No place for "really hardcore shooters" - R6 Vegas 2 developer

By Tom Bramwell Published 14 March, 2008

And there won't be a Vegas 2 demo, sadly.

Rainbow Six Vegas 2 game designer Phil Therien reckons Ubisoft will steer clear of "really hardcore only shooters" because "the market was too narrow for it to be a viable business choice".

Speaking to Eurogamer readers in today's LiveText Interview, Therien said in answer to a question from lavalant: "We would like to be able to please both sides but compromises have to be made.

"We have some ideas to improve on the situation though - keep in mind however that we want our games to be accessible to as many people as possible, otherwise we just couldn't keep making games."

Lavalant had been asking whether we'd ever see more realistic shooters like Ghost Recon 1 reborn on current-gen hardware.

Therien also revealed that there won't be a demo version of Vegas 2. "We took the decision to spend our time on polishing the game and the demo option was cut," he said. "It's really time-consuming to create a demo and we needed the dev time to finish our game."

Other highlights from the LiveText session, which ran for a near-record 80 minutes:

  • There's virtually no difference between the PS3 and 360 versions of Vegas 2, according to Therien. "A few minor differences in graphics as usual, but nothing major. We wanted it to be a choice of console and not a choice of content to play Vegas."
  • Working on the Wii is "discussed at least once a week" in the Vegas 2 office. "No plans at the moment but we love the Wii and I would really like to do something on the platform."
  • The Vegas 2 single-player mode is "about an hour longer". "There's actually more content in this one!" Therien joked.
  • In-game Easter eggs include body armour with Therien's gamertag stamped on it.
  • The drop from four-player to two-player co-op was made because the single-player levels couldn't easily support four. "Having more then four Rainbow bodies would have simply not fit in many places, so we had to move down to two."
  • "Nothing is announced at the moment for DLC. If there is DLC announcements it would be made after the game has been on shelves for a while."
  • Face mapping is back, and Phil's pretty sure it's on PS3 as well as 360.
  • Therien would rather have lasers for eyes than be invisible.

Check out the Phil Therien LiveText Interview transcript to see what else came up.

Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (54) Latest comment 4 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Pablo2k5 #1 4 years ago

    "the market was too narrow for it to be a viable business choice"

    Wow, jesus. The gaming industry seems to be run be corporate sharks these days. Sad.

    Maybe time to find a new hobby, that doesn't involved lining the pockets of c*nts like him.

  • symbiote #2 4 years ago

    So, does that mean it's going to be piss easy? Shame if it is as I'm loving R6V1 second time through on realistic difficulty...fucking casual gamers ruining our hobby :(

  • Vaxadrin #3 4 years ago

    Informative questionaire to sensationalist headline in under 5 minutes!

  • urban #4 4 years ago

    fuck the wii, and i'd imagine this is going to be balls. production turn around is too quick.

  • schachmatt #5 4 years ago

    Thank the console market for casual shooters galore.

  • Vaxadrin #6 4 years ago

    "Thank the console market for casual shooters galore."

    It's a double edged sword. If PC gamers bought games, there would still be a market for them. The only reason companies are focusing on console markets is because that's the best way to get paychecks.

  • LiquidViolence #7 4 years ago

    All the more reason you should show support for Ground Branch by Blackfoot studios, a console version would make me a happy bunny indeed.

  • CLOSEALDO #8 4 years ago


    good question lavalant......sadly i think we knew the answer beforehand. Really hope someone can make a realistic shooter commercially successful......if operation flashpoint 2 fails that could be it....fingers crossed. Come on codemasters!!

  • AbeFroman #9 4 years ago

    What a load of shite....








    ...Laserbeams are of no use for sneaking into the girls changing rooms.

  • patchbox360 #10 4 years ago

    thankyou wii, unskilled players and lazy reviewers ...thks

  • BraveArse #11 4 years ago

    so are we talking another bloody Lockdown here or what? You'd have thought they'd have learnt their lesson from that stinking turd of a game.
    Edited by 1 at 14/03/08 @ 19:55

  • Gruff #12 4 years ago

    Holy crap did most of you not read the Q&A ?

    The lower difficulty levels have been made a little easier and the realistic level from the last game a lot harder. That caters for all parties IMO.

  • bunglebonce #13 4 years ago

    No chance of Rogue Spear again, then. :(

  • muters #14 4 years ago

    'The Vegas 2 single-player mode is "about an hour longer"'

    This is why I shouldn't skim-read. Misreading that line made my eyes pop out.

  • Lonestar #15 4 years ago

    Rogue Spear we hardly knew ye...

    If anyone is interested in somthing akin to the original Ghost Recon or Rogue Spear then I'll point you in the direction of the game LiquidViolence mentioned:

    Ground Branch by Blackfoot Studios

    Some stuff:

    SimHQ user poster info:
    [link url=http://www.simhq.com/forum/ubbt hreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2370864#Post2370864
    ]http://ww w.simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.ph...[/link]

    Ground Branch Synopsis + forum:
    [link url=http://www.blackfootstudios.com/forums/index.php? showtopic=1084
    ]http://ww w.blackfootstudios.com/forums/i...[/link]

    Worth keeping tabs on at least...

  • SlackMaster #16 4 years ago

    Get over it drama queens... another hobby!?! There is enough and will be enough to appeal to everyone and if a game is too easy you can always increase the difficulty. R6V1 was challenging but was still popular and I can't see them changing it too much. GRAW 1 was great but GRAW 2 was refind and even better, and I can see the same being true for R6V2.

    Besides if you only have one hobby and that's gaming I'd say get a life.

  • seasidebaz #17 4 years ago

    hardcore shooters are what put me off the entire fps genre, starting shortly after i gave my love to unreal tournament & quake 3 in the 90's, and finishing shortly after i sold the crud that was halo 3...

    and @symbiote:
    edit:and @crofto:
    editedit:at every comment above me (given up reading now)

    if you're truly hardcore (which i seriously doubt...) you surely wouldn't mind giving the developers the millions of pounds in development costs just so they can make you a game? face it, casual gamers are expanding our hobby. and there are no hardcore gamers left.
    Edited by 2 at 14/03/08 @ 21:14

  • seasidebaz #18 4 years ago

    oh, and if gaming really is your only hobby... ever thought of a move to bridgend?

  • MattyD #19 4 years ago

    Lavalant, SRSLY. If you're that intent on playing something that dry and simmish then why not join the TA and do some service in Afghanistan, where you'll find out just how far from 'realistic' games like Operation Flashpoint actually are. *Most* people actually just want to have fun, and R6 Vegas is just about the best balance between tactics and fun there is right now. That might change when the new Brothers in Arms arrives though ;)

  • seasidebaz #20 4 years ago

    @xiphos: hardcore players don't speak. they just play games. in fact they don't even play games, they just ingest them

  • dsmx #21 4 years ago

    I thought you just left games next to hardcore gamers and they just absorbed them.

  • seasidebaz #22 4 years ago

    @dsmx: hardcore players have already beaten the game before the designers were born.

  • beastmaster #23 4 years ago

    The more I see of this, the less I like. Looks a bit too bare. Plus don't want to go and search every bit of the single player to unlock stuff in multi. Not much to look forward to in terms of FPS now (is there?). COD new maps should keep me busy for a while. Seems to be getting 7/10 reviews

  • SpeedyThing #24 4 years ago

    Sad as it may be, is it really surprising that when a next-gen shooter costs £5,000,000 minimum they want to appeal to as many as possible?

  • FooAtari #25 4 years ago

    Don't be a tool MattyD

    What your idea of fun might not be the next persons idea of fun.

    And you could apply that argument to every game ever. Want to play guitar, forget Guitar Hero and buy guitar and get some lessons. Want to play Football, get off your ass and get outside then. Want to play for Man U well you better get good enough.

    Developers and publishers are not just out to make money developing games they like, they are out to make as much money as possible. There is a similar problem in the racing simulation genre.

    Sure everyone wants to make money, but there doesn't appear to be the same love for making games as there used to be. A bunch of guys got together formed a company called Sim Factory and put a lot of their own time and money into developing a game called Arca Sim Racing. I think so far they only have another cash to produce 10,000 copies. But by all accounts it's one of the most realistic stock car racers yet. Got my copy ordered. Did they do it to get rich, I hope not as they might make some money but probably not a lot, they did it because they love sim racing. Not everyone wants to play another Forza or PGR...

    The games industry has a problem. In movies and music there is room for small artists and studios to do what they love and make some money, or do what they love and make none. It doesn't have to cost much to record a song and release it on the net. But this is hard in games. You can't just make a small game and slap it on the Xbox or PS3 you need go through MS and Sony pay them some cash probably and they get a cut of any sales off arcade no doubt. I guess this is where indy games come in on the PC and that's one of the many reason I hope PC wont die, and that's one reason why it wont imo.

    Games development is to expensive, thats the problem.

  • Shirow #26 4 years ago

    Thanks to the people who mentioned Ground Branch and BlackFoot Studios. I had no idea about this, you just gave me some hope!

  • seasidebaz #27 4 years ago

    @xiphos:

    why on earth would you play a game if it wasn't fun?

    surely the aim of a GAME (big giveaway there) is to have FUN. hardcore games will generally get low review scores, because if there is no fun element, there's no point going back to it.

    oh, and if you want hardcore, try playing ssf2 on the snes for about 18 hours solid trying to unlock shenlong. THAT's hardcore.

    (and before i get flamed, i know that shenlong is not in ssf2, and is actually a fighting style ryu adopts, but you try telling that to my 10 year old self)

  • MajorStone #28 4 years ago

    What a money graping ass... stupid console's have runed game's and its all money now.
    No demo means the full game is not that good if the past is any thing to go by?
    R6 started on pc and now its going to die on a stupid console's...
    The gaming industry seems to be run be corporate sharks who love cash and dont no what game's are..
    ITS A SAD DAY FOR GAMING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • seasidebaz #29 4 years ago

    @lavalant:

    he's not on about realistic games, they sell quite well.

    he's on about hardcore games, where you die before the title screen even comes up. the kind of games that aren't fun, they're a lesson in how to get your body parts fed to you on a plate.

    edit: and i think you're confusing "hardcore" with anything that isn't "casual".

    games by their very nature are inaccessible. they require buttons to be pressed, controls to be mastered.

    casual games typically use 1 button and a bit of movement control. and lots of advertising.

    example of a hardcore game: ikaruga. try and finish the game in your first life. not likely.
    example of an inaccessible game: forza motorsport. it requires quite a deep level of learning.
    example of a casual game: zuma. everything controlled by the mouse.

    all games now simply fit into the middle category. there are no "hardcore" games, they died out. same as there are no "hardcore" gamers. they grew up and got jobs and families.
    Edited by 2 at 15/03/08 @ 17:57

  • TagemandBagem #30 4 years ago

    UBI only interested in target markets and profits?! No way! And of course there's no correlation between that and this quickly churned out expansion pack masquerading as a sequel.

  • Apostle #31 4 years ago

    Funny how Red Storm had a hit with Rainbow 6 which is a hardcore shooter, and the franchise has grew into what it is today because of that.

    There is space for a "really hardcore shooter". It will need a smaller, independent developer to find that niche, and make a great game to draw in fans from Ghost Recon, Rainbow 6, Flashpoint, SWAT, and many others.

  • seasidebaz #32 4 years ago

    @apostle:

    it also needs a dev budget of about £10, which is all they'd make back on it

  • seasidebaz #33 4 years ago

    @lockyuk:

    i agree with the pc being the place for the hardcore, it's also the place to pirate games if you want to play it truly hardcore.

    cod4 is not hardcore. it just encourages crouching behind walls. and not moving from the spawnpoint.

  • thewolfiv #34 4 years ago

    no one mentions Armed assault? first sequal to ofp by the original ofp team- check it out if you like ofp this is still a little buggy but def one of the better harcore sims out there...

  • seasidebaz #35 4 years ago

    /gives in, all these y00fs who seem to throw the word "hardcore" round without even realising that their "hardcore shooters" are actually easy and shit.

  • Escape #36 4 years ago

    Why does there have to be only one type of shooter? I love simulations but still enjoy the occasional arcade blast.

    Ubisoft are correct, sadly, that the casual market is far larger. They're wrong however, in saying that us sim gamers have vanished. In an ideal world there'd be one sim in every handful of arcade titles.

  • Pablo2k5 #37 4 years ago

    SlackMaster said "Besides if you only have one hobby and that's gaming I'd say get a life."

    and

    Seasidebaz said "Oh, and if gaming really is your only hobby... ever thought of a move to bridgend?"


    Kinda hard to find the time for hobbys when you work all day and have a family to look after you fuckin' knobs.

    Edited by 4 at 15/03/08 @ 23:17

  • tenma #38 4 years ago

    "Maybe time to find a new hobby, that doesn't involved lining the pockets of c*nts like him."

    Because it's such a sin to hope that a product that you invest millions in actually sells to a greater market than 3-400 hardcore FPS gamers?

  • Nill #39 4 years ago

    Well, Rainbow Six started out as a very tactical shooter. It wasn't as dry nor as hardcore as some of the newbs on here fantasize, but it was indeed alot less arcadey than what the series became with its move to consoles. This did not detract from the fact that it could very well be action-filled and tense at times, just in a slightly different way.

    Some of us that've been around for a while think that those old tactical games carried alot more weight and substance than today's arcadey fragfests. Success were more dependant on teamwork and acquiring kills were very much more gratifying.

  • bloodflowers #40 4 years ago

    I just want them to re-make Black Arrow.

    Properly.

    Nothing since that has been any good.

  • SlackMaster #41 4 years ago

    I don't get the hardcore strategic argument from some of you who then go on to say how great COD4 is... that's probably the most arcadie shooter I know.

  • SlackMaster #42 4 years ago

    Kinda hard to find the time for hobbys when you work all day and have a family to look after you fuckin' knobs.

    So do I and a lot of others on here... It means I don't get as much time to game as I used to but that I get out a bit more rather than sit in feeling sorry for myself cos R6V2 isn't as hardcore as I want it to be. Get over yourself please.

  • Apostle #43 4 years ago

    I think there needs to be a clear definition of 'hardcore'. Each one of us seems to have a different interpretation. One person saying "Hardcore" mode in CoD4 isn't, well, what is? I admit it doesn't go to the lengths of ArmA, but does it need accurate weapon ballistics etc? Is a hardcore gamer interested in an immersing experience, or authenticity? Or both?
    Edited by 1 at 16/03/08 @ 10:59

  • theleif #44 4 years ago

    I must have read hardcore more times now then on any porn site I've ever visited.
    And it seems like as with god, every single user has their own personal definition of what it is to be hardcore.

  • Pablo2k5 #45 4 years ago

    tenma said... "Because it's such a sin to hope that a product that you invest millions in actually sells to a greater market than 3-400 hardcore FPS gamers?"

    Sir, you miss the point. Not all games have to be aimed at casual gamers. I prefer devs with passion who explore new ideas and make the games that they want to and not what the suits think will make money, that is all.

    Take Introversion for example... http://www.introversio n.co.uk/
    Edited by 1 at 16/03/08 @ 14:37

  • Pablo2k5 #46 4 years ago

    SlackMaster said... "I don't get as much time to game as I used to but that I get out a bit more rather than sit in feeling sorry for myself cos R6V2 isn't as hardcore as I want it to be. Get over yourself please."

    It not a case of getting over myself, I simply didn't like the implications that I have nothing better to do other than moan about the next R6.

    My main objection (in relation to the article) was that the video game industry has become 'too commercial', a bunch of suits with a lot of power making decisions based purely on financial return and not creativity. IMO.
    Edited by 3 at 16/03/08 @ 14:37

  • Bitkari #47 4 years ago

    A little depressing to hear that they're consciously going after the lowest common denominator, although it really does leave a gap in the market for someone to build a more intelligent console shooter, if only someone has the cojones to do it!

  • dog #48 4 years ago

    so, is it 2 player co-op on the pc too? if it is that really fucks that one up for me....

    vegas 1 was brilliant for 4-player co-op lan sessions but has grown a bit restrictive (even with the map pack), especially after playing the likes of CoD...

  • tenma #49 4 years ago

    I prefer devs with passion who explore new ideas and make the games that they want to and not what the suits think will make money, that is all.

    And that's fine, just don't expect many games with that kind of extensive monetary investment to fall in line with that. I understand being angered that not many games appeal to your tastes, but i don't get the "money hungry" rhetoric. Everyone who's willing to invest the amount of hours they do into creating a game is passionate about gaming. It's just that they're also passionate about keeping their jobs.

  • seasidebaz #50 4 years ago

    @pablo:

    it's simple economics really. if shooter x is accessible, and makes a profit of £10,000,000, but shooter y which is inaccessible to all but the most dedicated turns a profit of £500,000, which one would increase the profits of the company?

    i like games, but i like money more. if it's a choice between making another r6 that's super-realistic, or make a game where you can take down legions of aliens without gaining even a scratch (halo i'm looking at you...) then i would make the alien shooting game. i might not like it, but my bath full of £20 notes will soon ease my pains.

    the only way companies can live is with money. and to make money you need to sell lots of units. and to sell more units, you need to appeal to everybody.

  • TheRealBadabing #51 4 years ago

    While it would be nice to have a proper "old school" R6 mode, after playing this a few weeks ago, it is not a run-and-gun shooter just yet. All the old tactics still work, just now we have to think on our feet a lot more rather than getting to plan ahead like in the good old days...

    Initially it feels like it takes a few too many hits to kill (never as bad as Halo though) but after chatting to the guys at Warfighters, it makes sense. A quick double-tap in Rogue Spear was enough to kill most things but in the environments/situations R6 is based on, the aim is to completely destroy the bad guy's ability to to bad things.

    Therefore, which is more realistic? Hosing the enemy with hot lead and watching him fall limp to the ground or relying on a gentlemanly single shot? Just remember, we are not talking about Halo levels of spray, pray and punch...

  • djed #52 4 years ago

    sega rally for my ps3 is pretty hardcore.

  • Apostle #53 4 years ago

    Bitkari: "cojones"

    Like it! Well done sir.

    TheRealBadabing: Yeah I get what the Warfighters are saying. Different approaches for different situations though. If there's multiple hostiles in a situations, yeah pump 'em with lead. If it's a hostage situation, you need that accurate double tap to the head, preferably.

    Do headshots kill in R6V2? Or is this affected by headgear/armour choice?

  • Vaxadrin #54 4 years ago

    CoD4's hardcore mode isn't really hardcore at all, it's just deceptively named. In fact, run&gun tactics are even easier in that. I just pop on a silenced P90 with UAV jammer & bombsquad, then sprint circles around the map killing everyone in 2 shots & getting 20 more kills than all the snipers. Even killing snipers halfway across the map just using the iron sights...it doesn't seem very realistic to me. That's why I'm happy for a new R6:V game.

    It might not move at a snail's pace like the R6 vets want, but it's still head & shoulders above every other military shooter I've played in recent times.