And this is coming from a guy who had absolutely no expectations about the game. I paid almost no attention to the game after hearing about the cancellation of [i]Patriots[/i]. From what I did see, it seemed like a [i]Counter Strike[/i] clone, and after playing the most recent open "beta" (demo) and the final game for a while...
...I was right. It is, at it's foundation, a [i]Counter Strike[/i] clone, but it's a damn good one. It's more good than it has any right to be. I haven't had this much fun playing an FPS game in years. Matches are slow, tense games of chess. Patience, teamwork, and methodical aiming and movement are rewarded instead playing it like you would Call of Duty, running around the map quickscoping fools lone-wolf style. In this case, what's old really is new again (Seriously, it's a mainstream FPS with non-regenerating health. When was the last time you saw that in a AAA FPS?)
That isn't to say it's perfect. The netcode is wonky, hit detection can be spotty, there's quite a few annoying bugs and network errors going on, but those are technical issues that can be fixed. Aside from those issues, the core of the game is incredibly solid, and once those bugs are cleaned up I've no doubt it'll shine.
As for whether it's worth the sixty dollars or not, well that depends. Personally, I don't regret shelling out the money, but others might have different opinions. It is a multiplayer-centric title with no singleplayer story mode, but with that tradeoff comes focus. Instead of wasting time and money on a half-assed campaign mode (which these kind of games almost always inevitably have), Ubisoft focused on making a competent multiplayer shooter, and they succeeded (there is the Situation mode to scratch that singleplayer itch, but it's not a replacement for a campaign mode). Still, if you'd rather wait for a price drop, then more power to you. The game's not going anywhere anytime soon.
[i]Siege[/i] is the closest the series has gotten to its tactical roots in a very long time. Not quite there yet, but it's a big step in the right direction, and gives me hope that maybe we'll see a more old-school-style sequel some time in the future.
-
https://www.bungie.net/en/Forum/Post/178918148/0/0 This is the thread I created regarding the same as your post. Mine is more of a constructive critique coming from a Rainbow 6 player originating on Xbox. Rainbow 6 has always been on its own niche demanding team tactical movement. Siege delivers on that, however, even though we knew it would be multiplayer centered, there is a feeling of a lack of content. I expected more maps, larger areas, more enemies, sniper positioning, etc. as a diehard fan I was a little disappointed but still think it's a decent game. Feel free to peruse my thread to see all the great points ppl made.