Shaping up? Where have you been?
That game has looked awesome and been known to be awesome forever![]()
Shaping up? Where have you been?
That game has looked awesome and been known to be awesome forever![]()
I think that's the only game in OXM UK to get a 10/10. Not even Gears got a 10. Also, the tough PC Gamer gave it a 95%, Half Life 2 is the only game at 96% to get higher I believe.Originally Posted by Mysterio
I just laughed out loud as I noticed it was the only review, AND an official Microsoft owned magazine lol
But don't get me wrong, they had been touting Game of The Year since the beginning for Bioshock, I'm beginning to believe them.
Any magazine that only covers one platform is suspect.
Fuck reviews period. Like 3 magazines gave Resistance higher scores than Gears.Originally Posted by Mysterio
This game will be good though.
However, since we're on the topic.... Madden (360)got a 9.0 on 1up. PS3: 8.5
Blah, I hate magazine reviews. I usually trust what my peers think...and usually do a little research myself. If I'm still unsure...just go rent the fucking game or borrow it from a friend. Or get into piracy.
Originally Posted by Deejay
So what are your reasons why Resistance shouldn't get higher scores than Gears? I'm not saying it did or didn't deserve it, but I want to know why.
Resistance sucked and Gears was awesome?
Are you rhetorically asking this question? Gears and Resistance are on completely opposite spectrums when it came to gameplay, downloadable content, graphix, and multiplayer. I'm really having a hard time figuring out if you're being serious or not.Originally Posted by Pyro
Joke?Originally Posted by Pyro
Resistance was a fun game, but it was a carbon-copy of every other standard FPS game ever released. Gears was an entirely different experience.
It may not have been innovative, but it wasn't a bad game. I thoroughly enjoyed the game. When you say that Resistance copied every other FPS and Gears was so innovative, what did Gears do that was so innovative that hadn't been in any other game before?
The "run and cover" was never done before, or at least, never on that level. That's where the "innovative" part come from. The story, cutscene and graphics were also pretty good, placing the game in the upper tier when compared to most fps.Originally Posted by Pyro
I thought the story for Gears was terrible. It started off good then went no where.
Well, maybe not story as a whole, but the cutscene were still well executed imo, compared to many FPS where I won't watch them at all..
aren't you kind of "forced" to watch Gears' cutscenes, as they are integrated into the level progression? lolOriginally Posted by Kaylia
Gears had slightly richer graphics than Resistance, and the new cover system which was cool, but flawed.
They're both good games, but Gears brought some new elements to the table, whereas Resistance was still the boring WW2 setting.
Replace "watch" by "pay attention" if you prefer. >_>
haha, I've only played CO-OP Gears (offline).Originally Posted by Kaylia
Game was fun, it's solid action. The Cover button needed to be moved to a bumper, and be pressure sensitive, not toggled.
Like what they did in Rainbow Six ! haha
aside from that it was fun.
Gears was like a million times better than Resistance... and yes I own both.
Gears got high scores cause of graphics ONLY, after few months of gears being out everyone can tell you the gameplay was flawed with overpowered weapons and other crap. Sometimes its really hard to see gameplay flaws until after the games been out for a while. Same thing happened with Zelda TP, everyone busted a nut cause it was new Zelda and gave it high scores but after a month of playing it. It really felt like a water down OoT, which is down right pathetic of a game they took a whole extra year to port over to the Wii. And I'm not the only person who feels that way about Zelda TP, BTW. Resistance was a launch titles and a very solid one and I think thats the important not people are to blind to see, Gears was not. Not saying one game is better then the other, because one is a launch game and other isn't you really can't compare the too at all, its all a matter of opinion.
I just finished playing Resistance yesterday... the first half of the game your weapons stink, aim is horrible, and you can't really dodge enemy fire unless you just hide and do nothing.. At least in Gears you could go through an entire level (in campaign mode..) without getting touched (even on the hardest difficulty) if you were good enough.
How do you even compare the two though? In Gears you play in 3rd person and are able to dodge and sprint/hide behind walls/shoot over those walls even blindly, while in Resistance you can't do any of that, and you pretty much have a pretty solid, regular FPS that isn't that great tbh, and I liked it as a launch title... but comparing it to Gears and other good FPS's out there is a joke.
I agree on the opinion part though, just like everything is.