Student let me borrow this game awhile back, so I gave it a shot finally tonight.
I had heard that this was the ps3's GOW in terms of graphics. Did anyone else that played it notice that the visuals were nowhere near GOW in terms of detail, textures, etc.? SOme stuff looks good, but then you see cardboard boxes on the ground flattened out that look like PS1-era stuff with jaggy edges.
Not at all what I expected to see.
How is the 2nd one?
Resistance - fall of man...not so impressed.
-
- Posts: 2103
- Joined: Tue Feb 22, 2005 6:22 pm
Re: Resistance - fall of man...not so impressed.
I heard MGS 4 was supposed to be amazing looking, I told that person to play Gears 2.
Re: Resistance - fall of man...not so impressed.
http://video.yahoo.com/network/10000003 ... &l=3470586tnf wrote:How is the 2nd one?
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/43909.html
Re: Resistance - fall of man...not so impressed.
zewulf wrote:http://video.yahoo.com/network/10000003 ... &l=3470586tnf wrote:How is the 2nd one?
http://www.gametrailers.com/player/43909.html
I was looking for the opinions of people here who have played it. The online stuff I saw about the first one went on about how good it looked.
Re: Resistance - fall of man...not so impressed.
haven't played the first one, but part2. gfx wise it doesn't deliver. res2 has alot of problems with textures as there is no consitence resolution through the scene. you can have a high rex tree sitting next to a low res textured card and that just looks odd. additionally it doesnt seem that the game is rendered in 720p, everything looks so jaggy i suppose its rendered at 640 and then being upscaled to 720. overall it feels like a 2-3 years old shooter, compared to recent titles like gow2 or even older ones like bioshock.
on the gameplay front, its a straight forward mindless shooter, without much finess, but tons of trial and error. there are so many situations where if you step one foot into the wrong direction you die immediatly. then you have dozens of long distance firefights, which doesnt work so good with the low resolution the game is rendered at..
at the end i can say its not worth the fullprice i paid for sp, havent and won't try mp, so that might be the games saviour for someone else.
on the gameplay front, its a straight forward mindless shooter, without much finess, but tons of trial and error. there are so many situations where if you step one foot into the wrong direction you die immediatly. then you have dozens of long distance firefights, which doesnt work so good with the low resolution the game is rendered at..
at the end i can say its not worth the fullprice i paid for sp, havent and won't try mp, so that might be the games saviour for someone else.
- GONNAFISTYA
- Posts: 13369
- Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 8:20 pm
Re: Resistance - fall of man...not so impressed.
I tried it at a GDC and walked away after about 15 minutes. Fucking borefest....on the same level of inspiration (ie: low) as Quake 4.
The only reason it was touted as a PS3 release title was the graphics....which aren't impressive these days. Lord knows they never touted the gameplay...because it's shit.
The only reason it was touted as a PS3 release title was the graphics....which aren't impressive these days. Lord knows they never touted the gameplay...because it's shit.
-
- Posts: 17509
- Joined: Thu Jan 01, 1970 12:00 am
Re: Resistance - fall of man...not so impressed.
2 is ok...nothing special dude. Solid FPS title but only a mid 80's mark from me. Enjoyable but not exeptional by any standards