Unscripted Sieging: 6 Rounds of Rainbow Six Siege

He's upside-down.

We were quite excited about the defence-building, wall-exploding, hostage-rescuing, man-shooting action of Rainbow Six Siege during E3, but the demo Ubisoft showed was ever-scripted and poorly-acted silliness. We’ve been waiting to see actual gameplay since, and last week Ubisoft showed it off with six supposedly live rounds during a livestream. You may be surprised to learn that unscripted Siege contains fewer dramatic twists and less emoting than the demo. Come watch the games yourself and see what you make of it now.

Unscripted, Siege inevitably looks a lot lot less exciting. However, it might be difficult to pull off anything that great when you’re discussing tactics aloud while the other sits directly opposite. Most rounds of any FPS aren’t that great to watch anyway. It’s the exceptions, the rounds with twists and turns and surprises, that keep us excited enough to play through the slow ones.

Ubisoft’s hosts start gabbing about the game at about the 20-minute mark, show two scripted rounds at around 24 minutes (why?), followed by three rounds of actual unscripted play at 35 minutes, take a break, then play another three at 55 minutes. However, for supposedly unscripted live gameplay, I did notice a fair few fade transitions–or glitches which happen to look an awful lot like fade transitions. Hmm. Bit suspicious, that.

Siege is due next year, developed at Ubisoft’s Montreal studio.


  1. Pemptus says:

    What’s the point of all those sturdy-looking barricades if they are apparently made from tissue paper?

    • Napoleon15 says:

      Haha, I was about to say, it looks a bit silly when a single bullet can put a football-sized hole through things. I was waiting for the entire house to collapse when they used an explosive charge.

    • Melody says:

      The point is not to completely block access to a room, but to deny vision and obstruct entry. When you are destroying a barricade, you are giving away your location and exposing yourself to enemy fire. If they were harder to remove, the defenders would have an overwhelming tactical advantage.

      • P.Funk says:

        Defenders are supposed to have an overwhelming advantage, thats why people defend things.

        I will never stop enjoying the fascinating lengths computer games have to go to to make balanced teams competitive in Attack/Defense when in real life its always suicide to attack with equal numbers (unless the defenders are idiots, or they got stuck defending crappy terrain).

        I think it would be fascinating if you had a game where it would be 8v4 with attack defend. It would actually be a change, having to coordinate two human teams of 4 so that the attack creates enough chaos to overcome the defensive advantages the 4 terrorists have or whatever. You know… something different.

        That used to be what Rainbow six was about.

        • Post-Internet Syndrome says:

          To be fair, Rainbow Six used to be about 8 people going up against an army of mooks. I agree that parts of this seem somewhat silly, but overall I like the concept. Quite bored of this map now though!

        • Synesthesia says:

          Arma is pretty awesome at giving exactly just that. I remember pvp missions where a 30 man squad and a m113 (aka the death box) and chopper insertions were barely enough to retake a occupied hospital, by a much smaller, but well armed force.

          • P.Funk says:

            Basically the only mainstream-ish shooter that respects the rules of realistic combat without a major mod. I still think most people who’ve hopped on the bandwagon think of it only as a massive single player campaign sandbox.

      • Reiver says:

        I thought Mount and Blade did that well. It was possible in multiplayer optons to set the defenders to have limited spawns and the the attacker unlimited (or just larger thatn the defenders) with a timer. This made for an interesting tactical balance where, although never outnumbered, the defenders would be whittled down over the course of a round. When it worked it was brilliant and made aysmmetrical and interesting maps viable.

  2. Iain_1986 says:

    The “Ubisoft Shows” link goes to an article from 6 years ago about “French Street Racing”

  3. Koozer says:

    Looks like it could be entertaining, but there are a lot of niggles:

    Why are the drones invisible/invincible?
    Why does the hostage even exist? Each team just ignored them.
    Why is the defending team immune to barbed wire?
    This looks like the perfect game for more intricately modelled injuries, but it uses the CoD regenerating health model. I want to shoot people in the legs! (and in the game)

    If it supports mods and custom maps, it could be glorious though.

    • Melody says:

      I didn’t notice the barbed wire thing, but the hostage is really important to give the game depth and balance. Most CS:GO games with hostages (or bombs) also end when one team dies rather than when the hostage is saved, but if the hostage wasn’t there the defenders could simply hole up somewhere and hide for the entire game. This way, the defenders can still hide somewhat, but they have something to protect other than themselves, and in the same vein attackers can potentially ignore the defenders if they manage to sneak past them and get the hostage.

      • DrGonzo says:

        The changes to hostage mode mean this isn’t really true of CS:Go anymore. The time limit is tiny until the cts pick up a hostage. So if they ignore the hostage the round is incredibly short.

    • siegarettes says:

      From what I’ve read and seen before, the drones are actually destroyable, just most players haven’t bothered because they’d rather spend the time setting up barricades and reinforcements. Plus they’d have to hunt down all five of them to deny info.

  4. PopeRatzo says:

    Let me guess: it’s co-op or multiplayer only, right? Go ahead, Big Gaming. Ruin my life.

    • Post-Internet Syndrome says:

      They’ve said before and in this stream that there’s a single player mode too.

  5. Melody says:

    It’s definitely promising, although seeing them all play with a controller when they had keyboard and mouse in front of them was cringe-worthy.

  6. Scare Tactics says:

    Why not have a race with the RC drones instead? One from each team could be left to blow walls in order to manipulate the track, cheer, throw a luigi stare..I dunno.
    All in all, it could be a fun little racer for the lunch break..

  7. DrGonzo says:

    It probably looks alright, but I can’t help but compare it to the first fake video, which this looks nothing like. So it’s just underwhelming and disapointing.

  8. P.Funk says:

    So far Due Process looks like it’ll be way more fun, and with 100% less Uplay.

  9. fluffy_thedestroyer says:

    I hope Ubisoft’s Montreal Studio learned from their past mistakes with Watch Dog’s bad port from console to PC and make sure it runs correctly on PC. I say correctly since it runned on par with console which was not suppose to when you look around in news regarding the performances it was suppose to have.

    • jpm224 says:

      If vegas 2 is anything to go by, don’t get your hopes up.

      If far cry 3 is anything to go by, do get your hopes up.

      I’d say we have about a 50/50 chance of them mucking it up.

  10. Chuckleluck says:

    The whole “build a base to withstand an attack” idea seems great, but most games that have it end up being “build the objectively best designed base every time because it is the best”. Once that objectively best design is found, it takes the fun out of it.

    On a side note, I really enjoy the destruction. It may just be because the players were communicating, but it seemed like it had a much greater effect on gameplay than Battlefield’s Frostbite (aside from giant falling skyscrapers of course).

  11. rcguitarist says:

    This is one of those games where if everybody tried to play realistically (designate a team leader who gives orders that everyone follows, not jumping from the second floor of the house to the ground while shooting because you can, working as a team that considers even one death a tragedy, etc.) it would be an amazing game. But as history has taught us, that is not how 75% of players want to play. They will want to play it as though it is Serious Sam or Call of Duty deathmatch. That is what kills these games for me.

    So I can’t really blame Ubisoft for the scripted gameplay videos because they are just trying to show off what their game can be like with ideal players. Unfortunately for both them and us, that isn’t reality.

    • P.Funk says:

      The thing is they will design these games for those people so its not even like there is some underlying need for amazing teamwork. If there were people would think the game is broken.

      I am always amazed at people fetishizing heavily teamwork focused real world models and turning them into clusterfucks of a game. Whats odd is people respect the tacit rules of car racing more often than the rules of “hey, lets go in together alright?” or the unforgettable “watch my 6”.

      Its especially weird to me since the whole idea that in goings from A to B its something of a gentleman’s rule you don’t smash into each other on the way, but in the case of killing or being killed that ought to be amongst the most natural of human tendencies – to team up. We have no problems teaming up like cowards in real life on the play ground in order to bully someone. Quite efficient teamwork demonstrated there.

      I just don’t understand.

  12. zeep says:

    How is nobody seeing those drones??

  13. kevmscotland says:

    Putting aside my comments about the game until I’ve seen more of it to make an informed decision, I will say however that the presentation as a whole was absolutely awful.

    It was scripted, it was awkward but what really did it for me was the terrible host. Surely they could have gone for someone with a better presenting style. Maybe clearer english. Fairly sure the deciding factor here was boobs.

  14. Orionmeister says:

    I really wish that we could do away with the hit-marker in supposedly competitive, tactical games like this. Especially since this game seems to involve a great deal of wallbanging, I’d rather have the information have to come organically instead of being blatantly thrown at your face.
    Also wish for more skill required in shooting, but I suppose that is difficult in a game stressing the use of iron sights.