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

TurnDragoZeroV2G said:
In a tactical shooter, I'd rarely ever run around like I've seen people do in Resistance videos. It would also be very dangerous to have so many enemies in so many directions as well (thinking of the roundish courtyard where a dropship eventually comes). I've seen people (not in god mode) just mow their way through one side of this and totally ignore the other side. This would be fine for a run and gun shooter, but would seem very iffy doing in a tactical shooter, since you set up your position to danger to your right as well as a large area in front of you.

I don't have major disagreement with your points except the above paragraph. It's a subtle point really.

In a typical run-and-gun game like Halo, if you don't control/get out of a situation fast enough, you may find more and more enemies pouring out from locked doors. So running-and-gunning to maintain strategic control of the battlefield is part of the game. This may mean killing enough to stop/delay a charge... or find a temporary, safe hiding place in a transient environment to survive long enough. Even the simple act of taking cover behind walls may not work.

Most of the posts so far imply that run-and-gun is inferior or somewhat brainless. I tend to disagree (Perhaps they refer to the easier levels).

In tactical shooters, I'm sure the game designers will present a different set of problems for you to solve.

Personally, I prefer the run-n-gun style, especially when the enemies are smart and dynamic. I haven't played an FPS for 2 years now though (except for brief COD encounters in stores). :) May be I'll give Resistance a try.
 
Oh, the game I was watching had to have been played on easy, otherwise I would never consider picking Resistance up (if that was a higher difficulty). And you can definitely do the exact same thing on Halo/2 easy/normal. Obviously on the higher difficulties you're grenading choke points, ensuring your advantage by keeping enemies in a certain area rather than all around you, and so on. You probably wouldn't run out into the Hangar from Truth and Reconciliation, all the way through on Legendary and triggering as many enemies as you can to come out at once; at least, not if you're looking for the best/easiest way of handling that zone.

So, I think that most run and gun games, on easy, (or one of the non-"intelligent" run and gun shooters) are pretty brainless (in the sense that it's very, very forgiving of being stupid rather than, as you say, controlling the battlefield or using the right weapons for the right situations). And I think many casual gamers play (on easy/normal) like this all the time, which is what reinforces the perception that run and gun is stupid, no matter what. I agree that run and gun shooters are pretty far from brainless on higher difficulties (and aren't inferior to tactical shooters), or in the better games with less variation in difficulty. Meanwhile, of the tactical shooters I've played, I wouldn't do this on any difficulty (possibly skewed by GRAW: when I decided to play through normal again and just "blast my way through"--I'd forgotten how unforgiving it can be if you're stupid--I found myself asking why I thought I could just act like a shooting god and not get blown apart). In Halo 2, on the level Regret (I believe) when you're in the large room with hunters, honor guard, drones, and snipers, I've never tried going through one side alone on Legendary/possibly Heroic. It's always clearing out the two most immediate threats (honor guard on that side of the hall, snipers in that area, and then snipers along the other side of the hall), then moving forward if possible until you have to deal with the swarm of drones (which prompts retreating or rushing for the closest thing to a safe location). Or something like that, it's been a while since I've played Legendary on either of those. I don't think the Resistance tactic I saw would work there nearly as well as it had for that guy.

Perhaps to flesh it out more than I did earlier, a tactical game is based more on creating a solid plan beforehand, and quickly executing. It's over fairly quickly and you don't have to worry too much about the enemies messing with the plan. In a (/an excellent) run and gun game, it's more like a set of plans for different variations (dependant upon what course of action the enemy takes), woven together on the fly. Sometimes those pieces involve a specific location, sometimes it's more like move in a general direction and find the closest thing to good cover for the moment, etc. Certain sets of plans can carry over to future scenarios and work fairly well without developing a new one.

Or perhaps I'm trying to create a big difference for the sake of the argument where one doesn't exist. :smile:
 
Most of the posts so far imply that run-and-gun is inferior or somewhat brainless. I tend to disagree (Perhaps they refer to the easier levels).

.
I think this is my main point I was trying to make. I disagree with that statement as well. It really depends on the game, the controls, the difficulty, the map placement, and the weapons used. But for the most part, run and gun games are not brainless by a far margin. I just seem to be finding people put a stigma on the phrase "run and gun" as a negative, when its really a neutral argument because its the norm. At it's core, you could say half life 2 is a run and gun game, but at the same time the weapons involve inflict a lot of strategy on how you play the game. Same thing applies to halo, or resistance.

I think the best way to put this is that these games can be played both run and gun and tactical is chosen to, depending on the strategy and difficulty. SWAT 4 for example (a game that I love personally), is run and gun at it's core imo, but because the game play is much slower (running speed I mean) and aim is such a big part of the game, it must be played VERY tactical in how you play. I guess this is what I mean when I said every FPS is 'run and gun' at it's core, it really depends on other factors in determining how much of the game is really running and gunning.

But yeah, I feel this is a topic for another thread. I preordered resistance almost two months ago, and I can't wait to play it a couple weeks from now. The reviews should be very interesting. It's been getting high praise everywhere for the most part. IIRC one editor at OPM has already gotten to play through the entire game and says its very good, but very hard (which goes with everything we have been hearing). Infact, according to a gaf post, Ted Price says Superhuman mode is almost impossible to beat, which is a good thing to me personally. I find difficult games to be much more satisfying in the long run. But it's also good to know their are much easier modes for the others not like me. :LOL:
 
You probably wouldn't run out into the Hangar from Truth and Reconciliation, all the way through on Legendary and triggering as many enemies as you can to come out at once; at least, not if you're looking for the best/easiest way of handling that zone.

It depends on the level design, what the player wants and what kind of weapons he has really. That's why it's so unpredictable during the first run. My favorite level is when Master Chief and his troop first teleported to the alien ship in Halo 1. In some cases, you have to dash past the enemies; in other situations it's hit and run; yet others just sniping from far. The key is to maintain control of the situation and knowing when to run :)

There are still strategic elements in run-and-gun games, just more hectic and free-form. From the look of it, Resistance should offer enough challenges for FPS gamers.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think this is my main point I was trying to make.

My point wasn't that run and gun games are inherently flawed, just that very rarely are developers to make a 'great' runa nd gun game. Not only is there a ton of competition in the genre, but it takes a certain skill to make a game like this that does not become boring by the end of the game.

COD1, COD2 and Halo are some of the handful of games that have pulled it off.
 
My point wasn't that run and gun games are inherently flawed, just that very rarely are developers to make a 'great' runa nd gun game. Not only is there a ton of competition in the genre, but it takes a certain skill to make a game like this that does not become boring by the end of the game.

COD1, COD2 and Halo are some of the handful of games that have pulled it off.

I understand that, I was just saying that theres tons of great FPS games out there that are run and gun; so to say its run and gun and to kinda put it in a catagory of its own when it's actually the norm of most FPS games is kinda weird to me. So I agree it depends on the different factors that make up the game to determine how good it is at the end of the day, which should be the case always. But the line you said earlier kinda threw me off, "resistance is run and gun to the extreme." Which really depends on the difficulty and whats going on at the particular moment.

Anyways, as I mentioned earlier, OPM seemed to like it (no surprise there really), it got a 9 from OPM, and 9/8/8/8 from famitsu. Not a bad start at all :)

edit:
taken from gaf for the OPM scores
They say it took about 12 hours to complete but they found significant replay value (in the form of additional weapons and completing the story). They said they had minor complaints, mostly with the thin story and lack of online co-op. Also, they found the enemy variety lacking (there is a large variety of enemies, but you mostly encounter minor variations of the same enemy). Other than that, the review is really positive as the reviewer walks you threw a few minutes of the game. The reviewer says he was most impressed by the game's "very topmost level design. I'm talking about basic pacing, balance, sound design--that sort of thing."
Overall sounds good, I'm kinda worried about the 'thin story' line because I was expecting something pretty good with the narration and everything, but overall sounds like what I expected. Can't wait to try it out for myself.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Reading the whole thing (available at neoGAF, no doubt not for long I imagine), it sounds like they try to make the player do some work with the story in terms of uncovering intelligence and the like to fill in the plot. It's not all "out there".

The single player replay incentives sound pretty decent, I must say. Here's the review's wrap-up verdict:

Verdict: A supremely competent shooter that excels at top-level design. A few minor flaws hurt the overall score, but not much.

I might have missed it, but there was virtually no discussion of the online multiplayer, which could be one of the game's strongest points, hopefully.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Overall sounds good, I'm kinda worried about the 'thin story' line because I was expecting something pretty good with the narration and everything, but overall sounds like what I expected. Can't wait to try it out for myself.

Don't be alarmed. Imsomniac already said that this is just the first game to be released and there will be more so its no surprise if they keep people wondering whats going to happen. I'm sure there will be alot of random hints dropped in the levels for replay value.
 
Don't be alarmed. Imsomniac already said that this is just the first game to be released and there will be more so its no surprise if they keep people wondering whats going to happen. I'm sure there will be alot of random hints dropped in the levels for replay value.

Yeah, I wouldnt be surprised to see a Resistance 2 after Rachet & Clank PS3 is released. As for the reply value, I'm really liking the idea of including other treasures such as weapons with a second play through. Match that with the online component, I think this game will last a good while. :)
 
How long will it take to play through it?

And I'll be waiting for other scores, the latest Edge preview sounded a bit worrying (no final build though).
 
How long will it take to play through it?

And I'll be waiting for other scores, the latest Edge preview sounded a bit worrying (no final build though).
12 hours for the first play through OPM noted, a second playthrough unlocks new weapons and other hidden stuff if I read correctly.
 
Cheers! So far so good (I don't like long games in general).

For me it depends on the genre really.

For FPS its better to have it short, there's hardly anything in these games that shouts I HAVE TO COME BACK TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS NEXT! 12 hours sounds like its gona be Okay. One dude finished Half life 1 in 1 hour so I don't think any FPS will last long in the right hands. ;)

For RPG's its awesome to have games that last good 100~ hours. I.E Final Fantasy, good story going around to make you come back.
 
Anyways, as I mentioned earlier, OPM seemed to like it (no surprise there really), it got a 9 from OPM, and 9/8/8/8 from famitsu. Not a bad start at all :)


any mention to frame rate issue? is it confirmed a very solid 30 fps or a better 60 fps?...hope this game avoid slowdowns at least..
 
For me it depends on the genre really.

For FPS its better to have it short, there's hardly anything in these games that shouts I HAVE TO COME BACK TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS NEXT! 12 hours sounds like its gona be Okay. One dude finished Half life 1 in 1 hour so I don't think any FPS will last long in the right hands. ;)

For RPG's its awesome to have games that last good 100~ hours. I.E Final Fantasy, good story going around to make you come back.

Finished Half Life in just 1 hour? :oops:
How did he do that???
 
I finished Jagged Alliance 2 and Fallout in ~20 minutes.:smile: No speedruns surprise me now.;) Though I'm very impressed by people who are able to finish action games in very short time.

Anyway, 12 hours campaign in FPS is a sweet spot for me.
 
Back
Top