Brash Games writes "A more restrained approach to development from Insomniac has led to the creation of the PlayStation 3’s finest first party shooter and perhaps more importantly, a title that arguably does 3D better than any videogame before it".
I really like 3D gaming, no game has disappointed me yet and I've played quite a few now.
me to i have a vizio tv and games on it look great in 3d....i played a few but love it...MK was the only one that looked a lil weird
does this surpass uncharted 3 in terms of the 3d portion? i have yet to buy new and play these two games.
Just considering 3D no I don't think it surpasses UC3, I also thought Batman AC and Crysis 2 had better 3D than R3.
there are some areas in the game which are too dark making them too hard to pay in 3D! I think Insomniac hasn't really grab the essence of true 3D game design yet. even R&C All4One has bad 3D! both are still great games though but 3D-wise, very disappointing! UC3 has the best 3D on console IMO followed by KZ3! if only they would release a 3D patch for GoW3...OMG that would be godly! (excuse the pun)
Totally agree. R3 has one of the worst 3D implementations I've yet to see, so if this guy thinks it's great, then he 's going to be blown away by some of the other games. R3's confined spaces and darkly lit rooms etc just do not fit 3D at all. Uncharted 3 and Killzone 3 (once you turn down the 3D effect a tad) are much better implementations. ICO also has superb 3D. Tumble too.
Forget 3d, the game itself is one of the best campaigns I have played
Yeah, anyone who ignored R3 missed out big time. The weapons alone were worth the price of admission. The Cryogun and Mutator especially. Freezing enemies and shattering them with the sledgehammer and watching enemies twitch and fall to the ground in a greenish pile of goo never gets old
closely followed by the Sledge Hammer! For Me Resistance 3 really shined at the chapter with the prison! The game was expertly paced Its a damn shame that they made the decisions to make Resistance 2 the way they did because that was what sealed Resistance 3! The PS3 crowd caught up in COD and the bitter taste of R2 largely rolled their eyes upon R3's release!!! damn shame since This game is bloody good! Even better than KZ3 in story telling and it's art direction is amazing!!!
I`d love to test it out for myself, already have resistance 3 too. Too pricey for me though at the moment
Too pricey? I bought my LG 5600 for under a grand, and it came with 4 pairs of passive glasses. Also, R3 was awesome, but it is a game I wouldn't try to showcase how good the 3D is. Uncharted had sick 3-D, and so does KZ3 and Motorstorm Apocalypse. SSDHD was good too. Things look like they are blowing up right in your face. BTW, passive > active when talking about quality 3D. Active glasses suck. I know cause I've owned both.
Under a grand? Sign me up! /s
Under a Grand to you might be pocket change but to most people anything over 500$ is pricey. I would never drop that much on a TV.
When I bought my house I went all out and paid almost 2 grand on my TV. Kinda not worth it for that price lol
You need to be careful when purchasing a TV for the purpose of 3D, some 3D TVs are simply put, crap. It may be your personal experience that passive is better than active but there is currently no consensis from the professional TV critics. "Our main hang-up with passive 3D TV is the presence of the jagged-edge artifacts mentioned above, which we find especially distracting on the closer seating distances and large screen sizes favored by home theater enthusiasts. But with the practical and certain picture quality strengths of passive, especially in bright rooms, an argument can certainly be made that it's the better choice overall." http://reviews.cnet.com/273... "Even though active-shutter glasses should produce a better image, both of us preferred the passive 3D glasses overall. However, we both found that the quality of the TV itself is just as important as the type of 3D-glasses tech the TV employs. While passive 3D tech is at a disadvantage for image quality, it can nonetheless create a better-looking overall image than an active-shutter 3D set that just doesn't get it quite right. Unless other active-shutter 3D TV manufacturers step up their game significantly in price and ease of use, we think passive 3D is the way to go." http://www.pcworld.com/arti...
it's cheaper afterall! but I'm not the one to decide which is better because 3D is about personal perspective and I may not see like what you see and vice versa. personally I think active is the best at the moment. passive 3D is kinda underwhelm still
a paltry $560 And believe me Uncharted 3 is by far the best use of 3d! even more so than KZ3! I've tried resistance 3 in 3D and i didn't think the effect was that hot! Insomniac didn't use the technology well enough!!!
I looked into buying a passive 3D set when I purchased my new big screen but when I saw my 51 inch Samsung plasma that still retains up to 1080p in games or movies it was over. The new Panasonic sets are 720p while in 3D mode and a lot of the passive sets go down as far as 480P in 3d mode. There aren't many games that are still 1080p in 3D mode I think only a couple of playstation network games but the other games are still 720p in 3d mode which still look fabulous, I wouldn't want to lose the resolution with a passive set though.
My reasoning in choosing active over passive was similar to yours. The drop in resolution of passive was too much for me.
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.