Rainbow Six Siege has fewer Steam players than Borderlands 2 right now, and that's a shame - Sensationalist Headlines

[QUOTE=ashxu;49227471]the game seems quite shallow anyway. They're pushing it as an e-sports but it missed the point entirely on how to make a "deep" shooter. The Counter-Strike series masters the "easy to play but hard to master" design. Any dope can understand buy a gun at the start of the round then shoot people up but in order to get good you need to learn so much more and the nuances of each map.[/QUOTE] I disagree. Especially if you play with friends or happen to play with guys who actually communicate there's a lot that you can do, it has quite a bit of depth to it when you get into it. That being said though, it's certainly not going to take Counter-Strikes place or anything crazy like that.

God I wish we had another SWAT game

[QUOTE=proch;49227837]God I wish we had another SWAT game[/QUOTE] We did but it ended with a bunch of twitch streamers getting caught with pot and shit

[QUOTE=Scratch.;49227802]Fallout's 472,962 all-time peak 16 days ago cs:go that day [t]http://a.pomf.cat/vsbnoi.png[/t] ¯\_(ツ)_/¯[/QUOTE] Oh, might not have looked at the all-time peak. At the moment I looked it was definitely higher than Dota 2 and CS:GO though, but it probably wasn't the average.

[QUOTE=DEMONSKUL;49227409]Well, 80$ cad for what amounts to a multiplayer only[/quote] hahaha [QUOTE=DEMONSKUL;49227409] game with 1 gamemode [/QUOTE] [B]HAHAHAHAHA[/B]

[QUOTE=DEMONSKUL;49227409]multiplayer only game with 1 gamemode[/QUOTE] The game isn't amazing and all, but it doesn't have just 1 gamemode. It has like 4 :downs:

Well sorry for not seeing the huge difference in "find the bomb" and "find the hostages"

I could still get a game with both fully fleshed out single-player and multiplayer content for that price, or cheaper. Not every video game needs to be 60 dollars. If companies want to be flexible about the amount of content in the game, then they should be willing to be flexible about the price.

For those interested, it is $40 on GMG for a little bit here [url]http://www.greenmangaming.com/s/us/en/pc/games/shooter/tom-clancys-rainbow-six-siege/[/url]

AAA developers need to start making smaller games with smaller budgets for a lower price tag It's extremely hard to get people to buy $60 games when Steam has conditioned buyers to buy games for under $30

Did you guys even play it with people with mics? Good teamwork actually matters and there is some really cool shit you can do as a team. That being said, fuck paying $60 for that

I really enjoyed the betas, and I'd play the shit out of it if I had it. But I won't own it unless I get it for like $20 or less. Maybe $30 or less if they threw in some free shit on the side.

They should have made Patriots instead of this.

I got the game for free from a friend who got a GTX 970 recently, they didn't want it because it was a uplay copy and in their words: [QUOTE]Uplay sucks cock.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;49228286]AAA developers need to start making smaller games with smaller budgets for a lower price tag It's extremely hard to get people to buy $60 games when Steam has conditioned buyers to buy games for under $30[/QUOTE] the funny thing is i'm sure even the console crowd would look at R6:S and say "$60 for multiplayer only? pass"

[QUOTE=HAKKAR!!!;49227356]maybe developers should stop selling multiplayer only games for $60+ with pre-planned season pass dlc[/QUOTE] The only benefit you get for buying the Season Pass is a 1-Week early access to the operators. Operators and maps and modes will be free for every user.

I can't see myself paying the AAA "premium" for a game that, frankly, doesn't look like it should cost even half of that. Especially considering it's multiplayer only, combined with Ubi's notoriously shit netcode. AAA devs need to realize that not every game is going to sell for 60USD (higher in some countries). Especially when you can get generally better experiences (CS:GO comes to mind) for a fraction of the cost, or a game with massive amounts of content (Fallout 4 is a recent example, I've dumped 100+ hours into it and am on my third playthrough already, and I'm not even close to burnt out yet) for the same price. It's just a tough sell to sell a game without massive brand presence (like CoD or Battlefield) that has not a lot of content for the price. Consumers are looking to get as much content out of their game as possible. There's a price-to-content ratio that needs to be passed before a lot of consumers are happy with their product, and this doesn't mean gating all your content behind grinding to pad out the running time. And from what I've heard, Siege doesn't really have that much going for it. Sure it's fun, but not "60 dollars, possibly more if I want the season pass" fun.

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/QgLWZTk.png[/IMG] I'm not going to pay 120 bucks for a game, no matter how good it is.

The season pass shouldn't be bought for this game anyway. All future content will be free except for skins.

Like has been said many times already.. decent game with a bad price.

Think this whole article forgets that some people probably have it on uplay and not steam :v:

[QUOTE=Neddy;49229256]Think this whole article forgets that some people probably have it on uplay and not steam :v:[/QUOTE] Considering the title is Rainbow Six Siege has fewer [B]Steam players[/B] than Borderlands 2 right now, and that's a shame I don't think they were going for uplay buyers.

[QUOTE=Ricenchicken;49229280]Considering the title is Rainbow Six Siege has fewer [B]Steam players[/B] than Borderlands 2 right now, and that's a shame I don't think they were going for uplay buyers.[/QUOTE] My point was that. The article is kinda [b]pointless[/b] it seemed like It was trying to say thats theres not many players playing. When actually infact there's probably a shit ton more playing.

[QUOTE=Neddy;49229301]My point was that. The article is kinda [b]pointless[/b] it seemed like It was trying to say thats theres not many players playing. When actually infact there's probably a shit ton more playing.[/QUOTE] I loved this games beta. But lets be real This game's going to tank, and tank fucking hard. It's too fucking expensive, and it doesn't have enough content to justify that. I loved it. But it will fail horribly. I loved it, and I won't pay 70$ for it. Why would someone take a risk on it?

[QUOTE=Neddy;49229256]Think this whole article forgets that some people probably have it on uplay and not steam :v:[/QUOTE] People are already hesitant enough to use Origin, and UPlay is much worse than both Steam and Origin I don't think that's a lot of people

[QUOTE=HAKKAR!!!;49227356]maybe developers should stop selling multiplayer only games for $60+ with pre-planned season pass dlc[/QUOTE] if they did $30 for the base game and $30 for the season pass it would be a lot better

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;49229358]People are already hesitant enough to use Origin, and UPlay is much worse than both Steam and Origin I don't think that's a lot of people[/QUOTE] Steam doesn't get rid of uplay though.

Video game industry crash soon

[QUOTE=PieClock;49229539]Steam doesn't get rid of uplay though.[/QUOTE] Even less reason someone would buy it exclusively on uplay

I thought it was a combination of how the commercials are a rip off of recent CoD commercials, "Seige the Day" being a horrible tagline and people finally coming to their senses and ceasing to support a company that despises PC gaming. But NOOOOOOO, its just taking into account Steam connections. Way to ruin my day PCGamesN.