Resistance 3 announced? News

That's 4 games in 3 years?

@Xerx3s

'Insomniac' isn't just a name it seems

I think they are destroying long-term value and artistic merit for perceived short-term gain.

Welcome to Capitalism.

Bond movies for at least the last 20 years have had a lot of product placement, and not just for Sony products either.

Heh, what's that SDF? MS Milk Halo? Oh, OK.... ;)

On a serious note, not trolling just curious, am I missing something with Resistance? To be fair I only play a demo of the 1st one but found it terribly dull. Did 2 improve it massively or something to warrant a third? Is it the 2nd worth a look?

I did quite enjoy the second one...especially the zombie town bit. That was ace.

Someone didn't read the story.

"Did 2 improve it massively or something to warrant a third? Is it the 2nd worth a look?"

The story and setting of the 1st were better. The 2nd was still a nice shooter though and had more eye candy. IMO it could have done with a little less focus on multiplayer: SP was hurt by the shift of resources.

SeesThroughAll: fair enough. :)

flaming.carrot: perhaps I hadn't noticed it before, and it wasn't quite so blatant, or do you just mean the cars?

Vesper Lynd: "You know... former SAS types with easy smiles and expensive watches. Rolex?"
James Bond: "Omega."
Vesper Lynd: "Beautiful."

The best levels of Resistance 2 - zombie town included - felt 'borrowed' from HL2 and its attendant Episodes. Hopefully a new engine and new original ideas are what's in store.

I agree with StooMonster's comments about Sony product placement, but I do quite like the idea of pre-emptive advertising such as this; knowing you've got a game out in 2011 so sticking a billboard for it in a film due out the same year. I don't think that would disrupt the narrative flow of a film, as it would look like a naturalistic advert (assuming there weren't loads of cuts to it and close ups and whatnot).

I always thought it was a shame the Batman & Superman advert in I Am Legend wasn't a pre-emptive ad!

First game was great, the second was a crushing disappointment. Kill it now, please.

Wasnt impressed with it at all, just didnt like the style of it. I wont be rushing out for number 3. I agree with what someone else said, they need a totally new engine... perhaps they can steal KZ2's that might allow them to make better levels which are not so linear.

Apologies for apalling geography. Thank you those who wrote in to point out that LA was Louisiana.

Give the Insomniac guys some slack, the FPS genre is harshly competitive and with RFOM being their first since Disruptor (in 97?) they have a lot of ground to make up. Iterating quickly should really help them raise their standards and find out what gamers really want without just cloning what the market leaders are doing.

"Iterating quickly should really help them raise their standards and find out what gamers really want without just cloning what the market leaders are doing."

To be fair to them, their games haven't exactly been uninspired copy cats so far. RFOM offered original weapons and a nice setting that wasn't too serious nor too campy. Sure, it wasn't a HL2 but then, few games are. R2 offered inventive co-op (or so I heard. Don't like co-op myself so haven't played that part) and large scale multiplayer, which was quite fun (played it when I was recovering from an injury last year but haven't touched it since).

But like I said, IMO story telling wasn't that good in R2. They tried to do too much in-engine and during the action so half of the story was lost on me as I was shooting monsters while someone was babbling on the radio or one of the AI characters was talking to me. Again, they could learn from HL2 where in general you can't move on to the next action bit before the story segment is over (using elevators and locked doors most of the time). But the R2 game mechanics were enjoyable enough to see me through till the end.

I did like the first one, especially the Manchester level, but the second was too bloated and trying to hard to hide a shallow and uninspired story behind tons of gargantuan enemies. The zombie town was atmospheric, though. More of that please and less of the blockbuster crap.

May I just commend Donnie on possibly his first post which wasn't a complete troll...a round of applause please.

This article makes me grin in a "I see what you did there" sort of way... I mean setting up advertising for a game, in a film that won't be released for a while, so that when the film is released the game will already be in production. That's planning quite far ahead...Saucy buggers.

Still, Battle: Los Angeles sounds like a terrible film... unless it's one of those films that is just plain awesome and requires no plot or explanation and you need to be heavily intoxicated to enjoy, see death race, or crank....infact anything with Jason Statham requires intoxication. What was I saying? Oh it probably doesn't matter.

EDIT: I realise most of you will have to unblock Donnie to see what I mean...probably not worth doing.

Loved the first game (especially the excellent split screen co-op) but I have to say I thought the second one pretty much buggered up the whole thing. I can't believe EG rated it highly whilst giving the first one such a low score.

I agree. I was pretty disappointed with R2 after all the good reviews. The game just feels really uninspired, been there done that type of thing. Also I found the singleplayer really boring. After 4/5 hours I could not play it anymore, it was so boring.

Maybe I'm being too harsh, maybe my expectations were too high, but I won't be buying another Resistance game anymore.