Resistance 2 revealed in Game Informer

Shaz-fucking-Am
 
oh sweet god yes ~_~ I hope it comes out asap :3
 
I am sure it will be a good game and i am looking forward to it. One thing i am not impressed or looking forward to is 60 player online. I am in complete agreement with Bungie. There is a limit of people you can play with online, what game you are playing (setting and game type) have alot to do with determining this limit. Once that limit is passed there is no organization what so ever. There is no team strategy what so ever. I am one that thinks resistance online was terrible tho, so maybe my opinion wont matter at all to you. Not the connection to the server, that was great. The game is just very, bland, i think is the word i would use to describe it. The campaign was great to me other then bad visuals. That is one thing the second installment is sure to improve on tho. Anyways i want to play it.
 
lol, I love large online plays :P anywhere from 24 -> 40 (even 60) is fun. It does depend on the game. With CS:S I love between 16-24. With Resistence and Warhawk I was quite happy with as large a game I could find. C&C: Renegade I love around 40 or so players. It's fun :3 and there's organization if people aren't noobtarded.

And what "bad visuals" in Resistance? XD one of its appraised things was its visuals and how things were really detailed and such (something Halo 3 in some reviews have a problem with.. since Halo 1 and 2 pushed the XBox limits they feel Halo 3 didn't push enough and the character models were kinda meh but *shrugs*).

Anyways, from the sounds of it.. it sounds like they are being smart about having lots of players being able to play (remember, not ever map NEED have the maximum number) and have it not being a cluster fuck, but we'll have to see when it comes out if its true.
 
Last edited:
Elemmire said:
there's organization if people aren't noobtarded.
Click to expand...

Not quite the point. The can be organization, but it is less about an individual. When you go past 20 people (what i have found) it becomes less about how good you are as a person and more how well you can get randomly lucky. Especially with 60 people. You could spin around in circles and shoot the air and it would have no baring on how well your team does with that many people. I enjoy being able to be a playmaker. Its why i liked CoD and Halo online so much.
 
*shrugs* I dunno, I just like larger groups cause it's so much more satisfying when the majority of the group works together and does something fun :P Example being C&C: Renegade when we get snipers in position to pick off doods, engineers running with the tanks and then of course organized tank rushes :P it's oh so fun imo and far more satisfying than the individual "oh look at my kill count compared to yours!! FEAR MY E-PEEN!!!"
 
TheOsyris said:
I am sure it will be a good game and i am looking forward to it. One thing i am not impressed or looking forward to is 60 player online. I am in complete agreement with Bungie. There is a limit of people you can play with online, what game you are playing (setting and game type) have alot to do with determining this limit. Once that limit is passed there is no organization what so ever. There is no team strategy what so ever. I am one that thinks resistance online was terrible tho, so maybe my opinion wont matter at all to you. Not the connection to the server, that was great. The game is just very, bland, i think is the word i would use to describe it. The campaign was great to me other then bad visuals. That is one thing the second installment is sure to improve on tho. Anyways i want to play it.
Click to expand...

This isn't "throw 60 people into a map and duke it out"

The maps are massive, and people are divided into squads who are given separate, specific objectives.
 
Must say, until I read all this shit, I was more interested in Killzone, now the #1 shooter for me of 2008 will be Resistance 2 I'm sure.

Insomniac games = gods.

And large scale can work, as long as it's well organized. What resistance 1 did was incredible considering it was their first FPS and they had to hit launch deadline, now they are pretty much PS3 programming gods and have all this shit all of their shit seriously together.

Seriously, COD4 and Halo 3 were great but they weren't launch games and they were from seasoned vets just refining established series.
 
Firestreak said:
Seriously, COD4 and Halo 3 were great but they weren't launch games and they were from seasoned vets just refining established series.
Click to expand...
This is....bad?
 
Xalioniaf said:
This is....bad?
Click to expand...

I think his point was that Insomniac is none of those things and made an amazing game their first attempt at a FPS. They can only go up from Resistance.
 
Marajade said:
I think his point was that Insomniac is none of those things and made an amazing game their first attempt at a FPS. They can only go up from Resistance.
Click to expand...
Resistance was a good game. Pretty sure my bud'll pick up 2 when it comes out, so no reason not to try it.
 
That's what people said about bungie with H2.
 
Makelith said:
That's what people said about bungie with H2.
Click to expand...
Don't think I ever played much of Halo 2. Didn't even touch Halo: Combat Evolved. So I went into H3 with pretty much no idea what was going on. I stopped playing campaign when I realized I wasn't sad when one character died.
 
I was referring to this post. Your post slipped by me completely.

Marajade said:
I think his point was that Insomniac is none of those things and made an amazing game their first attempt at a FPS. They can only go up from Resistance.
Click to expand...


But yeah. H3 was a pretty big let down to me. I still like H2 alot more i'll just never get any good people to play against, besides hackers who still think its cool to mod in halo.
 
I haven't even got the original yet and I'm already excited about this! XD

*runs off to buy original Resistance game*

Seriously though, 60 player online, nice! That'll be crazy.
 
People who don't know that are sad gamers :P those games were fun :3 I especially loved the map editor for Marathon Infinity. So easy to use and fun.
 
Elem, Resistance did not look bad. But compared to every thing else out there it looked like a generation behind. I wont argue this with ya, most agreed way back that visuals was the games only weakness. And even with that it still was not bad. The multiplayer was bad to me, PS3 only guys love it i am sure. I had other options when resistance was out and i enjoyed them more. Alot of games dont get judged by how good they actualy are. They just get judged in comparison to what else is out at the time. Not fair in some ways but in others its fair. I like Resistance. It is my favorite PS3 game and kinda the only one i feel justified my $60 purchase. The campaign is what made me love it. It was a real real good campaign. For how long that game was i am impressed i did not get bored. Maybe i just like shooters too much, did you get bored? 60player online is never organized. I have played all the battlefields online for pc and it is anarchy. I hate, very strong word, hate, Resistance online maps. They are among the worste to me. If a map is ment for 40 people dont hand me some half ass version for 20. Argue what you want, i have played and know where my opinion stands on resistance online. I will for sure be buying part 2 tho, and am looking foward to it. I just wont get all hyped because they said 60 people online. Anyone see battlefield 3 is going to have up to 80 members in one match? Anarchy i say!
 
Last edited:
I will say Rainbow 6 online definetly owns Resistance, but it was always compared against Gears of War which is a joke online compared to Resistance, and in my opinion a worse campaign too. But visual Gears is still great, except visuals alone don't really prop up the gameplay anymore.

Rainbow 6 though was on the 360 back then, quietly being the best online console game while people jerked off the Gears of War.

As for large battles.. Warhawk does 32 pretty well, but I agree Resistance with 40 is a clusterfuck. Just remember you don't actually have to play those big 40 player matches. It's mostly just fun to me for nonteam deathmatch. Go around killing and dying every few seconds. No depth but cheap thrills.

I do think though that 60 people can work out, it just requires the right pacing, the right maps and good implementation of subdivisions. It also is going to require either some sort of pack in microphone or filtering allowing for only mic-enabled players to join, or at least lead squads.

It needs good net code but after Resistance that's obviously going to happen.

As for the rest, no guarantees but I'm cautiously optimistic. The best part of Resistance to me was the offline, but campaign is always most important to me. Just like with Halo, if the offline is good then I'm happy. Warhawk is the only game good enough to be a winner on it's online alone for any console, but they should have made an offline with bots like Unreal Tournament or Star wars battlefront.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top