Advanced Search Beta »
Basic Search Fields
Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Vegas PC
User Score
7.4 out of 10

Mixed or average reviews- based on 55 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 39 out of 55
  2. Mixed: 11 out of 55
  3. Negative: 5 out of 55

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    10 out of 10
    Rate this:
    out of 10
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

  3. Characters remaining: 5000 out of 5000

view
per page
  1. Xenous
    Sep 2, 2010
    4
    Sketchy PC port, average performance, below average graphics (Very muddy and blurry, lots of orange. And I mean LOTS OF ORANGE), needs patching for widescreen support, and even then the widescreen sucks total ass (UI scaling is borked), about as untactical as you can possibly imagine. Anyone who takes 'TACTICAL' (MY ASS!) games seriously, needs to play Raven Shield and avoid this PoS.
  2. PunendraR.
    Jun 10, 2007
    10
    I have played this type of game first in my life and never thought it is as superb as this is really.
    • 1 of 2 users said yes
  3. RufusS.
    Jan 6, 2007
    9
    Beautiful and exciting. They have listened to gamers and included features like being able to pick up an enemy's dropped weapon. The mulitplayer is also very good. I look forward to the mod community pumping out classic maps!
    • 1 of 1 users said yes
  4. Rhalle
    Jan 9, 2007
    8
    First of all, it is a system hog. I guess that that comes from it being a port. Second, it is a half-buttocksed port; a game with massive hardware reqs and fancy shader operations and other junk, and it doesn't even support widescreen resolutions. It's hard to fathom why a game released in 2007-- and 2 patches later-- would not have widescreen res support. And that's the thing: you can download .bin hacks that will get those resolutions working, and you can play with settings. A lot. And when tweaked, the game looks pretty good-- the first few levels are very reminiscient of the HL2 universe, but not as pretty or as well done.. All that said, the maps are BIG. Where you might have as many a 5 zones load in the Source Engine, in R6Vegas it's seamless. The size of the seamless world, and how the player finds cover to shoot, rappels, and controls teammates is the best thing about R6V. The stiffness and awkwardness of the NPCs, particularly the enemies you face, and the ever-present HUD, is the worst. I can't say much for the storyline, since I haven't played much of it yet, although it seems somewhat juvenille.… Expand
    • 1 of 1 users said yes
  5. DonaldA.
    Jan 1, 2007
    9
    Great Game, long awaited replacement for the long in the tooth Raven Shield, Vegas will make you upgrade your PC but it is worth it!!! great graphic's and gameplay, lots of game modes, make this game a keeper.
    • 1 of 1 users said yes
  6. LiboW.
    Jan 21, 2007
    10
    Reason for giving this game a 10 is not because it's better than half life, quake or any other revolutionary fps... but because there HASN'T BEEN A SINGLE GOOD FPS for about a year. (prey was a disappointment, and so was quake 4) And when's the last time there was a real fps with a storyline on the pc with cooperative mode..... uh quake 2, sven-coop halflife? Also the coop eliminate the terrorist mode brings good times with a buddy on a lan and some replayability.… Expand
    • 1 of 1 users said yes
  7. Gen3r1x
    Feb 3, 2007
    9
    I found this game unbelievably fun. This is the first FPS game that i have played that actually made you feel like you were a highly trained expendable government asset. The player animations were very realistic, almost too good. One of the only problems I saw was with the graphics. They seemed a little grainy to me, and there weren't enough options in the menu to mess around with. After trying different combinations in the graphics menu, I was able to get 20-30 fps and still make the game look pretty darn good. The port job they did to get this over from PS3 and/or Xbox360 was a 4. (on a scale from 1 to 10.) The control scheme was great, the recoil system was good, everything about this game makes it a winner. The storyline was great. It all had a feel of a real terrorist attack. Oh, and did I mention the fact that this is also the first FPS I have played that featured Co-op that was not mentally retarded? Most FPS games have friendly AI that don't do anything except stand there and shoot, and leave you to do all the work. Not the case here. The friendly Co-op actually worked with you, and got the same amount of kills you got. They seemed as good as you were. The enemy AI on the other hand wasn't as good. They seemed coordinated, but not challenging enough. Realistic difficulty does help though. Not as much as it should. I also enjoyed the way you take damage. A lethal hit (to the head) kills you instantly, but anything else goes into your body armor, and you get dazed but you recover. None of this armor points and hit points crap. That also added a sense of realism. Overall this game is a masterpiece that has it's few flaws that will be corrected in the future, and the developers really knew what they were doing when they made this. I give this game an 8.9/10.… Expand
    • 1 of 1 users said yes
  8. DONOVANR.
    Mar 16, 2007
    9
    I like it because in most games you could only go a certain distance, in this game you can go where ever you want!
    • 1 of 1 users said yes
  9. MicasaE.
    Dec 14, 2006
    8
    This really is a very good game, but don't expect to fun it properly with an older system. I have to run it in 800x600 mode, although I have a GTX go and 512 MB of video ram, 2 Gz of normal ram and a core 2 duo. The graphics are a bit gratuitous when looked at from this angle, but the result is really amazing. The blood splatters nicely as you plan out the perfect headshot, even leaving nicely textured wounds in your victims. The Vegas levels really portray the glitz and false glamour of the city. I have only played a couple minutes online in coop mode, and have been surprised at the quality of the maps and gameplay. Think Gears of War on this one, if you have experienced that. The only problems with this is the lack of good servers, but this won't be a problem with VS. mode. Overall, this is a wildly good game, picking up the rotting corpse of the RainbowSix franchise, injecting it with magical reanimation juice, creating a strange and morbid freak of nature more like a mixture of Full Spectrum Warrior, Gears of War, and a little bit of Soldier of Fortune. Oh, and they fixed the AI since Lockdown. It actually works now. I was getting sick of shooting my AI teamates before each mission in that last game.… Expand
    • 1 of 1 users said yes
  10. Mezz
    Dec 26, 2006
    8
    I bought the game last weekend (24/12/06). I read some reviews who were very promising. However, I was a disappointed in the graphics. I agree with Erwin that they are not as good as they should be. I first thought , it was some setting I forgot to turn on but everything was already set to the maximum. Even battlefield 2142 looks more smooth (although it uses an older engine). Besides, the video options are extremely limited. It's actually sad for a game like this. My AA is already set to 4x with 1240 x 768 (19" screen) but it still looks like I don't even have it turned on at all. The reason why I still gave it an 8 is because it's a good game. The controls are superb, the scenery is great and colourful and it's a joy to play. The sounds are very good on my X-Fi although the in-game sample rate could be higher. My advise: don't by it to show off your graphics card or to try the Unreal engine. Just buy it for the gameplay which is outstanding.… Expand
    • 1 of 1 users said yes
  11. HeR.B.
    Dec 21, 2006
    9
    Sweet game with loads of new special features. The requirements are indeed high, but anyone with a SM3 card will probably be OK and it looks awesome. In a nutshell: Sweet new features with the cost of a little bit of reality. Will gain more new fans than lose old ones.
    • 1 of 1 users said yes
  12. LeonardoA.
    Nov 21, 2007
    10
    This game is incredible, the graphics are awesome and the realistic gameplay dominates you even in the first level.Of cource in PC'S that are in the border of the system requirements will won't have good graphics.Well, a game can have Wolfenstein's 3D 1992 graphics, but if the gameplay is good a real gamer can disguise if the game is good or not.
    • 1 of 2 users said yes
  13. TeroU.
    Dec 23, 2007
    10
    Brilliant tactical shooter with enough realism and enough action. It's stupid to whine about lack of realism when the game doesn't even try to be some counter-terrorist -simulator but just one great action game.
    • 1 of 2 users said yes
  14. gas
    Dec 1, 2011
    7
    Just bought it with a super nice price around 2 euros, this game is 5 years old now but i have to tell it looks quite good to be honest, and its overall good. The game is between a stealth fps and a frag-fest one, im finding it enjoyable, even if personally i don't like 2 aspects of the game, into specific: First of all its fully scripted, which means you cant plan in advance so much and cant play very tactical as many enemies just will spawn triggering a specific event and usually there will be situation with tons of them running in a room from no were like a pack of raging bulls. Second the fact its not possible to save, there are just checkpoints with auto save. Anyway i can tell the engine is very good, the hitbox is precise and satisfying, controls are configurable and they work pretty well, so , the game could have been a lot better imho if it was a bit more tactical but overall its a good game.… Expand
  15. joen00b
    Jun 14, 2011
    9
    I just picked this up a few weeks back in one of Steam's awesome deals (all 6 R6 games for $13). it's been fun going back through it again, I forgot how much fun the game was, and how difficult it can be in certain areas. I really enjoy the Tom Clancy games, they are just hard enough to be frustrating at points and help hone my FPS skills with good stories. Of course, I'm an older gamer, so the story elements are interesting to me instead of just shooting the enemy for no good reason.… Expand
  16. Vic
    Dec 8, 2011
    9
    This is the first game where I felt how difficult a real gunfight is! You're really scared to stay out of cover even for a second here, it's not a game where you can just run and gun killing everyone in your way like terminator. Here you feel yourself very vulnerable, here you need to use all your tactic skills. This is a very realistic game where you can feel how a real gunfight dangerous is! The only disadvantage is length, I think the story is a little bit short.… Expand
  17. OlegT.
    Sep 21, 2007
    5
    I think we're witnessing the rise of a new genre in the FPS domain. Half-first-person-action, half-tactical (the latter being the lesser half). So we must judge them without looking back at RS: Rogue Spear and the first Ghost Recon. Sure enough, Vegas cannot be compared to the old classic for its shallowness and Hollywood style action, but sadly even without this comparison this game doesn't impress much. With tactical part amputated and action part half-baked we're left with a bleak and jarringly repetitive gameplay (burst open the door, do all the necessary killing, proceed to the next door, repeat ad infinitum). If this is what the "new genre" brings us I'd rather see it stifled to death in its cradle.… Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  18. BallisticBaggins
    Oct 5, 2007
    5
    This game could have been one of the best games ever, but for some reason it isn't. The graphics aren't too good, the singleplayer is ok and the multiplayer is most of the time horrible. This game is nothing like the earlier Rainbow Sixes and is not the great realistic tactical shooter the earlier PC releases were. The gameplay in general is ok, but the plot is even worse than in Raven shield. Peeking behind corners is replaced by unrealistic third person camera, which shows everything that happens behind the corners and this encourages camping in the multiplayer. Pistols have unlimited ammount of ammo. It isn't a big problem but it's still unrealistic. Player characters regenerate after beeing damaged, but atleast there is some blur when beeing wounded. Character customization is kinda nice, but compared to Raven shield and other earlier Rainbow six games there is much less weapons and the weapon stats make little sense (for example 5.56mm is often more powerful than 7.62mm NATO. In real life 7.62 NATO has almost twice the ammount of energy than 5.56mm, meaning that it is often more accurate, with longer range and greater damage). Sound suppressors silence the weapon almost completely and without subsonic ammo. Characters also can no longer go prone. While singlplayer still beeing kinda playable, multiplayer screws everything up. The multiplayer suffers from great ammount of different bugs, which in a way or another makes the playing a lot worse experience. One of the bigest and perhaps the most visable bugs is that you can't see your ping or the ping or others, including the servers. Server browser is very very bad and servers can't even have names. These two bugs combined you might rather easily find yourself playing on a korean server with a quite high ping. To addition, the game's netcode is horrible, causing that you have to shoot several meters in advance in order to hit anything (even on a server with a bit smaller ping) and sometimes a bug causes the bullets to actually hit a bit left or right from the sight of the shooter, even if it looks to him that he is hiting in the center of the sights. There are also several sound bugs, graphical bugs and crash bugs. Long story short: This game is a bad port from a console to computer. It is nothing like the Raven shield or others were and if you are thinking about buying it because you liked the earlier games or you like the console version, you should forget it. Singlplayer is ok, but realism has been mostly forgoten and multiplayer has tons of bugs and lots of lag.… Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  19. KarlL
    Feb 2, 2008
    6
    More Cod then Rainbow 6. Its a fun fps, but everything that would made it a rainbow 6 game has been scrapped. No more planning your attack, no picking the best team members for the job, Limited equipment. Standard linear fps level design instead of the small almost sandbox like areas of previous games. The AI is stupid and trys to shoot you through walls. Regenerating health, Strange system for leaning. Graphics look fairly outdated, Yes it looks (much) worse and runs worse then crysis. That said, as a run of the mill fps its fairly fun. And sometimes it manages to trick you into thinking your being tactical. Wait for it to hit the bargain bins.… Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  20. JaredJ
    Feb 14, 2009
    7
    After on-and-off play for ten months I'd finished it and was apauled with the results! I had never been so angry in my life when "To Be Continued" rolled around the screen. My respect for "Rainbow Six" had lowered from a ten to an eight. Only loosers make the "To Be Continued" and this really p***ed me off! Seven for story, graphics, A.I. and voice acting.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  21. TaktL.
    Jan 11, 2007
    6
    The main idea of Rainbow Six was to create a first person-shooter with tactical elements. In my opinion its really sad sad that the developers put the tactic in the background since "Rainbow Six:Lockdown". Vegas try to convince with action and a little tactical part: the control of your teammades. But this is not enough. Sometimes you fight through the levels like in any other first-person-shooter. Of course Vegas is an entertaining game because of the action, but it is nothing outstandig!… Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  22. AnuB.
    Jan 18, 2007
    5
    This game gets 10 points for being a technical masterpeice, but loses 5 points because it claims to be more than a shootemup and becasue it relies on a tired old paranoid lowest common denominator plot.
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  23. T.Erwin
    Dec 21, 2006
    5
    This game would be better if they had put an honest effort into porting this from the XBOX 360. Unfortunately, that isn't the case. If you plan on playing this in 'Single Player Story Mode' you will be initially very impressed by the eye candy, and eventually wind up disillusioned with everything else. My graphic settings are maxed, and even so, the enemies "pop" onto the screen when you trigger scripted events. This ruins the immersive quality of the great graphics. The friendly AI does work much better than previous renditions of the game, but they still tend to block your line of fire when following you -- this will sometimes get you killed. The most painfully obvious vestigal appendage however, is the "checkpoint save" feature notorious in console gaming and despised in PC gaming for years. If you buy this game and want to LEAD your team, (rather than simply send them in to do all the fighting for you) plan on playing, and replaying (and replaying and replaying) the same parts of levels over and over again as you are not allowed to save when you want -- only at the aforementioned checkpoints. This essentially ruins the single player game because you spend more time replaying the same levels than you do enjoying the storyline. What's worse, you replay so often that you begin to memorize very quickly where the scripted spawn points of your enemies are. The saving grace for this game is the fact that the multiplayer game modes are quite fun. Both cooperative and competitive modes allow you to enjoy a LAN game with local friends. Because you can set the respawn option to true, you will only respawn at checkpoints if everyone on your team dies in co'op mode. A down side is there are also realatively few weapons in the game. Gone are the M-14, the M-16, the AK-74, and the M-60. While these guns may have been out of place in the story mode, it would have been nice to see them in multiplay. In the end I'd rate the single play version of this game a 2, and the multiplay version of this game an 8. It's a sad testament to how starved the PC gaming industry is for real talent that gamers have to make due with console ports if they want to play cooperatively with friends in a game. Either way, this game is a decent multiplay value. Micasa - As a friendly aside - you might want to look into optimizing your system. I currently run an Athlon 3700+, a Geforce 7800GTX with half the video ram of your card, and 1 Gig of system ram. With this configuration I can run the game at a 1280 X 960 rez with all settings maxed and virtually no lag.… Expand
    • 0 of 0 users said yes
  24. Jakexxx
    Nov 17, 2010
    6
    Never played the singleplayer story mode. Only tried the Terrorist Hunt which one get to fights against over 30 AI terrorists. Some rather darken, blooded red screens make it looked more scarey and haunting than other game F.E.A.R. (when player got injured or killed in the game). Very intense combats even though using cheats with enabled infinite grenades, ammos and clips, very challenging that is. But no prone or leaning left/right at anytime you wanted. No team buddies to disatract your enemies, so there's very few chances you could take one out with his back/ass to you.… Expand
  25. Imachuemanch
    Oct 14, 2011
    1
    I don't know how to rate this game... It was recommended to me as a nice tactical-arcade mix shooter. After being disappointed with Red Orchestra 2, I thought that I can play some tactical-arcade shooter that isn't a crap (as I thought). Well. What a surprise, it is a crap. I don't know where to start... First, we have miserably unimaginative maps. Just a random made, claustrophobic tunnels or huge areas filled with garbage just to camp out all the enemies in few minutes and run along afterwards to the next area. Secondly, we've really retarded story... I know, I know, Tom Clancy never wrote a good book, but this game is like twice worse than those. Going on, we've TERRIBLE AI. I mean: just terrible. I've been playing on "realistic mode", but it's still just an arcade shooter with enemies behaving like Serious Sam's enemies. They run under our gunfire, no matter I killed five of them already exactly in the same place. They will come just for me to kill them. Is that a tactical shooter? No. Our companions have godlike aim skill. We can keep throwing them forwards and they will kill almost every enemy they will spot. Oh, they're immortal. How fun is that? We've retarded life system. We can take a few bullets, hide, and after five seconds we're like a newborn baby. But, on the other hand, we die after falling from the one meter high ground. It wouldn't be so bad, if we had simple quick-save. But it's a console game, so we have checkpoints. Rare checkpoints. After dying by stupid fall from one meter high ground we've to replay half a mission. Not funny. Aiming is retarded. Sometimes our sniper rifle behaves like drunk, with no reasons and we waste ammo shooting with the crosshair placed on the enemy's head but still missing it. Graphics are dated, it's not a new game, and we can see that. Models are terrible, weapons are scary with their lack of detail. Music is ok. Disappointed. I'm often disappointed with games lately...… Expand
prev next
Page:
  • 1

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
85 out of 100

Generally favorable reviews - based on 22 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 20 out of 22
  2. Mixed: 2 out of 22
  3. Negative: 0 out of 22
  1. GameSpot
    87
    Rainbow Six is reinvented and reinvigorated for a new age thanks to beautiful visuals and top-notch tactical shooting action.
    Read full review
  2. IGN
    84
    It's a serious system hog and those with older (and even middle-range) systems may have a hell of a time making the game run well and look smooth. Sadly multiplayer has been a big problem for us at this point.
    Read full review
  3. Eurogamer
    70
    It feels like an undecided halfway house between two genres - both of which the PC excels at - and it's incapable of deciding which one it wants to be.
    Read full review
See all critic reviews »