Rainbow6 2 or COD4

[DirtyJerz32]

Re: Rainbow6 2 or COD4

I'm one who doesn't agree or understand the whole 'rb6 is more tactical' argument. To add to that I also think that the 'cod4 people run around aimlessly' argument rediculous.

What is more 'tactical' about rb6 (I was a vet of the first one)?
I think that cod4 is more tactical than at least vegas1 (since I owned that one and played the crap out of it)

Cod has actual longish-range sniping, claymores, and real comoflauge suits, as well as buildings AND natural landscapes/nature. Rb6 has a cover system, but that lets you see things that you rightfully shouldn't from a 1st person perspective. I have never thought hat rb6 was anymore tactical than almost any shooter. The only thing that makes a game 'tactical' is if you are using 'tactics' the more you have at your disposal, the more 'tactical' it is and cod4 simply has more options as far as strategy goes in how to go about playing in a multiplayer match.

Secondly, if you are talking about team tactics; all that is dependent upon is who you are playing with, and if you work together as a team. There is nothing that seperates the two games in this regard. It is all about how good a communicator you are and the people that are on you team (friends or randoms).

The final way people may choose to say that one game is more 'tactical' than the other is really to imply that it contains more realism. I've never seen a compelling argument that shows Vegas to be more realistic.

I needed to get that off my chest because people say this about vegas without even thinking about it, as if it's some absolute truth, which I completely disagree with. Not in anyway trying to take away from the game, the only thing I can agree with is that these 2 games play very differently.

I guess you play with different people than I do. Everyone has its own opinion.

[thelwig14]

Re: Rainbow6 2 or COD4

I'm one who doesn't agree or understand the whole 'rb6 is more tactical' argument. To add to that I also think that the 'cod4 people run around aimlessly' argument rediculous.

What is more 'tactical' about rb6 (I was a vet of the first one)?
I think that cod4 is more tactical than at least vegas1 (since I owned that one and played the crap out of it)

Cod has actual longish-range sniping, claymores, and real comoflauge suits, as well as buildings AND natural landscapes/nature. Rb6 has a cover system, but that lets you see things that you rightfully shouldn't from a 1st person perspective. I have never thought hat rb6 was anymore tactical than almost any shooter. The only thing that makes a game 'tactical' is if you are using 'tactics' the more you have at your disposal, the more 'tactical' it is and cod4 simply has more options as far as strategy goes in how to go about playing in a multiplayer match.

Secondly, if you are talking about team tactics; all that is dependent upon is who you are playing with, and if you work together as a team. There is nothing that seperates the two games in this regard. It is all about how good a communicator you are and the people that are on you team (friends or randoms).

The final way people may choose to say that one game is more 'tactical' than the other is really to imply that it contains more realism. I've never seen a compelling argument that shows Vegas to be more realistic.

I needed to get that off my chest because people say this about vegas without even thinking about it, as if it's some absolute truth, which I completely disagree with. Not in anyway trying to take away from the game, the only thing I can agree with is that these 2 games play very differently.

QFT

[mgoblue]

Re: Rainbow6 2 or COD4

I'm one who doesn't agree or understand the whole 'rb6 is more tactical' argument. To add to that I also think that the 'cod4 people run around aimlessly' argument rediculous.

What is more 'tactical' about rb6 (I was a vet of the first one)?
I think that cod4 is more tactical than at least vegas1 (since I owned that one and played the crap out of it)

Cod has actual longish-range sniping, claymores, and real comoflauge suits, as well as buildings AND natural landscapes/nature. Rb6 has a cover system, but that lets you see things that you rightfully shouldn't from a 1st person perspective. I have never thought hat rb6 was anymore tactical than almost any shooter. The only thing that makes a game 'tactical' is if you are using 'tactics' the more you have at your disposal, the more 'tactical' it is and cod4 simply has more options as far as strategy goes in how to go about playing in a multiplayer match.

Secondly, if you are talking about team tactics; all that is dependent upon is who you are playing with, and if you work together as a team. There is nothing that seperates the two games in this regard. It is all about how good a communicator you are and the people that are on you team (friends or randoms).

The final way people may choose to say that one game is more 'tactical' than the other is really to imply that it contains more realism. I've never seen a compelling argument that shows Vegas to be more realistic.

I needed to get that off my chest because people say this about vegas without even thinking about it, as if it's some absolute truth, which I completely disagree with. Not in anyway trying to take away from the game, the only thing I can agree with is that these 2 games play very differently.

I'm a big COD4 fan (and I think nearly everyone here is as well), so it's not like we're bashing COD4.

If you can't tell that from feel they are two pretty different games pacing wise then I don't know what to tell you. COD4 is very tactical, it's not like Halo at all (which IMO sucks and is circle strafe city). RB6 is much slower paced, especially the single player. COD4 has nothing with your teammates where you tell them to hold up at a door, then decide whether to breach and clear, flashbang, or use smoke for cover.

In RB6 you can tell your team to repel down a zip line while you bust in through a door at the same time...I think that's the differences that people refer to. I also think COD4 has a quicker pace and does allow for a bit more running vs RB6, but in no way is it just wild run and gun.

We all like COD4, you seem to think we hate it or something....just when deciding between 2 games you have to get into the details, and there really is a difference between the two.

I will say that COD4's single player drove me nuts with its "respawn a billion guys" methods. How can you be tactical when the CPU has 50,000 guys to throw at you in a single room?

[dbeth]

Re: Rainbow6 2 or COD4

that's what always drove me nuts about the CoD series: until you got by a certain point, the guys just kept coming. As soon as you crossed the "invisible line", they stopped spawning. Would drive me nuts as I would try to hold my ground and knock them out...only to have them keep coming. I would have to go into the fire that I was trying to avoid just to get them to stop.

With R6, If I enter an area/room with 5 terrorists, once I kill all 5, I can move on....they won't just keep coming. Clearing areas becomes VERY important.

[mgoblue]

Re: Rainbow6 2 or COD4

that's what always drove me nuts about the CoD series: until you got by a certain point, the guys just kept coming. As soon as you crossed the "invisible line", they stopped spawning. Would drive me nuts as I would try to hold my ground and knock them out...only to have them keep coming. I would have to go into the fire that I was trying to avoid just to get them to stop.

With R6, If I enter an area/room with 5 terrorists, once I kill all 5, I can move on....they won't just keep coming. Clearing areas becomes VERY important.

Exactly...enemies will even zipline and stuff, but it's not horrible. I'm playing COD4 on Veteran and I'm giving up at the Ferris Wheel part. I've seen videos online on how to beat it, but it's just not fun. I don't play games to jump through these hoops with something completely unrealistic.

RB62 I beat on normal and plan on going back for Realistic. I spent over an hour on one section, trying again and again, but I never felt that pissed off feeling I get when I play COD4 single player. I refuse to play that anymore because it's just not fun.

[allBthere]

Re: Rainbow6 2 or COD4

I'm a big COD4 fan (and I think nearly everyone here is as well), so it's not like we're bashing COD4.

If you can't tell that from feel they are two pretty different games pacing wise then I don't know what to tell you. COD4 is very tactical, it's not like Halo at all (which IMO sucks and is circle strafe city). RB6 is much slower paced, especially the single player. COD4 has nothing with your teammates where you tell them to hold up at a door, then decide whether to breach and clear, flashbang, or use smoke for cover.

In RB6 you can tell your team to repel down a zip line while you bust in through a door at the same time...I think that's the differences that people refer to. I also think COD4 has a quicker pace and does allow for a bit more running vs RB6, but in no way is it just wild run and gun.

We all like COD4, you seem to think we hate it or something....just when deciding between 2 games you have to get into the details, and there really is a difference between the two.

I will say that COD4's single player drove me nuts with its "respawn a billion guys" methods. How can you be tactical when the CPU has 50,000 guys to throw at you in a single room?

I should have mentioned I was talking about mulitplayer...I agree with you, I'm not even a huge fan of cod4's single, while I enjoy vegas2 last night on single player rented. I also webcam'd my face in..there is a lot to like about the vegas series (again i owned and loved 1) I don't think anyone hates cod4...not sure where you got that from. My point was the way we use the word 'tactical' is all wrong at the moment. In multiplayer, my argument is rbs2 is not more tactical at all.

about enemy respawning..i completely agree, you can't snipe for long because it doesn't do anything...you physically have to move beyond a certain point. Vegas1 had the same problem (and 2 does in terrorist hunt) I would clear an area from afar, then pass by a certain 'trigger' area, and an enemy would spawn behind me. the only game that doesn't do this is the Hitman series- but they ruin it by having all enemies gravitate towards your location so that you can't have a midrange playstyle between stealth and rambo.

I was speaking purely multiplayer. I believe vegas2 single player would be more worth while if that's all you wanted, but even in that case it's beaten during a rental so there is no point in buying either game based solely on single player.

GTA is a game you can easily justify for sp only, or fallout3, oblivion etc.. SPORTS GAMES THAT ARE DONE RIGHT

[mgoblue]

Re: Rainbow6 2 or COD4

I should have mentioned I was talking about mulitplayer...I agree with you, I'm not even a huge fan of cod4's single, while I enjoy vegas2 last night on single player rented. I also webcam'd my face in..there is a lot to like about the vegas series (again i owned and loved 1) I don't think anyone hates cod4...not sure where you got that from. My point was the way we use the word 'tactical' is all wrong at the moment. In multiplayer, my argument is rbs2 is not more tactical at all.

about enemy respawning..i completely agree, you can't snipe for long because it doesn't do anything...you physically have to move beyond a certain point. Vegas1 had the same problem (and 2 does in terrorist hunt) I would clear an area from afar, then pass by a certain 'trigger' area, and an enemy would spawn behind me. the only game that doesn't do this is the Hitman series- but they ruin it by having all enemies gravitate towards your location so that you can't have a midrange playstyle between stealth and rambo.

I was speaking purely multiplayer. I believe vegas2 single player would be more worth while if that's all you wanted, but even in that case it's beaten during a rental so there is no point in buying either game based solely on single player.

GTA is a game you can easily justify for sp only, or fallout3, oblivion etc.. SPORTS GAMES THAT ARE DONE RIGHT

I still think the pacing of RB6, just the fact that you're a lot slower than COD4 makes you be more tactical (I can't run away from gunfire into a doorway as easily in RB6 than I can COD4), but all this is really just nitpicking. I just think the slower pace of RB6 forces you to be a bit more cautious, whereas you can get away with a bit more in COD4. Nowhere near the level as Halo though, I think both COD4 and RB6 are tactical, I just think RB6 is a slower paced game that makes it a bit different, at least worth mentioning.

I think I personally prefer COD4 online, but I haven't had a whole lot of time to get into the online aspect lately, I'm more of a offline gamer now (especially being west coast, all the east coast OS'ers are offline sometimes when I'm finally hopping on).

You are right though, there's no massive difference tactical wise between COD4 and RB6V, at least in multiplayer.