Insomniac: Fans believe Resistance 2 'was a failure'

Darkeyes - 28 days 12 hours ago

Yup, pretty much spot on... I liked the 1st game more compared to 2... Not that 2 was bad or something, but 1st one had a much better story compared to 2. I don't have much complain about the online aspect and co-op as it was good, but the main problem was the single player campaign.. You are in a war where you are fighting against aliens, but it didn't feel as if you were making any difference in saving the world.. Ya you destroy a couple of huge ships, but nothing of the sort OMG did I just do that or something like Oh maybe that will save humanity.... I just couldn't shrug off the felling that the game came to stop abruptly.

Hopefully R3 will fill the void. I don't want something that really defies logic, but at least give me something where if I sit at the end of the game when the credits roll, I should get the feeling that yes that felt fulfilling. And please Insomniac just update the engine for R3... KZ2 and UC2 have really spoilt me now...

Agree(18) | Disagree(3) | Report

gaffyh - 28 days 12 hours ago

I want to congratulate Insomniac for recognizing that there was a problem with R2. Resistance 1 was the first AAA game for the PlayStation 3. I don't care what anyone says, I spent literally hundreds of hours playing Resistance 1, and forced myself to play Resistance 2 online (and gave up at 6000 kills) :(.

PLEASE change the online back to R1 style.

Agree(24) | Disagree(0) | Report

jammy_70 - 28 days 12 hours ago

but the things they need to improve on it
- the story, get the narrator back!
- graphics, K2 engine wud be great
- weapon wheel
- a darker campaign, R2 was to bright at time was a earry or jumpy as the 1st game
- then of course even BIGGER enimies =DDD

Agree(11) | Disagree(2) | Report

mrv321 - 28 days 12 hours ago

Resistance 1 had loads of complaints... they fixed them all... but by doing so they had to kill what made Resistance so great.

Check the reviews, see how many they fixed and see the problems in R2 you'd be surprised.

Agree(5) | Disagree(3) | Report

snaz27 - 28 days 12 hours ago

and i thought the second was a good improvement on it, i liked the scale of everything, and i mean with shooters there is a limit to what you can do realistically, at the end of the day your just shooting stuff lol... look at what happened to killzone 2 when they tried to be a little different! tho i didnt mind the controls either way, you get used to it if you give it a chance... the only real gripe i had was the weapon wheel removal which i think is fairly universal, im betting they bring that back for the 3rd installment, or atleast i hope they do... and as for it being like halo well there both sci fi killing aliens lol, what you expect?... i thought the graphics were a great improvement, ok maybe the story was slightly less wow factorish, but ive never really thought shooters had brilliant stories anyway, and ive never really played them for the story, i just like to have fun, watch stuff explode and kill stuff, kinda light releive from heavier story driven games... i think they did a great job with it.

Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report

GWAVE - 28 days 12 hours ago

Insomniac is an awesome developer because they're willing to admit this instead of saying things like "DEFINITIVE"! 24 hours a day.

Agree(18) | Disagree(4) | Report

r3xmund1 - 28 days 12 hours ago

RFOM was an amazing title, surprising, detailed and very very entertaining...

I was waiting for nearly 2 years for a worthy follow up, and I am still waiting...

Damn it.

Agree(4) | Disagree(2) | Report

joe382 - 28 days 12 hours ago

I think going up against Gears of War 2 caused them to feel that they needed to make it 'bigger and badder' which just wasn't what the original was all about.

Agree(13) | Disagree(2) | Report

Hellsvacancy - 28 days 12 hours ago

I couldnt b bothered 2 finish Resistance 2, there wasnt a particular reason i think i started playin Bioshock instead (which again i didnt bother finishin) i sold them both on Amazon a couple of months after, they just sat there on the shelf

2 games i completely 4got about

Agree(2) | Disagree(9) | Report

Darkstorn - 28 days 12 hours ago

It surely wasn't a 'failure,' but it wasn't what I was expecting. The first one was a considerably better game. Hopefully Resistance 3 will be more along the lines of Resistance 1.

Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report

Winter47th - 28 days 11 hours ago

Won't say it was exactly a "failure", but the first one was superior 'cause Insomniac didn't bother to give a crap about other FPSs.

Well, maybe except for Chicago, that chapter was kick ass.

Agree(8) | Disagree(0) | Report

crck - 28 days 11 hours ago

R2 was a big letdown for me. My biggest complaint was the removal of co-op campaign. Me and my cousin had a blast playing through the first one. When word came that they removed it we were both extremely disappointed. Removing the weapon wheel, vehicles and narration was just pouring salt on the wound. Not only did they remove the good stuff but they added stupid instant death moments. Like the invisible monsters and falling in the water. Instant deaths are never fun and just break up the flow of a game.

Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report

JustTheFactsMam - 28 days 11 hours ago

It was the loss of the weapon wheel. Resistance replay value was so much higher and fun because of it. I had no desire to replay the campaign in R2.

Agree(4) | Disagree(0) | Report

mastiffchild - 28 days 11 hours ago

Talure's too strong a word and I think they fel into a few traps that devs often do with the middle game of a trilogy-mainly that the story only served to set up the final game and they over adjusted t the moans of the first lacking colour. While some of the scenes in R2 were impressive losing the oppressive feel of the original left a little of the atmosphere behind with it.

The posh bird narrating was a big loss as was the weapon wheel-a game like this need not suffer too much from being a reality slave ,no? The co-op, though, is more enjoyable, to me, than L4D and is something that could be really worked on for next time. I thought technically they put too much into the mp and it was impressive in number and in lack of lag(never really seen that much in it tbh)but lost the tension of FoM's smaller battles.

I think even just the brighter and more wide open space of the US and second game also helped erode that Resistance atmosphere-esp since 50's USA is synonymous with bright colours and good, safe financial times before real nuclear paranoia set in. So in a way it just didn't fit with what we'd expected after FoM.

That said it's far more polished and hit detection, enemy AI and gfx were all way better than FoM could offer back ay PS3 launch.

I trust Insomniac to pull this all together for the thrid game, however, and admitting a few errors is always refreshing in this industry. R2 is a far thing from beinmg a real failure, however.

Agree(2) | Disagree(2) | Report

Lifendz - 28 days 11 hours ago

the weapons were great, the interface was very cool, and I felt the pacing was just fine. Also, the levels felt like real places. Resistance 2 the levels didn't feel like anywhere in particular and the game just lost its charm. Multiplayer was awesome and I loved the Coop but man did they miss the mark on the single player. Fire Bryan Intihar (the guy they hired from 1up for input on the games) and get someone in there that can take Resistance back to the first one while innovating some things but not completely changing everything.

Agree(8) | Disagree(0) | Report

sikbeta - 28 days 11 hours ago

"Their biggest error was making the gameplay too much like Halo"

Is not only that, is just R:FOM was Epic in every way, for me is was more like survival horror + action FPS game

I miss everything from the first they quit in the second, R:FOM has it's own style and they change it instead on improve it

Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report

infamousXX87XX - 28 days 11 hours ago

Im not a huge fan of the Resistance series but I thought R1 was good. But when I bought R2, I thought it was a failure in my eyes. I thought everything felt a bit generic, rushed, and cheap...i dunno thats just my opinion. This is coming from a day 1 ps3 owner.

Agree(4) | Disagree(1) | Report

Marceles - 28 days 11 hours ago

Yeah I agree with what Winter said, I think they listened too much to what other reviewers were nitpicking about with RFOM and it changed what made RFOM great in the first place. "Buh buh multiplayer!", I don't care about multiplayer all that much. It's a good place to hang out while you're taking a break from the great single player but that's it. I think they were out to prove that they can have multiplayer just as good as Halo and COD, which they did, but it just ended up just changing the identity of the franchise. RFOM's multiplayer wasn't bad either, but they just "Matrix Reloaded" on R2's multiplayer and overkilled it IMO when it didn't really need that much.

Agree(3) | Disagree(0) | Report

AclayPS3 - 28 days 11 hours ago

I have both Resistance games, but I still enjoyed the first Resistance more... In Resistance 2 I think Insomniac was trying to make it too realistic b/c the movements felt a little bit more "weightier", but Resistance 1 didn't feel like that....after playing R1, the more realistic movements kind of felt out of place to me in R2. I enjoyed the vehicle portions in Resistance 1, and that being absent in R2 was a little disappointing.

In the next Resistance I want Insomniac to bring back vehicles in the Single Player, and maybe even implement them in Multiplayer, I want them to get rid of the more Realistic feel that R2 had and bring back the Original Resistance feel, and most of all a BETTER story than R2's.

I wouldn't say that R2 was a "failure", but considering how much R1 sold and it's success, I can't help but think that Insomniac (and probably Sony) were a little disappointed by R2's sales to date.

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

tristanmike - 28 days 11 hours ago

My biggest gripe with the game was that it was just all too intense all the time. Battle after battle, after battle. It didn't seem like there were any "slow" periods, sort of time to reflect on what's been going on, and push the story simply through the story telling.

I also enjoyed the health system from the first rather than the, sort of, Call of Duty style of regeneration (although I understand that many, many games use this).

And of course, I miss the weapon wheel...who doesn't like more weapons ? :D

I considered it a failure. Not that the overall experience wasn't fun, but we're talking about topping the first one. Nice try though, looking forward to Resistance 3.

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

Xgamerzus - 28 days 11 hours ago

Resistance 2 is a love hate ordeal for us,.
! it has so much potential !!!!
THe graphics on certain levels (Chicago and the one after and the swamp one LOOKED AMAZING so Clean SO CGI!!!the Grim look so CGI they moved amazing!and better than anything out there!!.Gorgeous!
BUt the consistancy was NOT there ,the rest of the game had a little bit of Ratched and clank in it!! IT did!! awful lame textures and builds.
Some particle effects were awful and some level work and detail looked horrible plane and drab.
Also Why DID they give you just 2 weapons ???Why did they remove Co-op???No Vehicles???
It was a step backwards and forwards in many ways.
Im Pissed and the next one (R3) better be consistent, and own KZ2 and Halo and Gears!!!!
The have the talent the tech but do they have the right sensibility and resources????
Resistance 3 can be the Best of the best but at what cost???
Where are the resources???$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Bring IT!!!!
I can't wait!

Agree(1) | Disagree(3) | Report

RememberThe357 - 28 days 11 hours ago

I loved the epicness of the combat but I missed the close combat of the first. Instead of the combat making my plus rise the set pieces did. If they can keep the epic set pieces and bring back the intense dark combat if the first, they will please everyone.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

FunAndGun - 28 days 11 hours ago

As a stand alone game R2 was good. As a sequel to FoM, it really didn't do the first game justice.

I am extremely happy to hear that Insomniac games have noted this however and I hope R3 comes out swingin.

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

gaffyh - 28 days 11 hours ago

@socomnick - Well considering both R1 and R2 were better than Halo 3, what does that say about Halo 3?

Let's be honest, you've never played either game, and you probably don't even own a PS3. If you did, you'd know that both games are fantastic, just that R2 sucked more because Insomniac tried to make it like Halo, and therefore made it worse.

Agree(7) | Disagree(3) | Report

randomwiz - 28 days 10 hours ago

R1 had better online play and gameplay overall. It was more fun playing R1 than R2. I agree with you where you say the coop is a plus, but it got too repetitive by the time you got to level 20.

With R3, i want them going back true to their roots with R1, but with small improvements in it.

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

matchgrade - 28 days 10 hours ago

Hell no. The accessibility and refinement of R2 was what made me go back and trudge through R1.

Agree(2) | Disagree(1) | Report

Xbox Avatars Shoe - 28 days 10 hours ago

My issues:

- Fall of Man had this magic to and a unique feel but R2 felt too much like a CoD4 rip-off by copying other games instead of keeping it's own formula.

- I didn't think the bosses were that good. The Goliath, Leviathan, Swarm and Dadalus were pretty bad IMO.

- No weapon wheel was bad for two reasons: in FoM it was sweet to pick whatever tool of obliteration you wanted at any time and it added a bit of tactical gameplay in that you opened up the wheel, carefully chose what weapon was good for that exact situation and then blasted the enemy. The second reason, is R2 would have certain weapons like the LAARK sitting in some random place so when you saw it, you knew there was a big enemy coming which made the game predictable. Same if there was a sniper or a Marksman. I also just didn't like being restricted two only two guns instead of an arsenal.

- I liked the FoM health system because it forced you to play tactically and got so suspenseful when you were down to 25%. My hands would start sweating when I was on a big part with only 25% health and then when I found a health vile I would be like "YES!!!"

- The pacing is R2 just didn't seem right and I likes FoM's no-stop action way better. Insomniac said they purposely made R2's pacing up-and-down instead of non-stop action like FoM, which I think was a huge mistake by them.

- The multiplayer was absolute poop! Bad level design, grenade fest and I hated how your health bar regenerated really slowly instead of like other games where the regen pauses for a second and then goes back to full really fast. I hated how you didn't earn XP and couldn't unlock trophies in custom games like in FoM (minus the trophies). One-hit Carbines in the Bus Yard, one-hit shotguns in the Mall and Subway, and one-hit snipers in the hanger are my most fun multiplayer games of all time!

- Co-Op was awesome but no split-screen campaign co-op sucked! You need three people for R2's co-op but when I had a friend over it was just the two of us so it was like impossible! My brother-in-law who is a "casual" gamer, absolutely loves R: FoM and it's his favorite game of all time. He visits once a month and we play through most, if not all, of R: FoM every time but we can't do that in R2's separate co-op >:(

- Overall I just didn't think R2 was that great which was a huge disappointment. The single player was good but not great; it was mostly fun but there were a lot of bad levels. The multiplayer sucked unlike FoM but the co-op was fun and addicting. I was sooooo hyped and excited for it but was sooooo let down. I just rented R2 last week to see how I liked it now that my hype died down and honestly I liked it even less. I played the first three locations and thought they were only OK, played two games of co-op which were fun and played one game of competitive and HATED it so I returned the game the next day. R2 was a 7.5 for me since even though it had a lot of features, only one of them was great.

R: FoM is my favorite next-gen game so far but R2 just wasn't the same game. As you can tell, R2 made me very sad, sad enough to write a huge rant. I'm glad though that Insomniac realizes their mistakes with R2 so hopefully they make R3 like R: FoM. I was worried that they would make R3 like R2 but maybe now they'll go back to the old Resistance formula that made Resistance, Resistance.

Agree(4) | Disagree(2) | Report

ToeKneeHaze - 28 days 9 hours ago

I kinda agree they made it too much like other games, in its initial outing it was very distinct looking and feeling.

The narrative tied the story and set you up for suspense and grim moments...when it was all battle and no seques in the sequel that chain of story telling was lost...

Also they made the colour scheme too bright and too much colour in the wrong places, they still coulda made it colourful and grim but it was like playing RATCHET and CLANK rendering engine for Resistance.

I loved the dark grim exterior and interior shots in the first game...it gave a sense of despair...

The online co-op was kinda over done, too much standing around shooting endless at big bosses...there was no chase no plight no adventure....just endless shooting in one direction at a big target...

They should bring back the story mode co-op

The multiplayer was pretty well done I thought, I kinda wish when u zoom up on a weapon ur aim slows down like in other shooters like halo or call of duty , it just helps narrow down the field of view.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

orakga - 28 days 9 hours ago

How come no one here mentions the BROKEN MATCHMAKER!!!

Seriously, I'm curious to know... how many people here have gotten into 30vs30 RANKED games on a consistent basis? Their ranked server wasn't working and noone mentions that???

Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report

Xbox Avatars Shoe - 28 days 9 hours ago

I played R2's co-op for awhile before I played competitive and when I played against other people, it always put me up against a bunch of high-ranked players who had all the berserks and knew the maps. I would constantly get shot in the back or blown up with a LAARK. Fall of Man's custom games were way better than R2's matchmaking because of how you could make games like Snipers Only and modify health and it's regenerative abilities but STILL EARN XP.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

zlatko - 28 days 9 hours ago

I really liked Resistance 2. Resistance 3 is my most looked forward to FPS next year. :)

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

TheDeadMetalhead - 28 days 9 hours ago

I loved Resistance 2... ;_;

Agree(2) | Disagree(2) | Report

callahan09 - 28 days 9 hours ago

I can see that the fans would feel this way because Resistance 2 is so different from Resistance 1. But for me, Resistance 1 was a good game that I played through a single time and never got addicted to the multiplayer (when I got my PS3, Warhawk had just come out, and I got addicted to that and not Resistance). So for me, I was never one of the hardcore Resistance fans. I enjoyed the first game, and that was it.

So Resistance 2 came along, and in my opinion it really upped the ante in terms of graphics and presentation. Personally, I didn't like the narrator in the first game. I thought it was a disjointed way of presenting the game's story. You play a level, and then you walk across some imaginary threshold and the screen blurs, then you have sepia-toned stills with a narrator telling you what happened. I liked it better in Resistance 2 where the story is told in more nuanced ways.

Even though the health system was really unique in the first Resistance, I felt that it was extremely challenging, and not always in a good way, but often in a frustrating way. For instance, I would accidentally walk over the health vials in a level way earlier than I wanted to, then I continue to take damage in the skirmish and there's no health left after the fight's over. So then I wind up having to approach the next difficult part without full health from the start. I just prefer fully regenerating health, and so I personally like that aspect of R2.

Also, I think that R2's co-op is the best class-based co-op I've ever played. Ever. It's better than Left 4 Dead, better than Horde, better than Firefight. It's just insanely addictive and fun. I love that co-op mode.

It would have been nice to see true campaign co-op return, and it would have been nice to have access to all the weapons at once and not just 2 at a time, but overall, neither of those things are deal-breakers.

My top 3 games of 2008 were MGS4, LittleBigPlanet, and Resistance 2. Personally, I think R2 is a phenomenal game, it's better than the original in more ways than it's worse, and it gets a bad rap because a lot of fans didn't appreciate that it was so different. Which I can absolutely understand. I just don't happen to agree that it is a bad thing, because for me, both Resistance games are dissimilar enough that they're BOTH worth owning and playing at any given time. Unlike most sequels which render the original completely obsolete because the two games are essentially the same core experience with a few tweaks and improvements for the sequel. Like Gears of War 2. I liked the original Gears of War more than the original Resistance. But in 2008, I was in love with R2, and severely let down by Gears 2.

I played R2 first, because it came out a week or so earlier, and I was intrigued by the differences between it and the original, and I was enthralled by the co-op. Then Gears 2 came out and I felt like I was just playing Gears 1 all over again. It was very underwhelming for me. And Horde just didn't even compare to R2's co-op. No backstory, no mission objectives, no classes, no leveling up for better skills and equipment. Yeah. R2 takes the cake, in my opinion. I can't wait for R3.

Agree(2) | Disagree(2) | Report

ikkokucrisis - 28 days 8 hours ago

Until Uncharted 2 came out, Call of Duty games on the PS3 made every other FPS look and play like an average one.

Agree(3) | Disagree(3) | Report

Ravage27 - 28 days 7 hours ago

Erm...have you even tried KZ2? I find it better than COD4 in almost every way. And fyi, UC2 is godly no doubt, but it is not a FPS.

on topic,idk about you guys, but me and my brother really enjoyed playing 30v30 team deathmatches side-by-side, but it really sucks that we couldn't get xp from custom games. I know they did it to stop people from exploiting, but i think it could have been done better.

Campaign has its moments, but overall...it was a disappointment. I don't like the fact that you keep getting rushed from pt A to pt B and the gameplay never changes. They should never have removed the unique segmented health bar and weapon wheel.

Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report

ikkokucrisis - 28 days 6 hours ago

Yes I have KZ2, but didn't like the campaign single player experience that much (Note to Devs: adding a swear word to every other line does not make the dialogue any better)! I also like the larger multi-player experience that KZ2 has to offer, but IMO the depth in customization of perks/guns/and the friend partying up system that CoD offers is still better than KZ2.

As for Resistance 2, the best part of the game for me was the co-op multiplayer mode. Even though it got repetitive at times, it was the first step in a new type of gameplay mode for FPS games that was previously only found in MMORPGs.

Agree(1) | Disagree(2) | Report

claney - 28 days 5 hours ago

RFOM
+ Narration in SP, helped tell the story and made it interesting
+ Split Screen on SP Missions
+ Weapon Wheel
+ Fun Online
- IDK cant really think of any lol (would be some tho)

R2
+ Co-op Missions
+ Decent Online (just not the same as RFOM tho)
+ Scale
- No Split Screen on SP Mission
- No Weapon Wheel
- No Narrator making the story seem interesting

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

madpuppy - 28 days 5 hours ago

R2 was just so predictable, I also liked the weapon wheel way more than a 2 weapon loadout, I don't care that it was "more realistic" neither is aliens taking over with a virus that changes humans into aliens.
The problem with the 2 weapon load out is that you have to craft levels to have the weapon you need to kill the boss conveniently placed near the area the boss is located.

It felt so scripted and predictable.

other than that the game looked great.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

WinterWolf - 28 days 4 hours ago

Insomniac gives us split-screen co-op campaign back in R3!!

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

ps3freak18 - 28 days 4 hours ago

I don't know why everything says such negative things about R2. I think the inclusion of online co op was enough to make it at least on par with resistance 1. The lack of splitscreen in the campaign was a deffinete downer though.

Online was better for R2 while the campaign was better for R1. It about evened out in my opinion. Either way, i put way more hours into R2(20 hours campaign[2 and a half playthroughs]/25 hours online) than R1 (3 playthroughs[unkown time]/ barely any online play)

The bottom line is this: Insomniac makes great games everytime, and none of their games should be considered a failure. P.S keep the weapon ring out!

Agree(2) | Disagree(3) | Report

Sarcasm - 28 days 4 hours ago

"The removal of the weapon wheel was a big mistake as well, I loved the weapon wheel. "

That pretty much what made the first game feel original and not like other FPSs. I have no idea why they decided to change that.

Overall Resistance 2 is about an 8/10.

Agree(3) | Disagree(1) | Report

The BS Police - 28 days 4 hours ago

It didn't play like Halo at all!

Agree(3) | Disagree(2) | Report

Lykon - 27 days 20 hours ago

and im dissapionted , i prefered r1 . i think it is something to do with atmosphere and pacing. lots of invisible walls, linearity, feel a bit overwhelmed and dis-interested. i do like the graphics and the monsters and animations, it is still a good game. i'd give it at least a 7/10. i enjoyed the first one as much as half life 2 , but r2 has lost some of its soul.

Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report

RussDeBuss - 27 days 20 hours ago

I think the main problem was that they tried to please too many critics for R2.

R1 had it's own style, it took gameplay elements from other games, but the whole package worked and made it quite different, maybe quirky compared to other games at the time. the main thing people liked about it was the feel of the game, the dark eerie-ness, and i think the whole atmosphere. this was helped by the fact that it wasn't set it america so didn't the whole "f**k yeah, team america" feel and dilogue.

R1 was a launch game, and when it came out there was so much hate against PS3 in the media, and because it wasn't halo, cod, or later on gears it was claimed as a failure, because the ps3 didn't have similar games, and certain pats of the media called it a failure because it didn't try and emulate these games.

R2 had the vivid colurs of hlo, the f**k yeah of gears, and to be honest it took away all of what R1 was about, and turned it into another run of the mil FPS, it wasn't bad, but had nothing to make it stand out.

lets hope in R3 they go backto what made the 1st one so distinctive

fingers crossed.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

Dpa - 27 days 20 hours ago

For me it just felt like the shooting mechanics had been changed for the worse. Resistance 1 instantly felt like a solid fps with decent controls but 2 felt really cheap and weird.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

DaTruth - 27 days 18 hours ago

All they had to do was make R1 with better visuals and the same formula. How could they remove vehicles??? How could they change the atmosphere??? The incredible multiplayer made up for some faults, but it was like playing a whole different game, but it wasn't a bad game, it just wasn't R2.

All this talk about R1 is making me want to play it again, but alas, too many games!(played R2 campaign once through, played R1 campaign 12 times, and yet, R1 is the one I want to play again!)

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

mistajeff - 27 days 17 hours ago

Yeah, I definitely agree. The gameplay itself was just too linear. It didn't encourage you to think for yourself, and if you kept dying over and over it was because there was a weapon drop somewhere that you were missing. I was hoping for more massive, open battles like the first one, but the level design itself was more linear this time around. A good game, but it suffered from an identity crisis in the level and gameplay design areas. The fact that Insomniac is taking fan critique to heart is fantastic news.

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

f789790 - 27 days 16 hours ago

But how they play out is completely different. People don't like change.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report

WenisWagon - 28 days 11 hours ago

Even the developers know the game was a failure.

Agree(4) | Disagree(22) | Report

AverageBOT - 28 days 11 hours ago

Wenis Wagon you're the real failure here.

Agree(16) | Disagree(2) | Report

Tony Scarboni - 28 days 11 hours ago

The squad based objectives were a total failure. The mp still just devolved into a massive spamfest. Sony really needs to stop pushing for these massive servers and just make a good mp already. I liked the XP idea, but everything else reaked of 'generic'. The whole game just felt slapped together. Don't even get me started on the atrocious co-op mode.

Its just seems like the devs are out of touch w/ what players think is fun. Take the main gun you start of for example. It must be one of the most boring guns I've ever used in a FPS. Its boring to fire, and you have to put like 100rounds into a guy before you kill him!

Really though, people can stop defending this game. It sold considerably less than R1 and for good reason, its not a launch game any more. People actually expect real quality.

Agree(4) | Disagree(8) | Report

talltony - 28 days 6 hours ago

Atleast they know this so resistance 3 will be much much better.

Agree(6) | Disagree(1) | Report

ultimolu - 28 days 12 hours ago

...Too easy. It's just too easy to say anything. :)

If this is what your life revolves around-trolling a website just to get people to notice you, then I feel sorry for you.

Agree(6) | Disagree(2) | Report

Shane Kim - 28 days 12 hours ago

I know MGR, so why is MS keep trying?

Agree(6) | Disagree(1) | Report

EpicGamerSwordsman - 28 days 9 hours ago

Was an EPIC FAILURE. 60$ for an expansion pack? yet 360 fanboys still bought it due to it being one of the Only exclusives to come out this year for the xbox!

Agree(6) | Disagree(1) | Report

MetalGearRising - 28 days 12 hours ago

No one is disappointed with Forza 3 and since when did they lie. All your good at is making up lies so best thing for u to do is go back and play Resistance 2 FAILURE. Also the funny thing is this is a game which also was hyped to the MAX with ps3 fan girls crying out loud the graphics look insane with some of Sony sites also crying out loud Best Ever Graphics. Well i hope this teaches u all a lesson don't hype a game because its gonna be a FAILURE.

Agree(2) | Disagree(17) | Report

Nitrowolf2 - 28 days 11 hours ago

@MGR i don't recall anyone hyping this game out with graphics, in fact if i remembered correctly allot of people were hoping it would look allot better then it is now. Its was just hyped cause the first one was sweet, and this one had 88 player co-op online. idk but i liked this game the story was awesome(not as good as the first but i think its because they went with a more futuristic approach)

Agree(5) | Disagree(2) | Report

AverageBOT - 28 days 11 hours ago

lol someone got to MGR, and i was dissapointed by Forza3, when i seen the trailer for it at E3 i really thought it had a chance to be fvcking sweet...then the demo came out and i felt like i was playing Forza 2 all over again. and MGR you shouldnt be the one trying to call people out for making up lies, your the troll of lies on here.

Agree(6) | Disagree(2) | Report

PirateThom - 28 days 7 hours ago

Poor MetalGearRising... he got Forza 3 today and it's already evident it wasn't as advertised.

Agree(6) | Disagree(0) | Report

Bloodraid - 28 days 1 hour ago

Oh the irony...

Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report

NewZealander - 28 days 4 hours ago

oh no did you just do a bikini girl? you did not just say resistance 2 is better then halo anything...seriously now.

Agree(2) | Disagree(4) | Report

Bodyboarder_VGamer - 28 days 11 hours ago

No weapon wheel, too much like Halo, atmosphere from the the first game completely lost, confusing story, simplistic bosses, really bad art direction that it is too much like Halo at times and the list goes on... It doesn't feels like the game's in the 50's anymore.

I have beaten R2 like 3 times and I still don't understand the story... You just go from one place to the other without any kind of explanation unless you read the intels. The first Resistance did a better job with the narrative and it was a better game overall compared to its sequel. Why it was rated higher? Only god knows.

Agree(4) | Disagree(0) | Report

ginsunuva - 28 days 11 hours ago

It was a huge dissapointment for fans of the first resistance because it was a completely different game. It was suddenly all colorful and the environments and controls changed

Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report

The Iron Sheik - 28 days 11 hours ago

They hate the PS3 because their mom's won't buy them one.

Agree(7) | Disagree(1) | Report

AverageBOT - 28 days 11 hours ago

They are just upset because 2million bots bought an expansion pack for full retail price and have already beat it so they just b1tch and moan.

Agree(7) | Disagree(1) | Report

SaberEdge - 28 days 11 hours ago

True. And you guys hate the 360 because your moms won't buy you one. That is the most common cause of fanboys--they only have one console and feel the need to attack the other consoles to make themselves feel better about not owning them.

Owning a PS3 and a 360 goes a long way towards curing fanboyism. Try it.

Agree(2) | Disagree(5) | Report

AverageBOT - 28 days 11 hours ago

I own both, hell i have 2 360's one launch that RRoD about 2 months after the warranty ran out so i use it as a door stopper and another that sounds like the disc drive is about to quit on me so i have to have all my games installed to my HDD. I'd have to say if you were gonna choose a console in 06' i would of said yea get the xbox theirs so many more games, but now id tell people not to bother with it since most of its exclusives come to the ps3 eventually and the ps3 has a far less chance of breaking on you and then theirs are the AAA games that have came out in the past 2 years and the AAA games coming out next year and im sure we dont even know all of them yet, then theirs the variety of game types its not all shooters either.

Agree(2) | Disagree(2) | Report

maniacmayhem - 28 days 8 hours ago

I just love all the buzz words you people abuse over and over again..

"AAA"
"Exclusivessss"

Hahaha, so hilarious.

Agree(0) | Disagree(2) | Report

ReviewsArePolitics - 28 days 8 hours ago

"Hahaha, so hilarious. "

HAHAHAHA yeah, Xtards though it the most though. :D

Agree(4) | Disagree(1) | Report

hatchimatchi - 28 days 7 hours ago

lol

+bubbles

Agree(1) | Disagree(5) | Report

hatchimatchi - 28 days 6 hours ago

oh the disagrees.

foreverflames comments are always backhanded compliments for the 360.

it's hilarious.

some people take this site to seriously, lol.

Agree(0) | Disagree(4) | Report

Bloodraid - 28 days 1 hour ago

The weapon weal was not lame, and did not give you too much power. If anything; it added more strategy to the game. For example; in Resistance 2, whenever there would be a Titan, there would be a LAARK or two lying about. In Resistance 2 however, if you'd used any LAARK ammo you may have found throughout the level, you're going to have to take it down with some less powerful weapons.

The boss fights were all scripted. The only one that actually felt like a boss-fight was the Marauder; and even that still felt a bit disappointing.

Most of the new weapons weren't that good, or didn't appear often enough. The only new weapon I found to be good was the Marksman. Everything else didn't feel right.

The campaign was great, story wise. But the gameplay elements didn't quite fit together as they should, unfortunately.

All in all; Resistance 2 improved on almost everything in the previous game, but the newly added elements were just lacking in my opinion.

Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report