I think we need to have a REAL Conversation about this game...
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 мар 2024
- Rainbow Six Year 9 is legit some of the best FPS gameplay I've had in a LONG TIME!
Learn more about Rainbow Six Siege here: wehy.pe/y/16/BigfryTV Thank you to Ubisoft for Sponsoring this video.
LIKE and SUBSCRIBE with NOTIFICATIONS ON if you enjoyed the video! 👍
💪BECOME A MEMBER OF THE CHANNEL - ruclips.net/user/BigfryTVjoin
💰 DONATE: streamlabs.com/bigfrytv/tip
👕 MERCH: bigfryshop.com
🖥️ BENQ Monitors: benqurl.biz/3Edd9ja
▶️ GET CONNECTED:
🎥 MoreBigfry: / morebigfry
🎮 Game Store | www.nexus.gg/Bigfry
🎮 Fanatical Game Keys | www.fanatical.com/en/?ref=bigfry
👉 Discord | / discord
🐦 Twitter | / bigfrytv
📷 Instagram | / bigfrytv
📱 TikTok | tiktok.com/BigfryTV
Outro Cover Done by: / @zulegmat 
Игры
![PIECE BY PIECE - Official Trailer [HD] - Only In Theaters October 11](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/7Bc6trBc1kc/mqdefault.jpg)
What are your thoughts on this topic? Thank you to Ubisoft for Supporting the channel! Check out Rainbow Six Siege wehy.pe/y/17/BigfryTV #AD
I'm cool that you do sponsor vids but Ubi needs to seriously crack down on cheaters in ranked I won't get back into that game until I see real evidence. R6S use to be my most played game.
yeah idc about sponsored vids either, been watching your channel for a while and I see a consistency in your opinions so I dont think they're ever affected by the sponsorship, idk why people bitch about it like they wouldnt do it to make some extra cash we all effing need always, plus its about a game you actually like so I dont see the problem
I personally don’t get the hate for sponsored content. I tend to agree on the overall context as well. Most realistic hardcore million games die. Not all and the ones that live tend to be exceptionally great or customizable. It doesn’t mean others are bad but it does mean you have to find ways to stand out and survive. Clearly this iteration of Rainbow has found a way to do just that.
HOT TAKE: R6 Siege was Peak around Operation Health days, game had less yeah, but selecting an operator felt like I had impact as there where less counters.
operation health was awful
What was that, like Year 2 or something? Yeah, that was my peak time
Only thing I wish attackers didn't have was emps or hard breach, the other changes were good apart from removing sledge smg11 and cooking nades
When the only problems with siege were the Bugs, Good times
@@Trojan-SZN exactly, now with all these operators and changes so many operators have become redundant. And the strats were beautiful, All sheild rushing, Terrorist Hunt, the bugs, graphics. Oh what a time it was playing siege
What's with the trend of converting previously immersive military FPS games into clown shows, furry conventions and lame crossovers?
Because the games would die without the pivot. R6 at launch was averaging around 7-12K players. For a AAA franchise, that's essentially death.
In short…Modernity. The majority of gamers are normies who enjoy looking like a goofball while they play and having the most accessible experience possible. They want pot leaves and bedazzled pink sequins all over their weapon skins because that’s the kind of person these games tend to draw in.
@@BigfryTV disagree - CoD had a very “healthy” community before pivoting to Fortnite style cosmetics. If anything, that pivot has just exchanged one community for another (more obnoxious) community.
I get it, they chasing the dollars - but that’s not about survival, that’s about corporate greed - at the expense of the games soul (yes, aesthetic design and immersion is important).
@@BigfryTV can you prove it?
Did all games that didn't have this kind of "art style" die?
Did you suddenly lost all faith in the tactical shooter community ability to keep good games alive?
@@tzav Yes, I have lost all faith in the Tactical Shooter Communities ability to keep good games alive. That's the point. I LOVE Tactical Shooters, but watching the numbers from Ready or Not dip to below 7K average tells me that if you're looking for a game to even come close to the longevity of an R6: Siege, the Tactical Shooter community won't support it.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not blaming them here. Games that are grounded, realistic and Tactical that don't do things like Battle Passes, Cosmetics etc. USUALLY have a terrible progression system, because they are hamstrung by keeping the game as realistic as possible. So, when new things don't get added because it wouldn't be realistic, gamers get bored and leave.
So why would ANY AAA Franchise dive into this space the way y'all keep asking for it. Yeah, I've lost faith in that ever happening.
There's more people sitting at the main menu of Siege RIGHT. NOW than there is playing all of the "BEST INDIE TACTICAL FPS GAMES" combined. Why keep begging for it when it doesn't make sense from their standpoint to do so?
People who say "They are just chasing Dollars" don't understand how expensive it is to make games, let alone support games for 9 years+. Yes, there is DEFINITELY corporate Greed, CEOs taking Million Dollar bonuses etc. But, the reality is, take all of that away and you're still left with a team that needs to be paid competitive salary + Benefits. If the Ubisoft R6 team is 100 people, that's expensive as fuck. Why take the risk on something that A) Hasn't been proven and B) When it is kind of shown with games like RoN and GRB, the numbers prove it.
Seige is good. But can i get vegas 3 please. Id really love to finish thay story and have terrorist hunt again
tbf, vegas already was a more cod styled copy to get player numbers up and siege is the product of wanting more numbers at the end of the day.
I honestly don't think that we'll see them going back to Vegas styled gameplay or even back to the original gameplay for that matter. especially since they'd have to compete with even more releases in that area which is way too risky for a company that wants to see profits.
@Unknown_Genius i dont really care about any of that..i want a good story team control tactical shooter. Ready or not has filled most of my old rainbow 6 cravings having played it from rainbow six rogue spear. But i just want to finish the vegas storyline since they left it on a cliffhanger. That and terrorists hunt, was me and my grandmas jam befire she passed away
@@Unknown_GeniusR6 Siege producer said something along the lines of"a sequel would be pointless"..
@@samuryz Yeah that's the whole thing about it, first they make it more cod styled, then they want to push patriots out to get the old fans back and essentially throw out the follow up they apparently had planned for vegas and then they just end up scrapping patriot as well for siege as a CS competitor.
Idk what screams more "we just want money and play in the big league" than their actions over the course of the past almost 20 years of chasing the next best trend - even tho I honestly do have to admit that I didn't expect them to actually support siege for that long.
@@TTrigg obviously, Siege is the biggest R6 they ever had, why would they divert resources to create new entries if their earnings from mtx per year is probably more than any new R6 would bring even if it'd sell well?
As much as I prefer the old style of rainbow-six games, I'm not going to bother you for preferring siege,just play the game that entertains you mate
they wanted to appeal to both fans. They could have retained the original realism build of the game as a separate game mode.
No one disputes this game is succesful - but it's not Rainbow Six. It's Countertrike mixed with Overwatch wearing Tom Clancy's skin like a suit. The fan anger is a RESULT of this success because we all know what it means: We will never see a proper PvE Rainbow Six game/mode again, the franchise that founded the realistic methodical tactical shooter will never, ever return to it's roots. It gives you a lot to be bitter about.
It’s called ready or not
@@lor7780 RoN is not Rainbow Six.
It's SWAT 3/4. Anyone who played both franchises in the past knows the stark differences. And considering the nearly 20 year gap between SWAT 4 and RoN, things are looking grim for R6 fans.
@@lor7780 Not quite. If you play Rainbow Six, Rogue Spear, or Rainbow Six 3 Ravenshield, it has one of the most in depth mission planners ever. The mission planners were so well done (albeit clunky at times) that you could plan the entire mission out then spectate the AI performing the mission and not even have to play it if you didn't want to. There were also missions that weren't just raiding houses. You could find yourself raiding an Embassy to save ambassadors. Raid a South American estate. An arctic village. Clearing houses one by one. I remember a cool Oil Rig mission from R6 1998.
The Characters from these games were taken from the book as well and they mattered. If you played a campaign and assigned Ding Chavez to Alpha team and he got killed breaching a door, Ding was dead for the rest of your Campaign. You fill his slot with another operator and if you didn't have a real operator left, you had RESERVES who were piss poor at anything but still gave you a body for the mission.
That same concept was present in Ghost Recon 2001. You had team members who were specialized in the WSEL (Weapon, Stealth, Endurance, Leadership). Your soldiers would gain points in these categories each time they survived a mission. Again, if someone on the team died, you lost them for good.
Ready or Not is a fun game but it is hardly close to how a classic Tom Clancy game was. OG Red Storm Entertainment made some cutting edge games and Ubisoft used to have no problem letting them do so.
@@jarvy251 I mean the only real difference is swat and RoN are more less lethal focused, where siege is take no prisoners, there are a lot of other differences to many to list but in pure gameplay they’re pretty similar 🤷♂️
You speak to my soul on that. This is what we are all saying.
This game is still good. It's still my main play. But it used to be better. Most of my gripes are atmospheric if I am being honest. Where I used to feel like I was raiding/defending a suburban house, abandoned theme park, a militia stronghold in Oregon, a bank. Now it feels like I'm just defending/attacking a multiplayer map. Don't get me wrong, the game definitely feels more balanced and optimized now. But I was willing to sacrifice some balance for that grit, that atmosphere, those dirty angles, sneaky bullet hole peaks, the maps and lighting that weren't quite optimized, but with convincing environments.
You can't be immersed in MP shooters anymore. you have to have pink operators that shout out cringy catchphrases. they do everything to make it NOT look like actual warfare so that it will be more popular as an esport and will not offend anyone...
the atmosphere is long gone
It is thriving because it is competitive and has a competitive scene, like cs and valorant - the fact that it is successful doesn't mean that this is the right formula for the tactical shooter genre.
if I'm looking to play an immersive tactical shooter I'm NOT playing R6S, and it doesn't matter how successful it is. It is just not scratching the same itch.
if i want to be competitive and grind ranks than sure I can consider playing this game, or valorant, or overwatch - but you need to realize that this is a completely different genre and it is "fun" or "good" for different reasons than what makes a tac shooter "fun" or "good".
Is R6S is what the community consider as a tactical shooter? probably no. not anymore.
is it a good game for what it is? for sure. Fortnite is also a good game. not my genre but a good game non the less...
''Tactical shooter is a sub-genre of first- and third-person shooters, associated with using strategy, planning, and tactics in gameplay, as well as the realistic simulations of ballistics, firearm mechanics, physics, stamina, and low time to kill.''
- That is the definition of a tactical shooter game i found on wiki. Except from the stamina that isnt a thing in r6, what other part of that definition isnt r6 cover.
@@giannispatras71 I don't need Wikipedia to tell me what is a tactical shooter..
The thing is if they stayed with their original agents without any goofy skins,it still would feel alot more immersive,but they unfortunately didnt.
@@tzav It's not a mil sim by any stretch of the imagination anymore, but it is fundamentally a tactical shooter, i dont even know how one can view it as anything but. It's a shooter that involves tactics and teamwork. Tactical does not necessarily mean realistic, and it's not my cup of tea anymore either, but it's definitely a tactical shooter.
@@joshuaford4460 so i guess valorant is a tactical shooter aswell.. I don't care about terminology. usually when people are talking about tac shooters they mean games that are grounded in reality and without those sci Fi gadgets and absurdly ANTI TACTICAL character skins 🤣
I've always said that the game is good in its own right but I wish it wasn't called rainbow six or had Tom Clancy's name on the cover because its just not that nor feel like a proper tactical shooter with all the bells and whistles of old.
The maps killed it for me. I really enjoyed R6 back in the day but these maze like maps are getting out of hand.
I dont see why they dont add a realism mode, which is really only realistic for the niche community, I dont have a problem of people who like r6 to be a hero shooter, just make both
R6 was meant to be "tactical" with a hint of realism, let's be real the game WAS and always was meant for the e-sports scene.
@@merked- esports doesnt exlude realism, its hero shooter vs realism
just have both
What is so un-realistic about it in the first place? @@l.3626
They turned the whole game into clownfest and you expecting a realism mode,what world are you living in?
@@contra7631 any reading skills, where did I write that I expect them to add a realism mode, nowhere, in fact Ubisofts incompetence makes me sure they won't add it
Got back into R6 about 2 months ago now after years' hiatus. Loving it.
What is your favorite Operator ATK and DEF?
@@BigfryTVthe anticipation is killing me
I used to play a lot of r6 siege but i stopped at some point because the game became stale and they removed or changed some thing that was originally in the game and now i just dont care about learning the game again, its a long road
I dont hate sponsored content, i just dont like what game has become with clown skins and weebo operators. Ive been waiting for recruit only competitive mode for years but looks like its not coming. Oh well, the game is just not for me then.
Also drone phase makes this game so unbearably slow for me. And some ridiculous abilities. Look up a video "worst lore in modern gaming" and the guy is right about ridiculous r6s lore with arena and sht. It's a fckn joke, Tom Clancy was rolling in his coffin. I played ghost recon and r6 where you couldn't even see your weapon in first person. This is a clown show with some decent mechanics.
It's a shame it's nothing like itnwas advertised and is essentially ahkrher valorant/cs clone.
Wish they make clancy games hardcore and tactical again. Not gimmicky and 'tacticool".
Agreed
I disagree. There is a lack of quality game releases overall with the gaming industry being overrun by politics and reddit... and indies shooting themselves in the foot with bad management and game design.
R6S's doesn't have any competition to worry about because of it's tactical style, Overwatch and Valorant are more arcadey. The only game that challenged R6S was Ready or not which is a barebones game and too sim for mass appeal, or in other words the devs shot themselves in the foot.
I dont get the sellout comments on here. BigFry can like games others dont like anymore. Thats what is great about the variety of games in the world. People flip out on micro-transactions and hackers. If those things prevent you from enjoying a game then play something else or find a hobby that doesnt stress you out. Play old games. Shit i will pop up pokemon red and do a run through on the gameboy. But it is pointless hating on someone that enjoys something you don't.
I totally agree. Why he's getting so much hate is beyond me.
He always tells the truth, but as soon as it is on a game being good they shit on him just because it's a *insert hated company here*.
The Triple AAA producers can still do great games and they can still come up with great decisions.. not as often, but it happens.
But as soon he says it's good... they disagree and spew their ridicolous hate.
It's childish and just plain stupid.
The destructible walls and planning defense vs attack is still fresh a unique. No one has tried to capitalize on it or challenge it's style.
There's a reason why it's so popular.
Nah he’s right
@@BigfryTV I've been playing games for a long time and there's still not much quite like it (maybe Due Process, which honestly, the RNG of the maps/light/dark gameplay is fresh. I hope they get there). I have been enjoying The Finals as of late, but it's chaos. When R6 first dropped it filled a niche for the kinda of destructive/tactical gameplay I had envisioned since I started playing Goldeneye64.
I haven't played in a few years. This vid made me redownload the game. ;)
Cheers BigFry. Time to sweat it up in ranked.
Still waiting on that FPS Ghost Recon that takes some idea from Siege and puts it in a more open style/outdoor maps.
Not really Battlefield Bad Company-2 did it long ago.But the only difference was it wasnt a 5v5 competitive match like this.
Can't wait for the year 17 video!
I stopped playing R6S long ago, its no longer my cup of tea. I respect Ubisoft's ability to maintain their shooters though (or at least the ones that have a good foundation). I was pleasantly surprised with how the division team stuck to the grindstone and brought great content to it like survival and underground when most other developers would have cut their losses.
I dont like the direction ubisoft took Siege, but im not gonna fault people for enjoying a title with consistent support and at least decent gameplay when the rest of the mainstream shooter industry has stagnated in recent years. Dont think I'll come back, but im glad its there for people who want to.
The intro itself is what sold me. To have a game this old and people still play constantly is a big deal. Ubisoft has a few games like this, like For Honor is a old game and it's still going as well.
Have you checked out 171 again recently? Looks quite a bit better from when I last saw it. They're even playing with motion capture now.
Is the audio in the beginning of the video messing with anyone’s hearing? I kept hearing these echoes in my head haha
Glad it’s just not me. I had to take my headphones off a couple of times.
I'm sorry but this game got killed by ubisoft by the moment the third season came out. I came to play this game as a tactical realistic shooter and the season one operators made sense, season two was bearable but the grind to get any of the newer ones without buying a pass wasn't worth it and the game quickly died to all of my friends who now suffer tarkov.
Define killed because THOUSANDS are still playing and enjoying this game…..9 years later. Maybe you mean lost its identity or something?
just wished they didn't lie in the reveal trailer
what they lie about ?
thats ubisoft to you
@@mopioline65 oh you mean like 2015 reveal trailer 😂
They did and they didn’t lie, Alpha tests of 6 sieges gameplay were very similar to that of what was in the trailer. You were able to close doors, use chairs to barricade jam doors, there was a lot more destruction and physics for bullets were quiet realistic.
@@thelocalbogan5605 A lot of that stuff was from when it was going to be the PvP portion of Patriots but during testing they came to the conclusion that while cool in a singleplayer game a lot of those mechanics either weren't really workable for PvP or just not fun for a PvP game unfortunately.
Yes, it is thriving, but this is not what Rainbow six is about. I bought this game for what it was. They proceeded to change it and betray the original community
The “original” community stopped playing the game so what are you talking about? Obviously the changes they made revived the game. To say they “betrayed” a community that didn’t even play the game doesn’t even make sense💀
You may not like it but there's a reason siege is still popular 9 years later
Me and a friend bought the game originally hoping that it was a hardcore FPS because it kind of set out to do that initially. Then some dude headshot us both at the same time while we were unloading in his chest simultaneously as he was wiggling like crazy. We both uninstalled then and there and never opened it up again. Other people can have fun with it thats their taste but yeah if you came originally for that hardcore fps action you got disappointed.
The original game wouldn’t have survived this long
@@BeegBeegYoshi. i tried this game in closed alpha ps4 , the game was broken especially fuze , the Original community stopped playing cause the game was garbage broken , constant server issues and crashes , glitches everywhere (every update produced new glitches that kept getting exploited like a valkyrie glitch that make window appear closed to attackers but not deffenders) , every new character was a cheat and u had to wait months before a nerf , hit reg was awful pray/spray headshots , deffenders peaking spawns in maps like the house sometimes u wont be able to leave ur spawn...,still the original community despite all problems and false advertisement actualy kept the game alive till ubisoft recently decided to work for once.
I’m in the same boat. My crew and I wish it was more stripped back like the good ole days, BUT we are still playing the heck out of it and love the game despite it being maybe a little more gimmicky than we would prefer
I just jumped back onto Rainbow after being away from it for a year. I brought a friend who is new along too which I have done before and it was so easy to jump back into the game.
My friend had to go through mandatory tutorials which almost put her off it and while she did that I was in the main menu and I was completely lost lol, the game looked so different. But I have to say Siege is still a banger of a game.
I remember when it was teased and was a whole different vibe. The game is fantastic, the only bone I have to pick is the silly operator skins but I can honestly look past that when i’m in the game and playing it.
It's a competitive tactical shooter catered for e-sports now. I'm ok with that, it has survived this long and the game is fun.
Would play Ready or Not if I want a true R6 pve experience.
I'm new to R6S and its hard to learn, but im having a blast right now
Its a fine game, but not Rainbow 6. Id just like a new Rainbow 6 story with epic set pieces like vegas again. Like if X Defiant ever actually releases that can be Ubisofts cross promotion playground and it would fit right in. I play console games so my Tac Shooter choices are nearly non existent. I am sad Rainbow died, Siege is a different game.
I loved Rainbow Six Siege back in the older days when it had less operators and I loved some of the old map layouts. I NEVER considered it a Rainbow Six game though. I've really struggled to get back into Siege since I stopped playing in very late 2017. It's difficult to remember what all of the new operators do what and it seems very bloated with how many gadgets and actions are going on in the middle of the shooting. I also don't know the new maps or new map layouts so I'm just an odd duck running around.
That said, Siege has survived 9 years now by revamping itself and as much as I'm not a fan of how it is now, it didn't have nearly as much success back then. The player counts were not this high and it was on a path of becoming a low pop game. The devs found a way to make this a game that lasted a long time and a game that is popular and loved.
If Ubisoft would just cut out the Rainbow Six from the title and just call the game Siege, it would clear up a lot of the "Rainbow Six" expectations. It's not an R6 game but it is a pretty decent game in it's own right, even if I don't like the direction it has gone since the time I played it every single day from 2015 to 2017.
Sorry Bigfry the game does not need to be alive for this long for it to be succesful, if it was a coop r6, well sure it wouldn't outlive R6, but R6 just lost its rootes.
It’s a different story because Breakpoint was actively panned and never got a playerbase.
If Breakpoint was a solid success, even if I didn’t like it I’d give it its credit. Most of y’all wouldn’t.
@@Penigale Because I'm actively watching it happen in real time? It has nothing to do with moral high ground? Ghost Recon Breakpoint on Steam can't even break 5K average players and has NEVER peaked over 7. How are you going to sit there and dispute something when the numbers are telling you you're wrong?
"The community is finally happy with the changes" - What community? It can BARELY scratch 3K players on Steam? With Uplay and console, it's what? 10K?
"The exact opposite of R6. Siege has more player count because there's no Terrorist Hunt PvE" - This doesn't even make sense. A game has MORE players because they took a mode away? What?
You're arguing in bad faith, whether its willful ignorance or knowingly, I don't know. But like, look at the numbers before you spout off about what I would and wouldn't say.
@BigfryTV heres your issue. Who gives a shit about high player count? People are looking in their own interests and as long as theres enough players to fill a lobby at the time they are playing, they dont care if the game has 200k players. You dont need 200k to fill in a lobby. People just want to play the game (old siege) they like and you are here talking about player numbers like people are at fault for not liking the game like the rest of the "player count". Also you built your community on a ground of "realistic" shooters and now you are trying to promote the game (r6s) which got so many people of the realism community mad when it started to take a turn for a more casual experience and then you wonder why the dislikes.
I don’t wonder the dislikes but the absolute hatred of me taking sponsored content, even though they know I like the games I get sponsored by. Zero Hour? Toxic response. Shatterline? Toxic response. R6? Toxic response. Six Days in Fallujah? Toxic response.
It never fails with this fucking comment section no matter what I do. I could have NOT been sponsored by R6, said the same thing and I’d still be called a sellout. It’s tiresome.
i've had so much fun with this game playing it in the last few months, racked up 300 hours! still so much to learn.
Id love to get back into the game but with all the operators and how sweaty it is i cant be bothered with that being said its cool to see the game still getting updates etc
If they would take the game back to season 0-2. I would play again. It is not what it once was unfortunately
Last time I played R6 was Feb 2020.... Will come back soon
I think the people hating on it are mainly the ones who were playing it at the start. The game is very different now and not what those players liked it for. I do think they could start developing a new R6 that looks a bit more updated, the game looks pretty dated now but that’s just my opinion.
EDIT: I should've prefaced this by saying that I've played Siege since the Closed Betas, not a new player.
I want to love Siege, but the matchmaking is atrocious and the community is awful which just sucks the enjoyment out of it. If it weren't for those things I would probably only ever play Infinite and Siege ever again for PvP shooters.
At the very least Ubisoft could fix the goddamn matchmaking with a few simple tweaks - like SoloQ protection (as in Gears 5) and making it so that if the difference between the highest and lowest MMR in a party it only uses the highest MMR, so that you stop getting goddamn Diamonds and Emeralds in Gold lobbies etc.
You think COD's community is any better? Or Valorants? 😂
The thing is it will take anybody way too long to learn the game because the game has too many agents.Which is what makes the game worse for any new comers.Also lets not mention the cringe operators.
@@merked- Irrelevant to the topic at hand.
@@ParagonFury In my opinion it just sounds like a skill issue you may have. I have been playing also since the game came out, maybe not the beta but you could even then tell it was for the competitive, e-sports market. "SoloQ Protection" is what I hear a lot, and while true, I disagree. Siege was meant to be team based, not solo based, it isn't my fault you have no one to play with hell you could hit me up if you wanted to lmfao and we could argue more prolly. I personally think this game had never been better before and it's truly fun to play if you really gotten into it and learned it.
When your talking about wanting to play a co-op, PVE mil-sim type game, you should try out Ready Or Not. I am sure you already have but thought I would mention it just in case.
With everythign I heard baout this game I assumed its playerbase was leaving lol. Had no idea it had those numbers.
while the game lost me around the time lion dropped, because of the dumpster fire the community was then and the major hacker issue the game had going on. but I've had a hard time getting back into it because of all the Sci-Fi heavy ability's.
though I also roughly remember when the lead dev apologized because they didn't know how to proceed keeping the operators realistic when it comes to ability's and keep their early day promise of 100 operators
I wish R6S is like E3 where Counter Terrorist vs Terrorist instead of Operator vs Operator
community of tactical fps or hardcore fps player is 1& population of course they need to keep the market to higher population which is casual... but still competitive.
Deimos is def keeping eyes on him over the other members of your team.
I miss the days of rainbow 6 vegas 1 and 2. I had sooo much fun on those. This game might be good but i just miss old school rainbo 6
R6 Siege may not be exactly what I want, but it's a very solid MP game. Up there for the best triple A live service shooters along with Apex & Halo Infinite (Helldivers is AA but God tier)
I disagree with the opinion that the game couldn’t have survived without straying from the more realistic setting, characters and gameplay that it started with at release.
There were other options available for expanding the game without straying further from the more realistic setting, and the game would likely not have died, looking at the relative success of recent and past successful tactical shooters and their feature-sets that R6 Siege could have expanded to implement.
I suspect that the development path Ubisoft took was the cheapest and least risky (easiest) option the company could take, for the short-term. I don’t believe that it was the correct decision for the long-term success of the game and franchise.
Care to tell us what is so "unrealistic" about it first? Then please tell me how that "unrealism" makes the gameplay worse.
@@Lornext it’s a departure from the games initial setting, less consistent with the grounded and realistic setting of Tom Clancy’s works, and mechanically, it now puts more focus on “special abilities” than gunplay, map-knowledge, etc.
I’m sure you can find a video or write-up explaining more of the details of the games departure from its initial setting, or changes since launch, on your own.
I mean, the playerbase at launch in 2015 was damn near on deaths door for a AAA game lol March 2016 it was averaging 6K players.
Why the fuck would they want to keep that more Realistic, Grounded approach? Lol
@@BigfryTV because having a realistic grounded setting and approach was a major part of the brand, franchise and product identity. Going against the core identity dilutes and devalues the brand. I suspect at least one person at Ubisoft has had to agree it’s important because they rebranded XDefiant.
My opening comment was there was at least one other option available to expand the R6 Siege player-base without straying as far from the initial realistic setting and approach. There was also the more simple, clear and decisive option available to move resources onto a different product and end future content support for R6 Siege.
Only slightly related to my first point, but more concretely:
1. The game has changed to the point I don’t want to play it, whereas before I did.
2. I have less of a clear idea what any future “Ubisoft Tom Clancy’s” brand game will be like than I did a decade ago.
3. Based on the history of their released games, the core tech, innovation and development resources that Ubisoft have built up over the past decade haven’t been heavily focused on pushing the boundaries of realistic tactical shooters, so I can’t reasonably expect them to deliver anything that I would consider novel or exciting in this space.
The problem with "realistic tactical shooters" like lets say Ready or Not or Ground Branch is that they niche games, especially compared to AAA games. If ready or not would release a similar PVP experience like Zero Hour or Siege it would be dead in a few months because there not many people playing RoN.
Squad is averaging relatively high player numbers because it also appeals to casuals. You dont need fast reaction speed and mechanical skills to be good at it. You bust have to be able to participate in basic communication and have some decent enough english to call out "enemy bearing XYZ".
Squad is a considered gamer retirement home for a reason
Bro has not hit the elo where there is a cheater EVERY GAME
siege bout to hit warframe age I'm still here for it do ur thing bigfry im fine with sponsors as long ur having a good time
No one can ever fight an opinion. Many of those enjoy the game now, and many of those enjoyed the previous versions of the game. Thats unchanged and not something to argue
I've recently bought R6 Siege on Steam for the first time because it had an 80% discount. And i gotta say i'm having way too much fun better than Warzone and Battefield that i've even unistalled Warzone and Battlefield from my PC.
The loud minority would rather the tom clancy name died with the original writer instead of letting it evolve with the tactical modern era of writing
What I understand is that you provide solid content and deserve to make some money through sponsorships, so we can continue to enjoy your work...
You’re saying that if they kept it “realistic” that it’d be dead, which is fine as an opinion, but what other realistic/semi-realistic 5v5 PVP FPS game has actually reached final release (v1.0) as any kind of example or proof? R6 has had ZERO competition, neither indie or Triple-A. The problem with other “tactical” shooters is that the development teams are positioning themselves to create an “experience” rather than an actual [competitive] game, where other elements and support-systems (outside of the game-play) are required to sustain a PvP player-base. Insurgency: Sandstorm was probably the closest thing to a “complete” game that would have provided a realistic 5v5 competitive outlet, but NWI had absolutely no interest (for a long time) or even capability to implement the support systems needed to thrive (especially upon release of Sandstorm, when they had the highest potential). Since then, what v1.0 game even comes close to rivaling R6: Siege? Insurgency’s competitive scene didn’t die off because it was a “realistic” game, it died off because the dev team wasn’t competitive-minded or focused on the 5v5 game-play, they were focused on crafting an immersive experience, as opposed to the developers of lets say Valorant, that specifically set out to build a competitive PvP game, with the features needed to sustain a player-base.
For example, Ready-or-Not is now v1.0 and have said that they plan to implement PvP at some point in the future. It will be interesting to see what they create, but ultimately, even with good game-play, the player-base will die off after the initial hype. In this instance, it’s not the game-play or realism that matters. They will need systems that sustain the hook/grind/loop that keeps players engaged: detailed stats, ranking systems, seasons, events, tournaments, leagues, live streams, cosmetics/skin markets, player highlights, Community Managers (with competitive experience), functional replay systems, caster capabilities, quality servers, and plenty of other things that indie devs (small budgets) will likely never be able to provide, which is why none of these related games have thriving PvP communities (long term).
The proof is that "realistic" doesnt fit with the competitive nature of Siege if you only want some kind of simulation crap, the other games like that never pop off because no one cares about that fringe genre and "Tactical" is exactly what the game is and has always been.
Notice how Ready or Not and things like that have a smaller community than the R6 community? The game has always been tactical like the comment here also says. They have always catered to the e-sports scene with this title.
@@merked- It's almost as if RoN is a PvE game with no PvP mode along with lacking the laundry list of other critical factors to a healthy player population that I've already listed 💀🤣 The point is that if a game with RoN's realism had all of the elements (including the budget) of a AAA game like R6, it could be just as populated and successful, yet no game with that type of realism has ever existed with all of the factors needed to support a PvP community. R6 without the uwu anime aesthetics and unrealistic abilities (tracking players thru walls) could be just as successful, not that I think R6 needs to change (and it won't), but the lack of realism is not why it's still a popular PvP game.
Just know there is a reason why Siege is more successful now than COD or any other game that is like it's kind. @@tmaskk
I think you’re kind of proving my point here. Ubisoft is thinking of making a new game. What market data can they look at to see if it’s viable to invest MILLIONS of dollars into?
There hasn’t been a Tactical, Realistic Grounded 5v5 competitive FPS before. Well, why?
They know that the Mil-Sim community hates Cosmetics, MTX and everything else. Why would they even want to?
Congrats on keeping the game alive and thriving ubisoft. Ok now that that's out of the way I think I earned myself the right to say.... this game sucks... another game that started off as "semi-realistic" that is now just operators that act as mages from a wow game, with skins from fornite. If I wanted to run around as ezio with a gun... oh wait a minute let me not finish that sentence because I will never want that
Cry me a river, play something else. The game was always meant to cater the e-sports scene whether you like it or not. Your comment is not and will never change the outcome of how this game was meant to be created.
wasn't blackflag and rouge just playing as Ezio with a gun in a way
I disagree rainbow 6 is a shell of its former self man. Also whats with all videos being filled with random gamplay lately im here for the cometary 😅
That shell is killing it in ways the former self can and would never. Do you blame them?
@@BigfryTVRemember kiddos, popularity equals good.
You havent played the game in the past 7 years, no one cares what you think about it.
Cool have fun missing out on a great game
Even if the game kept to its roots, ppl who are having this opinion wouldn’t wouldnt be playing this game anyway. Just get over yourself. This game not for you.
Reason why a lot of old players stop playing and why new players also complain would have to the cheaters. Sometimes you face a really good player and falsely report them which lead them to be banned or you face an actual cheater and they dont get banned. it's a coin flip really.
Gta 5 has survived for so long i dont know how that game still popular
The ultimate "normie" game. That is how.
@@Lornext GTA 6 bouta make more the US government
@@Lornextit’s not a normie game stfu
I give Ubi crap over how they treat the genre... but they have 9 seasons of one game. Not to mention the Division franchise.
They understand where they stand in the FPS landscape and they dont try to do too much.
DICE and Battlefield can't even do that.
Battlefield 2042 Season 7 looks to be a bust so far..one new map,the other"new" map is a area from the Hourglass map reworked into a stand-alone level
@@TTrigg to be fair. That's how every season has been. One new, one rework. The problem is that DICE is still expecting what worked 5-10 years ago with releasing maps is enough to keep players engaged.
8:13 mighty fine kill cam if I do say so myself!
I actually like this season
i miss year 2. I will not play the game unless its like year 2. theres way too many operators that all do similar things but some are just objectively better instead of the well balanced chess match it used to be and with too much reworked and deleted content i used to enjoy (RIP house) i dont think ill ever come back to it. its not the grounded realism that brought be it was the tight balance and comprehensive roster of interesting characters.
@@MadWatcher no im just annoyed that theres objectively the same but better operator abilities instead of equipment. Instead of gear it feels like overwatch mixed with csgo instead of its own thing. theres too many operators and they shouldve just made a sequel
Not sure what people here mean by the "previous R6 community". There's the Tactical Realism community that had moved on from Ubisoft after Raven Shield;. Then there's the Vegas Community that thrived the console market. Lockdown was the awkward period when they tried to stream line the realism to consoles which pissed off the Raven Shield fans .Fact of the matter is, Triple A studios will sell out and change directions to attract more players. Ubisoft figured that Siege was the more consistent formula after years of redefining Rainbow Six. I played Rainbow Six since Rouge Spear so I guess I’ve seen it all? 😊
Worst game ever
PC: Full of Cheaters
Console: DDoS and M&K users.
Game was the best with the OG operators.
Rainbow six siege for life ❤
i don't even play R6S anymore (would be down doe if my buddy's would be willing to pick it up again ) and i usually don't agree with bigfry (99% of the time) but he spiting fax
The game should have died YEARS AGO imo. Siege was best when it felt like an actual Tom Clancy game. If they have to change the game so much just to keep the game alive but it's so far removed from the tone of Tom Clancy, then it shouldn't be called Rainbow Six at all. They could have made Rainbow Six 2 and so on and kept the serious tones. There's also the argument for keeping this alive and broadening the audience towards younger base because it brings in more greedy revenue.
A revival is coming….
I don't think anybody has a real issue with gimmicky casual shooters being successful like Valorant, Overwatch & Apex Legends. Everyone in this tactical shooter space is just furious & tired that these lazy investors keep bastardizing our favorite authentic IPs because they're too afraid to take the risk of these games surviving on their own merit.
I gurantee CoD, Battlefield & all of the Tom Clancy titles as they currently stand, would survive just as well and without any backlash by releasing with new names & fully diving into the casual gamer space, just look at The Finals as proof. They could have their casual titles as cash cows and then have their authentic tactical shooters as passion projects on a much slower release schedule.
The milsim enthusiasts are pretty cringe with their takes on seiges approach to a 9 year old game that they would have abandoned regardless if it stuck to its roots.
I'd like to see you gather up some of your community members and do a revisit of Ghost War in Wildlands...
I wish Zero Hour would take over Siege...
I don't play the game, but I heard the reputation system forces you to have voice chat off because even if you're very nice you'll get fked enventually. Is that real ? This game is all about teamplay and communication but you can't use voice chat if you not stacked on discord ?
Not real, I communicate every match and I have max rep constantly. I play only solo and duo.
He said people just muting you increase your toxic level or w/e it's called ?@@Lornext
Oh thank god let's talk about how destroyed siege as become in the last 5 years. Nvm it's a sponsored video. I don't mind sponsored content. But I hate where this game went.
Damn feels like a big portion of your viewers just wanna hate lol to the point where you can tell they didnt watch the whole video or else half those comments wouldnt be here, I appreciate you being upfront about the sponsorship and in the end, nobody can call you a sellout when you keep giving your honest opinion
ppl crying about a sponser lol, get that bag fry
I don’t play R6 but apparently this video has brought out the angry nerds & tryhards lol
😂😂😂
People always hate on others who know how to make money outside of a 9-5
I’m seeing so many people crying about this game with MUH-REALISM and I really don’t get it. If it was what those people wanted it to be it would have died years ago, and it wouldn’t even be an afterthought in their mind right now. They would play it and abandon it just like every single tactical shooter to ever come out. These people really need to learn how to be quiet and just accept that Siege is in the best spot its ever been in right now.
Were you able to play the l33t test?
Soft breaching with buck on oregon with a thatcher and ace on team.. carry frags and you win that fight 8:45
Since 2015, I've taken breaks and returned several times to R6. I've been playing again lately and it's so fun!
Dear big fry, this intro felt really forced, even if it wasn’t forced, maybe it’s because you were not wanting to make the video knowing the pushback from your audience that wants the things from the game that are too niche for the game to survive. My opinion is, yiu do so much for those type of people that YOU GOTTTA GET THE BAG SOMETIMES AND TAKE THAT SPONSORED VID AND SAY F THE HATERS. It’s not like this is raid shadow legends… (I’d kill to get a RSL ad, maybe one day I’ll make it & say I sold out to the lowest of the low, but anyways)
I love sponsored content, it gives me comfort when watching RUclips videos.
RUclips isn’t sable and doesn’t make you rich, you’re supporting your family and a dev team. I don’t know how you do it.
Just don’t take a Raid Shadow Legends deal please 😂
Why do you never cover PUBG? Do you not like the game anymore? Hate BRs now?
he covers BR's every now and then, like Deadrop
I think something like the OG R6 or Ghost Recon will only ever be able to exist in the indie market and that's been the case for some time. Like you said, it would probably be dead if they went old school again, and expecting a company as big as Ubisoft to make something like that just ain't in the cards anymore.
I just wish I had something like the first Ghost Recon but modern, as I have yet to play an indie title that captures how it felt to play that game. I think it's mostly lack of controllable AI teammates and too basic AI in general as well as not having any kind of story behind what you do in games that makes them feel that way. I'm hoping I'm just missing said game and that it's actually out there, but I somehow doubt it.
Ground Branch is Original Ghost Recon but with steroids. Go look it up!
@@Jon87224 I've played that, and I think it has a lot of potential to be a successor, but it's missing everything I outlined in my second paragraph.
Even with the 1034 update improving enemy AI, the game still has a long way to go. At least Kythera middleware is finally implemented, so eventually we will see something better.
The big thing is there are no missions with varied and specific goals that progress a story or explain why you go to these places, no persistent AI teammates that improve throughout a campaign and can be lost, and even when teammates do get added it will probably be a long time before we see GB shape into what Ghost Recon is.
You shouldn't care if your viewers hate sponsored content or not. You deserve to get paid, anyway you can, for your work. Editing software isn't free and you're sinking in tons and tons of the only resource in life that you can't get back (time) for our entertainment so fuck them people who don't like sponsored content.
Well big fry you convinced me to get back into the game definitely more tactical with the scope reworks. Thanks
Dream world
get that bag bigfry, just dont forget other vids too😅
are you going to test project l33t?
Fuck no
lmao thats the answer i was looking for
@@BigfryTV
I respect your opinion on most games. And I don't want to call you a sellout or any of that, clearly you aren't peddling shitty cashgrabs. But surely you understand that it is a little bit hard to not question whether there was a bit of influence from Ubisoft money. I really don't mind paid promo videos and sponsored content, you deserve to make money with the job you do. But I would appreciate if you could save opinion videos like this for when a video is not sponsored by the company who made it. I would even be more than fine if this video was sponsored and completely sold out (as long as it was very clear that the video was sponsored), and released a non sponsored honest opinion video a day/ week later. Not sure I worded things correctly but I hope that you get what I mean 😅
The thing is (and the entire point of this video) is I did already. 8 months ago. My opinion hasn’t changed, money or not…yet I still get those comments from losers who can’t fathom that money hasn’t changed my opinion of R6.
They hate the game so take it out on me like children lol
Well, you obviously can't please everyone. And yeah I saw that video 8 months ago. Can't really imagine coming back to r6s though since I kind of lost interest in pvp shooters in recent years.
PS: any chance you will make a video on the division 2? It got a MASSIVE overhaul/ rebalance patch a month ago and is going to get its first dlc in like 3-4 years around December.
@@phinal9248 did division 2 ever address the crashing every 30 mins?. its been a problem for years and they refuse to fix it.
@@zackh8759I never had that issue myself. But I am pretty sure that they did mention it being one of the things they fixed as part of the large overhaul and QoL update last month?
Those that are complaining about Rainbow six not being what it used to be just need to look up the player counts of any "realistic/milsim" game that is out there.
The siege that you want exists and it's called "Zero hour". It's fantastic but it doesn't even have 1k players active. I wish the game was more popular but sadly this is the reality we live in.
Exactly! DCS, the undisputed champion of combat flight sims, has 1k current players (on Steam; there's also the stand alone version which cannot be tracked) , with an all time high of 3k.
@@ttpechon2535 Standalone can be tracked on their website. It usually has 2-3k whenever I check. Also comparing a live service game like Siege to DCS is dumb. ED doesn't rely nearly as heavily on concurrent players for profit. Siege needs people to constantly play so they keep buying cosmetics. DCS need you to occasionally buy a module and they make a lot more money per sale. Obviously they want people playing their game but considering their trailers get hundreds of thousands of views, they're probably making a bunch of sales per module. Your average DCS player has spent hundreds on the game while the average Siege player has probably only spent a few dozen.
@@ttpechon2535Ready Or Not also
Zero Hour isnt a good game.Also because the devs arent well known.If they were ubisoft,EA or Activision that game would have more players.
F R6 Glitter and Rainbows!!!! Ill take Rogue Spear instead. FNin Furry sim with guns
But mate all you talk about lately is this game as is
Because I’m enjoying it more than any other game right now?
If anyone thinks this resurgence is anymore than a month long turnaround is a moron. The game is still fundamentally flawed and betrays its core identity that it abandoned years ago. It’s just here to shove more microtransactions into our throats.
No joke i jumped and hoot n hollered as loud as i could in a house with sleeping family just for the fact it was sponsored. I dont play the game but i support gettin money any which way as a content creator as yourself considering other non-RUclips activities you do. Readin people bitch about you takin sponsors is icing on the cake.
I've never liked Siege's gunplay, and I've never liked games where any significant portion of the gameplay is spent watching your allies complete the objective after you've been shot. This game may be successful but I worry its part of the reason Ubisoft's game releases are so weak right now. Assassin's Creed hasn't had a truly great game since Black Flag, Far Cry hasn't tried anything new since 3, Skull & Bones.... doesn't need an introduction, hell even Breakpoint was awful until fairly receny and that still requires mods to be truly good, and it can't be great. I don't despise Siege's success because i dont think it's a good game, I despise it because it's success keeps Ubisoft from making progress towards new and greater games. Why put money into a new venture when you can make bank with silly anime skins in a nearly decade old game?
Man people need to put their big boy pants on and stop complaining about BigFry getting sponsors. He is still honest about how he feels about the games he plays and is not a sell out.
Never forget:
If someone doesn't do a sponsorship they deserve more - if they do a sponsorship they're sellouts.
That's how peoples minds usually work, they complain about anything - and be it that the 20€ game they bought doesn't get new content every month or if they have to pay for more content.
I like that your only taking sponsors for the things you truly believe are good.
Yeah and look at the reception? See how it literally doesn't matter to these fucking clowns?
@BigfryTV it's bs bro. Honestly your doing it right. I appreciate your content