Sections

Insomniac has “theories” as to why Resistance wasn’t Sony’s Halo, says Price

Tuesday, 11th September 2012 20:27 GMT By Stephany Nunneley

Resistance was big, but never a big as Halo, and Insomniac CEO Ted Price has his theories as to why the shooter never became a juggernaut for Sony the way Halo did for Microsoft.

Speaking with Kotaku, Price said one of the team’s theories is due to the changes made to the series with Resistance 2 development.

“We have theories internally about why Resistance wasn’t a Halo,” he said. “One is that we changed the game a lot in Resistance 2, and we surprised players in a way that perhaps wasn’t what was expected. And that may have not been a good thing. By changing up some of the core mechanics and— we got a lot of strong feedback when we did that.

“On Resistance 3, we went back to some of our more traditional core mechanics that players did love, and then built a story that was more personal. That in our opinion was the way to move the franchise forward in a way that was unique for first-person shooters.

“We’re really proud of Resistance 3. The team felt very personally connected to Resistance 3.”

Price also said the reason Insomniac didn’t develop Resistance for Vita, was due to the studio not having “the bandwidth to move onto the Vita.” Therefore, Sony handed off development duties for Resistance: Burning Skies to Nihilistic.

“We were really happy that Nihilistic went ahead and created their own vision of Resistance, and we feel very close to the franchise cause we created it, but it’s always interesting to see what other people do with it,” said Price.

“I thought that what they did with the game made a lot of sense, in terms of the decisions that they came to with their core mechanics. So I felt like it stayed true to the universe… [but] frankly, I was spending a lot more time playing our own games.”

Insomniac’s next release is Ratchet & Clank: Q-Force, also known as Ratchet & Clank: Full Frontal Assault in the US. The firm is also working on FUSE – the game formerly known as Overstrike.

Breaking news

28 Comments

Sign in to post a comment.

  1. Malmer

    Resistance 3 was nothing but completely fantastic. I loved that game. And the weapons were great – for once you really felt that all of them were useful.

    The long installtime and huge day one patch was bad though. Except for that. Loved it.

    Oh, man I just got the urge to replay it. Thanks VG247!

    #1 2 years ago
  2. TMRNetShark

    Because there wasn’t the words “Halo” on the box…

    Halo became a “brand” name game and that’s why it’s so successful. The same thing with Call of Duty and Madden NFL.

    PS3 never had a must have game like Halo… Uncharted might be close… but no cigar.

    #2 2 years ago
  3. diego-rbb-93

    Come´on Price! Nihilistic is an horrible studio and their Resistance was a really poor game. They doesnt give a fuck about bringing Vita to a real high graphical/gameplay level despite having a lot of resources from the original Resistance games on PS3.

    And what is worst, they are just copying/recicling resources with COD BO Declassified in a extremely poor way.

    It isnt necessary to say anything about them, but if you do, dont try to state that their game was awesome and a really good vision for Resistance on a handeld. Retribution in PSP was more decent and satisfatory.

    #3 2 years ago
  4. Ge0force

    #1 I agree, Resistance 3 was one of the best shooters I played this generation.

    #4 2 years ago
  5. ps3fanboy

    releasing resistance fall of man, a bland fps shooter that the mp was a lack luster of big portions and nothing special..

    releasing resistance 2, follow it up with another bland fps shooter that still is a lack luster.

    releasing a day one broken resistance 3 online mp and a co-op without no match making, that just felt like a rush job… then release a survival mode with no matchmaking and extra game mode called invasion as dlc, no one bought it because you serious fecked up!

    then releasing a resistance trilogy with non of the dlc included. no trophy support for resistance fall of man, and no hd remake of resistance retribution.(look what care the kz trilogy is getting!)

    here is my theory… you guys dont care for the game or you guys just cant do it properly, because everything feels so half way done, when compare to halo… so no wonder resistance wasnt a halo killer.

    #5 2 years ago
  6. zinc

    The short and brutal answer would be that Halo was great from the start, Resistance was mediocre up until the 3rd.

    And by then it was way too late.

    #6 2 years ago
  7. Takeshi

    Well, I do get this urge to play Resistance 3 once in a while. My friend bought R2 for me and it wasn’t very engaging. I still haven’t completed it yet. The graphics are pretty bland and the mechanics weren’t very fluid and almost seems incomplete in some places. At least not compared to Killzone 3. It really pales compared to that shooter.

    #7 2 years ago
  8. ant72

    Halo inspired a whole community of play and creativity. Resistance, although good, did not.

    #8 2 years ago
  9. strikkebil

    resistance 3 was just incredible. had alot of fun playing both sp and mp. resistance 2 had alot of things going for it but was underwelming. sad we wont see another resistance game from insomniac.

    #9 2 years ago
  10. LuLshuck

    R2 had a fantastic multiplayer but R3s was just awful, the graphics were bad and the level designs were even worse, campaign for the third game was alot better though

    #10 2 years ago
  11. Clupula

    It’s all down to the hype and marketing. No game will ever get the response Halo does unless it is hyped up to the high heavens the way that franchise is. The Halo games are not awful, but nowhere near deserving of the amount of praise they get, BUT Microsoft are masters at making people think they are the second coming.

    Even something like Vampire Rain would be just as successful with the same amount of marketing dollars behind it. Sony do not put even a 10th of the marketing dollars that Microsoft do towards their franchises, which is why there will not be a “Sony Halo.”

    #11 2 years ago
  12. matrix01

    At #2; What the fuck are you talking about ‘PS3 never had a must have game like Halo’, you mentioned Uncharted when it’s actually Gran Turismo and God of War that are Sony’s biggest franchises and they can shift over 5 million units in a short amount of time with no bundling with ease. Uncharted is really popular now too, as is LittleBigPlanet and Metal Gear Solid 4. PS3 has much more must have games than the Xbox 360.

    Aside from Halo what other big properties does Microsoft own? The only reason Halo sells so well is because Microsoft is great at advertising it and it’s the only franchise they make a HUGE effort in marketing and also because the Xbox 360 has so few exclusives that owners just have Halo buy. Do you really think Sony couldn’t make God of War, LittleBigPlanet, Uncharted etc 10 million + sellers if they put in enough marketing effort for those games? They could with ease, beside God of War III is looking to pass 6.5 million sales lifetime which is more than double the next best selling franchise in the genre and Gran Turismo is also the king of its genre, Sony has more genre defining games than Microsoft.

    #12 2 years ago
  13. Gheritt White

    Comparing God of War to Halo is apples and oranges. The main reason both sell so well is ‘cos they’re both so fucking good, innit.

    #13 2 years ago
  14. Clupula

    There are plenty of games that were great that were massive flops.

    Usually comes down to the amount of marketing behind them.

    #14 2 years ago
  15. hitnrun

    Huh? That’s like asking why Crash Bandicoot never became Sony’s Mario.

    Leave aside the fanboy dick-waving of pretending to like the games you’re told to like on your chosen console (while being less impressed with the other console’s games) for a minute. Halo had enormous quantities of two kinds of support: artificial and organic. Artificial, in that it was the chosen masthead of Microsoft’s quajillion dollar marketing warship for the Xbox brand back in the day. Organic, in that people who played it legitimately loved the hell out of it and converted their friends.

    Resistance had neither of those attributes. It was a good series that Sony designated as its Halo in its grand marketing chess match with MS that had nothing to do with the games themselves. PS3 owners who bought it liked it, but for the most part they don’t (or didn’t) make up a large chunk of the FPS-as-a-lifestyle market.

    #15 2 years ago
  16. TD_Monstrous69

    What has held this franchise back is a lack of consistency between new entries in the series. Drastic changes were made before gamers could ever really get a sense of familiarity for the Resistance franchise. What I believe should be done is this is an IP that should be left alone for a few years, and rebooted in the next generation. This series always had potential to be something greater than what it is (and still does), it’s just a matter of getting the right team together to make it work.

    #16 2 years ago
  17. polygem

    @3: what? insomniac is a great dev studio – one of the best. some of the most fun, most creative weapon design in the videogame business! the resistance games are great games and it´s a shame that sony fans didn´t buy them! but they are not even close to how good halo is as a whole package.

    that said…it´s hard to beat halo in the fps department. there is no better fps around, esp. if you take the mp. it is just the very best of the best. the gameplay is perfect. it is extremeley well balanced. very challenging too, almost tactical, yet still it is fast paced shooter. insane amount of online modes, forge…and a very well crafted storyline, a whole story universe.

    that said, @11: there is a reason why halo is loved by so many (see above). to say it´s just a brand is bs. it has a very good reason. you are obviously just a ps drone again while calling others fanboy soon…will ya?

    #17 2 years ago
  18. Dragon246

    It all comes down to the infamous shitty sony marketing I guess.

    #18 2 years ago
  19. Gadzooks!

    It’s nothing to do with marketing. Resistance simply wasn’t very good.

    1 was okay, had potential. 2 was just plain awful, and destroyed the series beyond repair, turning most people off the franchise for good.

    Pretty simple really.

    #19 2 years ago
  20. Dave Cook

    @18 ‘It all comes down to the infamous shitty sony marketing I guess.’

    You mean Sony, the company who has produced some of the most memorable game marketing since it first hit the scene in 94?

    You sure you’ve got the right Sony?

    (PS. I’m not a fan boy, but I am a fan of the truth)

    #20 2 years ago
  21. Dragon246

    @20
    See their marketing for exclusives since ps3 launch. The last great thing they did was kevin butler. MS spends 3-4 times what halo costs to make in marketing, give me an example of sony doing that.

    #21 2 years ago
  22. Kuwabara

    Their marketing for the game wasn’t that great, even still, it would be hard for it to sell in the millions, seeing how there are plenty of ps3 exclusives coming out of different genres, which would obviously limit the sales. Its not like waiting 2 or 3 years for a halo or gears. Imagine Sony went microsofts route. Resistance would have sold more at the expense of less exclusives. Also The the fan base of ps3 is skewed/diverse, thanks to the european and japanese numbers, who are into more genres, and not shooter centric like the majority of the americans which accounts for the majority of xbox 360 sales. The reason why modern warfare sold so well on ps3 was due to marketing and word of mouth. Evrybody knows someone who has the game. If they want to make a game sell like halo, throw away all the other exclusives for the year and market the shit out of it. But as a sony fan, im glad they are doing what’s best.

    #22 2 years ago
  23. DrDamn

    None of the Resistance games were ever the complete package unfortunately. They all had strengths and if you could pick and chose elements from each of the games to produce one then you’d have something fantastic.

    #23 2 years ago
  24. Dragon246

    @22
    Couldn’t have said it better.

    #24 2 years ago
  25. Erthazus

    It’s all about marketing. Halo when launched was just a crappy FPS game with one difference: It was the first very well supported FPS with multiplayer on console and with huge marketing campaign because Microsoft always like to shine it’s products. That thing worked for them.

    At that time I remember I played from CS/Half-Life mp to Unreal on the PC. I had a lot of choices. Console users had not a lot of choice anyway.

    Resistance on the other hand suffered from a crappy PS3 launch price with craptastic marketing campaign and ads. Being at the same time not a very good shooter compared to alternative from the PC or Xbox 360.

    Xbox 360 had Halo 2-3 at that time which was popular already and Gears Of War 1 which was okay. So who will want to buy a PS3 with 500 or 600 USD price tag with one ok game and with marketing campaign with crying babies… Lol.

    #25 2 years ago
  26. TheBlackHole

    Halo was the better game, and the Xbox controller suits FPSs much better, which is why it’s become the ‘console of choice’ for FPSs (on the whole).

    #26 2 years ago
  27. Da Man

    Erzadeluded,

    Halo was just better than any of those Resistances, Killzones or anything which copied it, that’s a fact of life. Any Halo is miles ahead of any of those, in every way aside from graphics. Halo on Xbox had just as good campaign as Half Life and just as good multiplayer as Ut. Resistance had none. Halo 3 redefined fps on consoles by adding The Forge. Resistance did none.. crap, few game have a Theatre even.

    Unreal Tournament was shit. It was just a crappy fps game with one difference: it was the first one with that many playlists. That and teh Clify B marketing.

    Half Life was shit. It was just a crappy fps game with one difference: it was the first one with a campaign like that. That and teh Valve marketing.

    See how idiotic you are?

    You keep telling yourself how playing a computer toy on a PC automatically makes it better.

    Свинья совковая.

    #27 2 years ago
  28. viralshag

    @26, Agreed.

    I would also agree with Erth and say the high price and slow uptake of the PS3 was a little at fault too. Halo found a huge following on the Xbox by being one of the best games on the system. Halo 2 for the 360 was like the next Gran Turismo for the PS3.

    #28 2 years ago