Resistance: Fall of Man update! BIG READ , come inside!

[Titanio]

What does resistance have to distinguish from other fps??The 40 player multiplayer??The graphics are good but not amasing(according to IGN,Gamespot,1up which are the 3 biggest videogames' sites),the enemy A.I is nothing special,the setting is generic(WWII-like backgrounds with ...aliens,like a RTCW clone just more open ended).

It's not my job to sell you on the game, but..

Whilst reviewers have to lesser and greater degrees pointed out that what Resistance does isn't particularly original, they seem to all agree that it executes excellently. To quote just the gamespot review, it references 'rock solid design', 'great weapons', 'thrilling' battles and a packed online multiplayer mode, concluding that any FPS fan should play this game. It's not common for a game like this to offer everything Resistance does offer in one package, with consistently excellent execution. Though you may consider it unoriginal does not mean you should overlook it.

Read the reviews (not just the scores, which are roundly excellent anyway), and I think it's hard not to get excited for this game. I know I'm more excited now than I was before reviews started hitting - I can certainly look past a supposed lack of originality if the experience is as excellent as it's touted to be (particularly w.r.t. multiplayer).

That said, some of the weapons do seem plenty inventive..

(And on comparisons with other FPS games..to date Resistance is on average reviewing higher than some of those mentioned above e.g. CoD3/FEAR/PDZ, though that could change of course as more reviews come in - if we're keeping score like that! Which probably isn't too advisable..but I figured it was worth noting since some seem to put a lot of stock in numbers).

 

[Shifty Geezer]

the setting is generic(WWII-like backgrounds with ...aliens,like a RTCW clone just more open ended).

Just to look at this point (can't comment on the others as I don't play FPSes), what FPS hasn't got a generic setting? There's bashed up Earth (past and future), middle-east, modern 'West', and sci-fi. When was the last time an FPS came up with a new setting? I can't see how setting can be held against a title. All games have the same problem there - pretty much every setting has been done before. At least in R:FoM you have a sci-fi shooter juxtaposed against older technology, which is something a little different from out-right historical shooter and out-right sci-fi shooter. And this game is supposed to follow a story arc through three titles, so the setting should be the basis of the story - and thus it's the story where they ought to be trying to do something new.

 

[Arwin]

That'd probably lose the sale of this game to me if I were in any position to buy it. I either want in depth solo RPGs or co-op action games, which are unfortunately few and far between other than two players playing a mostly single player game.

As far as I understand it though, it's particularly the lack of being able to play co-op online that's being faulted, rather than the co-op experience itself.

 

[MrFloopy]

PDZ > COD3 > F.E.A.R > Resistance? I wouldn't mind some of Gamespots drugs

I would say that this is one of the benefits of being first to market with a next gen platform.

While it is obvious that PDZ is not in the same league as the other mentioned games, it was the first on this generation and so given nothing else to compare it with except PS2/Xbox titles the inbalance in the scores is understandable.

One of the issues that Sony has to deal with is that the public has seen quite a bit of this generation's games and their quality. Therefore the impact it has is significantly less than had we seen Resistance last year.

 

[NRP]

Resistance looks like a fun shooter. If I were going to get a PS3, I wouldn't let an 8.6 stop me from buying this game. Although online co-op is great and arguably should be required for every action game, if this game has good multiplayer it should be fine.

 

[scooby_dooby]

Just to look at this point (can't comment on the others as I don't play FPSes), what FPS hasn't got a generic setting? There's bashed up Earth (past and future), middle-east, modern 'West', and sci-fi. When was the last time an FPS came up with a new setting? I can't see how setting can be held against a title. All games have the same problem there - pretty much every setting has been done before. At least in R:FoM you have a sci-fi shooter juxtaposed against older technology, which is something a little different from out-right historical shooter and out-right sci-fi shooter. And this game is supposed to follow a story arc through three titles, so the setting should be the basis of the story - and thus it's the story where they ought to be trying to do something new.

I don't think there would bee much argument with the statement that the WW2 genre is the most played out by a wide margin, especially in the console space.

 

[rabidrabbit]

Except that Resistance: Fall Of Man has nothing to do with WWII.
The World War 2 never happened in that games universe and alternate history.
So, you're wrong.
It's set at earth late 1940's-50's era, hence the similarities in architecture and technology to WW2 titles, but there's no World War 2 anywhere in that game.
It's distinctive in it's style reflecting that time, but it's not "generic".
Making the game in an unspecified "near or far future" or "time and place far away in galaxy far away" would be generic

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Except that Resistance: Fall Of Man has nothing to do with WWII.

Precisely. The looks may resembled WWII, because strangely enough there isn't much variety in how blown-up buildings in the 40s can look. And of course the tech, the uniforms and guns and such, look WWII because that's the period they're from. But I commend Insomniac for trying an alternative reality game (and it's a shame for them that while creating R:FoM, 82 WWII shooters have been released!). Who else has set a sci-fi shooter in the past, limiting the human options even moreso?

R:FoM is only WWII in superficiail likeness. It's a sci-fi shooter, to be likened to shooters where people battle aliens with ray-guns rather than Yanks battling Nazis with rifles. It's only the scenery and period that have earned R:FoM a misplaced WWII label, and I think the scenery and period actually make this game slightly different from the norm!

 

[Bad_Boy]

Gametrailers review:
http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?r=1&id=15068&type=mov

 

[weaksauce]

It's too bad they rushed it. Better animations and online coop would be good.

 

[scooby_dooby]

But I commend Insomniac for trying an alternative reality game (and it's a shame for them that while creating R:FoM, 82 WWII shooters have been released!).

Unfortunately, with all the possible alternate era's available, they choose to create it in the most generic of settings.

 

[rabidrabbit]

Where would you have set it then? Some alien planet? Wouldn't that have been most generic?
Modern day? Now isn't that generic as anything?
I think whatever it would have been , you'd found the "too generic" there too

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Unfortunately, with all the possible alternate era's available, they choose to create it in the most generic of settings.

I don't think there's many suitable eras, if you want the humans to have some useable tech (though R:FoM seems to have you on alien weapons from the off...). Go much further back then WWII and you lack useable technology. Aliens invading medieval Europe? Mesopotamia versus the Bug-eyed martians? Cavemen chucking rocks at critters with ray-guns?

I don't think they could pick many later times either without problems. A game set in the 70's would instantly become tongue-in-cheek I think. No-one can take the 70s seriously. The 80s were just brown. 90s is too modern to be worth considering. 50s...is very like WWII, or alien invader B-movies. Maybe the 60s?

I don't know what the design criteria were, but I can see how some criteria would pin them to the WWII period - and that would explain why they did an alternate timeline without WWII. They wanted that period but not that history.

 

[Arwin]

After Gears of War received an 8, Eurogamer continues the trend for Resistance, by giving it a whopping 7!

http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=70094

 

[CEO]

There is a Gears & RFOM comparison. To be found here: http://www.gamepro.com/gamepro/domestic/games/features/86688.shtml

 

[Dot50Cal]

The official site has a really nicely done timeline from 1897-1950. Pretty cool stuff, after reading all about it Im actually pretty excited for the title now.

http://www.us.playstation.com/Content/OGS/BCUS-98107/Site/default.html

 

[scooby_dooby]

I don't think there's many suitable eras, if you want the humans to have some useable tech (though R:FoM seems to have you on alien weapons from the off...). Go much further back then WWII and you lack useable technology. Aliens invading medieval Europe? Mesopotamia versus the Bug-eyed martians? Cavemen chucking rocks at critters with ray-guns?

I don't think they could pick many later times either without problems. A game set in the 70's would instantly become tongue-in-cheek I think. No-one can take the 70s seriously. The 80s were just brown. 90s is too modern to be worth considering. 50s...is very like WWII, or alien invader B-movies. Maybe the 60s?

I don't know what the design criteria were, but I can see how some criteria would pin them to the WWII period - and that would explain why they did an alternate timeline without WWII. They wanted that period but not that history.

Actually I was thinking 60's too. Anyways, I kind of dig the idea personally, I just don't think they did themselves any favours by choosing this setting, they automatically start in a hole,in some respects, if you know what I mean. Look at Bioshock for example, now there's an aloternate reality that immdiately piques your interest, and it's around the 50's era, but it's something totally different.

Eurogamer is funny....how did FEAR score a 9? Please tell me that...

 

[Gollum]

Its narrative thrust - the Half-Life 2 style mystery of a ruined world - meets the heaviest resistance in the whole game. England doesn't feel like it's been absorbed and processed and deformed like the inside of a Giger construct; it doesn't feel like it's been seized and subjugated like the heart of City 17; there's no focal point on the horizon, just endless hordes of oddball aliens and disparate locations. It feels more like a cross between the weird world of an early Pixar film and the wacky world of an alien cartoon, skipping violently through the sets of Saving Private Ryan. Insomniac's vision is caught somewhere in the twilight between brutal realism and brutal caricature.

I guess this describes the odd feelign some of us have when looking at the game. The mix is sort of (and I want to emphasize sort of) original, but the vibe just isn't there when watching screens or videos, at least for me. Since it'll be many months before we get the PS3 over here, I guess I won't have a chance to experience it in person and change that impression anytime soon either.

7/10 seems a little harsh for what seems to be a good, or even great game. But then again so does 8/10 for GoW.

 

[fulcizombie]

I can't wait for Edge's review.Gamespot review seems to be spot on and Edge will definately tell the unbiased truth about this game.

 

[Bad_Boy]

Been playing resistance for a good hour or two, I'm loving it. Had to remap the controls a bit to my liking, but after that.. all is well.
Havent got too many weapons so far but this bullseye weapon is pretty fun once you learn how to use it.

I'm just playing SP so far, I'll probably get into MP a little later.

edit: oh btw, the analog sticks are so much better than the DS2 its not even funny.