By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
S.T.A.G.E. on 25 October 2008
Edit Thread
Kantor said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
badgenome said:
PSnPANEK_KLS said:
Fuck Gays Of War 2_ Resistance 2 FTW!!!!!!!! 30vs30 Player online Resistance 2 vs 6vs6 Gays Of War 2____ PLZ ur retarted if u cant c which game offers more & hass amped it ^ more .. ding ding ding.. Resistance 2 my loyal PS3 Fanboys!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, & Fuck A Beta Bitch

PSN: PANEK_KLS

Well said.

 

 

I thought you were better than that. You're agreeing with Jibbrish? Gears isn't going to have 30 vs 30 multiplayer for a reason. It's a clusterfuck in 3rd person. Also, on Resistance that great huge 30 vs 30 multiplayer is all squadbased, because even they admitted it would be a clusterfuck as well. Gears is better with small doses of people anyway.

Stop being so defensive and let Sony win for once. Face it, they've won multiplayer.

And what does it matter if it's squad based? It's still 30 vs 30 and the squads stop everything erupting into pandemonium.

And in case you haven't noticed, Resistance is an FPS. Gears may be better in small doses, but that doesn't make the online as good as Resistance 2. I'm sure they could put in 30 vs 30 if they really wanted to.

 

Win what? The Nintendo is winning and deserves to. Epic tried more than 10 people on a Gears 2 map when creating the game and rightfully decided not go with any more than 10. I agree after watching the video's. It would've been a swarm clusterfuck. People would've been getting spawnkilled like crazy. Resistance 2 is an FPS, but even in an FPS, when you have too many players on a map it tones down the level of difficulty no matter what. The closer they are, the easier the  headshot. I would maul people in those games. Besides it's squad based, so they've already found a way to get around it. Too many squad based online matches wouldn't work on gears. It's not an FPS.