For fans of the Ranibow Six series, the announcement of Rainbow Six Siege was a moment to cheer, and then when it was revealed it would be an asymmetrical multiplayer-focused tactical shooter, interest piqued for dedicated multiplayer gamers as well. So has Ubi covered both bases?
To learn the answer to that, we turn to Joaby who has spent a lot of time with the game, and a lot of time trying to get into games. Here's a snippet from his review:
I'll cop to it. I'm the guy who, for years, has been saying "I'd prefer it if developers of multiplayer-focused games would stop creating half-hearted single-player campaigns to appease an already uninterested audience". I haven't been saying exactly that for years, because it's a mouthful, but that's roughly the gist of it.
Click here to read the full Rainbow Six Siege review
It's a case of prioritisation, in my opinion, as developers can either spend time and money on story elements and AI, or they can pour those resources into making the multiplayer as good as they can. And in the year 2015, two big games have launched doing precisely that. EA released Star Wars Battlefront, and Ubisoft has launched Rainbow Six Siege.
And both games would probably do better with single-player campaigns.