Digital Foundry vs. Resistance 3

Richard Leadbetter writes:

"The engine upgrades work on many levels. While the destruction isn't on the same level as Battlefield, the set-pieces can be quite sensational and the impact of weaponry on the surroundings is particularly pleasing. It's clear that the range of visual upgrades have taken a toll on resolution, but Resistance 3 works well in that its environments are rich in detail, beautifully lit and - while it may not sound so much like a compliment - very visually consistent in terms of light and shadow, giving an excellent sense of immersion in the blasted game world. In this sense, the parallels with Metro 2033 are palpable."

Read Full Story >>
andron4736d ago (Edited 4736d ago )

Ah I can't wait for this one. With upgraded graphics to match the great gameplay this might be the best Resistance yet...

edit: The only thing I'd like to complain about is that they have added those Cod like hit marker around your reticule. No need for those, they are just annoying...

MaxXAttaxX4736d ago

Despite some technical flaws, R3 looks a lot better than the first two games, design wise.

All I have to say though, is stay away from 3D.

killcycle4735d ago

Have you played games in 3D?

Motorstorm? Killzone?

SuperM4735d ago

Totally disagree. Played Killzone 3 and it was much more enjoyable in 3d.

MaxXAttaxX4735d ago

For Resistance 3. If you looked at the comparison pics, the graphical quality is lower in 3D.

But then again I don't think there would be much of a difference while playing(in motion).

morganfell4735d ago

The immersion in 3D makes up for it. I have run the demo in 3D countless times. It only took once and after that I didn't want to go back to 2D. The scale of this game, the set pieces really play well and 3D adds an element of immersion that I simply do not want to miss by going back to 2D.

As was stated above, Killzone 3 in 3D and Motorstorm - which will make your hair stand up in 3D, are mindblowing examples of why 3D matters.

Having played the R3 demo in 2D and then in 3D, it is obvious the difference is marked. It is readily apparent R3 is another game whose level design and well implemented 3D is a poster child for making the leap.

What is also amazing is that the detractors I see are the people that do not own a 3D TV and/or those that are looking for anything/anywhere to see Sony and 3D falter. Where have I seen that before????


Fact, 3D in major titles is a game changer. For me it has vastly altered the experience of every major game I have played including the U3 beta. I just hit the Platinum trophy for Captain America and even that 3D was very well done and made a difference in my time. Here is what Destructoid had to say:

"However 3D hope is there for you, my gaming friends. I have played a few 3D titles on PlayStation 3 and the Xbox 360 and I have finally found the one that gave me a dorkgasm. Captain America is here to save the day. The game looks amazing in 3D; I could actually see Chris Evans' birthmark (which prompted a Sega rep to exclaim that I am not actually supposed to be that close)."


And that was for a game that was good. Not groundbreaking, not epic, but better than most. If you have gamed in 3D then you understand 3D matters.

DatNJDom814735d ago (Edited 4735d ago )

I don't understand how all the trolls on this site have more than 3 bubbles.

nycredude4735d ago

YOu judge a game's 3d performance by looking at pics? LOL Epic fail. Try it yourself and tell me it don't look better. I happen to think, especially for a shooter, 3d makes a huge difference. It actually looks better to me.

MaxXAttaxX4735d ago (Edited 4735d ago )

@morganfell , @nycredude

My mistake. I'm not knocking 3D. When I said that it doesn't make much of a difference, I meant that the graphical difference isn't very noticeable when playing in 3D.
Digital Foundry showed a 2D screen of a 3D image which shows how the 3D effect can be a bit taxing on a game's graphics.
Not saying it's bad. Just pointed out that for the better graphical quality, 2D is best. But yes, the 3D effect really makes up for it, especially in motion and is generally better with games in first-person view.


Maybe it's because I'm not a troll.

thereapersson4735d ago

It's because the bubble system on this stupid website is fucked.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 4735d ago
Corepred44736d ago

I think all games are doing the hit markers now because if they don't people will complain about the hit detection.

subtenko4735d ago

I have a question....are we gonna see something even more epic than the..(SPOILER ALERT FOR Resistance 2)

(SPOILER ALERT FOR Resistance 2 Below)


The Nephiliem (how ever you spell it..) That big giant monster? Not sure if thats really a spoiler, but I didnt wanna be a prick. I guess we find out when the game comes out

Agree or Disagree if you Agree

pixelsword4735d ago (Edited 4735d ago )

You mean (spoiler below)
the Leviathan?

saladthieves4735d ago


!(Agree or Disagree if you Agree);

subtenko4735d ago

@pixelsword, yes!

sidenote, I like the regular spiders from Resistance 1 better than the upgraded ones (these were shown in trailers so no harm saying this)

@egidem, LOL!! Stop stealin my sig :P haha jk


another side note, I looked on google to see if anyone built a chimeran cooling pack, no results :/ Im thinking about making a 3d model of it, and if its easy to make, i'll make me one, possibly put it on indestructibles.

Agree or Disagree if you Agree

zeddy4735d ago

this was just an old ass demo, they,ve had plently of time to brush up and make it better.

mayberry4735d ago

@ andron666 I hate when people post comments like yours! <no offense> but when a comment has two or more viewpoints, and I agree with one strongly and disagree with the other just as strong, I dont know to hit the "agree" or "disagree" tab!

nan04735d ago

... What?

This saddens me. I loved R1 and R2, but R3 looks like crap... Is this a different team or something? The level designs I've seen so far look very poorly made in comparison to those in the past. Everything is dull, which, can be used in a good manner (like R1). All of the guns have the same name but look completely different which is stupid. The plot is basically dead, it's taking way too long to make this game for what they've shown. R2 was really fun, and now we have a group of hicks screaming annoying taunts during battle (something every FPS games feels is necessary to throw in. From killzone to COD to Resistance to halo) they can't help but to throw in Computer characters taunts and comments kissing your ass for shooting some A.I. on easy. Thanks alot Insomniac! I didn't realize my self esteem was that low that I needed a fake team mate to compliment me on my 20% accuracy. People who make games need to wake up and start offering good shet.

I hope all of this R3 revealed info has been a joke and they give us a surprise, otherwise sadly I'm not going to be adding R3 to my collection.

P.S. True fan hoping for the best /rant.

50Terabytespersec4735d ago (Edited 4735d ago )

although disappointed with their overall graphical approach(motor storm and kz3 had MLAA and HD) why didn't they get technical help from Sony?
Also 3d is killing the potential of these games!!!
I see it actually hampering the overall quality of the game ...Anyone agree?
Games are games!!! no one has the money for a 42" 3d TV right now .. last time i checked we were still in a recession recovery!!
Just give us games ,no gimmicks no BS! Just GAMES!!!!
Sony is becoming like Sega too gimmicky and over extending itself!!
remember what happened to Sega!!!

I will buy this game and enjoy it then sell it on Amazon but All i can say is 3d and low def just don't do it for me. i didn't pay $500 for my PS3 to be low def

showtimefolks4735d ago

the only question i have is whether this game will have the online co-op of resistance 2?

besides the single player in resistance 2 co-op was my most fav and i hope we get that in resistance 3 8 player co-op was a lot of good times with friends

xAlmostPro4735d ago

I think people should note this is the beta and there's a huge chance it will improve by it's release date. Why?

Because just like the demo(that came with the battle:LA) they used an old build to put it out.

I wouldn't be suprised if the version in the offices already surpasses the beta actually :)

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 4735d ago
Fishy Fingers4736d ago (Edited 4736d ago )

From my brief time with the beta I can tell this will already be my favourite of the franchise. First was good, but a launch title so down on todays standards and the second, well I found that pretty weak.

Tech point of view, nothing exactly outstanding here, sub-HD, jaggies (QAA) etc, nice lighting though. But I've never really seen the franchise as a technical powerhouse. Overall though, much better than what we saw from R1 or 2.

pixelsword4735d ago

Yeah, but it's a beta, just like the last beta was sub-HD, the end product will likely be 720p like the other two.

raztad4735d ago (Edited 4735d ago )


Dont hold your breath for a 720p capable retail version. It is not going to happen, sadly.

It is actually quite a bummer, however it doesnt take me by surprise the game is shipping sub-HD. Insomnia G is not by any means the most technically proficient developer on PS3. Just look at what Santa Monica and Incognito are doing with StarHawk for comparisons.

In Insomnia defence, it has been reported that R3 locales, ambiance fit very well the soft look that QAA + motion blur give to it (think in KZ2, which sports a soft look many people prefers instead the sharp KZ3 one)

gedapeleda4736d ago

Insomniac always impresses with those bosses

Sharingan_no_Kakashi4736d ago

Wow it's really subhd. I expected the extra year of dev time to improve the resolution not hurt it. Still the best fps ever regardless.

TKCMuzzer4736d ago

How do you improve the resolution but keep all the effects?
I would rather have effects that create a believable world than nice sharp edges with lifeless environments.