Launch title for the next generation.

#1 Edited by Nilazz (613 posts) -

Ubisoft haven't talked about or shown Patriots this year and with all the talk of new hardware next year, would it make sense for it to be a launch title? And is that even something you would care about? Would a new Rainbow Six game make you line up for the xbox 720 or ps4?

#2 Posted by TheHBK (5481 posts) -

If it was exclusive to the new consoles. Quite possibly. Rainbow Six Vegas 1 and 2 and GRAW 1 and 2 were the games that my best friend and I just replayed over and over trying to be perfect. We aren't all on the COD tip or stay with it as long as we did those games. It would also depend on if the system is compelling and powerful enough to warrant going out to line up for the new systems.

#3 Posted by Barrock (3531 posts) -

Or it's dead.

#4 Posted by Phatmac (5726 posts) -

It's dead.

#5 Posted by Rolyatkcinmai (2687 posts) -

@Barrock said:

Or it's dead.

@Phatmac said:

It's dead.

This game seems to have suffered from the overall shooter-fatigue more than any other game. When Jeff and Patrick were surmising it was either at E3 or cancelled I thought that was pretty strange as well.

People are forgetting this game was only announced about eight months ago and was slated for 2013 all along. If they're shooting for Q3/Q4 2013 (like you would with a shooter), E3 2013 is not an absurd time to show it.

The game had a bunch of staff changes, but nothing else indicates it would be dead. I think the shooter-shooter-shooter mindset of the last two years has convinced people this game has been around much longer than it actually has.

#6 Posted by Funkydupe (3316 posts) -

Isn't it on for february 2013?

#7 Posted by Bourbon_Warrior (4523 posts) -

Ubisoft loves to launch on new consoles.

#8 Posted by RE_Player1 (7560 posts) -

It's dead.

#9 Posted by Bane122 (788 posts) -

@Rolyatkcinmai said:

People are forgetting this game was only announced about eight months ago and was slated for 2013 all along. If they're shooting for Q3/Q4 2013 (like you would with a shooter), E3 2013 is not an absurd time to show it.

While it has been scheduled for 2013, it's definitely been around longer than eight months. I remember getting the Game Informer issue announcing it back in 2011.

#10 Posted by Rolyatkcinmai (2687 posts) -

@Bane122 said:

@Rolyatkcinmai said:

People are forgetting this game was only announced about eight months ago and was slated for 2013 all along. If they're shooting for Q3/Q4 2013 (like you would with a shooter), E3 2013 is not an absurd time to show it.

While it has been scheduled for 2013, it's definitely been around longer than eight months. I remember getting the Game Informer issue announcing it back in 2011.

So you quoted my eight month old post in which I said eight months ago (meaning sixteen months ago, currently)... why? Eight months ago from when I posted that was October 2011.

Pretty sure I was accurate.

#11 Posted by isomeri (1273 posts) -

It would make Ubisoft-Sense.

#12 Posted by ArtisanBreads (3828 posts) -

They just need to make Rainbow Six Vegas 3 instead of this, or a spiritual successor.

No one is doing anything tactical shooter wise right now. Vegas' formula still had legs. I loved the connected character experience in 2. Also, TERRORIST HUNT!

Just go that direction. I didn't see why this moral choice direction was where they wanted to take the series.

#13 Posted by Alexander (1721 posts) -

@ArtisanBreads said:

They just need to make Rainbow Six Vegas 3 instead of this, or a spiritual successor.

No one is doing anything tactical shooter wise right now. Vegas' formula still had legs. I loved the connected character experience in 2. Also, TERRORIST HUNT!

Just go that direction. I didn't see why this moral choice direction was where they wanted to take the series.

It's more a case that they moved out of that area for the larger market. There are still tactical shooters on the PC that have their audience, it's there Rainbow Six started. Terrorst Hunt was in Raven Shield.

#14 Edited by ArtisanBreads (3828 posts) -

@Alexander said:

@ArtisanBreads said:

They just need to make Rainbow Six Vegas 3 instead of this, or a spiritual successor.

No one is doing anything tactical shooter wise right now. Vegas' formula still had legs. I loved the connected character experience in 2. Also, TERRORIST HUNT!

Just go that direction. I didn't see why this moral choice direction was where they wanted to take the series.

It's more a case that they moved out of that area for the larger market. There are still tactical shooters on the PC that have their audience, it's there Rainbow Six started. Terrorst Hunt was in Raven Shield.

Yeah I played those games.

But the most recent incarnation was going perfectly fine and had more legs left in it. It had tactics but still a wider appeal. They could have just kept running with it, that is my point.

#15 Posted by Bane122 (788 posts) -

@Rolyatkcinmai: Time paradox wormhole science thing.

Or I didn't notice it was an old thread when reading it.

One of those two.

#16 Posted by Funkydupe (3316 posts) -

@ArtisanBreads said:

They just need to make Rainbow Six Vegas 3 instead of this, or a spiritual successor.

No one is doing anything tactical shooter wise right now. Vegas' formula still had legs. I loved the connected character experience in 2. Also, TERRORIST HUNT!

Just go that direction. I didn't see why this moral choice direction was where they wanted to take the series.

I just look at the screenshots and I see Rainbow Six Vegas everywhere in how the graphics look. Same thing different name?

#17 Edited by pweidman (2333 posts) -

Sounds totally plausible to me for this to be a launch game. And I think Ubi has been careful to keep this game out of the public eye.

I can accept them going down some moral decision tree storyline in the campaign, but there better be a beastly Terrorist Hunt mode in there somewhere.

Vegas 1 & 2 are my fav Ubi games far and away; Patriots better not be dead.

#18 Edited by project343 (2823 posts) -

@Phatmac said:

It's dead.

Ubisoft rarely outright kill their projects. They just pull them out of the oven, attempt to salvage what they can, then put it back in. See: Conviction.

@Rolyatkcinmai said:

This game seems to have suffered from the overall shooter-fatigue more than any other game.

See, this shooter fatigue, coupled with the prominence of Call of Duty's inspiration in the genre, tells me that Patriots needs to bring things back to Rainbow Six's roots: truly tactical, methodical gameplay. Those games of yore (need look no further than even Rainbow Six 3) were so drastically different from the monotonous single-toned experiences offered by games like Halo 2 at the time. Every door that you opened came with overwhelming dread and obsessive caution. It just isn't something that exists prominently in today's AAA shooter space. They could really capitalize on that nostalgia while differentiating themselves from the 'me-too' Call of Duty ilk.

#19 Posted by ArtisanBreads (3828 posts) -

@Funkydupe said:

@ArtisanBreads said:

They just need to make Rainbow Six Vegas 3 instead of this, or a spiritual successor.

No one is doing anything tactical shooter wise right now. Vegas' formula still had legs. I loved the connected character experience in 2. Also, TERRORIST HUNT!

Just go that direction. I didn't see why this moral choice direction was where they wanted to take the series.

I just look at the screenshots and I see Rainbow Six Vegas everywhere in how the graphics look. Same thing different name?

Eh I meant it's tactical action I guess? The whole focus seemed to be on moral choices and everything. Rainbow Six Vegas was about purely the action and the use of first and third person and the connected "career"... co-op and single player and multi all fleshed out.

There's a lot to it. I mean maybe this game could have had that but we didn't see it. The focus didn't seem to be there.

#20 Posted by Funkydupe (3316 posts) -

It doesn't seem like it'll be a tactical simulation, but more an action oriented game like the Vegas games. There are certain scenarios where you have to choose what to do, like throwing the guy strapped with a bomb over the bridge to save everyone else (trailer), it makes sense and it doesn't seem out of place that you could as an operative find yourself in a situation like that from time to time. It doesn't break the illusion nor ruin the feel of being awesome, but if these moral choices are made realistic in context with the mission you're on then they could end up making the game better and not worse.

This edit will also create new pages on Giant Bomb for:

Beware, you are proposing to add brand new pages to the wiki along with your edits. Make sure this is what you intended. This will likely increase the time it takes for your changes to go live.

Comment and Save

Until you earn 1000 points all your submissions need to be vetted by other Giant Bomb users. This process takes no more than a few hours and we'll send you an email once approved.