GRAW1 and 2 were great i casnt wait for nr 3. R6 has been slipping n the other hand. Almost seems like GRAW keeps being tactical and R6 is getting more arcadey by the minute.
I like GRAW, the first one on 360 was a great glimpse of what HD shooters can look like. One of the best games that year. Part 2 seemed a bit phoned in compared to that, and releasing the same year with RSV is a bad idea. Both games are pretty similar and both suffered from a bit lackluster sequels the last time around. I hope they can reinvent both franchises at once but I really doubt it.
I loved the RSV games, which was a surprise for me. I was always a PC purist when it came to Team Rainbow, as I played the series since the original's very first release day. LOVED the series. When they tried to port it to consoles, it just didn't work very well, the planning got further and further watered down, and played like a clunky POS.
Then, they released Vegas, and I was completely surprised. Plays well, very dynamic, enough "planning" happening in game that it feels like a great time, and thanks to the cover system actually feels like you have control over your character.
Now, Ubi, just do me a favor and hire a bug tester this time? Multiplayer played like crap on the PS3, and was only moderately better on the 360. There is no excuse in this day and age for a game to work so pitifully online.
@Mister_Jack: If I understand you right then yes, me.
Why on earth they decided to take two quite unique niche games and make them into central franchises I'll never know. I loved the old R6 and GR games because they offered something genuinely different from other shooters (well I guess SWAT was similar to R6).
It's not like the brand names were famous, except to people who already liked them how they were, so what's the point in moving the brand into a more mainstream game?
@slight: You're entitled to like whatever you want, but I personally loathed the old way for both games. I find the new way to be much more accessible and smooth.
Ghost Recon used to be wonderful back in the days of the original Xbox. The solo campaign was fun and the multiplayer was amazing. I used to play those games all the time and at my peak, I was ranked #7 in the overall online leader boards. But, these last two GRAW games have sucked (in my opinion) for being just too damn complicated.
The online was skill decent enough I guess, but the solo parts of these games are way to slow anymore. It has a lot to do with the micro-managing aspect added to the last two games in the series, which made me feel like I was playing Rainbow Six on the N64 all over again (not fun).
In my opinion, if the Ghost Recon series wants to survive within the current gaming landscape, they need to be more in tune with what COD4 did right. If Ubisoft can deliver that type of game play, then I'd consider it more of a return to form, and not just some sort of a rip-off.
@excaliburps: i also loved the first vegas. was amazing, the cover system was really intuitive, unlike gears of war. and not enough games stress accuracy with your shots like this one did. made multiplayer pretty damn challenging, but extremely fun at the same time.
vegas 2 was pretty much a clone, with a worse story line, and even worse new multiplayer maps (the maps that were new anyway). all they added was a sprint button. sure, if it aint broke dont fix it, but dont make me drop 60 freakin dollars on the same thing either.
@uppitycracker: Agree with your points. You know what? Vegas' cover system IS better than that of GoW's. At the very least it's less cumbersome.
I finished both Vegas games. Though I admit I don't remember Vegas 2's story one bit. The gameplay was ok I guess. It was just too similar with the first one. Granted it's not broken but they could've added something right?
@lilaliendog: Oh yeah the sprinting. Same with Cod's sprint. Agreed on the assets as well. Heck I think I even used the same gun to finish Vegas 2!
01/08/09
01/08/09
01/08/09
Then, they released Vegas, and I was completely surprised. Plays well, very dynamic, enough "planning" happening in game that it feels like a great time, and thanks to the cover system actually feels like you have control over your character.
Now, Ubi, just do me a favor and hire a bug tester this time? Multiplayer played like crap on the PS3, and was only moderately better on the 360. There is no excuse in this day and age for a game to work so pitifully online.
01/08/09
01/08/09
Why on earth they decided to take two quite unique niche games and make them into central franchises I'll never know. I loved the old R6 and GR games because they offered something genuinely different from other shooters (well I guess SWAT was similar to R6).
It's not like the brand names were famous, except to people who already liked them how they were, so what's the point in moving the brand into a more mainstream game?
:(
/me re-installs Raven Shield
01/08/09
01/08/09
01/08/09
01/08/09
The online was skill decent enough I guess, but the solo parts of these games are way to slow anymore. It has a lot to do with the micro-managing aspect added to the last two games in the series, which made me feel like I was playing Rainbow Six on the N64 all over again (not fun).
In my opinion, if the Ghost Recon series wants to survive within the current gaming landscape, they need to be more in tune with what COD4 did right. If Ubisoft can deliver that type of game play, then I'd consider it more of a return to form, and not just some sort of a rip-off.
01/08/09
you should play the old ones on pc, some of the user created map packs were amazing! if you do look up one called gangland.
01/08/09
p.s. My spelling/grammar was horrible in my above post. I feel so ashamed. :P
01/08/09
I'm not against a new one but I hope they do something new this time around. Vegas 1 and 2 were a bit too similar for my tastes...
Oh and as for news of new GRAW and R6, in other words the sky is blue. Or I am awesome. Yeah you can interchange that now.
01/08/09
vegas 2 was pretty much a clone, with a worse story line, and even worse new multiplayer maps (the maps that were new anyway). all they added was a sprint button. sure, if it aint broke dont fix it, but dont make me drop 60 freakin dollars on the same thing either.
/endrant
01/08/09
I finished both Vegas games. Though I admit I don't remember Vegas 2's story one bit. The gameplay was ok I guess. It was just too similar with the first one. Granted it's not broken but they could've added something right?
@lilaliendog: Oh yeah the sprinting. Same with Cod's sprint. Agreed on the assets as well. Heck I think I even used the same gun to finish Vegas 2!
01/08/09
01/08/09
01/08/09
01/08/09
nope ubisoft...
01/08/09
01/08/09