 or 3 months from now. If it has a price drop by then, fine. If not, this game looks quality and worth the full $60.

I've read about concerns of the game length and lack of MP, but those are not things I would fret about. I don't play games as often as I would like, so a 4-8 hour game would take me a good 2-3 weeks (maybe more if it's as difficult as I've read). As for MP, that's a feature I tend to ignore completely in most games.

Yeah, this game is pretty awesome. I recently finished the first Act (out of five I believe), and you're pretty much thrown right into the battle from the start. A little opening, "we've got 8 hours to stop **** from happening" and bam, explosions and mayhem everywhere. There's a lot of action happening on screen, it can be a little hard to take everything in, but it feels right with the kinetic pace of the combat. The clock says I finished the first act in about an hour, but I think I spent more time playing the level, half an hour more to be a little more precise. The acts are separated into missions, and there's a little downtime in between each one, I think when the next mission prompt pops up, then the timer starts, so it might give the impression that the game is shorter than it really is.

One thing I appreciate about the combat right now is how enemies don't always gun for you and actually fight with the other friendlies on the battlefield, so there hasn't been any moments where they completely ignore their surroundings and make a beeline for me. They're quite formidable is they all focus their attacks on you, but I love how nimble you can weave through the environment, and it feels great when you're connecting melee attacks against the bigger opponents. I just wish it didn't completely drain your boost meter.

Some minor gripes I have right now would be a small selection of weapons you use (you see everything there is before the end of the first act) and the disc launcher seems pretty useless compared to everything else, but for the most part weapons are fun to use and the enemies are enjoyable to fight. I hope they can keep the momentum up, cause things are starting out pretty nicely.

lol i rike it.

60 dollars for a 7-hour campaign and no multiplayer. How in the hell does anyone release a shooter this day and age with no multiplayer? I think I'll wait till I can get it for under 20.

I can't really imagine Vanquish is going to light up the sales charts. It'll probably go down in price as quickly as Bayonetta did.

lol i rike it.

S0lidSnake

Rent it. Play it. I'm looking to read more impressions.

60 dollars for a 7-hour campaign and no multiplayer. How in the hell does anyone release a shooter this day and age with no multiplayer? I think I'll wait till I can get it for under 20.

UT_Wrestler

Why even bother with multiplayer in the first place? Not every game has multiplayer and some of them turn out great. Multiplayer is, quite frankly, unncessary in some games. I don't mind the lack of it for here if it's that damn good.

And it seems though IGN and GS are the only 2 that actually like it. Destructoid ripped it a new one.

Vexx88

Jim Sterling is a joke!

Holy crap! The set pieces in Act 2 were exhilarating! The difficulty is also starting to ramp up. I died around 10 times towards the end of the level. I'm surprised to see how many enemies have one-hit KO moves. They're all telegraphed, but I tend to miss the cues when the action gets all hot and heavy. This game can be brutal if you're not paying attention.

Holy crap! The set pieces in Act 2 were exhilarating! The difficulty is also starting to ramp up. I died around 10 times towards the end of the level. I'm surprised to see how many enemies have one-hit KO moves. They're all telegraphed, but I tend to miss the cues when the action gets all hot and heavy. This game can be brutal if you're not paying attention.

_Dez_

No ****. I died about 6 times on the Act 1-3 boss. This game can be extremely unforgiving. Some of his attacks went through cover.... that left a bad taste in my mouth to be honest. And also, the fight was more of a puzzle than anything else. It was impossibly hard until I figured out the solution. Interesting... this will take some adapting.

This game could've benefited from a much better learning curve, to be honest. I love the intensity, and I'm starting to get ahang of things (like the fact that your Suit's super ability meter should basiclally be treated like your shields would be inin most games), but there is absolutely no explanation. I've literally replayed some levels 10 times, just so I could get used to the controls (which are relatively complex and crazy), cover system,radar, and enemy behavior.

Sometimes it's like you're in a firefight behind cover and some guy falls out of the sky and drops a grenade on your head. Like... WTF? :lol:

[QUOTE="UT_Wrestler"]

60 dollars for a 7-hour campaign and no multiplayer. How in the hell does anyone release a shooter this day and age with no multiplayer? I think I'll wait till I can get it for under 20.

Why even bother with multiplayer in the first place? Not every game has multiplayer and some of them turn out great. Multiplayer is, quite frankly, unncessary in some games. I don't mind the lack of it for here if it's that damn good.

[QUOTE="Metamania"]

[QUOTE="UT_Wrestler"]

60 dollars for a 7-hour campaign and no multiplayer. How in the hell does anyone release a shooter this day and age with no multiplayer? I think I'll wait till I can get it for under 20.

UT_Wrestler

Why even bother with multiplayer in the first place? Not every game has multiplayer and some of them turn out great. Multiplayer is, quite frankly, unncessary in some games. I don't mind the lack of it for here if it's that damn good.

I don't... if the experience was excellent. Quantity does not = quality. Never has, never will.

No ****. I died about 6 times on the Act 1-3 boss. This game can be extremely unforgiving. Some of his attacks went through cover.... that left a bad taste in my mouth to be honest. And also, the fight was more of a puzzle than anything else. It was impossibly hard until I figured out the solution. Interesting... this will take some adapting.

This game could've benefited from a much better learning curve, to be honest. I love the intensity, and I'm starting to get ahang of things (like the fact that your Suit's super ability meter should basiclally be treated like your shields would be inin most games), but there is absolutely no explanation. I've literally replayed some levels 10 times, just so I could get used to the controls (which are relatively complex and crazy), cover system,radar, and enemy behavior.

Sometimes it's like you're in a firefight behind cover and some guy falls out of the sky and drops a grenade on your head. Like... WTF? :lol:

Jbul

I think I might have had one of those moments. When you were in cover, was it one of those smaller pieces that has Sam lie down on his side? There a part near the end of act 2 where I got smacked by a beam and I swear I was lying in cover to hide behind it. Maybe I was clipped, but it was a kind of annoying.

There's a lot to take in, but at least the standard shooting controls help keep things familiar. I do wish the X and the A button could mesh together at times. If I am behind cover and I press A, I should be able to leap out of cover, not roll in place. Makes it feel a little clunky when I get the buttons mixed up. I am also pretty terrible when it comes to sliding around, I tend to slide to the wrong side of cover and I still get shot to hell :lol: I'm playing this game too recklessly right now. Trying to go for style, but I usually fall flat on my face.

[QUOTE="Jbul"]

No ****. I died about 6 times on the Act 1-3 boss. This game can be extremely unforgiving. Some of his attacks went through cover.... that left a bad taste in my mouth to be honest. And also, the fight was more of a puzzle than anything else. It was impossibly hard until I figured out the solution. Interesting... this will take some adapting.

This game could've benefited from a much better learning curve, to be honest. I love the intensity, and I'm starting to get ahang of things (like the fact that your Suit's super ability meter should basiclally be treated like your shields would be inin most games), but there is absolutely no explanation. I've literally replayed some levels 10 times, just so I could get used to the controls (which are relatively complex and crazy), cover system,radar, and enemy behavior.

Sometimes it's like you're in a firefight behind cover and some guy falls out of the sky and drops a grenade on your head. Like... WTF? :lol:

_Dez_

I think I might have had one of those moments. When you were in cover, was it one of those smaller pieces that has Sam lie down on his side? There a part near the end of act 2 where I got smacked by a beam and I swear I was lying in cover to hide behind it. Maybe I was clipped, but it was a kind of annoying.

There's a lot to take in, but at least the standard shooting controls help keep things familiar. I do wish the X and the A button could mesh together at times. If I am behind cover and I press A, I should be able to leap out of cover, not roll in place. Makes it feel a little clunky when I get the buttons mixed up. I am also pretty terrible when it comes to sliding around, I tend to slide to the wrong side of cover and I still get shot to hell :lol: I'm playing this game too recklessly right now. Trying to go for style, but I usually fall flat on my face.

When I'm playing, I'm constantly under the impression I'm not being bad*** enough -- that there are alot more tools at my disposal to take enemies down in crazy ways. So I leap out of cover, charging in the middle of some enemies, activate the AR, and get shot to death within seconds. :lol:

But I think despite the flash, the game is meant to be played relatively carefully. I have a hard time sitting in cover and playing "stop and pop", but I think that's what's nessecary. I also thought during the 1-3 boss fight I should go in and take the huge robot down close up since when you take down one of it's arms, you get into a QTE.

AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!! :P

Who knows!

[QUOTE="UT_Wrestler"][QUOTE="Metamania"]

Why even bother with multiplayer in the first place? Not every game has multiplayer and some of them turn out great. Multiplayer is, quite frankly, unncessary in some games. I don't mind the lack of it for here if it's that damn good.

Jbul

I don't... if the experience was excellent. Quantity does not = quality. Never has, never will.

Exactly. If the game is THAT good for a short one, I'll gladly pay the $60. Quality is really important to me in a videogame and a few companies, such as Nintendo, have never forgetton this. Neither has Sega, although this happens in some cases from their company, such as this one.

Totally awesome so far. The game constantly makes you feel like a badass. It's really cool to play a shooter where you actually have some mobility.

Act 3 has some pretty brilliant moments. The game does a great job of mixing different scenarios with all the shooting to keep things from feeling stale. It really starts to feel more like an action game than a shooter at times, especially when you're contending with some of the larger regular enemies. I'm getting some Resident Evil 4/5 deja vu in some areas. I'm probably going to finish it by today or tomorrow, but I don't want it to end just yet. It's really great stuff.