Dallinor said:
I feel that beyond the first game, both Resistance 2 & 3 felt like experiments. They nailed some areas of game-play and level design really well but some design decisions were just baffling. Each game was also a departure from the last, with the developers trying out new things, but they never really got all the right ingredients into one game.
Resistance 2 had great online, but the single player dragged on and was too linear and on-rails. It felt uninspired and tried to do everything on too big a scale. It also had a downright ugly graphics engine.
Resistance 3 fixed most of this and had much better pacing and structure to the campaign. In fact some areas of the campaign are the best I've played in a single player FPS this generation. It was however, interspersed with some sections (like the mining boss section and the train section) that just felt completely out of place, interrupted the flow of the game and were just not as polished as the rest of the campaign. In fact the very end of the campaign looks like it was rushed. Odd lighting effects, slightly glitchy looking character models and a weird gunplay sequence with the handgun. A truly bizarre end to a solid campaign in my opinion. It also had some very strange audio glitches throughout.
It's like every time they almost nailed something really well, they were busy shooting themselves in the foot with something else. The whole series just felt like it was on the verge of something really great, but never quite managed to get there. Mostly through lack of polish, poor design choices and again lack of polish!
I don't think I've played any other Sony first party game this gen that had the same lack of polish as the Resistance series. Some areas look like they were given lots of attention, others not at all. The blame has to be put squarely on the management of time and resources.
Even though the series has it's faults, I feel they should try and breath new life into it next generation. Or even give another studio a shot at it. With a new engine, and a more focused, but more sandbox style (less linear boss battles) campaign I think they could make something truly great. The enemy design, weapon design and story are all great, the project just needs to be steered in a clear direction.
|
Yeah, a key issue with the franchise is they kept adjusting it too much and always seemed to get caught rushing it either (there are some very good, and surprisingly frank making of videos where they come completely clean about how rushed R2 was for example).
While the first had the traditional issues of a launch title in that it was a bit rough and didn't fully exploit the hardware, it garnered a large install base as an early game and as a bundled game and probably boasted the first large online for PS3.
I think Insomniac then tried to push too hard for more, looked to copy apparently popular elements in other games (such as 2 weapon limit) and overstretched themselves with R2. The result was a game that was both rough and bound to alienate many who actually liked the first.
After that R3 was more or less doomed. Ironically, R3 seems to be much better regarded and I suspect if Insomniac were to build from that they could see better sales - but after a fan mauling with R2 and weak R3 sales I guess I can understand why they want to walk away.
Pity. I think if they'd stuck to the RFOM template, improved graphics and online and delivered a really solid R2 they could have seen the growth they were after.
