R2 game is better than GeOW2 in many ways, and could very well be

[ZenfoldorVGI]

Griffin said:

I was talking about the article, which puts R2 above Gears2, not some trash site thats picks and chooses what sites to take rankings from.  And i've played R2 extensively since it came out, its a fun game, and its better then average, but its far from great.  They also took out many features the first game had and made this one worse in many areas.  So i said, unless Gears2 is shit i don't see how he found R2 better.

 

 

Oh, ok, well, you've made a misassumption.

This article says that Resistance 2 has a mediocre campaign. Calls it run-of-the-mill and is pretty harsh on it.

The same site loves Gears 2's campaign. It's certainly the best part of the game.

They say that R2 may be the best shooter of the year, due to its online multiplayer.

Again, multiplayer. They were quite harsh about the campaign. See my earlier post in blue.

If you lend your acceptance to this article, you are admitting that R2's campaign sucks, is what it comes down to.

You see the title of the article is:

Resistance 2 gives PS3 devs a blueprint for online play

It really is focused on the online experience, not the campaign, which if flames.

So, you can either admit that Gears 2 has a better campaign, and R2 might just have a saving grace in its online multiplayer, or you can discredit this article and claim that R2 has an equal campaign to Gears 2. Your choice. Either way, it's nothing good for R2, unless you're in that "campaign doesn't matter" camp.

I'm more in the "I only care about the campaign" camp.

/bow

Edit: Also, yeah, the article doesn't say Gears 2 is worse than R2. It says that some things about R2 are better. Namely the online multiplayer, not the campaign, or anything that has anything to do with single-player. The run-of-the-mill campaign is the reason R2 hasn't necessarily been the hit with critics we all assumed it would be.