Network now...NEWS
Infamous, Resistance Sequels Underway?
Evidence has emerged that sequels to Sucker Punch’s Infamous and Insomniac’s Resistance 2 are in the works.
Voice actor David Sullivan said in a recent Twitter post that he was auditioning for the lead role of Cole in a sequel to open-world action title Infamous, which launched exclusively for PS3 in May 2009.
"First voiceover/motion capture audition today for a video game. Re-casting of Cole in the sequel of Infamous. 'I'll melt your face.' e.g," he said.
The message was later removed, and Sony issued the following statement to G4: "We have made no announcements in regards to the Infamous franchise."
Meanwhile, a camera-equipped NeoGAF forum user snapped a Resistance 3 billboard that will purportedly appear in Battle: Los Angeles, a movie due to begin filming this fall for an expected 2011 release. The billboard depicts the Statue of Liberty and the Empire State Building, indicating that New York City could play a central role in the title.
Insomniac has previously confirmed that it is working on an unannounced PS3-exclusive game. A third PS3 Resistance title is probably a safe bet, although there’s no official confirmation from Sony or the developer yet.
Contact Us / About Us / Advertise With Us / BeltwayBlips / TechBlips / MassiveBlips / GamerBlips / FAQ
Subscribe To Edge Magazine / Corrections / Terms & Conditions / Privacy Policy
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW
England and Wales company registration number 2008885
Subscribe To Edge Magazine / Corrections / Terms & Conditions / Privacy Policy
Copyright 2006 - 2009 Future Publishing Limited, Beauford Court 30 Monmouth Street Bath, UK BA1 2BW
England and Wales company registration number 2008885
Looks like David Sullivan has buggered his chances of being cast! I've been meaning to pick up Infamous, is it worth a shot?
inFamous is awesome - assuming that you're into open world structured games. The story (and the way it is told) is engaging and it has that intangible element of making you want to play just a little bit longer (after you've discovered you were already playing it hours longer than intended). If you played and enjoyed Crackdown, it is quite similar but with a better story and more variety (it even has shard collecting, much like Crackdown had its orbs).
I found the good/bad mechanic a bit underwhelming and contrived and like every open world game, sometimes the controls will struggle to keep up with what's going on, but I consider this one of the better games this gen despite those minor flaws.
Looking forward to Infamous 2; I do guess however it is a while off.
Funny little argument you guys have goin here made me chuckle lol. Anywayz loved Infamous and really dont understand what all the fuss about R2 is frankly I loved that game and the co op was fun as hell cant wait to see the next iterations of both franchises. Oh and BTW Halo is seriously milked theres Halo toys, boardgames, legos,drinking glasses,kids meals, comics ,animated shorts and much much more MS is obviously marketing this supposably mature product to little kids I wonder why that has never been an issue its rated M yet theres little kids toys and kids meals MS themselves stated that the main demographic is young kids and tweens. So the point is to say that Halo is not milked is just simply ridiculous when I can go to my local walmart and find 30 different toys for kids aged five and up all with Halo on them give mre a break guys denial sure is powerful.
I'm definitely looking forward to another InFamous game.
Resistance not so much, but hopefully 3+ years of development (if the release of the game, coincides with the release of the movie and marketing timing) will help make sure that one element of the game doesn't detract from another (like how the single player seemed to suffer, but the standalone co-op component of Resistance 2 was very well done).
Hazaar!!! More inFamous! I didn't put the first one down for two solid weeks (although that might of had something to do with the fact I'd only just got a PS3), hope they don't just repeat the first one and add a few extras. But some sort of co-op thing would be nice (or at least a quick multi-player fracas).
Hardly surprising. Two strong franchises (although I like inFamous far more than Resistance) with a lot of potential to expand upon the existing game worlds they have created. BTW, the Resistance novel by William Dietz (The Gathering Storm) is actually a decent, quick read for those so inclined.
I wonder if the Sony fanboys are going to change their tune about milking a franchise, considering Resistance is putting out games at a far faster pace than Halo...
Yes but Sony also has games such as EyePet, ModNationRacers and LittleBIgPlanet....
Further; Resistance and Infamous were new IP's; Halo was a carry-over from the last generation. I do not think there are any Sony 'fanboys' as you put it; just the pure facts.
Gears of War was an new IP on 360, as was Crackdown, Mass Effect, Lost Odyssey, Blue Dragon, Viva Pinata, etc. so I'm not sure what your point is.
Saying there are no Sony fanboys has to be the funniest thing I've heard in a long time - thanks for the laughs.
My point was to counter-act your ludicrous accusation. There are no Sony fanboys; just something totally F****D up with your mind; stop being paranoid. Getting back to the original point; Sony have a perfect variety and blend of new IP and Sequels as well as Innovative titles on their system. Anyone brining Sony fanboys into the debate like yourself is a total disgrace to the community.
WazWii, it's really not worth trying to explain. As you can see from the posts above and below this has become something personal to quite a few folks and reality really doesn't have much to do with anything anymore.
Woah, calm down bud. There has been a history of slanging matches on many game sites with each side accusing the other of being fanboys of one thing or another. This has recently been felt when ODST was accused of 'milking the fans'. ODST of course being the 5th Halo game in 8 years. Resistance on the other hand has managed 3 in 3 years, something not really commented on.
There clearly are 'fanboys' out there, as much as I'd like to see Edge sidestep them, it's painfully obvious that there is a congregation of them around sites like Gamespot. Seriously, head over to their forums and enter System Wars. It's not pretty.
You might have been trying to counter one of his points, but in going on to imply that Microsoft haven't had focus on new IP, you opened yourself up to his reply, which was perfectly valid. Both companies have a good mix of carry over franchises, and investment in new franchises. So like Grognard, I'm not entirely sure what your point is.
The reality is, silly arguments like this have been raging since the consoles wars of the late 80's and 90's. If you have allied yourself to a particular product that's great, more power to you! But then to slap each other round the face trying to convince them one thing is better than the other, when clearly there is difference of opinion. It's quite igonorant and not doing anybody any favours.
Whether we are talking franchises or consoles it doesn't matter its all the same rehashed rhetoric we've seen time and time again. What it eventually decends into is essentially bullying and for what? So you can reaffirm to yourself that your we're right, small victories and all that!!
Grognard baited his hook with the fanboy comment and you all went for it and in the ensuing aftermath the the point gets lost.
What were we talking about again?
The original point that he made was that Infamous and Resistance getting sequels was a Good Thing. The fanboy line as I read it was rather a throwaway comment, that got a hugely disproportional response. Certainly not one worthy of resulting in a person being labeled a disgrace.
That's the irony of this thread with WazWii - I've been a PS3 owner since 12/31/06 and was complementing Sony on having two strong franchises worthy of sequels. I consider both inFamous and the original Uncharted to be two of my favorite games this generation (Resistance not so much, but I'll stick with the series regardless).
What I don't like is the hypocricy and double-standard of anything Halo related being criticized as "milking" a franchise when every publisher (in this particular instance, Sony) is far more guilty of "milking" than MS has been with Halo. There is a segment of the PS3 consumer base which has devolved to a rabid, unhealthy level where they are so insecure and threatened by any perceived attack on their console of choice that they lash out with personal attacks. Unlike guys like Waz, Wall, Top, Rider, etc. I have never launched personal attacks or cursed at them.
I've been a hardcore gamer long before either Sony or MS got into the industry and suspect I'll be one long after both of them are a footnote in gaming history. I call them like I see them, and I feel MS is deserving of the most praise this generation and Sony deserving of the most criticism this generation (both capable of my ire and commendation at various times though - neither is all good or all bad). Next gen may be entirely different!
What planet are you on? Seriously man; you need to get a grip. Microsoft or Sony do not give a dam about your praise or criticisms. However what is totally a disgrace is you trying to ram your opinions on the EDGE website. And your total disgrace is shown when you say Microsoft deserve the most praise this generation?
Actually just stop and think about that for a minute;
Right...the company that has provided hardware with the WORST hardware failure rate in the video-gaming history....wow something to be proud of?
Do you exactly want to state what they have done is so praise-worthy exactly? Again I think you do not have a clue what you are talking about at all and you are a disgrace to the gamer identity you associate yourself with. What a complete joke this guy is.
Did you just learn the word "disgrace" in your sixth grade class this week or was it on your word of the day calendar, WazWii? I'm hoping you don't know what the word actually means, because the alternative (that someone could be so delusional as to find a difference of opinion a disgrace) is far more frightening.
MS' innovations regarding online gaming, online marketplaces and actually engaging with developers to ask what they would like in the SDK's and future architecture are just a few things MS brought to the console space that neither Nintendo or Sony can lay claim to. Western developers finally have a receptive ear in the console industry and the entire industry has benefited from that.
You appear unable to grasp some pretty basic concepts regarding forums, but the entire point of their existence is for people to share their opinions and hopefully engage in civil debate. Not accepting that a company cannot be completely bad (as you believe MS is) or that someone can have a difference of opinion from the one you hold is the only disgraceful thing happening here. The Edge comments were much more interesting and offered far better debate before you showed up recently and started insulting anyone who didn't think Sony was the best thing since sliced bread.
Engaging with developers? Your proof? Everyone engages with developers. Microsoft had to improve their third party relationships to get a better grounding this generation. Nothing innovative about that at all. I guess what was innovative in a way was getting the MS cash-out however. Western developers finally have a receptive ear?
Uh? What planet are you on? Who actually gave rise to these third parties? Was is SEGA, Was it Nintendo? Nope if it was left to those companies they would have only concentrated on first parties and virtually formed an Oligopoly of our industry. It was the PlayStation that gave rise to the third parties. Microsoft merely are eating that cake that was created by the PS brand. Microsoft are not market creators; they are market takers; they lob cash at the problem and slowly infiltrate it with no long term strategic insight whatsoever. Sony still have excellent relationships with their developers; very few people come out criticizing them and their first parties could not be any happier.
I totally however except Microsoft and the Live equation. They did get their first (well there was the Dreamcast) and they have managed to polish the service well. And if it was not for Live it can be argued the PSN would not have seen the vast improvement it has seen in the last three years. But the future of gaming is online play? I truly doubt it; not in the traditional sense anyway.
Hopefully that gives you some food for thought.
Woah, PlayStation gave rise to the third parties?
Activision, U.S. Gold, Square, Taito, Midway, Codemasters, Ocean and EA all were successful well before the PlayStation came along.
Gabe Newell, John Carmack, Tim Sweeney and the doctor's at Bioware also stand in stark contrast to his assertions about the type of support and influence they have on SDK's/new architecture at Sony and Nintendo as compared to MS, as well as general development support (to be fair, most now say that Sony is starting to come around and is improving their support).
All are on record as having been approached by MS long before the 360 launched to help design the system (with Epic infamously costing MS an additional $1B because of their emphasis on having enough unified RAM). If you haven't seen the plethora of quotes from Western developers praising the level of support from MS in stark contrast to the cold shoulder both Sony and Nintendo greeted them with historically you haven't been paying attention.
Contrast this with Hirai's well-documented statement that he intentionally made the PS3 difficult for developers to work with. There's a very good reason we see far more Western console developers now than before MS entered the market.
To be honest the stories I have been reading is how people are well used to the PS3 architecture now and see no problems with it whatsoever. I rarely here these accusations you are chucking at Sony; they are few and far apart. Nevertheless those who want to accuse the PS3 of being difficult to program for will no doubt remember these few moments and somehow take it out of context and just bash the PS3 with. In reality though nothing could be farer from the truth.
As for your cold-shoulder hypothesis; it simply is not true. If Sony gives the cold-shoulder (let us assume for now); how do you explain games like LittleBigPlanet and Heavy Rain. Again ask the first parties that Sony works so closely with; they are full of praise. (hint: go to www.gamesindustry.biz) where 'proper' interviews are conducted. Sony are truly supportive when it comes to funding and supporting a unique innovative IP. It always has been the case with the PlayStation brand.
I do agree on one part though...Microsoft got to market first and thus it was a challenge (or should I say a task) getting up to speed on the PS3 only a year later; but once they took time to look at it there are no problems at all. So I refute your suggestions and illogical theories.
Don't feed the troll dude.
WazWii, seriously man, chill out. Microsoft has clearly made huge strides forward this generation (some reasons which Grognard has gone on to state above), and the failure rate doesn't take away from that. Sony conversely has made many a stumble, with THAT price point (and yes, I paid £425 on day one), subsequent removal of features, ill thought out motion control and the disaster that has been Home.
This doesn't mean that Microsoft is perfect, and Sony filled with idiots though. Microsoft has issues, such as the aforementioned failure rate, and Sony has been worthy of praise at times - bowing to consumer demand and introducing trophies for example, the continual work on the XMB.
Indeed, Microsoft has aped Sony in it's software line up. Singstar became Lips, Buzz! became Scene It and now EyeToy is turning into Natal.
Can you actually tell me about these 'strides'. You know I would like to know. I cannot believe how a true gamer for our industry; the love of this industry would accept such 'shoddy' hardware with unacceptable failure rates. I mean what kind of precedent does that set and what market signal does that actually send out?
You mention a few of Sony's problems; fair enough there have been problems. But it will come through these minor issues and will complete its objectives; i.e. offer quality titles, establish BD as a format and also give Sony a platform with the PSN. On these front it will/has been a success and I could not think of anyone reputing that in the slightest.
I think your last sentence is quite a good example of what I was saying above about innovation and Microsoft...but Microsoft and Innovation I guess takes us back to that Corporation as a whole and really let us keep the debate on the PS3 and the 360.
Putting online at the forefront of the console was a huge thing - the Xbox laid the groundwork, but without the success of the 360, I doubt that online would have been a big thing for Sony. It's become accepted enough to force Nintendo, who have been hugely resistant, into exploring the online space. I do think that Sony made a mistake with not putting a headset into the box though, that was a masterstroke on Microsofts part.
I'm not excusing the failure rates - for the record, I don't believe either Microsofts figures, or the figures collected in online polls, I think the real failure rate lies somewhere in between - and whilst they deserve condemnation for that, it shouldn't take away from the successes they have had.
You have just listed one success (which is a niche market anyway within the whole empire of video-games (hardware and software sales)). Neither will it represent the future of video-games in any massive innovative way such as revolutionary and innovative moments like the Nintendo Wii. I wonder care to suggest some other successes Microsoft has had? Or indeed what it has brought to gaming for that matter?
I'm not even talking specifically about online play. The universal user name and the integration of friends lists has been a big a part of the success as actual online play. Look at the amount of online 360's compared to the amount of online PS2's, it might be 'niche' as in an overall minority, but the difference between the situation in 2005 and the situation now with regards to online consoles is massive. Online connectivity is definitely the future of consoles (not just actual online play), whatever you may like to think.
Achievements are another great success that Microsoft has had, copied by Sony because it was a very good idea.
Online connectivity is a totally different thing to online gaming and is nothing new at all. Again you are talking about one aspect; I asked you to name another and why could you not? I leave that for you to decide. I really do not think Microsoft has brought anything decent to the video-games industry at all. And I kind of thing people will remember them for that; and it explains why they can never sell massive numbers of hardware or main in-roads into Japanese and European markets. Heck they are only now where they are by default; people saw the PS3 over priced refused to wait and just bought a 360 because it merely played most of the multi-platform games they wanted. Perspective is everything here.
Nothing new at all? What other console brought in online connectivity, with single user names and integrated friends lists?
In any case, you clearly missed the second bit I mentioned, namely achievements. I could go on to add XBLA as being a great success, but I get the feeling you'd dismiss that as well.
LOL; is that it? Is that what you will list when the history of video-gaming is written?
Nope what will be written is the company that introduced the true failure of the RROD. I did admit Live was very good and polished but what I made clear was it is no big deal in the grand scheme of things especially when the PSN relative is pretty much a very good service also. Not as good as Xbox live and Xbox Live got there first (is more polished etc etc) but the PSN is free as the counter argument. I just do not thing Xbox Live is all that innovative that is all; say as something compared to the PS1 and how that gave rise to a whole host of third party games and the PS2 which has massive success; introduced DVD playback into the equation and bought us massive franchise after franchise. A similar industry breakthrough is now being achieved by the DS and Wii. This is the stuff that will be remembered in the future I think.
I believe internet gaming i far more important to videogames than motion control. Motion control will pass, its a fad, a pretty lucrative fad but a fad one the less, it will still happen for the right game but it wont replace the controller.
Internet gaming, on the other hand is here to stay and will continue to grow and grow as broadband speeds improve more people will adopt it and maybe one day Live may even become FREE
I actually think there is a future with interactive interfaces and control systems....nevertheless the online connected computer will also be an important feature going forward; perhaps both will co-exist. Still the king will be software; making compelling software that people want to play i.e. Wii Fit; Wii Sports, Nintendogs, Super Mario Brothers etc etc. Probably not all that enticing to us core gamers but the future is around there for sure.
The difficult thing with the casual market is providing constant re-invention, gamers are happy to buy a sequel to a game that only really provides more of the same, levels, guns, cars, tracks etc etc.
I believe the casual market will take a bit more convincing to buy a game sequel, particularily when you consider how many wii consoles are sat collecting dust.
I agree with you that there is a future in a motion interface, as a more P.C based system ala minority report, but i dont think it will be around forever in gaming
I think as long as you give the casual market compelling software that is all that really matters. There is a lot of ground left in motion controls, after-all the Nintendo Wii is only the first. I doubt we will go back to a controller (the D-Pad) environment again to be honest. I was thinking also; I would not mind a 3D enabled game with a Motion Controller interface; LOL would be an interesting experience.
Who's labelling? Xbox has good franchises as does Sony, nobody can deny this so whats the point in this tit for tat nonsence. Is all I'm saying.
WazWii was labeling, not yourself. I'm actually agreeing with you.
Again, I stand corrected. Awefully sorry :D
No problem, I just wish we had more people who rejected the 'fanboy' arguments and just enjoyed playing games.