By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - I need everyone to be open-minded about this Gears 2 vs Resistance 2 video

Phrancheyez on 17 September 2008
sieanr said:
Phrancheyez said:

I had a huge post written up last night, but this is getting beyond pointless, so I refrained from posting it.

Gebx, although I see your point to a degree, you still disappoint me.

Kill tracking isn't remotely near what I was talking to. Have you ever played Resistance online? Have you ever seen the online statistics for Resistance? It doesn't sound like you have, because the stat tracking system of Halo 3, like CoD4, PALES in comparison. This isn't an opinion, it's a fact. There is no other game with as detailed information of online statistics at the current time than Resistance: Fall of Man. Period..this shouldn't even be argued about..if you argue it, you're being a fanboy. Sorry, it's true.

Being able to curb-stomp your oponent is nice, but only 4v4? That'll be fun for the first few days, but I play online multiplayer with 8 or 9 people. That's going to be boring for me and all of my friends when we have to neglect to play with a few just because the game is too small in scale. But like you said - both games aren't going to appeal to the same people all the time.

I'll reiterate my opinion one more time that the reason Halo 3 is so popular is because it's a 'newer version' of Halo 2. The game is very similar..and did Halo 2 not have some of the highest ratings pre-Halo 3? No one wants to play an old version of the same game, and the old version was extremely popular. It shouldn't be surprising that the new one is just as popular.

My argument against Halo 3 is that the difference between it an Halo 2 is so small that it's not even worth it. And almost every friend that I played Halo 2 hardcore with no longer plays Halo 3 because most of them agree. Good thing for Bungie, though, that a lot of other people don't get tired of playing the same thing with new maps. For me - I do.

I also like sniping from 50 feet away or using an Auger to kill people who like to hide behind walls or using a splicer to cut someones heart out. You prefer chainsawing and curb-stomping. To each his own.

I'm sorry, but unless I'm missing something big RFOM stat tracking isn't that mindblowing. In fact its worse than halo 3 in numerous ways. Fact.

Compare;

http://www.myresistance.net/ostat.php?pname=kktoronto0711

http://www.bungie.net/stats/Halo3/CareerStats.aspx?player=PaladinKnight02

Keep in mind that halo allows you to view any game you've ever played. It allows you to see a map that displays where you die most often and where you get the most kills. Or you can break down stats based on map.

Not to mention that the presentation and navigation on Bungie's site is superior. 

 

True enough, Resistance doesn't have the maps so +1 for them.  I don't think (and I may again be wrong) that this was all available when the game launched, was it?  That's when I played..but I didn't like the game enough to stick around long enough to check that out either.

More-over, I was referring to how you can view your stats while in-game.  I guess I should have been more clear in what I meant.  At least when I played Halo 3, you couldn't see stats anywhere near that detailed through your XBOX 360.  All of Resistances stats are available right there, I don't have to go through a web broswer to see them (and even if I did, my PS3 has one..hah, sorry, moot point).  Regardless though, it's clear that Halo 3 has better stat tracking, so I apologize sieanr.



Around the Network
BILL COSBY!!! on 17 September 2008
gebx said:
Dno said:
gebx said:
Since when does gameplay = Weapons??

 

its called having different things to do. Which makes it fun..... fun effects gameplay...... makes it better to play...... do you see where hes going with that?

Sure the guns available are part of the gameplay, but thats the difference between generic FPS's and good ones. The generic will rely on over the top weapons to try to make up for shitty gamplay, while the good ones use weapons as a basic element to interact with the environment. The good ones will concetrate on how the A.I. interacts with you, on how strategies are used, its how Coop elements interact with the story, the flow of the game, the difficulty. 

Basing a games gameplay on weapons shown on a video is just dumb, by those standards Blacksite:Area 51 would of been a great game...

 

You really have no idea what you're talking about. You obviously have a bias which is fine but you're trying to justify it by talking out of your ass- don't



"YouR opinion is WronG!!!"

craighopkins on 17 September 2008

Textures Gears 2>Resistance 2
Physics Resistance 2>Gears 2



twesterm on 17 September 2008

You know, Resistance 2 does look great. By no means does the game look bad or even just good. It's a great looking game.

But do you really know why Gears 2 looks better?

The environments that I saw in that video just look so much more real. There are particles going off everywhere. Something is always moving. When a shot hits a brick rubble flies off and when a shot hits dirt dirt flies up. Their particles are simply amazing and you rarely just see flat ground or walls. Resistance 2 is just full of those.

From what I've seen on Resistance in that video everything is just really static and doesn't move much. There aren't always particles moving, the shot effects on the environment aren't anything special, and the environment doesn't do a lot to draw me in the game.

That all said, I would much rather reserve any kind of real judgment until both games are released.

Also, why must every youTube video maker force us to listen to their terrible music?

-edit-

And that bit he talked about at 2:55, I doubt that's all real environment.  I betcha a lot of that is a mixture of skyboxes and things you'll never ever get close to.  Still great looking but not a lot special.



 

scat398 on 17 September 2008

It was hard to watch one thing and have the guy try and tell you something different but that's ok. When it comes down to it Resistance just doesn't seem to measure up with Gears, it's just a few steps below it. Graphics, gameplay, and multiplayer are all greater on gears. Not by a landslide or anything but it is what it is.



Around the Network
twesterm on 17 September 2008

Hmm, and I don't know if I agree with points 2 and 3 (sorry, only watched the first one when I typed the last post, didn't think I would watch the other two).

Resistance 2 has some awesome numbers and it does look like it has a lot of cool depth but it's also a completely different game than Gears 2 multiplayer. Just because it has 60 players does it make it better than ever other multiplayer game that doesn't have 60 players?

Of course not.

Look at something like CoD4 for example. That is a simple 3v3 but it's incredible multiplayer. If you look at TF2, probably one of the best multiplayer games *ever*, large games aren't fun. It has incredible depth and the fun games are only 6v6 to 8v8.

Quantity does not mean quality. I'm not saying Resistance 2 is bad or Gears 2 is better, I'm just saying you can't rely only on huge numbers.

As for the gameplay, he only looked at weapons. Even ignoring that the two games are incredibly different, that's the lame thing to base all of gameplay on.



 

ZenfoldorVGI on 17 September 2008

lol, I would love to cut through the crap and predict that Gears 2 will be the better game, but I can't, because that would be stating an assumption.

That said, crap aside, I believe it will probably sell better, be reviewed better, and have better graphics.

I don't just base this simply off R1 not being great, I just think after looking at both games, that'll be the case.

However, I feel I have to put up a politically correct facade and say, "Hey guys, I'm your friend Zenfoldor, both games are great, and they will be equally as good. The PS3 and 360 are both great, so lets live in harmony for hereonafter."

That's obviously not what I believe, but it should be what I say. I shouldn't actually contribute, but instead I should post up pointless pc pandering. I think most previewers, reviewers and non-PS3 owners(even if they don't own a 360) believe what I believe. Something could change between now and when the games are released, or something amazingly weird could happen and Gears 2 could somehow not be nearly as good as everyone, including myself, believes that it's going to be, but I doubt it.

I think I'd be a hypocrite not to hint at my real opinion because there is a small chance I could be wrong. There certainly is that chance, as always.

So, no quoting out of context here. I'm not saying Gears 2 is or will be the better game. However, if I was speaking freely around my friends, and not worried about a little "gotcha" game where everything I say is subject to ridicule, I think I would be a little more free with my opinions.

Take that post for what you will.



I don't need your console war.
It feeds the rich while it buries the poor.
You're power hungry, spinnin' stories, and bein' graphics whores.
I don't need your console war.

NO NO, NO NO NO.

S.T.A.G.E. on 17 September 2008
perpride said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Phrancheyez said:
Both games will be good, but they will appeal to different people. They're TPS and FPS.

I read someone say that textures are way more important in terms of graphics than the modeling itself - you're out of your mind. I do 3D modeling, to the naked eye - yours, who has no experience doing this - maybe. It's harder to put high poly models in a game than high res textures. I look at graphics in a more technical way because I've done 3D modeling. If you haven't, you have no clue what you're talking about. High res textures is a way to make up for lack of high poly models.

Anywho..

Resistance is a generic type of shooter. That being said, I prefer Resistance over Gears by a long shot. The weapons alone make the game much more fun, but the physics are what separate this game from, say, a Call of Duty. Many won't agree with me, and it will probably be mostly people who only have a 360 - though some with a PS3 that like Resistance will still disagree - but I strongly prefer Resistance over even CoD4.

The online multiplayer will destroy Gears online multiplayer by a long shot. The only inovative thing that Gears brings is the Horde mode or whatever it's called that's basically a survival mode. It sounds like tons of fun, but Resistance game modes were already very unique when it came out, and still has the best game types of any online FPS out there.

It's not made a lick in Halo's shadow..Halo 3 - as I've said 10 million times - was a huge let down. It wasn't a horrible game, but it wasn't worth $60. It was a Halo 2 expansion pack that was worth, at most, $30. The game types in online multiplayer were generic, things every game has. They brought nothing new to the table. The gameplay was the exact same as the first, and the graphics were almost the exact same except HD. The storyline in Halo as a whole was one of the most pathetic and spastic storylines I've ever witnessed.

Resistance 1 is much better than Halo 3.

Gears of War, in my opinion, should be compared much more closely to Uncharted because they're both 3rd person shooters. Unfortunately, there's no Uncharted 2 coming out as of right now, so we can't compare the sequels. I loved Uncharted and I think it has better graphics than Gears of War, but I think Gears of War was a better game for the Genre. The graphics weren't that much worse, and you had much better control over your character and the weapons were better. The story was much larger in scale, which always lends to the experience of playing a game. While I didn't exactly enjoy Gears, I find any types of shooters better on Playstation for the simple fact of the controller. The 360's offset thumbsticks kills the FPS or TPS experience for me and always has since Halo 2. Halo 2 was just a good enough game to keep it going for me, much like CoD4.

All of that being said, I think Resistance will be a better game. The Campaign modes is a huge advantage for one having the separate campaigns for single and multi-player, and the geometry randomization that changes the landscape every time you play a level over will make the campaign never really get old.

The online multi-player will be much better as well, because of the scale alone. On top of that, as I said above, the game types are going to far outpace Gears 2 simply because no game has come close to as good of game types as Resistance 1 and I expect 2 to have most of, if not all of them and more.

That being said, I think Gears 2 will rate higher. There are more 360 fans that want their console to be better and will rate Gears as amazing whether they truly liked it or not. I find there are more honest gamers on the PS3 - not necessarily this website. I clasify truly liking a game as a game you play months after it's release, beyond when another decent-good game for that genre comes out. There are going to be a lot of people who buy Gears 2, get online and say it was awesome, and stop playing the game 2-4 months later. There will be more people who buy Resistance 2, get online and say it's a pretty good game, and continue to play it 6-8 months later.

My 2 cents - obviously a little biased - so take it as you will. At least I honestly gave Gears 1 it's chance and played it before I decided I didn't like it. And my stats on Resistance for online speak for themselves.




Just 1 other thing - No other game online has or apparently will ever come close to tracking stats as well as Resistance did. Not even close. The stat system on Resistance is so far better than any other game, it's not even remotely amusing. I wish all games would take a page from Insomniac as far as that's concerned, but unfortunately most won't JUST because they'd be worried about it being considered 'biting' Resistances style. I for one, wouldn't care about that, I'd like to know exact kills and accuracy for every weapon I've used, including grenades, in every shooter I play. I guess that's too much to ask, so I'll stick to Resistance where if I'm good and I say I'm good, I have extremely detailed stats to back it up. You just have a win % and accuracy %, and nothing else.

 

 Resistance was better than Halo 3 eh? Halo 3's storyline may have been a let down but the multiplayer is still going strong. There are more levels coming soon. People want to complain about the game and yet they are glued to it like crack addicts when they go on Xbox Live. Mark my words Resistance 2 will take a back seat to KZ2. 

Just because alot of people play it online does not make it good. I agree %100 that Resistance was better than Halo 3...eventhough I did not even like Resistance much. Halo was just full of dissapointments. This, my friend, is not one of the crack addicts you were talking about lol.

 

This makes no sense. Halo 3 has great gameplay and is still loved today. Resistance will never have the sales of any Halo title (Take your pick). KZ2 will own Resistance. I never said anything about Resistance 1 being better than Halo. Resistance is a cookie cutter FPS and Halo was forerunning on consoles. Theres a difference between the two. 

 



s-grandi93 on 17 September 2008

gears 2 has better detail and texture, resistance 2 is still very good though



Respect for compans: SONY > NINTENDO >>>>>>>>>> MICROSOFT

 

gebx on 17 September 2008
BILL COSBY!!! said:
gebx said:
Dno said:
gebx said:
Since when does gameplay = Weapons??

 

its called having different things to do. Which makes it fun..... fun effects gameplay...... makes it better to play...... do you see where hes going with that?

Sure the guns available are part of the gameplay, but thats the difference between generic FPS's and good ones. The generic will rely on over the top weapons to try to make up for shitty gamplay, while the good ones use weapons as a basic element to interact with the environment. The good ones will concetrate on how the A.I. interacts with you, on how strategies are used, its how Coop elements interact with the story, the flow of the game, the difficulty. 

Basing a games gameplay on weapons shown on a video is just dumb, by those standards Blacksite:Area 51 would of been a great game...

 

You really have no idea what you're talking about. You obviously have a bias which is fine but you're trying to justify it by talking out of your ass- don't

Are you serious??

I feel like I'm in bizzaro land here.. judging gamplay on guns available is stupid beyond belief.

CoD4 is a perfect example, all the guns available are regular guns that have been in FPS's since the Rainbow Six days.. Comparing those guns to lets say Unreal 3 would mean that Unreal 3 has better gameplay.

oh.. wait I see what you did.. the good old PS3 fanboy trick.. when confronted with facts turn to personal insults! Nice one!



Proud Member of GAIBoWS (Gamers Against Irrational Bans of Weezy & Squilliam)