We just got finished playing the GRAW 2 demo, and so far we like what we see. The demo is very short, lasting maybe 20 minutes or so depending on how you play. The demo gives you a chance to eliminate a few enemies with a variety of weapons. You'll get some basic assault rifles and a spiffy sniper rifle for some shoot-through-walls action. One of the coolest new features in GRAW 2 is the ability to directly interface with any of your units. This includes your teammates, the recon drone, or the new MULE. The MULE acts as a mobile ammo dump where you can pick up new weapons and supplies. The MULE is also handy in that it's just the right size to provide necessary cover. Directly controlling the recon drone to spot enemies is a nice addition as well. The direct control also makes it easier to issue target commands to your squad.The beginning of the demo has you going solo, but you'll pick up your three teammates near the end. Unfortunately, the demo ends soon after you join up with the rest of your squad, so you won't get to test the team dynamics too much. Still, the demo gives you pretty much what you'd expect from GRAW 2, a nice update to an already good game. Whether or not that's enough for a sequel is up to you. Go give the demo a try and tell us what you think.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
1-31-2007 @ 1:40PM
KilgoreTrout XL said...
GRAW's single player campaign was so superb that I would have gladly taken just more of the same. Any improvements will be just icing on the cake.
I'm more concerned with the connectivity and lobby issues in the Multiplayer arena. It would not be an exaggeration to call the original's lobby system just plain broken.
Reply
1-31-2007 @ 1:45PM
8dot3 said...
...the demo ends soon after you join up with the rest of your squad, so you won't get to test the team dynamics too much.
Which is the #1 reason I didn't love the first GRAW. I really hope they fixed how well your squad mates react to your commands and enemy fire.
Reply
1-31-2007 @ 1:52PM
cabrafeliz said...
You'd think they'd be comfortable enough with the 360 hardware by now to have the game run a a stable 30fps, but you'd be wrong... I'm getting the same vibe I got from NFS Carbon... quick rehash for a great game...
Reply
1-31-2007 @ 3:06PM
James Avery said...
I don't understand these different Tom Glancy games. Why can't Ubisoft just agree on a control scheme? The R6:VEGAS control scheme is far superior in my opinion. All of these Rainbow Six titles(remember, Ghost Recon USED to be a RAINBOW SIX offshoot), have different control mechanisms. They all share the same essential gameplay, why not the same controls?
Otherwise, I enjoyed the incredibly freaking short demo. I think I might GAMEFLY this one up. Word.
Reply
1-31-2007 @ 4:18PM
Stevie said...
I didn't like it. It's more of the same, and I really don't see many improvements over the first one (which I loved). Even the music and the menus aren't changed! Also, how hard is it for a next-gen game to show off some interactive environments? All that tall grass there showed was some serious collision detection issues. I might pass on this one...
Reply
1-31-2007 @ 4:23PM
Insomnious said...
"GRAW's single player campaign was so superb that I would have gladly taken just more of the same."
Seconded. The demo is a lot of the same, but that's a good thing and means fans of the original can jump right back into the fight.
Any news of whether the multiplayer will have the same cover feature as the campaign? Now THAT would be a massive improvement - as would an extended co-op campaign.
Reply
1-31-2007 @ 4:26PM
aragorn said...
bottom line: I prefer R6 vegas :p
Reply
1-31-2007 @ 4:31PM
Barbie Fu said...
way too short...........the multi player co-op is what kept me in it for a year, gears, CoD3, fear, far cry came after, and i still play co-op graw almost every night......i can't wait!
Reply
1-31-2007 @ 4:33PM
Barbie Fu said...
yeah, integrating the control from 1p to multi player would rock.........
Reply
1-31-2007 @ 4:51PM
Wii360dsPC said...
It looks more polished from the animations to the visual effects, but compared to Gears of War and Rainbow Six Vegas, the control scheme is very dated. Despite having played a sick amount of Ghost Recon and GRAW, I now really find the controls uncomfortable. If you combined these visuals with the cover system from either of those games, it could be a lot of fun.
Unfortunately, it's not. There were too many occassions where it appeared that I had a clear shot only to hit the rocks/cover in front of me. I'm being shot at and I want cover!
I'll rent, but I'm planning on sticking to Rainbow Six Vegas for multiplayer fun.
Reply
1-31-2007 @ 4:56PM
blueGrassTubb said...
Hey yo Barbie, blueGrassTubb in the house!
I agree with some of the above; more of the same is a good (great, fantastic, awesome, etc) thing. In all honesty, I would have been extremely happy with simply more maps (a la Summit Strike) with no changes to the gameplay or graphics.
Remember, for those who are complaining, that GR has always gone in 2 game cycles before seeing any huge changes to the graphics/gameplay. We had the original and GR: Island Thunder which were essdentially the same game with different maps. Sure, we had a few more weapons in Island Thunder, and the menus were upgraded so that we could cycle through kits backwards (huge upgrade), but the game was no different. The same goes with GR2 and GR2: Summit Strike (which requires GR2 from what I remember). There were no revolutionary changes there.
So if we have a well established pattern from Ubisoft (2 games, then major upgrade to the engine), why do we have all of the complaing that the game isn't different enough when we're in the middle of a development cycle? If you truly expected that this game was going to be drastically different than the last, you were fooling yourself, and blaming Ubisoft. The next iteration will be the next major upgrade in the series (assumming there is a next one). If the game still remains stagnant, then we will have room for some serious complaining.
Reply
1-31-2007 @ 5:17PM
J.W. said...
I had been avoiding the Ghost Recon series for a long time, but after playing the demo, I have to say... not too bad. A bit of a slow pace, but not bad.
Reply
2-01-2007 @ 10:53AM
Phil said...
And what are people complaining about It had A FUCKING M4 for christ sake.
not even Rainbow Six Vegas Had an M4.
That fact alone makes this Demo better then That game alone.
Reply
2-01-2007 @ 11:09AM
Phil said...
If you are smart you know that you can play the demo for hours and hours once you get the M4 and kill one of your team-mates to get his M14 and head back to the main camp and just to test out the team stuff and fuck around with the M4.
Reply
2-02-2007 @ 5:30PM
Willzay said...
I was personally disappointed with this demo, its just too simular to GRAW, which isn't a bad thing but doesn't justify 40 pounds for 'expanded healing commands' and a different coloured armour, unfortunatly for ubisoft im gunna give this a miss, march is for Guitar Hero 2 not Graw 1.5
Reply