Observations

[WhiteKnight77 1]

I found this from someone who has probably never visted here or Aggression when refering to what RSE games have become:

Originally posted by doubleTAP5.56mm:

They're going to do WHATEVER IT TAKES to squeeze every penny out of the biggest market.

They look at which other game is the biggest hit (Halo) and try to cash in on it's fans while it's still hot, leaving the real R6 fans dry.

The original R6 developers are clearly out of the picture and have been replaced by developers who see only $$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

Yeah, I'm real optimistic too. Optimistic that a good developer will see the void left by Redstorm's departure from realistic, tactical shooters, and fill it.

I am of the mind that a game sequel should advance the franchise and not totally change the franchise. Drastic changes to a game alter how a franchise and development house are precieved as show above.

Comments like this are found at the Ubi forums:

Originally posted by Crushda:

I really start to lose the confidence into the current Products, I have seen the videos and it looks like as if the gameplay has nothing do with tradional Rainbow Six Gaming.

Now i notice you guys turn the back on another tradional Item, the FONT "Hattenschweiler".

it used to be THE Rainbow Six Font since ever,

now you changed it into crappy "Arial".

Honestly WHAT is that? letting all the outstanding tradional Things down, things that make R6 to R6 and not a "wishwash **** counter Strike BS game".

I really would appriciate an anwer by Kurtis "Geiger" or "UBIRAZZ" or someone of the Us Marketing Team who is in charge of decissions such as this.

Sincerely

Martin

It is cleary seen that Ubi is out for the busck with statements like this:

Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon® 2 shifted its game design from a 100% tactical shooter to a more action-based game in order to broaden the audience.

We are keeping the realism that the core fan base has loved since the original Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon®, but we are looking to give the game a huge boost with the help of next generation technology in terms of immersive gameplay.

How can a first person shooter be immersive when playing from a 3rd person point of view? You become someone carrying the video camera from several feet behind the character than actually being the character.

Do the devs at RSE really like making clones of other games? With what we are being shown via console only trailers and videos, and the gameplay seen it them, it seems they do. What now sets RSE games apart from CS, UT or Halo? Why should people buy RSE games when other similar games are already on the shelf?

Remember, I am not the only one seeing these changes even if I am the only one who asks why.

[warhawk 0]

Here, HERE!!! It's this attitude that had driven me away from RSE and more specifically UBI. Not that they care. But that's fine with me.

Stout Hearts

|RE|Warhawk

EDIT: The main reason I have stop saying something personally is because UBI doesn't really listen nor do they care. Additionally either RSE doesn't want to rock the boat or they have been neutered by UBI and therefore can't or won't change what needs changing. Conclusion? Why bother.

Edited August 1, 2005 by warhawk

[NYR_32 6]

The percieved "attitude", is driven by the marketing more than anything. Ubi has these strong franchices, R6 and GR, that sell very well. If your in their shoes do you cater to a niche or try and bring in more people, and sales. Not that I agree, but they are running a business, the cost of dveloping a game today isn't very cheap.

I think peoples perception that the developers, RSE, are out for the money and don't care about the gamers, is out of ignorance. The dev's actually do give a damn about the product and how its recieved by the players, including the hardcore. Everyone from Red Storm that I've had the pleasure to meet says the same things.

The major problem currently is, there hasn't been a PC release of any of the newest RSE proucts, but from what I heard GR2 was shaping up nicely for us (probably cancelled because the money people determined sales of both 2 and 3 wouldn't make up for the costs of developing both). Hopefully, the PC version of Lockdown should make up for it.

Also I think the whole OTS thing is a non-issue, you don't have to play GR2 Xbox that way, and you are never forced to use it (heck I got used to it, and started to like it, it gives you the situational awareness you lose in standard FP).

The core of these games is still there, people just need to take the time to find it.

[WhiteKnight77 1]

Also I think the whole OTS thing is a non-issue, you don't have to play GR2 Xbox that way, and you are never forced to use it (heck I got used to it, and started to like it, it gives you the situational awareness you lose in standard FP). 

←

While this is an option, if you don't use it on non-FPV servers, you get owned by those who do use it. Again, RSE was petitoned to have 3rd person removed from games only to be included with a new version, just with a different name and a slightly modified view. I heard of many complaints of people getting shot by someone using it that shouldn't have been able to as the rock or wall was in the way if they were using a 1st person view. It's a way to cheat and has turned many people off.

Whle RSE may not be out for all the money, that doesn't answer the questions of how do they feel about making clones when they used to be the ones defining a genre. I know the old guard there can't be happy with the direction that their original work has taken, I wouldn't be if I was in their shoes. Would you?

Sequels should advance a game, not drastically change it. Why didn't the devs say hey, these changes you want us to do are overboard and do not fit with the franchise?

[NYR_32 6]

Why didn't the devs say hey, these changes you want us to do are overboard and do not fit with the franchise?

Because they have a job they want to keep. There is only so much you can do when the publisher owns the company you work for, they pays the bills, and your salary.

Do I like all the changes? No. But things change. *shrug*

[warhawk 0]

Why didn't the devs say hey, these changes you want us to do are overboard and do not fit with the franchise?

Because they have a job they want to keep. There is only so much you can do when the publisher owns the company you work for, they pays the bills, and your salary.

Do I like all the changes? No. But things change. *shrug*

←

And in this case not for the best. The plain and simple truth here, and RvS was the writing on the wall (looking back with perfect hindsight) is that even though RSE may care it looks to me at least as they don't care enough. UBI maybe pulling all the strings but it's up to the ones actually making it to dance or not to dance. I'm glad NYR that you like GR2 as much as you seem to. I'm happy for you in fact. I'm not and won't be unless the sky falls tomorrow and UBI has a change of heart. Again I am one lonely person. My money they won't miss. But someone else is glad to get. And getting they are.

Stout Hearts

|RE|Warhawk

Edited August 2, 2005 by warhawk

[NYR_32 6]

even though RSE may care it looks to me at least as they don't care enough.

Curious how you came up with that? Because they aren't able to express their opinions here?

They care enough that when word came down from UBI to stop working on GR2 PC, the people at the studio were angry about it, Why? Because they care a lot about their fans, and their work.

A year ago I'd probably have a different opinion, but I've had a chance to hear things that made me think a bit different than I used to.

I'm not saying my opinion is the right one, its just that an opinion but I trust what I've been told enough to give Red Storm the benefit of the doubt.

[warhawk 0]

even though RSE may care it looks to me at least as they don't care enough.

Curious how you came up with that? Because they aren't able to express their opinions here?

←

It is my opinion based on what did and didn't happen with GR2 for one.

Stout Hearts

|RE|Warhawk

[firefly2442 0]

Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon were both hits. I think sequels should be 75% of the same (with obvious graphicl and AI upgrades and so on) and 25% new stuff. I mean, Ghost Recon is awesome but how cool would it be to call in an airstrike on a target? That would be a cool new feature. Devs need to keep it simple and work with what was great about the game but also try a few new things to advance the series.

Also, I think mod support is absolutely essential for games today. Without it, the games just don't have much replay value or time on store shelves. Look at the OFP community, that game is how old now?

I think the greatest potential for gamers is in Independent developers who LISTEN to the community and provide good solid games. They might not have the latest and greatest graphics effects or they might not appear in many magazines but there are a lot of quality independent or small publishers putting out excellent games.

The only way to vote in this arena is with your wallet.

[calius 0]

Simple case of living above your means, works with companies too as well as individuals. Or is that victim of your own success .... one or the other.

Its like anything music / nightclub promotion / shops / manufacturing ... small comanies can afford to keep afloat and pull of some decent output, then they get bigger people become a number, outgoings get more .. expectation get more ... etc etc.

Looks to me like they have gone down the route of "broader audience" with gr2 but seems like they have switched back slightly (hopefully more than slightly) to bring GRAW to the PC platform ... we are a ard' core bunch and know they cant pull wool over our eyes with gameplay, aaah nothing like the smell of a PC connoisseur in the mornings ...

[WhiteKnight77 1]

Rainbow Six and Ghost Recon were both hits.  I think sequels should be 75% of the same (with obvious graphicl and AI upgrades and so on) and 25% new stuff.  I mean, Ghost Recon is awesome but how cool would it be to call in an airstrike on a target?  That would be a cool new feature.  Devs need to keep it simple and work with what was great about the game but also try a few new things to advance the series.

←

This is what I am refering too, small changes that enhance the game. Calling in air strikes is an enhancment and not a drastic change. We know that GR had at least one air stike in it with the Zebra Straw misson. As you neared the village, you heard a jet fly over and then the tank blew up. That could easily be changed to lase the tank for an air stike on it and or call in the planes or even an artillery strike on the position.

Moving from a larger squad where you were able to change characters to playing just one character is a large change. Adding the 3rd person view back in was a large change (and undoing lots of work by those who put lots of effort into having it removed it to begin with). Don't get me wrong, I am not adverse to change, I am adverse to drastic changes that completely make over a game from what it was.

I start threads like this to get people to think and talk about where games are heading, not just from RSE but all companies.

[ruggbutt 0]

What UBI forget is the reason that GR sold as well as it did was because it was different. Fantastic gameplay and graphics too. If they spent more time on making the game rather than trying to cater to as many focus groups as possible they'd have another winner.