Really feel like they should just make a Siege 2. I mean the game is unrecognizable from launch to Blood Orchid, Operation Health to Para Bellum.

I'd prefer Ubi tease Battle for Brooklyn. :banghead:

Just give us a new Division 2 with no RT and good performance, like Division 2 and Ubsoft could save themselves. Even without Ray Tracing that Game is stunning in visual quality,

kapone32Just give us a new Division 2 with no RT and good performance, like Division 2 and Ubsoft could save themselves. Even without Ray Tracing that Game is stunning in visual quality,

Oh yeah...You mean like Heartland? That would've been great had it not been cancelled...which I don't think I will ever fully comprehend.

I truly think Division 3 is going to look farking amazing when it launches (I'mma guess March 2027/2028)...if it launches.

I also really want Div2 to make it that long. You can tell that tiny team works *really* hard, as much as people complain about it. I hope Ubi gives them enough resources to pull it out. It's absurd they haven't.

For all of the criticism Ubi gets, mine will forever be squandering Division's potential. It is literally their last game that's initial sales made a ton of money, and could make live-service bank, yet it sits fairly dormant.

It is beyond ridiculous.

Again, this is not criticism of Massive nor the rest of the Div team, whom I feel do what they can and appreciate. It is of Ubisoft management, for not doing more with the franchise (even if giving Div2 more support).

alwaysstsOh yeah...You mean like Heartland? That would've been great had it not been cancelled...which I don't think I will ever fully comprehend.

I truly think Division 3 is going to look farking amazing when it launches (I'mma guess March 2027/2028)...if it launches.

I also really want Div2 to make it that long. You can tell that tiny team works *really* hard, as much as people complain about it. I hope Ubi gives them enough resources to pull it out. It's absurd they haven't.

For all of the criticism Ubi gets, mine will forever be squandering Division's potential. It is literally their last game that's initial sales made a ton of money, and could make live-service bank, yet it sits fairly dormant.

It is beyond ridiculous.

Again, this is not criticism of Massive nor the rest of the Div team, whom I feel do what they can and appreciate. It is of Ubisoft management, for not doing more with the franchise (even if giving Div2 more support).

2 didn't do near as well as 1. I kinda doubt they make a division 3
Div1 114k peak player count vs Div2 14k. . That's a giant loss. I played 1, liked it for a little, game is wayyyy to spongy to have any decent fun. Feels weird shooting an enemy that much. Looks great, would be less boring if it felt like my bullets did anything. I don't mind a tanky boss but even the grunts are spongy.

This new rainbow looks incredibly stylized, not going for realism I guess, like they used to.

I would love if they do another Rainbow Vegas, not a big fan of this Siege business.

Upgrayedd2 didn't do near as well as 1. I kinda doubt they make a division 3
Div1 114k peak player count vs Div2 14k. . That's a giant loss. I played 1, liked it for a little, game is wayyyy to spongy to have any decent fun. Feels weird shooting an enemy that much. Looks great, would be less boring if it felt like my bullets did anything. I don't mind a tanky boss but even the grunts are spongy.

This new rainbow looks incredibly stylized, not going for realism I guess, like they used to.

Div2 was only very slightly less successful that Div1, and still made something like ~250M (I haven't looked it up recently) around launch. AFAIK, it was their last title that could say that.
You're not wrong about retaining players, and it's widely believed that's why it was more-or-less abandoned (as sequels are supposed make more money), but it still wasn't a failure.
I wouldn't trust that player count it; it sold millions. The problem was people fell off really quick because it was *incredibly* front-loaded. I don't remember exactly, as it's been so long, but I think we only got major updates for something like a few weeks. I've always argued they should've rolled it out slower (and/or made a backlog of content). Again, while they have had a team working on and doing what they can/could, and we have gotten new activities, the game was largely abandoned and then later brought back to life with seasonal updates. It's all very strange and difficult to explain it you haven't followed it. DGMW, I'm glad we got the first DLC, and glad we're getting another. They didn't have to do that, but I still think it could have been much more successful had they stuck to something closer to Destiny's model. We still get updates, but much of it isn't 'new' so much as 'remixed'. Given I know the *current* player count isn't huge, I'm glad we get what we get. Point is, it could have retained people had it been consistent. Instead, Ubi/Massive went on to Avatar/Outlaws. I understand on it's face how that made sense, but (especially in retrospect) they should have put more into Div2 rather than doing *both* of those.

Division is their IP, they don't need to share revenue w/ anyone, and arguably their franchise with the most left in the tank. Why it's been left to languish versus other priorities (skull and bones, etc) is mind-boggling.

I'm not going to argue against things that are true; I can't defend the bullet sponges because it pretty much created the meme. It's still a fun (and beautiful) game imo. That's not to say I haven't had grievances; when it launched I got on my high horse about how D.C. was portrayed and the ridiculous amount of unneeded profanity (IK, as of late I shouldn't talk); it's also purposely morose. I've grown to appreciate (most of) it though. Like most-everyone that plays it, I still miss the winter of New York, but you can't argue it's a pretty amazing open world (with lots of great art) they cranked out in only a few years after the first.

I can only imagine what we could have gotten had even a slightly larger portion of the people that worked on the original project had stayed and continue to work on updates.

As for Div3, afaik it's been in pre-production since Avatar shipped, and went into full production after Outlaws shipped. They're working on it full bore right now. It's not a question of if, but when. I'm very curious if they will try to ride the end of the generation or rather the front-end of the next. As much as I want it sooner, I hope they cook it until after the next gen launches to take full advantage of it, even if it's cross-gen. Snow Drop is an incredibly good-looking engine, evidenced by the aforementioned titles, and created for Division, so with The Division it will likely again shine brightest. Or bleakest. Whatever.

I just wonder where we're going. Seattle? I hope it's Seattle. I've always wanted to visit Seattle...even if it's in the post-apocalypse. Chicago could also be interesting.

alwaysstsOh yeah...You mean like Heartland? That would've been great had it not been cancelled...which I don't think I will ever fully comprehend.

I truly think Division 3 is going to look farking amazing when it launches (I'mma guess March 2027/2028)...if it launches.

I also really want Div2 to make it that long. You can tell that tiny team works *really* hard, as much as people complain about it. I hope Ubi gives them enough resources to pull it out. It's absurd they haven't.

For all of the criticism Ubi gets, mine will forever be squandering Division's potential. It is literally their last game that's initial sales made a ton of money, and could make live-service bank, yet it sits fairly dormant.

It is beyond ridiculous.

Again, this is not criticism of Massive nor the rest of the Div team, whom I feel do what they can and appreciate. It is of Ubisoft management, for not doing more with the franchise (even if giving Div2 more support).

The Division is like Ubisoft's failure to manage new franchises in a nutshell. They screwed up part 1 by failing to make a solid client, instead we got one prone to CheatEngine hacks and the result was everyone was cheating their shit together, that and the array of exploits destroyed the game's online economy and subsequently, the Dark Zone, which was really the game's selling point alongside its PvE. Massive was warned during open beta this would happen. It happened. They didn't act upon it, for over a year, instead busy banning players for using exploits when in fact those players weren't cheating, and not the cause for the many issues in the multiplayer space. That, and the terrible weapon balancing that really made everyone use SMGs and AR's over anything else, plus the fact you could roll god tier weapons to amplify the poor balancing further.

As a result of the mismanagement of the online featureset, the Dark Zone and PvP elements got traded out for more PVE focus. And from there, the Division quickly became a thirteen in a dozen co op PvE shooter and a game with identity crisis. They added some PVP matchmaking arenas to it later... never took off.

So much wasted potential. The PVE part of the deal did really get better, even in 1 though, with the Underground DLC and the new armor sets. Weapon balance was improved a lot... but now mostly for PVE. It was still fun to play, the mechanics still worked overall... but so much was lost in the process. Game would've been legendary with a functional Dark Zone.

Inmi420Really feel like they should just make a Siege 2. I mean the game is unrecognizable from launch to Blood Orchid, Operation Health to Para Bellum.

I disagree. Live Service games are better served with major updates like this than totally new games(that are usually just updates to the existing game anyway). The last thing you want to do is split up your playerbase between two games that are essentially the same game, or abandon the first game, that some people have invested thousands of hours and dollars into.

EatingDirtI disagree. Live Service games are better served with major updates like this than totally new games(that are usually just updates to the existing game anyway). The last thing you want to do is split up your playerbase between two games that are essentially the same game, or abandon the first game, that some people have invested thousands of hours and dollars into.

Fair, that's a point I didn't consider when posting. Miss those old seasons though lmao

As if the Siege was not enough already.

Guwapo77I would love if they do another Rainbow Vegas, not a big fan of this Siege business.

At least remaster, with all the beauty and visuals from first part, and the polished gameplay from the second, as one single game, and all the maps from both, including all additional ones (which were amazing). That would be great. Even if it would be same old UE3, which could be very beautiful, if implemented well.

Upgrayedd2 didn't do near as well as 1. I kinda doubt they make a division 3
Div1 114k peak player count vs Div2 14k. . That's a giant loss. I played 1, liked it for a little, game is wayyyy to spongy to have any decent fun. Feels weird shooting an enemy that much. Looks great, would be less boring if it felt like my bullets did anything. I don't mind a tanky boss but even the grunts are spongy.

This new rainbow looks incredibly stylized, not going for realism I guess, like they used to.

Both games looked interesting to me, in almost all aspects, except unrealistic shooting model. Be it as realistic and unforgivable as the shooting in GRAW (PC), and it would be, as tactical as the later, and thus would have became more interesting.
The bullet-sponging was the biggest mistake. Because Tom Clancy's games used to be realistic and tactical, harder and more difficult, than the casual (somewhat dumb) shooters, like CS and CoD. It was a niche game series, not suitable for all.
Div1&2 were an effort to apply the tactical game, to the much wider, more casual audience.

Random_UserAs if the Siege was not enough already.

At least remaster, with all the beauty and visuals from first part, and the polished gameplay from the second, as one single game, and all the maps from both, including all additional ones (which were amazing). That would be great. Even if it would be same old UE3, which could be very beautiful, if implemented well.

Both games looked interesting to me, in almost all aspects, except unrealistic shooting model. Be it as realistic and unforgivable as the shooting in GRAW (PC), and it would be, as tactical as the later, and thus would have became more interesting.
The bullet-sponging was the biggest mistake. Because Tom Clancy's games used to be realistic and tactical, harder and more difficult, than the casual (somewhat dumb) shooters, like CS and CoD. It was a niche game series, not suitable for all.
Div1&2 were an effort to apply the tactical game, to the much wider, more casual audience.

100% correct.

I miss original Rainbow and Rogue Spear for the non-bullet-sponge tactical play. NGL. I will always appreciate Red Storm for creating those. Some people like 3/Vegas/etc, and that's fine, but those were my jam.

It created important tension in not just regular loadouts, like flash-banging to cause/survive an ambush, but also required things like sniping to survive/win. It was 'harder', more-punishing, and not for the impatient.

I absolutely *loved* those games, and were even a ton of fun to play online over Gamespy. Div is not the same, although sometimes tries, but I still enjoy it more than some of the even more arcade-like shooters.

I went back to OG Rainbow/Rogue Spear (and Jedi Knight/UT) for literal YEARS. Nothing can quite replicate them, imo, especially with the NATO mods.

I guess you could play something like PUBG, which is similar-enough, but battle royale games aren't personally my thing.

alwayssts100% correct.

I miss original Rainbow and Rogue Spear for the non-bullet-sponge tactical play. NGL. I will always appreciate Red Storm for creating those. Some people like 3/Vegas/etc, and that's fine, but those were my jam.

It created important tension in not just regular loadouts, like flash-banging to cause/survive an ambush, but also required things like sniping to survive/win. It was 'harder', more-punishing, and not for the impatient.

I absolutely *loved* those games, and were even a ton of fun to play online over Gamespy. Div is not the same, although sometimes tries, but I still enjoy it more than some of the even more arcade-like shooters.

I went back to OG Rainbow/Rogue Spear (and Jedi Knight/UT) for literal YEARS. Nothing can quite replicate them, imo, especially with the NATO mods.

I guess you could play something like PUBG, which is similar-enough, but battle royale games aren't personally my thing.

Unfortunately, RS Vegas series, is still superior, to all current "Rainbow Six", that Ubisoft desperately farts out.
Have R6 Vegas 2 the custom map/scenario support, and it would prolong it's life almost infinitely. But alas, Ubi didn't manage to give the community any mod-tools, nor the way to fix the issues, after they've dropped the development in half- backed broken state and without any support, whatsoever.
I'm not an expert, or pro, but AFAIK, UE3 implementations in R6V1/2 isn't really as straightforward, since that's some another beast, with some Ubisoft exclusive stuff, that needs description/guide to troublesoot and recreate. Even the maps from R6V1, do not load on V2, because there's a lot of hidden stuff, that requires the OG developer's guide.
And there's no one who could give these to the community, nor Ubi has the will, to even give the tools/source code etc (it still sells full price). Considering, this was and still is their duty, as they've released both Vegas games (much like most Ubi games) unfinished, with tons of bugs and problems, which were never addresses by the developers/Ubisoft to this day.
But these games are still played by many people, because they fill that middle ground, between serious tactics like R6 1, and fun FPS, and have the nice coop mode, which Siege is unable to give. Also, the later is a competitive PVP title, which is not for everyones taste. And Ubisoft did't magage too fill this gap for a decade, already. But it's still where the community interest is, IMO.

Random_UserAs if the Siege was not enough already.

At least remaster, with all the beauty and visuals from first part, and the polished gameplay from the second, as one single game, and all the maps from both, including all additional ones (which were amazing). That would be great. Even if it would be same old UE3, which could be very beautiful, if implemented well.

Both games looked interesting to me, in almost all aspects, except unrealistic shooting model. Be it as realistic and unforgivable as the shooting in GRAW (PC), and it would be, as tactical as the later, and thus would have became more interesting.
The bullet-sponging was the biggest mistake. Because Tom Clancy's games used to be realistic and tactical, harder and more difficult, than the casual (somewhat dumb) shooters, like CS and CoD. It was a niche game series, not suitable for all.
Div1&2 were an effort to apply the tactical game, to the much wider, more casual audience.

I wouldn't be mad at a remaster, I miss that game so much.

Guwapo77I wouldn't be mad at a remaster, I miss that game so much.

The game never seen the full potential, anyway. Due to Ubisoft maniacal habit, to "cut corners" here and there, even on crucial core gameplay elements. And now they have the ton of IP with enormous potential, that is severely misused, and will never reach the community. Because the holder (Ubi) is about to go belly up, with TC consuming its all the IP/Series for own tastes.

The sad thing is that not the companies go down under, but the potential is lost, due to mismanagement.

I agree with everything you said as Ubisoft is on par with Electronic Arts.