Geek Swagger.
Posts tagged co-op
Resistance 2 preview
Oct 30th
Alrighty so this is part 2 of my 2-part beta preview extravaganza. As you may have guessed I'm talking about Resistance 2 for the PS3 this time. This is one of my most eagerly anticipated Playstation 3 exclusives based on the first game (Resistance: Fall of Man) which I just got around to playing not too long ago. Like the Call of Duty: World at War beta I wrote about on Tuesday, the Resistance 2 beta is multiplayer-only. There is an added bonus, however. The beta also includes some samples of the 8-player cooperative mode, an excellent added bonus.
Let's start with the competitive multiplayer. First off let me say that this is the most beautiful multiplayer game I've ever played. I believe that the beta only includes one competitive map, but based on that map I have to say the graphics and environment are stunning. Generally in games like this you kind of expect the multiplayer portion of the game to be scaled back considerably to cut down on potential game lag. That's not the case with the Resistance 2 muliplayer. Not only does it look like it's been copy/pasted straight out of the game's singleplayer campaign, but it runs smooth to boot. I never had a single issue with lag while I was playing. Granted, I never got into a 60-player match (obviously the more players there are the higher the possibility of slowdown) but in the 16 player matches I played everything ran very smoothly.
If you're like me and you didn't play the Resistance: Fall of Man multiplayer, let me give you some insight. In team deathmatch (my competitive mode of choice) you play on the side of the American forces or the Chimeran army. Each has their arsenal of weaponry from the first game, and you can choose between different classes to get the load out you most prefer. Personally I stuck with the standard weapons (M5A2 Carbine for the Americans, Bullseye for the Chimera) and both controlled great. One issue they were able to avoid was potential lopsidedness due to weapon balance problems but each seemed to have its own strengths and weaknesses to a point that you never felt outgunned. The controls worked great, and the online functionality is one of the better implementations I've seen on the PS3.
One cool thing about the competitive multiplayer (and I think it carries over into co-op too) is that they've integrated a ranking system much like Halo or Call of Duty. Basically as you get kills you get points, get enough points and you rank up, unlocking skills and goodies in the process. That's always a nice feature to see and it's becoming more and more of a standard lately. I didn't have enough time to rank up too many times, but I did notice a lot of the other dedicated players' skills. If you rank high enough you can unlock weapon upgrades, better armor, and of course different abilities. That always adds a ton of replay value, much like Call of Duty 4 and 5.
On to co-op! This is a feature of the game that Insomniac has really been hyping. I remember hearing about Resistance 2's co-op not long after Halo 3's co-op component was revealed. Everyone was so excited to see 4 player co-op in Halo 3 and then bam, Insomniac unveils 8 player co-op for Resistance 2. Not only that but they promised that the co-op would be focused to a story external to the singleplayer campaign of the game, which is a bit of a revolution in cooperative play. Usually if you get co-op at all it's just the same thing you'd see in the singleplayer campaign, but with more people. The prospect of having entirely new content to play through with your buddies was extremely exciting. Now that I've played it though, I have to say I'm a little less excited.
Don't get me wrong, the co-op levels I played were fun (the first was fighting off an onslaught of Menials, the second was based around taking out Chimeran artillery) but they didn't exactly feel like a campaign. There was no interaction between co-op players, no real setup or story for the levels aside from a screen of text while the level was loading, and altogether it felt more like a scenario than an actual level. If you've played either of the Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter games you'll know what I'm talking about. Basically the co-op is veiled as objective based but when it comes down to it all of the objectives just have to do with eliminating all of the enemies on the map. That's fun, but it's not the cinematic experience I was hoping for.
Of course I only tasted a bit of the co-op, so I could be wrong on the overall experience. Hopefully they can tie the different levels together with a meaningful story. I think that would help a lot, and it's entirely possible because hey - this is just a beta. Insomniac might have chose to leave out the story bits in the beta so they don't let any of the story slip before the game has his store shelves. That makes sense to me. Either way Resistance 2 is still on my must-own list of games, and I can't wait to get back to Nathan Hale's story. If you've played the first Resistance game you'll know it leaves off as a bit of a cliffhanger, so to see the resolution will be nice. Add to that the solid multiplayer offering and you have a lot of content to keep yourself entertained. Resistance 2 will be in stores on November 5th; if you own a PS3 I'd suggest picking it up if you can tear yourself away from LittleBigPlanet long enough to do so. =)
Now Playing:
,
Call of Duty: World at War preview
Oct 28th
So I've been playing two betas a bit lately, and I figured since I don't have anything else to talk about I'd go ahead and devote my two posts this week to doing previews. Today's game is, as you may have guessed, Call of Duty: World at War. I got into the CoD5 beta by preordering the game at GameStop (so if you're interested I suggest you go do the same) and have had enough time to put a couple hours into the game so I figured I'd just share my thoughts. The beta is competitive multiplayer only.
First let me say that Call of Duty 4's multiplayer portion of the game was awesome. It introduced quasi-RPG elements which allowed you to earn levels, skills and guns as you played. If you liked CoD4's multi then you'll love CoD5's. It's basically the same system, with the main difference being that the game takes place in World War II. Obviously that means you'll be playing in different environments with different weapons and different skills. I was a little concerned about that since it's a devolution in technology, and so after having used modern weapons I was afraid that the older weapons would feel out of place. Fortunately that's not the case. The game feels great and the perks work really well.
As far as perks go (perks are skills you unlock as you play) there is a lot of old favorites and some new ones as well. From what I remember, some of the older perks include:
- Martyrdom (drop a grenade on death)
- Deep Impact (higher bullet damage)
- Juggernaut (take more damage without dying)
- Last Stand (before dying you get to pull your pistol to try and get a kill)
- Sonic Boom (higher explosives damage)
The newer ones I've been most anticipating are:
- Toss Back (resets grenade fuse so you can throw grenades back at the enemy that's thrown it)
- Second Chance (lets you revive downed comrades)
- Shades (decreases intensity of signal flares)
- Reconnaissance (reveals artillery and tank locations on the map)
There's also a whole new list of vehicle perks, which applies to another new feature of the Call of Duty 5 multiplayer - vehicles. In the beta there's only one map which features vehicles, but I was really interested/concerned to try them out. The problem with vehicles is game balance. If you have a ton of vehicles the whole game becomes a Twisted Metal spin-off with players driving around all over the place causing havoc and ultimately detracting from the infantry experience. From the one map that has maps in the beta I'm really happy with the limited amount of vehicles they've placed. The map is called RoundHouse and is basically an old destroyed train yard. On the map there are only two vehicles, one tank for each team (this is for the Team Deathmatch and War gametypes, it may vary otherwise). Have just one tank per team is great for a couple reasons.
First, it makes the tanks menacing. If there's 10 tanks and everyone has a tank you aren't really concerned about crossing paths with one. However when the other team is dominating with their tank but yours has been destroyed, you're much more cautious. Sure there's a perk to carry a bazooka, but you only get 2 shots and unless you hit the tank from behind you won't destroy it. Another cool thing about single tanks is that because it's so menacing it's a great distraction. I can see strategies being developed where one or two people hop into a tank and then the rest of your team flanks the enemy while they're distracted. I've tried a similar strategy on my own and it has worked quite well, so that adds value to having vehicles. Rather than just being another way to get around the map and kill opponents it can be worked in tactically. Great stuff.
The other two maps are Castle (a Japanese village) and Makin (a seaside village at night). All three are original maps which is good to see, since I remember playing Call of Duty 2 and 3 and being a little unhappy that they had maps from the original Call of Duty in them. That's not to say that I wouldn't like to see updated versions of those maps (Carentan was a favorite) but it's always good to have new ones. There is some bugginess still though, particularly on RoundHouse where I've run into some people who are able to glitch their way under the map and kill everyone without being vulnerable. Hopefully that will be patched but this is a beta so I can't critique it too harshly.
Another weird thing about the game is how weapons are earned. In Call of Duty 4 you started with an M16 and worked your way up from there. In Call of Duty 5 (this is the primary rifle/assault class) you start with an SVT-40 which is a Russian weapon. From there you get a Gewehr 43 which is a German weapon. Maybe the problem is that I know too much about World War II-era weaponry, but it just feels weird playing as an American soldier using a traditionally German weapon. By the same turn it's weird playing as a Japanese soldier and using an American Thompson sub-machine gun.  I guess the same argument sort of applied to CoD4 but since it was all modern weaponry I guess it was easier to justify that anyone could be using any weapon. Dunno. It's a weird and very nitpicky problem and doesn't really matter much, it's just something I noticed.
Despite having spent a decent amount of time with this beta there's still more multiplayer scenarios for Call of Duty 5 that I'm looking forward to. First, CoD5 will be the first time that co-op play is introduced to the Call of Duty universe. You'll be able to play through the entire campaign with your buddies. That's obviously very appealing. Second, and this is a much more recent development, Treyarch has revealed a cool new cooperative zombie mode which looks to be a lot of fun. It takes cues from Left 4 Dead, one of my most anticipated games this year, and applies them to World War II. Like I always say, the only thing worse than a nazi is a zombie nazi:
'Nuff said. CoD5 is shaping up to be a multiplayer powerhouse. Add to that the undoubtedly stellar singleplayer campaign and I think the game might end up being a "sleeper" best-seller this holiday season. Gears of War 2? Fallout 3? It's entirely possible that they won't hold a candle to CoD5.
Now Playing:
