• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Resistance fall of man > Resistance 3

I enjoyed FoM but thought it was seriously flawed (didn't play it at launch however, I'm sure it was a good launch title). Resistance 2 was really bad, didn't play the MP much (I don't play console MP) but the SP took me forever to finish. It had it's moments. Haven't played R3, however by all accounts I just wish Insomniac would go back to making platformers. Ratchet is one of my favourite franchises and I loved Spyro as a kid. Resistance had potential to be more than a generic space shooter but they ruined it. From memory their next IP is also a space shooter. Snore. Bring back something original Insomniac, you have so much potential!**

** This post is all my opinion. Yours may differ, and that's just FINE! :)
 
TEH-CJ said:
yeah bro. last night actually.

resistance 3 was the years biggest disappointment to me. the campaign is the same length as mw2 for fuck sakes. it has little to no replay value.

We share the same opinion, my friend. Unfortunately we are a rare species among these lands.

Resistance 3 is fucking pony.
 
The main thing wich were better in R:FoM were the narrator managed to put us more into the world.. I.e. I felt I were more in the various places in England, rather than I felt I were in New York in R3, without the narrator telling me I had arrived at New York. :-/
Also the Hailfire with the crazy ricocheting bullets-gun were super-cool (as long as the ammo lasted), and we had more of those exploding nail-grenades.
Other than that I liked R3 better due to better gameplay overall.. :)
R2 were fun aswell, but not so much more fun than non-Insomniac FPS's as R:FoM and R3 is. :)
 
OP there has never been a thread as wrong as this one.

Animations, visuals, sound, weapon balance, game play, story, voice acting, cutscenes and the multiplayer are all much, much better in Resistance 3.
 
Shtof said:
Resistance 2 is the best game in the series.

wtf.jpg
 
Kenshin001 said:
I could never understand why they never delved into the Cloven side story more. They hinted at it in R:FoM and then pretty much completely ignored it in the subsequent games.

Because they completely ignored everything about the first game in order to make the second. Virtually every single aspect of the game was changed from RFOM. All of RFOMs tension and intrigue was completely abandoned. This was incredibly frustrating because the ARG they released before R2 was really well done and felt a lot like RFOM. R2 for me remains the biggest disappointment I have had in all of my gaming life. I have never loved a game so much as RFOM while despising its sequel with such anger.
 
i though resistance 3 did everything better. i really like the way the guns felt and how you could level them up as you used them
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lt-V6IaoZXA

I remember seeing this and thinking - wow, this is next gen, that Cell processor is indeed a beast, and this is only a launch title!

I could not imaging at that time that this will be the only game using this level of physical calculations 5 years in. So yea, I kinda agree with OP. :p
 
Definitely can't agree. I enjoyed R1, but it always felt somewhat hollow to me, which I could excuse as it was a launch title. I think R3 is better in virtually every way and finally gives the series a real identity.
 
i only miss the more rpg like complex coop-multiplayer from Resistance 2.

...and im yet to even start the single player campaign in R3. Any suggestions on difficulty level? Is it murder on Hard?
 
Finished playing Resistance 3 SP last night and really really enjoyed it. Super controls, weapon wheel and fun weapons and atmosphere.

Definitely the best SP campaign I've played this year. Sure, it takes inspiration from other games but puts them all together into a very enjoyable package.

As mentioned previously, the level design is very well done with mutiple routes to complete an objective. This is very visible on the
prison
chapters.

Not a huge MP player so won't comment on it.


Noisepurge said:
...and im yet to even start the single player campaign in R3. Any suggestions on difficulty level? Is it murder on Hard?
I played on Normal and found the difficulty ramped up significantly in the last city.
 
TEH-CJ said:
R2 is better than R3. there I said it. and no I'm not even trolling.

Just played through the train section in R3 again. WTF were you thinking insomniac??..fighting brain dead humans?..really??

the story is non existent. the pure chimera and the other alien race we keep hearing about do not even get mentioned.

I don't get it.

3 years in the makings and we get what? a 4 hour campaign and a tacked on mp.
4 hour campaign? Oh yea, you're definitely trolling at this point. Rose tinted glasses fo sho...
 
Resistance 3 while I loved it, took only 5 hours on hard mode, while searching for intel etc.

A friend and I completed RFOM on co op in just under 8 hours.

As for which game I prefer...I would rather play through FOM again than 3 so FOM I guess.

I do love all the resistance games though.
 
regardless of RFOM, Resistance 3 has a brilliant campaign, one of the best games of the year, so much variety and fun and highly replayable due to the amount of weapons and how different every playthrough feels depending on the weapons you focus. Too bad lag ruined mp for a lot of people (I was lucky to enjoy it lag-free though).
 
R3 was better than R2 at atmosphere, but OP is correct:

R1 had better art, better atmosphere, better level designs, no stupid shitty family love fest plot, and better gameplay.

The sense of solitude and eeriness throughout the european backdrops were amazing.
 
RFOM was pretty lame. If R3 can't top it then Insomniac should just shut down because their best days have clearly passed.

Resistance 2 was terrible, if I wrote a list of the top 500 FPS games ever I doubt it would make it.
 
Jason's Ultimatum said:
R3 was better than R2 at atmosphere, but OP is correct:

R1 had better art, better atmosphere, better level designs, no stupid shitty family love fest plot, and better gameplay.

The sense of solitude and eeriness throughout the european backdrops were amazing.
Completey disagree no way in hell R1 had better art or atmosphere.
 
Jason's Ultimatum said:
R3 was better than R2 at atmosphere, but OP is correct:

R1 had better art, better atmosphere, better level designs, no stupid shitty family love fest plot, and better gameplay.

The sense of solitude and eeriness throughout the european backdrops were amazing.
Seriously? Better art and atmosphere? You must be joking.

What makes you say that? The world of R3 is so much more foreboding and interesting. It really feels like a destroyed world while R1 felt rather flat and sterile. I always felt a disconnect between objects and surfaces in R1. The rooms felt like simple boxes with textures slapped on while R3 delivers complete scenes.

The scenery was just beautiful.

resistance-3-20110912095503823.jpg

resistance-3-20110816115907411.jpg

resistance-3-20110809095115588.jpg

resistance-3-20110912095459368.jpg
 
Tambini said:
Resistance 3 while I loved it, took only 5 hours on hard mode, while searching for intel etc.

A friend and I completed RFOM on co op in just under 8 hours.

As for which game I prefer...I would rather play through FOM again than 3 so FOM I guess.

I do love all the resistance games though.
Resistance 1 accounts for deaths (i.e. The clock never resets if you die). R3 is different in that the clock will reset to the last check point time when you die. Even then, it's EXTREMELY unlikely anyone will finish in 4 hours, even 5 hours is powering through it for a speed run.
 
MrPliskin said:
4 hour campaign? Oh yea, you're definitely trolling at this point. Rose tinted glasses fo sho...

Maybe you are the one trolling, by being IG's free PR and street team by going around and being it's defense force. Maybe you need to remove your rose tinted goggles and hoping for the opportunity that somehow if you always side with IG that you will get a job with them, because you reading their papers and going to their fans appreciation day magically equals you to being IG employee

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=30028863&postcount=1218

MrPliskin said:
Well, I guess my being a studying software engineer might "jade" my perspective. Not to mention my interest in getting into the industry specifically, and following any development studio willing to divulge the inner workings of their projects. I was also at community day and played R3 then before all of you (and it was smooth as butter, mind you, no crashes). I also was in the Friends in Family beta long before most of you as well (and again, it was in MUCH better shape). I've been following this specific game (and studio) for a very long time. I read pretty much any design doc that IG uploads to their R&D site, and do the same for any other developer. So yes, I think, at this point, I do have a better knowledge of this games development history than most of the people on GAF. Admittedly, I am a super fan for the franchise, and the studio. Sure I'm also biased, but I am also realistic.

I use a lot of "common sense". I watched the game quality slowly decline as the beta grew, which leads me to believe a LOT of these issues are server side. I also know that Sony funds these servers, not Insomniac, so some things that they may want to do might take some time, like getting more servers running, etc.

It is a 4+ hours, maybe 5.5 hour tops campaign. It doesn't matter if the difficulty will make the game longer (any fucking game can do that)
If you play on easiest settings, w/o doing anything and just play guess what?, it's fucking short, not Homefront SP campaign short, but it isn't some 10-15 hour campaign, more to the low to middle

Only place you get this so called gaming hours is either playing superhuman (bumps it to 8-10 hours with maxed weapons, longer if you didn't) or if you are collecting Intel or grinding at certain spots for kills to max weapons/trophy

I'm sorry, just because it tries to make it feel like a lengthy game by showing you that you have completed 20 chapters, it really isn't more than 12, the 8 are filler chapters of you just bypassing an area and get to the next area, shit the first 3 so called chapters of the game alone are just walk from point a to point b

Resistance 1 MP was a game all to on it self. Chimeras had their advantage, Humans their. Chimeras had rage mode, humans had unlimited sprint. So there was variety, you had to switch up your play style for which race you were playing, SP gave off a world in which humanity struggled to overcome the odds and survive.

Resistance 2 saving Grace was Co-Op MP. Nothing else from that game matters. That feature alone is worth the $60 investment. The Competitive portion was broken as fuck, "Get to the Beacon, You lost your Beacon, No not that Beacon, that other Beacon". SP was stupid, introducing squad play, but half your fucking squad is dumb as fucking door knob, and enemies/AI are triggered only to you, bypassing your squad-mates and come after you and only you.

Resistance 3 again rather than be it's own, shuffles thing around again. If I placed RFOM, R2, R3 only thing you would think all would have common is the name & Chimera looking creature, that's all, that for a game is not a fucking identity.
SP revolves around you being the last savior again for Humanity, no help from anyone, you vs. 1,000,000 chimeras. No military back-up, no resistance so to speak of, hell you go from middle of America to the East coast by yourself (companion here and there, but yeah)

Resistance 3 falls into the same traps they did with 2, rather than be true to their story/goals, they just catered to what was popular during that time in the FPS category.
MP had a delayed Beta due to outage, the games MP shipped broken, no one can deny that, even you MrPliskin, the game was laggy, micro-stuttering, components not fully fleshed out, as IG has being doing for each Resistance title since FOM, Half-Assed. Their have been patches after patches to get it situated, hell RFOM/R2 didn't have this absurd amount of fixes.

On top of that they go add PSN Pass, I understand why Sony wants to add Project $10, because rather than be a leader this generation, they rather be a follower. So the team @IG goes out their way to put SP stats in the MP stats part of the section. Meaning you either buy new and not have anything to worry about, or if used and you just want to see how you did equals, pay $10 you get access to that info, a FUCKING JOKE!

RFOM >> R2 Co-Op >>>>>>>>>>> R3 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> R2 everything else
 
single player FPS's are a snooze for me so I'll just comment on the mutiplayer aspect.

R1>>>>>>>R2>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>hive of bees attacking my testicles>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Me and Magic Johnson in a clothes dryer with a bucket of broken glass thrown in>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>R3.

and R2 co-op over everything and anything in the resistance series.
 
GraveRobberX said:
Maybe you are the one trolling, by being IG's free PR and street team by going around and being it's defense force. Maybe you need to remove your rose tinted goggles and hoping for the opportunity that somehow if you always side with IG that you will get a job with them, because you reading their papers and going to their fans appreciation day magically equals you to being IG employee

It is a 4+ hours, maybe 5.5 hour tops campaign. It doesn't matter if the difficulty will make the game longer (any fucking game can do that)
If you play on easiest settings, w/o doing anything and just play guess what, it's fucking short

Only place you get this so called gaming hours is either playing superhuman (bumps it to 8-10 hours with maxed weapons, longer if you didn't) or if you are collecting Intel or grinding at certain spots for kills to max weapons/trophy

I'm sorry, just because it tries to make it feel like a lengthy game by showing you that you have completed 20 chapters, it really isn't more than 12, the 8 are filler chapters of you just bypassing an area and get to the next area, shit the first 3 so called chapters of the game alone are just walk from point a to point b

Resistance 1 MP was a game all to on it self. Chimeras had their advantage, Humans their. Chimeras had rage mode, humans had unlimited sprint. So there was variety, you had to switch up your play style for which race you were playing, SP gave off a world in which humanity struggled to overcome the odds and survive.

Resistance 2 saving Grace was Co-Op MP. Nothing else from that game matters. That feature alone is worth the $60 investment. The Competitive portion was broken as fuck, "Get to the Beacon, You lost your Beacon, No not that Beacon, that other Beacon". SP was stupid, introducing squad play, but half your fucking squad is dumb as fucking door knob, and enemies/AI are triggered only to you, bypassing your squad-mates and come after you and only you.

Resistance 3 again rather than be it's own, shuffles thing around again. If I placed RFOM, R2, R3 only thing you would think all would have common is the name & Chimera looking creature, that's all, that for a game is not a fucking identity.
SP revolves around you being the last savior again for Humanity, no help from anyone, you vs. 1,000,000 chimeras. No military back-up, no resistance so to speak of, hell you go from middle of America to the East coast by yourself (companion here and there, but yeah)

Resistance 3 falls into the same traps they did with 2, rather than be true to their story/goals, they just catered to what was popular during that time in the FPS category.
MP had a delayed Beta due to outage, the games MP shipped broken, no one can deny that, even you MrPliskin, the game was laggy, micro-stuttering, components not fully fleshed out, as IG has being doing for each Resistance title since FOM, Half-Assed. Their have been patches after patches to get it situated, hell RFOM/R2 didn't have this absurd amount of fixes.

On top of that they go add PSN Pass, I understand why Sony wants to add Project $10, because rather than be a leader this generation, they rather be a follower. So the team @IG goes out their way to put SP stats in the MP stats part of the section. Meaning you either buy new and not have anything to worry about, or if used and you just want to see how you did equals, pay $10 you get access to that info, a FUCKING JOKE!

RFOM >> R2 Co-Op >>>>>>>>>>> R3 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> R2 everything else
I'm positive I know more about dozens of developers than your game renting trophy earning ass, lol. R3 4 hours first time? ::rolleyes

So if I want a Job at IG for "defending them" does that mean you want to be employed by CJ? Either way, my posts in response to him really have nothing to do with you, so why, again, are you attacking me? Because I disagreed with him (which, by the way, was based on facts)? Why not attack anyone else who disagreed? Confused here.
 
R1 was good.

R2 was great.

R3 was awesome.


Though R3's MP right now is a fucking mess.

Edit: Oh shit, it's MrPliskin vs GraverobberX again. We all know what happened to your last duel in the other R3 thread so...
 
MrPliskin said:
I'm positive I know more about dozens of developers than your game renting trophy earning ass, lol. R3 4 hours first time? ::rolleyes

So if I want a Job at IG for "defending them" does that mean you want to be employed by CJ? Either way, my posts in response to him really have nothing to do with you, so why, again, are you attacking me? Because I disagreed with him (which, by the way, was based on facts)? Why not attack anyone else who disagreed? Confused here.

Because in the R3 thread you are the one that comes swooping as IG's lap dog to say "Everything is going to be OK!, Technical Difficulties"
Just because I earn trophies doesn't invalidate my opinion, somehow you think it does

I have played 100+ games to full completion, so you pick up on what worked for a game, what didn't. You see all the inner intricacies how a game being played on casual/normal is different from hard/super hard, what works, what doesn't.

You want the spotlight you get the spotlight, don't back away and try to diminish a fellow GAFfer's opinion with "LOL @ You trophy whore, I don't work for any company, but I'm studying to be one, so I'm superior in the knowledge base of gaming and what it takes to make a game." Enough of the I'm an Expert schtick.

Radec said:
R1 was good.

R2 was great.

R3 was awesome.


Though R3's MP right now is a fucking mess.

Then how is R3 awesome?, a main component part of the game being broken, for 1 month+
Hell R2 on a 1 year schedule did better than R3 in regards to being released and playable

Hell I had some GAFfer in GAF XMB chat say "Resistance 3 is like Half Life", those are pretty strong comparisons, I took a $60 plunge on that statement, seeing maybe IG did turn it around, boy was I mistaken

It's like every title is gotten worse, yes the visuals/voice work/whatever is supposed to be on par with what the current atmosphere of the gaming industry is, I don't get why people go ummm...R1 isn't better because of teh vizuals/graphixz....no shit...that is supposed to be a given. It's where the game takes you on a journey with-in the universe that matters. R1 did it great, R2 fell flat on it's face, R3 tried to get up, but slipped and fell again.
 
dark10x said:
Definitely can't agree. I enjoyed R1, but it always felt somewhat hollow to me, which I could excuse as it was a launch title. I think R3 is better in virtually every way and finally gives the series a real identity.

Pretty much this and I just played R1 and R2 again in august.
 
GraveRobberX said:
Then how is R3 awesome?, a main component part of the game being broken, for 1 month+
Hell R2 on a 1 year schedule did better than R3 in regards to being released and playable

The campaign is better in R3 IMO. I only played like a month on MP on all 3 games since I ain't really a Resistance MP guy. R2's coop was fun though.
 
Jason's Ultimatum said:
Those pictures just proves my point. Re looks like R2, except not as bright and colorful.
Funny how that works as I thought your pictures proved MY point. :P

More importantly, it's what you see and hear while playing the games that push R3 far beyond the original. The first game is very sterile in motion while the third game absolutely shines with particles effects everywhere, trees blowing around, and other such details bringing life to the scene.

Furthermore, the soundtrack used in the original game was always a sticking point for me. It's just so lifeless and generic. The third game manages to use sound to build atmosphere instead.
 
Radec said:
The campaign is better in R3 IMO. I only played like a month on MP on all 3 games since I ain't really a Resistance MP guy. R2's coop was fun though.

See I understand that you enjoyed SP, not so much MP

A game can have a stellar 9.5 SP, and 5.0 MP, would you still give the game a 9.5?
No, you look at the overall package, you are putting down $60 on a game expecting it to be spades across the board
Resistance 3 is maybe a 7 to 7.5 in it's current state, it loses points to MP being broke, and patches still trying to get it to a balanced state
You can't just let the little things go, because than as a gamer you haven't gotten your monies worth (for some, not all)

dark10x said:
Funny how that works as I thought your pictures proved MY point. :P

More importantly, it's what you see and hear while playing the games that push R3 far beyond the original. The first game is very sterile in motion while the third game absolutely shines with particles effects everywhere, trees blowing around, and other such details bringing life to the scene.

Furthermore, the soundtrack used in the original game was always a sticking point for me. It's just so lifeless and generic. The third game manages to use sound to build atmosphere instead.

So a release launch game, new IP, on a new system isn't up to par with a game that is made 5 years later than it, who is now on it's second sequel, with all the new stuff added in (tech goodies)....amazing, that should be a given, why would want to match the sound of a game from 2006 to sound from a game from 2011. You're picking @ straws.
 
R3's mutiplayer was/is garbage, patch the lag and balance all they want they still just half assed it.
R1's mutiplayer was simple, but fun and blanced.
R2's mutiplayer was incredibly unbalanced but jam friggin packed. Big maps, huge player counts, quite a few modes etc..and the Co-op, my god the co-op was glorious.

R3's mutiplayer consisted of dropping its biggest draw (the co-op) and then just copy+pasting its self into a low budget CoD clone. There isnt a single thing good about the mutiplayer. It feels like IG just said "screw MP" and tacked on a quick half assed MP rather then using any resources to build a MP.
 
I think the problem is R2.

R2 lacked the seriousness of R1 and the polish and improvements of R3. Especially in the multiplayer department.

The main thing i loved about R2 is the ending, very bold move there. And the Co Op, looooooovved the co op in r2.
 
GraveRobberX said:
Because in the R3 thread you are the one that comes swooping as IG's lap dog to say "Everything going to be OK, Technical Difficulties"
Just because I earn trophies doesn't invalidate my opinion, somehow you thin it does

I have played 100+ games to full completion, so you pick up on what worked for a game, what didn't. You see all the inner intricacies how a game being played on casual/normal is different from hard/super hard , what works, what doesn't.

You want the spotlight you get the spotlight, don't back away and start name throwing or try to diminish a fellow GAFfer's opinion with "LOL @ You trophy whore, I don't work for any company, but I'm studying to be one, so I'm superior in the knowledge base of gaming and what it takes to make a game. Enough of the I'm an Expertt schtick."


I'm sorry, how does completing any amount of games to completion somehow make you an expert on what works and what doesn't? I'm pretty sure there are things that "work" in some games that simply don't work for me (as in, I don't enjoy them) and other things I do enjoy, that others do not. I'm not sure if you've noticed, but you guy's ragging on R3 are in the minority, which is generally a sign.

I rag on you earning trophies because you carry it like a championship belt and use it to pump up your own opinion, constantly spamming your gamer card, and the dropping statements like "when you've finished as many games as I have, you see these things more" like somehow I don't? Right, you're not playing high and mighty at all ;)

As for me saying "everything is getting worked out" it's simply because it is. They've delivered many patches and are clearly working hard to deliver an experience they think is worthy of the consumers dollar. Being a developer (and not a publisher) they don't always have a say in when a game releases, and for all we know they COULD have asked for more time, and were denied. You're pretending like Sony wasn't the one pushing for release, and that the PSN outtage didn't happen. You're also somehow pretending like all games are created with equal budgets and get the same 1st party attention, which simply isn't the case.

Lastly, how exactly are you going to insult me, calling me a lap dog, etc, and then not expect me to take a jab at you? On top of that, you pull your trophy expert card, tell me how you see things, and then close off your post with "no more of that I'm an expert stuff!". Do you NOT see all of the hypocrisy in your post?


Also: Lots of GAF members have drawn the comparisons to half life, said the game was probably one of the best FPS experiences of the year, etc. Are they some how out of their minds because YOU said they were wrong? Or do you just not understand how something like this can be subjective?


*Note that I haven't responded to anyone who didn't like the game, only to someone who made statements that are factually incorrect (rather, maybe misinformed). No one (read: no one) finished this game in 4 hours on their first playthrough. Even if they *did*, the game clock does not reflect the total amount of time you spent playing the game.
 
Pliskin: the state of multiplayer was a disgrace at launch. Sure, it's been patched into actually working now but, functionally, it is a major, major step back from R1 and R2 .
 
Resistance 3 + Patch = A Polished Turd.
Polish it, shine it, dress it up in a pretty sun dress..it doesnt matter..its a turd burger deluxe.
 
JB1981 said:
Pliskin: the state of multiplayer was a disgrace at launch. Sure, it's been patched into actually working now but, functionally, it is a major, major step back from R1 and R2 .

I don't deny that it wasn't. I never claimed otherwise (in fact, I'm pretty sure I said this here on GAF as well). That's a given. However, IG has clearly been working very hard in fixing these problems, and to this point have improved performance considerably. We don't know everything behind the release date push, so for us to judge IG and say "they released an unfinished product" is a bit premature. Maybe it was them who said "we're okay, let's launch it" or maybe it was Sony who said "You're game is releasing, get the gold print ready".

Either way, that's been covered.

As for functionality, I agree, there is a lot removed that was present in the first two, and I'm only talking about community features. I think as far as MP is concerned on a "game play" level, the three are comparable in functionality. However, the things that were present in FoM and R2 (clan system, server browsers for custom games, stats pages) were scaled back in R3. We can't make the judgement that it was Insomniacs doing, since a lot of that is directly tied to resources and budget. Maybe they didn't have the money to use those server resources for custom games browsers and clan systems? Maybe they knew that R3 wasn't going to be a huge seller, so they wanted to eliminate customs to funnel the user base into matchmaking to improve it? There are a lot of things going on we can't judge at face value and make a determination about.

That said, I don't think anything I've ever said about this game (or Insomniac) has been blatantly ignorant of facts, or turning a blind eye to any faults the game may have.

tldr: I agree, the game had faults, but they're definitely working on it!
 
MrPliskin said:
I'm sorry, how does completing any amount of games to completion somehow make you an expert on what works and what doesn't? I'm pretty sure there are things that "work" in some games that simply don't work for me (as in, I don't enjoy them) and other things I do enjoy, that others do not. I'm not sure if you've noticed, but you guy's ragging on R3 are in the minority, which is generally a sign.

I rag on you earning trophies because you carry it like a championship belt and use it to pump up your own opinion, constantly spamming your gamer card, and the dropping statements like "when you've finished as many games as I have, you see these things more" like somehow I don't? Right, you're not playing high and mighty at all ;)

As for me saying "everything is getting worked out" it's simply because it is. They've delivered many patches and are clearly working hard to deliver an experience they think is worthy of the consumers dollar. Being a developer (and not a publisher) they don't always have a say in when a game releases, and for all we know they COULD have asked for more time, and were denied. You're pretending like Sony wasn't the one pushing for release, and that the PSN outtage didn't happen. You're also somehow pretending like all games are created with equal budgets and get the same 1st party attention, which simply isn't the case.

Lastly, how exactly are you going to insult me, calling me a lap dog, etc, and then not expect me to take a jab at you? On top of that, you pull your trophy expert card, tell me how you see things, and then close off your post with "no more of that I'm an expert stuff!". Do you NOT see all of the hypocrisy in your post?

Also: Lots of GAF members have drawn the comparisons to half life, said the game was probably one of the best FPS experiences of the year, etc. Are they some how out of their minds because YOU said they were wrong? Or do you just not understand how something like this can be subjective?

*Note that I haven't responded to anyone who didn't like the game, only to someone who made statements that are factually incorrect (rather, maybe misinformed). No one (read: no one) finished this game in 4 hours on their first playthrough. Even if they *did*, the game clock does not reflect the total amount of time you spent playing the game.

First of all I post my trophy card either in the OT of a game I finished, or in the Trophy/Achievements thread
If you have problems thinking that it's him running around putting signatures everywhere and it annoys you, I'm sorry, I have no clue why you are following me

Me completing games shows from my standpoint how a dev wanted a player to play their game. I can go and say such and such sucked/worked because I have fucking played through it, I can claim to do so. Somehow when difficulties are switched time might get added superfluously through luck, grind, and/or moment.

If someone rents R3, only wants to burn through it in a day, they fucking can, if they play on casual/normal they can blaze through with-in < 5 hours if they are accustomed to FPS and are either veteran of the genre or gaming series franchise
Only does playtime jarringly get added is the tougher difficulties, grind out for weapon max levels or trophy accumulation
 
GraveRobberX said:
First of all I post my trophy card either in the OT of a game I finished, or in the Trophy/Achievements thread
If you have problems thinking that it's him running around putting signatures everywhere and it annoys you, I have no clue why you are following me
Right, the problem is no one really cares if it's your 89th platinum, yet you specify every time. Maybe I just don't get the e-peen bragging, and yes, I do find it a bit too GameFaqs for NeoGAF.

GraveRobberX said:
Me completing games shows from my standpoint how a dev wanted a player to play their game. I can go and say such and such sucked/worked because I have fucking played through it, I can claim to do so. Somehow when difficulties are switched time might get added superfluously through luck, grind, and/or moment.
That's not what you said though. What you said was that your exhaustive experience with games gave you superior knowledge of what works and what doesn't (at least that's what your tone conveyed, and your constant use of the word "fucking"). Also, I'm not talking about time getting a bump because of difficulty.


GraveRobberX said:
If someone rents R3, only wants to burn through it in a day, they fucking can, if they play on casual/normal they can blaze through with-in < 5 hours if they are accustomed to FPS and are either veteran of the genre or gaming series franchise
Only does playtime jarringly get added is the tougher difficulties, grind out for weapon max levels or trophy accumulation
To elaborate on my last point, I'll clear it up (as you've seemingly ignored it the last 3 times I've said it).

When you play Resistance 3, it only actively counts from check point to check point without deaths.

If you play for 15 minutes in a fire fight, and then die, you'll be sent back to the last check point. The 15 minutes you just played for is not counted toward your game completion time. Thus, when you see "5 hours 15 minute" (though highly unlikely, I'd wager) that's only a reflection of the time you played between check points without dying, and does not include the reply time of any specific section.

So, I don't doubt that someone can finish it in one setting, and I won't pass any judgement on anyone who can spend five, six, or more hours sitting in front of their set to grind through a game they clearly don't like just to get a platinum trophy (hint: this is a sarcasm). I do strongly doubt that the average consumer (even average member of NeoGAF) will finish the game their first time through in under 5 hours (even under 6) from start to finish. To accurately measure this, you'll need to time yourself separate from the game, but I'd definitely say that claiming otherwise is false.
 
Jason's Ultimatum said:
Those pictures just proves my point. Re looks like R2, except not as bright and colorful.

resistance-fall-of-man-20061110064419046-000.jpg

resistance_fall_of_man-228536.jpg

resistance_fall_of_man-228539.jpg

31a_lit.jpg

299729613_a545228f1e_o.jpg

resist3ob8nb4.jpg

ps3_resistance_550x309.jpg

These images seem inferior to the R3 ones though.

On top of that, R3's effects are more dynamic. But R1 has very specific high points (e.g., realistic and breakable glass, great large scale MP battles).

Overall R3 is just much more well rounded than RFOM. The latter is a launch game and mainly relied on the PPU. So there were quite a few things they didn't have time to do to juice up the atmosphere even though they had the right idea.

OTOH RFOM MP is much more feature complete than R3, especially in the area of clan support. It is also cleaner, without perks and killstreaks. It attracted the large clans which makes combat very interesting. I just played R3 MP for 3 hours straight last night. It's very good too, like it more than other shooters; but RFOM is more dynamic because of the large clans. It's very interesting to counter their group tactics.
 
MrPliskin said:
Right, the problem is no one really cares if it's your 89th platinum, yet you specify every time. Maybe I just don't get the e-peen bragging, and yes, I do find it a bit too GameFaqs for NeoGAF.

Why on earth do you care so much?, Do you speak for all of GAF? I'm posting to show my gaming accomplishment. Other people post their videos, blogs, etc. to show something they've done gaming related, mines is Trophies.
I post it only when I have gotten something done, I don't leave it as a signature of every fucking time I post with a link sending you to my trophy count page
I have no clue why you get so up in arms about me showing it off, and good job always going to your backup GameFaqs defense, because somehow another website style has magically infested this wholesome community
You're just like the guys in Off Topic forums who come running in and go this is site is becoming reddit more and more

MrPliskin said:
That's not what you said though. What you said was that your exhaustive experience with games gave you superior knowledge of what works and what doesn't (at least that's what your tone conveyed, and your constant use of the word "fucking"). Also, I'm not talking about time getting a bump because of difficulty.

Yes, I have experience, I have the same experience as you until you get a job in the industry and build a game that I play, then you can come at me and tell me yes, that I'm wrong, cause you worked on this project, right now it's here say. I play the games, I don't sit their studying papers and seeing why dev x used this theory and why dev y went that route. I play games, many, many, many games. You pick up on things and on how the game must be handled. You can tell which devs learn from their mistakes and adjust and try to better themselves..say Naughty Dog, or they can go the IG route and try to hit the greatest common denominator by changing each variation of a a gaming franchise such as Resistance to just be the "Me Too, Look here"

MrPliskin said:
To elaborate on my last point, I'll clear it up (as you've seemingly ignored it the last 3 times I've said it).

When you play Resistance 3, it only actively counts from check point to check point without deaths.

If you play for 15 minutes in a fire fight, and then die, you'll be sent back to the last check point. The 15 minutes you just played for is not counted toward your game completion time. Thus, when you see "5 hours 15 minute" (though highly unlikely, I'd wager) that's only a reflection of the time you played between check points without dying, and does not include the reply time of any specific section.

So, I don't doubt that someone can finish it in one setting, and I won't pass any judgement on anyone who can spend five, six, or more hours sitting in front of their set to grind through a game they clearly don't like just to get a platinum trophy (hint: this is a sarcasm). I do strongly doubt that the average consumer (even average member of NeoGAF) will finish the game their first time through in under 5 hours (even under 6) from start to finish. To accurately measure this, you'll need to time yourself separate from the game, but I'd definitely say that claiming otherwise is false.

What does resetting time have to do anything with this?, Are you not a gamer first?
Why throw this IG has stated if you die those 15 minutes they don't get that tacked on, whoops/LOL, so don't take that into consideration. That alone tells me this developer isn't even capable of getting Playtime down to a tee
Why on earth does it count checkpoint to checkpoint w/o death as a Playtime feature, it makes no sense, playtime should be for every moment you play the game, be it grinding/goofing off/etc.
So the developer went out of its way to make it look like the game is short?, by showcasing you, yeah those 15 minutes you wasted won't count against you

I have beaten games with-in hours/days, if you have the will for it you can get it done.
I played 70+ hours straight ( i mean breaks for food/bathroom here and there) when FFXI for the PS2 released, I got all my 6 starting classes to level 20, then payed for it in the back end by being sick for 3+ days, and not even playing a hour of it for those 3 days
There are gamers who are really hardcore, some are ridiculous at it

This is my stats for Burnout Paradise:

Burnout Paradise Elite
Awarded for successfully collecting all trophies from Burnout Paradise (excluding Additional Content trophies)
September 27, 2008, 8:50:07am UTC+00:00
It took 1 day, 1 hour, 28 seconds to achieve this platinum

22,222 of 83,990 (26.46%) users, have earned this trophy.
Estimated Difficulty: Hard

My fastest Platinum to date: Transformers Dark of the Moon

AllSpark
Unlock All Trophies.
June 28, 2011, 10:52:01am UTC+00:00
It took 6 hours, 30 minutes, 36 seconds to achieve this platinum

981 of 2,255 (43.50%) users, have earned this trophy.
Estimated Difficulty: Medium
 
MrPliskin said:
Yea, this is definitely getting way too Gamefaqs for me, don't count on continued response's from me. "You win".

seinfeld.gif

Wow your so Mature

A heated discussion, in which both sides have statements that point/counterpoint and you pull that

Good job, class act, etc.
 
Top Bottom