PDA

View Full Version : OK! We NEED to get a yes verdict for it to work!



Snooping_Sniper
05-01-2008, 08:02 PM
Do we agree or disagree that Random respawns have totally ruined what was a moderate game and having no communication between teammates while dead has made the whole TACTICAL TEAM WORK Disappear. jus every one say yes to this post if they would like a respawn option available. And if UBI have any sense it would listen to its so called "VALUED CUSTOMERS"

All those who oppose can say no BTW

DexLuther
05-01-2008, 08:07 PM
Respawns in general ruined the tactical game play.

Take respawns out completely (except in Team Leader), and the game will be fixed (somewhat).

mohamed5867
05-01-2008, 08:26 PM
That and, i think the sprinting option, is being abused to a point where the killing is made more with a lucky shot, than dependig on accuracy..maybe its just me, but in vegas i didnt have that problem.

DexLuther
05-01-2008, 08:56 PM
Originally posted by mohamed5867:
That and, i think the sprinting option, is being abused to a point where the killing is made more with a lucky shot, than dependig on accuracy..maybe its just me, but in vegas i didnt have that problem.

They'd have to fix the guns too. Make the guns actually reflect how they really are rather than have them reflecting how people that don't know guns THINK they are.

GSG_9_Rage
05-02-2008, 01:15 AM
I agree that respawns should be taken out all together in order to return to the true tactical roots of the series.

VP360
05-02-2008, 01:43 PM
Originally posted by GSG_9_Rage:
I agree that respawns should be taken out all together in order to return to the true tactical roots of the series.

Im sick of people saying respawns should be taken out all together. The option is there so people can choose to play with respawns or without so why take out respawns. If you like no respawns play with them off and everybody else who likes respawns can play with them on. This game actually needs more options. No need to take any away.

DexLuther
05-02-2008, 02:17 PM
Originally posted by VP360:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GSG_9_Rage:
I agree that respawns should be taken out all together in order to return to the true tactical roots of the series.

Im sick of people saying respawns should be taken out all together. The option is there so people can choose to play with respawns or without so why take out respawns. If you like no respawns play with them off and everybody else who likes respawns can play with them on. This game actually needs more options. No need to take any away. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lets see maybe because respawns don't have any business being in a game that's supposed to be realistic.

That would be like adding squad based tactics, Al-Qaida terrorists, and hardcore realism to a game that is supposed to be all sci-fi run and gun like Halo.

Why not put guns on the cars in Grand Turismo or give the player the ability to get out of his car and highjack other cars?

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

PS: Don't be ******ed and say something like "It's a video game it can't be realistic" like so many other people on these forums that don't seem to realize that realistic means 'based on real life' or 'simulating real life.'

VP360
05-02-2008, 06:47 PM
Originally posted by DexLuther:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VP360:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GSG_9_Rage:
I agree that respawns should be taken out all together in order to return to the true tactical roots of the series.

Im sick of people saying respawns should be taken out all together. The option is there so people can choose to play with respawns or without so why take out respawns. If you like no respawns play with them off and everybody else who likes respawns can play with them on. This game actually needs more options. No need to take any away. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lets see maybe because respawns don't have any business being in a game that's supposed to be realistic.

That would be like adding squad based tactics, Al-Qaida terrorists, and hardcore realism to a game that is supposed to be all sci-fi run and gun like Halo.

Why not put guns on the cars in Grand Turismo or give the player the ability to get out of his car and highjack other cars?

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

PS: Don't be ******ed and say something like "It's a video game it can't be realistic" like so many other people on these forums that don't seem to realize that realistic means 'based on real life' or 'simulating real life.' </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well it is a video game and alot of thing arent realistic like the xray vision cover system for one. What I would really like to know though is why people care if there are respawns. Just play with no respawns simple as that.

DexLuther
05-02-2008, 10:35 PM
Originally posted by VP360:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DexLuther:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by VP360:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by GSG_9_Rage:
I agree that respawns should be taken out all together in order to return to the true tactical roots of the series.

Im sick of people saying respawns should be taken out all together. The option is there so people can choose to play with respawns or without so why take out respawns. If you like no respawns play with them off and everybody else who likes respawns can play with them on. This game actually needs more options. No need to take any away. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lets see maybe because respawns don't have any business being in a game that's supposed to be realistic.

That would be like adding squad based tactics, Al-Qaida terrorists, and hardcore realism to a game that is supposed to be all sci-fi run and gun like Halo.

Why not put guns on the cars in Grand Turismo or give the player the ability to get out of his car and highjack other cars?

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

PS: Don't be ******ed and say something like "It's a video game it can't be realistic" like so many other people on these forums that don't seem to realize that realistic means 'based on real life' or 'simulating real life.' </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well it is a video game and alot of thing arent realistic like the xray vision cover system for one. What I would really like to know though is why people care if there are respawns. Just play with no respawns simple as that. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again because they don't belong in Rainbow Six expect in certain objective based gamemodes.

I wonder what you'd all be saying if they did add squad based tactics and hardcore realism to Halo. They'd leave some of the stuff the Halo fans liked, but screwed it up royally and driving away a huge portion of their fans.

Now, all the Halo fans that remain would complain about it, but the new people would say: "what you like is still there. Why do you have to ruin the game for us?"

The fans would respond: "Yeah it's still there, but it's totally ruined because they catered to the hardcore tactical fans and drove away most of their loyal fans."

It's the same situation now, only in reverse. Ubi catered to that crowd, messed everything up for their fans, and drove most of them away. There really aren't many people left to play with respawns off.

Even if there were it would be pointless. Everything's catered to the run and gunners. The weapons, the maps, the ranks; everything (which is why the fans left).

That's why respawns should go. They shouldn't be in anyways. It's like adding guns to the cars in Forza or Grand Tourismo. The messed up weapons just make it worse. At least if the weapons worked properly instead of how people with no clue THINK they should work less R6 fans would have left since the game would be a little closer to a functional R6 game.

BTW: I've said many times that the cover system in Vegas is part of the problem. It severely needs to be completely reworked. The GRAW cover system would pretty much be perfect.

r0lled
05-02-2008, 10:56 PM
well what do you want from them. The gaming industry is a BUSINESS! They have to make changes to cater to the demographics of the gaming industry. You may not like it and if that's so, then run your own company and see how far it gets. They give you, the player, the option to play like you want, the OLD way that you enjoy or the NEWER way that is trying to keep up with competitors for FPS in general. Yes, RB6 is probably the only tactical FPS, but it IS a FPS and because of that it has to make some sacrifices to stay in the hunt with other games so they can make more games for PEOPLE that want the older game-play to complain about.

I mean if it's that bad, then don't play. Get enough people not to play and they may go back to what made them popular. Continue playing means...you don't have a problem with the game...simple business...

DexLuther
05-02-2008, 11:10 PM
Originally posted by r0lled:
well what do you want from them. The gaming industry is a BUSINESS! They have to make changes to cater to the demographics of the gaming industry.

That excuse is getting so old and is complete bull.

I wonder what's better for bussiness:

Sell 2+ million copies of a game that wins multiple awards, stays on top of Xbox Live's most played list for the better part of a year, and to have virtually no competition.

OR

Sell 2 million copies of a mediocre (being generous there) game that wins no awards, doesn't top any positive lists, and the player base spirals downwards within the first month due to general dissatisfaction and technical issues. Oh lets not forget that you're competing against some of the biggest names in the business.

<span class="ev_code_RED">*EDIT - Do not bypass the forum language filter*</span>
<span class="ev_code_RED">*EDIT - Yeah um hi, please don't edit my posts. Thank you. The game is rated 17+, M, and has warnings about blood, and language, yet I have to be censored on the forum for that game? That doesn't make sense.*</span>

WarHawk722
05-02-2008, 11:49 PM
I think an actual respawn system would have worked far better than spawn points. Spawning near your team but away from the enemy is the best option in my opinion. This way a "front" gets formed between the two teams making it a bit more tactical than random respawning and less frustrating than being spawn camped or getting bored spawn camping the other team.

As for making a good name for themselves. I hear too many kids at my school talking about CoD5 coming out soon when everybody with any knowledge of the gaming industry will most likely stay away from that game. Most people don't pay any attention to the names on the screen before the game starts, they just mash START until it's time to play...

r0lled
05-04-2008, 03:53 PM
Originally posted by DexLuther:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by r0lled:
well what do you want from them. The gaming industry is a BUSINESS! They have to make changes to cater to the demographics of the gaming industry.

That excuse is getting so old and is complete bullsh*t.

I wonder what's better for bussiness:

Sell 2+ million copies of a game that wins multiple awards, stays on top of Xbox Live's most played list for the better part of a year, and to have virtually no competition.

OR

Sell 2 million copies of a mediocre (being generous there) game that wins no awards, doesn't top any positive lists, and the player base spirals downwards within the first month due to general dissatisfaction and technical issues. Oh lets not forget that you're competing against some of the biggest names in the business. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

1)It's not an excuse it's reality. Yes it happens all the time, but it doesn't mean it's not a valid reasoning for what they are doing with the franchise now.
2)This game has won numerous awards already, and still have an active community. It hasn't fallen despite the number of people complaining. For every 1 person saying the game is **** is isn't like the old game, which I admit it isn't, there's a least 3 to 4 newer fans of the game.
3)WHAT other game is 1/2 as known, like RB6, out there. That's the reason people are pissed to begin with because the last game of it's kind isn't what it used to be.

XyZspineZyX
05-04-2008, 04:54 PM
The original poster asked if the update changes to spawns ruined the game NOT whether the game should have them etc, please keep on topic its in everyones interest http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

DexLuther
05-04-2008, 08:05 PM
Originally posted by ms-kleaneasy:
The original poster asked if the update changes to spawns ruined the game NOT whether the game should have them etc, please keep on topic its in everyones interest http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Um talking about whether or not the game should have them kinda fits into the whether or not it ruined the game topic.

I also love how there are language filters on a forum for a game rated M for Mature or 17+, and how people are censored. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Kinda ironic that they swear in the game, but you can't swear on the forum FOR that game.

oODmGOo
05-04-2008, 08:23 PM
YES! However, i also think that it was just one factor in a few that ultimately ruined the game. I half agree with keeping to 1 life, cept we do that in matches and pubbing is kind of used for practice.

Snooping_Sniper
05-05-2008, 04:01 AM
OK since my original post...
1) i have been killed from respawns directly behind me 12 times

2) i have to run from each spawn to kill again when playing less than 4 players every game

3) i miss being spawn camped cos there is nothing like having a good rant after the game

4) Finally its hard now to find a descent game where i actually enjoy knowing where i) i am going to spawn and ii) telling my teammates WHEN DEAD that there is someone behind them who has jus spawned.

SO I ASK UBI TO MAKE AN UPDATE QUICK!

They don't have the balls to reply to half my emails and give me a satisfactory answer.

(and yet i just want to touch on the swearing. Jus cos someone uses foul language does not make them a bad person i so hope they bring a human rights legislation out to stop people being a victim on how that person behaves

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif lolol)

HarlequinK
05-05-2008, 04:51 AM
Originally posted by DexLuther:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ms-kleaneasy:
The original poster asked if the update changes to spawns ruined the game NOT whether the game should have them etc, please keep on topic its in everyones interest http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Um talking about whether or not the game should have them kinda fits into the whether or not it ruined the game topic.

I also love how there are language filters on a forum for a game rated M for Mature or 17+, and how people are censored. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Kinda ironic that they swear in the game, but you can't swear on the forum FOR that game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I suppose your opinion would hold more weight if you were less of a **** about it. Criticizing the mods and chastising them for editing one of your posts on their board is pretty presumptuous. Who exactly do you think you are?

As far as the game goes, do you really think they care if their game wins awards? I doubt it. They still have the money for the 2 million copies sold.