CRank: 5Score: 13530

To Insomniac Games: Please fix the EXP System in Resistance 2

Letter to Insomniac Games:

Based on the current design of R2, the only way to earn EXP in competitive is by using the PLAY button (the ranked matches).  But after experimenting with this for quite some time since launch, I regret to inform you that this may be the biggest design flaw in R2.  No, this isn't just a personal gripe; this is a serious long-term issue that will limit community growth.

Please allow me to explain:

1) 60-players and EXP were the best addition to R2.  The 60-player upgrade was a very nice addition to the console gaming landscape (PC games have had it for a while).  However, the addition of the EXP system is perhaps the greatest addition to R2.  In the end, "60-players + EXP" is a winning formula, no matter how you look at it, and I do hope R2 becomes a big hit for you.

However, the current version of R2 does not offer the 60p+EXP experience.
Here's why:

2) The "Play" option in Competitive Mode is not perfect.  Well, I actually think that it is seriously flawed, and I know several others on the R2 forum agree.  The biggest problem is that Ranked games always end up being only 5v5, 7v7 or 15v15 AT BEST.  In fact, I can only recall one game where the total player count was above 20, and in most cases, I'm stuck playing with 13 or so people in the whole game (yes, that's an odd number).

To be blunt, if you want to earn EXP, you're stuck playing a CoD4/Halo3/GeoW2 clone.  And while there is nothing wrong with that, this is not enough to differentiate the game from its competition.  Frankly, I am already having enough difficulty convincing my friends to play this game with me, and the PLAY button might become the nail in the coffin (I am not telling them about this issue, of course).

I can try to guess why the PLAY button was implemented: you wanted to make sure that people didn't exploit the EXP system in competitive mode, and that each game is balanced.  But the outcome speaks for itself; the competitive mode itself is broken right now.  You can't EVER play 60-player matches, and the balancing is WORSE than in custom matches.

3) The Custom games offer the best gameplay experience.  And this is another example of user/self-regulation working its magic.  Users will always go and look for a well-populated game, and ensure that each team remains balanced in numbers.  You never see a situation where one team outnumbers the other by 4-5 people.  However, this happens all too often with the PLAY button. Again, the PLAY button defeats its own purpose of trying to be fair and balanced.


My suggestion to you is:

A) Allow custom games to earn EXP.  Whatever the reason behind limiting EXP to the PLAY mode, the algorithm behind the matchmaking system is NOT WORKING.  The magic of R2 was supposed to be the near laggless 60-player matches, but you simply cannot experience that unless you are willing to forego your EXP altogether and join a custom game.


B) Fix the PLAY button.  Either make it so that people are put into existing ranked games, or upgrade your matchmaking algorithm itself.  I really do not have a preference in how you do it. But make sure that people can consistently get into 60-player matches.  I've used the play button over 30 times in the past week, and have never even gotten close to a 60-player match, let alone a 40-player match.  Again, most end up being 10-15 player matches.

Remember, the ultimate goal is the make R2 what it was always intended to be: a 60-player slugfest where you can earn EXP for everything good you do.  It really is a winning formula, but as it is right now, the game does not offer this at all.

Personally, I think solution A makes the most sense and would be easier to implement.  So I would highly recommend changing your policy as soon as possible and allow those people in custom games to earn EXP.  Because, let's face it: even if there is a way to exploit the EXP system, there's no point in breaking the game itself in order to prevent it.

Thank you for reading, and I really hope this gets looked into.

SilverKiller5429d ago

i like your point of view but maybe is happening the same that happen with resistance: fall of man, at the beginning it was so difficult to find a 40 player match because there were to few players 2 months later you found a lot because more people bought the game i think is matter of time before you start to see more people, a lot of them are playing the online cooperative modes now and i'm going to join you in resistance 2 this coming weekend :D

PSN: Zheth

The Matrix5428d ago

Agreed. I played about 12 matches and looked at my record to find that I had been playing unranked games. Insomniac really needs to identify between ranked and unranked games.

orakga5429d ago

Yeah, that's basically what most people are saying, but a few things don't make sense.

1) When you go through the matchmaking system (the "PLAY" button), the match only waits for 15 seconds before starting a game. And regardless of how many people are in the game after the 15 seconds, it'll start right anyway. I think if they increased that wait time to 60 seconds (like most other games), that alone could substantially increase the number of players in each game.

2) There are plenty of full 60-player games that happen on the "unranked" list of games, and supposedly already 500,000 copies of R2 sold. And all of my PS3-owning friends are already playing this game. So, it makes very little sense that you can only get into 5v5 matches right now. I highly doubt that the problem is the lack of people who own R2. 500,000 is already a pretty big player base, and even with co-op, there should be enough players who want to play competitive matches to support at least one or two 60-player games.

I'm just ranting, really...

DERKADER5429d ago

I stopped playing R2 because of the ranked competitive games.4 vs 4 on a map designed for 60 is an epic game of hide and go seek where no one wins. Everything said in this article I completely agree with. This is a great game that isn't using its best selling point to its full advantage. I don't want to have to choose between full games and EXP.

motts5428d ago


I was excited to see matchmaking in beta, and figured they would actually fill up games when its used, but i guess not. Hopefully they fix that. Even expanding matchmaking would be great, so you can choose what type of game you want to be ranked in. Halo 3 matchmaking is amazing, R2 needs something like it

Gun_Senshi5428d ago

its not out in europe yet -_-'

Show all comments (25)

Gloomhaven Review - More Exasperation than Imagination | COGconnected

Gloomhaven is a tactical, turn-based RPG modeled after the hit tabletop game, but it loses a little something in its digital form.

Read Full Story >>

Smalland: Survive the Wilds gets December launch on Xbox Series X|S, PS5 and PC

Merge Games have announced the full release date for Smalland: Survive the Wilds. Xbox Series X|S and PlayStation 5 versions are confirmed.

Read Full Story >>