I'm truly disappointed by this game in terms of graphics, AND in terms of gameplay mechanics as well. It seems to play similarly to all previous couple iterations of Rainbow Six prior to this one. That is to say it looks extremely linear and corridor-ish, with a hand leading the player down a predetermined path, rather than having open levels with complete buildings/environments that allow you to choose the point of entry and path of progression. To me, a special-ops genre game really calls for complete, mapped out environments, which require player tactics and volition to get through.

All these linear, closed-path single-player campaigns, with the same throw-away scripted level/game design that plague all games nowadays, like this and CoD4, are really snooze-fests to me, and miss the opportunity/potential to achieve some sort of greatness in gameplay mechanics. It looks like we'll all have to wait for SWAT5 to finally get a good SP game out of this category.

I'd buy this game for the multiplayer alone :D

definitely the best tactical shooter on the 360

I didn't know Lance Bass visited Gamersyde!

looks lame

scripted scenes FTW for me. it creates excitment in what would be a very samey game. open environments have been done before in MoH airborne and it was just plain boring. no scripted events means no excitment. and the only realistic way to have scripted events is to have a linear game. the problem with an open, freeform environment is that there is no telling where you, the player may be at any given time. and so a scripted sequence of events wouldnt be able to trigger unless you aproach from a specific angle anyway. which negates the point in an open environment.

linear, scripted games still have their appeal since they have a far more story driven, exciting experience. and the FPS genre is one that works best with that method. the open nature of far cry and crysis is the reason i hate them so much. it feels like there is no narative, or that the "freedom" is forced since you have to go to specific points anyway to complete the objectives, its a fake sence of freedom to me.

Agree 100% there's nothing more tedious than the last, last, last gen game mechanics and structure of garbage like this and COD4, give me open world, freedom to explore and do the missions how I want to do them, kill the targets close up or from long range, give me stuff like Far Cry 2, White Gold, ArmA2 etc. etc.

LOL at snake caming a door and getting to see a terrorist crouching motionless with a shield!! Why are all the terrorists either frozen to the spot or walking up and down on a fixed path? Lame, lazy and unrealistic.

Anyway, the multiplayer will be good fun.

You answered your own question ;)

Scripted, linear games would be perfectly fine if it weren't already done to death in literally a HUNDRED shooters prior. That style all started with a 10+ year old game in Half-Life 1 (maybe before), and 10+ year old, archaic gameplay mechanics have no business being the primary gameplay thrust in modern "next-gen" games such as CoD4. To me, having nothing but linear paths and closed level structure is not only unoriginal and been-there-done-that, its simply too artificial in the sense that you're completely taken out of the illusion of a real-world environment when you're faced with nothing but constrictive invisible walls and fences that you for some reason can't jump over. When you're faced with all these invisible boundaries, it completely shatters the immersion and intensity of the situation by reminding you that you're in a videogame, thus, you can't go here because the programmers SAID you can't go here! Lame.

I'm not totally against OCCASIONAL use of scripted sequences, because it helps to tell a story and to bring up the cinematic presentation up a notch. However, I don't need another 500 first-person shooters that hang their hats on the tired formula of: go from Room A to Room B, watch something happen, walk from Room B to Room C, watch another thing happen... It's been done too many times before, it requires no forethought or strategy on the part of the player, and it's simply no longer stimulating or entertaining to seasoned FPS gamers who are a bit more cerebral, and want a little more substance/sophistication in their shooters. What I advocate is occasional scripted sequences interspersed between levels and at certain chokepoints in the wide-open environment. It's not undoable to have scripted sequences in freeform levels, because you can have certain narrow pathways, hotspots, and chokepoints where the player must eventually traverse in order to progress.

If you don't think non-linear games can be "intense," then you haven't played SWAT 4, which does this special-ops genre type of game right. Complete buildings with back alleys and various upper/lower levels, and multiple entry points. You the player choose your own path throughout the course of the level, and you must be constantly on-guard and plan ahead map-wise, or else you'll get yourself, your teammates, or a hostage killed. It's a far more tense and involving and immersive game than some arcadey kid-crap like CoD4.

Far Cry 2 will be an incredible shooter, as will Fallout 3. I'm actually not a fan of Crysis only because its developers have questionable taste in terms of storytelling and presentation. MoH Airborne sucked because it was EA, not because it's an open-world game.

Seems very bland. The first one had interesting locations but this one just seems "bleh". The gameplay is solid though. I suppose the devs have a "if it ain't broke don't fix it" attitude. I'll get it eventually.

You should try "Operation Flashpoint" (PC).

I just saw the videos..... OMG how can you ppl say it looks ugly?? It looks amazing, the lighting is spectacular and the shaders are perfect. And finally a game that doesnt have knife-sharp shadows that are pitch-black. Ever heard of something called light scattering? Global illumination?

Or better yet ArmA, then wait for ArmA2 on PC/360 which will be great ;)

I didn't say CoD4 wasn't a great game. I play it all the time. That is, I play the MULTIPLAYER all the time. The multiplay in the game is the standout portion, whereas the single player while good is nothing exceptional, save for some interesting story elements and well-crafted cinematic set pieces. It's basically your typical run-and-gun shooting gallery, where you progress from point A to point B to C, shoot down the endless procession of enemies one-by-one, like that light-gun arcade from Back to the Future, and move on to the next area where you do the exact same thing over again. Zero thinking and strategy involved in what amounts to nothing more than a twitch shooter.

I'll grant you that sandbox-type level designs have been done before, and I'll agree that just because something is sandbox in nature doesn't MAKE or BREAK a game; however, in my opinion, it's always preferable to allow the player a little bit more freedom of movement and freedom of gameplay. Maybe not all the time or in every game (as you say, not every title is GTA), but I think a lot of your average scripted shooters nowadays could take a break from the formulaic scripted, predetermined pathways to give the player a breath of fresh air by opening up the environments on occasion. Again, not for every level or every instance of a game, but some variety couldn't hurt.

CoD4 SP is a mere taster of the fun I get out of MP, and as for this, have to say I'm looking forward to it, it'll certainly do as a nice diversion until GTA4 arrives!

one more question,
When I with my friend play MP in story mode, can I heal him when my friend get hurt?
In vegas 1 only can heal NPC...:(
thx~

Video part #2 crashes Windows Media Player after 7:46.

alot of people bitchin about it being the same exact game just a different name.
oh well no point in changing a good thing. i like every new feature they put in this game, just add new features and the hardcore fans will buy it. games like cod4 are just fads imo and the devs for that game seems to be backing it seeing as the next cod game goes back to ww2, games like this and counter strike are timeless and as far as shooting weapons go this game tops em, as far as consoles anyway.

Does anyone else have the problem with video #2 crashing Windows Media Player after 7:46?

Did the graphics get worse?

That's what it looks like.

No wonder Ubisoft keeps boasting about "better performance in the sequel!"