Insomniac explains departure from Resistance series

By Robert Purchese Published 27 January, 2012

The end of a Chimera.

Insomniac big cheese Ted Price has recorded a video statement confirming yesterday's news that the developer will no longer work on the PS3 series of Resistance games.

You could say the studio now resists resisting Resistance resistance.

"Some of you may have seen the headlines we inadvertently made through an interview I did, where I confirmed that we are not making any more Resistance games," a calm Price pronounced. "Now this is not the first time that those of us at Insomniac have said this, but today it was big news.

"So I did want to confirm it, face to face, that we are not moving on with the Resistance franchise."

He added: "We believe that Resistance has reached its logical conclusion in terms of the story that we wanted to tell. However, that doesn't mean the Resistance franchise isn't continuing; it's already in the capable hands of Nihilistic, and Sony's shepherding. We know that it will continue to live on and expand. And we're excited, as fanboys, to see where it goes.

"So I did want to confirm it, face to face, that we are not moving on with the Resistance franchise."

Ted Price, CEO and president, Insomniac Games

"But I wanted to thank all of you, our fans, and certainly those of you who have played Resistance, for coming with us on this journey from Resistance 1 all the way through [to] Resistance 3. Your enthusiasm, your comments and your critiques have been extremely helpful and rewarding for us at the same time."

That's odd; perhaps Ted Price forgot what Eurogamer reader weaselrat wrote in the comments section of the Resistance: Fall of Man review five years ago. But I can't work out how "Resistance sucks balls. Yeehaaaaaa" was extremely helpful or rewarding.

Price progressed: "We're very much looking forward to having you with us as we move onto other games such as Overstrike. So, thank you very much for your support."

Insomniac's next game Overstrike will be published by EA and - a studio first - be a game developed for Xbox 360 as well as PS3.

Picture of Robert.

About Robert Purchese

Bertie is Eurogamer's Senior Staff Writer. When he's not hunting down news stories he's often found playing with his kids or gabbling about fantasy games and strange online worlds.

Read more articles from Robert by visiting the Robert Purchese archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (26) Latest comment 3 weeks ago

  • bladdard #1 4 weeks ago

    More Jak and Daxter...


    EDIT: Oops, I've made a mistake on the internet, now I'm for it. ;)
    Edited by 1 at 27/01/12 @ 12:17

  • charliemouse #2 4 weeks ago

    Jak and Daxter was by Naughty Dog though.

  • fabiosooner #3 4 weeks ago

    "That's odd; perhaps Ted Price forgot what Eurogamer reader weaselrat wrote in the comments section of the Resistance: Fall of Man review five years ago. But I can't work out how "Resistance sucks balls. Yeehaaaaaa" was extremely helpful or rewarding."

    Simple: he said "our fans". Somehow I *think* this commenter isn't one of them. Don't know, it's just a *hunch*...

    But anyway. What the heck is happening with gaming journalism these days that one can't write a simple news article without taking a jab/cheap shot at someone? It's pretty annoying. The Escapist wasn't like this, Eurogamer wasn't like this, but both suddenly are doing this left and right, while others have been doing it for some time.

    OK, we get that gaming journalism just entered its teens years, but bitch please.

  • -cerberus- #4 4 weeks ago

    Oh dear... Insomniac is having a multiplatform four-player co-op action game published by EA. We all know what that means: extortion pass, DLC, on-disc ULC, pre-order BS, etc.

  • Oh-Bollox #5 4 weeks ago

    I love how a developer has to explain why it's not milking a series to death.

    "We'd prefer to work on something else, and let someone else drive Resistance into the ground..."

  • FogHeart #6 4 weeks ago

    "You could say the studio now resists resisting Resistance resistance."

    Well, you could, but the only time I'd try would be as part of a drinking game.

  • WeakOrbit #7 4 weeks ago

    As much as I enjoyed Resistance 3 for an end of a franchise game a little bit more of an effort could have gone into the ending of it.

    I mean radio reports with a drawing of chaps looking at a map!!!! Bit lazy lads.

  • DUFFKING #8 4 weeks ago

    At least they finished on a high, love R3, hated R2 quite passionately.

  • el_pollo_diablo #9 4 weeks ago

    Resistance never quite reached the dizzy heights (fun-wise as well as sales-wise) that I kind of hoped it would.

  • gundato #10 4 weeks ago

    @WeakOrbit The point of R3 wasn't a global story. It was Cappelli's story. Just like R2 (was meant to be) Hale's story. Everything else that happened was secondary to Cappelli, his actions just happened to have an impact on the world.

  • Triggerhappytel #11 4 weeks ago

    This is a very poorly-written, immature article from EG yet again. As Fabio says above; what's going on here these days? Poor proof-reading, questionable articles advocating piracy or 'griefers' and then stuff like this.

    "You could say the studio now resists resisting Resistance resistance."

    No, you wouldn't say it because it's not funny and doesn't make sense.

  • makeamazing #12 4 weeks ago

    So I did want to confirm it, face to face, that we are not moving on with the Resistance franchise.
    So are they or are they Not moving on from Resistance? Someone make up their mind or check the typing skills :)

  • Triggerhappytel #13 4 weeks ago

    @makeamazing
    He says "not moving on with", not "not moving on from".

  • Darren #14 4 weeks ago

    I think it is a good idea for developers to make a trilogy of games but then they should move on to something else IMO as it prevents franchises from becoming stale and repetitive (hello, Call of Duty!) and keeps the developers motivated and interested in the games they're making. I can't think of anything worst than having to keep churning out sequel after sequel at the request of a publisher just because a game is popular.
    Edited by 1 at 27/01/12 @ 13:42

  • WeakOrbit #15 4 weeks ago

    @gundato
    his actions just happened to have an impact on the world
    I know that it was primarily Capellis story, but I don't think his actions just "happened" to have an impact.

    But I'm not arguing about that,

    I'm just saying since the whole thing ultimately messed up the chimera, a better effort towards an epilogue could have being made seeing as Insomniac knew it was going to be the last of their trilogy.
    Edited by 2 at 27/01/12 @ 13:45

  • BigDannyH #16 4 weeks ago

    I look forward to the day that games, like films and novels, pay more attention to the people that make the thing than the title. I don't think it's too far off either.

    Hardcore gamers follow developers but I'm not sure the mass market do just yet. Hence why we get so many sequels, it's the only way developers can build up a fan base.

    I know we get a lot of sequels in the film industry too, but people seem far more aware of a new Christopher Nolan film than simply the new COD. Inception was essentially a new IP by the guy who made The Dark Knight.

    The acid test will be whether the new Bungie and Respawn titles fair well compared with Halo 4 and the CoD 17 (?).

  • jablonski #17 4 weeks ago

    What are you lot all moaning about, Rob's a legend.

    "You could say the studio now resists resisting Resistance resistance."

    Magical.

  • Yuroko #18 4 weeks ago

    I've never played the Resistance games, they never appealed to me, but I admire the way the devs can walk away from it. I hope naughty Dog leave Uncharted alone now, just leave it as a quality trilogy and come up with something new. I hate how everything has to be a franchise nowadays.

  • landlock #19 4 weeks ago

    @Yuroko Even if Naughty Dog leaves it alone. Sony will still milk the series into the ground as they have done previously.

  • gundato #20 4 weeks ago

    @WeakOrbit I do agree that it would have been nice to have a proper send-off, but I think it would have hurt the game.

    This is the problem that faces going from "Hale is the POV character for the battle of britain" to "Hale is the POV character for the battle of the world" to "Cappelli is just trying to save his family". They shrunk back their perspective. It made for a much better game, but it kind of hurts to end the trilogy on that point.

    I dunno, I think they were buggered either way, but I am glad they focused on making R3 a solid game with a fun story rather than trying to just one-up R2.

  • albo #21 4 weeks ago

    You could say the studio now resists resisting Resistance resistance.

  • Alex_V #22 4 weeks ago

    This is PR fluff. They aren't making any more because they weren't successful, not because of anything to do with creative juices or logical conclusions.

  • djronz. #23 4 weeks ago

    <quote>Alex_V wrote:
    This is PR fluff. They aren't making any more because they weren't successful, not because of anything to do with creative juices or logical conclusions.</quote>

    1 and 2 saw reasonable success but 3 less so. Its a shame because as a single player experience they are much better than any cod or many commercially better received titles.

  • TetsuZaemon #24 4 weeks ago

    So, Resistance DOES suck balls.

    Sony's.

  • Alex_V #25 4 weeks ago

    @djronz. I think that too many gamers accept mediocrity in their games. I found the Resistance games okay but in the wider scheme of things they are bog-standard generic shooters. Far inferior even to commercial failures like Vanquish or Singularity imo.

    If we want games need to raise the bar, these 'ok but not great' franchises need to be shoved aside so better games can be made. We should be celebrating this.

    I feel exactly the same about the Killzone series, despite it's fantastic visuals. Games need to move on.

  • Architect_z #26 3 weeks ago

    Buy the rights to Starship troopers and make a game out of it!