• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Resistance: Fall of Man (Review)

VIAN

Diamond Member
I've been busy, but I finally got the review done. Remember that the 'B' corresponds to the new Vik Scale in sig. Next is "Ratchet & Crank." Then afterwards, I don't know. I think I'll start polling you guys.




Grade: B

Pros
Shooting aliens with cool weapons.
Cons
Crappy textures.

Introduction
Resistance: Fall of Man is called the ?Halo Killer? on the PS3. I completely agree. While it may be difficult to compare this game to Halo: Combat Evolved because of the different shooter styles, this game can be directly compared to Halo 2, which Resistance destroys in every aspect. Well . . . I haven?t tried the multiplayer of either game; so in every single-player campaign aspect.

Story
Make believe WWII never happened, and instead an alien race, called the Chimera, has taken over all of Europe; all, except Great Britain. The English buy the aid of Americans. You?re a Ranger named Sergeant Hale. Ironic enough, and I assume, deliberate, Hale means ?free from disease or infirmity; robust; vigorous.? Many or all of these meanings actually tie into the story, including the whole ?one-man army? deal that we get with typical first-person shooters.

The story isn?t completely progressive. It?s mostly just completing objectives that may seem typical of war, or an excuse to play further. But there is an underlying fascination behind it. Maybe it?s the setting of the story. Maybe it?s the mystery behind the narrator. Maybe it?s the interest that builds in the Chimera. These small things made me want to see what the ending was.

The story is told via cut-scenes in between levels. Black and White sketches are shown and a woman, who you meet early on, narrates. I initially thought it was a cheap way of telling the story, but it grew on me. You also get to find extra, interesting information hidden throughout the game.


Gameplay
For the first few levels the game started out slow and crappy. It didn?t feel like a war. You are all alone and enemies are scarce, similar to DOOM3. Then the action picks up and it never quits. The game has a good level of challenge at Medium difficulty. I died a bunch of times, but . . . I also, didn?t die a bunch of times.

The health system is unique because it is a hybrid of the old, health pack system, and the new regeneration system used in the Call of Duty series. Full health consists of four bars connected horizontally. If you get shot, and your health doesn?t dip into the next bar, then you regenerate back to full health. But if it does dip into the next bar, then you can only regenerate to three full bars instead of four. The idea is that getting hit enough times produced irreparable damage. In this case, you need a health pack to get back to the fourth bar. I like it.

There are a variety of different enemies, which all get introduced at a nice pace. This is something that many games can?t quite get right. Other types of gameplay enhancements are vehicles sections, which you get to control various types of vehicles. And you have to be impressed again ? something else that other games can?t quite get right.

The guns are interesting. Well first let me say that when you pick up a new gun, the game pauses and you get to read a short summary about it. I love that. Taking into consideration that the game takes place around 1950 and that WWII never happened, we have some futuristic weapons here. The M5A2 Carbine is an automatic rifle, who?s style hints at WWII carbine. Then you have the very useful Double Barrel Shotgun, a sniper rifle, rocket launcher, and top secret grenade launcher. The only weapons that look futuristic are the rifle and grenade launcher. I didn?t like using the launcher. I did use the rifle for most of the game though. It was fun and it sounds great. You also get four fun alien weapons the first time you play the game. You can get more weapons by playing the game multiple times if you wish. All these weapons, except the grenade launcher, are fun to use. Each has a special place in battle.

Grenades are also very cool. There?s the regular grenade. Then there?s a grenade that when explodes launches arrows in all direction, which is very deadly, and looks cool. Finally, there?s a grenade that causes a huge fire explosion, which also looks cool.

Other Stuff
A major disappointment with the graphics is the texture quality. It is very low resolution. It is noticeable and bothersome. I?ve seen better textures on the Dreamcast. But all is not lost. The game is blessed with excellent geometry detail which you can clearly see in the buildings and environment.

Music is scarce initially, but becomes more of a presence as more action occurs. It can be subtle and creepy at times, and it can be loud and tension-filled during a battle.

Most sound effects such as guns and footsteps are great. However, when you bump into any object in the environment, including the wall, it sounds awkward.

Conclusion
As a single-player game, you will not be disappointed. I think Resistance set out to be a Halo Killer, and got much inspiration from various high-scoring shooters. What it borrows, it does well, with distinction. And the fact that Insomniac succeeded in that is impressive.
 
So it succeeded in being a Halo killer? How so. I don't like Halo much but still i have to LOL at that statement.
 
Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g
So it succeeded in being a Halo killer? How so. I don't like Halo much but still i have to LOL at that statement.

yea it's far from a halo killer i honestly have no clue how one could say that, especially better than halo 2 (as I believe halo 1 > halo 2 > halo 3).

it is a solid FPS game from a single player perspective, and the co-op is cool (local only), but it doesn't do anything special that hasn't been done before other than having a nice set of alternate weapons. the online is ass too.
 
Halo doesn't do anything special that wasn't done before too.

I don't understand why it's so hard to be a halo-killer in terms of gameplay, popularity, sure that's tough but beating Halo on gameplay is not very hard.
 
I read many user comments that the Halo 3 single player is similar to Halo 2. I haven't played Halo 3 and I don't care about it. Halo 2 was such crap that I couldn't care less about Halo 3. For me, Resistance is a Halo Killer because it is a better single-player game VS the current state of Halo today.

Let's face it - Halo is a one hit wonder when it comes to single-player. Halo: Combat Evolved was the only good Halo. Bungie got lucky the first time. What made the original Halo great; free to roam, open environments; Bungie completely destroyed in the sequels.

If anything, it is a nice fresh take on the staleness of the Halo universe.
 
Originally posted by: VIAN
I read many user comments that the Halo 3 single player is similar to Halo 2. I haven't played Halo 3 and I don't care about it. Halo 2 was such crap that I couldn't care less about Halo 3. For me, Resistance is a Halo Killer because it is a better single-player game VS the current state of Halo today.

Let's face it - Halo is a one hit wonder when it comes to single-player. Halo: Combat Evolved was the only good Halo. Bungie got lucky the first time. What made the original Halo great; free to roam, open environments; Bungie completely destroyed in the sequels.

If anything, it is a nice fresh take on the staleness of the Halo universe.

i understand you have your own opinion on the 2 games, but how can you say Resistance is a better single player game vs the current state of halo today, and that it's a fresh take on the staleness of the Halo universe, when you haven't even played the current halo game?

it's also pretty much in agreeance amongst the majority of people who have played all 3 that halo 2's single player was the worst of the 3.
 
Halo 2 made Halo stale. The monster score it received made me expect great things. So you could imagine my surprise. Halo 3 got a crazy good score as well. And obviously that means nothing. That is not enough for me to consider, ever paying money to "try" to see if the game is good. Of course I could just rent Halo 3 to try it out if I didn't have such a sour taste in my mouth from Halo 2. It was such a task to complete Halo 2 that I don't mind ever seeing another Halo game. Hence, the staleness.


Metacritic.com users gave Halo 3 a 7.5/10. Average. Resistance is better than average.
http://www.metacritic.com/game...ox360/halo3?q=halo%203
 
Originally posted by: VIAN
Halo 2 made Halo stale. The monster score it received made me expect great things. So you could imagine my surprise. Halo 3 got a crazy good score as well. And obviously that means nothing. That is not enough for me to consider, ever paying money to "try" to see if the game is good. Of course I could just rent Halo 3 to try it out if I didn't have such a sour taste in my mouth from Halo 2. It was such a task to complete Halo 2 that I don't mind ever seeing another Halo game. Hence, the staleness.


Metacritic.com users gave Halo 3 a 7.5/10. Average. Resistance is better than average.
http://www.metacritic.com/game...ox360/halo3?q=halo%203

I bet there were anti-Halo players that gave it a 0 or a very low score. I wouldn't trust any public polls which can easily be distorted.
 
I like the reviews but don't like the comparisons to Halo... especially since they're on different consoles. You can't call something a Halo killer when you haven't played MP for either since that's where Halo shines. I'm not defending halo here (never liked the series much) but am just saying that if you want to compare games in a review make sure you know enough about both to do so. Otherwise keep all comparisons out.
 
Originally posted by: nycxandy
I bet there were anti-Halo players that gave it a 0 or a very low score. I wouldn't trust any public polls which can easily be distorted.
There's lots of things that can go wrong with public polls. There are anti-Halo players who give deflated scores, and there are pro-Halo player who give inflated scores. I've seen it all. But the score still represents the overall public happiness because it does contain both evils.


Originally posted by: gorcorps
I like the reviews but don't like the comparisons to Halo... especially since they're on different consoles. You can't call something a Halo killer when you haven't played MP for either since that's where Halo shines. I'm not defending halo here (never liked the series much) but am just saying that if you want to compare games in a review make sure you know enough about both to do so. Otherwise keep all comparisons out.
The review mentioned that it was a single-player comparison only.
 
Originally posted by: VIAN

The review mentioned that it was a single-player comparison only.

That's a flawed comparison then. Halo is far superior to Resistance when it comes to multiplayer. Only viewing one part of both games and claiming one is a Halo Killer is wrong, especially when Halo has always shined in multiplayer and sucked campaign wise.
 
Originally posted by: VIAN
Originally posted by: nycxandy
I bet there were anti-Halo players that gave it a 0 or a very low score. I wouldn't trust any public polls which can easily be distorted.
There's lots of things that can go wrong with public polls. There are anti-Halo players who give deflated scores, and there are pro-Halo player who give inflated scores. I've seen it all. But the score still represents the overall public happiness because it does contain both evils.

Sure, but a lower score will be more detrimental. Halo got an average score of 9 from reviewers. However, if one person gave it a 0, it'll need at least nine 10's to counteract that. So yeah, think about that.

Edit: Let's not mention that the ones that hate do tend to be more vocal.
 
Originally posted by: nycxandy
Originally posted by: VIAN
Halo 2 made Halo stale. The monster score it received made me expect great things. So you could imagine my surprise. Halo 3 got a crazy good score as well. And obviously that means nothing. That is not enough for me to consider, ever paying money to "try" to see if the game is good. Of course I could just rent Halo 3 to try it out if I didn't have such a sour taste in my mouth from Halo 2. It was such a task to complete Halo 2 that I don't mind ever seeing another Halo game. Hence, the staleness.


Metacritic.com users gave Halo 3 a 7.5/10. Average. Resistance is better than average.
http://www.metacritic.com/game...ox360/halo3?q=halo%203

I bet there were anti-Halo players that gave it a 0 or a very low score. I wouldn't trust any public polls which can easily be distorted.

Pretty sad that fanboyism would be so bad. Look at Call of Duty 4 - it got a 8.4 on the 360 and a 9.3 on PS3. How does that happen?

Edit: Just looked at Gamerankings - 360 got a 9.1 with 28 votes, PS3 got a 7.8 with 9 votes. All votes are 10s or 9s except for 5. 2 6s on the PS3 (probably people who only play single player, because the campaign was short), and two 1s on the 360 and one 1 on the PS3 - obviously fanboys. But that just shows you the impact that an undeserved low vote will have on a game that deserves a high rating. Like you said, a low vote or two will have a much bigger impact than an undeserved high vote.
 
Originally posted by: purbeast0
yea it's far from a halo killer i honestly have no clue how one could say that, especially better than halo 2 (as I believe halo 1 > halo 2 > halo 3).

As a single player game, I personally think it's better than Halo 2 for sure... by a long shot really. The mix of weapons and flow of the game is much, much better. I never played the MP, but it supposed to be pretty good as well. Of course, I don't care much for Halo's MP to begin with. I've had fun with it the few times I played it with friends, but overall I prefer faster paced games like the UT series or more Battlefield-esque games like Warhawk. The only downside to the game IMO is the lack of online co-op. I'm really looking forward to Resistance 2... I really want to see if they pull off the 8-player co-op campaign successfully.
 
Originally posted by: purbeast0
Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g
So it succeeded in being a Halo killer? How so. I don't like Halo much but still i have to LOL at that statement.

yea it's far from a halo killer i honestly have no clue how one could say that, especially better than halo 2 (as I believe halo 1 > halo 2 > halo 3).

it is a solid FPS game from a single player perspective, and the co-op is cool (local only), but it doesn't do anything special that hasn't been done before other than having a nice set of alternate weapons. the online is ass too.

What's wrong with someone thinking a game is better than Halo? 😕

I'd say Resistance is better than Halo 1, but only because it's newer and I feel it's technically better. However, I'd say I was always much more excited to play Halo 1 when it was still new than I was ever excited to play Resistance.

However, Resistance is still a great game, and you can't really argue that. And you're right, it might not do anything particularly new, but it was one of the most fun games I'd played in a LONG time. And as you mentioned, it's solid...very solid at that (very polished).

Because it's very good, I think it's very fair to let someone have their own opinion on if it "kills" Halo or not and respect that (unless they do it out of fanboyism, which VIAN was not)...no need to act like it's heresy to say Resistance is better.

But for calling the online "ass", that I'd question...perhaps it sucks now (I haven't played in months), but the first few months it was out, I LOVED playing it online. Everything was so smooth and fast for me (hardly ever any lag). I never had so much fun playing a game online. I had much less fun playing Halo 3 online, and it never worked very well for me.

I think you're being a bit too harsh about the game (and defensive) because someone claims it's better than Halo...if you don't agree, fine, but don't state what you think as "fact". VIAN didn't say Resistance IS the Halo killer...he said he "thinks" it is. Let's just respect people's opinions here...
 
Originally posted by: hans030390
Originally posted by: purbeast0
Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g
So it succeeded in being a Halo killer? How so. I don't like Halo much but still i have to LOL at that statement.

yea it's far from a halo killer i honestly have no clue how one could say that, especially better than halo 2 (as I believe halo 1 > halo 2 > halo 3).

it is a solid FPS game from a single player perspective, and the co-op is cool (local only), but it doesn't do anything special that hasn't been done before other than having a nice set of alternate weapons. the online is ass too.

What's wrong with someone thinking a game is better than Halo? 😕

I'd say Resistance is better than Halo 1, but only because it's newer and I feel it's technically better. However, I'd say I was always much more excited to play Halo 1 when it was still new than I was ever excited to play Resistance.

However, Resistance is still a great game, and you can't really argue that. And you're right, it might not do anything particularly new, but it was one of the most fun games I'd played in a LONG time. And as you mentioned, it's solid...very solid at that (very polished).

Because it's very good, I think it's very fair to let someone have their own opinion on if it "kills" Halo or not and respect that (unless they do it out of fanboyism, which VIAN was not)...no need to act like it's heresy to say Resistance is better.

But for calling the online "ass", that I'd question...perhaps it sucks now (I haven't played in months), but the first few months it was out, I LOVED playing it online. Everything was so smooth and fast for me (hardly ever any lag). I never had so much fun playing a game online. I had much less fun playing Halo 3 online, and it never worked very well for me.

I think you're being a bit too harsh about the game (and defensive) because someone claims it's better than Halo...if you don't agree, fine, but don't state what you think as "fact". VIAN didn't say Resistance IS the Halo killer...he said he "thinks" it is. Let's just respect people's opinions here...

It's not VIAN's opinion I'm talking about, it's the fact that he claims this without playing Halo 3 or either of the multiplayer modes. I think it's a really solid review and honestly written, but it's hard to take any comparison seriously when they haven't done their homework.
 
Originally posted by: gorcorps
Originally posted by: hans030390
Originally posted by: purbeast0
Originally posted by: bl4ckfl4g
So it succeeded in being a Halo killer? How so. I don't like Halo much but still i have to LOL at that statement.

yea it's far from a halo killer i honestly have no clue how one could say that, especially better than halo 2 (as I believe halo 1 > halo 2 > halo 3).

it is a solid FPS game from a single player perspective, and the co-op is cool (local only), but it doesn't do anything special that hasn't been done before other than having a nice set of alternate weapons. the online is ass too.

What's wrong with someone thinking a game is better than Halo? 😕

I'd say Resistance is better than Halo 1, but only because it's newer and I feel it's technically better. However, I'd say I was always much more excited to play Halo 1 when it was still new than I was ever excited to play Resistance.

However, Resistance is still a great game, and you can't really argue that. And you're right, it might not do anything particularly new, but it was one of the most fun games I'd played in a LONG time. And as you mentioned, it's solid...very solid at that (very polished).

Because it's very good, I think it's very fair to let someone have their own opinion on if it "kills" Halo or not and respect that (unless they do it out of fanboyism, which VIAN was not)...no need to act like it's heresy to say Resistance is better.

But for calling the online "ass", that I'd question...perhaps it sucks now (I haven't played in months), but the first few months it was out, I LOVED playing it online. Everything was so smooth and fast for me (hardly ever any lag). I never had so much fun playing a game online. I had much less fun playing Halo 3 online, and it never worked very well for me.

I think you're being a bit too harsh about the game (and defensive) because someone claims it's better than Halo...if you don't agree, fine, but don't state what you think as "fact". VIAN didn't say Resistance IS the Halo killer...he said he "thinks" it is. Let's just respect people's opinions here...

It's not VIAN's opinion I'm talking about, it's the fact that he claims this without playing Halo 3 or either of the multiplayer modes. I think it's a really solid review and honestly written, but it's hard to take any comparison seriously when they haven't done their homework.

Well yes, that's a silly thing to do. I'll admit that. But he doesn't even mention Halo 3 in his original review (unless he edited it out, in which case it's good now).

My post mainly went towards purbeast0

 
Back
Top