I am still missing the "old" R6 concept: Tactical, non-linear, no spawning, varying locations, situations and weather conditions, old buddys (Chavez & co), multiple teams, more realism etc.

I don't visit this forum very often for months, since UBI chose the new direction with Vegas. But I am wondering, who else is missing the "old" R6...

Question:
Are you missing the "old" R6 days (R6, Rogue Spear, Raven Shield)?

Choices:
Yes, I am missing the tactical, non-linear and much more realistic game concept of the old R6 games.
No, Vegas is exactly how a tactical FPS should be in these days!.
Don't know. I am new to the R6 series and don't know other R6 games than Vegas.

 

I like this poll

Unless you're talking about the older PC games, all Rainbow's have been even more linear than Vegas. More open with more options is always good to me though.

Very nice poll!

I've seen lots of people who miss the old Rainbow since my short time on these forums. My bet is that most of these people are PC gamers.

Let me elaborate. Most of the money is now in console games, for many reasons. The games price doesn't go down as fast its PC component and then there is always DLC (which allows developers to get more money out of the sucker customer, content which should have been included at release). Most console gamers don't want realism, they want cheap cover systems and magic grenades.

This, in my opinion is one of the reasons for the series new direction. Don't get me wrong, I don't hate console gamers, in fact I'm one myself. Games like Gears of War and Halo seriously influence the market when they sell so many copies. I'm not saying this is the only reason for a new direction.

So, to answer your question with my completely unnecessary post, yes I do miss the old R6.

Oh yeah. I wasn't an old RS player. I started with Rogue Spear for console and never got into it. Then picked up RS3 for Xbox and couldn't play anything else.

But just a week ago, I got a hold of Raven Shield and it is very fun. I'm not a big big fan of making the plans, I prefer some one else tell me what to do, but it is still fun.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Hanky2005:
I like this poll

Yeah, it should give us a picture of the current customer base (I mean, the tiny percentage that comes to these forums...). I wouldn't be surprised that the third option will be the top winner choice. Oh wait! Maybe not! I'm sure that a significant proportion of kids will answer No (2nd choice) while they should instead answer Don't know (3rd choice) because they actually never played the original PC games but they are nevertheless sure that Vegas is the perfect tactical shooter on earth. Anyway...

Now, myself being an old fart with a minimum of common sense, I voted for the first option...

On the other hand, I have accepted the fact that UBI has resolutely taken the arcade direction with this franchise. From now on, I will observe with curiosity just how deeper and deeper UBI is going to drag this series into the mud, just like an expert of ancient civilizations delightfully studies how extinct societies have undergone a slow but sustained downfall as a consequence of their arrogance and their unquenchable thirst for wealth.

why do you guys always insist on having no respawns. there's a choice. Survival or sharpshooter.

I am new to the rainbow franchise and started on vegas. I picked up old bow after just to see what it was. I liked the old rainbow alot better. The maps were awesome and all that jazz but you dont have to completely take away respawns.

quote:

Originally posted by RawKryptonite:
Unless you're talking about the older PC games, all Rainbow's have been even more linear than Vegas.

The question was ''Are you missing the "old" R6 days (R6, Rogue Spear, Raven Shield)?''

quote:

Originally posted by phobia_x:
why do you guys always insist on having no respawns. there's a choice. Survival or sharpshooter.

Thanks for the disruption...

quote:

Originally posted by xoops:
On the other hand, I have accepted the fact that UBI has resolutely taken the arcade direction with this franchise. From now on, I will observe with curiosity just how deeper and deeper UBI is going to drag this series into the mud, just like an expert of ancient civilizations delightfully studies how extinct societies have undergone a slow but sustained downfall as a consequence of their arrogance and their unquenchable thirst for wealth.

''A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within.''

Will Durant

This message has been edited. Last edited by: reggo,

quote:

Originally posted by xoops:
The question was ''Are you missing the "old" R6 days (R6, Rogue Spear, Raven Shield)?''

Well, that's subjective to the player what the "old days" are. To many, that's Rainbow Six 3 & Black Arrow (even more "channeled" in gameplay than Vegas IMO). For some, it might be the older console games. For others, it does mean PC.
So, I think the question is a bit flawed which is why I specified that I'd like more open environments with more options.
With the forum being mixed with PC and console gamers, I think being more specific would help the poll.

What about the console versions of Rainbow Six and Rogue Spear?

I totally agree to Raw Cryptonite.
A have played all pc versions of rainbow six and all after 3. they just aren't that.
I just started to reed the BOOK. Original source of these games. And reading I more and more understand how far we have gone from original strategic shooter Rainbow six. In latest versions are no more realistic things except the look. Rainbow six have became just one more action shooter - don't we already have enough of them.
Sorry if comment was too sharp. skavotajs@yahoo.com

Okay, here's my take:

I have played and enjoyed all the "old" Rainbow Six games (that includes the original, Rogue Spear, and Raven Shield on PC), and I respect all they have done for the squad-based tactical shooter genre.

What Rainbow Six: Vegas 2 needs to do is bring back some of the better aspects of those older games, namely the following items:

1. Open, non-linear environments. By the way, RawKryptonite is right is noting that Rainbow Six 3 and Black Arrow for Xbox seemed a heck of a lot more linear than Vegas did, although I will admit that Vegas's environments were quite linear. Areas that are as open and non-linear as the stages in Rogue Spear and Raven Sheild would be ideal, but I'm hearing that Vegas 2 will introduce more tactical options and such for nearly all situations in the game. This, luckily, is a step in the right direction, at least.

2. Selecting and outfitting all Rainbow teammates. I would, at the VERY least, like the option of customising the weapons and equipment my Rainbow teammates take with them into each mission. For crying out loud, this is ONE thing Lockdown actually got right. At the same time, however, I do acknowledge that the current teammates your character is accompanied by are specialists in certain areas, necessitating particular loadouts for each of (heavy weapons for Michael, for example).

If Vegas 2 could do these things, I will continue to be very satisfied with where the Rainbow Six series is at the moment.

You forgot the planning phase.

originally posted by xoops
QUOTE
Yeah, it should give us a picture of the current customer base (I mean, the tiny percentage that comes to these forums...). I wouldn't be surprised that the third option will be the top winner choice. Oh wait! Maybe not! I'm sure that a significant proportion of kids will answer No (2nd choice) while they should instead answer Don't know (3rd choice) because they actually never played the original PC games but they are nevertheless sure that Vegas is the perfect tactical shooter on earth. Anyway...

Now, myself being an old fart with a minimum of common sense, I voted for the first option...

On the other hand, I have accepted the fact that UBI has resolutely taken the arcade direction with this franchise. From now on, I will observe with curiosity just how deeper and deeper UBI is going to drag this series into the mud, just like an expert of ancient civilizations delightfully studies how extinct societies have undergone a slow but sustained downfall as a consequence of their arrogance and their unquenchable thirst for wealth.

YAWN do you have to come up with the same old whine in every thread its getting sooooo boring.

To be honest, I am delighted to see, that I am not the only one who realized how far away the "new" R6 concept is from the original concept.

quote:

Originally posted by RawKryptonite:
Unless you're talking about the older PC games, all Rainbow's have been even more linear than Vegas. More open with more options is always good to me though.

Yes, of course, I am talking about the PC version. I did not realize, that the forum is mixed with PC and console gamers.

quote:

Originally posted by reggo:
'A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within.'

A very good analogy!!! I believe the same, being a hobby taoist!

quote:

Originally posted by skavotajs:
I just started to reed the BOOK. Original source of these games. And reading I more and more understand how far we have gone from original strategic shooter Rainbow six.

I am glad to hear that. New R6 players, which I welcome, can't understand the point about this discussion without knowing the book. I LOVED the book (bought it twice - german and english version)! And I loved the original rainbow six (PC) games. It's cultic!

quote:

Originally posted by skavotajs:
why do you guys always insist on having no respawns.

The problem with spawns is (and I am talking about the SP missions), that there is no tactical consistency (hope, this is the right expression), if tangos suddenly appear from nowhere. It's probably connected to the linear game concept of Vegas.

Real tangos just doesn't spawn suddenly in a place - sometimes even in a place you have just secured.

quote:

Originally posted by rojasaga1960:
YAWN do you have to come up with the same old whine in every thread its getting sooooo boring.

If you have a look at the poll results you will see that this is by far not an "OLD whine".

And the only thing R6 fans like me can do about the degeneration of the original game concept is to bring this theme up from time to time. There are a lot of great forum members which I haven't seen for months, who are probably as dissappointed as me about the direction the whole thing ist going.

They are probably like me waiting for a worthy successor for the "old" rainbow six (PC) games...

I can see a strong tendeny in almost all PC games in these days that the game concepts get less and less intelligent, meaning that the players have to use less intelligence in there game decisions. In R6 part 1 to 3 you had to really think through your attack plans several times: What tactics do I use in this situation? Which approach do I take? How do I attack this room without endangering the hostages? Where do I place my sniper? What do I do if the tangos spot me sooner than planned?

I do not know if the average PC gamer is dumbed down in these days, but viewing the results of this poll, forum discussions before Vegas and some reviews at amazon, I realize, that a lot of people are dissapointed like me from this situation.


DreamMarine


From wikipedia about Close Quarter Combat (CQC):

"Ideally, the leader of the assault team gathers all available intelligence about the crisis scene, targets, and innocents. He diagrams and discusses the proposed plan, outlining each team’s actions and responsibilities, location, fields of fire, and special tasks (even to the point of a wall-by-wall and door-by-door layout of the objective, where available)."

quote:

Originally posted by phobia_x:
why do you guys always insist on having no respawns. there's a choice. Survival or sharpshooter.

I am new to the rainbow franchise and started on vegas. I picked up old bow after just to see what it was. I liked the old rainbow alot better. The maps were awesome and all that jazz but you dont have to completely take away respawns.

In order to preserve the tactical nature of the series, I believe that all respawns must be taken out. Respawns give the game a "speed" that is not good for the tactical nature of the game. There were never respawns until Rainbow Six 3 console (Lockdwown for the PC) and I don't htink that there should be respawns in future Rainbow Six titles.

quote:

Originally posted by rojasaga1960:

quote:

originally posted by xoops

Yeah, it should give us a picture of the current customer base (I mean, the tiny percentage that comes to these forums...). I wouldn't be surprised that the third option will be the top winner choice. Oh wait! Maybe not! I'm sure that a significant proportion of kids will answer No (2nd choice) while they should instead answer Don't know (3rd choice) because they actually never played the original PC games but they are nevertheless sure that Vegas is the perfect tactical shooter on earth. Anyway...

Now, myself being an old fart with a minimum of common sense, I voted for the first option...

On the other hand, I have accepted the fact that UBI has resolutely taken the arcade direction with this franchise. From now on, I will observe with curiosity just how deeper and deeper UBI is going to drag this series into the mud, just like an expert of ancient civilizations delightfully studies how extinct societies have undergone a slow but sustained downfall as a consequence of their arrogance and their unquenchable thirst for wealth.

YAWN do you have to come up with the same old whine in every thread its getting sooooo boring.

Stop trolling.

quote:

Originally posted by GSG_9_Rage:
In order to preserve the tactical nature of the series, I believe that all respawns must be taken out. Respawns give the game a "speed" that is not good for the tactical nature of the game. There were never respawns until Rainbow Six 3 console (Lockdwown for the PC) and I don't htink that there should be respawns in future Rainbow Six titles.

I agree. Why does every shooter have to cater to that type of gameplay? I don't see most fast paced shooters out there feeling pressured to offer no-respawn objective based MP games, so why should other games offer the run and gun gametypes? There is nothing wrong with a game choosing the type of game it is meant to be and then running with that 100%. Is there team survival in the Battlefield games? No, and there doesn't have to be. There also doesn't have to be Battlefield type MP games in every other shooter out there (as seems to be the tendency now). We don't have to have sharpshooter either. "Well add it as an option"...why? Let the game be what it's supposed to be. It was a mistake in AA:TS to deviate from regular AA game play, and it's run off fans who won't buy it in this state.

The fact is that Rainbow Six and GR are NOT realistic shooters. They're compromise shooters that combine realistic with arcade style. It's leaning towards arcade and it needs to swing back the other direction. It'll never be truly "realistic" and it never has been, but it would be nice to have it at least lean that direction for a change. A big part of that: more serious game types. No Lazarus option to come back to life if you die during the round.
I'll still buy Rainbow Six games and enjoy them, but I want more. With some much more serious games on the slate for 2008, Rainbow needs to keep up since the fans are about to have some real options here: ArmA2, Operation Flashpoint 2, Rogue Warrior (one day), and possibly even Ground Branch on console as well as PC (cross your fingers). The Clancy games need to step up, they're being challenged and possibly left behind in a genre they created.

I certainly miss the feel of the old games. I have the original Rainbow Six installed on my XP box with the complete series (minus Takedown [can't get it] & Lockdown [wouldn't want to get it]) all the way through Vegas.

Unfortunately the only thing remotely close on the horizon that could get me back to that feel is Ground Branch from Blackfoot Studios.

I hold no hope for a tactical shooter of any merit from UBI.