Got R6V2. Little dissappointed, -my thoughts on the game

Um? I don't care.

Itz Called t3H Blogz.

Thanks for that note. I keep on hearing that it's not much of an upgrade from the first, other than coop.

Why does everyone think cod4's graphics are good. They are nothing special. Go play gears.

k the game is called R6VEGAS 2 for a reason. Its supposed to take place in Vegas not some backstreets. Second, the graphics and music are bad especially after playing COD4. The multiplayer dissappointed me cause there is no big maps with long range fighting and sniping. Story still sucks. Yet it is a good sequel, and though it feels underdeveloped, it is fun.GOW-Freak

COD's graphics are good. Gears is a totally different art style, You can't really compare the two. As for R6V2. It's like a big expansion pack. I love it but i was expecting much more for a SEQUEL. Shame on Ubisoft. The only part worthy of " #2 " is the campaign.reubendarosa

k the game is called R6VEGAS 2 for a reason. Its supposed to take place in Vegas not some backstreets. Second, the graphics and music are bad especially after playing COD4. The multiplayer dissappointed me cause there is no big maps with long range fighting and sniping. Story still sucks. Yet it is a good sequel, and though it feels underdeveloped, it is fun.GOW-Freak

[QUOTE="GOW-Freak"]k the game is called R6VEGAS 2 for a reason. Its supposed to take place in Vegas not some backstreets. Second, the graphics and music are bad especially after playing COD4. The multiplayer dissappointed me cause there is no big maps with long range fighting and sniping. Story still sucks. Yet it is a good sequel, and though it feels underdeveloped, it is fun.1noteshort

I agree, I think they wanted it out sooner and that's why is seems unfinished somehow. As for graphics, Yeah I don't think the people playing R6V2 really care about the graphics, The game has been about the gameplay anyway.

The only thing I care about in R6V2 is the campaign. All I want to know is .....IS the campaign as good as the first one. IS everyone just complaining about the online bugs or are there bugs in the single player? This is really the only reason I want the game....TO CONTINUE THE FIGHT!FunkyHeadHunter

The single player is good and fun. Its great to acquire experience for ranking up while playing the story, its great that if you want, you can take 2 AI teammates into terrorist hunt, and its great that friends can jump in and out of co-op story mode without you having to stop and start over. I started a single player game last night that i left open for friends to join. I played a few levels alone when a buddy came in. We played a few more levels, he left and i played a few more. Then another friend came in and we went through 5-6 more levels before he left. I just kept on going. Thats what i love about the story mode. Overall, if you just compare the 2 games, i like Vegas 2 alittle more than the original. The game is slightly easier since i learned everything you can do in Vegas 2 from the first, but the ranking and ACES system is great in Vegas 2, the single player is great, co-op and terrorist hunt is great, and the online multiplayer is no different than the first. The only thing they changed was ranked matches.

ya its not some mind blownig game, but tom clancy games never improve too greatly on the first games...and ya not fair to compare to cod4 or gears, such a different style of game

i find when i havent played a game in a while and i go back it takes some time to get back to being really good and enjoying the game again (aka not getting killed a minute into each match)

k the game is called R6VEGAS 2 for a reason. Its supposed to take place in Vegas not some backstreets. Second, the graphics and music are bad especially after playing COD4. The multiplayer dissappointed me cause there is no big maps with long range fighting and sniping. Story still sucks. Yet it is a good sequel, and though it feels underdeveloped, it is fun.GOW-Freak

I disagree with the graphics, on a visual standpoint. R6V2 looks a lot cleaner, more crisp, less jaggies per say, but CoD4 looks better in terms of realism. Either way, they're both different settings. R6V2 failed on the framerate side of things, glitches and bugs, which may have hurt it more in the long run. I didnt really take notice. To R6V2's credit, it does look a lot better than it's predecessor, and that's already good news, on its own. Personally, I like both games just about the same, but multiplayer online has to go to COD4, hands down. Story was a let down. I wasnt sucked into the story, like I was in the first R6V. But you gotta love the sprint function. It makes gameplay so much easier and smoother, and overall, more enjoyable.

[QUOTE="FunkyHeadHunter"]The only thing I care about in R6V2 is the campaign. All I want to know is .....IS the campaign as good as the first one. IS everyone just complaining about the online bugs or are there bugs in the single player? This is really the only reason I want the game....TO CONTINUE THE FIGHT!DZBricktop

The single player is good and fun. Its great to acquire experience for ranking up while playing the story, its great that if you want, you can take 2 AI teammates into terrorist hunt, and its great that friends can jump in and out of co-op story mode without you having to stop and start over. I started a single player game last night that i left open for friends to join. I played a few levels alone when a buddy came in. We played a few more levels, he left and i played a few more. Then another friend came in and we went through 5-6 more levels before he left. I just kept on going. Thats what i love about the story mode. Overall, if you just compare the 2 games, i like Vegas 2 alittle more than the original. The game is slightly easier since i learned everything you can do in Vegas 2 from the first, but the ranking and ACES system is great in Vegas 2, the single player is great, co-op and terrorist hunt is great, and the online multiplayer is no different than the first. The only thing they changed was ranked matches.

Sounds great then...that is whats important to me...Single player and coop terrist hunt with my kids...Must buy for me..."yells at wife to run to wallmart"

If I hear one more comparison from Rainbow six vegas 2 to call of duty 4 I will leave these forums. Because call of duty 4 gets repetitive and is unrealistic and actually not fun and I think Im the only one who found the story of call of duty and graphics to be better than average but not amazing. The sound in call of duty 4 wasnt that good. And Rainbow six vegas 2 has some big maps but Im sorry you cant sit back sniping the whole game like call of duty 4.PacBoy23

So you start off by saying if you hear one more comparison between RB6V2 and CoD youll leave the forums? Then you compare the 2 of them in the same post? LOL. These forums never cease to amaze me.

k the game is called R6VEGAS 2 for a reason. Its supposed to take place in Vegas not some backstreets. Second, the graphics and music are bad especially after playing COD4. The multiplayer dissappointed me cause there is no big maps with long range fighting and sniping. Story still sucks. Yet it is a good sequel, and though it feels underdeveloped, it is fun.GOW-Freak

i really disliked vages one, it felt like a grind to play for what ever reason. But i love vegas2. Already beat the single player twice (normal and realistic) and beat 12 terrorist hunt missions on realistic. Theres nothing better than 4 player terrorist hunt when you are all working together.

Why does everyone think cod4's graphics are good. They are nothing special. Go play gears.

JakeTD21

You're INSANE if you think COD4 doesn't have some of the best graphics ever. It feels like your actually in the game, and yes I do believe the graphics are better than Gears of War. I love both games, but there's no question about how good call of duty 4's graphics are.

Why does everyone think cod4's graphics are good. They are nothing special. Go play gears.

JakeTD21