Variety Reviews Resistance 2

The success of the Xbox 360 has been staked largely on "Halo" and "Gears of War," but the PlayStation 3 has never had a flagship shooter. Into this gap Sony once again tries to shove "Resistance," a much improved but still significantly flawed sequel to the disappointing 2006 original. The massive, deep and accessible online multiplayer modes will appeal to a core group of fans, but the miserable single-player campaign leaves "Resistance 2" as more of a party barge than the flagship Sony needs.

Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
jkhan4052d ago

well have u noticed that this review = 70 on metacritic. I mean come on 70?
The game is the best shooter of the year and i m sure if this was released on 360 the scores would have been perfect 10s.

Genesis54052d ago (Edited 4052d ago )

That is one sad and sorry excuse for gaming journalism. They are far to biased to be reveiwing anything but 360 games. #1 is right when you reveiw a game for the PS3. The first sentence should not be about the xbox 360.

Metacritic has to stop making up scores when one is not supplied they are really losing all credablity. That and their user ratings system is a total mess.

Doppy4052d ago

First off this game has too much good content to even think of rating it below a 80/100.

But have you noticed that there are only 17 reviews posted on metacritic for Resistance 2, and Gears 2 already has 28. I'm glad to see Gears is getting the love it deserves, but why is it that Resistance has the same reviews posted since the game was first there. Resistance has gotten over 30 reviews that I have seen on this site alone, so why aren't they on metacritic. I mean most games get at least 25 - 30 reviews, but Resistance only has 17.

And where is Gamespot's Resistance review. They had a special page just for Resistance on their website showing gameplay, images, etc... I wonder what there going to give it, since the guy who was playing it seemed to really like it (he say he loves the magnum about 100 times), and he's the reviewer.

Michael Jackson4052d ago (Edited 4052d ago )

It's only now that I find myself agreeing with the guy from gamespot that reviewed Ratchet & Clank..

"Too much variety."

I agree. I've had too much of this stupid website.

Rhoic4052d ago

God quit crying all the time.

Michael Jackson4052d ago

"God quit crying all the time."

How dare you say that about Kratos? The God of War NEVER cries.

thewhoopimen4052d ago (Edited 4052d ago )

Wow... that had to be the most sophomoric piece of journalism trash I have ever read. Coming from Variety of all places... it's like how far has professional writing fallen?

I normally don't have anything against reviewer preference ratings on games but this guy has taken it to a new low. There is nothing informative here... Just hate, hate, and more hate from what I guess is a fanboy in every sense of the word.

He doesn't even provide concrete example choosing to extrapolate of common knowledge and then flagrantly passing off merits worth mentioning. Did he not notice the sheer amount of enemies in the environment? How insomniac has taken the title to a new level of immersion with chaotic warfare? What about audio quality or audio sampling? 3-4 sentences about a literal standalone coop mode or a 30 vs. 30 online multiplayer?

RememberThe3574052d ago

Exactly. Game journalism is trash... There are a small number of blogs that write really well, as well as a small number of reviewers. But as a whole, they are terrible. This guy must not have played the same single player campaign as I did, because the game I'm playing incredible. If your into shooters at all, pick this game up.

BattleAxe4052d ago

I just finished R2 an hour ago and all I can say is OMG its so frickin amazing. Clearly these guys are influenced huge by Microsoft.

I've played a bit of Halo 3 and it just doesn't compare to R2.

TheUsedVersion4051d ago

I haven't been one to cry foul about reviews being biased or whatnot but even I have to agree with the person above that if Resistance 2 had been released on 360 that it would have gotten perfect 10's across the board. I'm in no way saying that 360 games get higher scores than they should because I honestly believe that Gears 2, Fable 2, etc deserve the scores they received. However, Resistance 2 is getting the short end of the stick and I can't quite figure out why. It has nothing to do with a conspiracy or reviewers getting paid off. It must be hype, image and expectation that are swaying these scores because the game is truly amazing and shouldn't be scored so low. Anything under a 9 is suspect.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 4051d ago
xhi44052d ago

Little Pig Planet an wtf?

ruibing4052d ago

Not only that, these are the shortest reviews I've seen. If you are going to dumb down a historic exclusive title, at least show it some respect and flush out the review a little bit. Six meager paragraphs that wouldn't have even passed grammar school is poor excuse for any critique.

cmrbe4052d ago (Edited 4052d ago )

Movie review at the browser title bar?. Why the reference to Halo and Gears?.

Now why are Metacritic using a N/A score as 70?.

Why is even gamesdaily R2 review clearly reviewed by a xbot even on.

This is what i have been saying. Metacritc is biased and i propose it should be banned from N4G as its nothing more than a site used by trolls for penis measurement contest. It serves no purpose at all other than this.

SWORDF1SH4052d ago (Edited 4052d ago )

i dont think it metercritics fault. i find a lot of american sites and mags biased towards the 360. they seem to not make a big deal out of small faults and bugs in a 360 game but over eagerate small faults and bugs in ps3 games and mark them down loads. i have gone off metercrtic loads because of this reason. its not metercritics fault. it the same scores on games raankin. what would help with scores is it they took all the scores and cut out the extreme reviews. what im mean by this say if theres 20 reviews.and 16 where in the 85 to 90 region and 3 scores at 75, 78, 80 and 1 score at 99 then they cut out all the extrmes (75,78,80 and 99) to keep out biased reports. there is a name for averagin this way. cant remember waht its called.

KenjiWB4052d ago

The word youre looking for is outliers. And it IS Metacritic's fault for not taking them into account, I emailed them asking why they dont offer a seperate score that disregards them and got this response:

"I appreciate your taking the time to write in. We've certainly considered exactly what you're suggesting, and we've had a number of internal fights about it. One thing to consider, among the many things to consider in this case, is the groupthink that often goes hand in hand with product reviews. Assuming that the critics are properly vetted for their skill and expertise (and I like to thing we're pretty good "vetters"), that one outlying score might be one of the most valuable, and it should arguably have a sway on the average. Of course, if the score were suspect, and if that critic turned into a contrarian for any number of reasons, we'd drop him/her. And that's certainly happened. But short of that, I'd prefer including all the scores. But you make a perfectly sound argument that I respect. We'll redesign the site in the near future, and I'll share your note with my team when we re-evaluate our scoring process...."

So basically, they fully support outliers...despite the fact that even if a game gets 10 perfect scores, 1 review of a 60% has more weight than all of them individually, and is completely acceptable as a credible source.

It is not hard keep all reviews but only average those that fall into a certain range of the average, but they dont care.

Rhoic4052d ago

LOL.. I hope you're not saying you take N4G over Metacritic. You realize about 90% of these articles are blogs written by people like you and I, correct?

Sarcasm4052d ago

Right Metacritic not biased? That's why they consider As and A+s from 1up to be 100/100 only on the 360.

thewhoopimen4052d ago (Edited 4052d ago )

Agreed, there is a definitive American/Western slant in most of these reviews I've been reading. Anti-PS3 seems to be word of the day even if few of these fanboys/fanboy publications realize how much worse the game industry would be if it were dominated by a company such as Microsoft.

I have nothing against being Pro-American, but only insofar as intelligence is involved. Biased crap such as this should not be tolerated only b/c it serves to show the world how bigoted, ignorant, and unprofessional Western publications can be. We deride muslim fanaticism... yet here we can't even keep game reviews straight.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 4052d ago
Dragunov4052d ago

Metacritic is biased. Look at n4g meta of any ps3 game. now look a 360 exclusive and compare it with metacritic. No surprise that the 360 fanboys are in love with it