Graw2

[folken001]

Surprisingly, this game only received somewhat underwhelming scores. I thought it would get a 9 for sure, but gamespot gave it a 8.7 then 1up gave it a 8.5. 1up even went as far as calling it a GRAW1.5 Gamespot pointed out that GRAW2 can be finished in 4-5 hours. While this somewhat disappointed me, but I do believe that it's a good sign. Perhaps, this is exactly why Ubisoft decided to give PS3 version of GRAW2 more development time. Maybe there will be more scenarios and all the problems presented in current version will be fixed.

Anyone is going to get this game for PS3?

[PapaSmurf]

This game has PC written all over it, at least for me.

I played the demo on the 360 and lets just say I was extremely dissapointed the game took place and revolved around Mexico again. There's a whole world for the Ghosts to go around in and I have be to in Mexico again. I was excited for this at first, but I'm probably not going to be gettng this one for a while for any system.

Definitely seems like GRAW1.5 to me and that was just from the demo.

[Mochan]

Ghost Recon has gone to the dogs ,what can I say. It was bad enough to be in Mexico the first time, now I have to do that all over again?! Ghost Recon 1 was freaking around the world. Started in the Middle East, went to America, Russia, Africa, etc. Not that I have anything against Mexico, but GRAW felt very claustrophobic in comparison to Ghost Recon. Quit with the freaking city combat, this is Ghost Recon not Rainbow Six Urban Operations. I want freaking wilderness guddamit.

What's with these developers suddenly developing tunnel vision? Rainbow Six was also a game that went everywhere. From Kosovo to Japan to America to Georgia to Kazakshtan etc. etc. today we are stuck in freaking Vegas. Boring!

[PapaSmurf]

Well Mochan you can always play Socom. Those games still take you around the world.

[Rogue Bounty Hunter]

I'll pass. I played GRAW and quickly got tired of its "teamwork".

I'm not shocked this sequel is shorter. I believe more focus was on the multiplayer portion of the game, and when that happens to a game, I usually try to avoid them.

[folken001]

Well none of us should be shocked about the length of the game since it came out a year after the first. Reviews pointed out how the saving grace for GRAW2 is its online matches and so on. However, I only liked the first for its single player. I never really cared to play it online because no one was playing it like a team.

I didn't like the old recon. I thought how you could switch from member to member was kinda lame. I prefer how it's done in GRAW. While I think it's better to play in 3rd person, I think PC version of GRAW has better handle on operating the teammates. If you didn't already notice, PC version of GRAW2 has about the same release date as PS3's. I think there is a huge possibility that PS3 & PC version of GRAW2 will be much more complete. The only downside though is that I have to wait until June given there is no more delay then. :(

[Rogue Bounty Hunter]

I think the reason why I even tried out GRAW was because it was the only next-gen 3rd person shooter. I'm glad GRAW 2 doesn't have that luxury, though the 360 version had a release date sale last week for $50.

I think I'm going to avoid the GRAW and Rainbow Six games from now on. Splinter Cell is hanging on by a thread, though the next one will be a make or break for me and the series.

[Ocelot]

I think the reason why I even tried out GRAW was because it was the only next-gen 3rd person shooter. I'm glad GRAW 2 doesn't have that luxury, though the 360 version had a release date sale last week for $50.

I think I'm going to avoid the GRAW and Rainbow Six games from now on. Splinter Cell is hanging on by a thread, though the next one will be a make or break for me and the series.

Really? I can kinda understand how you feel about GRAW 1&2 but I really enjoyed the Vegas demo on my 360 and I can't wait for SC on my PS3. I was going to cave and get Vegas for my 360 but I keep hearing the PS3 version will be superior in both visuals and polish. Plus I need some games to ease my pain of parting with the $700:thumbsup:

[folken001]

pfffft Not SC.

[DrunkenThumbmaster]

Really? I can kinda understand how you feel about GRAW 1&2 but I really enjoyed the Vegas demo on my 360 and I can't wait for SC on my PS3. I was going to cave and get Vegas for my 360 but I keep hearing the PS3 version will be superior in both visuals and polish. Plus I need some to ease my pain of parting with the $700:thumbsup:

Where did you hear that about Vegas. I've heard that the textures won't be as good. And some of the online functionality won't be there. That was a interview in 360 gamer magazine. You might can find at 360gamer.uk

As for Graw despite the name it's not a sequel it's an Expansion it has less new content than GR2 Summit Strike which was marketed as a expansion.

The GR series is about online that's the focus if you're not into online play I can't imagine why you would want it. And for the record the PS3 version I doubt would look as good this is making heavy use of the GPU and pushing some DX10 effects. These are the stronges weakness in the PS3. that are more CPU intensive should do better on the PS3 but GPU heavy should do better on the 360. The PS3 may get extra content. Like SC but in this age of DLC expect to see it on the 360 as well ala what Ubisoft is doing with SC maps and female character.

[Cuddly Knife]

The only problem with the DLC part Thumbs, is that 360 owners are given the product 90% complete, then the PS3 owners get 100% when their version comes out, but only the 360 owners will have to pay for that extra content. The only benefit the 360 owners have is that they get to play it 3 -6 months sooner, but really, is that a worthwhile trade-off?

I think I would want to wait and get the extra content than to play the game a few months earlier. I think most people would, but it also depends on the game and content.

[Ocelot]

Where did you hear that about Vegas. I've heard that the textures won't be as good. And some of the online functionality won't be there. That was a interview in 360 gamer magazine. You might can find at 360gamer.uk

As for Graw despite the name it's not a sequel it's an Expansion it has less new content than GR2 Summit Strike which was marketed as a expansion.

The GR series is about online that's the focus if you're not into online play I can't imagine why you would want it. And for the record the PS3 version I doubt would look as good this is making heavy use of the GPU and pushing some DX10 effects. These are the stronges weakness in the PS3. that are more CPU intensive should do better on the PS3 but GPU heavy should do better on the 360. The PS3 may get extra content. Like SC but in this age of DLC expect to see it on the 360 as well ala what Ubisoft is doing with SC maps and female character.

I've heard about this through different forums and posts. Mind you I don't believe everything I hear but considering the allotted time given to create Vegas on PS3, I would expect it to look slightly better. I quite honestly tired of waiting this long for inferior ports to arrive to the PS3.

The GRAW series while decent, I must agree with you here. Online is key here. As much as I would like to challenge you on the technical mumbo jumbo about the visuals of PS3 vs. 360...well I really must side with your statement in this matter. I've read some blogs and even done the homework for myself. I still have yet to see any PS3 game that matches the graphical splendor found in Kameo, PD0 and Gears etc.

Kameo was a release game and those textures are unbelievable. Resistance overall is supererior to PD0 in almost every way but the textures in PD0 are almost lifelike.

If that hardware issue wasn't so abundant, 360 would be prime cut.

[DrunkenThumbmaster]

The only problem with the DLC part Thumbs, is that 360 owners are given the product 90% complete, then the PS3 owners get 100% when their version comes out, but only the 360 owners will have to pay for that extra content. The only benefit the 360 owners have is that they get to play it 3 -6 months sooner, but really, is that a worthwhile trade-off?

I think I would want to wait and get the extra content than to play the game a few months earlier. I think most people would, but it also depends on the game and content.


It depends on what the added content is. Take Splinter Cell for example they added a female for multiplayer which bascially is just a skin, she plays the sames as the other spies and they added 2 maps. That's nothing significant Same with the Knights of the Nine quest in Oblivion it's extra but I think Oblivion on the 360 was complete. The one advantage they do have is not having to pay for that extra content but they get the game so much later. So I think it's a decent tradeoff.




I've heard about this through different forums and posts. Mind you I don't believe everything I hear but considering the allotted time given to create Vegas on PS3, I would expect it to look slightly better. I quite honestly tired of waiting this long for inferior ports to arrive to the PS3.

We'll see I'm not saying it's impossible but I have my doubts. I don't understand why the ports are taking so long. Has Ubi released a PS3 game yet?

[folken001]

We'll see I'm not saying it's impossible but I have my doubts. I don't understand why the ports are taking so long. Has Ubi released a PS3 game yet?

i took Bungie how many years to port Halo2? I believe the first PS3 Ubisoft game will be released in April.

[Rogue Bounty Hunter]

Has Ubi released a PS3 game yet?

As far as I know, nope, not yet. I wonder if they are optimizing the game for the PS3 or is it just simply taking longer to port. I always thought Oblivion and Saints Row should have been ready by PS3's launch, but it could also be taking longer on those as well.

I don't expect anymore multiplat late arrivals on PS3, but I also wouldn't want the devs push back the 360 version release of a game just to get both out on the same day.

[Rogue Bounty Hunter]

i took Bungie how many years to port Halo2? I believe the first PS3 Ubisoft game will be released in April.

Come on, Folken. You know we don't care about anything being ported to PC around here. :D

[DrunkenThumbmaster]

i took Bungie how many years to port Halo2? I believe the first PS3 Ubisoft game will be released in April.

the timing was marketing based more than anything.

[PapaSmurf]

the timing was marketing based more than anything.

that is definitely the truth, especially when you look at how Halo was originally being developed for the PC first. Of course I'd put money on that if Halo came out for PC first it wouldn't have gotten any where near the praise it's gotten since it came out for Xbox