[QUOTE="Ben Dutka"]
So after weighing in on Resistance 2, it started to dawn on us: is this now the franchise to beat in the FPS genre? And with the impending Killzone 2, is the PlayStation 3 now home to the best FPS experiences on the planet?
Typically, Microsoft has been responsible for the best FPS experiences ever since the original Xbox launched way back in 2001 with Halo. Even multiplatform FPSs have been better on a Microsoft console, although we believe that trend will soon fade in this generation. Earlier, developers simply didn't have a good handle on the PlayStation 3, but now, things are starting to come together and it appears it's Sony's machine that has the best to offer in the FPS genre. Xbox 360 loyalists will consistently turn to Halo 3, but although I am a big fan of that trilogy, the fact of the matter is that Resistance 2 is better.Awesome - stating his opinion as fact despite reviews and failing to clarify. Insomniac's initial effort, as good as it was, may not have been a "Halo killer," but the sequel most certainly is. Now, will there be a Halo 4? Even if there is, I will continue to give the edge to Resistanceuntil I see something that changes my mind.Again, very little explanation After all, I was a little disappointed in Halo 3; clearly, that game was made more as a multiplayer attraction, and I didn't think much of the single-player campaign.
But R2 delivers big time in terms of both single-player and multiplayer, and it eclipses the best the Halo franchise has ever had to offer.Repetitve picking on Halo, perhaps deliberate attempt to arouse lemmings??Sorry, but that's the way it is. Now, looking at other FPSs, we should probably consider the insanely popular Call of Duty franchise, especially after last year's stellar Modern Warfare. And if this year's World at War is another gem, perhaps it'd be an interesting competition for Resistance. However, beyond that, the only other series that could eclipse R2 and potentially Resistance 3 is 2K's Bioshock. Is R2 better than Bioshock? Er...that's hard to say. I think they're pretty even, but again, I'm going to give the edge to that awesome sequel, and besides, some people will argue that Bioshock isn't a true-blue FPS. More lack of explanation outside of "My opinion is this and it is the only right one." Then there's Half-Life 2 or The Orange Box, but at this point in time, I consider both to be outdated and not worthy of being in the discussion. Half-Life 3? Sure, maybe. But that probably won't arrive until 2037,Two games he acknowledges as being superior except they are now "outdated" Then qoutes some abitrary date directly from his lower half... anyway.
Therefore, from what I can see, it appears that for the first time ever, a Sony console is leading the FPS charge...especially if we look forward a few months and include Killzone 2. We're trying to forget the original (it wasn't bad, but it certainly fell far short of expectations), and if Guerilla comes through, Insomniac and Resistance is gonna have mega-competition. But that's exactly the point- it used to be that FPS fans absolutely had to own a Microsoft console if they wanted to play the best of the best; now, the roles appear to have switched. Oh, and before anyone even mentions Gears of War, that's a third-person shooter. As amazing as those games are, FPS purists will dismiss them from the debate, and therefore, so shall we. And provided the Call of Dutygames are of equal quality on both consoles in question, the PS3 easily tips the scales with R2 and what we will now call K2.Game, set...match?I suppose CoD:2, and to a lesser extent CoD:3 just ceased existing... along with Shadowrun
Kickinurass
A biased rant from some fanboy at PSX...
Log in to comment