Rainbow Six: Siege Review | Gamerheadquarters

Review for Rainbow Six: Siege which brings absolute tactical perfection into play along with dynamically destructible environments for excellent and fierce competitive multiplayer.

[ThePresentIsAgift]

Admittedly I try to avoid reviews these days as I am very much aware of the click for revenue nature that often appears to drive forward controversial reviews.

I believe reviews themselves have become a source of entertainment as opposed to the informative articles they once were. Am I the only person who misses the 90's and early 2000's? Haha.

I really want siege to be good but its up against a hell of alot of competition on all platforms. I'll still give it a go though and for now will avoid actually reading the reviews.

[sactownlawyer916]

I would say with the popularity of twitch and YouTube you can watch gameplay on the system you like before you buy and do your own mini review.

[ThePresentIsAgift]

Good point, thanks. I downloaded the beta for play and then they canned it! Lol a little gutted tbh

[WoshJills]

Agreed. This is just a website made by some kid. The article is clickbait. As the first comment pointed out: "Jason, your review has grammatical errors and you use the word 'solid' 3 times in your conclusion."

[skycaptin5]

Like I said, my editor hadn't had time to look over it yet. Not a kid at all and I was invited/went to E3 this year which is for professionals only. This was provided by Ubisoft to review and gave my opinion on what I played. It's a lot of work running the site, creating articles and dealing with people that write reviews for me. Try to be helpful to a gamer and sorry you found this to be clickbait. Maybe you should read the actual review.

[WoshJills]

Step 1. Create website
Step 2. Write article.
Step 3. Post article to N4G.
Step 4. Click "disagree" on people who criticize your article.

Wow, SOOOO professional, Skycaptin5!

Part of professionalism is being ethical. You should probably take a journalism ethics class.

You're pathetic.

[WoshJills]

. . .

[Dabigsiebowski]

Agreed.

[Aloy-Boyfriend]

MP Only games with lack of content and MTs... Yuck!

Die MP only games... DIE!!

[yarbie1000]

Linear short Single player only games with lack of replayability are also Yuck.

Order 1886 comes to mind.

Let's face it, there are some games that can stand on their own that are single player. And some that are multiplayer.

Shouldn't matter if it's only single or multiplayer. What matters is that the gamer feels their getting their money's worth. Some will, and some won't.

I like Star Wars, but some feel it's not enough there.

Okay, that's fine. That's your opinion.

My opinion is, i'm lookin forward to the free DLC coming out next week.

[Aloy-Boyfriend]

Didn't buy the Order, nor I buy anything less than 8 hrs. Point still stands

Problem is tht these MP only games always lack content. None are worth

[yarbie1000]

MMORPG are multiplayer only. They lack content?

[_-EDMIX-_]

"Didn't buy the Order, nor I buy anything less than 8 hrs"

? So you missed out on Onimusha, Portal 1 and 2, Spec-Ops, Journey, Bastion, Mirrors Edge, Limbo, Heavenly Sword etc? Bud...do you even play games for fun or just to hit a number count on hours? lol

I don't know what you mean with MP only titles lacking content when the actual concept of those games is based on competing, not really sure how "content" plays through to such a thing other then maps and many, many MP only games have lots and lots of maps.

Mind you, some of the best MP only titles don't really even have a strong focus on its quality based on its number of maps.

I'm sorry bud but number of things and number of hours doesn't always = fun.

I put 300 hours in TF2 with just 6 maps across 2 systems. Portal 1 and 2 are to of my favorite games last gen and Onimusha series one of my favorite befor that.....all short games. The Onimusha games are legit like less then 9 or so hours, Onimusha 1 literally being like 6 hours.

I don't get how something being short could render it not worth your time.

So you game for a number count huh?

That is how you base any type of fun huh bud? That might be one of the dumbest and most narrow minded things I've heard in a long time, you might have hurt your cause more then helped it as it seems you seek to play things based on content count and number of hours vs.....fun.

I like long games, I like short games...I overall REGARDLESS LIKE FUN GAMES! If its long, fine, if its short....fine.

Did I have fun is the real actual goal, not how long or short it was. You can have a bad game be long, you can have a game with lots of um "content" be bad. I'm sorry but having lots of "maps" doesn't mean the game is good, you can legit have a bad game, broken with glitches that is just not fun that has lots of maps.

What is "content" to a bad game? lol who cares...you play just based on that number?

[_-EDMIX-_]

"SP Only games with lack of content"

...consider you could say that. We've had MP only, we've had SP only.

I don't see anyone questioning where Fallout 4's single player is. If the team wasn't up to making a single player, I'm pretty sure I'm not down to play it.

Stop seeking MP only titles to attack. The reality is...they exist JUST like single player titles exist. To my understanding, multiplayer "only" is like saying RPG only or racer only etc.

Yes....that is the genre in which its focusing on, its not missing a single player, its merely just not that in the first place. That is like saying Resident Evil is missing its RPG portion.

Accept what it is, stop bashing it for what its not.

Again...can't someone say the very same thing about Fallout 4 or Witcher 3?

If the team doesn't feel they can do it, I'm fine with it being gone. I only want a single player if its going to be a quality single player, I trust the team tossed it based on not being good enough, if they want MP focus, let them.

That is like asking Turtle Rock to make Left 4 Dead have a single player as if the concept was created for that. All games were not made to be narrative single player titles, please.....stop asking for this 1 size fits all and demanding titles all have such a mode as if ALL GAMING is just that.

Again...this title isn't missing a single player, its merely just not that at all. That is like saying Bioshock 1 was missing a muliplayer as if it was made for that exact purpose, yet when they did add one, it was complete utter trash.

I buy single player games for their concepts.

I buy muliplayer games for their concepts. I don't suddenly expect ever game to be a multiplayer game or every game to be a single player game.

I'm merely accept what it currently is.

[jb227]

I definitely agree that there is a cause for mp only just like there is a cause for sp only...I think for my tastes though this gen has been severely lacking in dedicated sp content aside from the open world variety. Looking at EA, last gen they published one of the greatest sp focused franchises of the entire generation in Dead Space yet slowly but surely we saw those mp & mt ideas creep in... first we got the wholly unnecessary mp in DS2, then the co op & mt focus in DS3...they essentially killed the franchise w/ those practices, and this gen they seem to be trying to do the same w/ Mirror's Edge....they haven't mentioned the mp much yet, but there's a pattern springing up & I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that the sp is gimped in order to throw an mp in there that no one will care about, that will turn off fans of the franchise & ultimately service no one in the long run. Seems like a lot of game publishers are completely out of touch, sacrificing quality ip's by diluting them w/ unnecessary modes, then dropping them like a hot potato when they don't realize that the ip's are perfectly fine, it's their demands that killed them.

I'm an old school gamer that started on the NES, and all of the things I love about gaming seem to be slowly fading away...no more couch co op, no more narrative focused adventures, just a whole lot of mp only fps titles & open world RPGs ultimately only bothered w/ repetition & grindy loot grabbing. 2016 looks to hold a lot of promise for a gamer like myself, but it seems like the only people holding up the torch for narrative driven games that aren't open world & for couch co op are the platform exclusives themselves, like UC4 & QB....all of the multiplat publishers have been completely absent from my game collection this gen & that's just a bummer for me personally. I get that times change & I'm not trying to complain but in all honesty it's just crazy to me that I'm being faced w/ the reality of this gen being my last for gaming. I guess us old heads are just being phased out to make way for the new generation. It's strange though because I've read statistics that the average age of a gamer is actually around 30 years old, so they seem to potentially be throwing the baby out with the bath water. Wish there were more devs & publishers possessive of a unique vision & courageous enough to not worry about the trends that the industry seems to be dictated by.

[_-EDMIX-_]

"n Dead Space yet slowly but surely we saw those mp & mt ideas creep in... first we got the wholly unnecessary mp in DS2, then the co op & mt focus in DS3...they essentially killed the franchise w/ those practices"

Don't disagree with that, I didn't play either Dead Space 2 or 3's mp, but in DS3 it was clear that the game was made with co-op in mind. Didn't like that. Though I didn't use the MP in DS2, at least the game wasn't made with it in mind ie certain areas clearly being made solely for co-op or MP.

" publishers are completely out of touch, sacrificing quality ip's by diluting them w/ unnecessary modes"

For the most part, I agree with SP and with MP.

".no more couch co op, no more narrative focused adventures"

I disagree with that, we still have lots of local co-op and we actually have a huge list of narrative focused games and growing legit every year. Having MP doesn't mean less narrative focused games...

Those teams where never making that in the first place.

" that's just a bummer for me personally. I get that times change & I'm not trying to complain but in all honesty it's just crazy to me that I'm being faced w/ the reality of this gen being my last for gaming

Not that serious, it really isn't. We still have narrative focused single player games. Horizon was announced to be just that, Detroit was just announced, Until Dawn, Everybody's Gone To The Rapture, Transistor, Life Is Strange, Fallout 4, Dying Light, Deus Ex is still a single player game, to my understanding so is the next Mirror's Edge game outside of time trials, its still a single player focused game, same with the next Mass Effect as even Mass Effect 3 adding MP didn't just make the game a MP title in the respect you saw the influence on DS3.

Mind you, that is just major titles, I'm not even saying the independent stuff coming out, Soma, Firewatch, Hell Blade, Pillar Of Eternity etc

I would argue with independent teams and even major publishers have put more focus on narrative driven games then in any other time in gaming. For all the games you bring up, we have games like Watchdogs, Horizon, Rime, Until Dawn, Quantum Break, Phantom Dust, Sunset Overdrive, Scalebound etc and I'm leaving out quite a few. The reality is....we have lots of narrative focused games that came out, are coming out and still planned to be released.

Some publishers focusing on multiplayer doesn't actually mean they are also leaving behind traditional single player. Many of those sames publishers are also making new IP that are single player and are narrative based in nature, its hard to say we are getting less of something when we sorta are actually getting more of it. We didn't just have a sea of titles like Heavy Rain or Until Dawn generations ago, I would say we are in a huge influx of titles like that right now, in a great way.

Its not all doom and gloom, it really isn't.

[Aloy-Boyfriend]

Bla bla bla

True is I will never accept these MP only games due to how low in content they are and the shiet practice like MTs and DLCs: Evolve, Battlefront, this crap, Destiny, and anything that comes after. The last MP Only game I played was MAG and no more. Now that game was great. Battlefield is the only shooter that comes close to it for me,and even that has more content than this Siege crap and all those games I mentioned combined.

Sadly the PS4 doesn't have a log feature that shows the amount of hrs i put into games. I'm sure I've put shit ton of hrs into excellent games like TLOU, Uncharted, Witcher 3, Bloodborne, Black ops 3, Dying Light, and so on. I play games for fun and entertainment. I play games that last an entire gen-- games I can go back afterwards instead getting tired or burned out playing these MP games over and over with little variation. Fk that

[_-EDMIX-_]

@XiK- I get you don't play MP only titles, but you don't need to "accept" them in the same respect I don't need to "accept" RTS games.

IF you don't play the genre..merely don't. It doesn't some how need your blessing or acceptance.

I don't play RTS games online as I only play RTS games in terms of their SP modes.

What I'm saying is stop assuming you not liking MP only games means something is wrong with the industry or something, it merely means you don't like that genre or concept.

Others do.

I know you like to play SP focused games as I do as well, but I'm not going around begging for other genres to be to my liking, i merely don't play them. I get why they exist, I get others like them.

"I can go back afterwards instead getting tired or burned out playing these MP games over and over with little variation"

I don't disagree with you, merely that is based on you personally. I myself only play around 3 MP only titles a gen, last gen I played TF2 (I still do a bit here and there)

COD4, BFBC2, BF3. That is about 4 titles, compared to dozens of single player games. I've come to the conclusion that its harder to make a great MP title, then a great SP title, extreme variations really factor with MP titles, I might legit only play 3 to 4 again this gen on and off IF they are really, really good. Thus far, BF4 in 2 years is my only solid MP title that I play as Star Wars Battlefront is a light MP title for me, I don't see me going past 200 hours in it, maybe.

If you don't like MP only titles or MP focused titles...merely don't play them. I'm legit telling you I get why people like them and even myself I only really play maybe 3 or 4 an entire gen.

IF you feel it doesn't offer much for you.....fine. Free to play, mobile games, RTS online only titles, MOBAs etc don't do anything for me, but that is due to a difference in taste, that actually has nothing to do with those titles in terms of quality. Clearly someone likes them for a reason. I can't say I like TLOU over a MOBA because its a "excellent game" as...I'm sure those MOBAs are good in their own right.

Its just too subjective and its just not a matter of fact, its merely a matter of taste. I get you like single player games as I often see you on PSN playing them, as do I. I merely don't assume all concepts other then SP's are "crap" consider how you feel about Battlefield or MAG is not that different then how I feel. I rarely find a MP title that is of great balance or quality, DICE is the only team that has been able to keep that track record with me, even ReSpawn and Turtle Rock didn't deliver imho with their later titles.

That is not saying they are "crap" merely that its a hard concept do to correctly. I might like Siege if I feel its fun, I've yet to play the beta so who knows. Could be loads of fun, not sure yet.

[Erik7357]

The beta was actually really fun to play

[Aeery]

What a smart comment ...

These kids...

[Austin48]

I agree with u my freind and the majority of people like games with a single player story mode rather then multiplayer including me so we win lol

[cooksauce]

your review score and article do not match

[skycaptin5]

I did really love it, but there's only really the one game mode as I said and the servers have issues. That's why I gave it the lower score.

[cooksauce]

The game isn't even out yet and your rating server issues?

[skycaptin5]

It was indeed having server disconnects today with the full game on regular servers as stated in the review. This was on Xbox One

[jmac53]

That's funny because Ubisoft has stated that the servers will go live at midnight eastern.

[Sm00thop]

I've been playing since 12 GMT on Xbox One and I've had zero disconnects or any lag. The game is brilliant and a breath of fresh air if you ask me, actually has some very fresh gameplay compared to many other multiplayer games. I don't get the whining over no campaign, this will entertain people that appreciate decent gameplay for hundreds if not thousands of hours. The tactics and teamwork is amazing, really gets people actually communicating and thinking. Best multiplayer game in years IMO.

[skycaptin5]

#3.2.1 or @jmac53
Don't quite know the reply system on here. I was told that I would be playing on the full servers today for review, spent five hours on them (beta was supposed to be used for impressions, spent long time on them). Did mention that I will be updating as I continue playing over the week as I imagine they will be hopefully working perfectly. This is of course based on the information that my Ubi contact provided within my review provisions. Server issues persist currently as well.

[Sm00thop]

I've been on the full game since 12 GMT, its worked flawless for me and my mates. It seems like they've sorted all the beta issues out and got it running perfect.

[PancakeLova]

Games headquarters for life

[alfcrippinjr]

8 out of 10

no campaign

but it the only new rainbow six out there and it got die hard fans

shame they fuc*** it up no campaign is just lazy

[Allsystemgamer]

It's not the new rainbow 6. It's not rainbow 6. It's nothing like it.

[PreAtaric]

This game is more like the original Rainbow 6s than the newer games with that name have been...

[Sm00thop]

They just focused on making a really balanced and well thought out multiplayer, its not easy to design a game like this and I don't think a lot of people understand the work that goes into making this type of game. It's not going to appeal to everyone, but that's like most games, this is going for the more hardcore crowd and it'll have a decent following because right now there's nothing like it or as good as it in the same genre.

[AtlastheGhost]

game is pretty much a slap in the face to anyone who was waiting for a full fledged Rainbow Six game the last 7 years. easily the biggest disappointment of the year.

[Masterchief_thegoat]

you right, seven years waiting and we get this bs I'm mad at ubicrap

[trywizardo]

the conclusion and the rating is way off , when i read the conclusion i thought oh maybe its gonna get 7.5 or even 8.5 ...

[StormLegend]

Not surprised

This game is so meh..

[Akuma2K]

Me and my buddies played the first siege beta and the one this past weekend and we can't wait to get online and do damage starting tomorrow.

The thing I love about this game is you HAVE to work as a TEAM, you can't go Rambo or running and gunning thinking your helping the team by doing that when in reality your actually hurting it because once your numbers start to dwindle you'll find your team in many situations where there's only 1 or 2 members left alive going against 4 or 5 enemies in a heartbeat.

[skycaptin5]

Hope the servers work perfectly and you have a great time with game. The 5v5 is a ton of fun!

[Akuma2K]

Yea, I hope the server issue will be resolved and there's not to many problems with the matchmaking.

I can't wait to play, the teamwork aspect of this game reminds me of socom and socom 2.

[vanity29]

Oh man, I had my team open a bunch of windows so i could snipe people down easily and we came out with a flawless. Then i had new guys go crazy and die leaving me alone againt 3. I spidermaned my way to victory.

If this game got anything right, it's the intense moments.

[JackTheRipper101]

I don't know why people bash multiplayer only games yet don't bash single player only games. Multiplayer games can usually give you more replay value.

[WoshJills]

Many multiplayer-only games get great reviews. Look at Team Fortress 2.

Many singleplayer-only games get bad reviews. Look at The Order: 1886.

[Austin48]

Since when has multiplayer had more replay value I get tired of the same thing after 2 weeks but when u have single player story mode it's got hours of a story some even give u different choices from your past review.