Resistance 2

[Kittonwy]

God knows who will be playing R2 in two months, but if the old fans are the people kept playing R1 after two years, but hate R2 now, I think it's fair to say Insomniac can safely ignore them, since that's not really splitting the userbase considering their size.

Well let's see whether they'll have any kind of loyal fanbase now that the old fans are gone.

Sure you have. But that's besides the point. The discussion is about what they changed from R1 for the worse, not whether there are any better shooters in your world.

There are better BETAS out there than R2, and oh they did change from R1 for the worse. The point is that it's not about the fact that they changed the gameplay, it's about changing the gameplay and ending up with something worse because you're trying to force a play-style that isn't consistent with the map design.

Does that make it OK? (note that I have ever complained about them )

Sure, as long as a weapon with a longer range can trump the shotty from outside the shotty's range, it's all about effective range and how well-tuned they are and how the maps enable people with different weapons to still play with their favorite weapon, it's about making sure the players gets a clear sense of how far they can reach with their weapons of choice and figuring out the sweetspot.

That's getting ridiculous. How many maps in R1 are completely safe for shotgun? None. Have you not played Manchester, Summerset, Nottingham? Even relatively closed maps like Grimsby maps have large long corridors or open areas.
Who the hell would want a map where one weapon completely dominates any other?

The difference is that in R1 you start with a carbine or a bullseye, NOT a shotty, AND you can switch to another weapon given the situation, in R2 if your load-out is the shotty as a primary, you're STUCK with a shotty, and regardless, R1 maps are still way better in terms of giving short-range players enough cover to go from A to B, in the hangar even with snipers you CAN make your way across, in R2 on maps like orick and chicago it can be insanely bad for shorter-ranged weapons like the shotty or the splicer, except you cannot switch to a more appropriate weapon because of the two-weapon load-out. Being able to provide routes for short-range weapons does not make the shotty or any other weapon dominate, on the contrary, it PREVENTS one weapon from completely dominating the others by providing a sweetspot for every type of play style.

You can get completely wasted with any weapon against someone with wraith depending on the situation.

Given the wraith's short range AND its underpowerness compared to the carbine, it would be silly for a carbine user to ever lose out against a wraith user in a one-on-one situation without one side being blindsided by the other.

Don't use it then. For the record there are many Orick maps (regions), and the one in the beta is the most open one. That said, I have seen people rule with splicer in that exact map.

I'm sure you have, but successes with the splicer are relatively rare.

I'm really curious whether you were also complaining because Far Eye was useless in all 8p maps besides Manchester in R1?

Actually I find the fareye to be quite effective on most maps.

I'm sorry but you either don't know, or don't care what balancing means.

I'm sorry but I do know what balancing means and you probably don't.

Let's rephrase this. "Good balancing" implies all weapons feel adequate for all situations? Right?

Good balancing means all weapons feel empowered on the map, not in all areas but the maps would provide a way for a player with a particular play style to play effectively, meaning a particularly weapon won't feel completely shitty on a particular map, which isn't the case in R2.

There's just no comfort zone for the player who plays games based on HDR maybe.
Seriously, speak for your self.

I'm obviously not judging the gameplay by the lack of HDR, I'm merely judging the graphics based on the lack of HDR in terms of the poor lighting in R2.

I bet you all used Auger, Dragon, prepatch Arc Charger in R1 since they are full of comfort zones.
And bullseye is an awesome weapon for all maps if you are willing to run.

I don't have to use the auger dragon or the arc charger because I'm not spawned with any of them and no one is forced to load out with any of those weapons. The point of the bullseye is to tag and bag, and it's not an awesome weapon at all for any of the maps, it's main function in terms of tagging has been completely destroyed and it does not possess much range or accuracy compared to many of the other primary weapons.

40mm doesn't magically appear in your carbine. You need to find ammo boxes and this is why people with carbine are always racing over dead bodies. Sometimes you 40 an opponent, the game gives you another 40mm.

At this point the way R2 handles the 40mm is basically garbage.

Sorry, I have nothing to say to that.

Well I did make a great point.

No we cannot, for a couple of reasons. There is no game that does everything right graphically. And I can nitpick your favorite game way more than you. For example, R2 destroys vegetation and geometry of Uncharted. So what?

The problem with your statement is that it isn't remotely close to being true. First of all Uncharted as a 2007 game COMPLETELY DESTROYS R2 in terms of visuals. Secondly, Uncharted has more interactive vegetation and geometry that is more than just things in a skybox, no it's not an MP game, in terms of SP it's actually more wide-open and interactive in terms of levels than R2 which is ridiculously linear given how much they boasted about geometry. Yes, no game does everything right graphically, it's just that R2 did a lot of things wrong. Flat lighting, poor shadowing and weird-looking water are just some of them.

Also your obsession with HDR is a joke. Among all the visual shortcomings of R2, HDR is the least important one.

On the contrary, poor lighting/shadowing is one of R2's biggest flaws, it made a lot of things stick out like a sore thumb, good lighting and shadowing could have seriously pulled the scenes together.

Again they aren't any worse than R1 maps in terms of landmarks. Downtown Orick is actually way better since there are signs on the buildings.

Downtown orick is terrible in terms of landmarks and you're supposed to improve on things with a sequel.

I had enough of this tough. Maps are generally bigger and more open than R1, thus ranged weapons are favored more so than R1 especially with gimped tagging and carbine range.

So you ADMIT the tagging and carbine range are GIMPED? Good. And no, ranged weapons shouldn't be favored on a balanced map, so yeah, there's a balancing issue right there.

If you want to criticize R1 to R2 MP changes logically, be my guest. If you cannot find any logic, just cite your personal preference and leave it at that, it's way better than what you are doing.

I did, I find it strange that you're trying to defend the changes like they were supposed to be good, I don't mind the change in play-style if they made it work, but they didn't, stop-and-pop on open maps didn't work so well and I'm not sure HOW they can even begin to fix it.

 

[Kittonwy]

Insomniac added new game modes (e.g., Team Conversion, Assault, and Spectator mode) to RFOM about 3 months after US launch. Couple of patches were added over time to re-balance the weapons. 2 map-packs were released. Chimera-Chimera was taken out.

I don't necessarily think they have to put the weapon wheel back, but I believe they will try their best to improve the game -- unless there has been a change in strategy. If they decide to release patches, I would be surprised if they don't touch the weapons. The SP health bar is the one I am hoping they tweak.

I don't think it's even realistic to ask for the weapon-wheel back, I'm not sure how they can tweak things to make the weapons feel good again, both the carbine and the bullseye need massive tweaks.

 

[patsu]

I should replay R2 competitive again. I forgot how it's like after reading both of you going back and forth. @_@

Problem is I left the game at work.

I don't think it's even realistic to ask for the weapon-wheel back, I'm not sure how they can tweak things to make the weapons feel good again, both the carbine and the bullseye need massive tweaks.

Yeah, they will figure it out themselves. It's hard for me to gauge what they will do because Insomniac has personality and charm ^_^ (but it's a business afterall).

Hey betan, so do you use the gun sight view at all ? Even with Bulleyes ?

I find that I can kill people faster if I use that view, but I would like to play without it. What gun should I pick ?

I feel that the weapons behave differently between SP, MP and Co-op. My Co-op experience does not carry over.

 

[Kittonwy]

So true. I honestly hope Insomniac doesn't devote resources to this, because it's just not as worth it as putting towards their regularly scheduled projects, and frankly I think it's got to be somewhat demoralizing to even be in this situation where such is even an option. It's not worth it, as it won't be appreciated even by the gamers asking for it if it arrives; they've already set themselves up mentally to be playing Killzone 2 in two months anyway, so best to focus on the future rather than linger on the present.

They need to keep cranking out new trophies and maybe a couple of co-op maps to keep people grinding levels and hope that in two months the group they have playing the game now won't flock to that other game.

 

[Cornsnake]

I feel that the weapons behave differently between SP, MP and Co-op. My Co-op experience does not carry over.

They are very different between gamemodes, making switching between a little more difficult. But it probably needed to be done in order to get them balanced in every gamemode. The difference in grenade throwing I find a bit unnecessary. In SP and Co-op you can still throw them as far as you like, but not in competitive. IMO they should be able to be thrown as far, but have less splash damage.

 

[betan]

Well let's see whether they'll have any kind of loyal fanbase now that the old fans are gone.

I don't expect miracles. As of now it seems fine. KZ2 is the first test.

The difference is that in R1 you start with a carbine or a bullseye, NOT a shotty, AND you can switch to another weapon given the situation,

If you have the weapon.
Suppose you are playing Manchester 32 and the other guys took the wall side and some camping around tree side Far Eye. You cannot do anything at all and weapons you start with and have access to are useless.

in R2 if your load-out is the shotty as a primary, you're STUCK with a shotty, and regardless, R1 maps are still way better in terms of giving short-range players enough cover to go from A to B, in the hangar even with snipers you CAN make your way across, in R2 on maps like orick and chicago it can be insanely bad for shorter-ranged weapons like the shotty or the splicer, except you cannot switch to a more appropriate weapon because of the two-weapon load-out.

You can and that weapon is called Magnum. R2 provides enough safe passages given the range of Magnum. Not that every point is safe. There is no such weapon.

Being able to provide routes for short-range weapons does not make the shotty or any other weapon dominate, on the contrary, it PREVENTS one weapon from completely dominating the others by providing a sweetspot for every type of play style.

While all true, providing safe routes for weapons is different than being completely safe for a particular weapon. And since you were complaining about new Subway I don't see any relevance at all.

Given the wraith's short range AND its underpowerness compared to the carbine, it would be silly for a carbine user to ever lose out against a wraith user in a one-on-one situation without one side being blindsided by the other.

A Wraith master can take out Carbine master any day face-to-face one-on-one because Carbine doesn't spawn with 40mm, but Wraith starts with shield. Even if Carbine master has range or surprise advantage (since it takes time for Wraith to start firing), Wraith master can simply shield up and either retreat or get closer to melee or switch to magnum once the hp is back up full. There is nothing carbine master can do but run.

I'm sure you have, but successes with the splicer are relatively rare.

Yes it's, because the gun requires skill to use in the open, like Bullseye.

Actually I find the fareye to be quite effective on most maps.

I'm sure you do, especially since there is no Far Eye in Nottingham, Grimsby, Subway, Thames. It's only available for Manchester and Somerset among the 8p maps.

I'm sorry but I do know what balancing means and you probably don't.
Good balancing means all weapons feel empowered on the map, not in all areas but the maps would provide a way for a player with a particular play style to play effectively, meaning a particularly weapon won't feel completely shitty on a particular map, which isn't the case in R2.

There is no weapon that is completely shitty on any map. On the contrary each maps have parts where particular weapon has advantages and disadvantages, this is how it should be.
However as i said many times before, maps overall favors ranged weapons a little more so than others for TDM. That said, for Skirmish and Core Control, even in the same maps those weapons are useless more often than not. I know this is surprise to some but TDM is not the only mode in Resistance.

I'm obviously not judging the gameplay by the lack of HDR, I'm merely judging the graphics based on the lack of HDR in terms of the poor lighting in R2.

If you say so.

I don't have to use the auger dragon or the arc charger because I'm not spawned with any of them and no one is forced to load out with any of those weapons. The point of the bullseye is to tag and bag, and it's not an awesome weapon at all for any of the maps, it's main function in terms of tagging has been completely destroyed and it does not possess much range or accuracy compared to many of the other primary weapons.

I know you are an expert after playing a map during the beta and all, but let me try to explain this slowly. Bulleye tagging is almost free if you are running, at the cost of revealing your position (which happens when you shoot as well). Still it's one of the most fun weapons and I would prefer it to carbine or any other medium to short range weapon if there weren't so many 40z.

At this point the way R2 handles the 40mm is basically garbage.

Yes

Well I did make a great point.

What's great about not being able to kill anyone without help? I'm sorry I cannot think of any response that's not insulting at this point.
What's even funnier is that all your talk about R2 makes me wonder how much you understand the other BETAs you seem to like.

The problem with your statement is that it isn't remotely close to being true. First of all Uncharted as a 2007 game COMPLETELY DESTROYS R2 in terms of visuals.

Because you say so?

Secondly, Uncharted has more interactive vegetation and geometry that is more than just things in a skybox,

MGS3 had those interactive vegetation in form of triangle grass. Awesome.

no it's not an MP game, in terms of SP it's actually more wide-open and interactive in terms of levels than R2 which is ridiculously linear

unlike Uncharted.

given how much they boasted about geometry.

Who cares what they boasted about. The fact of the matter is even the MP maps destroy Uncharted in terms of geometry and vegetation. Please don't tell me they are linear as well.

Yes, no game does everything right graphically, it's just that R2 did a lot of things wrong. Flat lighting, poor shadowing and weird-looking water are just some of them.

Better than poor vegetation, poor geometry, flat water, one could say.
I personally find R2 more impressive technically, but I hope you get my point. It's really irrelevant which game you and I think is better looking overall.

On the contrary, poor lighting/shadowing is one of R2's biggest flaws, it made a lot of things stick out like a sore thumb, good lighting and shadowing could have seriously pulled the scenes together.

_More_ dynamic shadowing, especially on destructible geometry could help, I agree, which happens to be unrelated to HDR.

Downtown orick is terrible in terms of landmarks and you're supposed to improve on things with a sequel.

I have a feeling you have no idea what downtown Orick is. Check for example Suburbs region also part of 60p Orick map.

So you ADMIT the tagging and carbine range are GIMPED? Good.

I have been saying that since the beta, not that carbine is any worse weapon.

And no, ranged weapons shouldn't be favored on a balanced map, so yeah, there's a balancing issue right there.

If there is, they had the same issue in R1, since there wasn't any balanced map by your understanding. Are you seriously arguing that all maps should "favor" all weapons equally?

I did, I find it strange that you're trying to defend the changes like they were supposed to be good,

What I find strange is you think I'm trying to defend anything. To be honest, I feel like I'm the only one criticizing the game, between some noise.

I don't mind the change in play-style if they made it work, but they didn't, stop-and-pop on open maps didn't work so well and I'm not sure HOW they can even begin to fix it.

Here's why you don't get the game. You think this is a stop-and-pop game. If you had slightest understanding you would know that the game punishes you for that, maybe even more so than R1. There is no stopping allowed besides possibly with invisibility berserk. Even with stuff like Ironheart, Ring of Life or turtle Wraith you have to keep moving constantly. It doesn't matter you are sniping, camping or defending.

Hey betan, so do you use the gun sight view at all ? Even with Bulleyes ?

Yes I do depending on the distance. Bullseye tagging is at its best without ironsight but ironsight improves range and accuracy significantly.

I find that I can kill people faster if I use that view, but I would like to play without it. What gun should I pick ?

If you don't want to use ironsight with carbine and bullseye you need to keep it close.
Bullock and Splicer don't have ironsight but I'm sure that's not what you are looking for.
I think it's difficult to completely avoid ironsight in R2, but that view is still as fast, or faster than most other games' over the hip view.

 

[Kittonwy]

I don't expect miracles. As of now it seems fine. KZ2 is the first test.

There won't be a second test.

If you have the weapon.
Suppose you are playing Manchester 32 and the other guys took the wall side and some camping around tree side Far Eye. You cannot do anything at all and weapons you start with and have access to are useless.

That's totally untrue and you know it.

You can and that weapon is called Magnum. R2 provides enough safe passages given the range of Magnum. Not that every point is safe. There is no such weapon.

You're seriously overrating the magnum and its range, the magnum is not so powerful that one can make it around a level, even with the secondary fire it's still very much a sidearm at best, which means the player might have a disadvantage with certain primary weapons.

While all true, providing safe routes for weapons is different than being completely safe for a particular weapon. And since you were complaining about new Subway I don't see any relevance at all.
A Wraith master can take out Carbine master any day face-to-face one-on-one because Carbine doesn't spawn with 40mm, but Wraith starts with shield. Even if Carbine master has range or surprise advantage (since it takes time for Wraith to start firing), Wraith master can simply shield up and either retreat or get closer to melee or switch to magnum once the hp is back up full. There is nothing carbine master can do but run.

A wraith cannot stand up to a carbine, yes you can shield up with a wraith, but then you wouldn't go toe to toe against a wraith with a shield up in the first place. The advantage the carbine has is not primarily range, it's damage/shot.

Yes it's, because the gun requires skill to use in the open, like Bullseye.

The bullseye is gimped to the point where it's useless in medium distance, no amount of skill can compensate for lack of accuracy.

I'm sure you do, especially since there is no Far Eye in Nottingham, Grimsby, Subway, Thames. It's only available for Manchester and Somerset among the 8p maps.

So? Those maps aren't suitable for sniping and thus they didn't put the fareye in there.

There is no weapon that is completely shitty on any map. On the contrary each maps have parts where particular weapon has advantages and disadvantages, this is how it should be.

The shotty is utter crap in orick.

However as i said many times before, maps overall favors ranged weapons a little more so than others for TDM. That said, for Skirmish and Core Control, even in the same maps those weapons are useless more often than not. I know this is surprise to some but TDM is not the only mode in Resistance.

NOT BALANCED. Frankly neither skirmish nor core control is all that great, not sure why they decided to go with those two.

If you say so.

Yep yep.

I know you are an expert after playing a map during the beta and all, but let me try to explain this slowly. Bulleye tagging is almost free if you are running, at the cost of revealing your position (which happens when you shoot as well). Still it's one of the most fun weapons and I would prefer it to carbine or any other medium to short range weapon if there weren't so many 40z.

Bullseye has limited tags now which undermines it even more, and is mainly a short-ranged weapon.

Yes

What's great about not being able to kill anyone without help? I'm sorry I cannot think of any response that's not insulting at this point.
What's even funnier is that all your talk about R2 makes me wonder how much you understand the other BETAs you seem to like.

Why do you even NEED help to kill someone?

Because you say so?

Yes?

MGS3 had those interactive vegetation in form of triangle grass. Awesome.

MGS3 is a PS2 game, why are you comparing R2 to a PS2 game?

unlike Uncharted.

In Uncharted the level is open enough that you can take different approaches and flank enemies, such as outside the church and inside the customs house as both are HUGE and have tons and tons of cover points to make it from one side of the map to another, far from the linearity in R2 SP levels.

Who cares what they boasted about. The fact of the matter is even the MP maps destroy Uncharted in terms of geometry and vegetation. Please don't tell me they are linear as well.

MP maps in R2 is obviously bigger because they're MP maps meant to house SIXTY PEOPLE, R2 SP levels can't touch those in Uncharted SP, not even close.

Better than poor vegetation, poor geometry, flat water, one could say.
I personally find R2 more impressive technically, but I hope you get my point. It's really irrelevant which game you and I think is better looking overall.

Compared to what? The jello in R2 that for the most part doesn't even reflect properly? And how often do YOU spend swimming in R2 water versus Uncharted water that you HAVE TO swim AND drive a jetski on?

_More_ dynamic shadowing, especially on destructible geometry could help, I agree, which happens to be unrelated to HDR.

Poor lighting in general DOES relate to the lack of HDR or some type of tone-mapping, and points to the poor quality of the lighting in R2. And yes, dynamic shadowing is really lacking in R2. The problem is also not enough GAMEPLAY geometry, objects in the background really don't matter too much because you can't interact with them so there's no point in putting so much focus on them.

I have a feeling you have no idea what downtown Orick is. Check for example Suburbs region also part of 60p Orick map.

I have a feeling you have no idea what a landmark is.

I have been saying that since the beta, not that carbine is any worse weapon.

Ok then, the bullseye is garbage and the carbine is gimped, that much we can agree on.

If there is, they had the same issue in R1, since there wasn't any balanced map by your understanding. Are you seriously arguing that all maps should "favor" all weapons equally?

R1 is clearly different in that you do NOT spawn with any weapon, you spawn with the standard weapon, and the maps have to and are fair to bullseye/carbine in R1, R2 on the other hand needs to make sure someone who spawns with a fareye or a shotty feels the map is fair and is not which is unfortunate.

What I find strange is you think I'm trying to defend anything. To be honest, I feel like I'm the only one criticizing the game, between some noise.

Here's why you don't get the game. You think this is a stop-and-pop game. If you had slightest understanding you would know that the game punishes you for that, maybe even more so than R1. There is no stopping allowed besides possibly with invisibility berserk. Even with stuff like Ironheart, Ring of Life or turtle Wraith you have to keep moving constantly. It doesn't matter you are sniping, camping or defending.

The problem is that ironsighting is a STOP AND POP mechanic, the game punishes you for ironsighting because the maps are open but they would really cater more to R1-type aiming, worse yet the relatively low damage per bullet does not yield quick kills, so you end up with quite a bit of circle-strafing but WITH the awkward ironsighting, AND the game requires people to rely more on berserks. The problem is that the game needs to cater to skill first and foremost instead of berserks.

Yes I do depending on the distance. Bullseye tagging is at its best without ironsight but ironsight improves range and accuracy significantly.

Bullseye tagging is garbage even WITH ironsight.

If you don't want to use ironsight with carbine and bullseye you need to keep it close.

I don't know what your idea of close is, without ironsighting the effectiveness with both weapon is rather close-ranged and this is basically shotty range, compared to R1 where shooting from the hip is still possible at mid-medium range.

Bullock and Splicer don't have ironsight but I'm sure that's not what you are looking for.
I think it's difficult to completely avoid ironsight in R2, but that view is still as fast, or faster than most other games' over the hip view.

R2 ironsighting is really not fast at all, nor is it all that great in terms of providing additional precision. No, I'm not a big fan of either the splicer of the bullock.

 

[Neb]

Poor lighting in general DOES relate to the lack of HDR.

Not really, bloom can be good to and other methods. Look at Killzone 2, it doesn't have HDr.

 

[Kittonwy]

Not really, bloom can be good to and other methods. Look at Killzone 2, it doesn't have HDr.

I'm not stipulating the use of FP16 here, just some sort of approximation or hack/tone-mapping. Whatever lighting model + lens flare they have in Killzone 2 there's clearly enough range there between the really bright and the really dark, in a day map like Radec academy one can really tell it's bright and when a character goes into shadow which is something you can really tell, that is really lacking in R2, the maps look like dusk maps and the sun looks way too soft, I'm really not sure why they decided to go with such an art direction.

 

[_phil_]

Poor lighting in general DOES relate to the lack of HDR.

no,but in R2 it's more a problem of artists than tech.

 

[RenegadeRocks]

Just saw a gameplay vid of the SP. I think it was Awesome !
(Haven't played the game yet, though I own it since 28th nov )
Will be with my ps3 on the 10 or 11th, will get on it then

 

[tha_con]

So this thread is still:

R2 isn't R1
R2 doesn't look as good as (insert game)

Weaksauce. Thread still sucks. Strangely enough the community online is pretty strong, must have something to do with how terrible the game is I suppose.

 

[Kittonwy]

So this thread is still:

R2 isn't R1
R2 doesn't look as good as (insert game)

Weaksauce. Thread still sucks. Strangely enough the community online is pretty strong, must have something to do with how terrible the game is I suppose.

Well, let's put it that way, in addition to looks, R2 doesn't PLAY as well as (insert game), (insert game) isn't out until february, (insert game) MP beta is finished, and SOCOM Confrontation still has an online interface fit for SOCOM 1.

 

[Kittonwy]

no,but in R2 it's more a problem of artists than tech.

I just wonder how much time the artists have to work on the levels, it just doesn't make sense in the San Fran level where there are all those crates with no shadows whatsoever, does the game slow down too much so they removed them? Or did they not have enough man-power/man-hour to work on the levels to polish them up? Does the tech support higher quality lighting than showcased in the levels? Looking back when they showed the Chicago level with the Leviathan at E3, it just looked rough and unfinished even for something one would show at E3 when everybody was bringing their best duct-taped version of what they were working on.

 

[tha_con]

I just wonder how much time the artists have to work on the levels, it just doesn't make sense in the San Fran level where there are all those crates with no shadows whatsoever, does the game slow down too much so they removed them? Or did they not have enough man-power/man-hour to work on the levels to polish them up? Does the tech support higher quality lighting than showcased in the levels? Looking back when they showed the Chicago level with the Leviathan at E3, it just looked rough and unfinished even for something one would show at E3 when everybody was bringing their best duct-taped version of what they were working on.

Maybe it's because I've been to Insomniac Games, but when you're working with around 150 people in your studio, and pushing out a downloadable title (R&C: Q4B) Plus another huge huge project like R2 with SP, Co-Op, and Competitive MP...something just tells me that shadows on boxes aren't exactly your primary focus.

They wanted to get the game out. You may not understand it, and you my want it to look and play like (insert sequel to other game you probably didn't even care about when you played the first title), but they have deadlines they want to meet.

Frankly, I think they did a great job, lots of other people think they did a great job, they'll turn a profit, and at the end of the day, they'll have still done better than most developers ever dream of. It's really funny that what some may consider Insomniacs WORST effort is still better than a lot of other studios BEST.

But, as has been evident with the terrible terrible mistake of a thread on GAF, maybe they'll put more focus on worthless, meaningless, pointless HDR and shadows for crates, then all will be well in the world.

 

[Kittonwy]

Maybe it's because I've been to Insomniac Games, but when you're working with around 150 people in your studio, and pushing out a downloadable title (R&C: Q4B) Plus another huge huge project like R2 with SP, Co-Op, and Competitive MP...something just tells me that shadows on boxes aren't exactly your primary focus.

They wanted to get the game out. You may not understand it, and you my want it to look and play like (insert sequel to other game you probably didn't even care about when you played the first title), but they have deadlines they want to meet.

Frankly, I think they did a great job, lots of other people think they did a great job, they'll turn a profit, and at the end of the day, they'll have still done better than most developers ever dream of. It's really funny that what some may consider Insomniacs WORST effort is still better than a lot of other studios BEST.

But, as has been evident with the terrible terrible mistake of a thread on GAF, maybe they'll put more focus on worthless, meaningless, pointless HDR and shadows for crates, then all will be well in the world.

Maybe if I own shares in Insomniac Games maybe I would care about how many games get rushed out per year, it doesn't matter if many other developers are cranking out mediocre titles, what I DO care is Insomniac Games making truly AMAZING games, I wanted a better MP shooter than R1 from them but that didn't happen with R2, the modes ended up being a step backwards. They can run their business whichever way they want obviously, what I do care about are the games.

It's all about attention to details, or the lack thereof, which manifests itself when using ironsights and ending up still looking at a RETICLE, or when playing on rather open maps having to circle strafe while zooming because the damage/shot isn't high enough but shooting from the hip just isn't accurate at all at medium distance (if you want to do stop-and-pop, make stop-and-pop maps WITH the damage tuned up, if you want to do run-and-gun, have open maps with better hip-aiming, because right now it's definitely NOT at a sweetspot), or when playing the leviathan level expecting an epic boss battle but ending up with an extremely linear experience, or the other uninspired boss battles, having poor lighting and shadowing is just one of the problems with R2 that held it back from being a highly polished blockbuster title, the lack of polish can be seen everywhere. It's GREAT they managed to crank it out by November, unfortunately I don't really benefit from them getting a game out in a rush.

Maybe their primary focus should be on making a better playing AND looking game instead of just trying to get the game out to meet a deadline, not that I'm not all for hitting milestones but if they're serious about making the Resistance the number one shooter IP on the PS3, they need to do better because they've got some serious competition come february.

 

[Neb]

I just wonder how much time the artists have to work on the levels, it just doesn't make sense in the San Fran level where there are all those crates with no shadows whatsoever, does the game slow down too much so they removed them?

But is it that important?

I mean I have seen several of the latest Sony/GG released screenshots of KZ2 where shadows are not cast when it should from lightsource point on different parts.

 

[tha_con]

You know, if R2 had shadows on those crates and bricks, it would have got AT LEAST another half a point on meta-critic. We all know that's whats important right?

Afterall, kittonwy spent nearly two months of R2 media blitz talking strictly about shadows and HDR, and only post beta/release did he start nagging on gameplay (then picked up another shooter that's farily similar in play and loves it).

 

[Cornsnake]

Afterall, kittonwy spent nearly two months of R2 media blitz talking strictly about shadows and HDR, and only post beta/release did he start nagging on gameplay (then picked up another shooter that's farily similar in play and loves it).

Well I guess Kittonwy really cares for the Resistance franchise if he spends so much time talking about it. In the end we all just want the best for the Resistance franchise, it's just that we disagree on what the best is.

 

[betan]

That's totally untrue and you know it.

I meant Somerset not Manchester, which should have been obvious to someone who played R1 TDM regularly. There are many more examples of disadvantages of weapon pickups, but I guess it only make sense to people who knows R1.

You're seriously overrating the magnum and its range, the magnum is not so powerful that one can make it around a level, even with the secondary fire it's still very much a sidearm at best, which means the player might have a disadvantage with certain primary weapons.

Magnum is powerful enough to take out enemy (or enemies) with at most three shots. There aren't many primary weapons that can take magnum easily on its range.

A wraith cannot stand up to a carbine, yes you can shield up with a wraith, but then you wouldn't go toe to toe against a wraith with a shield up in the first place. The advantage the carbine has is not primarily range, it's damage/shot.

I want whatever you are smoking. Wraith does the most damage/unit time excluding headshots.

The bullseye is gimped to the point where it's useless in medium distance, no amount of skill can compensate for lack of accuracy.

Aren't you tired of this bs? Please stop talking about weapons you don't comprehend.
Or better yet, here is a resolution.
I challenge you to a duel for which you can pick the map AND weapons (which can be different for each of us) and I claim that with your current understanding of the game, you have no chance of beating me. Only rule is Bullock is out.

So? Those maps aren't suitable for sniping and thus they didn't put the fareye in there.

Obviously they are not, unlike someone else claimed earlier. There are maps in R2 which are not suitable for sniping either. Does it make it unbalanced because you have an option spawn with Far Eye?

The shotty is utter crap in orick.

There is no single Orick map. What part of this is difficult to understand?

NOT BALANCED. Frankly neither skirmish nor core control is all that great, not sure why they decided to go with those two.

Core control is great, it's way better than the CTF in R1. Skirmish is also great when teams are balanced and no one quits.

Bullseye has limited tags now which undermines it even more, and is mainly a short-ranged weapon.

See my resolution above.

Why do you even NEED help to kill someone?

That's a question about you, not the game.

MGS3 is a PS2 game, why are you comparing R2 to a PS2 game?

That PS2 game happens to have the same vegetation you are praising in Uncharted.

In Uncharted the level is open enough that you can take different approaches and flank enemies, such as outside the church and inside the customs house as both are HUGE and have tons and tons of cover points to make it from one side of the map to another, far from the linearity in R2 SP levels.
MP maps in R2 is obviously bigger because they're MP maps meant to house SIXTY PEOPLE, R2 SP levels can't touch those in Uncharted SP, not even close.

MP maps _are_ from campaign. The fact that you traverse them linearly in SP campaign doesn't make it any less impressive.

Compared to what? The jello in R2 that for the most part doesn't even reflect properly? And how often do YOU spend swimming in R2 water versus Uncharted water that you HAVE TO swim AND drive a jetski on?

Are you still talking about the flat Uncharted water, with 2d splash effects?
Yes I prefer that interactive jello in R2 that does reflect and deflect any day, thank you very much.

Poor lighting in general DOES relate to the lack of HDR or some type of tone-mapping, and points to the poor quality of the lighting in R2. And yes, dynamic shadowing is really lacking in R2. The problem is also not enough GAMEPLAY geometry, objects in the background really don't matter too much because you can't interact with them so there's no point in putting so much focus on them.

This is utter bs and you know it.

I have a feeling you have no idea what a landmark is.

Ok then.

Ok then, the bullseye is garbage and the carbine is gimped, that much we can agree on.

Yes yes, we agree on the fact that you have no idea what you are talking about. What?
Bullseye rocks, and carbine is the most overpowered gun in game.

R1 is clearly different in that you do NOT spawn with any weapon, you spawn with the standard weapon, and the maps have to and are fair to bullseye/carbine in R1,

Carbine had the range, yet was one of the weakest guns in R1. Not to mention people camping for Laark and 40mm.

R2 on the other hand needs to make sure someone who spawns with a fareye or a shotty feels the map is fair and is not which is unfortunate.

Why do you feel like you have to spawn with weapons that is not suitable for that map?
Is this really the best argument you got? Seriously?

The problem is that ironsighting is a STOP AND POP mechanic,

No it's not in case of R2. It wasn't in R1 either, which could use smooth and fast ironsight R2 has.

the game punishes you for ironsighting because the maps are open but they would really cater more to R1-type aiming,

BS

worse yet the relatively low damage per bullet does not yield quick kills,

Once again, no idea what you are talking about. Far Eye is a two-shot weapon without headshots (same as before), Marksman is a three-shot at most, so is Magnum. Carbine is definitely stronger than it was before, and kills much more quickly. In fact in R1 you had a bigger chance of surviving when flanked with Bullseye or Carbine. Now it's just too easy to kill.

so you end up with quite a bit of circle-strafing but WITH the awkward ironsighting,

Well at least you admit the game is not stop-and-pop.

AND the game requires people to rely more on berserks. The problem is that the game needs to cater to skill first and foremost instead of berserks.

I'm not sure you have any right to talk about skill.

Bullseye tagging is garbage even WITH ironsight.

How thick does one have to be not to understand this, but let me try again, tagging works best when you are running which is obviously without ironsight.
If you don't get this, you loose any right to talk about bullseye too.

I don't know what your idea of close is, without ironsighting the effectiveness with both weapon is rather close-ranged and this is basically shotty range, compared to R1 where shooting from the hip is still possible at mid-medium range.

With very little damage.

R2 ironsighting is really not fast at all, nor is it all that great in terms of providing additional precision. No, I'm not a big fan of either the splicer of the bullock.

Who was talking to you again?

Well I guess Kittonwy really cares for the Resistance franchise if he spends so much time talking about it. In the end we all just want the best for the Resistance franchise, it's just that we disagree on what the best is.

I personally find it more likely that he wants the worst for Resistance because he cares about another franchise.