When the PS3 launched everyone and their cat agreed that Resistance: Fall of Man was the only game worth purchasing for the system. It went on to sell over a million copies leaving fans of the series with high hopes for the sequel. While Resistance 2 was well-received by the gaming media ( G4TV’s X-Play rated it 5/5 with high praise), Senior community manager James Stevenson, in an interview with VideoGamer.com, admitted that some fans of the series believed Resistance 2 ”was a failure”.
“Resistance 2 got better reviews than Resistance 1,” said Stevenson. “But the long term fan feedback from that game weighed on me.
“The hardcore fans of Resistance 1 were maybe a little bit disappointed. Those folks consistently expressing that – especially GAF [NeoGAF] – it was like your dog turned on you,” Stevenson explained.
“That’s the feeling of it. You had this dog that loved you. You loved the dog, too, but they expressed all this affection for you. And then suddenly the dog bites your hand and it’s that feeling of, ooh, ow, that really hurts.
Agree or disagree? Did Resistance 2 fail to meet your standards?
Written by: fleakitten
#1 by JimmyMagnum on October 25th, 2009
hmm, I think I’d have to agree, I’ve played both, and enjoyed the first one more. IDK what it is, but it just didn’t seem like the same game… Hopefully R3 will fair a bit better
^
#2 by iFlash on October 25th, 2009
I loved the both games but I think R2 could have been way better had they not tried to include so much. Lots of bullet points without any one thing being amazing.
^
#3 by Craig on October 25th, 2009
I’d have to say I enjoyed R1 slightly more than R2.
I loved the split-screen coop in R1. The fact that you needed 3 people to do coop in R2 sorta ruined that part for me. While the graphics and set pieces were definitely better in R2, I can remember more of the story from R1.
I would have been happier if they put in local coop (or made single-player longer) and spent less time on the multi-player in R2. But as I rarely play any games online I’m sure most of the gaming community would disagree with me there.
Overall, I loved both games though. Insomniac are yet to disappoint me and I’ve already pre-ordered R&C:ACiT.
^
#4 by Darrin on October 25th, 2009
I was slightly disappointed, just because my expectations were astronomically high. It was still a great game though. I expect Crack in Time to be much better single player and I don’t think I will be disappointed.
R2 coop was absolutely amazing for the first 10 hours or so before it’s formula wore off. It lacks the longevity of a good MMO.
Single player was dumbed down compared to something like Ratchet & Clank or Dead Space or even Uncharted which have more upgrades or puzzles or more involved tactics, but it was still a lot of fun and better than a Call of Duty single player campaign.
Competitive seemed fine, but not enough to separate it from the rest. I prefer Killzone 2 or even Unreal or Metal Gear Online for competitive.
R2 probably did get too much preview buzz relative to the game, while Crack in Time looks like it’s getting too little preview buzz.
^
#5 by George on October 25th, 2009
R2 is one of my “staple” PS3 games. I’m no longer playing it on a regular basis, but it’s one I’ll haul out if guests come over and want to see what the PS3 can do. Still tons of fun to play, and I think it’s one of the best PS3 games I have.
^
#6 by SL33PY on October 26th, 2009
I loved every minute of the game. I even don’t mind that [SPOILER]you die [/SPOILER] Won’t go into detail why, still, I loved the story and enjoyed the game completely.
^
#7 by TwoSheds on October 26th, 2009
I really enjoyed the first game, I think it was the environments, weapon balance and the overall mystery behind the Chimera. In R2 there was way to much time spent running around identical alien corridors and rooms. Any mystery was quickly dispelled. As for enemies, bigger is not always better, a smarter enemy is much more interesting. I was so uninspired by the single player experience I haven’t even bothered much with the multiplayer, even after being in the closed beta.
^
#8 by King32 on October 26th, 2009
I agree to what ever one here is saying. R2 wasnt a failure (i mean c’mon 60 player online) but i just expected much better. Yeah the graphics improved alot but thats pretty much it. To me R3 will be better than both in every way…………..I hope????????
^
#9 by Eddie on October 26th, 2009
I loved R1….didn’t care for R2 at all.
^
#10 by Paranoimia on October 26th, 2009
Loved R1 and spent many, many hours playing it online in our friendly little clan.
I enjoyed the R2 single-player, but hated the online. Other than the beta, I’ve played only one competitive online game of R2. And I hate the co-op, which is simply “all run here, shoot this until it dies, repeat” – tedious in the extreme.
^
#11 by mcloki on October 26th, 2009
R2 was a dissapointment.
Single player. The story was a bummer. The main character dies (spoiler) This was dumb. It left me me with a sense of. Why was I fighting all along. So I leave the game not feeling great. PArt of the role of video games is wish fulfiment. win the race, win the game, get the girl, Not die.
R2 Online. “It’s not the game I hate, It’s their fans”. Co-op players are dumb. Really, really dumb. They don’t talk or worse they don’t listen. Everyone is out for themselves. Kinda sad really. Needs a better party system and a tournament type of set up.
Mainly the biggest problem with R@ was. I didn’t care about the characters. This comes to light clearly by playing Uncharted 2. I care about Drake, Sully and Elana, Even Chloe. I want a UC3, They should have started already. I’ll be one of the first to see the UC Movie. If it’s as good as the video game it’ll be a Blockbuster. Ryan Renolds as Drake. I miss the voice over of the first. They forgot the storytelling part of the video game.
I’ll wait for reviews on R3. Hopefully it’ll be a reboot of the series. But bring the story.
^
#12 by Trieloth on October 26th, 2009
I enjoyed R2 . It had better graphics and a more interesting story. The co-op was tons of fun, but the MP was absolute garbage.
^
#13 by Watcher on October 26th, 2009
I loved R2. The only thing I found lacking was the absence of Vehicle gamplay. Other than that, R2 was a lot more engaging that R1 and the multiplay (co-op specifically) aspect of R2 was awesome. I don’t really care for death matches or other forms of pvp.
^
#14 by King32 on October 26th, 2009
Yea, who ever said that R2 was a disappointment is wrong. The game was really good but it was jus the same as R1, there wasnt really anything new. Thats what made it kinda dull. Now i havent played the multiplayer, so i cant say anything about that but R2 definitly wasnt a disappointment, it jus wasnt anythng new.
^
#15 by Trev on October 26th, 2009
i was in the beta but just didn’t enjoy it enough to get it and i didn’t think much of the 1st either. problem was there were other games i’d rather have and spend my time on and did.
^
#16 by Emrah on October 26th, 2009
I found R1 one tick above mediocre and R2 was never interesting so I didn’t even buy it. The extreme change in story telling was also an alienating factor (lack of narration), because our protagonist, who looked like a piece of log with little to no emotion, didn’t make me want to care for him at all. Leaving the story to this piece of wooden and lifeless character was a bad idea.
^
#17 by Jonaskin on October 26th, 2009
A couple of things I didn’t like about R2 were the fact they went for a more Halo style ‘only two weapons and regenerating health’ concept as opposed to the weapon wheel and health packs of the first game, and the fact that the levels were incredibly linear. Sure the levels were massive but the game always pushed you along a set path. The first game IMO wasn’t as linear by comparison. Bring back proper split screen campaign co-op as well!!! That being said, I really enjoyed both games, and R2 multiplayer is far superior to R1.
^
#18 by Abdulelah on October 26th, 2009
I enjoyed R2 more!
it is way better in graphics and it has a nice storyline.. an amazing Co-op mode that is time consuming.
R2 wasn’t disappointing at all.
^
#19 by Michael on November 4th, 2009
The lack of control options (invert x and y) meant to me it was too much of a chore to even play. Together with the other shortcomings it meant I gave up only a couple of hours into it.
The screenshots were better but the graphics suffered tearing and slow-down more than R1.
And the gameplay missed something. Even though R1 was just as ’scripted’ it didn’t feel anywhere near as scripted at R2 did – e.g. the invisible monster bit in the forest, that you had to memorise to get through was a bit much.
Overall extremely disappointed to the point where I might not even bother with R3. Crack in Time looks very good from the demo though, so I still have hope for Insomniac, but I skipped Quest For Booty since it didn’t seem like value for money (tools of destruction also lacked something — e.g. too easy for the most part).
^