Verdict: Normally TrustedReviews would mutter about rushed releases and waster potential, but Turning Point makes you wonder whether there was ever a good game in here. One to miss.
IT SUX HITLER'S BALLZ! which probally sucks alot
wow,,, thats a little harsh ... a 3.5 would be a little more appropriate but what do i know, i never even played this pile of uninteresting super flop...
God what's with the hate on Resistance? "Turning Point makes Resistance: Fall of Man seem like Half-Life 2 or Halo 3." Personally I thought it was an awesome game, and the weapons were the most unique guns I have ever seen in a FPS.
The campaign in Resistance is one of only several FPS I ever cared to finish. I liked the weapons, I liked the story line, I even liked the two most complained about things: the graphics and the way the story was told. Do I think they could have done a better job not telling a first person shooter in a third person narrative, sure, but it was still interesting while getting me from point A to point B. I've even heard critics say the graphics looked like a beefed up PS2 game....WHAT!?! No way. They weren't fantastic, but they are certainly better than PS2 or XBOX 1 graphics. With a Metacritic rating sitting at a more than respectable 86, I can't figure where all the animosity is coming from. I'm going to get beaten just for saying this, but "makes Resistance look like...Halo 3" is insulting. Halo 3 is sitting at a MC rating of 94, not even 10 points above Resistance. I played it pretty extensively with my friend, and I thought it was good, but not top tier like Half-Life 2 or anything. Especially the campaign. What got Halo 3 the extra points was its multiplayer. In fact, it seems to account for a majority of its points. Not its great narrative, not its superb graphics, nothing of the sort. With quotes like "The best thing I can say is that if you never really cared about the single player game in the first place, you can expect to have a great time with Halo 3 for years to come" and given a 70. Oddly enough, we get "While the campaign is nothing to keep you entertained after a couple of play-throughs the well put together online mode will have you playing for much longer" for Resistance, and a 70 as well. The top scores for both sound the same, the praises are similar as well as their shortcomings. Heck, even TrustedReviews themselves said "Resistance: Fall of Man isn’t quite good enough to justify the purchase of a console...but it is a pretty enjoyable FPS romp". They compliment the weaponry and the online component and said "Resistance offers a fairly varied and lengthy campaign, with an atmosphere that draws you in over time". Sounds like they thought it was better than average...actually they sound as if they like it, even if it wasn't seen as the best thing since sliced bread. This isn't directed entirely at this review, it is just an annoyance that has been aggravated time and time again with criticism of Resistance lately that is mostly unfounded. I'm just saying that Resistance was a good game. A fun game, and at least as good as Halo 3. So sitting there saying that Turning Point makes Resistance look like Halo 3 is both insulting, and amateurishly inaccurate.
Spark is making the upcoming shooter Legendary which looked somewhat interesting, but not anymore.
Demo was horrendously bad, how do they expect to sell something as crappy as this game? Gamers aren't stupid.
Well maybe some of us are. If i could go back in time i would not get this game, i thought that the theme would be enough to make it at least interesting but......................it's not. lol
we can surely trust this critic
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.