to join the CVG community. Not a member yet? Join now!
CVG

Looking Back... Rainbow Six: Vegas

Your comments on our articles.

Jamie Sefton extends a snake cam under the door of Ubisoft Montreal to eavesdrop on the making of the glitzy tactical shooter...

Las Vegas - a city synonymous with Hollywood glamour, Elvis, casinos, the Rat Pack and endless dodgy escort/contact magazines promoted by unfortunate illegal immigrants. America's gambling paradise, however, is an unlikely setting for a notoriously hardcore tactical shooter with a squad that has to take on a band of particularly brutal South American terrorists. Ubisoft Montreal's game designer Steven Masters huddles in Canada's -14-degree big-freeze to give us a warm insight into the making of Rainbow Six: Vegas...... read more

Moderators : CVG Staff, CVG Moderators

Looking Back... Rainbow Six: Vegas

Postby infamous76 » 04 Apr 2007, 15:50

beg of me put this game back on - still have to complete it on realistic (co-op)
infamous76 37
 
Posts: 224
Joined: 04 Apr 2007, 12:08
Location: United Kingdom

Postby lmimmfn » 04 Apr 2007, 16:20

Single Player was fun BUT

Multiplayer
Steven Masters: It was absolutely crucial to get this right for the PC game. FPSs live or die by their multiplayer mode, and it's always been integral to and a big focus of the Rainbow experience. Personally, I'm a big fan of co-op, so I really wanted to make that work well. We wanted people to have fun going through the casinos together - it's always a really powerful experience when you gather your friends together, and instead of competing against each other, you're working together against the AI. It's great fun and I'm aiming to put co-op in all my future games.

Thats the biggest load of horse SH*T ive ever read, the multiplayer in Vegas is the WORST MP i have ever played, hell the server browser doesnt even show ping rates and check out the UBI forum for all the happy Vegas MP customers - http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/frm/f/3801065024

His comments are infuriating, but he is right
FPSs live or die by their multiplayer mode

Which is why Vegas PC is dead
User avatar
lmimmfn 61
 
Posts: 3879
Joined: 24 Sep 2003, 13:55
Location: Ireland

Postby desmasic » 04 Apr 2007, 18:26

This reads like one of those bullshit interviews with developers who are living in wonderland of their own. Rainbow Six PC is dead (after Raven Shield), and you can see why by visiting UBI forums.

Hell, people are complaining to get their money back because of poor support from UBI on the game. Forget the part that they destroyed one of the most intense TS on PC for 13 yr old console crowd, the problem is that they aren't even willing to support PC community with what it requires with proper patches.
desmasic 17
 
Posts: 35
Joined: 07 Sep 2005, 18:46
Location: India

Postby Al3x » 05 Apr 2007, 06:47

Heh, I spared myself from this version after following its development for a while. Turns out I was right to do that... Where's my SWAT 5? Now that's a series that should get a high budget powered sequel, R6 went downhill years ago.
Al3x 44
 
Posts: 430
Joined: 15 Dec 2005, 10:06
Location: Greece

Rainbow 6

Postby soldier1991 » 05 Apr 2007, 16:58

ok guys this looks like a damn good game, DESPITE PCZone giving it a 53% RATING!!!! so lets hope some mods come out for it....
soldier1991 16
 
Posts: 17
Joined: 21 Mar 2006, 19:03
Location: United States

Postby Al3x » 05 Apr 2007, 19:50

Let's just forget it existed.
Al3x 44
 
Posts: 430
Joined: 15 Dec 2005, 10:06
Location: Greece

Re: Rainbow 6

Postby lmimmfn » 07 Apr 2007, 00:04

soldier1991 wrote:ok guys this looks like a damn good game, DESPITE PCZone giving it a 53% RATING!!!! so lets hope some mods come out for it....

53% wow, excellent, thats around what i would give that crap, 35euro for 7 hours play is bloody expensive
User avatar
lmimmfn 61
 
Posts: 3879
Joined: 24 Sep 2003, 13:55
Location: Ireland

Postby User removed » 07 Apr 2007, 18:48

''Rainbow Six has traditionally been about multiple teams of four, so it was a tough decision to reduce that to just three guys''.

This sentence alone is enough to conclude that this Steven Masters is a professional liar.

Why ?

He explains the development of Vegas like it was meant for the PC, which before Lockdown, always had multiple fireteams of four operatives. Now it is known that R6 Vegas was designed as a console game first and foremost, and the PC version is nothing but a straight port from the Xbox 360 version.

It is also well known that no one of the past console versions of R6 had multiple fireteams. R63 (Xbox, PS2) and Lockdown (Xbox, PS2) both had a single fireteam of four operatives. So, stating that they took the decision to reduce the number of operatives from multiple teams of four to just three guys makes no sense, since all their previous squad based console shooters have always been about a single team with four guys at most (except the original 'Ghost Recon', but this one was a port from the PC version, like in the good old days).

Moreover, even if R6 Vegas was designed with the PC in mind (which is false), the statement of Mr Masters still makes no sense. The preceding PC iteration, R6 Lockdown, which is indeed a straight port from the PS2 console version, had a single fireteam of four operatives. That means that this removal of the multiple teams feature is not new to the Vegas game. It happened before on the PC, and the decision was taken well before R6 Vegas' design. And since the Vegas game makes a reference to Lockdown's events at the end of the Mexico episode, it means that Vegas designers were perfectly aware of Lockdown's design, which makes even more laughable their claim that their decision was new and difficult.

Sorry if my argumentation was relatively long for such a small detail, but all of this was just to show that Mr Steven Masters, like all UBI representatives, is just a specialist about patter and sales talk. I give absolutely no credibility to anything coming from a UBI representative.

I'm therefore happy to have decided to boycott this ''liar's club'' a long time ago, and supporting only private game companies whose expertise is not about bullshit talk.
User removed
 

Postby Al3x » 09 Apr 2007, 13:29

Yeah it was pretty long for such a small detail, you could have explained the same things in fewer words. But oh well :P

Anyway, what I'm curious about is why this interview wasn't done in the tone of "why did the game suck in the end" (obviously more tactful than that) since this website/magazine did rate it badly. Why have an article that hypes it up and ignores the fact it was a s**t game?
Al3x 44
 
Posts: 430
Joined: 15 Dec 2005, 10:06
Location: Greece


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], qualopec and 5 guests

The forum teamDelete all forum cookiesAll times are UTC [ DST ]