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

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

Kasz216 on 15 September 2008

Gears 1 was a game that one "Game of the Year" from just about every videogame review site except IGN.

Resistance 1 was an average FPS, with ok ratings for a launch game that was a FPS which are generally treated better then TPS.

There is just about nothing that could make me thing R2 was going to be better then G2 until both games are released, and either reviewed with a good 8-10 point difference.... or both played by me.



Around the Network
noslodecoy on 15 September 2008
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.

... [trimmed to save space]

 

For what exactly did you do 3D modeling?  I doubt it was for game design. Polygon Count is, of course very important.  But last I checked, GPUs were not capable of rendering the polygon count required for individual fibers in clothing or the perceived bumps in the locust's skin.  That's where textures, bump maps and opacity maps come in.  And textures have their limitations.  Texture size and variety are limited by the memory available and of course it's clock.  Afterall, that's why there are still games with crappy textures or games with the same textures constantly being recycled.  Don't downplay the importance and difficulty of textures.  Saying high rez textures are an easy way to make up for low polygon count--Well, that's just bull.

Of course, I haven't done any 3D modeling ;)

... and what's with this, "can you read" and "finish school" talk?  It's a bit childish and crude.  A person who finished school, such as yourself, should be able to point out argumental flaws without resorting to such infantile taunts.



Me on 15 September 2008

that was one of the most boring 10 minutes of my life. Why didn't I just reaqd a book!

Anyway who cares which is best - just get them both like I am.



 


ZenfoldorVGI on 15 September 2008
Impulsivity said:
This is kind of like GOW 1 vs Resistance 1. The campaigns were pretty good (though Gears was WAY short), both had quality coop and both had good graphics/gameplay. Where Resistance pulled ahead was in the multiplayer with 32+ person maps, a rank leveling system and a bunch of other stuff (compared with the dinky 4v4 gears system). It looks to be similar this time, as the video says. They are more or less tied on the single player, but the multiplayer options are heavily in R2s favor. As a bonus R2 will be free to play online, win.

 

So, you're trying to say GeoW 1 was comparable, or perhaps worse than Resistance.....

Not trying to infer anything, but have you actually played either game?



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.

Gnosis on 15 September 2008

Both games are looking great in their own way. Each one has qualities that I like.



Around the Network
BengaBenga on 16 September 2008
Phrancheyez said:
kowenicki said:
@Phrancheyez

resistance 1 is better than COD4 and resistance 1 has the best stats recording of any game ever! ok. whatever you say...

 

 It's a preference, if you can read, I said many would disagree.  Go to school or at least finish it you moron.

There's really no need to call others morons. You're warned.

 



gebx on 16 September 2008
Phrancheyez said:
ooo oo also I want to add, Gebx, that yes I said I measure games by how long people play it. And Halo 3 does have a lot of people playing it. Coincidentally, if you read my response to that other hater, what's his name..umm S.T.A.G.E. that's right, Halo 3 was going to have that success regardless because it's so much like Halo 2, so almost everyone who had been playing Halo 2 is now playing Halo 3. Halo 2's online community didn't start to die off until Halo 3 - no ones going to play an old version of the same game. How many unique hits did Halo 2 have before it began to fall off? And how many did it have this long after it came out compared with Halo 3? I'd suffice it to say pretty close to the same...hmm? Ok then.

Sorry guys, really. It aggrivates me when people read only what they want to and then flame me for my post for something I didn't say...and if they'd have read my whole post, it's clearly there.

Whatever.

It aggrevates me when people make statements solely based on their opinions and then get mad when people disagree with them. Resistance is not better then Halo 3... you might believe so, but its not. Do I think Godfather should be one of the All Time best movies? no, I think dozens of movies are better, but I'm not going to get aggravated.

Also, I was refering to the kill tracking feature for Halo 3.

Also, you're whole post are baseless opinions with no facts or anything to remotely back up what you say

You think Gears 2 will rate higher because 360 fans want it to be good? WTH does that mean? That reviewers will go easier on it, that they'll just give it a 10 because its made by CliffyB? If Gears 2 get a 10 from famitsu then I'll agree that those could of been affected by hype, but if the other more reputable website give it top ratings then don't even believe for a sec that Gears didn't deserve it.

Comparing multiplayer between the two is like comparing different sports. If you prefer massive scale battles with 30 to 60 players then R2 is your game. If you want personal close combat chainsaw in your face action then Gears 2 is your game. Personally, shooting some guy from 50 feet away will never be as satisfying has curb stomping your opponents face, for that reason alone Gears 2 trumps R2.

And looking at the video I just have to say that the PS2 called and wants its "clueless enemy running straight at you" A.I. back... Based on those videos, we can safely say that Halo Combat Evolved has better enemy A.I.



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

                   

Reasonable on 16 September 2008

Gears = better textures, different playstyle, less open world delivered with extreme polish

RFOM = good textures, different playstyle, more open world delivered with solid polish

Both look very good, RFOM2 is a bigger jump from RFOM than GoW2 is from GoW, but then RFOM was clearly rushed for launch and was near enough the developers first FPS. GoW was delivered with a 'when its done' attitude and maximum polish from a seasoned shooter developer and it showed.

Anyway, I've just spent the morning playing FPS on my PC for the first time in yonks and I'm coming to the conclusion the real killer is both these games should be on PC! Damn consoles for dragging shooters off their true home!

I want the lot of you to get gaming PCs pronto and play shooters properly!

That said I'll be owning RFOM2 on PS3 and playing GoW2 at my mates house - and he can come to mine and sample some RFOM - see, 360 / PS3 owners can be friends!



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

NeoRatt on 16 September 2008

Both games look like must buys...



perpride on 16 September 2008
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.