Rainbow Six, or, More fun with Gametap

[lord of the mark]

Ok, so I joined gametap at the free level, so I could play Deus Ex, as we have discussed. In January Gametap moved DX to the premium level, as part of a move where they generally moved most of the non-casual games to premium - I guess ad revenue is suffering, so theres not much point to an extensive free service.

I hadn't finished DX by the time it moved to premium, so I bought one month or premium, at the intro rate of one dollar for the month. I didn't intend to renew, as $10 a month doesn't really seem worth it to me for GT at this point ( though its still a great bargain in many ways)

I finished DX a few days into the month, so, for a change of pace, I decided to play Pharoah on Gametap. I did for several weeks, till i began to get tired of it, and the scenarios got more puzzly. If I owned it I probably would have kept playing, but well, the benefit of the extra month was to try stuff out, so why continue if I am not totally into it? I had gotten the idea. But I only had a few days left in the month, and didn't really want to start something new. So I decided to try Zeus, pretty similar to Pharoah. I've been playing the tutorial, and so far not wild about Zeus, I liked Pharoah better, though I hadnt gotten to the god effects which I guess are supposed to be one of the better features of Zeus. Anyway, my time was almost up.

Well tonight I get on to cancel my premium membership, so I dont forget in the next couple of days and end up paying them $10 I didnt intend. Low and behold, after I click to cancel, they offer me a month free. Naturally I take it. But not to play more Zeus. If I have a month, I can get a bit more into something, and I am ready for a change from Impressions City builders.

So I go for Rainbow six, in the interest of broadening my FPS knowledge. This series is as good an example of the tactical FPS as any, IIUC. And Rainbow six was better than the next batch Rainbow Six:Three, or whatever, according to metacritic (do y'all disagree?) So here I go. Ive just started on the training missions, though they go quickly.

[snoopy369]

Hmm, rainbow six. Is that a true FPS (here I show my lack of knowledge of the genre: by 'true' I mean a shooter like Doom, where you do not see an avatar on the screen)? I tried Half Life the other day, and it drove me absolutely nuts...

[Solver]

There are the "early" and the "modern" Rainbow Six games. The early ones are all pretty good, except for Lockdown. So the original R6 is good, but so is, say, Raven Shield. The original just has slightly better reviews because it was more of an innovation at the time. The modern R6 gives are R6: Vegas and R6: Vegas 2. They are not necessarily bad games, but they are quite unlike the early R6 games - much less tactical. They're still tactical shooters, not something like Doom or Half-Life, but far less so.

And yeah, while you do see yourself from a first-person perspective in the R6 games, the early ones are a very different game from Doom/HL. Those are true tactical shooters, and the planning phase is as important, if not moreso, than the actual "shooter" phase. Team member selection is also very important.

[snoopy369]

I guess I just have played too many 3rd person RPGs and really prefer seeing the character on the screen (ie, Mass Effect or similar). Oh well...

[Solver]

Well, it's a FPS game. Guess what the FP part stands for

Note that third-person shooters are always bad. But for a realism-oriented game, like R6, first-person is definitely the better perspective. You don't get to see what's behind you or far to the sides - nothing you wouldn't see in reality. Note how even Mass Effect switches to a different view when in combat. 1st person is just better for that.

[snoopy369]

I really can't stand it, though... so in that sense, it's not better

[Zero]

TPV is usually terrible for aiming. Though that might be because most games are calibrated for FPV, even on TPS games. /shrug

[snoopy369]

Actually, for the aiming, I don't mind returning to FPV such as in Mass Effect. What I don't like is not being able to see my character while maneuvering behind cover and whatnot. FPV is terrible for moving, unless you have surround monitors or something, because you don't have good peripheral vision - even on a giant screen, you are always missing the side views. It just doesn't feel realistic to me, and the sort-of-realistic that it does feel just feels wrong. I'd rather have a third person view while moving, with no pretense towards realism, and then have a first person view while aiming.

[lord of the mark]

i have not gotten far, but I do now from the training mission that you can switch to third person view.

[DrSpike]

The Rainbow Six series is pretty good, and no jump puzzles. So you should like it.

[lord of the mark]

The Rainbow Six series is pretty good, and no jump puzzles. So you should like it.

I am not expecting alot of stuff about the illuminati either

[DrSpike]

Oh they are there. But just use the cover system and some smoke grenades and you should be able to sneak past them.

[Zero]

Actually, for the aiming, I don't mind returning to FPV such as in Mass Effect. What I don't like is not being able to see my character while maneuvering behind cover and whatnot. FPV is terrible for moving, unless you have surround monitors or something, because you don't have good peripheral vision - even on a giant screen, you are always missing the side views. It just doesn't feel realistic to me, and the sort-of-realistic that it does feel just feels wrong. I'd rather have a third person view while moving, with no pretense towards realism, and then have a first person view while aiming.

i agree. most games where aiming is not important (wow for ex.) TPV is preferred.

Also on topic of RB6, I'd have to say it's alot like wow in that I would say I liked the old RB6 during its time but I would never go back to it cause the gameplay was just not friendly. Later RB6 is much more casualized which is better IMO. I don't see how someone who starts playing now would find it enjoyable.

[lord of the mark]

i agree. most games where aiming is not important (wow for ex.) TPV is preferred.

Also on topic of RB6, I'd have to say it's alot like wow in that I would say I liked the old RB6 during its time but I would never go back to it cause the gameplay was just not friendly. Later RB6 is much more casualized which is better IMO. I don't see how someone who starts playing now would find it enjoyable.

I am definitely finding the whole plan creation aspect difficult, both in terms of interface and developing strategy. What other tactical FPS might you recommend as an intro to the subgenre? What to do you think of the other early clancy games, Ghost Recon and Splinter Cell?

(note I am asking this on Qto3 as well. Meanwhile I have dled Pirates!)

[DrSpike]

Most of the early TC games on the PC are pretty hardcore. The later RB6 game (Vegas) is a bit more forgiving.