The RWP

Pez · #1 8th June 2007, 12:57 PM

My friend kept telling me that I needed to go to his so we can play Resistance: Fall of Man on his PS3 (which is apparently "Far more superior" than my Wii...he's such a fanboy, makes me sick

).

One day I go over and he fires it up.

I was shocked.

Not only was it another generic FPS, the graphics failed to impress...they're good, but no where near as good as it was hyped up to be by Sony and other people...

Gameplay = 5/10

Graphics = 7/10

Sound = 7/10 (The alien dudes make funky sounds)

Multiplayer = 4/10 (Possibly better online with like 525295739 different people?)

Anyone else played this lame excuse of a Next-Gen FPS?

SubDrag · #2 8th June 2007, 01:15 PM

I just checked out the IGN Video Review. It looks decent, but it seems like it is equally as generic and very similar to Gears of War for XBox 360, but in first person.

Articerile · #3 8th June 2007, 01:17 PM

Yeah, it's terrible, for about half the price you can get an Xbox 360 and Gears of War which is a lot better.

Pez · #4 8th June 2007, 01:27 PM

I personally haven't played Gears of War...yet, it looks proper good, I loved the advert when the dude jumps through the window into that huge dark room to dodge bullets, and theres this MASSIVE F*** OFF spider creature in there...and there's "Mad World" by Gary Jules playing softly in the background...classic.

But yea, Fall of Man = Poo-not-scary-clone of Gears of War

SubDrag · #5 8th June 2007, 02:33 PM

Gears of War isn't scary either. In fact, I felt like I played the same level throughout the entire game. It was good once, I guess.

Pez · #6 8th June 2007, 02:38 PM

Oh right, everyone always told me that Gears of War was ment to be some sort of horror survival shooter...it sounds good, and it probably is one of those games you would only place once.

ConkerKing · #7 10th June 2007, 03:17 PM

"If you don't like it, don't play it."

Honestly. I played the game though, and I honestly enjoyed it. Sure, my friend beats me at every single game we play, but it's still tons of fun. Even Campagin mode is enjoyable from time to time.
As far as graphics, they still hadn't realized the full potential of the PS3 when they made this game. Now that they know what it can do, they can make MUCH better graphics.

digimastermike · #8 10th June 2007, 04:51 PM

Eh? I thought Resistance was a solid little shooter. I suppose if you haven't played that many FPS's, you'd think it was the same as any other one and pass it up, but I felt that Resistance incorporated everything that was good about them and put it all together. Granted, I don't like it better than Gears of War and it's not perfect, but it's still a good game.

Pez · #9 10th June 2007, 05:08 PM

I respect what you both say, and I know that if I don't like it, then I shouldn't play it, but I was just expressing my views of the game.

I felt the game rather generic, and I have played a LOT of FPS's...Meteroid Prime, Deus Ex, Farcry, Battlefield Series, Half-Life series, Goldeneye 64, Timesplitters series...the list goes on.

It is decent, but for the standards of a Next-Gen Shooter for a Next-Gen console, I think it is a rather average game.

digimastermike · #10 10th June 2007, 05:15 PM

Played Goldeneye, Deus Ex, and the Half-Life series? Amazing FPS's, so I can see why Resistance wasn't that amazing to you. I will say the campaign isn't great, but I like the multiplayer quite a lot. Wish I had a PS3 just so I could play it online. I'm just forced to play the campaign at a friend's house.

Pez · #11 10th June 2007, 05:19 PM

They are all amazing games...especially Goldeneye and Half-Life...Half-Life 2 is amazing.

As I said, the multiplayer would have been better online, the level designs are decent and the Hedgehog grenade was cool...their weapon designs are slightly out of period since they are alien, but still well made and thought of.

I only got the chance to play 1v1 against my fanboy friend who plays it 24/7.

Was getting my ass served to me on a golden plate, but racked up some kills...

would have won if there was 5 more mins

ConkerKing · #12 10th June 2007, 08:00 PM

If you're comparing this to such amazing games, you're going to get bad results. I mean, the game came out WHEN the PS3 came out. It is a launch title. You can't expect that much out of them if they havn't even tested the full capabilitys of the machine yet.
If you treat it like a launch title, it's rather good. I mean, just because I get my tail wooped by my friend everytime I play him, doesn't mean it's a bad game. Well, I like it. But, that's just my oppinion.

gdsmzroll · #13 11th June 2007, 12:29 AM

To me it was like if the developers wanted to make Gears of War an FPS,
I mean, it's ideas mirror the GOW ones as if it was actually plajerised.

The developers were totally outraged when they saw that TLOZ TP had scored 10/95/10 and GOW 9.5/10/9.0 while they only scored 8.5/8.0/9.0

Even Super paper mario scored better

machanist · #14 15th June 2007, 12:51 PM

heh... funny how the church are getting it taken off the market, any excuse to take FPS' off... then again it was a pretty bad thing Sony did, i mean use the cathedrol without permission.
But the church high people were pretty stupid with what they wanted

Church: Take this game off the market, it is offensive
Sony: How about we just take out the level and give a public apology?
Church: NO! We want the game TAKEN OFF the market!
Sony: Why are you suing us instead of the developers?
Church: Because we WANT IT TAKEN OFF THE MARKET!

Seriously though, its stupid how they are suing sony instead of insomniac, I mean Sony didnt make the game, they only produced it.

Never played, looks stupid