PDA

View Full Version : Questions to Stuart White



xoops
02-22-2006, 12:31 PM
Mister White,

I downloaded and watched your very interresting interview on Gamespot web site:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/tomclancysrainbowsix4/index.html?q=Lockdown

I'm not a very clever person and sometimes things must be explained to me in order for me to understand. So below are the questions that came to my mind when I watched your interview.

1) QUOTE: "It's not a port, it's different!".
I know the graphics have been updated, but since we got the same levels from the PS2 (presented in a different order though) with the PS2 code base, how could one say that it's not a port ?

2) Just after saying "It's not a port, it's different!", you then described all the Multi-Player (MP) modes. Since 'Rainbow Six' is a game based on a novel written by the famous best-seller author Tom Clancy, don't you think it would be more appropriate to start any presentation of a R6 game by describing the story and the single player campaign? America's Army is an APPROPRIATE, FREE, COMPETITIVE and BUG-FREE MP-only game. Don't you think a Tom Clancy game should rather come with a wonderfull story and SINGLE PLAYER campaign first and foremost, AND THEN, come with multi-player features as a COMPLEMENT of the game?

3) QUOTE: "You no longer have the ability to jump from character to character. You play Ding Chavez throughout the entire game. We did that because we wanted to try to ??? the player into the role of Ding Chavez for the player to actually feel what it is to be the leader of these anti-terrorist guys."

Weird decision because the guy who plays Raven Shield has the freedom (choice, possibility) to keep the role of Ding Chavez in order for him to actually feel what it is to be the leader of these anti-terrorist guys. And in Raven Shield, whether the player switches character intentionally or because Ding has been killed, he/she will get another character who will automatically become the new leader, and then, he/she will actually feel what it is to be the leader of these anti-terrorist guys.

IMHO, the Raven Shield approach, with it's character and multi-team switching, was the best of the best. The player/customer should not be taken for nothing more than an idiot! He does not have to be restricted to the role of Ding Chavez to actually feel what it is to be the leader of these anti-terrorist guys. Indeed, every Raven Shield player knew at all time what it actually feel what it is to be the leader of these anti-terrorist guys.

If you said that the player has been restricted to the role of Ding Chavez because the PS2 console was not powerfull enough to allow character/team switching in open-ended non-linear levels, then I would have understand... Oh! I'm sorry, I forgot that it's not a port, it's different!

4) QUOTE: "Everybody in the team would have liked to implement a planning phase but
they didn't have time to do that."

Weird! Even if you had time to do that, how could you have done that? The levels are LINEAR with ONE entry point, there is ONE fireteam, the player can control ONE character and the ennemies SPAWN when the player crosses the TRIGGER point. Explain me how it would be possible to implement a planning phase with all those design choices? Your designers/programmers must be very clever and courageous because for the normal human being, it is simply not possible (and useful) to come up with a planning phase inside a game like Lockdown.

Please explain me mister White, I'm not very smart and I just want to understand...

xoops
02-22-2006, 12:31 PM
Mister White,

I downloaded and watched your very interresting interview on Gamespot web site:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/tomclancysrainbowsix4/index.html?q=Lockdown

I'm not a very clever person and sometimes things must be explained to me in order for me to understand. So below are the questions that came to my mind when I watched your interview.

1) QUOTE: "It's not a port, it's different!".
I know the graphics have been updated, but since we got the same levels from the PS2 (presented in a different order though) with the PS2 code base, how could one say that it's not a port ?

2) Just after saying "It's not a port, it's different!", you then described all the Multi-Player (MP) modes. Since 'Rainbow Six' is a game based on a novel written by the famous best-seller author Tom Clancy, don't you think it would be more appropriate to start any presentation of a R6 game by describing the story and the single player campaign? America's Army is an APPROPRIATE, FREE, COMPETITIVE and BUG-FREE MP-only game. Don't you think a Tom Clancy game should rather come with a wonderfull story and SINGLE PLAYER campaign first and foremost, AND THEN, come with multi-player features as a COMPLEMENT of the game?

3) QUOTE: "You no longer have the ability to jump from character to character. You play Ding Chavez throughout the entire game. We did that because we wanted to try to ??? the player into the role of Ding Chavez for the player to actually feel what it is to be the leader of these anti-terrorist guys."

Weird decision because the guy who plays Raven Shield has the freedom (choice, possibility) to keep the role of Ding Chavez in order for him to actually feel what it is to be the leader of these anti-terrorist guys. And in Raven Shield, whether the player switches character intentionally or because Ding has been killed, he/she will get another character who will automatically become the new leader, and then, he/she will actually feel what it is to be the leader of these anti-terrorist guys.

IMHO, the Raven Shield approach, with it's character and multi-team switching, was the best of the best. The player/customer should not be taken for nothing more than an idiot! He does not have to be restricted to the role of Ding Chavez to actually feel what it is to be the leader of these anti-terrorist guys. Indeed, every Raven Shield player knew at all time what it actually feel what it is to be the leader of these anti-terrorist guys.

If you said that the player has been restricted to the role of Ding Chavez because the PS2 console was not powerfull enough to allow character/team switching in open-ended non-linear levels, then I would have understand... Oh! I'm sorry, I forgot that it's not a port, it's different!

4) QUOTE: "Everybody in the team would have liked to implement a planning phase but
they didn't have time to do that."

Weird! Even if you had time to do that, how could you have done that? The levels are LINEAR with ONE entry point, there is ONE fireteam, the player can control ONE character and the ennemies SPAWN when the player crosses the TRIGGER point. Explain me how it would be possible to implement a planning phase with all those design choices? Your designers/programmers must be very clever and courageous because for the normal human being, it is simply not possible (and useful) to come up with a planning phase inside a game like Lockdown.

Please explain me mister White, I'm not very smart and I just want to understand...

XsargenX
02-22-2006, 02:38 PM
yeah Mr white! Please explain to us and the R6 community why is that you can come on and review in front of a camera,and say "we did that so the player can feel what it is to be the leader of rainbow" come on! give us a brake!

Quote" We are in the 4th generation of Rainbow so we have to stick with what it got us to where we at,and at the same time bring something new to the players" Quote

Is that acurate from what we all have seen in Ld Gold? The best, features that made Rainbow six are gone!, and whats new just sticks out all over the game making it feel like a Halo Run and Gun Game, Not Rainbow Six.

we will feel what it is to be the leader of rainbow when we get a product that is actually worth paying $50.00 for it. I'm pissed!

xSargenX

DayGlow
02-22-2006, 04:20 PM
Well you answered your own question about the planning. They would have to rebuild the levels from scratch to accommodate it, which wasn't realistic.

As for it's not a port, it isn't. They expended a huge effort in building the graphics engine up to current DX9 standards, including all the textures and animations. This is a huge effort and entailed much more than just porting over the PS2 code.

The fact that they used the console side of the franchise as a start point is what is foreign to the PC gamer. There are 2 very distinct R6 franchises. The console side and the PC side. LD for PC is a crossover from the console side.

SODsniper
02-22-2006, 05:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
LD for PC is a crossover from the console side. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And that is not a "port"????

Forgive me, but that is what most average PC gamers would consider a "port". And, as UBI is.... excuse me... WAS the premiere PC Game Creator, they would KNOW that.

It sounds like you are trying to determine what the definition of "is" is.

Or to quote some unknown historic cop, "I may not be able to define PORN, but I sure know it when I see it!"

We may not be able to define exactly what a PORT is, but everyone sure can recognize a PORT when we see it.

And, no matter how it is sugar-coated or tied up in semantics, LockDown is a PORT.


...and any attempt to state otherwise is futile, cuz it just ain't so.
-Tom Cruise, A FEW GOOD MEN

DayGlow
02-22-2006, 06:41 PM
You can argue all you want, but there was significant effort put into updating and changing the code base of the game.

It was not a simple transposing or 'porting' of the code over. Massive changes were made. Not enough for some people, but whatever. They didn't sit on the hands for 6 months and release the same code as there was in the PS2.

The problem is that the underlying concept isn't what most people that post on this forum agree with. Myself included. They made the game they wanted to make, a more story driven hollywoodesque action game.

If you really want to argue fine points, this engine is a port of the GR2 engine from Xbox, which was a port of the GR1 engine from PC.

SODsniper
02-22-2006, 07:19 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
You can argue all you want, but there was significant effort put into updating and changing the code base of the game.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So?? No one said that PORTing a game was easy. The amount of work required to do it doesn't determine whether or not it is a port.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
It was not a simple transposing or 'porting' of the code over. Massive changes were made. Not enough for some people, but whatever. They didn't sit on the hands for 6 months and release the same code as there was in the PS2.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

No one claimed that PORT = Same Code.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
The problem is that the underlying concept isn't what most people that post on this forum agree with. Myself included. They made the game they wanted to make, a more story driven hollywoodesque action game.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Too bad they did not make the game that their customers wanted.

But I digress...


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
If you really want to argue fine points, this engine is a port of the GR2 engine from Xbox, which was a port of the GR1 engine from PC. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

So, basically what you are saying is that we have a PORT from a game that is... what... 5 years old??

And this is supposed to make me feel better.... exactly how??

I just yearn for the gold old days when people actually worked at producing a worthwhile original product.

Call me an old fart, but that is what I would like to see.

DayGlow
02-22-2006, 07:31 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Just keep insulting anyone that worked on the title. Who are you to question their work ethic? That they don't care about the game? You have zero clue about it.

you don't like their game, fine, that's your opinion, but to say they don't care about what they release is way off base. I don't like everything about LD, but I would never suggest that the devs worked long hours and put their effort into the game didn't care.

That is a huge cheap shot.

wick1975
02-22-2006, 08:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Just keep insulting anyone that worked on the title. Who are you to question their work ethic? That they don't care about the game? You have zero clue about it.

you don't like their game, fine, that's your opinion, but to say they don't care about what they release is way off base. I don't like everything about LD, but I would never suggest that the devs worked long hours and put their effort into the game didn't care.

That is a huge cheap shot. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Man if you dont work for Nubi then you should be...
What a load of **** you trying to convince ppl that its not a port.Here is a qoute from jj that SAYS Its A Port..
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">It's a PS2 port, and you can't do a direct connect over Sony's DYNS service. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

DayGlow
02-22-2006, 08:59 PM
It's my opinion, renforced with discussions and meeting with the devs and seeing what they were doing. I will never disagree that the base of the game is the PS2 code, but it's not a direct port to the PC. A lot of work went into making it more than just porting over the game. Graphics engines aren't created overnight.

I'm sorry I don't praticipate in the Ubi bashing since it's the cool thing to do. I look at something and make up my own opinion. I'm not a sheep that goes with the crowd. I encourage anyone to do teh same. You can disagree with me all you want and that's fine. Just don't think it's an insult to call me on having a discussion on a discussion board. We aren't here to cheerlead each other.

Vadimnk
02-22-2006, 09:25 PM
Everyone and Everything Sucks!
Why are they making us take off our socks?
We give them all the support and pointers
They just laugh and point at us
Saying to them selfs: What a load of suckers
They thought this game will roxors

We just sit and watch
Looking at our watch
Thinking when will this end...

Spoonoop
02-22-2006, 09:34 PM
I think I'll try to change the mood here without getting flamed. Personally I like Lockdown for what it is, but I do agree along with everyone else that it is missing many features that the past Rainbow Six games had. Ubi took a different approach on creating Lockdown and it seems the majority of the fans didn't quite like what happend. Lockdown is a complete game but doesn't live up to the previous Rainbow Six titles.

Xessive
02-22-2006, 10:39 PM
Honestly I think everyone would have been willing to wait another month or so in order to get a complete, bug-free game.

Is till don't get why they cut out the storyline? Were the cinematics and character development features too 'consoley'? I'm glad they took out things like "secret breifcases scattered around levels" coz that woulda been too much. But teh game still feels like a stripped and incomplete console port. Again this is against what was announced about LD ("Re-engineered for PC").

EDIT: Oh yes, and the inability to choose your team members really makes game "actually feel what it is to be the leader of these anti-terrorist guys."

SODsniper
02-23-2006, 05:24 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Just keep insulting anyone that worked on the title. Who are you to question their work ethic?
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uhh... Their customer?? And it is not their work ethic I am questioning. If they want to make a port, fine. Let them make a port. But do not try and BS the customers into thinking it is NOT a port.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
That they don't care about the game?
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The evidence leads me to believe that they don't care about the game.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
You have zero clue about it.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And who'se fault is that?? I, and many others, have been BEGGING for information. We WANT to have a clue. We WANT to have the knowledge.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
you don't like their game, fine, that's your opinion,
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You must not have been reading my posts. I DO like the game.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
but to say they don't care about what they release is way off base.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Is it?? Other than JJ's posts, I see no evidence that anyone from UBI cares about LockDown.

The evidence shows that very real and sincere issues, most notably, the Dedicated Server issue has been completely IGNORED.


<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
I don't like everything about LD, but I would never suggest that the devs worked long hours and put their effort into the game didn't care.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

This discussion was initially about whether or not LockDown for PC was a port. You seemed to indicate that Port = Lazy and I followed you there when I probably shouldn't have.

But the point is, even LOCKDOWN Devs are calling LockDown a "port". The vast majority of Game Reviews call LockDown a port. Poll the people in this forum and you will find that all but a few call LockDown a port.

With all those posters, all those Game Reviewers and even the Devs calling LockDown a port, how can you post that it is not a port?

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
That is a huge cheap shot. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Perhaps it was. It wasn't meant as such and if I insulted anyone then, if they come on here and post that I insulted them, I will be hppy, no.. ECSTATIC, to apologize to them, sincerely and profusely.

SODsniper
02-23-2006, 05:26 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Spoonoop:
I think I'll try to change the mood here without getting flamed. Personally I like Lockdown for what it is, but I do agree along with everyone else that it is missing many features that the past Rainbow Six games had. Ubi took a different approach on creating Lockdown and it seems the majority of the fans didn't quite like what happend. Lockdown is a complete game but doesn't live up to the previous Rainbow Six titles. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

A very clear, concise and accurate synopsis.

And dead on balls accurate.

SODsniper
02-23-2006, 06:03 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
It's my opinion, renforced with discussions and meeting with the devs and seeing what they were doing. I will never disagree that the base of the game is the PS2 code, but it's not a direct port to the PC. A lot of work went into making it more than just porting over the game. Graphics engines aren't created overnight.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, if it is just your opinion that LD is not a port, then I that is a different matter. I can respect that.

No one is claiming that PORTs are easy to do and there is no work involved in doing a port. I am sure it is quite complex and time consumming.

I'll give you a perfect example. I took an old game (Star Trek DS9: THE FALLEN), took several maps from that game and PORTed them over for use on RavenShield servers. It was a bear of a project and took me about 4 weeks of solid 10-12 hour days to make it work right.

BUT, I never claimed that this map was an original product. I ALWAYS told people that this map was a PORT from the DS9 game.

Now, I put enough work into the conversion, plus added a bunch of my OWN stuff (working transporters, working doors, 3 "working" Holodecks, etc etc) that I could have argued the point that this map was NOT a port. It was orignial work that has the BASIS in the old DS9 map. I could have argued that point quite successfully. But it still would have been a lie, because the map was a PORT. I use the word "conversion" but the concept is the same.

That is my point. PORT does not mean it was easy. PORT does not mean it didn't require a lot of work. PORT, to the average gamer, means that they took the basics, story, actions and what-have-you and put it in a different platform.

And that is LockDown.. To a "T".

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
I'm sorry I don't praticipate in the Ubi bashing since it's the cool thing to do.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Try being banned for a week and then say it is "cool" to bash UBI.. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif I don't bash UBI because it is "cool" to do so.

What you call "bashing" I simply call "telling the truth". If/when UBI does something outstanding that warrants kudos, I will be the FIRST one to render them.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
I look at something and make up my own opinion. I'm not a sheep that goes with the crowd. I encourage anyone to do teh same.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

As do I. Because I am the same way.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
You can disagree with me all you want and that's fine.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Kewl! Thanx. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
Just don't think it's an insult to call me on having a discussion on a discussion board. We aren't here to cheerlead each other. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are correct. We are here to share information.

But, if I may be so bold, your posts do come across as "cheerleading" for UBI. You do not appear to be objective when it comes to the wrongs committed by UBI. You seem to discount all the issues with UBI as simple "UBI bashing" and discard them.

Just my observation, mind you. I could be wrong.

DXS_MacGyver
02-23-2006, 06:23 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
Well you answered your own question about the planning. They would have to rebuild the levels from scratch to accommodate it, which wasn't realistic.

As for it's not a port, it isn't. They expended a huge effort in building the graphics engine up to current DX9 standards, including all the textures and animations. This is a huge effort and entailed much more than just porting over the PS2 code.

The fact that they used the console side of the franchise as a start point is what is foreign to the PC gamer. There are 2 very distinct R6 franchises. The console side and the PC side. LD for PC is a crossover from the console side. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You tell us that the Console-based maps for the PC version sucked for a PC planning phase which was why the planning phase was eliminated. Then you tell us that LD is not a port because it has better graphics and animations.

Now you're trying to separate the two games, but at the same time you call LD for PC a "crossover". To me that makes it a port, since by definition a port is the modification of software designed to run on one platform so it will run on another platform, regardless of the amount of work involved.

As I have been arguing, I feel that because the game was designed for an inferior platform than what I'm running, this affected the decision making for the port for my platform. You have admitted as much by saying we got the linear levels from the Console versions. In fact, you have basically said we got everything from the console but prettier graphics and better animations. And not only did we get everything from the console, you're telling me that we LOST stuff we were accustomed to having because the dev team didn't have the time after improving the graphics and animations!

If the only difference is prettier graphics and better animations, imo, it's just a port, and nothing worthy to be compared to what a computer of today's standards is capable of.

Woosy
02-23-2006, 06:39 AM
I'm sorry DayGlow but it is a port...

"Porting is also the term used when a computer game designed to run on one platform, be it a personal computer or video game console, is converted to run on another platform. Earlier video game ports were not true ports but rather complete rewrites, but more and more video games are developed using editing software which can output code for PCs as well as one or more consoles. Many early ports suffered from bad quality because the hardware of PCs and consoles differed greatly."

Source wikipedia, as Sniper has said you can port a game code from a console, add things to it on the pc, but it still remains a port. Lockdown is using the PS2 code hence it's a PORT, they can polish it to look better on the pc add better ai change things slightly *lol* but the code, it's foundation is ps2 and it has been converted to the pc I don't think this concept is hard to understand. Now you can be delusional to these facts, thats entirely up to you, but I know the difference.

SODsniper
02-23-2006, 06:58 AM
I think where we are getting hung up on is the definition of a "Port".

Thanx Woosy for that definition. That is in keeping with what I believe a PORT to be.

It appears that DG simply has a different definition of what a PORT is.

ToMAYto, ToMAAto and all that. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

STaTiC_SD
02-23-2006, 07:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
Well you answered your own question about the planning. They would have to rebuild the levels from scratch to accommodate it, which wasn't realistic.

As for it's not a port, it isn't. They expended a huge effort in building the graphics engine up to current DX9 standards, including all the textures and animations. This is a huge effort and entailed much more than just porting over the PS2 code.

The fact that they used the console side of the franchise as a start point is what is foreign to the PC gamer. There are 2 very distinct R6 franchises. The console side and the PC side. LD for PC is a crossover from the console side. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You don't really believe any of that do you? Please tell me you are just trying to keep your forum status.

FI_FlimFlam
02-23-2006, 08:25 AM
Sniper I believe you are thinking along the correct lines on people's opinion of what a port is and what it means.

Most people have a negative connotation associated with the word "port" in reference to games. However it is not the fact that the game shares common code. What's really underlying peoples issues with the game is it's base DESIGN. Not that is was first released on the console or utilizes code from the game. After all, the console version uses the Ghost Recon Engine, an engine that was originally coded for the PC right? Does that make it a port of a PC game because it uses PC originating code? Or is LD a port of a port? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif Just kidding no need to go there.

Well let's all get off the "it's a port" bus here for a second, and look at the game design beacuse that really is the issue here not the basis of the code. Fact is that the game was designed with a different demographic and mindset for players. They attempted to make it more mainstream and initially cater to the console market. They have mistakenly believed that same gameplay would translate over to the PC and satisfy gamers here. While some have liked it, the majority have issues with at least a good portion of the game - ranging from level design, to gameplay mechanics, to administration. It all translates from the overall design of the game, not the code itself. Rather than take the time to listen to feedback and make a game that built upon that. Rather they gave us the same game that was designed for the consoles polished with better graphics and fancy lighting effects and chopped-up schizo story that made absolutely no sense.

If anything we need to stop with getting hung up on the port issue, and start speaking of the laziness of either the publisher or/and producer (not the devs since they are paid to make the game that the publisher and producer want) and the decisions they made. Which was to put essentially the same game on the PC rather than make a game that would cater to the PC audience in line with the feedback that has been given them. I blame the decision makers, UBI and Stuart White, not the guys who coded the game for it's bad design which IMO is the root of all the negativity. (I do blame the devs and coders for the INEXCUSABLE amout of bugs in a game that supposedly made it past BETA status)

Kaggis
02-23-2006, 08:26 AM
Dayglow, you are calling 98% of the r6 fans mindless sheeps...hmm.Do I need to say more?

And you say something like:"I wont keep bashing Ubi becouse its the cool thing to do.."
Omg!Do you think almost every fan/costumer of the previous R6 titles thinks its cool to give negative feedback on a R6 game?Yea, right Im super cool.Maybe Im the coolest guy on earth, writing comments on a R6 website......
I mean, cmon, is this the best stuff you can come up with?To tell you the truth, I think you actually are an employee of Ubi.Your not gonna fool me with this council thing..Why were you choosen to be on the council?Why exactly you?Did ubi just send you a mail and asked if you had tried any R6 games, and if you would like to be on the council?I dont believe any of this. Admit it, you are an Ubi employee, and you pretend to not be just so we wont ask you any questions.Why in the name of the lord would you defend this game if you werent?

gab-sorcer3r
02-23-2006, 08:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by STaTiC_SD:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DayGlow:
Well you answered your own question about the planning. They would have to rebuild the levels from scratch to accommodate it, which wasn't realistic.

As for it's not a port, it isn't. They expended a huge effort in building the graphics engine up to current DX9 standards, including all the textures and animations. This is a huge effort and entailed much more than just porting over the PS2 code.

The fact that they used the console side of the franchise as a start point is what is foreign to the PC gamer. There are 2 very distinct R6 franchises. The console side and the PC side. LD for PC is a crossover from the console side. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You don't really believe any of that do you? Please tell me you are just trying to keep your forum status. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

SODsniper
02-23-2006, 08:41 AM
To be fair to DayGlow, I don't believe he is defending LD per se. He is on record as stating the game does have some major flaws and is not a true RainBow Six.

I just think he is defending UBI and is, therefore, somewhat blinded to their faults. He is also a bit too willing to write off the real problems posted here as nothing but "Ubi Bashing".

Just my 2 cents worth....

Woosy
02-23-2006, 09:11 AM
The reason why the PC version is a console port is not because it wanted to reach a mass audience in my opinion, it's because there just wasn't enough time to change it totaly. Ubisoft is a PLC, which needs to make a certain amount of cash in X amount of time to keep the investors happy. If this is not met they simply pull out for future projects this makes ubisoft easy to aquire, Sniper knows this also from the confirmed inside information I gave him. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Lockdown had to be made in X amount of time to fulfill this, hence the game coming out half done, making some money and upsetting fans is better then making no money at all and if it meets the investors negotated profit they will be happy and invest more for other projects, this is a fact of business.

The Dev team on the PC are lazy in a few areas, one being the Dedicated server support, it needs a graphic card, I don't know any other game bar Gr1 which is also thier designed game that requires this. The game itself feels polished but the storyline has more pot holes then a dirt road, which is done willy nilly and not making a whole lot of sence, which is also lazyily done.

There are some positive welcomed things in Lockdown, but what you have to remember Rainbow Six has a reputation of being one of the best tac shooters out there. This game doesn't do it justice to the name, I think if it wasn't called rainbow six, somthing like Tom Clancy's| Operation Red Fox people would be more positive about it, as there is no expectations.

SODsniper
02-23-2006, 09:48 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Woosy:
The reason why the PC version is a console port is not because it wanted to reach a mass audience in my opinion, it's because there just wasn't enough time to change it totaly. Ubisoft is a PLC, which needs to make a certain amount of cash in X amount of time to keep the investors happy. If this is not met they simply pull out for future projects this makes ubisoft easy to aquire, Sniper knows this also from the confirmed inside information I gave him. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

"Al, what are you doing? Why are you bringing me into this?"
-Genie, ALADDIN

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

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Woosy:
Lockdown had to be made in X amount of time to fulfill this, hence the game coming out half done, making some money and upsetting fans is better then making no money at all and if it meets the investors negotated profit they will be happy and invest more for other projects, this is a fact of business.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes it is. And as such, I do not have any problems with it.

I don't know. It just seems to me that UBI could have handled it better. Granted, total and complete disclosure is not really an option under the circumstances. But out and out misleading is not really called for either. Especially when one considers that eventually EVERYONE will learn that UBI wasn't being completely truthful. It's the old "ROCK AND A HARD PLACE" scenario. I don't envy UBI's position, but I do maintain it should have been handled better.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Woosy:
The Dev team on the PC are lazy in a few areas, one being the Dedicated server support, it needs a graphic card, I don't know any other game bar Gr1 which is also thier designed game that requires this. The game itself feels polished but the storyline has more pot holes then a dirt road, which is done willy nilly and not making a whole lot of sence, which is also lazyily done.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

They could have saved themselves a WHOLE lot of heartache and hassles (not to mention all the negative posts) had they just paid more attention to this one area. The Dedicated Server one is the biggie, in my book. This goes to the very core functionality of the game and borders on False Advertising in it's release.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Woosy:
There are some positive welcomed things in Lockdown, but what you have to remember Rainbow Six has a reputation of being one of the best tac shooters out there. This game doesn't do it justice to the name, I think if it wasn't called rainbow six, somthing like Tom Clancy's| Operation Red Fox people would be more positive about it, as there is no expectations. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, dead on right. But, looking at it from UBI's point of view, they had to call it an RB6 game to sell as many copies as they could. How many have bought the game SOLELY because it was an RB6 game. I would wager quite a lot. And the fact that this misleading bit of PR seems to be UBI's M.O. recently is what perturbs me the most.