Cool the sites back up. I see everybodies heard the news. I'm hyped for this game. I can't believe this is coming in '08.

It did feel rushed, just like most other launch titles do. And since the same team will undoubtedly be working on the sequel, they better take the time to flesh out that world and do it justice. There's a great idea behind the game, it's too bad the execution fell a little flat.

I'm actually not talking graphics as in poly count and all that, I'm just talking about how pleasing the scene and art direction. Resistance is boring. you have WWII era which is already over done and is easy to make not that interesting but luckily they had aliens which can always be interesting. Of course they took the least creative route possible and made them boring bipeds that I've seen 100 times before. All in all it was just a boring game art wise.

Gameplay wise, it was nothing special. It was your generic shooter that was slightly rushed and not that well tested. Hopefully they really are taking feedback into account and they make the game as good as it could be.

@ rocketpig

I doubt 4 out of 5 people who actually played both games till the end prefer Gears. IMO Gears was overhyped especially by the US gaming press like many other 360 games, not sure why. I guess the graphics played an important part, maybe still the most impressive the 360 has seen to date. Maybe because its on the 360, I doubt the same game on the PS3 would have been given such ratings.

The PC version seems actually better but scored quite a bit worse. You for instance don't get this in the 360 version (maybe if the 360 version wouldn't have gotten such high scores, the PC scores may have been lower still):

http://youtube.com/watch?v=NQSL1Ke8QsU

Wow some crazy comments here. I'd hope that people cut out the Resistance is better than god thing, it's reminding me of why I lost interest in Halo 2 (and thus 3) from it's fans.

Anyway, this is some cool news. I'm amazed that Insomniac is doing this and if I recall, they even had some people working on Ratchet and Clank Future at the same time as Resistance. Still, those screens look pretty cool showing some cooler looking Chimera and what looked to be some new lighting/shadows. 8 player co-op sounds extreme, but we'll see how that goes if it's all online (I'm sure 4 player Halo 3 went pretty well). It looks like they've been listening (from what I've been seeing other people say) because Resistance online was a fast paced twitch fest, it was like they took everything from the single player game and ran it at 2x speed and called it multi-player so I'm hoping a more thought out multi-player will improve it further. I don't know what the problem is with 60 players is (especially if there are squads and classes), Battlefield 2 does pretty well with squads and 64 total players.

Now when it comes to Gears of War vs Resistance. I really didn't like that argument. For one, both games were good, but I liked them for different reasons. Resistance was the usual FPS controlled game with fast gameplay and Gears of War was a third person shooter with much slower gameplay accompanied by a cover system. For a FPS, I loved how Resistance had so much going on the screen without any slow down. For a TPS, I enjoyed how Gears looked great and how robust it's cover system is so that it felt natural to stop'n pop.

To those comparing GoW to R:FOM it seems pretty pointless, TPS vs FPS is like comparing Arcade racer to simulation racer, there are similarities obviously but then the core mechanic is different.

Regardless, both games were pretty damn impressive. R2 looks as if its shaping up to be pretty special.

I always thought Resistance looked awfully generic and wasn't very interested in it, but the sequel has definitely got my attention.

I'm not a huge fan of first person shooters, especially on consoles, but I absolutely love to play them in co-op mode. I've beaten the otherwise pretty average single-player modes of Halo 1 and 2 five times now with a friend, and loved (almost) every second of them. I played Halo 3 with 2-tv 4-player co-op, and it was probably the most fun I've had with a console FPS yet. Co-op with 8 players sounds thrilling, but I am curious as to how they intend to balance the game so that it's beatable by yourself, but still a challenge with 8 players. Halo 3 got a bit ridiculous at times with just the four of us. On top of that, it looks like there are going to be quite a few awesome levels, which always helps.

There's a high chance of it being outrageously short, due to the costs of working with HD, the short development time, and the amount of effort they seem to be putting in other areas of the game, but hopefully it'll be at least 10 hours. I suppose that's the standard for multiplayer orientated shooters these days.

The massive multiplayer games sound awesome, but I can't help but to be skeptical. In my experience, games with over 20 or so participants tend to be very frustrating, as there are too damn many campers sniping around every corner, and so many idiots spamming various explosives that you can't get anywhere without being blown up, and worst of all having no idea why you died. Of course I've always sucked at online shooters, so what do I know? =P

The slightly changing maps sound pretty cool too. I hope they do it well and everyone else copies them.

tl;dr: A few things sound dodgy (this is marketing hype after all), but all in all I'm now officially interested in this game.

btw, does the magazine cover make anyone else think of The Mystery of the Druids?

A PC game that launches a year late with graphics that are completely underwhelming when compared to the latest tech gets a lower score than its console brethren?

Shocking, I say. 

apparently as a ps3 fan I cant bash any of the games that are made for the system. lol

btw, imo where its at is socom ps3.

that is when the multiplayer fun begins for ps3 owners and i cant wait :)