Resistance 2

[Cornsnake]

That's the beauty of the competitive mode. You don't bring it to an open level, you bring it to certain levels. It keeps the game fresh, IMO, unlike R1, where you were constantly rinse/repeating your strats on each map to suit the game mode. You run your ass off to the weapon spawn points, get in a fire fight along the way, load up on ammo, and proceed. In this, there is far more strategy to your play style, picking the shotgun in Orick can be devestating, but picking it in the Subway can be very very useful. It also enforces team work. You move in pairs, one with a shotgun, one with a Carbine / Marksman. Now you're a long range / short range team moving together.

If you just look at Solo performance, yes, the shotgun can be somewhat useless on some maps, but even then, is still useful on others.

I still feel Rfom's weapons and their alt. fire modes brought more diversity then R2 has now. The weapons spawns I don't mis, but I find having manually switch weapons as bothersome, and you'll still need to go over dead bodies for ammo.

It's true that R2 forces more teamwork, but I find respawn point make that difficult. You often respawn very close to the fight, in which cases you die quickly, or far away from you squad. Sticking together is made more difficult that way, and it's easy yo lose track of each other on the giant maps. And of course if you play with random strangers, all teamwork gets throw out the window. We're still trying to get a decent number of people to join our R2 clan, we still haven't filled up a squad of 5 once. There just isn't much interest in R2 from our older members. All of which own Rfom, and have played clanwars on it for a considerable amount of time, still hold it in very high regard.

 

[betan]

I have played for over 2 hours of competitive, and also in the beta.

I was talking based on your stats, which may very well be wrong indeed.

None of the guns are as fun to use as Rfom's Carbine.
They are all dumbed down, and provide nowhere near as much options.

Not true.

The new Carbine is missing it's range and accuracy, making a decent Carbine battle impossible.

Most of the best players I know in R2 uses Carbine. It's also possibly the most overpowered weapon thanks to 40z being plenty. Of course it's not the mandatory human weapon any more, so don't expect a lot of Carbine battles any time soon.

Ignoring the 40z issue, I currently like the current Carbine way more than the old one, though I almost never start with it because of the frag issue. It's definitely more powerful, has decent range especially with ironsight. Despite the complaints about ironsight, it's not gimped like in R1, it's fast and maybe more importantly you can move fast while using, also doesn't disorient.

Making headshot does very little extra damage, and you'll likely mis more often due to the lack of accuracy. Same for the Bullseye. Tags are almost useless because when you are close enough for them to hit, you might as well not use them.

Weren't you one of the carbine guys who hated tagging in R1? That should be good news for you.
I personally miss tagging a lot. But there is a trick in R2, basically you can run and tag because tag autoaim increases with speed (somewhat similar to R1 in that regard but still more difficult overall).
When you pull it off, it's by far the most fun run and gun game ever. You continuously run like Mirrors Edge, making your position known to the enemy and start circling around them, cat and mouse style. You get a lot of kills (and berserks) along with a lot of deaths if there are multiple enemies. Even so you can get pretty good k/d though not as good as a sneaky approach.

The Auger's shield is far to large and offers protection even from grenades and another Auger.

I think Auger shield should not protect against another Auger, but minor issue since shields aren't plenty unlike R1. Round and directional shields are welcome.

Both the Marksmen and Fareye have a ridiculous auto aim that can even track a moving target.

Yet for some reason people generally suck at using those.

The new and old are both noobguns, but at least the old one had a more interesting alt. fire.

new and old what? The remaining weapon I can think is Laark which had much better alt fire but was totally unfair in competitive mode.

The Bellock and Shotgun are only effective at short rage, so it makes a poor choice as a primary weapon because of the many open maps.

I cannot really comment on those. Never liked shotgun even when it was overpowered in R1.
However Bellock and its altfire are pretty good for bottleneck battles that are very common in R2.

The 2 weapon limit really hurts these 2. All of them are more accessible, but also a lot more boring to use.

Maybe. I almost never use shotgun, and rarely start with Bellock, so that makes sense I guess.

 

[Cornsnake]

I was talking based on your stats, which may very well be wrong indeed.

Not true.

Most of the best players I know in R2 uses Carbine. It's also possibly the most overpowered weapon thanks to 40z being plenty. Of course it's not the mandatory human weapon any more, so don't expect a lot of Carbine battles any time soon.

Ignoring the 40z issue, I currently like the current Carbine way more than the old one, though I almost never start with it because of the frag issue. It's definitely more powerful, has decent range especially with ironsight. Despite the complaints about ironsight, it's not gimped like in R1, it's fast and maybe more importantly you can move fast while using, also doesn't disorient.


Weren't you one of the carbine guys who hated tagging in R1? That should be good news for you.
I personally miss tagging a lot. But there is a trick in R2, basically you can run and tag because tag autoaim increases with speed (somewhat similar to R1 in that regard but still more difficult overall).
When you pull it off, it's by far the most fun run and gun game ever. You continuously run like Mirrors Edge, making your position known to the enemy and start circling around them, cat and mouse style. You get a lot of kills (and berserks) along with a lot of deaths if there are multiple enemies. Even so you can get pretty good k/d though not as good as a sneaky approach.

I think Auger shield should not protect against another Auger, but minor issue since shields aren't plenty unlike R1. Round and directional shields are welcome.

Yet for some reason people generally suck at using those.

new and old what? The remaining weapon I can think is Laark which had much better alt fire but was totally unfair in competitive mode.

I cannot really comment on those. Never liked shotgun even when it was overpowered in R1.
However Bellock and its altfire are pretty good for bottleneck battles that are very common in R2.

Maybe. I almost never use shotgun, and rarely start with Bellock, so that makes sense I guess.

R2 has a problem with stat tracking, giving you occasionally too much or to little of something. I have a medal for killing 10 Marauders, without killing a single one. And I've been playing R2 at a friend house, also keeping me from all the XP you get from beating the SP once.

It's true I didn't like tagging, but it was great for taking down laggers.

The Carbine is more powerful, but that is only because all weapons are. I'm surprised they still give you so 40mm grenades, it was also complaint in Rfom. I still like the Carbine to be incredibly accurate over long range. It was my favourite weapon in Rfom.

Place all 4 shields of the old Auger together, and it's about the size of the new one. But the old one you had to place more carefully, you could easily walk around them, forcing the player to stop placing them or he won't be able to return fire. Or just throw a grenade through the shields. All and all provided a lot more options for the player using it, and the one fighting against it.

That would indeed be the Laark. It hate it both games.

 

[Phil]

I've been running into 30 and 40 player games very often recently, with the occsional 60. Rarely do I hear people talking about how bad the game sucks and how much they hate it. Hell, I think in two games with 30 people each, I ran into more people who enjoyed it than I read about here and on GAF combined. I think that's proof enough.

That's because everyone who disliked the direction R2 took over RFOM either played the beta and didn't buy the full game, or bought the game, completed it, played competitive for a few hours and ditched it for the similar but better, more solid, CoD5. At least I have and I can't see myself playing R2 much, which is a real shame, given my hundreds of hours I spent on RFOM going from n00b to mastering the gameplay, the weapons and the levels. The level of satisfaction is just not around anymore. And yes, I've played more than enough of the beta and the full game to know this - it's not as if I'm sucking at R2. It's just not fun and as rewarding anymore.

In that sense, I have to agree with Cornsnake. In comparison to RFROM, most weapons are seriously dumbed down. The weapons might feel stronger too, but in the end, I think it's rather the player being weaker and being quicker dead, making the difference between weapons less important and thus, the overall learning curve smaller.

It is certainly more accessible, but with that, a whole lot less rewarding (and fun to those that take time to master it).

 

[AntShaw]

With each of the Phil's and Cornsnakes, there are the AntShaws. I owned R1. Didn't care for it much, didn't like the multiplayer aspect and got bored with the SP. I did get into the R2 beta, didn't like the competitive, and didn't play much of the co-op.

Since, I have also bought R2, and almost beat the SP, and play co-op incessantly. I like the controls of this one better, I like the reduced health, I don't need the wheel of weapons. Most situations only call for 1-2 weapons anyhow.

It is what it is. To me, a fun game.

 

[JPT]

It is certainly more accessible, but with that, a whole lot less rewarding (and fun to those that take time to master it).

Then it comes down to, who does Sony/Insomniac make most off, ie who should they please

For instance competitive mode, there must be a line when its not worth running the servers any ie cost vs inital profit on the game and dlc. Online certainly adds to the number of sold copies, but if you run the servers indefinitely then it surly turn into a loss?

 

[betan]

The Carbine is more powerful, but that is only because all weapons are. I'm surprised they still give you so 40mm grenades, it was also complaint in Rfom.

In case of R2, it feels like if you have a lot of carbines in your team, the enemy will get more 40z with their kills. For example, since human beginners start with carbine by default, you are bound to be 40ed a lot in a beginner heavy team, when the other side knows what they are doing that is.

I still like the Carbine to be incredibly accurate over long range. It was my favourite weapon in Rfom.

I couldn't tell.
Seriously though, Carbine was fun and all but it wasn't the all purpose weapon someone else was making it to be here. It had bullet lag (unlike the new one), so stuff like carbine sniping only worked on stationary enemy via headshots and that is still at a much smaller distance than Marksman or obviously Far Eye kills at.
Again, while it's understandable some people misses R1 Carbine, it can and should never have the same relative importance in a "start with whatever weapon you like" system where situational rock-paper-scissor balance is much more important.

That said, I wonder whether it would be OK for you guys if Carbine had the same accuracy and lag as in R1, or maybe same accuracy but reduced bullet damage with distance instead of lag?
Whatever the case, it has to be weaker than bullseye at close range and marksman at medium.

Place all 4 shields of the old Auger together, and it's about the size of the new one. But the old one you had to place more carefully, you could easily walk around them, forcing the player to stop placing them or he won't be able to return fire. Or just throw a grenade through the shields. All and all provided a lot more options for the player using it, and the one fighting against it.

I liked the old shield, even if I don't use Auger to fire, I often used its shield to setup defense, especially a life saver against Laark. The new shield like Wraith shield however is more teamwork friendly in addition to making defense much easier since you can fire trough with other weapons from your side.
To be honest, I haven't had much problems on the other side of the shield either. There doesn't seem to be many Auger masters yet so it hasn't been as issue. If the shield is far away I simply ignore it, if it's close enough I run through.

Anyway, I really like the new TDM with all the problems that haven't been voiced here. In R1 the most satisfying moments were not the individual kills but turning the tides with simple team based strategies like taking the wall, top floor, 40mm house etc.
While map specific strategies won't be as prominent, I already had great "down but not out" moments thanks to stuff like teamplay berserks (specifically ring of life and prototype ammo). Even seemingly unimportant things like switching from Marksman to Bullseye (or vice versa) can be a strategic decision for the better, especially if you are the only one in your team who's killing people.

Unfortunately I'm not very optimistic about the future of R2 competitive. Looking at here for example, there are only two guys who like it and seemingly for different reasons, which is significantly less than number of people who liked R1 competitive (5?).
What's worse is that current R2 players, even all star clans, don't seem to play the game cooperatively besides occasional voice chat regarding enemy positions. It's still everyone for him/herself mentality.
Thus I worry this gem will not get the appreciation it deserves.

Phil or anyone else who has the game but haven't played TDM yet, can you please check your online ranking with 0 experience.
Last week I checked with my non-gaming (purchase only) account and it was around 247k which is pretty decent I guess.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

Ostepop - based on my experience with other players online? I'm sorry, but the SMALL number of folks on message boards and clan wars do not represent the minority. Sure, the R1 vets may leave, but you better believe the new players who are introduced to this game will start popping up on Clanwars, etc. It's not like there is a finite number of people who purchased the game in which we can judge it's longevity, etc.

I've been running into 30 and 40 player games very often recently, with the occsional 60. Rarely do I hear people talking about how bad the game sucks and how much they hate it. Hell, I think in two games with 30 people each, I ran into more people who enjoyed it than I read about here and on GAF combined. I think that's proof enough.

Lol.

You cannot possibly say that the vast majority is enjoying R2 more than R1, based on that!

First of all, player who dont like the game have probably allready moved on, player who hate the game, are also very unlikely to keep playing the game.

You have NO way of saying if people like R2 more than R1, all you have is some aneqotal evidence based on some matches (its fairly obvious that people who continue to play a game like it), unless there is some drastically higher % of people playing the game in relation to how the game sold compared to the first title, you cannot possibly make that statement!!

 

[DJ12]

Theres bound to be thousands of trophy whores (It's not an insult, I'm one too) that are playing online even if they don't like it. I cannot stand GTA 4 online, it's possibly the worst online game that I have ever played, but I find myself logging on every night trying to get trophies.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

Theres bound to be thousands of trophy whores (It's not an insult, I'm one too) that are playing online even if they don't like it. I cannot stand GTA 4 online, it's possibly the worst online game that I have ever played, but I find myself logging on every night trying to get trophies.

Still, making the statement that R2 is generally more liked than R1 is ridiculous based on how many people talk it down\say they hate it in a couple of matches.

 

[DrJay24]

I'm glad we have folks to come into threads, parse words and start arguments and in no way have anything to say about the game.

 

[Cornsnake]

More accuracy, and less damage, same range would probably be the way to go to make it more to the liking of fans of Carbine battles, while keeping it balanced with the other weapons.

Insomniac has really made some strange choices regarding competitive. The option for 1 shot kills in unranked games is gone for example. I didn't like them, but many players did, you would think that it's a simple thing to provide. And with all the changes they made, they must have known it wouldn't be to the liking of some of their old fans. With that in mind they could have looked at gamemodes that are more interesting for their old fans. Clanwars we're very popular on Rfom, and very well supported with excellent party options, and gamemodes to play. Now there is only TDM and CC, and no communications between squads. I feel competitive has suffered the most from Insomniac's choice to create a big single player, co-op, and competitive. And trying to re-invent everything. There are still a lot of bugs in it that were already known during the beta, and the new myres. site that is supposed be accessible ingame still isn't ready.

Every forum or gamesite I visit, is completely divided on the issue of wether R2 competitive is an improvement or not. I haven't seen a single place where everyone is completely for or against the changes. It is very difficult to see what the majority is, and lets not forget it's not a matter of for and against, there is also some disagreement about the smaller details. Everyone can make their own opinion about it after all.

 

[tha_con]

I think what you have to keep in mind is that forums are no where near the majority of players. You may visit 10 different forums, and out of those 10 forums, you may run into 500 people who own the game, and of that 500, 250 may hate the game.

That is still not representative of the total installed user base. I know a lot of folks hated the Campaign for CoD4, but to the average joe six pack consumer, it was fantastic.

Just saying, it's always best to absolutely ignore forum comments when talking about majority / minority.

 

[tha_con]

Lol.

You cannot possibly say that the vast majority is enjoying R2 more than R1, based on that!

First of all, player who dont like the game have probably allready moved on, player who hate the game, are also very unlikely to keep playing the game.

You have NO way of saying if people like R2 more than R1, all you have is some aneqotal evidence based on some matches (its fairly obvious that people who continue to play a game like it), unless there is some drastically higher % of people playing the game in relation to how the game sold compared to the first title, you cannot possibly make that statement!!

Please at least read and understand what I write, instead of looking for instances in which you can troll my posts.

I said the majority of people who are playing R2 enjoy it, as opposed to those who do not.

An example would be 500 people enjoy R2, 250 people do not. The majority of those 750 people enjoy the game.

Hopefully that makes sense.

 

[Cheezdoodles]

I dont look for instances to troll your post, i simply misread your post. Sorry

 

[Phil]

Then it comes down to, who does Sony/Insomniac make most off, ie who should they please

The people that buy games like ToyStory, Superman (maybe not these games in specific, but you get the idea) and other sub par branded games that despite the lacking quality, sell millions and are at top of the chart with lacking quality and good marketing behind them?

And having said that, we still don't know what the majority is. Ignoring the target group that made you, is a risky move if you ask me. Despite the AntShaws outthere, Resistance was quite a success despite it being a new and unknown factor. While Insomniac might be a well known studio, people buy games/names, not devhouses/publishers.

 

[RenegadeRocks]

May i ask why you ordered the game upon release when it will be cheaper in january when you have the ability to play the game?

Man proposes, God disposes !

 

[Shifty Geezer]

The people that buy games like ToyStory, Superman (maybe not these games in specific, but you get the idea) and other sub par branded games that despite the lacking quality, sell millions and are at top of the chart with lacking quality and good marketing behind them?

Case in point, Ben10 sold millions apparently, way more than LBP. And the critic-panned 'Little Britain' game hammered Okami in sales.

 

[betan]

And having said that, we still don't know what the majority is. Ignoring the target group that made you, is a risky move if you ask me.

Yet the group that made R1 ignored the game once CoD4 was released.
At least now matchmaking works painlessly.

 

[patsu]

Mike Acton is asking for feedback here: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=346575