Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: My only concerns............ | Forums

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,156
    1) The location (Las Vegas)...... Is it a good place for a rainbow six game?

    2) The 12 hour span gameplay seems a little too short.......

    Edit: Frankly, I think the subtitle sucks!
    --------------------------------------------------
    "I'm not a tuxedo kind of guy." -Sam Fisher
    "But, but you are... some kind of spy!" -Displace executive
    "Yeah, I'm the REAL kind, not the tuxedo kind." -Sam Fisher
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    139
    Well, sinse we're not talking Ghost Recon here, It's going to be a fine setting. In all realism, wars and battles can be faught on our

    soil. The fact that this can happen, puts the stage of events into perspective(makes the game more interactive.) Rainbow Six has always been

    a game about close quarters combat. The stage is set in an urban environment, thus having an impact directly toward crowd that has fallen in

    love with that aspect of Rainbow Six. Thank you, UBI For keeping it in the close quarters scene.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    1,725
    Originally posted by Real720:
    1) The location (Las Vegas)...... Is it a good place for a rainbow six game?
    Speaking strictly from a real world stand point:

    Vegas is a plausible location for terrorist threats given its high visibility and its reprsentation of decadant capitalism.

    From a game design perspective, Vegas is the perfect city/location to highlight the lastest next-gen console features such as HDR (High Dynamic Range) lighting, new pixel 3.0 shader effects like rain-slicked asphalt streets, etc.

    2) The 12 hour span gameplay seems a little too short.......
    I think there is room for concern here because this is obviously part of the "Hollywood" cinematic feel UBI is hell-bent on turning the R6 experience into and if you notice, most Hollywood blockbusters and thrillers take place within a time span of less than a few hours, I.E. Die Hard was in real time; About two hours from the start of the movie and the start of the seige by Hans Gruber and his men.

    Most movies do this because an imposed timelimt increases the stakes and thereby makes you root for the protagonist(s) because not only do they have to overcome incredible odds -- A lone cop with no shoes vs. 30 well-armed terrorists -- But also the progtag has to do this in less than two hours, or Hans escapes with millions in Bearer Bonds and hundreds of office workers are blown up in a diversionary explosion...

    Which is very different from playing a video game where there are timelimits, but they are already implied via the mission parameters, I.E. "win", and not because they are a driving force of the narrative story.

    I've said this before and I will say it again... Video games and movies are NOT the same, although the video games industry as a whole is trying to turn most games into interactive movies which is resulting in very linear, non-replayable SP experiences because everything has to be scripted -- pun intended -- Just like a movie to create those moments of tension, angst, fear, excitement, euphoria, etc.

    I used to write screenplays in Hollywood, which is why I know exactly where and how video games are trying to emulate movies...

    But, in my humble opinon, games never do a very good job because the big difference between a video game and a movie besides one being passive (movie) and the other interactive is the gamer is just that: A "lowly" video game player and not someone who is particuarly interesting if we are going to be blunt...

    But this is the main element most story-driven FPS games are trying to accomplish, yet it always fails in my opinion because the gamer goes into the game knowing it is a GAME whereas we go to movies knowing it is a movie and wanting to be entertained and part of the overall entertainment experience is meeting people who you WISH you could be for a small period of time... Unlike in games where the gamer is still and always will be the gamer no matter what.

    In other words, John Q. Gamer playing "Halo" is far less interesting than Bruce Willis as police officer John McClane fighting a bunch of terrorists in a 30-story skyscraper for the simple fact he IS Bruce Willis/John McClane and John Gamer is John Gamer, 9:00 to 5:00 grocery store clerk

    There is no emotional investment in a video game player playing a game other than "win" versus watching Casey Rybeck (Steven Segal) and his rag-tag crew of misfits defend the Missouri against 50 terrorists bent on stealing its nuclear warheads.

    This is the main disconnect between movies and games in my opinion and that games will never be able to emulate simply because movies are still a much broader medium and thereby can do things video games still can't, and also because video games rarely deliver a truly emotionally satisfying experience compared to a (good) movie.

    Half-Life, Doom III and other story-driven games all claim they deliver this... But what they deliver and cater to are just base emotions such as fear, excitement, etc. Compare this to well-done movies where you are rooting for the main characters, you can identify with the main characters and you want them to succeed beyond just getting the next key card or BFG so you can take on the next level Boss because in a movie, there is a multitude of emotions and emotional states -- which is part of the emotionally satisfying experience -- Other than just basic, knee-jerk reactions like you get out of a lot of horror (scares), teen comedy (sex; gross-out jokes) and other films whose primary purpose is to shock the audience more than do the actual work of entertaining them emotionally.

    Video games fall into this same category in my opinion and until we have devices like the Star Trek Holodeck, or virtual worlds like The Matrix this isn't going to change for a long time in my humble opinion.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    139
    I see what you are saying, and you made a good point. I don't mind some cinamics, but I don't want the game soley concentrated on the story line.

    If you remember, like in Black Arrow. the story line was just a briefing, then you went out killed some terrorist, then came back for a debriefing.

    Hell, in Ferryboat there's a theatre room that only shows the Black Arrow logo on the screen, and some audio that plays over and over again.

    It could, however interest the Rainbow Six Fans by captivating them with a really good story line. That would be terific, but only if it didn't take away from the gameplay.

    You see, the gameplay is key. Rainbow Six still doesn't have as good as graphics as some of the other games, but it is hellafun to play.

    It aint no joke, son!

    Very intreging post, brother. Very indeed.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,156
    Originally posted by KungFu_CIA:
    <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Real720:
    1) The location (Las Vegas)...... Is it a good place for a rainbow six game?
    Vegas is a plausible location for terrorist threats given its high visibility and its reprsentation of decadant capitalism.

    </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I just want the levels in Vegas to be like the ones in Rainbow Six 3: http://www.rainbowsix3.com/us/missions.php

    Or at least similar to them.....
    --------------------------------------------------
    "I'm not a tuxedo kind of guy." -Sam Fisher
    "But, but you are... some kind of spy!" -Displace executive
    "Yeah, I'm the REAL kind, not the tuxedo kind." -Sam Fisher
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    139
    Yeah I have to say that I agree. I want cool maps, but they have to be extremely cooler than the ones for R63, because those maps were cool, but there were a lot of glitches, and wierd graphics. At least with the Xbox 360 they have a chance to make these new maps a lot more realistic, and without glitches.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  7. #7
    It seems to me like Vegas is an excellent location for a Rainbow Six Game! No one else enjoyed Streets of Milan? I love that map...for multiplayer; which is what I'm after in any game.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    139
    Ah! Good old Sreets of Milan. Good Map indeed. I love that map, but I hope maps in Vegas are a lot more interactive. I'm not talking using computers to open doors either. I hated that in Letdown and C-hour. What I'm

    talking about is innocent bystanders walking around. Every door can be opened. Every wall can be blown down. Now that's cool.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,156
    I liked the shipyard, the Penthouse, and the Quebec building levels from Rainbow Six 3.
    --------------------------------------------------
    "I'm not a tuxedo kind of guy." -Sam Fisher
    "But, but you are... some kind of spy!" -Displace executive
    "Yeah, I'm the REAL kind, not the tuxedo kind." -Sam Fisher
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

  10. #10
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    139
    Yeah those maps were sweet. I wish they had the old bow maps in Black Arrow.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •