Anyone else really enjoy Vanquish?

[omega 616]

I don't need a shooter to be realistic, I love Vanquish. I'm not really hating on CoD for realism moreso for trying to be hardcore when it's not. If I'm supposed spend 100+ hours playing online, it better have hard-to-master gameplay that is deep (that is my definition of hardcore). CoD is the opposite of that. I'm not hating on Uncharted, I love Uncharted 2 (the 1st game is just very average though), but Uncharted is not a pure cover shooter, it has platforming and puzzles. Uncharted is just like a good Hollywood summer blockbuster, it's not trying to be anything else whereas CoD thinks it's the end-all-be-all of FPSs when it's, in fact, just a dumbed down FPS.

I call games like Tekken, Street Fighter, etc. just fighters or fighting games. It doesn't really matter if we call them by different names, we both agree what kind of game Bayo is and what kind of game Tekken is.

Did you not read the reply I made to you about "how to play Vanquish"? I said Vanquish should be played somewhere between the video I posted and a cover shooter. You shouldn't play Vanquish as a cover shooter but you don't have to play it like in the video I posted either, that's just how far you can take it, not that you HAVE to.

That other game you talking about is called Quantum Theory and it's just a very generic cover TPS, nothing more. Vanquish is completely different from that game, the only thing they have in common is that they both are Japanese developed. Again, I don't think any shooter lets you ROCKET slide over that battlefield like Vanquish, that's some innovation, not huge, but it's something. You can't deny Vanquish has a unique feel to it even though it's a parody of a cliche.

Kind of messed up description of hardcore but ok. I think of hardcore as the kind of games that get tournaments built around them, starcraft, unreal tournament etc.

How does CoD thinks it's the end-all-be-all of FPSs? I think it is just pumped out every year and makes millions, I don't think it claims to be better than it is. Maybe the kiddie winks who play it do but I am sure CS players do the same.

I can't see how it is dumbed down? Although if your thinking of it as simplified, is that always a bad thing? I think COD is made to be fast paced, so having MGO style gameplay would seriously fuck up that goal.

I said Vanquish should be played somewhere between the video I posted and a cover shooter

Why should it?

I think quantem theory (thank you!) is more innovative than vanquish, throwing your friend round to do special attacks, I can only thin of one other game like that (some stupid kids game, were you kill ink creatures with a giant key) and three that only had it in very small parts (resident evil 4+5 and MGS3 with eva), although you could only give boosts, not attacks.

Is rocket sliding innovative or a gimmick? Something to set it slightly apart from it's competitors?

 

[Googenstien]

Ive heard very good things about it from respectable people on these boards and it got good reviews from sites and reviewrs I like.. my issue is its length. I will wait for a price drop, but I have no doubt I will like the game.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Kind of messed up description of hardcore but ok. I think of hardcore as the kind of games that get tournaments built around them, starcraft, unreal tournament etc.

How does CoD thinks it's the end-all-be-all of FPSs? I think it is just pumped out every year and makes millions, I don't think it claims to be better than it is. Maybe the kiddie winks who play it do but I am sure CS players do the same.

I can't see how it is dumbed down? Although if your thinking of it as simplified, is that always a bad thing? I think COD is made to be fast paced, so having MGO style gameplay would seriously fuck up that goal.

I have a problem with your description of hardcore because that excludes single player games from being hardcore. Playing other real people instead of the AI is definitely harder; however, there are gameplay mechanics that just don't work in an online environment like the rocket sliding and slow-mo in Vanquish. Online games sacrifice single player only gameplay mechanics that can add more depth for the depth added when you play against real people.

I think Activision, most CoD players, and the gaming media (the major review sites) think CoD is the gold standard for FPSs (and probably Halo for sci-fi FPSs). That makes me feel that a lot of people think CoD is hardcore. I don't mind simplified; if there is some kind of control scheme that is simpler than the current one and allows all the mechanics to stay in the game, then I have no issue with that. I think dumbed down comes into play when things are removed (like leaning) and changed in way that makes the game less tactical. I think one button grenade toss breaks the balance of the game because in order to throw a grenade (a very powerful and destructive attack) you should be vulnerable, you shouldn't be able to throw a nade with your gun still out, that's my opinion and I stand by it (I don't mind this in single player but in online I HATE it). Regen health also sucks online because there is no penalty for moving through open areas while getting shot (but not killed) since you will be back to 100% in a few seconds. Don't get me wrong, simplified and dumbed down are pretty close to each other so it's kinda hard to explain.

Depending on the game mode and map, MGO can be very faced paced. In one map, it literally takes 10 seconds (maybe even slightly less) to get to the other team's spawn, that's makes for fast paced play. Some modes like team sneaking are very slow paced, and depending on a team's strategy, it can also be fast paced; rushing the other team is a tactic that can make a slow paced mode rather faced paced.

I said Vanquish should be played somewhere between the video I posted and a cover shooter

Why should it?

I think quantem theory (thank you!) is more innovative than vanquish, throwing your friend round to do special attacks, I can only thin of one other game like that (some stupid kids game, were you kill ink creatures with a giant key) and three that only had it in very small parts (resident evil 4+5 and MGS3 with eva), although you could only give boosts, not attacks.

Is rocket sliding innovative or a gimmick? Something to set it slightly apart from it's competitors?

I'll give you the "Vanquish has no single gameplay mechanic that is innovative" card. When all the parts of Vanquish are summed up, you get a cover shooter that stresses that you stay out in the action and NOT take cover, which I feel is refreshing change of pace. The sliding, the slow-mo, the enemies, the level design, etc. all come together to achieve this goal. So alone, I guess, not one mechanic is innovative but combined, I think there's some innovation there, maybe just a little, but I think it's there. If it's not there then that's OK because Vanquish is definitely unique and it's own game even if there's nothing innovative there, and that is why I really love the game. I definitely disagree that the sliding is a gimmick.

I just had to many problems with the demo to really give it a fair chance. Mainly with the weak controls and weak feeling guns.

1) The controls aren't weak, it's takes a bit of time to get used to them but once you do, they are very tight controls.

2) The guns aren't that weak. The assault rifle is the weakest gun in the game and I barely used it in the main game; I'm guessing you used the assault rifle most of the time. The heavy machine gun is pretty strong and the shotgun is strong up close like a shotgun should be. It only takes like 3 shots to the legs of the boss to take out his leg. And, the guns upgrade and get more powerful during the game.

Ive heard very good things about it from respectable people on these boards and it got good reviews from sites and reviewrs I like.. my issue is its length. I will wait for a price drop, but I have no doubt I will like the game.

Kmart had it for $35 this week. If you get into Vanquish, you will get at least 20hrs out of it. It is really a game you'll want to play twice for sure, and the challenges are pretty tough. If you are just going to play it once through, then it's not worth the $60.

 

[blind_dead_mcjones]

played the full version of the game, thought it was fun (i found boosting behind the enemy trenches to fire a shotgun blast into their backs rather satisfying, the lock-on laser was rather fun too, not much use indoors though).

its definately in the vein of "so bad its good" and "a guilty pleasure". sure its purely style over substance, sometimes that is what you need to break the monotomy every now and then.

it could do without the quicktime events though

Is rocket sliding innovative or a gimmick? Something to set it slightly apart from it's competitors?

not sure, it certainly isn't something new, as mecha based TPS games like Armored Core and Another Centurys Episode (and everything with the name gundam in it) have been using rocket sliding for ages

the only part that annoyed me was how the melee destroys your shields and you ave to regenerate them before you can do any bullet-time shiz

if you have the disc launcher you can melee without the boost/shield guage being knocked down to zero and waiting for it to regenerate

 

[Ulfur]

I love this game. It's just plain fun. I've always liked shooters and especially tactical ones with cover and teammates. I also like sci-fi. This game takes those things and kicks them into high gear. It's tactical and frenetic at the same time. It's hard to run straight with guns blazing, but you also can't just sit behind the same wall and take potshots. It forces you to be both clever and fast and gives you the power to fight in many different ways.

Sure it has it's little glitches and annoyances like any game, but they are few and far between. It's probably not a game for everyone but they sure made it available to anyone that wants it with 5 different difficulty levels, the lowest with auto aim and the highest with ungodly zero margin for error and no weapon upgrades. The skill cap is pretty damn high. There are so many well implemented features in this game that I find it hard to criticize it.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

I'm not buying Vanquish for two reasons:

1) The story/characters are fucking god-awful. A lot of people defend this shit on the grounds that it was intentional, but I think that line of reasoning is plainly idiotic. 99% of videogame writing is mediocre or horrendous, so it seems entirely too convenient that we're suddenly churning out this nonsense "on purpose". I think it's just easier to go with the standard writing effort (none) and declare yourself ironic - even if your work bears no discernable signs of carefully-crafted satire.

2) The single-player is inexcusably short. Everything I've read puts it in the 5-6 hour range. I'm well aware that skill-intensive games like Vanquish trade heavily in replay value, but no amount of mundane challenge modes is going to compensate for a game I can easily finish in one sitting. It's Alan Wake all over again, and I'm taking the exact same approach here; if devs are going to offer me one evening's worth of entertainment, I'll wait until it costs exactly what one evening's worth of entertainment should.

 

[TailstheHedgehog]

I enjoyed it, though I didn't think the action was quite as good as Platinum Games' Bayonetta, and I wouldn't have minded a bit more close-quarters combat, but I'll buy the sequel for sure (assuming it's definitely in the works). Still, it wasn't my favourite game of 2010, but was brilliant in its own right.

 

[Madara XIII]

I felt it was almost a parody and thoroughly enjoyed the story because of that (how can you not laugh when both of the main characters are chewing on gravel as they speak while a woman who fits almost every support character cliche guides them during a journey where they will enter helicopters that only sometimes crash, at least when the main character isn't genre savvy enough to realize that Helicopter+enemy controlled airspace+action game=crash, and smoke way too many cigarettes?).
As for the action, the slowmo slide was a *****, but the other bullet time methods worked out well, the bosses were fun to fight even if they were all shoot the weakpoint battles (though that fight with the russain can piss off and die in some godforsaken hole where I never have to see it again), many times I frequently let out a "holy shit" at something I just did (sliding behind a tank with a shotgun and blowing it apart in slowmo made my day), the guns all felt powerful as they tore through robotic minions, and the enviroments I went through (while they blend together to the point that I forgot I was fighting my way up a giant transforming robot/cannon, not an easy task) were exceptionally nice to look at.

Also, I got the game for half off new so I can't complain really.

I know it's awesome huh? Just did an LP of it and the final boss ranked up in there with my all time favorite final bosses.

1. Vergil from DMC3
2. the 16th Colossus
3. Colonel Radec from Killzone 2
4. Sephiroth from FF7
5. Bowser from Mario 64
6. The two russian mechs from Vanquish.

 

[Vivace-Vivian]

Blah it was ok. Kinda like Japan looked at America through a telescope, went back and made a game then wrapped it up and sent it to us with a big note saying 'HERE, YOU'LL LIKE THIS.'

All in all the story was stupid, the voice acting was way over the top (and I like most over the top voices) and the characters had little to no depth. Did I care about the little gun to head action at the end? No. Because I didn't care abut the game.