Team Hardcore = Getting killed in two hits and Minimal HUD = Isn't realism. You're playing the wrong game if you think that's realism. Check Armed Assault or SWAT 4 for that department.
Well the ending left a lot to be desired, I felt the game had given me enough story and fun that I wasn't too bothered by it. I just hope that 2 is the end of the arc. I do like the leader though, his southern drawl and anger at things was a nice change of pace from cool headed gritty voiced people like GoW.
Preacher on
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Honestly, R6:Vegas was the only one I could get into. Maybe it's because I don't like the planning or heavy strategy but I did enjoy the atmosphere and more strategy than the average FPS that R6:Vegas provides. I'm glad to hear them coming out with more.
However, I do understand what other R6 fans are complaining about and I hope they continue to make more hardcore tactical shooters. In fact, I always assumed they were different branches and Vegas was the "strategy light" branch which fit me nicely
I actually liked how effective your team members were, in previous r:6 games the ai was borderline retarded for helping you but the enemy ai would pick off your retard crew like no ones business.
Preacher on
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
So if I'm new to these games, where should I start? Rainbow 6 games or Ghost Recon? If you feel like describing what differs between the R6 and Ghost titles I'd be grateful as well.
Please note that all of the comparisons are between the two games, and not to all games out there:
GR = Very thoughtfully-paced, strategic shooter. By thoughtful, I mean slower, more deliberate. Lots of use of tactics (i.e. commanding multiple assets in single-player) and careful evaluation. Multiplayer? Great, but does take place at a slightly slower speed than many are used to.
R6:V = Much faster-paced FPS, less deliberate. "SWAT-team-like" is one way I'd describe it... with bigger guns. In single-player, you direct a couple of guys. Multiplayer is a little more frenetic. The bestest cover system evar. The best weapons sound effects evar.
I really enjoy both of these games. Online play has been great with both games. As noted, I love the sounds from R6. While I would recommend both games, if you only wanted one, and wanted quicker, "pick up and play" mechanics... I'd hit R6, even if just for local (or online) co-op terrorist hunts... Fun as all hell.
Please don't hate on the playa for liking the game.
(I threw up a little when I used the word "playa")
I love Vegas, but I just tried to get back into it tonight, and it was taking in excess of 20 minutes to get into an actual match. Granted, there are fewer players now, but even before November dropped a mess of new titles on us, the system sucked. Especially as there is no way to tell if the game you're joining just started a 15 minute round that you'll have to sit out as an observer.
Vegas 2 will need a host of improvements to compete with new shooters, but the most important to me personally is a matchmaking system that actually puts the player in the damn game as a participant. In a timely fashion. Anything less is a dealbreaker.
Hahaha Rainbow Six Vegas...a tactical shooter? Its tactical in the sense that uh...you can hide I guess.
Hiding is tactical.
I am just bitter over what has happened to the Ghost Recon and R6 franchises
I know how you feel...
But that doesn't make Vegas any less fun (for co-op anyhow).
An old-school Rainbow 6 game, or something like it, would be great.
Personally, I hope 2K...Boston? picks the SWAT franchise up if they still have it. That's pretty well our last hope.
Man I really hope so. Irrational did an awesome job with SWAT 4. Co-op playing through the campaign was pretty cool with the knowledge that even one person messing up could get the whole team killed. Tense doesn't even begin to describe how encounters played out.
I'm not going to slate on R6: Vegas, the audience is different, the mechanics are different, and that's fine.
However I'm sick of people saying how financially unviable more tactical games are. If that was truly the case neither the Rainbow 6 series, nor the Ghost Recon series, nor the SWAT series would have lasted long enough to get as many sequels and expansion packs as they did. Heck, SWAT 4 was PC only and that still did well enough to get its own expansion pack (and the community is still quite active too). Would a new tactical game sell as well as the 'new style' R6? Probably not. But I take issue with the whole attitude of "ZOMG Instant financial failure OLOL!". You don't like those styles of games, that's fine, please appreciate that some OTHER people do.
I really dug what little I played of Vegas (rented it, played the first 2 missions, then stopped as I know I want to buy it).
I though it's cover system was better than Gears, and it had just enough tactical stuff to make in interesting without getting bogged down.
:^:
The single-player was a lot more fun than Gears, as well, since your squadmates weren't retarded. The co-op in Gears has it beat, though, and I do hope they allow you to play through the campaign co-op in R6:V2.
rented it - single player is fun. Split screen co-op can suck my butt though. Who in their right mind splits the screen vertically?! There's a bad guy in front of me but 2 inches to the left so he's not in my fov. AWESOME!!!
King Nada on
0
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
rented it - single player is fun. Split screen co-op can suck my butt though. Who in their right mind splits the screen vertically?! There's a bad guy in front of me but 2 inches to the left so he's not in my fov. AWESOME!!!
It makes more sense to split a widescreen TV vertically, unlike with an old 4:3 TV.
rented it - single player is fun. Split screen co-op can suck my butt though. Who in their right mind splits the screen vertically?! There's a bad guy in front of me but 2 inches to the left so he's not in my fov. AWESOME!!!
It makes more sense to split a widescreen TV vertically, unlike with an old 4:3 TV.
There wasn't an option though? IIRC a lot of co-op FPS's give you that option, it really ought to be standard.
rented it - single player is fun. Split screen co-op can suck my butt though. Who in their right mind splits the screen vertically?! There's a bad guy in front of me but 2 inches to the left so he's not in my fov. AWESOME!!!
It makes more sense to split a widescreen TV vertically, unlike with an old 4:3 TV.
I have a feeling he is playing on an SDTV. That was my second reaction to his comment, after the O_o.
Thanks to Black Friday sales, I got R6V and GRAW2 for $20 each. I've beaten GRAW2 and am playing through R6V.
They are similar but different. To be perfectly honest I am liking R6V more than GRAW2, not that I think GRAW2 is a bad game.
But I can remember playing the original Ghost Recon on X-Box and I kind of miss the days where you could actually spot enemies on a battlefield without having to rely on your automated HUD to put a big red marker on them.
I won't make the same mistake and pick up the pure shit port ubi loves to do to PC's.
Understand, I've been playing R6 and GR since their inception. Slowly the series has been changing to less tactics, this upsets me. So I fire up the PC version of Vegas only to find it practically unplayable. PC runs everything from Tribes to Crysis.
Anyways, once I picked it up on 360 I actually enjoyed the game.
I still miss planning my entry points, teammates load outs, and all that fun tactical stuff. I know Vegas 2 isn't going to bring the series back to its roots, but as long as the Co Op is as fun as last time, then I am there.
I won't make the same mistake and pick up the pure shit port ubi loves to do to PC's.
Understand, I've been playing R6 and GR since their inception. Slowly the series has been changing to less tactics, this upsets me. So I fire up the PC version of Vegas only to find it practically unplayable. PC runs everything from Tribes to Crysis.
Anyways, once I picked it up on 360 I actually enjoyed the game.
I still miss planning my entry points, teammates load outs, and all that fun tactical stuff. I know Vegas 2 isn't going to bring the series back to its roots, but as long as the Co Op is as fun as last time, then I am there.
My first R6 experience was about 30 minutes struggling with the controls in the Dreamcast version, I never really got to experience the tactical stuff. Sounds fun, but it missing isn't all that important to me, the co-op really made the game for me.
Are co-op single player missions in R6V playable over Live?
I'd like to try that out.
Yes, all singleplayer missions are in co-op, but you don't get all the story elements.
Vegas can be very tactical in co-op. Realistic difficulty with no respawns and three other guys that want to act like a squad? Yes please.
It may not be the original, but it sure feels great using a snake cam to check a room for enemies, and clearing a room as efficiently as possible with a group of real people.
Are co-op single player missions in R6V playable over Live?
I'd like to try that out.
Yes, all singleplayer missions are in co-op, but you don't get all the story elements.
Vegas can be very tactical in co-op. Realistic difficulty with no respawns and three other guys that want to act like a squad? Yes please.
It may not be the original, but it sure feels great using a snake cam to check a room for enemies, and clearing a room as efficiently as possible with a group of real people.
Hey, I already got you on my friend list for Halo 3.
Let's get online and do a R6V mission. I don't know about "realistic no respawn" though since I only have done the first two missions on normal.
Are co-op single player missions in R6V playable over Live?
I'd like to try that out.
Yes, all singleplayer missions are in co-op, but you don't get all the story elements.
Vegas can be very tactical in co-op. Realistic difficulty with no respawns and three other guys that want to act like a squad? Yes please.
It may not be the original, but it sure feels great using a snake cam to check a room for enemies, and clearing a room as efficiently as possible with a group of real people.
Hey, I already got you on my friend list for Halo 3.
Let's get online and do a R6V mission. I don't know about "realistic no respawn" though since I only have done the first two missions on normal.
Sure, why not? It probably could do you better to play on normal first though.
I want a Rainbow 6 game that's like the first few levels of Swat 3, before the enemies became impossible to talk down and impossible to kill without unloading entire clips.
LOL BUT THERES NO WEPONZ ON MY SCREEN?! HOW DO I KNO WUT I HAVE?!
Seriously though, why would they dumb down these two series. Sure its more marketable, sure a larger population can grasp the gameplay easier. But what about me?!?!?! The niche market is important too arent we?
LOL BUT THERES NO WEPONZ ON MY SCREEN?! HOW DO I KNO WUT I HAVE?!
Seriously though, why would they dumb down these two series. Sure its more marketable, sure a larger population can grasp the gameplay easier. But what about me?!?!?! The niche market is important too arent we?
The only thing I don't know is why even use those franchises in the first place? Surely if the games weren't recognized by the mainstream they wouldn't even know what Rainbow Six or Ghost Recon were, so why even take those franchises that had a focus on realism and tactics and change them? Had they created new franchises this conversation wouldn't even be taking place.
rented it - single player is fun. Split screen co-op can suck my butt though. Who in their right mind splits the screen vertically?! There's a bad guy in front of me but 2 inches to the left so he's not in my fov. AWESOME!!!
It makes more sense to split a widescreen TV vertically, unlike with an old 4:3 TV.
Posts
pleasepaypreacher.net
However, I do understand what other R6 fans are complaining about and I hope they continue to make more hardcore tactical shooters. In fact, I always assumed they were different branches and Vegas was the "strategy light" branch which fit me nicely
pleasepaypreacher.net
Please note that all of the comparisons are between the two games, and not to all games out there:
GR = Very thoughtfully-paced, strategic shooter. By thoughtful, I mean slower, more deliberate. Lots of use of tactics (i.e. commanding multiple assets in single-player) and careful evaluation. Multiplayer? Great, but does take place at a slightly slower speed than many are used to.
R6:V = Much faster-paced FPS, less deliberate. "SWAT-team-like" is one way I'd describe it... with bigger guns. In single-player, you direct a couple of guys. Multiplayer is a little more frenetic. The bestest cover system evar. The best weapons sound effects evar.
I really enjoy both of these games. Online play has been great with both games. As noted, I love the sounds from R6. While I would recommend both games, if you only wanted one, and wanted quicker, "pick up and play" mechanics... I'd hit R6, even if just for local (or online) co-op terrorist hunts... Fun as all hell.
Please don't hate on the playa for liking the game.
(I threw up a little when I used the word "playa")
Vegas 2 will need a host of improvements to compete with new shooters, but the most important to me personally is a matchmaking system that actually puts the player in the damn game as a participant. In a timely fashion. Anything less is a dealbreaker.
This makes me very unhappy.
NintendoID: Nailbunny 3DS: 3909-8796-4685
Man I really hope so. Irrational did an awesome job with SWAT 4. Co-op playing through the campaign was pretty cool with the knowledge that even one person messing up could get the whole team killed. Tense doesn't even begin to describe how encounters played out.
I'm not going to slate on R6: Vegas, the audience is different, the mechanics are different, and that's fine.
However I'm sick of people saying how financially unviable more tactical games are. If that was truly the case neither the Rainbow 6 series, nor the Ghost Recon series, nor the SWAT series would have lasted long enough to get as many sequels and expansion packs as they did. Heck, SWAT 4 was PC only and that still did well enough to get its own expansion pack (and the community is still quite active too). Would a new tactical game sell as well as the 'new style' R6? Probably not. But I take issue with the whole attitude of "ZOMG Instant financial failure OLOL!". You don't like those styles of games, that's fine, please appreciate that some OTHER people do.
Yea that was lame. I don't know if I'm sold about it taking place in Vegas again, I shot enough slot machines the first time.
I though it's cover system was better than Gears, and it had just enough tactical stuff to make in interesting without getting bogged down.
:^:
The single-player was a lot more fun than Gears, as well, since your squadmates weren't retarded. The co-op in Gears has it beat, though, and I do hope they allow you to play through the campaign co-op in R6:V2.
It makes more sense to split a widescreen TV vertically, unlike with an old 4:3 TV.
There wasn't an option though? IIRC a lot of co-op FPS's give you that option, it really ought to be standard.
I have a feeling he is playing on an SDTV. That was my second reaction to his comment, after the O_o.
NintendoID: Nailbunny 3DS: 3909-8796-4685
They are similar but different. To be perfectly honest I am liking R6V more than GRAW2, not that I think GRAW2 is a bad game.
But I can remember playing the original Ghost Recon on X-Box and I kind of miss the days where you could actually spot enemies on a battlefield without having to rely on your automated HUD to put a big red marker on them.
Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
im surprised no one commented on this baffling statement.
I'd like to try that out.
Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Understand, I've been playing R6 and GR since their inception. Slowly the series has been changing to less tactics, this upsets me. So I fire up the PC version of Vegas only to find it practically unplayable. PC runs everything from Tribes to Crysis.
Anyways, once I picked it up on 360 I actually enjoyed the game.
I still miss planning my entry points, teammates load outs, and all that fun tactical stuff. I know Vegas 2 isn't going to bring the series back to its roots, but as long as the Co Op is as fun as last time, then I am there.
Final Fantasy XI -> Carbuncle - Samash
My first R6 experience was about 30 minutes struggling with the controls in the Dreamcast version, I never really got to experience the tactical stuff. Sounds fun, but it missing isn't all that important to me, the co-op really made the game for me.
R6 and Rogue Spear FTW man.
Yes, all singleplayer missions are in co-op, but you don't get all the story elements.
Vegas can be very tactical in co-op. Realistic difficulty with no respawns and three other guys that want to act like a squad? Yes please.
It may not be the original, but it sure feels great using a snake cam to check a room for enemies, and clearing a room as efficiently as possible with a group of real people.
Hey, I already got you on my friend list for Halo 3.
Let's get online and do a R6V mission. I don't know about "realistic no respawn" though since I only have done the first two missions on normal.
Gamertag: PrimusD | Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
Sure, why not? It probably could do you better to play on normal first though.
LOL BUT THERES NO WEPONZ ON MY SCREEN?! HOW DO I KNO WUT I HAVE?!
Seriously though, why would they dumb down these two series. Sure its more marketable, sure a larger population can grasp the gameplay easier. But what about me?!?!?! The niche market is important too
Final Fantasy XI -> Carbuncle - Samash
The only thing I don't know is why even use those franchises in the first place? Surely if the games weren't recognized by the mainstream they wouldn't even know what Rainbow Six or Ghost Recon were, so why even take those franchises that had a focus on realism and tactics and change them? Had they created new franchises this conversation wouldn't even be taking place.
You are correct sir!