Patriots No More: Rainbow 6 Siege Breaches E3

I suspect someone's had a lot of fun touching-up this screenshot.

E3 is a bit like a flashbang. In it comes whoosh kersplode then you’re disoriented and confused and struggle to continue whatever it was you were up to. What I’m saying is that Ubisoft announced Rainbow Six Siege during E3 while we were curled up on the floor and armed men shouted at us, so we forgot to actually post about it even though we’ve discussed it.

The FPS (no third-person at all this time) sees baddies trying to fortify and hold buildings before the goodies smash in to come and get them. Emphasis on the smashing, as it has magnificently destructible environments powered by tech some joker at Ubi named ‘Realbast.’ Realbast!

Ubi’s E3 demo sees terrorists and Rainbow Six fighting in a suburban house to capture a woman-shaped flag. What starts out as quite a nice house becomes riddled with holes over several minutes as players shoot through walls, breach windows, and blow great holes in walls and floors with explosives. Environmental destruction is often a novelty, a spectacle, but here it seems an exciting reconfiguration of space. I’m quite keen to start destroying things.

[As we bicker about who’ll write this, Adam suggests compromise by representing Graham’s intentions in this note: “(Memories of Vegas, jumpers for siegeposts…coo, corrr, lovely – Graham)”]

Ubi are playing coy but do hint that it may have single-player or co-op bits like Terrorist Hunt mode. Multiplayer is definitely their focus at E3 this year, and also why we’re getting Siege instead of Rainbow Six Patriots–that game Ubi announced in 2011 then quickly shut up about.

I’d assumed their silence was because someone made them sit in a corner and think long and hard about their plans to make a game where you would Press Square To Kiss Wife then be kidnapped and strapped with bombs by banker-hating terrorists but no, it’s multiplayer.

Patriots had started with the campaign in mind then multiplayer would be spun off from that, Ubisoft CEO Yves Guillemot told CVG this week, but they decided to make MP experience the core and start over from scratch around that. “The mockups were ghastly” would also have been a good reason to scrap Patriots, but I’m especially glad they did it to make this cracking-looking game.

Developed by Ubisoft Montreal on its Anvil-Next engine (as seen in Assassin’s Creed from III onwards), Siege is due next year. Though this is a staged performance, do watch the E3 demo:


  1. hungrycookpot says:

    Stack up on Comments Section;

    • Syra says:

      Affirmative; game I want spotted, be advised demonstration video is armed with canned dialogue but can’t aim for shit.

  2. El Spidro says:

    Devs pimping multiplayer games with fake “in game chatter” pls stop

    • Atrocious says:

      Right staaaph!

      Seriously “captured from a multiplayer match”. Sure, just a random multiplayer match. The whole thing is clearly staged. It’s ridiculous how that one terrorist sweeps the team and waits just long enough to have them get the hostage out.

    • Solidstate89 says:

      Seriously, Ubisoft needs to stop this charade. No one talks like that in Multiplayer. No one. Not a fucking soul. If they want to give commentary; fine. I’m OK with that. But trying to pretend like the in-game chatter between players is the equivalent of character dialogue in singleplayer games is just ridiculous.

      • SillyWizard says:

        Indeed, any real human communication with these things is peppered with quite a few n-words and a few hue hues.

        Also some pre-teen kid who apparently has no parental supervision in his life.

        • The Random One says:

          I say they should go all the way and have their fake dialogue sound like Victorian gentlemen.

          “I say, good chaps, I appear to have spotted a ruffian… Egads! They are exceedingly numerous! Kindly provide supporting fire for our fair group’s hasty retreat!”

  3. Volcanu says:

    Looks like this could be fun. And who doesnt love destructable environments.

    Still it’s a bit of a shame it’s gone full crash-bang-wallop arcade shoot, rather than the fantastically tense 1 shot kill Rainbow 6s of old. The sting of losing an experienced operative even puts the recent XCOM to shame. So yeah- looks fun but I wish they hadn’t felt the need to dress it in the Rainbow 6 moniker…

  4. Post-Internet Syndrome says:

    At 0:40, a bad guy is boarding up a wall. Thorough chaps, them terrorists.

  5. XhomeB says:

    How did we get from Rainbow Six, Rogue Spear and Raven Shield to… this?
    Seriously, have people become dumber, publishers even greedier or something in between?

    • Crossbit says:

      I’d wager all of the above.

    • Philopoemen says:

      I (re)installed SWAT3 the other day after finding it on GOG – the planning, the build-up, timing your entry etc etc. Now to dig out all my old mods and usermade missions i kept on cd…

      Surely the AI of 2014 should be able to give something 10+ years ago a run for it’s money?

      Yes a proper tactical shooter in the vein of the old games is not going to sell as well as a shooty game these days, but surely the market has become saturated to the point where something “new” can be introduced. Games like DayZ show how gamers want more than just bang.

      Just as children who grew up with Harry Potter migrated to Twilight and now Game of Thrones, perhaps the DM kiddies who have grown up with COD and Battlefield may want to migrate to something a bit more cerebral in their limited gaming time.

      Or not.

    • TT says:

      Trashing R6 plus winking at Raven (shield) and Rogue (spear) should be considered copyright infringement, probably the only kind worth fighting for.

    • jellydonut says:

      First-person shooters found a gigantic console audience with exceedingly low standards. All funds and dev time are allocated towards said audience. Fans of good games are left in slump.

      Unfortunately our only hope for these games to return is Kickstarter and such, but one of the more promising games (Ground Branch) never got off to a good start there.

      I guess the interest for these games is really so low there’s no chance we’ll see them again.

  6. DarkLiberator says:

    Looks interesting, though the fake multiplayer voice chat is pretty fake. Missing your shots for “cinematic purposes”.

    Needs more work obviously. the UI is placeholderish for one.

    • Turkey says:

      I like that they used “Havoc” as the monster that kills the player at the end of every trailer.

  7. CookPassBabtridge says:

    Videogames Company says:
    1. We realise tactical shooters are awesome
    2. We suck at AI
    3. SO – Multiplayer Tactical Shooters

    Does look sexy though. Fingers crossed for SP

  8. Crossbit says:

    The deliberate ‘not actually aiming anywhere near the enemy so we can extend the firefight for dramatic effect’ got in the way of me enjoying that video fairly quickly. Pairing that with the mock voiceover of an organised team… just no.

    • Ernesto says:

      Yeah, really nice. Also: They ‘rescue’ the hostage by shooting bad guys and wrecking whole buildings. And then use her as a human shield? Really? It seems more about shooting then rescuing.

    • Leb says:

      Ubisoft seems to be big on this year. Did the same shit in the division gameplay video.
      “IM GOING IN!!!!!!”

      “realistic” game chatter.

      Then they look like they are using their big toe to control their mouse and aim

      • CookPassBabtridge says:

        And if the girl doing the sniping could see the enemy camping outside, why didn’t she … you know … shoot them? Or at least provide some kind of suppression to give the other guys time to move outside? Yeah I know, because drama. Also they all have such lovely radio voices. No one going HULLO MAII NAMEEEEE EEZ RAYYYMOND in a squeaky voice

  9. Ramshackle Thoughts says:

    Urgh, that scripted gameplay commentary makes my skin crawl…
    If you’re going to pretend it’s taken from a proper match, at least have your players sound like real humans.

    On the bright side, this looks great if it’s an accurate representation.

  10. BLACKOUT-MK2 says:

    I was quite pleased with the demo of this, well, the gameplay part of it anyway. The purposely bad aiming was a bit silly, and Ubisoft need to change up their ideas of how they represent people playing. We don’t all sound like voice actors taking the game as a serious tactical breach. If anything, I’ll be the daft knob who runs around blowing everything up yelling ‘PHYSICS! DESTRUCTION!’ and ruining everyone’s fun, along with the house. Though I still don’t know whether I can trust what I see after Ubi’s Watch Dogs downgrade debacle. It wasn’t a bad looking game, but the downgrade was definitely noticable, and I fear the same happening to all of Ubisoft’s other games from AC Unity to Far Cry 4.

    • dontnormally says:

      I lay the blame for that on playing to the lowest-common-denominator: x360 & ps3.

  11. Kollega says:

    Okay, I have a question: what’s to stop some griefing jerk from shooting the hostage to make everyone lose? Or hell, friendly fire in general? I don’t think leaving friendly fire off in a TENSE, EXTREME TACTICAL SHOOTING GAME is true to the whole idea.

    That aside, though, this announcement did lift my mood considerably. Not because this exact game is something I desperately want to play, but because people are starting to use new consoles’ power for destructible environments (and open worlds, but that’s a different conversation). I seriously loved the destructible environments of Red Faction: Guerrilla and Armageddon.

    • Einhaender says:

      I was thinking the same.

      If rescuing the hostage is the main objective and the round would stop after it is killed, the “terrorists” can simply shoot the hostage whenever they want or are leading in points.

      But if it’s “only” giving your team more points, it would not stop people from jumping through windows guns blazing, because points made by shooting the other team is enough for many people.

      My concern would be how they will ensure paced, tactical gameplay over quick 5min rounds.

      • Volcanu says:

        I imagine that the hostage is invulnerable. Whcih sort of defeats the point of a real hostage rescue situation, but probably works loosely in the confines of a MP ‘thing’ to be fought over….much like a ‘person shaped flag’ as Alice describes it.

        Otherwise I cant see how it would work as the Terrorists players would automatically execute the hostage if doing so meant the CTs fail on the hostage’s death. It doesnt look like ‘realism’ is a thing they’re going for here so sadly, that would be my guess.

        • Bull0 says:

          We kind of got over this with Counter-Strike 1.6, about a million years ago. In a nutshell, they need that hostage to try and secure their escape, or whatever.

  12. Gap Gen says:

    An Ubisoft exec in Montreal is sitting scratching their head wondering what happened to that art game they commissioned about seats.

  13. skyturnedred says:

    I really hope it has a proper singleplayer/co-op component, could be pretty fun with some SWAT4 type missions.

  14. Turkey says:

    Y’all should learn to embrace the stupidity of videogame marketing. It’s the only reason I watch trailers anymore.

  15. Jerkzilla says:

    I get the feeling that video game publishers are scraping the bottom of the barrel for competent PR officers.

    Also, the game looks very limited and doesn’t seem to have anything to do with Rainbow as initially described by Tom Clancy.

  16. WALLS says:

    its a shame they didnt go through with patriots as it would be the first time in an fps i would genuinely not have wanted to shoot the enemies and supported their cause

  17. Chaz says:

    What would they do in a house that hasn’t just been knocked up with cheap stud walling?

    • SillyWizard says:

      As the game is taking place in the contemporary US, as far as I can tell, that shouldn’t be an issue.

  18. Octuplex says:

    Is it just me or does this look like it wasn’t actual game footage? Kinda looked like it was animated (the hostage talking to the drone seems kinda impossible to practically do). After years of watching trailers I’ve learned to be cynical when it comes to these things. Killzone 2 and Aliens: Colonial Marines both tried pulling that before.

  19. The Godzilla Hunter says:

    People, we all seem to be ignoring this trailer’s greatest sin: their abusive use of the term “pre-alpha”. Seriously, isn’t pre-alpha, you know, basically drawings on a white board? I would reckon that this footage is, at the very least, late alpha.

    At this rate of using earlier and earlier developing terms for trailers by 2017 trailers will be opened with the caption, “The following is taken from footage of a game that does not yet exist in the mind of its creators.”

    • Dave Tosser says:

      “What follows is footage taken from the distracted daydreams of the project lead. The finished game may look nothing like this, but it’s releasing tomorrow.”

      “Beta is beta” doesn’t mean anything anymore because beta isn’t beta. Beta is gouging customers for early preorders.

  20. gunny1993 says:

    Real voice chat at the time


    ” huehuehueheuhe bet i could get some sweet upskirts with this drone huehueheuheuheuheuheu”

    “Lets charge the fuckers fuckin LEYROOOOOOY JENKIIIINNNNS”

    “No come on guy, lets go in through the roof, make sure we all come in at the same time”


    “right, time to blow these fucking windows”

    “OI, get to you window you prick, stop afking”

    “BOOOM mother fucker, how you like that”

    “hey there was a hostage in here, whatdayaknow”

  21. Soggy_Popcorn says:

    Why are you ignoring the real issue at play here RPS? I speak, of course, of the abscence of any female operators in R6.

    I NEED to be able to play as an operator that has boobs. And, ideally, I would like to shoot female terrorists in the boobs as well.

    If you don’t confront the devs on this troglodite, game-breaking discrimination, who will?

    • dE says:

      You know, just the other day I was wondering if the Red Sea could maintain it’s level of saltiness. Thank you for re-assuring me that you’ll be there to keep it just salty enough.

    • SillyWizard says:

      I essentially made this comment on the recent Sniper Elite 3 multiplayer post and they censored it. :(

  22. Dave Tosser says:

    Protracted firefights? What is this, Gears? Rainbow Six is like Hotline Miami. You get in there, paint the walls and move on to the next room. No faffing about. No fuckery with using hostages as human shields. Already crippled this franchise three times, just let it die.

    I’d honestly rather have Doorkickers than a first-person tactical shooter at this point, as I don’t feel anyone is capable of improving on ten year old designs when we’ve made zero progress for the tactical shooter since SWAT 4, and what we care about more is just having a first-person tactical shooter than having one that pushes boundaries. Which is why Takedown: Red Sabre was so miserable.

    It’s also that we’ve made zero progress on AI with a few exceptions, and when firefights in FEAR are more interesting and engaging than anything I’ve played released this decade that isn’t multiplayer Arma, you know we’ve forgotten something somewhere. Random scumfucks from across the world are no substitute for clever AI.

    My thinking when it comes to Kickstarter and remakes- bringing back fleet command games or turn-based CRPGs now, whilst exciting, is less picking up where you left off and more trying to emulate the likes of Freespace 2 and Realms of Arkania, because we’ve had nothing to go on since. And maybe once we’ve got a dozen of them we can start moving forwards, but I don’t see all that much in the current crop of revivals that I didn’t see back in the day. Something like Age of Decadence, which has a decade of development to it, seems more likely to come with new ideas.

    Erm, right. Rainbow Six.

  23. Megakoresh says:

    This very well might end up being
    But other than that and cringeworthy fake gameplay, I liked what I have seen.

  24. thedosbox says:

    Not convinced about the destructible environments, as I’ll bet that it ends up being a few fixed hot spots.

    However, I really really do want a Raven Shield or SWAT 4 successor.