ROFL at GeOW vs RFoM threads

These games are not comparable. Gears is a 2nd year release that's a Great game and Resistance is an above average generic FPS that does Nothing to further the gaming community, if anything it sets it back.

There are Soooooo many better FPS's out there than the trash known as PS3's Only decent exclusive title. So quit comparing RFoM graphics to the amazing GeOW graphics. It's just sad...

You're ermm... nearly a year late... ?

yes and i guess gears does so much with gaming

with its short, boring campaign

its 4vs4 multiplayer with 4 modes and 3 of which are the same and only one of them is actually fun.....

this game is a graphical showcase and you still cant experience the graphics because theres not much to do in it.

resistance actually has multiplayer that lasts, gears.........................theres really nothing more to do in the multiplayer

    I have not seen a RFOM GeoW thread in a long time that got more than a few posts.

    Most people have regressed to Halo 2 threads. 

yes and i guess gears does so much with gaming

with its short, boring campaign

its 4vs4 multiplayer with 4 modes and 3 of which are the same and only one of them is actually fun.....

 

this game is a graphical showcase and you still cant experience the graphics because theres not much to do in it.

 

resistance actually has multiplayer that lasts, gears.........................theres really nothing more to do in the multiplayer

 

mish55

yea, mindless halo type instant kills that mean nothing, there isn't anything tatical or even a hint of thought put into the damn game.

yes and i guess gears does so much with gaming

with its short, boring campaign

its 4vs4 multiplayer with 4 modes and 3 of which are the same and only one of them is actually fun.....

 

this game is a graphical showcase and you still cant experience the graphics because theres not much to do in it.

 

resistance actually has multiplayer that lasts, gears.........................theres really nothing more to do in the multiplayer

mish55

gears multiplayer is still a blast however if you have a 360 u would know theres great multiplayer games like vegas and graw 2 that people are still playing!

yes and i guess gears does so much with gaming

with its short, boring campaign

its 4vs4 multiplayer with 4 modes and 3 of which are the same and only one of them is actually fun.....

 

this game is a graphical showcase and you still cant experience the graphics because theres not much to do in it.

 

resistance actually has multiplayer that lasts, gears.........................theres really nothing more to do in the multiplayer

mish55

I'd lay money that there's at least twice as many people playing GeoW MP right now than there is playing R:FoM. 

your right 40 player online with no lag does nothing to further the gaming community :roll:downPlayDemon

i used to play return to castle wolfensteind 32 vs 32 MP like 6 years ago. u were saying?

[QUOTE="mish55"]

yes and i guess gears does so much with gaming

with its short, boring campaign

its 4vs4 multiplayer with 4 modes and 3 of which are the same and only one of them is actually fun.....

 

this game is a graphical showcase and you still cant experience the graphics because theres not much to do in it.

 

resistance actually has multiplayer that lasts, gears.........................theres really nothing more to do in the multiplayer

Snugenz

I'd lay money that there's at least twice as many people playing GeoW MP right now than there is playing R:FoM. 

i'd say 4-5x at least

[QUOTE="downPlayDemon"]your right 40 player online with no lag does nothing to further the gaming community :roll:Utensilman

i used to play return to castle wolfensteind 32 vs 32 MP like 6 years ago. u were saying?

I'm just going to expand on what someone said. Gears looks better than Resistance, but its levels are cramped and small, it has very few enemies on screen at once, and the enviorments are almost totally static. Wasn't the cover supposed to be destructable? In the final game, you can shoot up desks and couches, wheeeeeeee. :roll:

The textures on Resistance are not as good as gears, but the system's power was spread out to things like destructability of glass in dynamic ways. Panes of glass in that game never break the same way twice. The game has up to 20 intelligent enemies on screen at once with full AI running, and up to 30 more mindless enemies at once.

gears is only a testament to what you get when you put most of your RAM on the graphics side, not that impressive.

I absolutely hate playing MP games where you have 30 or more people in a map.  Its makes it impossible for your team to do anything meaningful except run, get shot, respawn, shoot, repeat.lhughey

I found resistance multiplayer to be accomodating for the individual like yourself. You don't show up on human radar if you are only walking. while everyone else sprints around shooting, one can sit around the corner, shotgun in hand, and get the drop on the other guys. everyone is so used to running around and revealing themselves to eachother, they don't notice me at all as I pop up and blow them away. you should try that, it's fun.

your right 40 player online with no lag does nothing to further the gaming community :roll:downPlayDemon

Ya no lag thats believeable, unless you guys are on an intranet together maybe.

I'm just going to expand on what someone said. Gears looks better than Resistance, but its levels are cramped and small, it has very few enemies on screen at once, and the enviorments are almost totally static. Wasn't the cover supposed to be destructable? In the final game, you can shoot up desks and couches, wheeeeeeee. :roll:

The textures on Resistance are not as good as gears, but the system's power was spread out to things like destructability of glass in dynamic ways. Panes of glass in that game never break the same way twice. The game has up to 20 intelligent enemies on screen at once with full AI running, and up to 30 more mindless enemies at once.

gears is only a testament to what you get when you put most of your RAM on the graphics side, not that impressive.

Mordred19

what? :lol:

Gears had great AI that used up some RAM. Read any of the numerous rave reviews. Also, I didn't fine RFoM's environments to be any more alive than Gears'.

You're correct about the number of enemies on screen. However, each game was designed far differently than the other. A closer comparison would be CoD2 (x360) vs RFoM.

[QUOTE="downPlayDemon"]your right 40 player online with no lag does nothing to further the gaming community :roll:xscrapzx

Ya no lag thats believeable, unless you guys are on an intranet together maybe.

He's right about the almost non-existant lag. However, he is wrong about the 40plyr matches.

Most RFoM matches have 12-26 players. Very few in the 30+ players range. A rarely have 40plyrs

These games are not comparable. Gears is a 2nd year release that's a Great game and Resistance is an above average generic FPS that does Nothing to further the gaming community, if anything it sets it back.

There are Soooooo many better FPS's out there than the trash known as PS3's Only decent exclusive title. So quit comparing RFoM graphics to the amazing GeOW graphics. It's just sad...

 

Utensilman

These games are not comparable. Gears is a 2nd year release that's a Great game and Resistance is an above average generic FPS that does Nothing to further the gaming community, if anything it sets it back.

There are Soooooo many better FPS's out there than the trash known as PS3's Only decent exclusive title. So quit comparing RFoM graphics to the amazing GeOW graphics. It's just sad...

 

Utensilman

I compared them. Directly. I found out you're very wrong on a number of points.

Gears of War does not compare to RFOM. RFOM has superb draw distances, the details are reduced less aggressively in the gigantic environments with occasionally hundreds of units onscreen simultaneously with environmental visuals such as planes or artillery fire.

Resistance Fall of Man has over 3 times as many levels (it has 30, and they're all huge), a wider selection of guns and grenades (which are all unique and feature interesting particle effects and secondary fire characteristics), and has far better physics.

Ultimately in one screen, Resistance can hold a gigantic environment, multiple times the max number of enemies on screen in Gears of War, particle effects that destroy the paltry machine-gun spitball stream in Gears, and physics calculations across the screen. You're wrong about Gears of War being better looking. You're also wrong about GeoW being amazing. If I had played Call of Duty 2 for 9 months in SD before playing Gears of War in HD I might be inclined to agree...however, I am absolutely not.

Gears of War has embarrassingly bad gameplay and poorly designed bosses (laughably so).

The only thing that Gears of War has on Resistance is better player character models and the chainsaw bayonet. Lose. 

[QUOTE="xscrapzx"]

[QUOTE="downPlayDemon"]your right 40 player online with no lag does nothing to further the gaming community :roll:LosDaddie

Ya no lag thats believeable, unless you guys are on an intranet together maybe.

He's right about the almost non-existant lag. However, he is wrong about the 40plyr matches.

Most RFoM matches have 12-26 players. Very few in the 30+ players range. A rarely have 40plyrs

When I bought the game I saw 40 player matches ALL OVER THE PLACE. If you HAVE to play a forty player match, search the custom games. 40 player matches are everywhere. It is not difficult to find them at all. However, things might have changed as popularity wanes. This is natural. This game is not Counter Strike. Most games user bases move on eventually. But believe me, the launch players were playing 40 player matches all day and all damn night, 

Is this a joke? You laugh at those threads, yet you make one yourself and proceed to do a comparison...TheCrazed420

Yeah I'm thinking the same thing. 

Resistance not being very good is your opinion.  Just like those of people who make up the other Gears vs. Resistance threads.

And there hasn't been a Gears vs. Resistance thread in a good while, not counting this one.

[QUOTE="Utensilman"]

These games are not comparable. Gears is a 2nd year release that's a Great game and Resistance is an above average generic FPS that does Nothing to further the gaming community, if anything it sets it back.

There are Soooooo many better FPS's out there than the trash known as PS3's Only decent exclusive title. So quit comparing RFoM graphics to the amazing GeOW graphics. It's just sad...

 

wiistation360

Gears is 2nd gen because it didn't come out alonside the 360... Resistence is considered 1st gen because it DID come out alongside the PS3

as for the Gears v Resistence threads: i have never seen one... in fact this is only my 2nd day ever even paying attention to System Wars :shock:

[QUOTE="Utensilman"]

These games are not comparable. Gears is a 2nd year release that's a Great game and Resistance is an above average generic FPS that does Nothing to further the gaming community, if anything it sets it back.

There are Soooooo many better FPS's out there than the trash known as PS3's Only decent exclusive title. So quit comparing RFoM graphics to the amazing GeOW graphics. It's just sad...

 

Redfingers

I compared them. Directly. I found out you're very wrong on a number of points.

Gears of War does not compare to RFOM. RFOM has superb draw distances, the details are reduced less aggressively in the gigantic environments with occasionally hundreds of units onscreen simultaneously with environmental visuals such as planes or artillery fire.

Resistance Fall of Man has over 3 times as many levels (it has 30, and they're all huge), a wider selection of guns and grenades (which are all unique and feature interesting particle effects and secondary fire characteristics), and has far better physics.

Ultimately in one screen, Resistance can hold a gigantic environment, multiple times the max number of enemies on screen in Gears of War, particle effects that destroy the paltry machine-gun spitball stream in Gears, and physics calculations across the screen. You're wrong about Gears of War being better looking. You're also wrong about GeoW being amazing. If I had played Call of Duty 2 for 9 months in SD before playing Gears of War in HD I might be inclined to agree...however, I am absolutely not.

Gears of War has embarrassingly bad gameplay and poorly designed bosses (laughably so).

The only thing that Gears of War has on Resistance is better player character models and the chainsaw bayonet. Lose. 

I disagree completely....as do most of the media. Gears has the best graphics on a console to date and some of the best gameplay. It didn't win mulitple GotY awards for nothing.

[QUOTE="LosDaddie"][QUOTE="xscrapzx"]

[QUOTE="downPlayDemon"]your right 40 player online with no lag does nothing to further the gaming community :roll:Redfingers

Ya no lag thats believeable, unless you guys are on an intranet together maybe.

He's right about the almost non-existant lag. However, he is wrong about the 40plyr matches.

Most RFoM matches have 12-26 players. Very few in the 30+ players range. A rarely have 40plyrs

When I bought the game I saw 40 player matches ALL OVER THE PLACE. If you HAVE to play a forty player match, search the custom games. 40 player matches are everywhere. It is not difficult to find them at all. However, things might have changed as popularity wanes. This is natural. This game is not Counter Strike. Most games user bases move on eventually. But believe me, the launch players were playing 40 player matches all day and all damn night, 

I was referring to ranked matches. I rarely play custom matches.

For ranked matches; my statement was correct.:)

[QUOTE="Utensilman"]

These games are not comparable. Gears is a 2nd year release that's a Great game and Resistance is an above average generic FPS that does Nothing to further the gaming community, if anything it sets it back.

There are Soooooo many better FPS's out there than the trash known as PS3's Only decent exclusive title. So quit comparing RFoM graphics to the amazing GeOW graphics. It's just sad...

 

Redfingers

I compared them. Directly. I found out you're very wrong on a number of points.

Gears of War does not compare to RFOM. RFOM has superb draw distances, the details are reduced less aggressively in the gigantic environments with occasionally hundreds of units onscreen simultaneously with environmental visuals such as planes or artillery fire.

Resistance Fall of Man has over 3 times as many levels (it has 30, and they're all huge), a wider selection of guns and grenades (which are all unique and feature interesting particle effects and secondary fire characteristics), and has far better physics.

Ultimately in one screen, Resistance can hold a gigantic environment, multiple times the max number of enemies on screen in Gears of War, particle effects that destroy the paltry machine-gun spitball stream in Gears, and physics calculations across the screen. You're wrong about Gears of War being better looking. You're also wrong about GeoW being amazing. If I had played Call of Duty 2 for 9 months in SD before playing Gears of War in HD I might be inclined to agree...however, I am absolutely not.

Gears of War has embarrassingly bad gameplay and poorly designed bosses (laughably so).

The only thing that Gears of War has on Resistance is better player character models and the chainsaw bayonet. Lose. 

you have got to be kidding me, If they had dozens of enemies on screen trying to kill you in gears. the game would not be possible since the AI blows RFoM out of the water. As for bad gameplay.....lol wow. I guess generic FPS jumping stupid BS is much better than a Superb cover system used for semi tatical warfare. Also MP maps in gears are made as a confined circle for a purpose, no maps, no radar, no name above ur head. It's all based on sight and sound. People don't wanna spend 20 mins lookin for a guy hiding on some huge map, they want satisfying kills and to have fun.

Also i'd be very very suprised if RFoM was flagged for a sequel, which as gears has already two coming. RFoM franchise will never make as much money or never be able to truly compete with the far superior GeOW franchise.

I'm just going to expand on what someone said. Gears looks better than Resistance, but its levels are cramped and small, it has very few enemies on screen at once, and the enviorments are almost totally static. Wasn't the cover supposed to be destructable? In the final game, you can shoot up desks and couches, wheeeeeeee. :roll:

The textures on Resistance are not as good as gears, but the system's power was spread out to things like destructability of glass in dynamic ways. Panes of glass in that game never break the same way twice. The game has up to 20 intelligent enemies on screen at once with full AI running, and up to 30 more mindless enemies at once.

gears is only a testament to what you get when you put most of your RAM on the graphics side, not that impressive.

Mordred19

OK well....if i use your logic then i guess Dead Rising is the best looking game of this Gen. Hundreds of enemies on screen with hundreds of breakable/useable objects.

[QUOTE="Mordred19"]

I'm just going to expand on what someone said. Gears looks better than Resistance, but its levels are cramped and small, it has very few enemies on screen at once, and the enviorments are almost totally static. Wasn't the cover supposed to be destructable? In the final game, you can shoot up desks and couches, wheeeeeeee. :roll:

The textures on Resistance are not as good as gears, but the system's power was spread out to things like destructability of glass in dynamic ways. Panes of glass in that game never break the same way twice. The game has up to 20 intelligent enemies on screen at once with full AI running, and up to 30 more mindless enemies at once.

gears is only a testament to what you get when you put most of your RAM on the graphics side, not that impressive.

Utensilman

OK well....if i use your logic then i guess Dead Rising is the best looking game of this Gen. Hundreds of enemies on screen with hundreds of breakable/useable objects.

sorry, but those zombies had no AI running from long distance, they were just static sprites. their AI only came on if you came within about 15 of them, so that was just smoke and mirrors. and the physics were very poor, you throw one object, and it bounces, you hit a zombie with a pipe, and he falls the same way as every other zombie in a fixed death animation. no ragdoll physics, and pyhsics for only a few objects at a time. in fact, the only physics enabled object was what you threw, and it had no effect on what it hit. could you cause a domino effect and knock over a bookcase, and then a cash register, and a picnic table, for instance? now that I think about it, the isles of items were totally static as well. I could on and on.

Yeah I'd like to see a picture of R:FOM with "hundreds of units on screen". I don't ever recall seeing anything like that. Even if you are talking about those little "flood type" things that come swarming at you.JiveT

someone else said hundreds. they were exaggerating. I say dozens of smart enemies on screen at once, and I am right.

[QUOTE="JiveT"]Yeah I'd like to see a picture of R:FOM with "hundreds of units on screen". I don't ever recall seeing anything like that. Even if you are talking about those little "flood type" things that come swarming at you.Mordred19

someone else said hundreds. they were exaggerating. I say dozens of smart enemies on screen at once, and I am right.

I'm afraid the most units I ever saw on screen in Gears was 4.

They are not smart in Gears. The mechanics are not deep. That is an illusion. I beg of you, play this game: Red Orchestra Ostfront 41-45. This is the definition of flanking, shooting, intelligent, vicious opponents. You will be flanked, flushed out, beat up, ground up by MG fire, shot out by sniper rifles...

But of course that's because it's not AI. But ultimately, let me tell you in an instant, the tactics in Gears of War are not tactics at all and pale in comparison to this game.

Not saying Resistance is deep or tactical or involves a lot of strategems...most of the tactics come from efficient usage of the weapons, which really doesn't involve much at all. I'm just saying you cannot even attempt to convince me that Gears of War is tactical, or that the AI is amazing. It's extremely static. 

the best of Gears' AI on Insane difficulty is: "they charge at your position if you stay in one spot too long" :roll:

[QUOTE="Mordred19"]

[QUOTE="JiveT"]Yeah I'd like to see a picture of R:FOM with "hundreds of units on screen". I don't ever recall seeing anything like that. Even if you are talking about those little "flood type" things that come swarming at you.Redfingers

someone else said hundreds. they were exaggerating. I say dozens of smart enemies on screen at once, and I am right.

I'm afraid the most units I ever saw on screen in Gears was 4.

They are not smart in Gears. The mechanics are not deep. That is an illusion. I beg of you, play this game: Red Orchestra Ostfront 41-45. This is the definition of flanking, shooting, intelligent, vicious opponents. You will be flanked, flushed out, beat up, ground up by MG fire, shot out by sniper rifles...

But of course that's because it's not AI. But ultimately, let me tell you in an instant, the tactics in Gears of War are not tactics at all and pale in comparison to this game.

Not saying Resistance is deep or tactical or involves a lot of strategems...most of the tactics come from efficient usage of the weapons, which really doesn't involve much at all. I'm just saying you cannot even attempt to convince me that Gears of War is tactical, or that the AI is amazing. It's extremely static.

Give me a break, i recall numerous times when there were alot more than 4 enemies on screen, actually 4 enemies onscreen is a rarity in Gears (except in MP).

But then again your a known 360 basher, thats all you do around here, so why should anybody take anything you say seriously :roll: 

so 4 is an exaggeration. the truth is that Resistance has way more enemies on screen at once. this, with it's interactive enviorments put it on par with Gears in terms of overall power.Mordred19

Your point ?

Do you really think i care about R:FoM having more enemies and interactive environments ?

Only reason i'm in this thread is to silence bashers, i couldnt care less which game is better. 

These games are not comparable. Gears is a 2nd year release that's a Great game and Resistance is an above average generic FPS that does Nothing to further the gaming community, if anything it sets it back.

There are Soooooo many better FPS's out there than the trash known as PS3's Only decent exclusive title. So quit comparing RFoM graphics to the amazing GeOW graphics. It's just sad...

 

Utensilman

You laugh at those threads yet you make one yourself, so basically you laugh at yourself.  Now thats sad

But you are right, those arent comparable.  One is an FPS the other isnt.  Different points of view of the game itself have a different perception in the player

[QUOTE="Mordred19"]so 4 is an exaggeration. the truth is that Resistance has way more enemies on screen at once. this, with it's interactive enviorments put it on par with Gears in terms of overall power.Snugenz

Your point ?

Do you really think i care about R:FoM having more enemies and interactive environments ?

Only reason i'm in this thread is to silence bashers, i couldnt care less which game is better. 

your tone seems to imply that you want Gears to be better.

[QUOTE="Snugenz"]

[QUOTE="Mordred19"]so 4 is an exaggeration. the truth is that Resistance has way more enemies on screen at once. this, with it's interactive enviorments put it on par with Gears in terms of overall power.Mordred19

Your point ?

Do you really think i care about R:FoM having more enemies and interactive environments ?

Only reason i'm in this thread is to silence bashers, i couldnt care less which game is better.

your tone seems to imply that you want Gears to be better.

No, i really really dont care.

But you seem to really care, feeling insecure about your PS3 purchase, trying to make the most one of one of your only good games ?

See i can make assumptions too, arent they fun :roll:

[QUOTE="Mordred19"]

[QUOTE="JiveT"]Yeah I'd like to see a picture of R:FOM with "hundreds of units on screen". I don't ever recall seeing anything like that. Even if you are talking about those little "flood type" things that come swarming at you.Redfingers

someone else said hundreds. they were exaggerating. I say dozens of smart enemies on screen at once, and I am right.

I'm afraid the most units I ever saw on screen in Gears was 4.

They are not smart in Gears. The mechanics are not deep. That is an illusion. I beg of you, play this game: Red Orchestra Ostfront 41-45. This is the definition of flanking, shooting, intelligent, vicious opponents. You will be flanked, flushed out, beat up, ground up by MG fire, shot out by sniper rifles...

But of course that's because it's not AI. But ultimately, let me tell you in an instant, the tactics in Gears of War are not tactics at all and pale in comparison to this game.

Not saying Resistance is deep or tactical or involves a lot of strategems...most of the tactics come from efficient usage of the weapons, which really doesn't involve much at all. I'm just saying you cannot even attempt to convince me that Gears of War is tactical, or that the AI is amazing. It's extremely static. 

you must've only played the first part of the first actual level in gears, because i recall numerous times when the LEAST amount of enemies i've seen on screen was 4...

people: as -L-U-I-S- has said, these games are at different points of view... if the gameplay mechanic is different, the games canNOT be compared and most people in threads like these make themselves look stoopid :P

These games are not comparable. Gears is a 2nd year release that's a Great game and Resistance is an above average generic FPS that does Nothing to further the gaming community, if anything it sets it back.

There are Soooooo many better FPS's out there than the trash known as PS3's Only decent exclusive title. So quit comparing RFoM graphics to the amazing GeOW graphics. It's just sad...

 

Utensilman

Gears of war was released in 360's FIRST year, not its 2nd

Xbox 360 Launch: Nov 22, 2005

GeOW Release: Nov 7, 2006

 You my friend have been OWNED