Rainbow Six Vegas 2: Xbox 360 Review

by Eddie Turner on 4/4/2008 12:00 AM EST
Comments Locked

29 Comments

Back to Article

  • Donkey2008 - Monday, April 7, 2008 - link

    Maybe Anandtech wanted to review the game because they found it interesting. I personally like the concept and would love to battle it out in a Vegas casino. With a PC version forthcoming, I found it useful to hear that the console game had framerate issues.

    Complaining about their rating or the fact that it's a console game is simply complaining for the sake of complaining. Good for Anandtech for previewing a game soon to be available to us PC users.
  • EddieTurner - Saturday, April 5, 2008 - link

    Hey all! Just thought I'd shed some light on a few of your concerns.

    This rating system is one that I devised after the good folks at AT explained that they wanted something new that would steer away from the traditional point scale. It is still evolving. But for now, I've created seven senarios that I believe people can indentify with. After all, if you were to ask a friend what he or she thought of a particular game, I doubt very seriously that you'd get a reply that included two numbers with a decimal in between. Not everyone will agree with my final words, and I don't expect that to be the case. I'd hate for any of you to miss out on something you were truly interested in because of something I said. I am hardly the authority on gaming. However, I do have a passion for games and I play a lot of them. So may be it'll help to think of me as your neighborhood fellow gamer. Because that's what I am indeed. AT saw that in me and here I am.

    Yes, this review is of a console game. But a game nonetheless. Considering array of different articles here at AT, I see no reason that such a product should be exluded from the site. Consoles are very much part a of the gaming world today. Sales figures will tell you that. As for me, I don't limit myself to a single platform. I go where the games are. And they're very much on consoles, as well as PC. The Xbox 360, PlayStation 3, and Wii all have a fair offering in the tech-world today. So there's no reason they shouldn't have a presence here. Needless to say, you can expect a full review of Grand Theft Auto IV very soon. But I do have in mind a pretty intriguiing PC game to talk about next.

    Oh, and I've never been repelling. Thanks for setting me straight!
  • ACasualObserver - Saturday, April 5, 2008 - link

    While I might share some of the reservations expressed in other posts about console reviews at Anandtech, and there were enough caveats listed for the game to have me scratching my head at a "Sweet" rating, you've earned some serious points for taking the moral high ground and responding to criticism with a humble, enthusiastic and entirely positive outlook. Your forum post was in many ways more illuminating than your game review. There is a lesson there for all of us.

    Kudos sir, and welcome aboard.
  • simla - Saturday, April 5, 2008 - link

    1) Much too long. I enjoy most of the in-depth hardware articles but still find myself skipping through the hyperbole in the middle sections. This much text on a game is beyond me though. Seriously.

    2) Ratings system, while trying to be 'cool' and unbiased is a little off the mark for me. 'Sweet' really doesn't mean shit for me - I'll still be using Metacritic for my games ratings...

    3) Confused by the sudden move to console gaming coverage on what is self-labelled as 'the' PC enthusiast website. Stick to what you know and specialize. Personally, we don't need another all-in-one site that tries everything, yet knows ultimately ends up knowing nothing. I really hope this isn't a sign of a good website going the way of Toms...
  • dare2savefreedom - Saturday, April 5, 2008 - link

    WTF,

    W
    T
    F

    you guys don't review disney's princess enchanted journey pcdvd but u review a 360 game?

    how much is m$ paying you guys, I'll double it.

    I want to see the review for dpej with sli.
    6bit macs and you guys never said a word.
    Ever since anandy got married this places been going down.
  • poohbear - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link

    why on earth would you review an xbox 360 game on a PC enthusiast website?!?! are you guys really trying to insult us here?!? BLASPHEMERS THE LOT OF YOU!!!!!!
  • jordanclock - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link

    It doesn't sound like the reviewer actually played through the game on co-op.

    I went through the game with my room mate on co-op and every non-character texture is downgraded to a blurry mess. Every single one. And the helicopter event at the end of the game brought the frame rate to what I would guess to be low teens, at best. This kind of problem came up in other parts of the game, to a lesser degree, many times. And it wasn't little things, it was 10-15 second spots that made it very difficult to play. What seems to be the culprit of this are the "physics." Whenever the frame rate dropped, it almost always occurred during firefights where there were lots of things that moved or broke.

    Also, the lack of control of the NPCs by the second player is a pretty big issue. There were many times when I'd get stuck between the two or unable to get somewhere because they were in the way. Of course, being player two, I had no way to get them to move other than ask my room mate to stop what he was doing and tell them to move.

    Playing on co-op is further hindered by the fact that whenever you receive a video message from the command, it covers up half of the second players view. It's a bit hard to aim properly when a giant Cisco logo is in your way.

    I think the game lacked a lot of polish. I'm not even going to bother with the PC version unless a decent demo is released.
  • Hardin - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link

    Oh man don't even mention that helicopter. I was playing that level with my brother and we had to repeat that part several times because we died so much due to the terrible frame rates. The Cisco message was also very annoying because it blocked my view. And it was really hard getting used to the coop splitting the screen right down the middle.
  • jordanclock - Monday, April 7, 2008 - link

    The middle split wasn't too much of an issue for me since we were playing in widescreen. However, I could see major issues on a standard definition TV.

    All I know is that the game had a strong feeling of lack of polish. I can not see many reasons why a game should be released with any of the problems my room mate and I experienced, let alone all of them together. It completely turned me off from purchasing the PC version.
  • Blitzed Penguin - Friday, April 4, 2008 - link

    I love AnandTech and there unbiased review of PC hardware such as graphics cards, CPU, power supplies, routers, and my other techy stuff. They also post the latest and greatest news of what is going on the the PC world and what we can expect in the future.

    Whats with the article about an XBOX video game? Did UBI pay you guys to advertise? It has nothing to do with hardware or PC. You have it labeled as "software" but there is no "software" tab at the top of the screen. There are several other sites dedicated to video games that gamers are more accustomed to.

    I could understand an article about the PC version maybe. AnandTech did use the first R6 Vegas as a benchmark and they could do the same with Vegas 2 (its a port and has limited graphics settings so maybe not). It is your site so you can change it how you want just giving my opinion. I just love the site and would hate to see it change.
  • 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.
  • 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.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now