Price explains Resistance online

Despite being one of the best-looking titles for the PlayStation 3 at launch (unless you're Ridge Racer 7 fetishist Tom, it's between this and MotorStorm really), Insomniac Games' Resistance: Fall of Man will not be integrated with the console's online functionality, specifically the built-in buddy list - instead, it will use its own buddy list, clan management system, and so on.

That's according to Insomniac boss Ted Price, who was speaking to Eurogamer's Rob Fahey earlier this week in an interview for the ThreeSpeech blog. While the decision to make the game run its own buddy list and so on is a blow to Sony's claims of an integrated online service - and in fact, it harks back to the bad old days of the PS2 online system - Price apparently left the door open for the possibility that the two systems could be reconciled in future, saying that "it is definitely possible to update the game via online."

At least the news about the rest of the game's online functions is more positive. According to Price, the game supports four player split screen, and up to 40 players online - with games being hosted on Sony's own servers for low-latency play.

[power of Green]

40 players! how fun is that going to be. Fragfest city. At least you can choose less than 40 players so the games actually fun not to mention it would allow tactics and skill with less online.

[sjappie]

I think it will be more like Lagfest city, just wait and see.

[x440Magnumx]

Except Motorstorm isn't a launch title. That really sucks....looks like it'll be a big inconvenience to play with friends in other games. And this is for the biggest game yet....hopefully sony gets it all under control....

This makes it look like Sony's system is difficult for devs to work with, or just not worth messing around with....

[THE TRUTH]

Spoken like someone with first hand experience with this game!

Seems everyone who has played this game online has nothing but praises! Of course you can set up whatever # of players you want, and have the choice of 4player split screen. Choices, choices, isn't that what makes 360 so great?

Insomanic us truly making its way towards legendary status! They put in the time work and research to make amazing games with us gamers in mind! They are extremely talented and origional I can't wait to see what they do with the next rachet and clank!

[Donkey Slayer]

Insomniac kicks butt

[EnforcerOfTheTruth]

Boy you must be kidding, more players have nothing to do that there is less tactic. You obviously never played BF 2 with 64 players on PC, otherwise you wouldn't talk such ridiculous smack. Your holy GOW with just 8vs8 is a joke compared to that.

[Smellslikepie]

360 can't do 40 players? Ever read about Huxley? A FPS that supports 200 players?

I think that owns Resistance. 40 players? Let's see the PS3 do 200 :P

[HyperBear]

and RFOM only has 40, and all you 360 fanboys are saying it'll lag so much and you dont need 40, and 40 players suck anyways, then wouldnt 200 players have 5 times the lag, 5 times the boredum, 5 times the suckiness of RFOM?, you guys dont make any sense. "Oh 40 Players online really sucks anyways, but 200 is alright". LOL

[Optimus Prime]

well you have fun with a 40 vs 40 game that has lag, because i am sure it will, i am fine with 8 vs 8

[eques judicii]

umm... huxley supports up to 5000 players per servers... afterall, its an mmo

[CG]

GOW is a TACTICAL shooter moran having 24 or 40 players online would defeat the whole point and design of the game you stupid fool.

[sjappie]

that Xbox 360 has xbox live wich will probably handle it better than the free(crappy) online service from ps. And I can know since I played all 3 socoms online only to be frustated by the lagfest.The online part of ps is looking to be the same crap.

[JIN KAZAMA]

but seriously people, there is NOTHING going on in there. Every video I have seen, there are like 3 other people on screen at the same time. Anyways, this game is going to rock. This is what I want in a FPS, total chaos. I cant wait to play this game. Also, Motorstorm. Thats my number 1 choice. They should just take their time, and put as much into the game as possible. I heard it already is looking awesome. Cant wait till i get my hands on the PS3.

[JIN KAZAMA]

shows how anti-Sony this website is, and how incompetent the moderators of this website are. "was a sony fan"'s comments are dispicable and not surprising from a 360 fanboy. He should have at most 1 speech bubble.

[Bhai]

...I must first say that I disagree to the extent that GOW's nothing but a good looking game. I must add here that alongwith a cool usage of the Unreal Engine, it does have that outstanding animation system that is so pretty to look at, every action is tailor-made so most of the action appears to be going on as a cut-scene. All of this praise goes to the animation system. But I do agree with JIN on the aspect that there is in-effect nothing else going on around in GOW !...

...to clear my point up, I must relate to the fact that I was really astonished to see the E3 2006 video of the team coming out of the prison stage, and I said 'now we're talking !', but after that...it was the same stuff with same fixed actions, same casual-looking marines and the gamer.tv put word...'monochromatic' look. The latest video was the x'o6 one, the team out side the prison stage...and I must admit, I was underwhelmed, for there was a dryed fountain and some locusts were coming out of the soil, they just ran into the characters wildly like nerds and I never saw a single AI thingy that could tell it apart from any other game. There is a new one with the gun-control method of GOW, and VOILA ! its happening again, only 4 or 5 characters running at you with your comrades doing nothing special, no AI swarms, no physics simulations, no water interactivity, no vehicles...DAMN ! nothing procedural at all, and only a middleware even after a whole year of 360 launched, being playable on a two core PC (Epic's Gemini threading system) man why is MS not letting the players play that game...do they fear that actually playing the game, the players will be underwhelmed ?!!! So I must add here that when it comes to getting deeper that superficial beauty...Resistance, MotorStorm and LAIR pretty much blows 360's a whole year edge away !

[Silver360]

http://feeds.feedburner.com...

[ACE]

sorry if i offended u dude :) no hard feelings. oh and i aint no fanboy OK . i think ur the biggest sony fan boy on this site :), good for you ;)

[shoota33]

please stop lying to yourself, you are one big xbox FANBOY!

[Marriot VP]

gametime your hilarious, you have absolutely nothing to contribute but call people fanboys.

you being the biggest one on this site just makes that fact even more humorous.

and aren't you going to answer my question,
You think anyone who buys a 360 and not a PS3 is a 360 fanboy. SO WHEN CAN SOMEONE BUY A 360 AND NOT A PS3, WITHOUT BEING A 360 FANBOY???

answer it you coward, realize your problems

[andy capps]

I encourage everyone to go to Three Speech and comment on the most recent update on the interview with Ted Price and tell them that this needs to change. There needs to be a universal buddy list and that should be what is used in the games for matchmaking and clans and such. Ted Price said this can be fixed via a patch if fans want it, so we need to let him and Sony know that we want it. I've already posted a comment on there, would encourage everyone to do the same.

[Bhai]

Full interview here:

http://threespeech.com/blog...

"By contrast, Resistance is a really polished game - the kind of thing you expect to see a year after a console launches, not the day it comes out."

^^^...more and more people are admitting of the edge PS3 is having even at this earliar stage before even the launch itself. Awesome!!!

[nambo]

We all know how biased threespeech is, being paid by Sony. It'll just be a couple more weeks before we can get a real comparison...that is if Sony can deliver.

[DJ]

until like the second year out, but the launch titles are getting pretty insane. I had doubts when Sony said that the PS3 is a lot easier to program for than the PS2, but luckily I was wrong. Can't wait to see the graphical/technological edge that 2nd-gen PS3 titles end up bringing to the table.

[xrobbanx]

Its fun how you talk about the PS3 second generation games with the console not out and not evene the first wave here. I feel sorry for you that you think the games not live up to the hype.

[InMyOpinion]

And now you're enjoying your Ps3 to the max? It must be fun playing on a console that you can't buy. Tell me more about the wonderful world of Ps3 please. Like you, I have'nt been able to actually enjoy it in real life...

[power of Green]

I know you Sony fanboys are new at Next-gen gaming but jees give me a break you guys were all but making fun of FPS's and online. Xbox gamers have years of experiance with the matter.

[shoota33]

Everyone is new to next gen because it starts in two weeks lol.

[BoneMagnus]

I probably won't be able to afford my PS3 until next May - but I want one badly. - That is my disclaimer.

Xbox and 360 owners have known the joys on CONSOLE online fragging for years...amid many a Sony fanboys' remarks of "Halo sucks" etc.

But don't worry, you'll see the same when the 360 gets some good Japanese style RPGs and the Xbox fanboys who attacked the PS2 lineup will be bragging about what they are getting!

[power of Green]

Why do you always point out that my old name was pro logic?. Like is said what gave it away lol besides my fanboy point of veiw(preference for Xbox makes me a fanboy, so they say). 11.2 they(xbox owners) already brag.

[Boink]

not having a universal buddy system is what most complained about with ps2's online service. I am starting to wonder if sony even listens...

on a plus side 40 people in multiplayer would be awesome.

I too was dissapointed when GOW was only 8, I mean halo 2 on the original xbox could get 16, battlefield 2 has 24, as does COD3, so I expected at least that. I will still buy it, and will still have tons of fun, but it had better be more people for GOW2:)

[power of Green]

Halo's a first person shooter and more players suits the genre perfectlly, games like GoW, Rainbow 6 and GrAw are next-gen 2.5 person shooters or (next-gen 3rd person). Tactical sqaud based shooters would not work with so many enemies on the screen it would defeat the purpose of the seek cover and hide then shoot gamplay. It wouldn't be "GoW"(Gow's gameplay would be lost) if you tried to find cover with so many people around you would always be surounded. It's appearent you like FPS better than this new style(Next-gen gameplay) of gaming that goes for the rest of you; you either don't like the style or you're just hating and this is the only thing you can think of to vent your envy. Still GRAW at times had many enemies on screen at once if the level was set up right point is Epic isn't really showing sh*t yet so we can't say much on how many charectors are on screen at once but too many will kill the gameplay. Can't wait to see what vehicels are in GoW and the interactive cutscene things they were talking about.

[Boink]

I just wish I had the option, sometimes utter chaos is fun. but I understand the tactical point, and that makes sense.

[power of Green]

Have no idea what you fools are talking about but RFOM and GoW will pretty much sum up the differences(graphicaly) between first party tiittles for both console through out their life cycles of both consoles. Both Games started developement around the same time. HOW MANY PEOPLE PLAYED TACTICAL SQUAD BASED SHOOTERS IN HERE?. IF YOU HAVE PLAYED "GRAW" OR "RAINBOW SIX" RAISE YOUR HANDS, THEN TELL ME IF #6 AND OTHER FOOLS ARE RIGHT. THE SWEET SPOT FOR THAT TYPE OF GAMEPLAY IS AROUND 10 CHARECTORS AT ONCE.

[kmis87]

Resistance Fall of Man = 2 months with the final devkits

Gears of War = over a year with the final devkits

They may have been in the works for a relatively similar amount of time, but that is not typically how game generations are judged. The fact that Kameo was in sporadic development for years didn't make it any less a launch title. Insomniac could have been working on this game since 1995, but it would still be a first gen game.

And Gears could accomodate more players and still maintain the tactical style of gameplay. The maps would just need to be larger and still maintain a good design.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

I guess it comes down to the individual. I mean, me personally, I would take a smaller scale of combatants with more tactical play over a free for all any day. Example: I play Chromehounds often..and at first I dreaded the thought of 6 vs 6...but now I have come to really love and appreciate games like that. First, you get a much better sense of team as you all talk, and you can hear each other as opposed to the mayhem of a 16 v 16 or higher game. 2nd the team tactical play is MUCH more rewarding than the chaos of mass multiplayer.

Anyway, again its personal choice. Some may like that "Unreal" style of play in RFOM where you run around and jump around as you shoot and avoid getting shot. Others, we just like a little more realism in our games.

And no....I didn't like playing Halo online for the very reasons I stated above. If you give me a gun and put me in a fire fight, I promise you I, nor you would be running out and jumping up and down as we shot moving down a street with enemies there.

Lastly, to the point of this article. This is about what I expected Sony's online to be like. It will no doubt be smooth (little to no lag) for RFOM, but not unified. I really doubt you will see much unified buddy lists, I think this is a sign of how it will be. This is going to be a much improved version of the PS2 online service but it is showing signs of weakness already.

[Arkham]

While I don't think the lack of unified buddies at launch is that big of a deal, the recent PS3 interface video showed the demonstrater's buddy with "Resistance: Fall of Man" underneath his name, because he was online and playing that game in the other room.

Sounds unified enough for me, at least for starters.

[TheXgamerLive]

To me this is much more chalenging than 40 total, with that your going to just look around and see 3 or 4 players at your side, not fun and yes I bet it will frag also.

Still, It will be a great game for sony fans, feel lucky that they had about 2 years to work on it to make it playable on the ps3.

Have fun.

This 4 player split will suck too, yes, just my opinion.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

Unless you have a big screen TV, split screen is pretty crappy IMO. I get why they do it, it certainly seems like a selling point but at the end of the day it just makes for a lack luster experience comparitively speaking.

[ApocalypseShadow]

gears goes for highly detailed characters,but can't put that many on the screen at once and probally runs at 30fps.resistance goes for the war type environment and has many things going on and tons more players on the screen.ps3 could handle gears.because not a lot is going on.it's like motorstorm.the target video showed about six or so vehicles.if sony would have went with that,it would looked just like the video.the framerate would have not been as fast and not a lot of people would have been able to play.but there's like twenty cars on the road and it still looks great.design choices people.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

Just clarifying incase you were trying to state otherwise.

[Marty8370]

R:FoM looks awesome for a PS3 launch title.

[ApocalypseShadow]

but games starting off the bat are 60 fps and 1080p on ps3.but the designers decided on more going on than 8 people at a time.war on a battlefield doesn't just have "eight people".so they sacrificed framrate for more.the less you have means more detail on screen.and that's "a LOT" of 360 games.8 people in gears,6 or so cars in gotham,and so on.then when you have more things on acreen,you get dead rising,99 knights and dynasty warriors that just look plain ugly compared to gears.and the AI is dumb.sony's gonig for more and the games still look great.if less things were on screen,the games would have looked like the target videos.but then heavenly sword already looked good.and that wasn't a target video.360 is going to sacrifice interaction with backgrounds and speed for "LOOKS".while ps3 will have "looks and background interaction.the early games already show this.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

First, I am not trying to take anything away from RFOM. I actually do happen to think this is a quality title for the PS3 launch. I will save any statement about the actual games for when they launch because truthfully, previews are one thing but actual release and play "sometimes" can be vastly different from the preview. Again, so far RFOM is definitely one of the must haves for the PS3 launch.

That said, as for the comment about the on battlefield combat. The two games in question are set in different era's so I actually will agree with you in that in past conflicts (i.e. WWII) large scale battles were often the norm. But in todays times, guerilla warefare and urban fire fights are usually much smaller in scale and much slower in terms of people running around. It is much more pop and shoot. Just look at footage from Iraq, rarely do you see more than 6-8 soliders in the screen at any point. And YOU NEVER SEE THEM RUNNING OUT AND JUMPING UP AND DOWN TO AVOID FIRE. This is the one aspect i don't care for over all others in ANY of the FPS today, not just RFOM.

Anyway, what I was trying to say and didn't do so well is...I think RFOM is a fine title and definitely worthwhile on the PS3 launch line up. GoeW and RFOM are definitely different and each have their own good and bad. Enough said.

[DC RID3R]

dropped off the bat at 60 fps!

cod 3 on the ps3 is only 30 fps whereas the 360 version remains at 60fps.

can you dig it

[ApocalypseShadow]

and it's not to knock gears or the other games.it's design choices.if sony's teams put less on screen,they could make games that look as good as gears or better.same with 360.games will come out on 360 that will look better than gears.it's going to happen.but it's sad when people knock a ps3 game before playing it because "there's too many people and enemies on screen."like power of green.that doesn't make sense to me.as for iraq.i was in the military.there's more going on simultaneously than the 6-8 people you see on "TV".but i get what you mean about tactical teams fighting small battles.

[HyperBear]

You get guys like Power and some others who9 say GoW is the best thing since sliced bread and all this sh!t, yet they are posting it on a PS3 topic. GoW has nothing to do with RFOM, they are completely different games. RFOM is a fast-paced, Alien/WWII FPS that is very detailed and in some cases different from other shooters on PS and Xbox. GoW is totally different. For one its a 3rd Person-tactical-shooter, with more ordering ppl around and taking cover and shooting, but with more detailed enironments, and stronger AI (not to say RFOM's AI isnt as good, but it just shows more in GoW). I dont know how you ppl compare the 2, they are compleetly different games, and both of them are the best games to get for this year for their respective consoles. Lighten Up PPL, just lighten up. they will both sell, I am getting both, and they are both Sci-FI and great games.

[FirstknighT]

I agree...Keep GOW out of this...Number 1: It's totally a different game than this....Number 2: It's totally a better game than this ;)

[MySwordIsHeavenly]

Dude, i'm sorry that you gotta bash like that. I'm a sony fanboy...yes...it's ever-so-true. It's just sad that you are bashing on sony fans when xbox fans have been behind the FPS craze as well. I had been playing FPS's a LONG time before the original xbox came out. Personally, i'm waiting for a console who can beat the PC. I don't want to buy cards nemore. I believe the PS3 will do this. Yeah, you get your Halo 3 and your overhyped GOW, but really...it comes down to the games that are actually fun. For example...you guys have Dead Rising...<Great Game

Listen, i'm not ragging on xbox fanboys...i really am not. I just don't like incompetence.

DJ...you keep doin' your thing. They have no idea what they're saying

[THAMMER1]

YEP^^^

[Funky Town_TX]

Maybe compare Halo 3 to R:FOM or maybe COD3. Maybe even Killzone PS3 (king of console shooters) to it.

[MySwordIsHeavenly]

maybe your commment wasn't directed to me, but i'd like to clarify what i was saying. I do think GOW looks like an incredible game...and Halo 3 will be great for those that love Halo. I just think that, right now, nothing is better than playing an FPS on a PC. I'm hoping that changes soon though. I know GOW is a 3rd person game, but hey...so is unreal championship (not tournament). I'm just not much of a hide 'n shoot kinda guy. The animations are stunning, however. To keep this comment about Resistance, i'll say that while the character animations may not be like GOW, it certainly has the environmental animations to a tee. The AI looks incredible.

[MySwordIsHeavenly]

You're concerned with frame-rate?

Don't be stupid and say that the 360 has better graphics than the PS3. We ALL know that the PS3 will eventually show the graphical difference...and it will be prettier. The thing is...you and "some others" are only taking one thing into account at a time. While the Frame Rate isn't as high on the PS3 version, the environmental detail is a lot greater on the PS3 version of COD3. I'm just saying that you are taking one advantage of another system and making it sound superior. Grow up.

[DJ]

"The 360 is perfectly capable, hardware and software-wise, of doing the same things as the PS3, but they chose not to."

There's simpler versions of this statement along the lines of "The 360 can do it too" and "The 360 devs could do it if they wanted, but the game is better with less ____"

Frankly, it's a bit disconcerting because what a lot of these guys are saying is that the 360 is just as powerful as the PS3 (or more powerful), and since the gameplay videos prove otherwise they simply say the developers chose not to use that alleged power. What they're essentially stating is that 360 developers are too damn lazy and untalented to take advantage of hardware they claim is equal or greater than Sony's console, and I really don't like it. As far as I can tell, developers are pushing the 360 to its limits, and often times that means working around limitations. Even PS3, the most powerful console in existence, has limitations, as Kojima himself has stated.

Why they can't accept the fact that the 360 is technologically inferior is beyond me. It, in no way, means that the 360 is a bad piece of hardware (if anything, the 360 is a big improvement over the Xbox1). But the word 'inferior' has a negative connotation so it's understandable that they would react this way. Xbox had the hardware advantage last time around, and now the situation has been completely flipped around. Instead of a slight power difference though, we're talking about one console being twice as powerful as the other, and that's a really big deal. What people have to understand however is that power does not Automatically equal great titles; it does however enable developers to do more with their titles, and Potentially create better titles. If the PS3 had horrible titles coming out that showed absolutely none of its power the haters wouldn't even be on this site. But since Sony's CG Lies are looking more and more achievable with each month that passes they feel compelled to spread false fact sheets and misinformation in order to dissuade other gamers from purchasing the PS3.

The biggest proof of this is what happened on this site when the first screens of Motorstorm were released two months after E3 06. If you remember the post with 1100 comments where many people were accusing those screens of being "CG Lies", you'll know what I mean. The August trailer got the same reaction, and ironically the game looks noticeably better than even that trailer.

While the haters seem to be everywhere on this site and are extremely vocal, I find it important to remind everyone that in the real world these kinds of people are few and far between. People like them get laughed at and totally disregarded by real gamers.

There's a big difference between being a Fan and a Fanatic. I'm referring to the Fanatics; Fans on the other hand are simply people who know what they want. They have brand preference based on what they like, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

[bung tickler]

the 360 is inferior to the ps3 in ways and the ps3 is inferior to the 360 in ways, neither has an edge, like 90% of 3rd party devs have stated such things over and over. so why you keep stating the the ps3 is the end all be all for technology is beyond me, cuz its not. i know it must be hard for the sony die hards to grasp the fact that they waited a whole year to play a system that is equal (not that being equal is saying that it isnt powerful) to its rival.

[Watapata]

gametime, you are well near one of the worst on this site. I have never witnessed you provide one ounce of good contribution to any discussions...

[bung tickler]

gametime i hope you die, and in this i know i am not alone.

[Watapata]

voluptuary, I for one hope you ARE alone, the fact that you'd even say that is ridiculous. Dislike someone all you want, but you should never wish death on them...

[Sphinx]

...you're sorta dumb. You've just restated a lot of things. The 360 and PS3 are different machines with different pros and cons. Choose your poison, or get both.

[ACE]

twice as powerfull . ur messed up in the head dude and u r a fanatic :)

[bung tickler]

i would just like to say one thing... the ps3 will never be as good as the 360 for FPS games if only for one simple fact. the controller blows... not triggers no rumble = bad FPS, only thing that could fix it is if they let you plug a keyboard and mouse into the giant thing and use that for your games. other wise they should just stick to the next twenty versions of final fantasy and g@y crab killing games.

[DJ]

Dev support is a different thing. Oh yeah, the Sixaxis controller has triggers; just letting ya know. Why you're attacking Final Fantasy is beyond me though. There's only been one sequel in the entire series: FFX-2. Every other FF title has no connection to the others, gameplay or otherwise.

[bung tickler]

i wouldnt call those little nubs triggers, they are about as much triggers as the "L" & "R" buttons on my Game Boy SP. And as far as the FF games its an old tired ip, thats why the creator MOVED ON (and is now making some awsome games for the 360 i might add) just like every one else should.

[GamerMan]

is like saying FPS is tiring... I'm sorry but how many FPS can you have in a war setting shooting the same type of guns at some random enemy (alien or human doesn't matter) ... running around and looking at different backgrounds.

That statement above is my "opinion" of FPS.. I haven't played them since Duke Nukem and Doom which I think were the best of them. To call the FF series a sequel or not different is from someone that has the same opinion as me about FPS.... I know that all FPS aren't the same to people who enjoy that genre and I am not really knocking anyone that plays them and likes them. It's all about gaming preferences.

But to put such a broad statement on a series you know little to nothing about yourself is ridiculous. In fact I don't remember to many crabs until the MMORPG FFXI came out which is different then the single player storylines of the previous and now FFXII. Also I have yet to kill a "crab" in FFXII but I just got it so there might be one to kill.

I like RPGs, Racing Games, MMORPGS, strat games, and some sports games. FPS is never on my list but I can tell that many people like them and thats cool. Just a reminder the statement at the beginning was to prove a point and I really don't knock other peoples gaming preferences. R:FOM looks to be interesting and very graphical but is not a game for me.

[InMyOpinion]

The brain behind the best Final Fantasy games is now working on Lost Odyssey and Blue Dragon for the 360. Final Fantasy ain't what it used to be. I'm glad i'm not the one who has to pay 600$ to play games like Resistance: Full of man...

[kewlkat007]

This game will be so so. I don't play that many FPS games but this game is bringing nothing new here so I'm not sure why every sonyfanboy is getting excited for. All I hear is 40 player online at 30FPS and cool looking aliens. Great "next-gen" I tell ya.

This game will not do what Halo did to the xbox. COD3 will outsell this game easily. 40 people shooting each other is just stupid and there is no fun in it. Every half a sec your getting FRAGED or FRAGING someone else, just plain boring, and just a waste without "tactics", stealth, which are some of the characteristics that makes multiplayer matches much fun.

Visually this game does look good, however I'm sure sony paid good money to make sure it's not a flop. Again playing an FPS with the dual shock 3 sucks ass. just wait and see. On that note this game has nothing to do with GOW. GOW way more polished and tactful.

[Arkham]

(Tactful? Did you mean Tactical? Were the marines trying not to hurt the aliens' feelings?)

Wow, I can smell your brown MS-puckered breath from here. You sound like the lunchroom kids in _Billy Madison_ bickering over which Sega Genesis game was better.

What is it with this fanboy (from all 'camps') over-postulation about games/hardware that isn't even released yet? Do you all have a secret club that gets first crack at pre-release material? Can I join?

BTW, it's "fragged". "Fraged" sounds a bit like you were assaulted by a female's you-know-what...
.
.
.
(Sorry, I had to edit this again. I'm still thinking about being "fraged". Hmmm. Interesting.)

[Agent VX]

I wish this game came out for the 360, as I would be on it in a second.

I have played online PC games for years, and depending on my mood, Fragging can be very very fun when your on a roll.(40 vs 40) But then again, tactical combat can also be very very fun when your on a roll.(4 vs 4)

Too bad I couldn't have both GOW and RFOM. :(

Looks to be a very promising title for you soon to be PS3 owners. It's one of those games that make you wish you owned both systems.

[EnforcerOfTheTruth]

I totaly forgot GOW is only 4vs4. Poor, poor MS fanboys, that's just sad. Mad we get 20vs20? Haha and your lameass excuses only show that all of you are just lil noobs. Kiddos less players doesn't mean more tactic, it means less fun cause you play on lil, tiny maps or you have problems finding enemies. Everybody who played Battlefield 2 with 64 players knows how much fun is it and how much tactic can be achieved with so many players. You are just lil, mad noobs that are jealous 360 can't drop so many players. 4vs4, this is next gen? LOL

[Retard]

Despite that... Sure, Gears coulda been and I'd prefer more people... But after watching the multiplayer video.. It'd look to hard with more people then 4v4's.. This limits the ability really have any clans though, and I wouldn't expect this to be the new fix of multiplayer..

Back to RESISTANCE. I really like there idea with "Take out this node, you get (Turrents, Supplies, etc.)" I think that's really awesome that they've implentmented that idea with the game.

Anyone else think that?

[Grown Folks Talk]

with that many players IF you can actually find the right group of people to play with. 9 out of 10 times you'll get stuck with a bunch of jack@sses that just run around wildly with no sense of awareness getting killed every 5 seconds. or you run into the situation of having too many chiefs and not enough indians. everybody wants to be the leader and set the gameplay, but nobody follows instructions or works together. a lot of times it's higher ranked people that screw it up because so many games let you rank up based on your teams success. (1 good thing about bf2. you had to earn it.) in other words, tactical or not comes down to who you play with. i have a group of friends from the gamestop i worked at who i play graw and soon r6:v with all of the time, and it's a lot better because we work as a group.

[Retard]

Tactics there would require the ability to get out of the situation. See, tactics are required MORE with MORE people. =D

[AudioRage]

Dj is right they pretty much stole the triggers as well, funniest line i read in a review is this...
"Sony made no comment on how its competition had staked all of its console's potential on its unique controller input, other than saying that its own technology was a breakthrough for gaming."

Own technology!!lol, aw how irrelevant was that to have in a review of the ps3 controller.. own technology.. brilliant..

O yeah, and i know yous will try and get back at me.. but like

"While on the topic of borrowing ideas from other companies we noticed that there is a "guide" button in the center of the controller -- SCEA did not comment on this, and many of the developers at the show still had not been able to make use of the feature on their debug units."

Classic. used to always get sony items, ps1, 2, psp... not this time. i not a 360 fanboy, more i jus despise sony for all the problems they have caused and never fixed. My opinion

[Retard]

PS3 button is the power. You can turn the PS3 on via controller.

[gnothe1]

do you think that same button does on the xbox controller!!why is everyone still comparing RFOM to GOW, thats just stupid!!. why dont ya'll just compare RFOM to COD3,there basically the same type of game. plus COD3 has 24 players online.so stop arguing anout GOW an focus more on COD3.

an you ps3 fans are really something.last gen all ya'll said was graphics wasnt everything is all about the games which ps2 had, now this gen its all about the graphics, what happen to graphics dont matter, oh I guess since xbox has all the games RIGHT NOW!! all you can talk about is graphics,please people get a life an you know who you are!!

[Antan]

Exellent reply, all totally agreeable.

[Grown Folks Talk]

yet nobody seems to respond. last go round it was ps2 is better because it has better/more games. xbox and gamecube in some instances had better graphics (sometimes for the same game). xbox had better load times, didn't need memory cards, built in ports for extra controllers, yet it sucked. why? because it was new and different. plus EVERY single game is a fps just like 360. but amzingly now that the ps3 is at least just as strong hardware wise, now all of a sudden it's "xbox fans are stupid for not waiting for the most powerful system" "the ps3 is a lot stronger than the 360" "look at the GRAPHICS on these 1st gen ps3 games" make up your minds. is it graphics/power or games/gameplay? or does that just depend on which one favors your position?

[EnforcerOfTheTruth]

...cause both games are FPS. COD3 is just the thousands ww2 FPS, with the usual multiplayer so there is nothing to get excited about. I compare RFOM to GOW simply cause all MS fanboys do it, but even without comparing it to RFOM 4vs4 is just sad. It has less to do with GOW being a tactical shooter(Counterstrike is also a tactical shooter, but offers 40 players), but more with 360 not beeing capable of more players with such graphics. You should ask yourself why all 360 games offer only max 24 players and why even BF2 got dumbed down to just 24 players. It's not the same game, you won't get the feeling of a battlefield with so little players. Planes, tanks, 64 players on huge maps is what makes BF so great, the 360 version is just sad compared to the PC one.

Copying is usual in the business, companys have to watch the competition and react if they want to stay in the business. Everybody does it. Sony/MS/N copies and got copied. People that point fingers are just noobs without any understanding about the business. And no Sony doesn't copy more, thePS3 controller uses besides triggers their own technology and was explained and patented back in 1999:
http://v3.espacenet.com/tex... It can be only said that Nintendo copies less than usual. They are very original and they have to if they want survive against such huge companies like Sony or MS. But Nintendo isn't perfect, they backstabbed Sony:
http://www.youtube.com/watc... This was their biggest mistake they ever made. Sony jumped into the console market and took the lead.

I think it's better to support a company that offers a future proof multimedia system and which support their fanbase for years, than a company that kills their console after just 4 years and releases a HD-DVD crap which can be used for a limited time. No HDMI means 480p in a few years and the avareage buyer won't even know it. MS won't surely tell this crap will be useless when the movie studios inculde HDCP in a few years. They just play with peoples pockets, same goes for the 360 accessoires. 360 sucks bigtime and I won't ever allow MS to screw me.

It's not only about graphics, it's about graphics, games and gameplay. 360 doesn't offer anything besides graphics. It's not like it was with the PS2 when it comes to games. Most 360 games people can get on PC. 360 has maybe now more games, it's nothing unusual as it's already 1 year on the market. We will have to wait 1-2years to make some conclusions which system offers more games.

[Arkham]

Good points all, Enforcer.
One thing that baffles me is the continual comparison between GOW and RFOM. Sure, they're both similar in the sense that they're military shooters and are supposed to be graphic powerhouses, but comparing a TPS to an FPS is tricky. Resource-wise you can afford much more detail on a TPS than on a first person shooter. Concurrent player & enemy count is a prime example. Aside from that there's development time as well. This is pretty much a case of first-generation versus first-and-a-half, if not early second-generation (GOW). Players will get a better comparison when we can look at a 2nd gen PS3 FPS and see how it stacks up to Halo 3, which will probably be one of the top FPS games of the "next" generation.

A better comparison, taking development time on real dev kits, game perspective and this ambiguous concept of "2nd generation" into consideration, would be GOW to MGS3. I don't think many of the diehard 360 fanboys want to do that just yet.

[Arkham]

By "MGS3", I meant "MGS4", of course. ;) Whoops.

[Deceased]

Non of the games coming out are anywhere close to the CG targets presented at E3 05.

Heres proof: http://www.wii60.com/videog...

[beans]

They don't look anything like the cg from E3'05! Also the 360 games look so much better which I don't get since the PS3 is said to be more powerful! This will be a very interesting 2007 to watch and be apart of!

[Arkham]

I have to disagree with you there. The latest first-person gameplay for Motorstorm (still many months away from release) is damn close to the original CGI target video. You do understand the concept of target/concept videos don't you? Ignore the "fog of war" comments by fans, reporters and reps during E3, regardless of those most sane people took those videos at face value, that is, as displays of concept.

Fanboys on all fronts have really muddied the waters since then.

[InMyOpinion]

Too bad all 1080p games on the ps3 moves in slow motion, like Motorstorm. Lack of memory? Anyone?

[Antan]

Ridge Racer 7 anyone?

[InMyOpinion]

I meant of hte games that look next gen. Not Ridge Racer 6.3

[Silver Bull3t]

haha, I thought the title was "Prince explains Resistance online"...

(Revolution and New Power Generation unlockables anyone ;)

[Deceased]

while yo install massive amounts of data on your 20gb hard drive and think to yourself, man this blu-ray drive is a peice of crap I have to install 5gb of data on my CONSOLE hard drive to have fast load times. Did sony forget this is a console or are they trying to bypass the console/computer taxes over seas? This is funny I laughed so hard when I heard you have the option to install games onto the hard drive of the ps3 lol, if you do that where will you put your music, arcade games, movies, etc...? You going to keep installing and uninstalling. LOL

[kmis87]

Hmmm. Usually there are only 3 games that I play frequently at any given time. Assuming I CHOOSE (I have the option to not install and still play, albeit with slightly longer loading times like 15 seconds, which isn't really bad) to install all three of those, and they all happen to be 5 GB, then I still have 45GB left for music and other stuff. That's still more than twice as much as you have on your 360 deceased, and that's a worst case scenario for me. I don't think Resistance has an install function, and it's load times are supposed to be 4 seconds anyways.

[Antan]

"This is funny I laughed so hard when I heard you have the option to install games onto the hard drive"

now THIS is the funniest thing ive read all day!!!! hehehe

[NextGen24Gamer]

Works perfectly for Sony fans. YOu have to remember that the average sony fan buys 1.8 games on average. So to install their 1 to 2 games to hard drive would work like a charm. Now that wouldn't work for 360 gamers. On average we buy 5 games per console. We are gamers who buy games and installing all of the games we buy wouldn't work. Thanks Micrsoft.

BTW...We will see which game gets the best Reviews. Gears of War or Resistance. 8 Players, 40 players, 65 players don't make the game. More isn't better folks. 40 players on screen at once ONLINE will be for null if its not fun to play,laggy, or impossible to even find a game with the lobby full of 40 players. So there are many variables. And we won't know the answers untill the games are released and reviewed and played.

But one thing to keep in mind. There has never been a 3rd person shooter that has that many players multiplayer. Its the nature of the game. And I wouldn't be as hyped about GOW if they announced 40 players online. That does not seem fun to me for that type of game. But for Sony fans to say the 360 isn't capable of it...Well, thats there fanboyistic views speaking. The original xbox was no where near as powerful as the 360 but it had a game that allowed 50 people online at once. Its not that impressive. Its a developers choice for game design. But who braggs about the amount of poeple that can play online together? ha ha ha ha... MMO's do it. They have 1000's of players online at once. There are 2 xbox 360 MMO's that do it now on the 360. Final Fantasy and Phantasy Online. WOW...And its a big deal why?

The reviews will come. Games will Play. We will see then. Not which can hold more players. But which is the better game as a whole. Which has better graphics? Which has better more immersive gameplay? Which adds more to their genre? Which sells more copies? I believe from all I have read, the answer is CLEAR. But I will let Mid November roll around so everyone can see for themselves.

Sony has poured alot of resources into Resistance. And MS has doen the same with Gears of War.

Its not about 1st gen vs 2nd gen. Its about Sony's Muscle vs MS's Muscle.

Keep in mind. Halo 1 was a launch title and through many years after, many second gen games couldn't compare to Halo 1. So the whole 1st gen vs 2nd gen is a joke. When people say that. They are making excuses in advance for games they know won't match up to the 360 games. And thats sad. you pay over half a grand for a console and you have a company like Sony putting all they can into projects like Resistance. You don't want no excuses. Every generation developers will get more and more out of both systems. The hardware will remain the same for both consoles. But its the software and middle war that will make the difference. And thats right down Microsofts ally. Both systems will have great games. I just believe that its clear MS will have much more of them coupled with a much larger install base for developers to sell to. Thanks Microsoft.

[Raist]

PS2's tie ratio is 10 games per console.

1.8 hahaha XD

[dalectrics]

Screw it. Why doesn't everyone get their rulers out and we'll sort it out that way.

At the end of the day, both consoles will create amazing gameplay experiences that you will never forget. This would be true of a Sony fanboy playing on GoW/Halo3/SC:5, or a 360 fanboy playing on Resistance/Motorstorm/Tekken.

It'll be fun whatever, but seriously - no one is ever going to make a 'bad' looking game for either console (especially First Party).

By the way if anyone s wondering, I have a 360, I had an xbox, i love Halo 2 (Challenge anyone? - you'd get whipped) and I probably won't buy a PS3 - simply because I could never afford one as a 3rd year Uni student. Unless I skipped 4-5 Months rent. Not to say I won't be jealous of playing those games. However I will not be jealous (or be forced to feel jealous) of the systems capabilities/graphics.

Anyway, that's my thoughts. Who knows maybe I just caused complete console unification and the fanboy war is no more.

What's that, Microny Sontendo are releasing the WiiStation1080? My work here is done.

[The great 1]

Usually there argument on a issue like this is oh my this is terrible now the game is rubbish bla bla bla, but i thk there starting to feel the ehat because PS3 is shaping upto be a great piece of kit and it's comming out real soon, not long now!

[Grown Folks Talk]

has bigger issues than games to worry about. i prefer 360 over ps3, but i'm not AFRAID that the ps3 is coming out. anyone with any real common sense doesn't care. you either want one or you don't. neither the ps3 nor wii release will affect my life whatsoever unless i buy 1 or both of them. i, like everyone else have my preferences, but everything that i don't like or don't want doesn't suck. I just don't like or want it. my personal feelings have no bearing on what you or anyone else should spend their money on. on topic, 40 players can be fun depending on the experience you are looking for. i do feel it's harder to have real tactical gameplay with that many people simply based on the fact of finding that many people that will actually play that way. i've booted many a young kid, or others that just want to do their own thing. and i'm sure like most other games of this nature, there will be the jack@ss that joins team games only to run around killing his own teammates.

[Sphinx]

...that is, less people on the battlefield... then again, Battlefield 2 was a lotta fun. I guess small groups and big groups can be fun, as long as their done right.
Other than that, you can continue waiting for your PS3, and have a few games to choose from, and try to play online... but I for one am going home today to a true next-gen console, the 360. It's got the graphics, the online, the service, and I'm thinking about playing some Splinter Cell... or maybe some Just Cause... you can continue to wait, and hope, and pray that you'll get a PS3. I'm already there, a step ahead, enjoying the next-gen gaming. Maybe you're just more patient, or maybe you have been brainwashed by Sony to think the PS3 is worth waiting and paying for. Either way, we'll all be enjoying next-gen soon... not this year, however, because the majority will not be able to get a PS3.

[highps3]

Wow game looks great hope there is no lag like on the 360. Can care less about the features being as its free. Just no lag!

[AudioRage]

what news did u jus read?

[TheMART]

So guys. Just to be fair, it's not about quantity (40 players online), but quality:

That's where Gears of War owns this game this Christmas.

ANd if you still want to talk about quantity, a non-unified online system where the developer chooses to cut on Sony's system and put another single one for this game out there, isn't the best place to have it on. A unified, premium service like XBOX Live is better suited for those difficult jobs.

So yepz. Be afraid for lags. Be afraid of the PS2 online service, just updated a bit.

On big freaking mess, every game producer running it's own service (and you may hope it's still supported in 2 years when almost no one plays the game anymore, but you want to...). That's where premium unified services keep it up in the long run and these aren't. Because why do I hear Sony fanboys always only talking about SOCOM on PS2 online? The rest died a slow death, that's why

[satanslilh3lp3r]

i've just realized something. u are just some sad little MS fanatic who disses on sony just to make urself feel better about the 360. even if it's good news for sony, u find something bad about it or go off topic and talk about GOW. all u ever talk about is GOW and how much u think sony sucks. do everyone a favor and go back to the xbox section where u belong. ur the single most pathetic person i've seen on this sight

[TheMART]

Well, Gears is all that the gaming world is talking about if you hear them there's nothing out there this christmas that can even get close. Nothing

Well. Read my statements again. If you use your brain's you'll agree. Unified online systems are better then non-unified, especially when a developer disses the console producers online system. You'll agree with that?!

Furthermore what's on this 'sight'? funny guy

[shoota33]

Sorry mart but the gaming world is talking about ps3.Maybe in your little xbox fanboy mind people are talking about gears but not in the real world lol.Its ok mart gears will get overshadowed by ps3 and wii PERIOD! face it there is nothing you can say or do about it GET IT! GOT IT! GOOD!.

[TheMART]

Sorry gametime to disturb the wet dream, but the game reviewers all stated that there is nothing out there like Gears of War this Christmas.

And in Europe the PS3 won't even be launched before spring 2007. How lame is that. What you'd think people will buy for Christmas presents when they see Gears of War running on demopods overhere and can buy it actually. No killzone CGI, ingame stuff. When parents see Viva Piniata for their childeren. When European soccer lovers see PES6 and Fifa 07 which will only be on 360 till next christmas.

PS3 died with kens lies and in Europe for sure

[Antan]

"When European soccer lovers see PES6 and Fifa 07 which will only be on 360 till next christmas"

you might want to re-think this particular quote. What systems are both games on again?

[InMyOpinion]

I won't believe in the 40-players-at-once-gaming until I've seen it with my own eyes. Sony say lots of things so how come no one doubts their network capabilities? I do. How far have they come since the ps2 fiasco? Was'nt Resistance: Full of man supposed to be 1080p as well? Seeing is believing...

[Deceased]

http://www.wii60.com/videog...

[ChickeyCantor]

i agree with you but, it has nothing to do with the online thing.
so i claim your post to be SPAM( and no i didnt clicked on the spam/offensive)

[FirstknighT]

Thats a great link...I always wanted to see the difference from those clips a year ago to the real product...wow, what a difference...Sony Suckers!

[AudioRage]

i hate all the stupid fanboys!!! sony fanboys i hate slightly more, but microsoft fanboys are nearly as bad. like seriously!! quit dissin the other consoles, that guy up there.. Enforcer of the truth, prime example. I have a 360 and i think every game ive bought are played has had brilliant gameplay and i was amazed in quite a few with graphics compared to the last gen.. (had a ps2 no xbox)... so like your statements..
" 360 doesn't offer anything besides graphics."
and
"360 sucks bigtime "
are jus totally irrelevant, if they are your opinions, please say it rather than tryin to make it factual. If they are opinions.. try and make them slightly less childish...

I not jus pickin on you its jus one example. its not personal, your one of many, and i know u have to "defend" .. "your" console.. but like, aw it jus irritates me. You also do make some good points but they jus seem to become irrelevant with the comments that sometimes follow..

Mart, you need to chill. ur like him, in fairness u make some good points and stuff, but like.. chill.

i jus think yous should be happy with the console u want. both companies only wanna make money, in my opinion thats why theres a hd-dvd add on, microsoft didnt wanna see sony winnin a wee battle when they set up the whole streamin hdmovies thing so they thought theyd thro somethin in to damage a few sales. and it could be good. also why sony prob included the bluray, to try and prevent microsofts ambition of controllin your whole media experience. and in my opinion, thats all bad for the gamers, it makes one console overpriced (o god i can hear the fanboys comin to slate me already with the bluray storage debate) and one thats not got a hidef player. thats basically the reason i bought it. ps3 will probably edge the 360 in terms of most console issues, except price,earliness of playability (dono if that makes sense) and well i like shootin games, and xbox had them.

[gnothe1]

that insomniac was putting video chat in RFOM.now!! my question to that is, if there putting video chat into there game, that means that in order for me to video chat with you I must have a copy of RFOM also!!do that also mean that developers must implament these type of features themselves.if so then thats a complete advantage for xbox live because I can chat (video or voice)just by having the system on!!as far as RFOM onling lag I dont think there will be a problem!!there wont be that many systems around for a while an not everyone that buys a PS3 will buy RFOM so there for there will be hardly any strain on the servers there fore lag free gaming!!but just wait about a full year after the game is out an theres 800k people playing that game, thats when it'll get the real quality test!!

[FirstknighT]

...I see people still talking about the number of players able to play online...which is better and which has more tactics. GOW has 4v4 and Resistance has 40. The option for having 40 players is nice if you want to have mindless fun running around, shooting, and killing. But the real tactical online game consists of less players: 4v4, 5v5, 8v8. When you have less players, you actually have to pay attention...need to keep your eyes movin cuz u dont know where they are...the tension and mystery of where they are and what they are planning...better communication with teamates for better teamwork. When you have 20v20, you lose all that suspense cuz most likely they will be scattered all over the map. More players also encourages camping....grab the sniper, camp, and kill....easy....boring!!!! Just turns into another online fragfest. Now this is okay for mindless fun...for the noobs that have no skill...its easy getting kills when you have players all over the place. But it takes skill and tactics when you have less players.

The top gaming leagues in the world agree...MLG (Major League Gaming) uses 4v4 for Halo 2...CAL (Cyberathlete Amatuer League) uses 5v5 for Counterstrike - this game can play 64 players...why only 5v5??? Global Gaming League: Counter-strike 1.6: 5v5, Unreal Tournament 2004: 4v4, Battlefield 2: 8v8. These games can be played with over 40 players, so why do they choose to only have under 16 for tournament play??? Easy...It's more skillful and tactical. You rarely see 32v32 or 20v20 tournaments cuz it just turns into a fragfest! Noobs play with more...Pros play with less!

[EnforcerOfTheTruth]

AudioRage - Read my post again. I didn't post opinions. I posted simple facts. 360 doesn't offer anything besides graphics, cause there isn't even 1 innovative game. On the PS3 we already get 1 innovative game at lanuch and this is the multiplayer of RFOM. 360 doesn't offer even 1 great game which people can't get on PC. Add to it that 360 is already 1 year on the market, that's simply ridiculous.
I said 360 sucks bigtime, cause of the things MS is doing. Ridiculously overpriced products( twice the price but half the size for a HDD is just 1 example) and this crappy HD-DVD addon( No HDMI=limited usage time).
This is the naked truth that you can't deny. I'm not a fanboy and I don't post opinions, I post the truth. It's not my fault it's so ugly, I always just try to enforce the truth. I really wonder there are still some MS fanboys around. They must be very young or just love to get screwed, ripped off and getting betrayed. Well I don't like it and I think the avarage user with brain also doesn't like it.

Real Freakio aka TopGamer - Boy you are just ridiculous, I always have a good laugh reading your posts. You got caught numerous times lying(multi accounts, HDDVD movies,etc.) and you just can't stop posting some noobish comedy. Ok Real Freakio let me show you the truth once again.

1. The avarage Sony fan doesn't buy 1.8 games per console. The avarge user does it, but it's not the fan. Sony sold 100 millions and only a small percantage were Sony fans. Playstation is unlike Xbox a mass market brand and many people bought it without even beeing a gamer. Reason: Eye Toy.

2. The Sony fan buys more than 1.8 games and he will surely go for the chrome finished top of the line 60GB PS3. So even if he buys 5 games, he will still have enough room. Let's also not forget that the Sony fan can unlike the MS fanboy upgrade his HDD the cheapest possible way: Twice the size but half the price of an 360 HDD. MS just added HD movie download, so you boys will soon meet limitations of your HDD. Happy spending $99 for HDD? Don't think so.

3. Well we will see the reviews soon. All I can say is that 4vs4 is freaking sad. You will need some really tiny maps to have some fun, that's not next gen. More players of course doesn't automaticaly means more fun. If the gameplay sucks, more players surely won't help. Best example is is the compariosn between Joint ops vs BF2. 128vs64. BF2 has less players, but it makes much more fun. 64 is just enough for having the feeling of a battlefield, there is just enough action and you don't think with more it would be better.

4. Saying 360 isn't capable of 40 players with good graphics, physics, etc. isn't fanboyish, it's just the simple truth. You can twist it as much you want, fact remains 360 can drop afetr 1 year on market only 24 players. That's just sad.

5. Sorry but there were numerous TPS with many players. Socom with 32 players is just 1 example. The graphics weren't below the usual PS2 standard, so you can't say this game got dumped down just to achieve such number.

6. MMO's do it? Real Freakio are you serious about it? Are you serious about comparing a RPG to FPS? Boy, you got very noobish with such a comparison, that's just too funny. MMO RPG's doesn't need such ressources like FPS games, cause the battles aren'r realtime, but round based. Here is a little comparison for you: 360 can drop 1000 players but the PC can drop UNLIMITED number of players when it comes to RPG's.

7. Sorry Real Freakio but it's 1st gean vs 2nd gen and not Sony's Muscle vs MS's Muscle. Only noob thinks otherwise. New hardware needs time until the devs can use it properly, it's a simple fact.
Also that FNR3 not beeing a launch title is the best example for the devs not having an extra developing time for the PS3. The game ain't ready, so it's the common sense that the devs weren't as advanced as with the 360 version. The game just ain't finished, so there was no extra time for polishing a finished game.

8. Halo1 was gamplaywise one of the best Xbox games, but graphicaly most later games were better. Of course not all, but the good ones.

10. The hardware remain the same, but 360 is easier to develope for, so the devs should figure out quicker how to use the 360 hardware properly. I have a bad feeling GOW is already the best 360 can drop. Don'rt worry, this is just a feeling of an experienced gamer, I may very well be wrong.

10. Truth was enforced.

Deceased - This are some old ass pics and you surely missed when Sony said PS3 is not just a console, it's a multimedia sytem,it's a computer ;-)

Sphinx - You ain't a step ahead. You are forgetting all the PC gamers. What are you playing? Just Cause? Please, that's surely not next gen.

dalectrics - There are already some awful looking 360 games. Here is a good example:

360:
http://media.xbox360.ign.co...
PS2:
http://media.ps2.ign.com/me...

FirstknighT - You obviously never played with many people online. That tournaments are usualy with less players has not only to do with more tactic. It's also just easier and better for the clans. It's almost impossible for a clan having 40 or more players training regularly and having such a big professional team.
Even if it would be like you say, don't you think it's better for you to have a choice for a war, a frag fest or a small tactical match? It's surely is and with many players you have the choice. You can choose what ever server you want, with as many people you want. Less players doesn't automatically means more tactic, but it surely means less action and less fun. More playres also doesn't have anything to do with beeing a noob, it takes much skills to be in the top 10 of 64 players.

[candystop]

That had to be the longest and most pointless comment i've seen in awhile! 360 is booming and only getting better day by day buddy! It's doesn't matter how you try and word it because right now the PS3 is not looking so hot and as a matter a fact probably never will! Some people like you just don't get it and will never see beyond Sony which is very sad! I could go on and on and give examples but why?... because it's not worth it and you Sony fans like I said will never get it or except the real truth! 360 is by far the greatest console I have ever owned and it's annoying azz he11 to hear a Sony fanboy that's never even tried it or gave it a fair chance say the stupidest things about it! You will eat your words soon enough once all 3 consoles are on the market and the exclusive games on 360 kill just about anything on PS3! Your in denial so get over it and stop posting these long rants with your silly opinionated views!

[candystop]

He's out of bubbles and i wonder why! lol

[gnothe1]

bothers me how STUPID people are in here.I wont call no names or point no one out but come on!! all they say is xbox360 sucks, if that were true then why would your beloved sony go out of its way to make this system!!if MS would have never came into the picture the Ps3 would have been nothing like it is today! all this talk about the xbox only giving polished up graphics, what do you think the ps3 offers. think about it the same people are making these games.EA ,ubisoft,etc. so these kind of claims are just STUPID!!the ps3 aint offering nothing differnt than the xbox. they both got great graphics, they both play online, they both have wireless controllers.they both will be great systems,but to say the xbox DOESNET OFFER anything next gen has to be one of the most rediculous comments someone could make!!if the xbox dont offer anything new well the Ps3 doesnt either!!

I been a Playstation fan all my life.when I got my first Ps I bought battle arena toshinden,then I bought konami's in the zone basketball game an fell in love from there, so you know the ps2 was a no brainer, but then comes Ms with the xbox1, I saw the system played they system an liked it. I played both systems for differnt reasons.I played madden on the ps2 for the controller an I like tekken, that was my ps2 uses,I played unreal championship, an halo on xbox, so im no fan boy. but it angers to see the people in here that, instead of finding the strong points of a system, all they try to find or make is bad points (4 vs 4)get the FU@% out of here, if the game was made for that it would have it. its not a matter of system capabilities but producer preferance, got it!! good I hope so, im enforcing the truth also!!

[kmis87]

Gamespot was just playing through the first part of Resistance and it looks like the enemies actually DO have some nice ai. They took cover, flanked the players, and one enemy actually hid so that the player passed him and then the chimera got the jump on him from behind. Anyways, the game also looks like it's pretty hard. The players died like 4 times in the first part of the first level.

[AudioRage]

aw man, i wrote a really good reply and it didnt post!

[TheXgamerLive]

Ya see, it's too crowded so as soon as game play starts about 15 will die in the first minute of the game, thus only 25 people will be on screen after 60 seconds.

40 just isn't fun, unless each map is the equivalent of 8 square miles and I'd say it's guaranteed not.

[TheXgamerLive]

I think people will see this as they try to play 40 people and it's too fragmented gameplay, 20 or less will clear that up.

[kmis87]

And you know this how?

Let's everybody stop complaining about 40 people online, and just wait until it comes out to see how it is. Some people will obviously prefer 40 people, while others will prefer to set their games at 8. It's all personal preference, so let's allow gamers who play it to decide.

[Geohound]

How is it that all of you have opinions on Gears of War and Resistence and yet you have never played them? IS IT MAGIC!?!?!

[Retard]

Nice one... Simple... Yet, you've made the most since of all of us here.

[FeralPhoenix]

First off the only reason I point out you two is because it seems that you at least try to make a logical point.....IMO I just disagree with "Most" of what you say, its pointless to talk to comment on some of the other fanboys comments, since I doubt I would get an intelligent reply.

DJ post #10:
"I had doubts when Sony said that the PS3 is a lot easier to program for than the PS2, but luckily I was wrong."
-really? Seriously I'm really curious if this is true?, maybe this is some new info. I haven't read yet, because most of the info. I have read seems to suggest that the PS3 is more difficult....link please.

DJ post #26:
"Instead of a slight power difference though, we're talking about one console being twice as powerful as the other, and that's a really big deal."
-Well I won't even bother asking you to provide a link for this accusation, since its not true according to both company's public spec sheets, devs assesstments, major analysts, and most importantly we all have eyes -which BTW even numerous Sonyfanboys have been admitting that...?...well uhm, lets just say a certain potential "game of the year" favorite looks better than anything on the PS3, to be fair it is early for the PS3, but with "TWICE" the power and it being "EASIER to develop for than the PS2" then there's really "NO EXCUSE" why RFOM and every other PS3 game doesn't outshine every 360 title, is there? By your logic we should see a noticeable difference between 360 and PS3 games just like we can see the "GRAPHICAL" difference between 360 and Wii games.

EnforcerOfTheTruth #47 post:
"I posted simple facts. 360 doesn't offer anything besides graphics, cause there isn't even 1 innovative game. On the PS3 we already get 1 innovative game at lanuch and this is the multiplayer of RFOM. 360 doesn't offer even 1 great game which people can't get on PC."
-Its funny that you mention the 360 doesn't offer anything great thats not already on PC, you have stated this before and again, its very silly because anyone could make a baseless opinionated comment like that about all the consoles; example: "yeah bro, uhm I think RFOM and Motorstorm sucks, the only good games the PS3 has are games like R6: Vegas and COD3 which are going to be on PC"....lol that sounds like a 5 yr old kids type of reply for everything "yeah but MY candy tastes better *cause its from the NEW WalMart"....and you consider 40 players innovative, why? Is it considered innovation because you add more players to "multiplayer"?-doesn t the word itself suggest their could be various amounts of players depending on variables the dev's think will suit their game best....so COD3 would be "innovative" as long as they put in a 45 players....nah, XBL offered nothing innovative to games, with all the game demos, features, downloads, arcade games, etc. and the 360 version of R6: Vegas coming out this month with the face mapping feature isn't "innovative" at all, huh?

I wish you had more bubbles, I really like to hear more of your Sonyfanboy logic....maybe another time so for now I'll just leave it there, I could elaborate more on your posts but its clear EnforcerOfThe..Untruth is totaly biased and would believe the Earth is flat if Sony says so.

[TheMART]

You break it down just fine man.

DJ is always posting nonsense, tries to make lies facts.

Easier to program on than what? Please man. The developing costs are 5 times as high on the PS3 as they are on the 360. That implies that the PS3 is much, much harder to program on than anything else. And that's the proof up till now. He writes like he almost program the damn thing, man the only thing you're programming DJ is your microwave to heat your food at night!

And twice more powerfull? Nice. Like the RSX specs that aren't known? They're just in it like Nintendo. Nintendo knows their Wii is a supercharged Gamecube. Sony knows their RSX is a standard Nvidia 6800 PC card. They first had thought the Cell could do CPU & GPU tasks to spare costs. Then they realized "Oh damn it can't do it... we're doomed" So they ran to Nvidia and put the bag of money on the table and simply asked: "What can we get for this?" Nvidia gave them something that was laying on the shelves. Now MS build a special designed GPU for the 360 together with ATI. Sony is always talking on the TFLOP paper specs and emotion engines and that brought the worst graphics of last gen. Expect the lesser GPU this time again with all the great story's but not putting out the specs of the GPU. Just like Nintendo was covering the Wii specs...

Oh and the EnforceroftheUNtruth is giving even more funny statements. "cause there isn't even 1 innovative game"

Allright, ROFM is COD3 with less graphics and aliens added. What's the innovative part there? 40 players online? It's not about quantity, but quality my man and you'll experience it soon.

Innovative? More on 360 then on PS3! You get Ridge Racer 7, Final Fantasy 238498093, MGS 4, Virtua Fighter 5, GT4 HD smugged up PS2 game

360 gets:

Gears of War
Viva Piniata
Huxley
Bioshock
Too Human
Mass Effect

Already those alone have more innovativity then the PS3 has in all it's game and now beat it!

[Antan]

"Sony knows their RSX is a standard Nvidia 6800 PC card"

sadly not. Nvidia have already said the RSX is at least twice the power of a 6800 "ultra"...not standard 6800. Anyone with a hole in their ass has seen the countless Nvidia comments on this. Now beat it.

[FirstknighT]

Its nice to have a nice debate over which is better which is fine...but when you hear nonsense like twice as powerful..innovative games on the ps3...than you clearly see that these guys just wont accept failure in there debate and in there ps3.
Nice Comment Feral!

[Marriot VP]

GEARS OF WAR AND CALL OF DUTY THIS WEEK

I will enjoy it, after all I am a gamer