New Rainbow Six screen+info (morality system, multiple endings, shooting limbs)

http://kotaku.com/5814871/source-new-rainbow-6-might-be-the-most-innovative-shooter-in-years

Ok, take all this with a grain of salt, since Ubi said they are testing these features to see whether or not they work in a Rainbow Six game.

The new details are:

- Morality system (choose how to complete the mission: objective at any cost or saving lives first?)

- Multiple endings for both campaign and single missions

- You can now shoot an enemy's limbs to incapacitate him instead of killing him

- On-screen icons provide intel on your surroundings

Not too fond of the icons idea, but the rest sounds great! I want this. 2012 promises to be a great year for Ubisoft

I wasn't even aware they were working on a new Rainbow Six so that is a pleasant surprise. But so far it sounds good.

With that red square thing on the screen makes it look like the hud target on'Terminator',And that background looks terribly flat.

lol...so much for "going back to roots" :D I knew there was actually no chance of this happening.

THat aside, for arcade shooter it does sound very promising.

Great another military shooter. Just what we need.

Great another military shooter. Just what we need.

Evil_Saluki

Uhhh... what?

:o Great! We need more co-op games these days. Can't wait since Rainbow 6 is an awesome series.

Wait isn't there one coming for the IOS...Is this it?...

Woooooooooo love Rainbow. Lets get it

[QUOTE="Evil_Saluki"]

Great another military shooter. Just what we need.

Hatiko

Uhhh... what?

I used to play the original Rainbow Six games which are so old now. I remember them, faffy squad commands, trying to get them to open a door at the same time and setting up a row of commands. I also remember how the enemy could shoot you with a pistol from the other end of a cargo ship if you so much as poked an ear out in line of their eagle eye vision. Despite that it was something new back then, I quite liked it and played them through.

I know full well the games going to be nothing like that, I not followed the series since but I've heard of what it's devolved into other the years. Goodbye squad tactics, hello regeneratinghealth solo supersoldier. I can't find myself being enthusiastic about yet another American military shooter when we are already up to our scalps in them right now, despite it's claims at being innovative because it's trying to get us all emotional by showing us briges with people on them and going "look at what's at stake!" Morality system an innovation? Huh? What? New to first person shooters they say, well holy crap that's reflective, considering how something that's gotten old in just about every other genre is news to them, shows how slow these guys are to stray off that beaten path. How can something that casts aside so much, and does nothing but follow last years fashion claim innovation? I suppose we will wait and see.

If your anticipating Modern Warfare 3 then this is all probably giving you an errection. Or is it Modern Warfare 4? I lost track already.

Looks intresting. I'll be keeping an eye out for it.

The morality needs to be shades of grey if it actually wants to be good. People are realizing now that the morality system in most games is pure garbage. You can't have it black and white, because then everyone is just going to going to try and be the hero on the first play through.

Cool, was waiting for a new Rainbow Six for a while, good to know its in the works.

[QUOTE="Hatiko"]

[QUOTE="Evil_Saluki"]

Great another military shooter. Just what we need.

Evil_Saluki

Uhhh... what?

I used to play the original Rainbow Six games which are so old now. I remember them, faffy squad commands, trying to get them to open a door at the same time and setting up a row of commands. I also remember how the enemy could shoot you with a pistol from the other end of a cargo ship if you so much as poked an ear out in line of their eagle eye vision. Despite that it was something new back then, I quite liked it and played them through.

I know full well the games going to be nothing like that, I not followed the series since but I've heard of what it's devolved into other the years. Goodbye squad tactics, hello regeneratinghealth solo supersoldier. I can't find myself being enthusiastic about yet another American military shooter when we are already up to our scalps in them right now, despite it's claims at being innovative because it's trying to get us all emotional by showing us briges with people on them and going "look at what's at stake!" Morality system an innovation? Huh? What? New to first person shooters they say, well holy crap that's reflective, considering how something that's gotten old in just about every other genre is news to them, shows how slow these guys are to stray off that beaten path. How can something that casts aside so much, and does nothing but follow last years fashion claim innovation? I suppose we will wait and see.

If your anticipating Modern Warfare 3 then this is all probably giving you an errection. Or is it Modern Warfare 4? I lost track already.

Also , how many recent shooters can you list that feature a dynamic campaign (player's actions can alter the course of events, changing the plot)?

Double Post :/

Rogue Spear was the best R6 in my opinion,And after Raven Shield the series died.

[QUOTE="Hatiko"]

[QUOTE="Evil_Saluki"]

Great another military shooter. Just what we need.

Evil_Saluki

Uhhh... what?

I used to play the original Rainbow Six games which are so old now. I remember them, faffy squad commands, trying to get them to open a door at the same time and setting up a row of commands. I also remember how the enemy could shoot you with a pistol from the other end of a cargo ship if you so much as poked an ear out in line of their eagle eye vision. Despite that it was something new back then, I quite liked it and played them through.

I know full well the games going to be nothing like that, I not followed the series since but I've heard of what it's devolved into other the years. Goodbye squad tactics, hello regeneratinghealth solo supersoldier. I can't find myself being enthusiastic about yet another American military shooter when we are already up to our scalps in them right now, despite it's claims at being innovative because it's trying to get us all emotional by showing us briges with people on them and going "look at what's at stake!" Morality system an innovation? Huh? What? New to first person shooters they say, well holy crap that's reflective, considering how something that's gotten old in just about every other genre is news to them, shows how slow these guys are to stray off that beaten path. How can something that casts aside so much, and does nothing but follow last years fashion claim innovation? I suppose we will wait and see.

If your anticipating Modern Warfare 3 then this is all probably giving you an errection. Or is it Modern Warfare 4? I lost track already.

Fully agree, rainbow 6 is just a modernized bad shooter. It was something unique now its just a load of crap.

[QUOTE="Hatiko"]

[QUOTE="Evil_Saluki"]

Great another military shooter. Just what we need.

Evil_Saluki

Uhhh... what?

I used to play the original Rainbow Six games which are so old now. I remember them, faffy squad commands, trying to get them to open a door at the same time and setting up a row of commands. I also remember how the enemy could shoot you with a pistol from the other end of a cargo ship if you so much as poked an ear out in line of their eagle eye vision. Despite that it was something new back then, I quite liked it and played them through.

I know full well the games going to be nothing like that, I not followed the series since but I've heard of what it's devolved into other the years. Goodbye squad tactics, hello regeneratinghealth solo supersoldier. I can't find myself being enthusiastic about yet another American military shooter when we are already up to our scalps in them right now, despite it's claims at being innovative because it's trying to get us all emotional by showing us briges with people on them and going "look at what's at stake!" Morality system an innovation? Huh? What? New to first person shooters they say, well holy crap that's reflective, considering how something that's gotten old in just about every other genre is news to them, shows how slow these guys are to stray off that beaten path. How can something that casts aside so much, and does nothing but follow last years fashion claim innovation? I suppose we will wait and see.

If your anticipating Modern Warfare 3 then this is all probably giving you an errection. Or is it Modern Warfare 4? I lost track already.

You apparently don't know what "military" means. But anyway, I like MW1 and 2. But I also like tacticle games too. I like to sit back relax and play a few MW missions but when I want to get challenge I play the older games that actually take time and skill where the game feels like it is actually working against you instead of the game being on your side.

But, you have obviously played the game, right? I hope it isn't like CoD, and more like Rainbow Six of old. I would even take the Vegas games over what you are describing, but I feel as long as they don't make it like CoD, it's good, but you are assuming way too much over what you "heard" from a few people.

I wasn't even aware they were working on a new Rainbow Six so that is a pleasant surprise. But so far it sounds good.

SouL-Tak3R

[QUOTE="Evil_Saluki"]

[QUOTE="Hatiko"]

Uhhh... what?

Ravirr

I used to play the original Rainbow Six games which are so old now. I remember them, faffy squad commands, trying to get them to open a door at the same time and setting up a row of commands. I also remember how the enemy could shoot you with a pistol from the other end of a cargo ship if you so much as poked an ear out in line of their eagle eye vision. Despite that it was something new back then, I quite liked it and played them through.

I know full well the games going to be nothing like that, I not followed the series since but I've heard of what it's devolved into other the years. Goodbye squad tactics, hello regeneratinghealth solo supersoldier. I can't find myself being enthusiastic about yet another American military shooter when we are already up to our scalps in them right now, despite it's claims at being innovative because it's trying to get us all emotional by showing us briges with people on them and going "look at what's at stake!" Morality system an innovation? Huh? What? New to first person shooters they say, well holy crap that's reflective, considering how something that's gotten old in just about every other genre is news to them, shows how slow these guys are to stray off that beaten path. How can something that casts aside so much, and does nothing but follow last years fashion claim innovation? I suppose we will wait and see.

If your anticipating Modern Warfare 3 then this is all probably giving you an errection. Or is it Modern Warfare 4? I lost track already.

Fully agree, rainbow 6 is just a modernized bad shooter. It was something unique now its just a load of crap.

[QUOTE="Evil_Saluki"]

[QUOTE="Hatiko"]

Uhhh... what?

Black_Knight_00

I used to play the original Rainbow Six games which are so old now. I remember them, faffy squad commands, trying to get them to open a door at the same time and setting up a row of commands. I also remember how the enemy could shoot you with a pistol from the other end of a cargo ship if you so much as poked an ear out in line of their eagle eye vision. Despite that it was something new back then, I quite liked it and played them through.

I know full well the games going to be nothing like that, I not followed the series since but I've heard of what it's devolved into other the years. Goodbye squad tactics, hello regeneratinghealth solo supersoldier. I can't find myself being enthusiastic about yet another American military shooter when we are already up to our scalps in them right now, despite it's claims at being innovative because it's trying to get us all emotional by showing us briges with people on them and going "look at what's at stake!" Morality system an innovation? Huh? What? New to first person shooters they say, well holy crap that's reflective, considering how something that's gotten old in just about every other genre is news to them, shows how slow these guys are to stray off that beaten path. How can something that casts aside so much, and does nothing but follow last years fashion claim innovation? I suppose we will wait and see.

If your anticipating Modern Warfare 3 then this is all probably giving you an errection. Or is it Modern Warfare 4? I lost track already.

Also , how many recent shooters can you list that feature a dynamic campaign (player's actions can alter the course of events, changing the plot)?

Mass effect (yes I know it's a 'rpg', but given the amount of shooting in that game you could say it's a shooter/rpg).Loegi

So that's the features they're trying? How about squad tactics, carefully planning missions and, you know, more realistic gameplay? Shooting limbs is a good start though.

Still, the chance that I'll even be playing a demo of this game are slim to none. Rainbow Six stopped being Rainbow Six a very long time ago.

[QUOTE="Evil_Saluki"]

[QUOTE="Hatiko"]

Uhhh... what?

Hatiko

I used to play the original Rainbow Six games which are so old now. I remember them, faffy squad commands, trying to get them to open a door at the same time and setting up a row of commands. I also remember how the enemy could shoot you with a pistol from the other end of a cargo ship if you so much as poked an ear out in line of their eagle eye vision. Despite that it was something new back then, I quite liked it and played them through.

I know full well the games going to be nothing like that, I not followed the series since but I've heard of what it's devolved into other the years. Goodbye squad tactics, hello regeneratinghealth solo supersoldier. I can't find myself being enthusiastic about yet another American military shooter when we are already up to our scalps in them right now, despite it's claims at being innovative because it's trying to get us all emotional by showing us briges with people on them and going "look at what's at stake!" Morality system an innovation? Huh? What? New to first person shooters they say, well holy crap that's reflective, considering how something that's gotten old in just about every other genre is news to them, shows how slow these guys are to stray off that beaten path. How can something that casts aside so much, and does nothing but follow last years fashion claim innovation? I suppose we will wait and see.

If your anticipating Modern Warfare 3 then this is all probably giving you an errection. Or is it Modern Warfare 4? I lost track already.

You apparently don't know what "military" means. But anyway, I like MW1 and 2. But I also like tacticle games too. I like to sit back relax and play a few MW missions but when I want to get challenge I play the older games that actually take time and skill where the game feels like it is actually working against you instead of the game being on your side.

But, you have obviously played the game, right? I hope it isn't like CoD, and more like Rainbow Six of old. I would even take the Vegas games over what you are describing, but I feel as long as they don't make it like CoD, it's good, but you are assuming way too much over what you "heard" from a few people.

I agree with Evil_Saluki. R6 has become just another military shooter (and yes, I know what the military is after being around it my entire life and the reason why I ejoyed the unadulterated versions of R6/RS/GR and didn't buy the follow on games that were Ubified). The games have deveolved and no longer resemble their original and innovative selves. They now try to capitalize on features found in other games (morality in a Ubi game first reared it's head with SC: DA) instead of advancing what the franchise originally was.

Games should advance and get features that enhance the features that are already in said game instead of tossing out the old features and brining in all new features that are found in a plethora of other games already. Shooting of limbs? It was already there, one didn't have to have head shots only, and they necessarily were not kill shots (rather they were incapacitated which needed real time and not just game time to heal from, talk about innovative). R6 was very innovative when first release, yet those features were tossed out even though the game wasn't broken and now, yes, it is just another military game.

i would love if when you shot someone in the leg they wwent in last stand thagt would be awesome

[QUOTE="Hatiko"]

[QUOTE="Evil_Saluki"]

I used to play the original Rainbow Six games which are so old now. I remember them, faffy squad commands, trying to get them to open a door at the same time and setting up a row of commands. I also remember how the enemy could shoot you with a pistol from the other end of a cargo ship if you so much as poked an ear out in line of their eagle eye vision. Despite that it was something new back then, I quite liked it and played them through.

I know full well the games going to be nothing like that, I not followed the series since but I've heard of what it's devolved into other the years. Goodbye squad tactics, hello regeneratinghealth solo supersoldier. I can't find myself being enthusiastic about yet another American military shooter when we are already up to our scalps in them right now, despite it's claims at being innovative because it's trying to get us all emotional by showing us briges with people on them and going "look at what's at stake!" Morality system an innovation? Huh? What? New to first person shooters they say, well holy crap that's reflective, considering how something that's gotten old in just about every other genre is news to them, shows how slow these guys are to stray off that beaten path. How can something that casts aside so much, and does nothing but follow last years fashion claim innovation? I suppose we will wait and see.

If your anticipating Modern Warfare 3 then this is all probably giving you an errection. Or is it Modern Warfare 4? I lost track already.

WhiteKnight77

You apparently don't know what "military" means. But anyway, I like MW1 and 2. But I also like tacticle games too. I like to sit back relax and play a few MW missions but when I want to get challenge I play the older games that actually take time and skill where the game feels like it is actually working against you instead of the game being on your side.

But, you have obviously played the game, right? I hope it isn't like CoD, and more like Rainbow Six of old. I would even take the Vegas games over what you are describing, but I feel as long as they don't make it like CoD, it's good, but you are assuming way too much over what you "heard" from a few people.

I agree with Evil_Saluki. R6 has become just another military shooter (and yes, I know what the military is after being around it my entire life and the reason why I ejoyed the unadulterated versions of R6/RS/GR and didn't buy the follow on games that were Ubified). The games have deveolved and no longer resemble their original and innovative selves. They now try to capitalize on features found in other games (morality in a Ubi game first reared it's head with SC: DA) instead of advancing what the franchise originally was.

Games should advance and get features that enhance the features that are already in said game instead of tossing out the old features and brining in all new features that are found in a plethora of other games already. Shooting of limbs? It was already there, one didn't have to have head shots only, and they necessarily were not kill shots (rather they were incapacitated which needed real time and not just game time to heal from, talk about innovative). R6 was very innovative when first release, yet those features were tossed out even though the game wasn't broken and now, yes, it is just another military game.

You mean generic shooter. Apparently you don't know what military shooter means.

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

[QUOTE="Hatiko"]

You apparently don't know what "military" means. But anyway, I like MW1 and 2. But I also like tacticle games too. I like to sit back relax and play a few MW missions but when I want to get challenge I play the older games that actually take time and skill where the game feels like it is actually working against you instead of the game being on your side.

But, you have obviously played the game, right? I hope it isn't like CoD, and more like Rainbow Six of old. I would even take the Vegas games over what you are describing, but I feel as long as they don't make it like CoD, it's good, but you are assuming way too much over what you "heard" from a few people.

Hatiko

I agree with Evil_Saluki. R6 has become just another military shooter (and yes, I know what the military is after being around it my entire life and the reason why I ejoyed the unadulterated versions of R6/RS/GR and didn't buy the follow on games that were Ubified). The games have deveolved and no longer resemble their original and innovative selves. They now try to capitalize on features found in other games (morality in a Ubi game first reared it's head with SC: DA) instead of advancing what the franchise originally was.

Games should advance and get features that enhance the features that are already in said game instead of tossing out the old features and brining in all new features that are found in a plethora of other games already. Shooting of limbs? It was already there, one didn't have to have head shots only, and they necessarily were not kill shots (rather they were incapacitated which needed real time and not just game time to heal from, talk about innovative). R6 was very innovative when first release, yet those features were tossed out even though the game wasn't broken and now, yes, it is just another military game.

You mean generic shooter. Apparently you don't know what military shooter means.

Care to enlighten me? I haven't bought an R6 game since Raven Shield (though I got it through a hardware purchase). Of course, R6 was a counter terrorism team made up of former military personnel, but now they don't resemble a team. R6 defined the Tac-Sim genre and RSE followed on with Ghost Recon. Both featured military weapons used by military and CT personnel (who would have thought to use real military rifles in a military shooter, they are just fore use in sci-fi shooters right?).

I have spent my life in or around the military since I was born and still live within a mile of a military air base. I play certain games due to their military settings and that entails RTS to Tac-Sims to flight sims. I stand on my assertion that R6 is now just another military shooter instead of the ground breaking, innovative Tac-Sim that it defined to begin with.

hope they put planning ur missions back in and do away with the vegas crap

basically give me rainbow six 3 prettyd up :)

[QUOTE="Hatiko"]

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

I agree with Evil_Saluki. R6 has become just another military shooter (and yes, I know what the military is after being around it my entire life and the reason why I ejoyed the unadulterated versions of R6/RS/GR and didn't buy the follow on games that were Ubified). The games have deveolved and no longer resemble their original and innovative selves. They now try to capitalize on features found in other games (morality in a Ubi game first reared it's head with SC: DA) instead of advancing what the franchise originally was.

Games should advance and get features that enhance the features that are already in said game instead of tossing out the old features and brining in all new features that are found in a plethora of other games already. Shooting of limbs? It was already there, one didn't have to have head shots only, and they necessarily were not kill shots (rather they were incapacitated which needed real time and not just game time to heal from, talk about innovative). R6 was very innovative when first release, yet those features were tossed out even though the game wasn't broken and now, yes, it is just another military game.

WhiteKnight77

You mean generic shooter. Apparently you don't know what military shooter means.

Care to enlighten me? I haven't bought an R6 game since Raven Shield (though I got it through a hardware purchase). Of course, R6 was a counter terrorism team made up of former military personnel, but now they don't resemble a team. R6 defined the Tac-Sim genre and RSE followed on with Ghost Recon. Both featured military weapons used by military and CT personnel (who would have thought to use real military rifles in a military shooter, they are just fore use in sci-fi shooters right?).

I have spent my life in or around the military since I was born and still live within a mile of a military air base. I play certain games due to their military settings and that entails RTS to Tac-Sims to flight sims. I stand on my assertion that R6 is now just another military shooter instead of the ground breaking, innovative Tac-Sim that it defined to begin with.

1. Stop telling me about your life. It has nothing to do with this at all

2. To be a military shooter you have to have the military. Last time I checked. R6 was about, like you said, counter terrorism. Unless you are using "military shooter" to refer to the generic CoD like games

3. IDK why you showed me a picture

I love Rainbow, Bring it on, I welcome it all. Old rainbow style, or the vegas kind.

Great another military shooter. Just what we need.

Evil_Saluki

I know right? Why can't there be a "Steven Segal takes down drug cartel" shooters. It's unbelievable how many military shooters there have been this gen--surprisingly worse than Madden.

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

Care to enlighten me? I haven't bought an R6 game since Raven Shield (though I got it through a hardware purchase). Of course, R6 was a counter terrorism team made up of former military personnel, but now they don't resemble a team. R6 defined the Tac-Sim genre and RSE followed on with Ghost Recon. Both featured military weapons used by military and CT personnel (who would have thought to use real military rifles in a military shooter, they are just fore use in sci-fi shooters right?).

I have spent my life in or around the military since I was born and still live within a mile of a military air base. I play certain games due to their military settings and that entails RTS to Tac-Sims to flight sims. I stand on my assertion that R6 is now just another military shooter instead of the ground breaking, innovative Tac-Sim that it defined to begin with.

Hatiko

1. Stop telling me about your life. It has nothing to do with this at all

2. To be a military shooter you have to have the military. Last time I checked. R6 was about, like you said, counter terrorism. Unless you are using "military shooter" to refer to the generic CoD like games

3. IDK why you showed me a picture

1. I know what military means.

2. I guess you missed the part about Rainbow being made up of former military personnel. The fact that they also use weapons that the military uses as well as tactics put it in the military shooter genre. Duke Nukem would not be considered a military shooter. Other games with military themes fall into that category as well, even if they are run and gun or CoD clones.

3. Hmm, maybe to show you that most of the games I own are military based. :roll:

How far the mighty have fallen.

[QUOTE="Hatiko"]

[QUOTE="WhiteKnight77"]

Care to enlighten me? I haven't bought an R6 game since Raven Shield (though I got it through a hardware purchase). Of course, R6 was a counter terrorism team made up of former military personnel, but now they don't resemble a team. R6 defined the Tac-Sim genre and RSE followed on with Ghost Recon. Both featured military weapons used by military and CT personnel (who would have thought to use real military rifles in a military shooter, they are just fore use in sci-fi shooters right?).

I have spent my life in or around the military since I was born and still live within a mile of a military air base. I play certain games due to their military settings and that entails RTS to Tac-Sims to flight sims. I stand on my assertion that R6 is now just another military shooter instead of the ground breaking, innovative Tac-Sim that it defined to begin with.

WhiteKnight77

1. Stop telling me about your life. It has nothing to do with this at all

2. To be a military shooter you have to have the military. Last time I checked. R6 was about, like you said, counter terrorism. Unless you are using "military shooter" to refer to the generic CoD like games

3. IDK why you showed me a picture

1. I know what military means.

2. I guess you missed the part about Rainbow being made up of former military personnel. The fact that they also use weapons that the military uses as well as tactics put it in the military shooter genre. Duke Nukem would not be considered a military shooter. Other games with military themes fall into that category as well, even if they are run and gun or CoD clones.

3. Hmm, maybe to show you that most of the games I own are military based. :roll:

We get it. You know what military means. Who cares. We all don't know what the military is then? I have family in the military too. Doesn't mean I all of a sudden canclasifyanything I want as military.

So since big boss was in the militray is MGS3 a military shooter? No. Still not a military shooter unless you have the military. Maybe you don't know what the military is after all. R6 wouldn't be clasified as a military shooter because, uh, it doesn't have the military.

So you have some games that have the military. So what? That makes you an expert? Rolling eyes like you made a point haha.

Never heard of it. Battlefield 3 is still going to be better though.zombehhhhh

Never heard of Rainbow Six? Whhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?!

[QUOTE="zombehhhhh"]Never heard of it. Battlefield 3 is still going to be better though.Hatiko

Never heard of Rainbow Six? Whhhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaat?!