Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six Vegas

 Xbox 360
User Score
8.2

Generally favorable reviews- based on 254 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 196 out of 254
  2. Mixed: 35 out of 254
  3. Negative: 23 out of 254
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. TomislavM.
    Jan 3, 2007
    6
    First of all I don't think people Ubi should sell this game under Rainbow6 name. Playing the first level was like Rambo3. I thought I was gonna get a quad-missile launcher on level 2. Now seriously. The thing that annoys me most (and I can't play it anymore) is that the 'hero' constantly has his finger on a trigger. And thats the first thing they teach you, never keep First of all I don't think people Ubi should sell this game under Rainbow6 name. Playing the first level was like Rambo3. I thought I was gonna get a quad-missile launcher on level 2. Now seriously. The thing that annoys me most (and I can't play it anymore) is that the 'hero' constantly has his finger on a trigger. And thats the first thing they teach you, never keep your finger on the trigger. Game is OK if you like games that display bodycount at the end of each level. In my humble opinion classic Rainbow6 tactical style was why the brand became popular. Don't get me wrong, I don't like long planing before play, but classic Rainbow6 gave me an opportunity to dynamically switch between teams, coordinate simple actions with 2-3 men 'on the go', without any pre-play planning at all. I am deeply concerned about where R6 series is heading. It's going to get lost in the sea of 'realistic' first person shooters, that the market is already overwhelmed with.… Expand
  2. RainbowS.
    Feb 13, 2007
    5
    Good tactics and a great setting but I expect more from the next gen gaming, give me Ghost Recon over this any day.
  3. RedR.
    Dec 2, 2006
    6
    As usual, the legendary British magazine Edge gets it right. Ignore the hype from the usual suspects with their 8's and their 9's. This game is overrated. Edge magazine set the barometer of game standards and whatever you do, you should never buy a game until you have read the review in Edge first. Here is an article about Edge: - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edge_(magazine) As usual, the legendary British magazine Edge gets it right. Ignore the hype from the usual suspects with their 8's and their 9's. This game is overrated. Edge magazine set the barometer of game standards and whatever you do, you should never buy a game until you have read the review in Edge first. Here is an article about Edge: - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edge_(magazine) Edge is a multi-format computer and video game magazine published by Future Publishing in the United Kingdom. It is known for its industry contacts, editorial stance (which has frequently given it problems in obtaining pre-release review code for games),[citation needed] yearly awards, and longevity. The magazine is very strict in its scoring; it was several years before any game was given a ten-out-of-ten rating and the scores it grants major games are often controversial. The magazine was launched by Steve Jarratt; a long-time video games journalist who has launched several other magazines for Future. The current editor is Margaret Robertson.[2] Other regular contributors to the magazine include Tim Guest (the author of My Life In Orange), "Mr Biffo" (founder of Digitiser) and game developer Jeff Minter. Previous columnists include Trigger Happy author Steven Poole (who chose to end his column after issue 148, April 2005) and Toshihiro Nagoshi of Sega's Amusement Vision (whose column has been on hiatus since issue 142, November 2004). In 2003 the magazine celebrated its tenth anniversary. Artwork for the hundredth issue's cover was specially provided by Shigeru Miyamoto. One of Edge's forerunners was ACE, its main competitor is Games… Expand
  4. Rol
    Jan 18, 2007
    7
    Solid shooter with lots of online options but been-there-done that feel is overwhelming. Buggy and awful online graphics. The bar has been raised but no one told the developers. Having said that if your fresh to the genre it has a lot to offer. One for the masses because if you want to play gaming by numbers then this is numero uno.
  5. FPSMaster
    Nov 29, 2006
    7
    Nice single player this time with great friendly and enemy A.I. I could have used a fourth team member though so as one team opened and cleared one door myself and another teamate could open and clear another door. It would have helped considering you are usually outnumber 5 to one in most situations But instead, you are left all alone like just about every other Tom Clancy game when you Nice single player this time with great friendly and enemy A.I. I could have used a fourth team member though so as one team opened and cleared one door myself and another teamate could open and clear another door. It would have helped considering you are usually outnumber 5 to one in most situations But instead, you are left all alone like just about every other Tom Clancy game when you send the team to another point. GR2 got this right by sending 2 teamates to the point you instructed and left the other one to cover you. That was the last time a Tom Clancy game had a teamate stay behind and help you while the other 2 went forward to cover each other. And taking the fourth team member away just feels like they wanted to simplify this already over simplified single player even more. It worked in R63 and R63BA, so why it was taken out here must have something to do with not having enough room sometimes for 4 people to move around in but this game has way more room and entry points than all the other R6 games put together. But they have simplified this mode to the point that you don't seem to have that many options anymore. The sounds are great and realstic, and the graphics are pretty good. They look great sometimes and at others very Counterstrik-ish with great textures sometimes and very 1998 textures at other times. The game seems to do what GOW and Halo 2 do which is sometimes it takes a few seconds for the textures to load up leaving you going through the levels in wire-frame mode too. This is usually a sign that the hardware is being pushed too hard and can't load up everything fast enough.There are too many jaggies always though and way too much screen tearing with the v-sinc turned off like every other Ubi game as of recent years. There doesn't seem to be enough weapons this time around either, as they've taken out some of the better ones from previous games and given you more uselss ones. The multiplayer is about like Lockdown, except now you have to no longer buy ammo and pay to fix your gear which is a nice chnage considering in Lockdown you only got money to fix your gear IF you had a good match. But if you had a bad one you were screwed into having torn up armor to use which would start a domino effect of bad games causing you to have to pretty much start your PEC mode all over. The spawn camping is still there, and now there is only up to 2 spawn points, one for team games and 2 for attack and defend, so its even worse than the other R6 games and much worse than the spawn camping in GRAW. It's still more run n gun than anything else though. Anyone that thinks otherwise hasn't played it enough yet. It's just run to a point and unload. Waiting around behind cover just gets you blown up by a grenade or worse someone comes from behind you and kills you. The co-op is what you would expect of co-op...nothing special other than 4 players can work together...which makes me wonder why the 4h team member isn't in the single player mode. GRAW had 16 player co-op, so I don't see the big deal here. Anyway, upgrading online is fun, yet Ubi seems to be more game designeers than players or you would think they'd have figured out by now that playing against people who are ranked so much higher than you that they have weapons and armor you don't have causing you to get your ass handed to you is never fun no matter how yo look at it. Same archaic Ubi interface for online though, so get ready to refresh over and over again when the matches have already started and be prepared to sit in lobbies listening to people fight over the internet and wait around forever just to be booted because the host needs his friend to fill up your spot so they can hold hands. There are a ton of glitches online, mainly freezes and lock-ups, but sometimes there are sound glitches and you will get shot through concrete walls too. Having had the game freeze so many times has made me not want to play online because you will be racking up points to upgrade then it freezes causing you to lose all that effort. But the worst part about the online is the graphics. Absolutely horrible any way you look at it. Anyone defending the graphics for online needs to go play R63 again and see that it actually looks better. The animations look like something from the original Countersrike, as do ALL the testures, and the lighting is totall crap as are the washed out weapon models. Check out Bordertown for proof. It looks like they pulled the same thing here as they did with Graw...make a decent looking SP mode, although still with last gen textures, and water down the graphics so far online it looks a generation behind the original Xbox. It looks worse than GRAW MP did compared to it's SP mode. Overall a good game, but nothing Earth shattering. It's a standard Tom Clancy game with a few new features like the decent offline graphics and the cover and rappelling modes which honestly get a lot of use offline but don't do anything online but cause more problems to the point no one even uses them since rappelling just leaves you open to be shot. But the rest of the game is filled with age-old Ubi problems that they seem to be happy leaving in there and promsing to fix next time.… Expand
  6. Xeno
    Dec 22, 2006
    6
    I am not impressed. The game mechanic is pretty much the same as GRAW except GRAW has far shorter check points. Coming from an old time Rainbow Six player on PC, I was hoping to get back to the tactical map planning with 4 teams at your disposal. Instead, what I got is pretty much GRAW with more door to open.
  7. MikkoP.
    Nov 21, 2006
    5
    Single player is good stuff. The online sucks. Reason: 3rd person. It ruins all realism. Yes its nice to have cover system, but there has to be a way to do it, without being able to see the enemy through walls and corners. It makes the otherwise great game very very unrealistic. And it encourages players to camp. Another great Tom Clancy shooter ruined by 3rd person.
  8. dinoramic123
    Jun 22, 2013
    6
    Great game, a lot options of tactic ,like in a real life ,but lacks graphic and you cant save when you want in singleplayer ONLINE 9/10

Awards & Rankings

5
#5 Best Xbox 360 Game of 2006
7
#7 Most Discussed Xbox 360 Game of 2006
5
#5 Most Shared Xbox 360 Game of 2006

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
88

Generally favorable reviews - based on 69 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 67 out of 69
  2. Mixed: 1 out of 69
  3. Negative: 1 out of 69
  1. IGN
    93
    The sprawling levels like the glowing Fremont Street or the Hoover Dam open up Rainbow like it's never been before, and the result is a balanced shooter that is as much close-quarter combat as long-range head shots...The best first-person shooter on the Xbox 360.
    Read full review
  2. TeamXbox
    95
    It's the game's multiplayer mode that will keep us playing Vegas for years to come. This isn't just the multiplayer game of the year, it may actually be the best multiplayer game in the whole Xbox 360 library.
    Read full review
  3. 360 Gamer Magazine UK
    80
    Due to the easy-to-use squad control, advanced A.I., gorgeous visuals, realistic physics, and intense action, Rainbow Six Vegas is easily the best in the series. While the game has been slightly simplified - and is not a massive next-gen leap forward - the result is a fantastic, intense experience that few others can rival. [Issue 18, p.62]
See all critic reviews »