B+ (or as metacritic would put it, 83/100)
http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3171026
"An extremely well-assembled FPS overall, with an improved campaign, fun competitive multiplayer, and a damn neat take on co-op."
Summary:
"That's the main disappointment, if any, behind Resistance 2. It's a clear "we're improving upon our predecessor" type of title, and it succeeds on that front. If you're really picky, you can quibble about certain aspects -- not as many cool visual effects as you'd hope for in a modern shooter (depth-of-field, motion blur, etc.) or occasional slowdown (mostly when respawning after an active firefight), to name two. But, overall, Resistance 2 is an extremely well-assembled FPS, with an improved campaign, fun competitive multiplayer, and a damn neat take on co-op. I wouldn't go as far as to say this is the definitive PS3 game, but it's certainly one of the best PS3 exclusives I've played. Plus, I gotta give props to a game that loves giant monsters as much as I do."
Can't really say if I agree or disagree with him being that I've yet to play it, but the words and final score just doesn't match up. Shouldn't a game that's better than the previous installment in every single aspect atleast match or get a higher score than it?
Eitherway, I always thought motion blur would have been awesome with resistance. Since R2 draws some comparison to cloverfield, it could have benefited from a more "amatuer/shaky" camera view.
