Review: Resistance 2
- Thread starter tendo82
- Start date
I was jokingly going to wonder if this was going to be a copy/pasted Halo 2 review, and frankly for all intents and purposes it could've been. But all jokes aside it's good to know I'm not the only person who doesn't get the appeal of this game.
The frightening thing about this review is that I know there is still a long line of developers trapped in the 2 to 3 year development cycle making an FPS just like this one and getting ready to release it to an audience that is just as tired of it.
It's nice to see a generally negative review. I feel that too many game reviewers are soft on games nowadays.
I dig it.
I dig it.
I think Resistance 2 was pretty good, not nearly as fun as the first, but still good. I think this review seems a little too intent on pointing out all the features of the game that have been in other games and not nearly enough on how it plays, weapons design, etc.
I haven't played the game, probably would'nt anyway, but as good as people think it is because its well executed in the game design, its certainly fair to give it a negative review for lacking in inventivness. Unfortunatly i hardly think its going to help much, since pretty much every other reviewer (especially the pure ps3 reviewers, suprise, suprise), gives it perfect or near perfect scores and reviews.
I was going to buy this game and, well I still am. It is the first negative thing I have heard about Resistance 2, not just from reviews but from everyone. This was basically a Yahtzee review minus the funny stuff. I know reviews are opinions but surely he must have liked something about it.
Because how it plays and weapon design, etc. has also already been in other games.Syphonz said:
OMG NORMAL HOUSES LOOK LIKE.... NORMAL HOUSES!
Geez...
There's probably no land marks because of the fiasco with the church thing.
And seriously, do you think the PS3 can handle the flying ships, a city, AND what goes on in the actual game play?
Geez...
There's probably no land marks because of the fiasco with the church thing.
And seriously, do you think the PS3 can handle the flying ships, a city, AND what goes on in the actual game play?
Hm. One of the criticisms of the first Resistance, if I recall, was that it didn't do anything new, but what it did do it did very well, and that was fine.
That's pretty much what I'm hearing now, too; this game doesn't do anything new, and that's what's wrong with it.
There is no real discussion of why it doesn't work, just that you've seen it before, and that's a problem for this reviewer. He doesn't really point out where it isn't fun, or is broken somehow, and so I'm having trouble seeing the ire here. Maybe he expected more out of it?
That's pretty much what I'm hearing now, too; this game doesn't do anything new, and that's what's wrong with it.
There is no real discussion of why it doesn't work, just that you've seen it before, and that's a problem for this reviewer. He doesn't really point out where it isn't fun, or is broken somehow, and so I'm having trouble seeing the ire here. Maybe he expected more out of it?
I'm really shocked that he didn't even go into multiplayer (a fairly large part of the game, and how well its set up), and when playing this game I found myself taking cover and flanking foes, not really a straight up run and gun. But, I guess thats what I get for playing it on hard. Also, it's interesting about how glowing the gears of war 2 review was, when that game is even more repetitive. You didn't even mention the co-op campaign either. But, to each his own.
I've not played R2, so I can't comment on that directly. Yet Mr Endo's review could so easily apply to R1, which I HAVE played. Which would mean that he's basically describing a two year-old game which was, let's face it, already deeply mediocre in its gameplay and eye-avertingly derivative in its production design. It's not the job of professional reviewers to seek a game's qualities in spite of its wealth of deficiencies. I mean, I love Viking: Battle For Asgard, but show me a journalist who scores it above six out of ten and I'll call him or her an unprincipled cretin.
After hearing so much bull about this game its nice to hear an honest review about it. If this was Halo you guys would be all over it, yet Resistance does the same thing and you defend it...I don't get it.
To whoever mentioned Gears of War, its not very repetitive if you've played it...
To whoever mentioned Gears of War, its not very repetitive if you've played it...
Exactly my thoughts.Smokescreen said:
I would like to see this man give a review of Halo 3.
This could be almost a carbon copy of said review, more than likely, the review for Halo 3 would be positive.
Each person has his own opinion, but unless all Mr.Endo's reviews focus on the negative parts of gameplays, I find it hard to believe this one.
Fanboy?bue519 said:
Grammar Nazi?
State your business - what you fail to see is that, that is my opinion of Resistance, a shooter that brings nothing new to the table - it just steals bits of other games food. You on the other hand, attack my view of Gears because...
Well I don't know...