Resistance 2

[LordNerevar]

I've never played first Resistance (except the demo), but i did grab this one, because i liked the way it looked on the trailers, screenshots, and because i wanted to see how the 60 players per map multiplayer was implemented.
First of all, i must say i'm amazed on how fun the co op mode is.
I really, really like it, especially when everyone is doing what they're supposed to be doing. The game is super fun on those occasions.
Competative is excellent, though i wouldn't mind more gameplay modes in the skirmish.
Campaign is pretty solid, though it's quite linear.
I did, however, dislike the fact that the enemies quite often attack only the player, while completely ignoring the rest of the squad. Also, some of the boss fights were quite underwelming and too easy, especially the last one (i played on hard difficulty).
Cutscenes were excellent.
Regarding the graphics, i do think that the game should have better lighting and shadowing, but it's not that serious issue, as kittonwy is trying to make it.
I think the graphics, regarding the scale of the game and everything, are pretty solid.
Also, after playing numerous shooters which, basically, consist of gray and brown colors, i was quite amazed when i saw how colorful the Resistance 2 is.
Regarding the weapon balancing, i haven't found any weapon to be really, really, more powerful than everything else, though the marksman is quite devastating on some maps.

At the end, i would probably rate the game with 9 out of 10.
There are some things that need to be fixed, but i find the game to be very addicting (especially the co-op) and fun to play.

 

[patsu]

Now that I'm back at work, I played R2 competitive this evening for about 1-2 hours. Patched to 1.30 before I started.

The game has changed somewhat. I enjoyed it MUCH better this time round. I didn't play with the clan, so it's just me and the big bad world out there. I decided to pick my favorite R1 weapon: The Auger. It's pretty usable now compared to R1. Useful for defending nodes. Barely good enough to go toe to toe against Carbine and Bullseye, better if I strafe behind obstacles. I am going to see how far I can go with this rarely used weapon.

Even though I ended up with abyssal K/D ratio, I managed to rank in the middle of the pack sometimes (Just like my early R1 games). Still dislike the color choice, but the game is actually solidly fun now. I had forgotten how 20 vs 20 player fight feel ^_^

Will alternate between Co-op and Competitive from now on. Thanks Insomniac (!) for improving the game. Hopefully you find more incentives to keep at it.

 

[Kittonwy]

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).

I also spent two years playing R1 night after night with my clan, supported the additional content, participated in both betas. Most of my clan are still FURIOUS about the lack of polish in R2, whether it's the three modes, the visuals or the sound. Like many others in the beta forum, I've made NUMEROUS criticisms in the beta forum regarding GAMEPLAY, otherwise players like yourself would still be stuck with a completely SHIT grenade. The lack of shadows is just one of many problems. Even now there are many criticisms on the myres forums to the point where they have to limit people to a single thread which now has 15 pages of complaints.

 

[Kittonwy]

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 said Manchester, don't blame me when YOU can't get the facts straight. Somerset is all about holding the high ground, a more skilled clan will always win by taking over the sniper spots, because they're MORE SKILLED, and not necessarily being the first ones reaching the sniper spots, if you're beaten by a better team, give them props.

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.

The magnum doesn't have either the range to take on a marksman or the firing rate to take on a carbine/bullseye, at close range it's powerless against a shotty.

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

Carbine does more damage per shot and it doesn't need reving up.

Aren't you tired of this bs? Please stop talking about weapons you don't comprehend.

You should ask yourself this question instead.

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.

I'm flattered that you want me to play with you but I'll have to decline on your generous offer as it doesn't benefit me in any way whatsoever.

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 maps in R1 which are not suitable for sniping do NOT have fareye spawns, the maps in R2 which are not suitable for sniping still allow people to spawn with the fareye. Yes it DOES make it unbalanced when you give people an option to spawn with a weapon that puts them at a disadvantage, that is EXACTLY why it's unbalanced.

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

Orick in general is too open for the shotty.

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.

First of all CTF in R1 is garbage, and by far the WORST obj mode in R1, my clan used to play obj ONLY if we have too many people to get CTF just so we can play meltdown/assault/breach instead, core control is even MORE GARBAGE than CTF, which was in itself a complete and utter MIRACLE that one can create a variation of CTF that is even MORE repulsive. People quit skirmish all the time, secondly skirmish doesn't work well because cross-squad communication is minimal at best, it never feels like 60p online.

See my resolution above.

I'm still unclear on how me beating you in a "duel" actually benefits me, or you for that matter.

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

Your question doesn't make any sense in that it's the game that increases the frequency of someone finishing off someone else's kills.

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

You're referring to the fact that the vegetation reacts to characters moving through it in MGS3 and Uncharted, but NOT R2? And that helps your argument how?

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

The fact that you traverse them in a completely linear way and they're sectioned off in a way that results in a bunch of narrow corridors which limits AI behaviour DOES make them much less impressive, especially in terms of gameplay.

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.

If you want to prefer jello for water, that's up to you.

This is utter bs and you know it.

It's not bs that R2's lighting/shadowing needs work.

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.

Neither of those statements are true.

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

Carbine was the best weapon in R1.

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?

I don't have to spawn with weapons that are not suitable for that map, the problem is the developer shouldn't make available for the maps weapons unless they're suitable, it's about balancing.

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

R1 does not cater to stop and pop, R2 however forces ironsights but the maps are still too open for stop and pop.

BS

Not bs, but truth.

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.

Marksman is a three shot HEADSHOT kill, magnum is maybe a three-shot kill WITH secondary fire, and even then the fire-rate is slow and is completely vulnerable against another primary weapon, carbine has far shorter range than in R1 and far less accuracy. Not sure who you were playing against but with the bullseye if you're tagged from medium range in R1 you're deadmeat, now the tagging range is significantly shortened and carbine at medium range can trump the bullseye.

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

The weapon aiming promotes stop and pop, the maps are not conducive to it, hence the problem, they couldn't make up their minds whether they wanted a stop and pop game or a run and gun game, and decided to mix two different elements that don't mesh well.

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

I'm not sure you have any right to tell someone else they have no right to talk about skill.

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.

Tagging is inaccurate, whether you prefer to run or not, the problem is the lack of range, not whether you want to run and tag versus someone else who might want to stop, zoom and tag, either way it's inferior to the tagging in R1 which was accurate enough to tag someone in mid-air and worked at medium range.

With very little damage.

Obviously you're getting your facts wrong.

Who was talking to you again?

Then don't reply.

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

If I don't care about Resistance obviously I wouldn't be among the beta people who suggested changes to many of the problems in the beta, maybe those of us who have suggestions should have kept quiet so you would still be stuck with those marshmellow grenades. I want the series to play and look better and become a more dominant FPS franchise, you obviously don't, so WHO wants the worst for Resistance again?

 

[Kittonwy]

Now that I'm back at work, I played R2 competitive this evening for about 1-2 hours. Patched to 1.30 before I started.

The game has changed somewhat. I enjoyed it MUCH better this time round. I didn't play with the clan, so it's just me and the big bad world out there. I decided to pick my favorite R1 weapon: The Auger. It's pretty usable now compared to R1. Useful for defending nodes. Barely good enough to go toe to toe against Carbine and Bullseye, better if I strafe behind obstacles. I am going to see how far I can go with this rarely used weapon.

Even though I ended up with abyssal K/D ratio, I managed to rank in the middle of the pack sometimes (Just like my early R1 games). Still dislike the color choice, but the game is actually solidly fun now. I had forgotten how 20 vs 20 player fight feel ^_^

Will alternate between Co-op and Competitive from now on. Thanks Insomniac (!) for improving the game. Hopefully you find more incentives to keep at it.

Clan has moved on to SOCOM for the time being I think, I can't get efertlis or BigE to play R2 anymore, I would play if it's more than just Bob or Aeon. I wonder what the patch does though, maybe one day they'll tune it right so I will feel like playing, pretty tired of co-op.

 

[patsu]

I see. Queeq was in R2 the entire day though.

 

[Kittonwy]

I see. Queeq was in R2 the entire day though.

He could be playing single player, not sure, maybe he's going after his 10000 kills. SOCOM isn't out in Aussieland yet, but by the time it comes out so will KZ2.

 

[patsu]

Okay, he was there for co-op. Almost 100 hours now.

Betan, I heard some phone ringing but I don't know how to answer it. I suspected it was from you since I saw you online too.

EDIT: Kittonwy, I don't think 1.30 patch the gameplay. It's a bug fix patch. I think the earlier patches tuned it (I died a lot more in 1.0 or 1.1 due to weapon-related issues IMHO). Since I needed to retrain myself, I chose to focus/retry on Co-op; it's more interesting and less frustrating. Now the connection and game matching problems seem to have gone away too.

 

[Silent]

Is it weird to say that I personally have a much better time with R2 then R1. But then again I'm no hardcore fps gamers offline or online. This is the first game that I played more then 2 hours online !

 

[LordNerevar]

The magnum doesn't have either the range to take on a marksman or the firing rate to take on a carbine/bullseye, at close range it's powerless against a shotty.

Magnum is a secondary weapon. It isn't meant to be used as a primary weapon.
It's used only when you run out of bullets. So, instead of the reload procedure, you pull out the magnum and hit the enemy once or twice.
I made numerous kills with the magnum when both me and my enemy ran out of bullets.
Some people will try to meelee you when they run out of bullets, and that's just the perfect time to pull out a magnum.

 

[catisfit]

Is it weird to say that I personally have a much better time with R2 then R1. But then again I'm no hardcore fps gamers offline or online. This is the first game that I played more then 2 hours online !

No, I prefer R2 as well. We're just not part of the (very) vocal minority, it seems.

 

[patsu]

Now that I can feel the competitive mode and guns...

Online gameplay-wise, R1 is harsher (very fast) and simpler. R2 is more forgiving, has more variety and perks to hopefully keep you going. The guns are balanced differently according to their game needs. They are both solid, just different. R2 has a higher player cap, but I haven't played any game larger than 20 on each side yet.

Usability-wise, R2 is snappier in matching games. The UI is more tedious and confusing. To be fair, Sony's XMB game invite mechanism may have complicated the experience. R1 has a complete, standalone UI so the experience is tighter.

Visually, R1 is stylized (one-two color) and cleaner. R2 is richer but can be ugly due mainly to "strange" color combination IMHO. I find the character customization screen weird looking too.


SP-wise, R1 is an overall better experience than R2. Already posted about this so I won't repeat here.

For their DLC, I hope they refine co-op more. While it's very unlikely for them to tune the SP, I feel that they should do something about it (Probably wistful thinking).

 

[tha_con]

The magnum doesn't have either the range to take on a marksman or the firing rate to take on a carbine/bullseye, at close range it's powerless against a shotty.

You want a handgun to be effective against rifles and shotguns? Do you realize how UNBALANCED the Magnum would become in that case? Think about it.

The maps in R1 which are not suitable for sniping do NOT have fareye spawns, the maps in R2 which are not suitable for sniping still allow people to spawn with the fareye. Yes it DOES make it unbalanced when you give people an option to spawn with a weapon that puts them at a disadvantage, that is EXACTLY why it's unbalanced.

So options are bad. Got it. I mean, who is Insomniac to give players CHOICE to use a weapon that's not suited for a certain level, even if it's their favorite. WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU INSOMNIAC, TAKE AWAY OUR CHOICES!!!

Orick in general is too open for the shotty.

Really? Because the Lumber Mill, housing area, and business district are all pretty close quarters with alleys, halls, and doorways. Seems pretty condusive to Shotgun play to me...hmmm...

First of all CTF in R1 is garbage, and by far the WORST obj mode in R1, my clan used to play obj ONLY if we have too many people to get CTF just so we can play meltdown/assault/breach instead, core control is even MORE GARBAGE than CTF, which was in itself a complete and utter MIRACLE that one can create a variation of CTF that is even MORE repulsive. People quit skirmish all the time, secondly skirmish doesn't work well because cross-squad communication is minimal at best, it never feels like 60p online.

Regardless of what you think, Core Control (and CTF) still require organization and team tactics. You can win matches with luck, but a team playing together flanking the enemy base and stealing the core / flag will always win out, just like Meltdown / Breach / Assault. Core control is way more tacticle than CTF because of the timer implementations, etc.

If you want to prefer jello for water, that's up to you.

If I preferred Jello for water, I'd go play Uncharted, which also had shitty water (OH!).

Carbine was the best weapon in R1.

As well as the least interesting. Go figure.

I don't have to spawn with weapons that are not suitable for that map, the problem is the developer shouldn't make available for the maps weapons unless they're suitable, it's about balancing.

Again, choice =/= bad. How in the HELL does that effect balance? If it's someones CHOICE to use a weapon that isn't effective on a certain map, that doesn't say anything about balance, it says everything about that players ability to chose. The subway in Chicago is designed for close quarters almost exclusively, focusing on weapons like the shotgun, and weapons with splash damage like the bellock and splicer. The Bullseye and Carbine also do well here in the hallways.

I have no idea how you think it's a balancing issue. If the player has the option to use weapons off the bat that are effective on a map, then the game is still balanced. Period.

R1 does not cater to stop and pop, R2 however forces ironsights but the maps are still too open for stop and pop.

I disagree. Strongly.

The weapon aiming promotes stop and pop, the maps are not conducive to it, hence the problem, they couldn't make up their minds whether they wanted a stop and pop game or a run and gun game, and decided to mix two different elements that don't mesh well.

It actually caters to both, neither is necessarily stronger than the other. I dont 'really see a problem. Though, you said you HATED stop and pop gameplay, but then gave praise to allah to another title that is stop and pop....

Tagging is inaccurate, whether you prefer to run or not, the problem is the lack of range, not whether you want to run and tag versus someone else who might want to stop, zoom and tag, either way it's inferior to the tagging in R1 which was accurate enough to tag someone in mid-air and worked at medium range.

Compared to the tagging in R1 that was terrible and could be done from the other side of the planet.

If I don't care about Resistance obviously I wouldn't be among the beta people who suggested changes to many of the problems in the beta, maybe those of us who have suggestions should have kept quiet so you would still be stuck with those marshmellow grenades. I want the series to play and look better and become a more dominant FPS franchise, you obviously don't, so WHO wants the worst for Resistance again?

Grenades were not a porblem, I wish they stayed the way they were, along with fall damage and the reduced speed.

 

[betan]

YOU said Manchester, don't blame me when YOU can't get the facts straight. Somerset is all about holding the high ground, a more skilled clan will always win by taking over the sniper spots, because they're MORE SKILLED, and not necessarily being the first ones reaching the sniper spots, if you're beaten by a better team, give them props.

This is related how exactly? You are playing with a party of 2 along with 14 privates. The other team is a party of 16 supreme commanders. They are not idiot and took the wall side. Now, should I be able to kick them out all by myself? They have Laark, 40z and Far Eyes. Skill my back.
At least in R2 you can start with you weapon of choice and do something about it even if your team looses miserably.

The magnum doesn't have either the range to take on a marksman or the firing rate to take on a carbine/bullseye, at close range it's powerless against a shotty.

All weapons are powerless against a shotty at close range. The skill is not letting the opponent set the distance.

Carbine does more damage per shot and it doesn't need reving up.

Why do we care about per shot again?

I'm flattered that you want me to play with you but I'll have to decline on your generous offer as it doesn't benefit me in any way whatsoever.
...
I'm still unclear on how me beating you in a "duel" actually benefits me, or you for that matter.

Since you have the skills, we will see if your theories about weapons and maps are true.

The maps in R1 which are not suitable for sniping do NOT have fareye spawns, the maps in R2 which are not suitable for sniping still allow people to spawn with the fareye. Yes it DOES make it unbalanced when you give people an option to spawn with a weapon that puts them at a disadvantage, that is EXACTLY why it's unbalanced.

So we want all maps to be same, fair to every gun equally with no variety and that's your understanding of balance. Right.

Orick in general is too open for the shotty.

we can test it

First of all CTF in R1 is garbage, and by far the WORST obj mode in R1, my clan used to play obj ONLY if we have too many people to get CTF just so we can play meltdown/assault/breach instead, core control is even MORE GARBAGE than CTF, which was in itself a complete and utter MIRACLE that one can create a variation of CTF that is even MORE repulsive.

Don't care what your clan did. CTF in R1 was garbage because it didn't scale well.
CC in R2 is awesome but I guess you need to play it with people who knows what they are doing.

People quit skirmish all the time, secondly skirmish doesn't work well because cross-squad communication is minimal at best, it never feels like 60p online.

Why do you need cross-squad com when 99 out of 100 times you have different objectives?
And for the record, you can say whatever you want to other squads.

Your question doesn't make any sense in that it's the game that increases the frequency of someone finishing off someone else's kills.

Not being able to kill anyone by yourself has no relation to game allowing assists.

You're referring to the fact that the vegetation reacts to characters moving through it in MGS3 and Uncharted, but NOT R2? And that helps your argument how?

Sorry to disappoint you but having grass triangles with 1 sec response time for interaction is not exactly space tech.

The fact that you traverse them in a completely linear way and they're sectioned off in a way that results in a bunch of narrow corridors which limits AI behaviour DOES make them much less impressive, especially in terms of gameplay.

Yes, yes, let's try to change discussion to gameplay instead, since you have nothing else left to argue.

If you want to prefer jello for water, that's up to you.

Thanks for the permission

It's not bs that R2's lighting/shadowing needs work.

What's bs is shadowing has anything to do with HDR.

Neither of those statements are true.

This statement is not true.

Carbine was the best weapon in R1.

It was the weakest weapon for all ranges.

I don't have to spawn with weapons that are not suitable for that map, the problem is the developer shouldn't make available for the maps weapons unless they're suitable, it's about balancing.

Are you listening to yourself? What's wrong about giving an option? Tell me, I'm dying to know.
I mean in R1 weapons were available in the maps that are not all safe for that weapon. For example you have the option to fight with FarEye inside the Manchester buildings. Does it make it wrong for R1 to provide that stupid option? Or should they had removed Far Eye altogether from Manchester maps? It looks like you are defending idiot rights or something. Either that, or you don't like HDR.

R1 does not cater to stop and pop, R2 however forces ironsights but the maps are still too open for stop and pop.

I agree. Don't stop and pop in R2. It's not that game.

Not bs, but truth.

Game punishes you for ironsighting is the truth? Total BS.
Game punishes you for stop-and-pop not ironsighting. Ironsigh in R2 is not the slow and low visibility thing you are accustomed to.

Marksman is a three shot HEADSHOT kill,

Marksman is a two shot headshot kill if all 6 bullets hit to the head.

magnum is maybe a three-shot kill WITH secondary fire,

Maybe?

and even then the fire-rate is slow and is completely vulnerable against another primary weapon,

We can test that you know.

carbine has far shorter range than in R1 and far less accuracy.

It does more damage with no lag.

Not sure who you were playing against but with the bullseye if you're tagged from medium range in R1 you're deadmeat, now the tagging range is significantly shortened and carbine at medium range can trump the bullseye.

Apparently it's not that simple looking at my weapon stats.

The weapon aiming promotes stop and pop, the maps are not conducive to it, hence the problem, they couldn't make up their minds whether they wanted a stop and pop game or a run and gun game, and decided to mix two different elements that don't mesh well.

There is no stop-and-pop in R2.

I'm not sure you have any right to tell someone else they have no right to talk about skill.

My bad, I thought you were the guy who couldn't get a kill by himself.

Tagging is inaccurate, whether you prefer to run or not,

I think you should have stopped right here.

the problem is the lack of range, not whether you want to run and tag versus someone else who might want to stop, zoom and tag, either way it's inferior to the tagging in R1 which was accurate enough to tag someone in mid-air and worked at medium range.

Tagging in R1 was way easier. It was also the source of most complaints especially since majority preferred Carbine.

Obviously you're getting your facts wrong.

Obviously

Then don't reply.

I wouldn't if I knew whether you were pretending that someone was talking to you, or simply replied without reading the post first.

If I don't care about Resistance obviously I wouldn't be among the beta people who suggested changes to many of the problems in the beta, maybe those of us who have suggestions should have kept quiet so you would still be stuck with those marshmellow grenades.

Wow, that has to be your proudest achievement in your life. Good for you.

I want the series to play and look better and become a more dominant FPS franchise, you obviously don't, so WHO wants the worst for Resistance again?

I think you can stop caring now. You cannot change the game at this point, you are certainly not helping anyone especially with this misinformation, bs about weapon balancing and maps, etc..

Above all, you are an arrogant kitty who cannot accept the fact that game can be different without being better or worse. You don't have to like every game, go drink milk or something.

I decided to pick my favorite R1 weapon: The Auger. It's pretty usable now compared to R1. Useful for defending nodes. Barely good enough to go toe to toe against Carbine and Bullseye, better if I strafe behind obstacles.

An auger with shield is a nightmare for attackers in Core Control.
It's also one of the safest guns out there. Can take on pretty much anything 1-on-1.
I find it not so pleasing for many-on-1 or 1-on-many. But its shield is always useful.

Usability-wise, R2 is snappier in matching games. The UI is more tedious and confusing. To be fair, Sony's XMB game invite mechanism may have complicated the experience. R1 has a complete, standalone UI so the experience is tighter.

Messaging should be back, at least they should provide a tab for recently played for checking stats and sending messages (even using OS dialogs). I can live with reading messages from XMB.
That said what I really like about the new UI is that you don't have to wait for the MP interface. All three modes launch from same interface.
The party system is also better in the way you can join parties any time you want and talk to the guys playing and letting them know. Party permission system is also welcome in getting rid of invite problems of the original. Squad limitation sucks though. I really really miss old squad channels.

While the current party system is a little buggy, overall I like the interface much better.

 

[Kittonwy]

Magnum is a secondary weapon. It isn't meant to be used as a primary weapon.
It's used only when you run out of bullets. So, instead of the reload procedure, you pull out the magnum and hit the enemy once or twice.
I made numerous kills with the magnum when both me and my enemy ran out of bullets.
Some people will try to meelee you when they run out of bullets, and that's just the perfect time to pull out a magnum.

LOL melee vs. magnum? Yeah I think the magnum is going to win that one.

 

[Kittonwy]

You want a handgun to be effective against rifles and shotguns? Do you realize how UNBALANCED the Magnum would become in that case? Think about it.

No I don't want a handgun to be effective against rifles and shotguns, Betan was the one who's touting how the magnum allows one to waltz around the level. What I do have a problem with is how some of the primary weapons are just lousy on two of the maps, like having a splicer or a shotty in orick or chicago, THAT's unbalanced.

So options are bad. Got it. I mean, who is Insomniac to give players CHOICE to use a weapon that's not suited for a certain level, even if it's their favorite. WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU INSOMNIAC, TAKE AWAY OUR CHOICES!!!

You're not making a real argument here. Allowing a weapon that performs poorly on a map is a simply a bad decision.

Really? Because the Lumber Mill, housing area, and business district are all pretty close quarters with alleys, halls, and doorways. Seems pretty condusive to Shotgun play to me...hmmm...

Shotty range is too short to be effective other than some of the tight entry points, the problem isn't there isn't some tight quarters, it's not enough tight quarters while much of the orick level is wide open with a TON of sniper lanes that can be taken advantage of using the fareye or the marksman.

Regardless of what you think, Core Control (and CTF) still require organization and team tactics. You can win matches with luck, but a team playing together flanking the enemy base and stealing the core / flag will always win out, just like Meltdown / Breach / Assault. Core control is way more tacticle than CTF because of the timer implementations, etc.

Nobody here is arguing that core control doesn't employ tactics, it's just not as fun as meltdown/breach/assault, all three of those are superior modes to core control or CTF.

If I preferred Jello for water, I'd go play Uncharted, which also had shitty water (OH!).

That makes no sense since R2 has jello for water and not Uncharted which has way better water effects.

As well as the least interesting. Go figure.

It's the standard weapon, but it's effective.

Again, choice =/= bad. How in the HELL does that effect balance? If it's someones CHOICE to use a weapon that isn't effective on a certain map, that doesn't say anything about balance, it says everything about that players ability to chose. The subway in Chicago is designed for close quarters almost exclusively, focusing on weapons like the shotgun, and weapons with splash damage like the bellock and splicer. The Bullseye and Carbine also do well here in the hallways.

If you're going to provide a choice for the player to SPAWN with a certain weapon, design the map to allow that particular weapon to be competitive. If everybody spawns with one of two standard weapons that are both equally effective, and give people a choice of picking up optional weapons that perform well in certain situations, then it would likely be more balanced, the problem is you have weapons that are really awful on certain maps and you're allowing people to SPAWN with them as primary weapons, that I have a problem with.

I have no idea how you think it's a balancing issue. If the player has the option to use weapons off the bat that are effective on a map, then the game is still balanced. Period.

It's not balanced when you have players spawning with weapons that are not viable on certain maps because then the maps are not designed to allow people who have chosen to spawn with for example a splicer in chicago.

I disagree. Strongly.

That's fine. I'm not here to convince you.

It actually caters to both, neither is necessarily stronger than the other. I dont 'really see a problem. Though, you said you HATED stop and pop gameplay, but then gave praise to allah to another title that is stop and pop....

I do not hate stop and pop gameplay, I like it when it's EXECUTED WELL. I hate stop and pop gameplay shoehorned into open maps which is what R2 is doing, because it doesn't play well.

Wow. The "allah" comment was completely unnecessary. Whatever.

Compared to the tagging in R1 that was terrible and could be done from the other side of the planet.

Tagging in R1 is terrific, especially being able to tag someone in midair, while in midair. The bullseye in R2 is simply too inaccurate to be effective in terms of tag and bag.

Grenades were not a porblem, I wish they stayed the way they were, along with fall damage and the reduced speed.

So basically you want an even worse-playing game.

 

[Kittonwy]

This is related how exactly? You are playing with a party of 2 along with 14 privates. The other team is a party of 16 supreme commanders. They are not idiot and took the wall side. Now, should I be able to kick them out all by myself? They have Laark, 40z and Far Eyes. Skill my back.
At least in R2 you can start with you weapon of choice and do something about it even if your team looses miserably.

That's a difference in skill, obviously your team isn't up to snuff. Nobody expects you to kick them out all by yourself. Play with a bigger party of friends perhaps? I used to play R1 with 7 or 8 clan mates.

All weapons are powerless against a shotty at close range. The skill is not letting the opponent set the distance.

The problem is that you have to close in with the shotty and the maps are more often too open, giving longer range weapon users an opportunity to take you out before you can even get close. If the maps have more cover and fewer sniper lanes, it would be better balanced, keep in mind I LIKE using range weapons.

Why do we care about per shot again?

Because the carbine more often than not will quickly finish off a wraith player before he can rev up.

Since you have the skills, we will see if your theories about weapons and maps are true.

It doesn't matter, I have no interest in playing you, there's nothing in it for me.

So we want all maps to be same, fair to every gun equally with no variety and that's your understanding of balance. Right.

All maps do not have to be the same in order to be give a fair shot to each of the weapons, just have enough close quarters with cover strewn throughout the level and adequate sniper lanes, but they can be configured differently.

we can test it

No need to test it when I know I'm right, you don't have to agree.

Don't care what your clan did. CTF in R1 was garbage because it didn't scale well.

Not sure if you're trying to get me to defend CTF in R1, which I dislike anyway, a completely putrid game mode.

CC in R2 is awesome but I guess you need to play it with people who knows what they are doing.

Even with people who know what they're doing, CC is more putrid than CTF in R1.

Why do you need cross-squad com when 99 out of 100 times you have different objectives?

Actually in R1, often when offense or defense need more support, people can break off from one squad and join another while the whole time stay in communication, it's a matter of better coordination instead of having squads isolated from each other, which essentials render moot the point of having 60 players on the map.

And for the record, you can say whatever you want to other squads.

The problem is not being to choose your squad and switch squads dynamically, the player is not in control of the big picture like in R1 where an awareness of which squad is doing what and being able to choose which node to attack/defend can dictate the outcome of the match.

Not being able to kill anyone by yourself has no relation to game allowing assists.

You're not really arguing the point.

Sorry to disappoint you but having grass triangles with 1 sec response time for interaction is not exactly space tech.

Space tech or not R2 doesn't have it, the other games do and it's something that adds to the immersion.

Yes, yes, let's try to change discussion to gameplay instead, since you have nothing else left to argue.

I've been discussing gameplay in addition to graphics.

Thanks for the permission

You're welcome.

What's bs is shadowing has anything to do with HDR.

Lighting and shadowing complements each other.

This statement is not true.

My statement is true.

It was the weakest weapon for all ranges.

The carbine in R1 does more damage than the bullseye (but has a greater need for accuracy from the player), at medium range it trumps the shotty, plus with the 40mm being an instant kill, it's arguably the most versatile weapon in the game, the good thing about R1 was with the weapons there's a very nice rock-papers-scissors dynamics going on all the time, no weapon is absolutely the best or worst, one weapon can always trump another given different conditions.

Are you listening to yourself? What's wrong about giving an option? Tell me, I'm dying to know.

I mean in R1 weapons were available in the maps that are not all safe for that weapon. For example you have the option to fight with FarEye inside the Manchester buildings. Does it make it wrong for R1 to provide that stupid option? Or should they had removed Far Eye altogether from Manchester maps? It looks like you are defending idiot rights or something. Either that, or you don't like HDR.

Giving an option to SPAWN with a certain primary weapon should be accompanied by designing the map to allow that primary weapon to be effective.

You cannot SPAWN with the fareye in manchester in R1, you either spawn with a carbine or a bullseye in a ranked match, and manchester is equally fair to both carbine and bullseye, the fareye is an option through a weapon spawn but not a primary weapon that you are spawned with, not to mention in manchester you can be very effective with the fareye, or a shotty, or some of the other weapons that you don't spawn with.

I agree. Don't stop and pop in R2. It's not that game.

The weapons are not accurate enough shooting from the hip to not stop and pop via ironsights.

Game punishes you for ironsighting is the truth? Total BS.
Game punishes you for stop-and-pop not ironsighting. Ironsigh in R2 is not the slow and low visibility thing you are accustomed to.

The game FORCES the player to use ironsights because shooting from the hip isn't as accurate, the problem is turning while in ironsights is slow but the maps are more open and the damage per shot is still small enough which lends itself to more circle-strafing while in ironsights, which is awkward at best.

Marksman is a two shot headshot kill if all 6 bullets hit to the head.

You're contradicting yourself, if all 6 bullets hit the head then it's a 6 shot headshot kill.

Maybe?

Not sure what you're arguing against.

We can test that you know.

I don't need to.

It does more damage with no lag.

Whether that is true or not, it has nothing to do with the lack of range of the R2 carbine or the lower accuracy.

Apparently it's not that simple looking at my weapon stats.

Actually it is rather simple.

There is no stop-and-pop in R2.

Ironsighting is a stop-and-pop mechanic which is in R2 since moving while in ironsights is very slow.

My bad, I thought you were the guy who couldn't get a kill by himself.

?

I think you should have stopped right here.

Not sure what you're arguing here.

Tagging in R1 was way easier. It was also the source of most complaints especially since majority preferred Carbine.

Thus making the bullseye more effective, people hated getting tagged but that's exactly what the bullseye does when it's an effective weapon. People complained about getting sniped, 40ed and shottied but that's what the weapons do.

Obviously

I wouldn't if I knew whether you were pretending that someone was talking to you, or simply replied without reading the post first.

Wow, that has to be your proudest achievement in your life. Good for you.

I think you can stop caring now. You cannot change the game at this point, you are certainly not helping anyone especially with this misinformation, bs about weapon balancing and maps, etc..

Above all, you are an arrogant kitty who cannot accept the fact that game can be different without being better or worse. You don't have to like every game, go drink milk or something.

There's no point in debating if you can't keep it civil.

 

[tha_con]

Kittonwy, the sad thing is, R2 had gameplay that was condusive to stop and pop mechanics, and individuals like you ruined that during the private beta.

People wanted the accuracy differences when moving, stopped, and in cross hairs gone (which all together brought down the effectiveness of stop and pop). The wanted the game sped up, which further destroyed the ability to use stop and pop gameplay. They wanted no fall damage, more run and gun. They wanted grenades to have the Brett Farve effect again, tossing across half the screen.

Basically, all of the elements that were changed from the private beta (as requested by individuals like yourself) are what made the game what it is today. So you (and people like you) made your bed, now sleep in it.

Insomniac knew what they were doing in the private beta, and it was changed to cater to YOU, blame them, not Insomniac.

 

[Cornsnake]

Everyone should feel free to voicing their opinion about a game. It is up to Insomniac to decide what they want to do with that opinion. And honestly I can see them change the game again. Whether that is a change in the direction of Rfom, or more towards how it was during the beta, or fine tuning what they have now. And whatever they change, it will never be, or ever was, the best possible game for everyone. So I guess we can look forward to continue debating this issue for a while. Even though we already know we'll never agree, which is okay of course.

 

[tha_con]

Everyone should feel free to voicing their opinion about a game. It is up to Insomniac to decide what they want to do with that opinion. And honestly I can see them change the game again. Whether that is a change in the direction of Rfom, or more towards how it was during the beta, or fine tuning what they have now. And whatever they change, it will never be, or ever was, the best possible game for everyone. So I guess we can look forward to continue debating this issue for a while. Even though we already know we'll never agree, which is okay of course.

No game is ever the best possible game for everyone. I loved Bioshocks atmosphere and art, but thought the game itself was less than stellar.

Insomniacs key problem here was creating a product, and then listening to a small group of fans during the Private beta. I tried my best to be extremely vocal against the "This isn't Resistance" group, but it didn't work out. There were entirely too many people who wanted Rfom, which IMO was, and I apologize for using this word, stupid.

They ruined the great great game that the Private beta was. The Private beta was far more tuned. IMO, you should rarely change your gameplay mechanics. You tune, and tweak, but the general mechanics shoudl not change. Unfortunately those loud mouthed fans in the beta didn't understand that concept, and Insomniac fell victim to circumstance, they took the feedback (I think this was a mistake) and applied it. The end result is a game that isn't finely tuned and has gameplay mechanics that clash.

They could have avoided a lot of this, and I'm sure it will all get fixed in time, but I still think they did a great job with what they put out, and I enjoy it.

The mechanics that were changed (speed, accuracy, grenade throwing distance, fall damage, etc) are what changed the game. I feel that if these changes were not made, the game would be significantly better. Sure, it wouldn't be Resistance: Fall of Man, but when was it ever RFoM? It's always been R2, and should have always been treated as such, IMO.