digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

Why Gears of War looks better than Resistance

palgn.net — Insomniac boss explains all.

Who dugg this? Made popular Mar 29, 2007

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

155 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+103Gears of War had arguably better developers working on it than Resistance. I mean, it's freaking "Epic", people. These guys have been making games like this for YEARS. What is Insomniac's area of expertise? Family-friendly platform games. It's the guys behind "Unreal Tournament" versus the guys behind "Spyro: The Dragon". Experience goes a long way.

    That, and the biggest reason GOW looked better was because it had FAR superior art design. This isn't really so much a graphical issue, it's just their production design (before the stuff was ever turned into 3D environments) was incredibly high-quality, while Resistance just looks like a derivative FPS game with boring-ass environments.

    However, I will say this: As much as I am a fan of Gears of War, I will say that the concept behind Resistance is better overall. In any case, I'm glad that two of the biggest next-generation games thus far have both been original IP. I'm sick and tired of franchises, sequels, and ***** based off of other media, so Xbox gamers shouldn't be bad-mouthing Resistance, and PlayStation gamers shouldn't be bad-mouthing Gears of War.
  • Georgy, on 10/12/2007, -10/+100if a game looks as good as gears of war who needs mpeg cutscenes....
  • cbrunet, on 10/12/2007, -12/+70I finally beat GoW this weekend (it took surgery to give me the time to play through it), and I must say, I dont think I've played a single player game ever that was as fun or as rewarding.
  • R34C7, on 10/12/2007, -9/+63They are both great games, what end does it achieve fighting over which is better. Play them both and be happy that there are companies with the skill and drive to create such entertaining games.
  • JayD16, on 10/12/2007, -9/+60How about the fact its Unreal 3 engine vs. something Insomniac will throw in the storage locker?
  • xeroband, on 10/12/2007, -3/+49"I'm sick and tired of franchises, sequels, and ***** based off of other media."

    Coming soon: Gears of War 2, Resistance 2, and Gears of War: The Movie...
  • elev, on 10/12/2007, -2/+39Answer: Because Tim Sweeny worked on Gears not Resistance.
    Does anyone else remember the PC Gamer (could have been Boot) interviews with him? Impressive!
    He and Carmack have never written an engine together because they both know they would end up creating the matrix 1.0.
  • daridave, on 10/12/2007, -29/+66Insomniac is the biggest crybaby of a company EVER.

    Seriously, they were nobodies, they make an average-good game and it geats beat by a great one (ORLY?) and since then it's been damage control, damage control, damage control... Come on now. Resistance on PC or 360 would have been an average game. It got attention because it was "as good as it gets" on PS3, but that's all.

    It's that "everything tastes good when you're starving" situation, they got lucky enough to get this much attention, could the please shut the f*ck up now ?
  • chriskzoo, on 10/12/2007, -8/+44"Yet with all that space, Resistance still doesn't have a longer single player than GoW."

    Did you even play Resistance? GoW is about 7-8 hours, Resistance is more like 14-15 on the first run through.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -50/+85Yet with all that space, Resistance still doesn't have a longer single player than GoW.

    But to be honest, I don't remember the last time I bought a shooter for its single-player. Half-life? It's all about multiplayer for shooters.
  • Gerz1219, on 10/12/2007, -11/+43Yeah, and this fall you'll be saying that Halo 3 is a third-generation 360 game, while -- I don't know -- Resistance 2 is only a second-generation game. The PS3 is always going to be a full generation behind. When they're charging more for the console and the same $60 a game, they don't get to make excuses. If Resistance was inherently inferior because it's a launch title, it should be priced accordingly.
  • Konrad9, on 10/12/2007, -1/+33Well it's third-person over the shoulder, so I wouldn't call it a good FPS at all.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+35This is why I never understood why developers STILL rely on cut-scenes (especially for promotional material) when today's games can do in-game what these cut-scenes were barely able to do even 5 years ago. How paranoid do you have to be? If your game looks good, don't hide it.
  • heinousjay, on 10/12/2007, -10/+39We don't hold them to a higher standard. They (Sony) claimed that the PS3 would be the greatest thing ever. When you make excessive claims and back them up with nothing approaching what you've promised, people call you on it.

    It's not that hard to understand, unless you have some irrational love for Sony. Me, I love games. I don't care who makes them. I have no love for anyone, and I will call everyone on their *****.
  • johngardiner, on 10/12/2007, -8/+37agreed... some said it was too short but it felt like the perfect length. adding more onto it would have made it repetitive and old... it kept me entertained the whole way through
  • spacemanspork, on 10/12/2007, -2/+29Um, obviously you didn't play it on hardcore or insane mode.

    In insane mode you die with in 1-2 seconds of being not under cover. Cover isn't really required on Casual mode, it's pretty required on Hardcore, and it's absolutely required on Insane.
  • Butros, on 10/12/2007, -7/+34Look if I'm paying 200 dollars more for a console it better look 200 dollars better. Otherwise I feel like a sucker, and I don't like to feel like a sucker.
  • DirkBelig, on 10/12/2007, -3/+28In-engine cut scenes >>>>> rendered MPEG cut scenes.
  • Butros, on 10/12/2007, -6/+30The Train... is a smooth ride
  • Sparke, on 10/12/2007, -6/+29I've played both and I can honestly say they are both great games.

    With regards to texture streaming, it seems obvious that Insomniac would have done things differently if given more time. Getting a good title ready for a console launch is incredibly difficult.
  • Cyber_Akuma, on 10/12/2007, -15/+38Everyone knows by now that Insomniac are biased towards the PS3. I mean, every single game they were made was either on the PS1, PS2, or PS3.

    http://www.gamefaqs.com/features/company/12886.html

    I love how he boasts about how big the game is, as if the size of the game is directly preportonal to it's quality. He even mentions that the game uses "uncompressed audio", thats not impressive, thats just a waste of space. There is an almost a humanly undetectable difference between audio compressed at high quality and audio not compressed at all, while taking up considerably less size.

    ""Starting with Ratchet and Clank Future: Tools of Destruction we are supporting texture streaming, which will make the worlds look even better, and will also consume even more space on disc."

    Again with boasting about their games taking up a lot of space.

    "There’s no question that you can always cut more levels, compress the audio more, compress the textures more, down-res the mpeg movies, and eventually get any game to fit on a DVD. But you paid for a high-def experience, right?"

    And thats what I am getting with Gears of War as well as just about any other Xbox360 title, his point?

    If you need any more proof that they are kissing Sony's boots then just look at this little gem:
    http://www.ps3forums.com/showthread.php?t=65579

    Just look at the first few sentances and tell me he isnt incredibly biased.
    "beautiful, ground breaking, free, community-enhancing online PS3 service"
    "if you’re trying to spin Home as a bad thing I can only conclude that you’re part of Microsoft’s $3.2 billion viral marketing campaign."

    I didnt bother to read the rest, I skimmed through it, its mostly the same drivel.
  • strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -0/+21@hervethekid
    If I want to solve puzzles I'll play bejeweled.
  • psych0fish, on 10/12/2007, -1/+21http://duggmirror.com/gaming_news/Why_Gears_of_War_looks_better_than_Resistance/
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+25i hear pac-man has a pretty long play time.
  • SomeManbeapig, on 10/12/2007, -12/+30its not next-gen anymore...its current-gen
  • swoper101, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19I own both games and have beaten both. Gears really shines when played with another person and Resistance has a more "epic" feel to it. Where Gears trumps Resistance is with not having any loading screens whereas in Resistance, you're constantly being dumped back to those old "loading" screens which really sucked me out of the game. Having said that, Resistance had a rock solid frame rate the entire time which made the larger battles very enjoyable. They're 2 great games and really should be played by everyone that enjoys the action genre. To say that one is better than the other is just a matter of taste. I, for one, am looking forward to the next installment in each franchise.
  • MaynardJK, on 10/12/2007, -8/+24"Blu ray = more disc space = bigger games = more hours of fun."

    you forgot "=$200 over dvd", which is the only reason people are mad about it. I didn't mind swapping disks for MGS. Is it really worth spending that much extra just to avoid the hassle? I don't think it is, and neither do a lot of other gamers.
  • Alchemeron, on 10/12/2007, -4/+19That's not an explanation at all. So why doesn't Resistance support texture streaming? Lots of what-ifs. What he's basically proved is that even with uncompressed audio and this and that, GOW is still the higher-quality game.

    Resistance looks worse than Gears of War because Resistance didn't have the effort put into it that GOW did. It's that simple. Fudd about how quickly a level can inflate means nothing. How hard is it to burn another DVD-9? Not very. And *still* cheaper than a single Blu-Ray disc.

    This is not a 360 v. PS3 issue, it's an Insomniac v. Epic issue.
  • strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -7/+21Yeah, I don't recall PC game publishers complaining about the amount of space on DVD.
  • punkrockscks, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18@psg188
    "and Crysis looks better the GoW"
    and crysis looks better than wolfenstein 3d...
    sorry don't see the point in your comparison...
  • punkrockscks, on 10/12/2007, -6/+20Excuses, excuses. who cares, gears just does look better.
  • Harrison88, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15Apparently Gears looks so good because the Unreal Engine streams the graphical data, whereas Resistance doesn't do that. The developers said from the new Ratchet and Clank they will be streaming the graphics.

    Oh wait... that's what the whole article is about. Haha, sorry.
  • jacksons98, on 10/12/2007, -26/+38@jimbojim
    Resistance does have a longer single player game. Gears was very short. I would say if you aren't on Live then Gears is probably not worth a full price purchase. The single player campaign for Gears is easily beat in the 6-9hr range.The article says, "Resistance also had 30 single-player chapters, six multiplayer maps, uncompressed audio streaming, and high-definition mpegs. That all added up to a lot of space on the disc."
  • michaelb1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13I submiited this last week sans inflammatory title. This story makes the front page while my story went down like Paris Hilton.
  • NoHandle, on 10/12/2007, -8/+20Yes, but resistance had a lot of recycled levels. Each area, each level, everything felt the exact same as the previous area. GoW was completly different on each Act and each Chapter was unique.

    Quality over Quantity any day.
  • MrAdventure, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15GoW is the kind of game where as you enter a new section, you stop and start panning everywhere and go "ooooh, pretty!"

    The gameplay backs up the graphics, so it's a winner, in my book.
  • Ajajadude, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12Yeah, there's reasons why FPS and straight up shooters are named things like that. In-game puzzles are for more adventure-like games. If they start putting puzzles in shooters, I'll have to kill people.
  • harreola, on 10/12/2007, -4/+14"Why Gears of War looks better than Resistance" How can this be any clearer? It's not saying which one has a better single player experience or how many hours you get out of it. It's saying why it LOOKS better.

    Gears of War uses the Unreal 3 engine. That's it. Simple.
  • WickedDrag0oN, on 10/12/2007, -18/+28I remember back in the day when the 360 launched, there were a lot of xbox/360 games that looked like they were one in the same. Why is it that all of a sudden a launch game has to look like it revolutionized the gaming industry. Because its Sony bias. We hold them to a higher standard apparently. Be happy the damn games looked as good as they did and wait for the real next gen games come out. All things considered for a launch title Resistance looked fantastic to a large portion of the 360 launch games. You think GOW and Resistance looked Next Gen? Wait a year and you will be drooling.
  • jmdajr, on 10/12/2007, -11/+20Again with the not enough space non sense.

    If if is that big of a problem, but the single player on one disc, and the multilayer on the other.

    Does a game like Crysis need blu-ray? Um... nO!
  • grumbel, on 10/12/2007, -7/+16I doubt that there is ever a need for 50GB, sure you can fill it with uncompressed audio and whatever, but you don't need it, MP3 or OGG compressed music sounds perfectly fine and consumes a lot less space. Beside from that, prerendered videos got out of fashion a generation ago, most stuff is now rendered in-engine and consumes quite a bit less space then full HD-TV video. Many things like ambient maps, that you might want to store on disk, are also getting generated in real-time in the near future (see Crysis).

    All that aside there is another very simple factor: No company has enough money to waste to actually fill the 50GB with useful stuff, its simply way to expensive. It doesn't really matter if there is a theoretical benefit when you don't have the money to pay the artists to actually produce the content.
  • adriankeith, on 10/12/2007, -6/+15GoW brought a new style of playing to the table. Yes it was fairly run and gun but there were just some areas you could not get through without using the cover system, but overall it made the experience that much more rewarding. I'm sure resistance was a great game as well, but you just can't beat a machine gun with a chainsaw at the end.
  • christopheles, on 10/12/2007, -4/+12PS3 engine? That thing got a hemi or something?
  • jacksons98, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7I think your misreading the article. They are complaining about lack of space on DVD saying Blu-ray let them have: "30 single-player chapters, six multiplayer maps, uncompressed audio streaming, and high-definition mpegs. That all added up to a lot of space on the disc."
  • zerokill, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12@grumbel:Then why does Blue dragon use 3 dvds? Blue dragon uses at least 19gigs (2 * 9gigs + something). Seriously why is it a downside that there is more disc space? Most developers have stated that they like the fact that they don't have to resize their textures and video to make them fit on a single DL-DVD. Larger disc just makes things a lot easier for developers.

    btw blu ray drive components cost 120$, not 200.
  • pasht, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8Off the top of my head? Microsoft, Flight Simulator X is two DVDs.
  • kauko, on 10/12/2007, -5/+11"I doubt that there is ever a need for 50GB, sure you can fill it with uncompressed audio and whatever, but you don't need it,"

    So true. I also think that 640 kilobytes should've been enough for everyone and that the whole world really needed only maybe two or three computers.

    Seriously, I've never, ever heard of any game developer complain "hey, we have too much space!", "hey, we have too much CPU power!", or "hey, this thing pushes too many polygons per second!".

    Considering the PS3 will be around for the next 5-7 years abandoning DVD was probably a smart thing to do, even though it carries a price premium for now.
  • michaelb1, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9Both games look good.
    so am I to understand that based on GOW's:

    1- more experienced development team
    2-more time to work on the game
    3- more time to optimize gameplay with the 360 platform

    that the Next Insomniac game or Resistance II will be that much better since Insomniac will have the 3 above listed attributes?
  • toasty168, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6for a console game, GOW is amazing.
  • inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7"But who is doing that?"

    Um, all of them. Almost EVERY PC game has you install it to the hard drive, which means it was compressed extremely heavily on disc, to the point where real time decompression would be impossible
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 155 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.