Insomniac’s Ted Price Expands on Leaving Resistance

If you played Resistance 3 and saw the credits roll, it wasn’t much of a surprise to recently hear Insomniac Games CEO Ted Price revealing the studio was now done with the franchise.

Price appears to have been caught off guard by the headlines and ensuing fan response, however, and took to YouTube to deliver a message towards fans about the decision.

“I did want to confirm it face-to-face that we are not moving on with the Resistance franchise,” he said. “Now, the question we’ve gotten through our forums and through emails is: why? Well, we believe Resistance has reached its logical conclusion in terms of the story we wanted to tell.”

When everything faded to black, Resistance 3 definitely felt like an ending to a trilogy, even if I took issue with how much Insomniac Games chose to keep open-ended regarding the overall mythology. With Nihilistic Software working on Resistance: Burning Skies for Vita, however, it’s clear Sony has plans to keep going.

“With Sony’s shepherding, we know that it [Resistance] will continue to live on and expand,” he said. “We’re excited, as fanboys, to see where it goes.”

Now that I have a PS3, I feel like I should try the first and third resistances. Skip the second.

Would that be right, fellow GBers?

@Shaka999: The second one isn't as bad as people say. And it does have a story. I think. The ending, at least, is kinda cool, because it's crazy.

@Shaka999 said:

Now that I have a PS3, I feel like I should try the first and third resistances. Skip the second.

Would that be right, fellow GBers?

I hated the first, but liked the second. Never played the third.

It was fun while it lasted.

@Shaka999 said:

Now that I have a PS3, I feel like I should try the first and third resistances. Skip the second.

Would that be right, fellow GBers?

I had a LOT of fun playing through the single player and coop sections of Resistance 2. People claim Resistance 2 gave into popular console FPS trends by having regenerating health and such, but I felt that it was still very fun and challenging. Play through all three on hard difficulty!

Fine with me, I just want to know if they will be continuing with main line Ratchet games.

@Shaka999 said:

Now that I have a PS3, I feel like I should try the first and third resistances. Skip the second.

Would that be right, fellow GBers?

Yes, that is the correct thing to do.

@Shaka999 said:

Now that I have a PS3, I feel like I should try the first and third resistances. Skip the second.

Would that be right, fellow GBers?

I liked the 2nd. It was different and not the best in the series, but good.

1st was interesting, if a bit too grim with its gray/muddy green/brown palette all the time. Best part of the 2nd was the coop, which with a full group was some of the most online fun I've had in a game. I heard good things about 3, but after they dropped the coop I lost interest and never picked it up.

@Shaka999: Just play the second one, it's not bad at all. Just different.

@Shaka999 said:

Now that I have a PS3, I feel like I should try the first and third resistances. Skip the second.

Would that be right, fellow GBers?

I would even go as far as to say skip the first one, too.

I played through R1 and R2 back to back in 2010 and I didn't really think the first one holds up and the second is just not that interesting. But the third comes highly recommended, it does every cool thing from the first two games better and manages to deliver a very emotional story at the same time.

At some point the tug of war between humans and Chimera has to get more then a little hopeless for the player.

Kudos to them for commiting to ending the series due to the story. At least they didnt announce another trilogy.

@Shaka999 said:

Now that I have a PS3, I feel like I should try the first and third resistances. Skip the second.

Would that be right, fellow GBers?

I thought the second was the best one...2>1>3.

Regardless of any sugar coating they put over this story, I still feel like they've decided to stop Resistance because the franchise began to fall off from profitable and disappointment.

This doesn't mean that Sony won't keep the series going, and it's evident that they own the IP and it's out of Insomniac's control, regardless of what they feel, or what "note" they wish to end on.

@HeartbreakRidge said:

but after they dropped the coop I lost interest and never picked it up.

3 does have co-op. Four players online, two local, the entire campaign. OK, so it isn't a separate thing, but it's still good.

@Shaka999 said:

Now that I have a PS3, I feel like I should try the first and third resistances. Skip the second.

Would that be right, fellow GBers?

2 isn't complete shit, it's just... shallow. It's a middle child in a series that was desperately trying to break its head into mainstream territory, and the second one is where it showed most. I wouldn't call it "bad", but it definitely isn't essential. All you need to know is that

Anyway, all I can say is "oh well". The series finally had a noteworthy installment and its creators just left it by the wayside.

I wish Halo took this route and ended at 3. Now, it's just ridiculous.

@Shaka999 said:

Now that I have a PS3, I feel like I should try the first and third resistances. Skip the second.

Would that be right, fellow GBers?

The first one was good back when it was basically the only shooter on the PS3, but overall it isn't anything special compared to many shooters that have been subsequently released. If you can find it for $10 or something it might be worth you trying out. It is still 100x better than the second game though...even though the 8 player Co-op in the second game did have it's moments (I have to imagine that community has all but disappeared at this point).

I still haven't played 3, but based on all the reviews I've read it is something I do intend to play eventually...if only I can stop playing Skyrim for long enough to go to the store and buy it.

I would even go as far as to say skip the first one, too.

I played through R1 and R2 back to back in 2010 and I didn't really think the first one holds up and the second is just not that interesting. But the third comes highly recommended.

This! in fact I would even go as far as to say play R2 over R1 because the first games control's are now very dated.

@Napalm said:

This doesn't mean that Sony won't keep the series going, and it's evident that they own the IP and it's out of Insomniac's control, regardless of what they feel, or what "note" they wish to end on.

Indeed, In fact there is a Resistance game coming out on the Vita this year!

@Shaka999 said:

Now that I have a PS3, I feel like I should try the first and third resistances. Skip the second.

Would that be right, fellow GBers?

The second isn't a bad game, but it just feels bland. The first one is excited as the start of a trilogy, and the third is emotional and beautiful, but the second one? Well, you shoot things. It's a fine game, but not particularly exciting.

I think it's great that they moved on. Inject some new blood in this franchise.

I'm surprised the series lasted this long.

If not for Left 4 Dead they probably would have never thought of the premise for this one and stopped after the second one.

This really makes me interested in trying out the third, because if the first two games showed me anything, it's that the creative decisions were made, relatively of course, on the fly.

Well, I just hope someone comes along and fleshes out the story. The plot starts out interesting, but you quickly become frustrated as you realize that they'll barely explain anything about the Chimera over the course of the game. It's no wonder that much of the back-story is told through optional text files, because the developers didn't expand on any of them at all.

@Shaka999 said:

Now that I have a PS3, I feel like I should try the first and third resistances. Skip the second.

Would that be right, fellow GBers?

I say you have to play them all. The first one has great gameplay and a good concept, and the second one has an ending that will make your jaw drop. The third reminds me a bit of the walking dead in tone, and is solid on the gameplay front.

They're both really cheap, just get them both.

@Shaka999: The second one isn't as bad as people say. And it does have a story. I think. The ending, at least, is kinda cool, because it's crazy.

@KontX: Is it? First of all, I'm not a Halo fan in the slightest, but how is telling a side story and a prequel in the universe ridiculous? The games are still enjoyed by their fans, so what's the harm? Secondly, I doubt highly that Sony will drop the franchise.

“Now, the question we’ve gotten through our forums and through emails is: why? Well, we believe Resistance has reached its logical conclusion in terms of the story we wanted to tell.”

The war's over, soldiers... go home.

These games always seemed kind of a generic response to Halo anyway. I've heard good things about the third one, I guess, but I can't imagine there's tons and tons of money to left to be made out of the franchise... we need some good new high budget IPs anyway, instead of sequel after sequel.

@Enigma_2099: I'm pretty sad to see this cause I know Sony will continue the series but it won't be the same, I honestly didn't think Insomniac was done with the series. I mean that ending was not a ending saying "yep, its all over" it was more of a "things are finally starting to look up" type of ending.

@Shaka999 said:

Now that I have a PS3, I feel like I should try the first and third resistances. Skip the second.

Would that be right, fellow GBers?

The first and second campaigns are about the same. The Third is a better but not by much. They all feel and play about the same. If you like shooters the combination and creativity of the gun types still make the games worth checking out. But if you only have time to try one, go with the third. The game really looks great at times and still have all the same great game play.

Hopefully if Sony goes on to continue the franchise they dont fuck it up.

Fine by me, to see people capable of making something as great as Ratchet and Clank: A Crack in Time make something like Resistance was really off-putting. That series was pretty bad, and even though the setting was cool, the visuals were so brown and dull.

They need a nice new franchise that can make use of their artistic abilities.

I'd kind of be surprised if there is a Resistance 4. From what I've heard, the franchise hasn't really been a big seller. As for Insomniac not making these games anymore, I think it's a good decision. After 3 games I'd imagine it would be hard to do much else with a game's formula.

I liked the first 2 and will eventually get the third but I have gotten to where I only buy a couple of full price retail games a year and then buy quite a few when they hit $20-30 and that is what I will do with the third. But I would recommend the first two to anybody. I know I may be the only one that still prefers this series to the Halo series but I truly do. And no I'm no Sony Fanboy I think the fact that my 360 achievements outnumber my PS3 ones about 10-1 can verify that.

@Shaka999 said:

Now that I have a PS3, I feel like I should try the first and third resistances. Skip the second.

Would that be right, fellow GBers?

at least play the third. it's fantastic.

Playstation is churning out too many sequels as it is. If you told me they were dropping Uncharted, Ratchet and Clank, Killzone and Infamous I'd be like... eh. I've played one of each and enjoyed it, that's enough for me.

Posting the usual "R2 sucks" thing, because why not.

Resistance 1 felt like a full arc - you progressed through Britain, slowly learning more and more in your desperate struggle against the Chimera, and the locales were expansive, well-realized, and fun to play in. Your arsenal and abilities expanded as time went on, and by the final battles in frozen London, you were a walking Taskmaster of your opponents and allies - you needed to be, because the Chimera were no fucking joke at the end of that game.

Resistance 2 threw all of that out. The companion characters sucked, just becoming the action-horror stereotype of "a badass squad that slowly gets picked off", the plot was disjointed (and, as Patrick said, nonsense without optional and obscure data logs), and the two-weapon restriction made it so much less fun to progress. The final level blatantly ripped off Half-Life 2 by overpowering you as you blast through the enemy fortress, but your abilities weren't that interesting, and whatever charm the sequence did have got a bullet through its brain in the most fuckretarded ending to any game I've ever played.

Going from the best PS3 launch title to a mediocre Halo clone was crushing. It's too bad the second game's only redeeming factor, its co-op, didn't show up in a better installment.

@Shaka999: No, you should play the first and second one and skip the third. The third game was not that good overall.

I'd like to see Insomniac do Crash Bandicoot. Just to see what happens.

The only resistance I ever played was a couple hours of the first when years after it came out and I didn't like it. Maybe I should give resistance 3 a spin and see how it evolved.

R1 and 2 were garbage games, but R3 was genuinely fantastic. They hit their stride, and then quit. It's a damn shame. I'd play another game like R3.

I have no problems with this. Now they can concentrate on their reboot to Disruptor *crosses fingers*

@Shaka999 said:

Now that I have a PS3, I feel like I should try the first and third resistances. Skip the second.

Would that be right, fellow GBers?

the first did not age well at all. Skip it.

These games sadly never embraced the era the games were set in or explored the world in any interesting ways. Fun shooters but a complete waste of a interesting premise.

Makes me glad I never invested any time in it.  Probably the
future R games will be multiplatform?