Talk:Resistance: Fall of Man

Cloven

The cloven should be added under the species list

What in the hell are Clovens anyway. Johnny542 20:39, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

The Cloven are not a form of Chimera. Therefore, they should not be included. A separate heading could be included though, but the little info we have is from the intel you pick up. Dboyz-x.etown 08:13, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Could the X-Rays be a part of the The Cloven? 24.127.4.36 23:27, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

In the section where you get the the sniper rifle for the first time, one of the solders screams out "are the blokes on black on our side?" could that be a refrence to the Cloven? There occasionally dead bodies in black hidden in the game, mostly recognised for having morse code blaring from their radios.User:Guru Larry

"are the blokes on black on our side?" I think this is to do with the black ops that pick you up at the end of the game.User:Ackers

Ah, cool, So infact you never actually get to see the Cloven in the game, just writings about them in the journal enteries? user:Guru Larry

The blokes in black are part of the US forces. The helicopter thing they come out of at the end of the game has US markings on the side —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 218.215.194.238 (talk • contribs).

Yep, you never get to see them but i have a feeling they will be in the sequel and another thing is that from my discovery's (looking in a lot of forums) they injected you with some sort of vaccine (or something) against the virus and monitor you all the way through the game! The morse code you hear in every pause screen in every different level of the game is the black ops that are monitoring you sending secret messages back to base to update them on your progress.user:Ackers

the other guy was right- those guys in black (no doubt the 'X-rays') must be US agents, because everything they own has that weird star symbol thing on it, not just the chopper at the end of the game. i'm also sure that the x-rays and the cloven are different things- after all, the x-ray transmissions are in english, arent they? exactly Tryzon 14:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone think that the x-rays will be enemies in RFOM 2? Grayjack 15:42, 11 July 2007 (UTC)Grayjack

I don't think the X-Rays will be the enemies in the Resistance sequel. Like they said, the X-Rays are most probably Americans and not Cloven. First because of the unlockable skin in multiplayer and second because if they were Cloven, they wouldn't need the protection against infection as they would have been proven to have a resistance to it not unlike Hale's. Plus, they are described as Russian maniacs in intel reports. user:SDBR39952

Title

I noticed Sixteen Left removed my explaination of the title. I understand his reasoning for not putting it in the main article, but I still want to include it, so I'm putting it here, on the Talk Page.

Note: "I-8" will probably not be the real title of the game. "I-8" is probably just Insomniac's way of saying that this is Insomniac's 8th project. However, from their list of games here, it will most likely be their 9th game released after Ratchet: Deadlocked. Perhaps they started work on it before Ratchet: Deadlocked - that's why it's "I-8" and not "I-9." -Hyad 3 July 2005 02:34 (UTC)

CPU Usage Confirmed Unoffically in Interview

A interview with Ted Price confirmed that 1 PPE was used for the majority of the mathematical computer eqasions. One SPE was used for artifical intellegence on both sides while a second SPE was used for both ragdoll physics and explosions. Renegadeviking 12/24/06 12:08PM (CST)

The game has been rated M

Read this inview that i found on gamespot.

http://www.gamespot.com/pages/unions/read_article.php?topic_id=24679070&union_id=891

Sloud we edit it or not ?

-Ratchetcomand 30 Augest 2006 02:34 (UTC)

No. Your article even says it's not official yet. --HQ 00:29, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

On the official site it says the Russian revolution never occured, because the tzar stopped it , maybe this should be included in the settting? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.105.29.94 (talk • contribs) .

A lot of things on the official site should be added. The defeat of the Bolsheviks is definitely one of them. Someone is going to have to rewrite the story and setting sections, because I can not word things well. --HQ 01:41, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Hedgehog

"the Hedgehog, much like it name implies, will float up and launch many spikes into anything around it."

This really made me laugh. Does the name hedgehog imply floating up and launching spikes? I've never seen a hedgehog do that! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by OAP boba (talk • contribs) .

That's what I meant when I said I can't word things well. --HQ 01:29, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

It was obvious what you meant, but quite funny when taken literally. I've reworded it...is that better? OAP boba 08:23, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Much. --HQ 21:36, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Enemies

Enemies are supposed to be smarter in this game capible of weighing options. focusing more on innate behaviors then flat out scripting, no 2 battles are supposedly repeated.

The Chimara types (Leapers, Hybrids, Howlers, ect..) also include different "personalities" you can say. The Leapers being more animalistic (and my guess focus more on swarming you), where "Menials" are more zombie-ish, slow, and try to grab you to bite you. and Howlers(those big dog-like creatures) will try more to leap up and pin you down (like a dog) and bite you.

Someone needs to make a list of the various Chimera (it's just weird that there's weapons but not enemies). ListedRenegade 15:59, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

well as you can see I started to already so lets continue to add on.

Leapers- Leapers are your basic weak Chimera. takes little damage to kill them but they often appear in swarms.

Howlers- sorta like a man-sized dog. they are big and mean and my guess strong.

Menials- these are the pushovers. they are genrally not fighters just movers. they are slow and easy targets.

Slip-skulls- These are the guys you see in the pictures as the ones on the walls they are pretty ugly but they can climb up walls and jump across to other walls. they are armed with the Reaper.

Grey Jacks- they are the tall skinny things that you see in the pictures strangling your comrades! they look a bit on the slow side but have longer melee range than most others. also said to be able to rip a human in two with ease.

Chimera Hybrids- These guys are the guys you see in just about every picture! very ugly but genrally very dangerous beings. these guys use guns. not just any guns but the same guns as you! so watch out these guys will kill you if given the chance. (just like everything else!)

these guys come in different looks. From a full face view of them to a combat mask. They are also a playable creature in multiplayer. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Konfusedkat (talk • contribs) .

aside from the regular hybrids theres also Chimera Elite, robo, and huge forms of these so watch out for them.

Widow Makers- these are big spider-like creatures that blast out the sapper shots from their mouths. they also use theres feet and teeth.

Stalkers- yes these to are enemies. they are the big robotic forms of stalkers. they have one known weakness. the back of the head.

Angels: The leaders of the chimera. They command all other forms with telepathyPyrofan1 01:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Titan: Big guys that carry large gunsPyrofan1 01:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Advanced Hybrids: Guard important buildings and carry bullseye mark IIPyrofan1 01:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC) Roller: adult leaperPyrofan1 01:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Carries: Carries humans to conversion centersPyrofan1 01:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Crawlers: infect humans with the virusPyrofan1 01:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Hardfang: An aggressive hybrid that results from a shewed conversion processPyrofan1 01:22, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

IGN Review is Up

I'll add the link to it.

http://ps3.ign.com/articles/745/745206p1.html Arctic-Editor 16:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Didn't check references. Someone made it before me. ;) Arctic-Editor 16:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Air Fuel Grenade?

It seems to me that the section on the "Air Fuel Grenade" is a little confusing. I assume that it's some kind of thermobaric (or "fuel air" weapon) but I wanted to check before editing if "air fuel" has some other meaning that I don't know of. RWyn 18:09, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

That's definitely what it is. Reword it as you see it necessary. --HQ 21:45, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I've added a link to Thermobaric weapon and added some stuff about the similarity to Halo's plasma grenade. I got my information from any third-party sources I could find using Google, so please change it back if I messed up. RWyn 00:42, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Chimera Theory

I'm not really familiar with this game and saw someone edit the article and add all of the below text, so I reverted the article and moved the text here in case anyone needs it. Bgold4 15:50, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

This part is a theory on what the Chimera are. (Written by someone different from above)

I'm using facts from the cutscenes and snippits of info from the Resistance: Fall of Man Website.

Did you notice the armor the guys were wearing was very anti-chimera? There's no skin exposed for crawlers to bite, and the masks provide seperate air from any airborne biological weapons. Also, the US army symbol is on their arms. I think that the Chimera were an American Biological Weapon. The Americans (in the game) released the virus into Russia, where they wanted to see what it was capable of. See, Russia was sealed off at the time, and the Iron Curtain was supposedly Impregnable. The Virus infected the russians for the better part of the Decade, then it breaks across the Iron Curtain. Europe falls to the Chimera, and the USA collects data on it. How? By being the Cloven (The President in the Game, is acting Like a dictator. He probably made the virus as a weapon to attack the rest of the world or something) Then The Chimera manage to get across to Britain, and somehow, someway, manage to capture a angel. (Chimera Leader) The US wants one so they can study it and presumeably and find a way to control the Chimera. SO they agree to send some soldiers and pretend to help, so they can get the angel. Also, sending more people to be infected helps them find a way to have a cure for the virus. In the website, it says there are camps across the US for XXXXXXXX. I think those are chimera research centers. So after the game ends, the US gets a bunch of New tech from the Smart Chimera Virus, and it gets chimera infected subjects to study, with one (Nathan Hale) Still being alive. That's why they found him so quickly, so they could study him.

• My theory on the Chimera is that they came to earth (regardless of the previous alternate history) as a result of the Tunguska event, which was in 1908; if you pay attention to the cutscenes and maps that show the spread and supposed epicenter of the Chimera takeover of Russia, they correspond well with where this event occurred. As for the timing and growth (again shown through cutscenes), one could say that it took a couple decades for the Chimera virus to convert mass on earth into machinery to convert humans to Chimera, at which point it could exponentially grow so that by the 1930s it would have forces to start taking over small villages and so on. As to what Chimera is, I think it's artificial virus meant for the equivalent of terraforming planets buy only by converting the native species into something it can use. --Masem 17:32, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I think they are genectically engineered mutants or just mutants like it says in their Chimera Wikipedia article. If they were aliens, they would have had enough technology to take over the whole world...not the entire contienents of Europe and Asia. Instead they could be, like the article says, a mutant race created by the bio-weapon known as the Chimera virus and when they evolved into a entire military race and gain enough intelligence, they used the technology they created to conquer the contienents. If they had even more advanced technology like hover-crafts or flying spaceships, they would have conquered the entire world in the time they first appeared. Instead they have still-advanced items like the Goliaths and Burrowers to take over at least parts of Asia and Europe, I think thats how the Chimera got into Britain. This is my theroy and what I think the Chimera are. Johnny542 05:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

The Alien theory has the most credible support behind it as it has a strong precceeding event to cause it to happen. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 164.116.71.226 (talk • contribs).

Wikipedia is not a place for speculation like this. Also Cloven speak Russian so they are not American

Tunguska event fits the initial outbreak of the Chimera and their spread across Europe, but remember those towers they excavate? It's less simple than aliens carried to earth by a meteoroid.

I have been informed by a strong source at Insomniac(Who's name i cannot disclose) that the Chimera came to earth by crash landing millions of years ago, hence killing the dinosaurs, then they built their towers and hid their weapons and left. Then in 1908 they crash landed again, this was the Tunguska event, and began excavating their towers, facilities and weapons to take over the world.-- conorsykes@hotmail.co.uk, PSN: Syko_CoNoR Conor Sykes (talk) 19:43, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Regardless of any of these theories, there certainly will be a lot of things needing to be explained about the Chimera in Resistance 2. And as well as that the cloven, black opps. And particuarly if all that weird morse code and freaky fuzzy radio messaging you hear all over the place are the black opps watching you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.137.79.174 (talk) 05:37, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Use of Future Tense

I was looking through the article, and in some cases — most notably in the "Multiplayer" section — the future tense is used when talking about the game, even though it was a launch title (in other words, it was released on November 17, 2006 in the U.S.). An example: “Insomniac Games is currently planning to utilize the Playstation 3’s online service...” I figured we should change this to the present tense, because the game has already been released (something like “Insomniac Games utilizes the PlayStation 3’s online service...”). I figured this would be pretty uncontroversial, but I thought I’d ask anyway. —BrOnXbOmBr21 06:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

yeah change the tense if you want. I wont because im too lazy. Dappled Sage 01:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Resistance: Fall of Man 2

Well think about it in the game you only liberate England not Europe or Russia so maybe a couple more games to explain where the Chimera came from or where they get their tech (such as the metal towers and stalkers).Sam ov the blue sand 03:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah that would be cool if a sequel is made. Like you said only Britain was liberated and not Europe and Asia and there isn't much about where the Chimera came from or what in the hell they are. Johnny542 13:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Getting too FAQish...

The weapons section is rather text heavy and a lot of the information seems to be edging more on a game faq or walkthough as opposed to a WP article. There should probably be some significant cutting of information here.--Masem 00:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

All that info is in the game and so should be put in the article.Sam ov the blue sand 02:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Just because it's in the game and fully verifiable from game sources, full weapon lists are strongly discouraged - that's information for a FAQ (See WP:NOT#IINFO). Also see what is currently topic #7 in [[1]] regardines "Lists of X/Y/Z...". Same with the vehicle lists, particularly since there's only one vehicle the player can actually use. The only list that should be on the page is the major characters/species. The weapons section should be reduced down to something along the lines "The game features weapons both of human construction circa 1950, weapons created by the Chimera, and versions of Chimera weapons reverse-engineered by human forces." and then maybe a brief example or two (like the Auger). Anything more on this and we're just describing material that should be in a game faq and becomes listcruft. --Masem 14:53, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Recent spat of vandalism

Anyone know why R:FoM is seemingly getting a lot of vandalism? Is there some weird meme or the like that's encouraging people to do this? Or just anti-PS3 people or others just being stupid? --Masem 23:54, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Just revert and wait until someone can block him.Sam ov the blue sand 02:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

I know what you mean, there seems to be a lot of vandilism of the X-Ray Agents stuff. I am not sure if this information is right but if it isn't, it should be changed. Johnny542 13:48, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

The X-Ray stuff is right but you need to tell which missions they come from.Sam ov the blue sand 03:30, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I think the X-ray stuff is more because, unless you access the Morse code stuff, it's not apparent or official literature for the game, and thus up for debate and frequent changes. I was talking more about the people that are added "THIS GAME SUCKS" type stuff. --Masem 04:11, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Historical Inaccuracy...

I was wondering if we could post a little critique subsection regarding any possible inaccuracies within the game's alternate history. For example, FDR was elected primarily because of the troubles of Great Depression, which did not occur in the Resistance timeline. Franck Drake 14:42, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

It's an alternate history. Things that didn't happen in real life are to be expected. --HQ 02:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

How did the US Rangers come around? They were created in World War Two, being trained by British Commandos. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.23.134.118 (talk • contribs).

Where did all the alternate history come from?Grayjack 02:38, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Grayjack

Um...it's a game...--Eloc 08:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

there are a lot of untied knots in the game, this being one of them. We'll just have to wait till' Dawn of Fate. Machine758 20:49, 13 September 2007 (UTC)Machine758

It's all well and good to say it's just a game, but there are certain things that don't make sense since their stories aren't covered in the game, like FDR, like the Rangers. For me, it's how they still referred to the Russians with the "Red" moniker (Red Curtain for example) when it's stated that Lenin and his red revolution was quashed. Since the White (the Tzar's army) defeated the Reds (Lenin and he Bolsheviks) in this timeline, referring to Russia makes no sense, and saying "oh, because ITS A GAME!!!" makes even less sense. (Bobbo9000121.45.188.152 (talk) 10:44, 6 July 2008 (UTC))

Sequel

Section was blanked. Couldn't figure out who did it. Should we restore it? -NordsternMN 20:33, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

It should be restored as long as the info was true.Grayjack 02:18, 5 August 2007 (UTC)Grayjack

Date Inaccuracy?

The article states that this game was released in the US on November 14, 2006. However, the PS3 didn't come out until Nov. 17. Is the release date in error?J.delanoy 00:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

No, it isn't. A few PS3 games were indeed released on the 14th, Resistance being one of them. --HQ 00:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

PS3 Haters Comment

Some PS3 hating, xbox loving vandal said this game was a poor man gears of war, so I removed it.

If it is a poor man's Gears of War than why is the PS3 $600 and the 360 is either $400 or $480 so I guess you could say that Gears of War is a poor mans Resistance. I'm just commenting, I found that funny.Sam ov the blue sand 14:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

But you still don't put that in the article. Machine758 18:57, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Spoiler warning?

Shouldn't the story section have a spoiler warning? Perhaps somewhere before it is revealed what the British 'secret weapon' is, and at least before the ending scene is described? (I've taken the liberty of tagging the 'plot synopsis' section btw) --Lemi4 13:53, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Based the new policy on spoilers per WP:SPOILER, sections marked "Plot" or "Story" carry an implicit spoiler tag. Thus, spoiler warnings are redundant. (There probably was a spoiler warning there a while ago, but there's a huge effort to remove unneeded spoiler tags.) --Masem 14:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

One has popped up again, killing it with fire. WP:SPOILER clearly states that a section called "Plot" or "Story" needs no spoiler tag. Please do not add it again. Goldfritter 11:44, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Church of England controversy

I found this amusing; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/6736809.stm might be worth noting. --Caiman 13:39, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm making some small changes to this section. Comments will be most welcome. The major change is to take "Church of England" out of the dispute - it is Manchester Cathedral, a different body.

CoE section neutrality

I've added Sony's statements on the matter. Can the neutrality dispute tag be removed now? --GracieLizzie 17:50, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

I would say it is ; most of the section is direct quotes from both sides so there's no WP editor bias in it. I'm sure there'll be more Monday too. --Masem 18:18, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Screen shot of Cathedral scene would be helpful

If anyone who has the game could provide a screenshot of the battle in the Cathedral that would be helpful for the article. Perferrably not only would it have some easily identifible Church image, such as stained glass or a cross or something, but it really should also contain a pic of whichever alien beasty that your doing battle with in there.

I've heard a couple interviews with the Dean of the Cathedral and no one as of yet has asked him if he's saying that the Church would side with flesh eating aliens if it suddenly found itself transported to this fictional reality. Is he suggesting Jesus loves Slipskulls and Greyjacks? I don't have a PS3 but I'm tired of videogame haters going off without even looking at the product. So someone please post a pic of you battling a fanged nightmare inside the Cathedral.

--Wowaconia 04:34, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Game sales topple 2 million?

Use this source for whatever you like.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8PPE8KG0&show_article=1

1. It claims that Sony has apologized for the Cathedral scandral, and other info

2. The article claims that Resistance has sold more than 2 million units worldwide.

I'm putting the source up for grabs. Use it for what you want.

7FlushSetzer 01:10, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

In the Jan. 17, 2008 Insomniac podcast, they mention that the game has sold over 2 Million copies while interviewing a Bungie rep. Evilkeen (talk) 23:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Controversy with Manchester Cathedral, England

I think it should have its own article this article is about the game not the controversy. Sam ov the blue sand 19:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I would say that if there's no further developments in the next week, that can be significantly reduced in size and kept on this page - the "event" is not sufficient to merit its own page, but it is too much post-fallout of the event on the page. --Masem 19:37, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

This is supposed to be an encyclopedia. When all is said and done, the most encyclopedic information about the game are the fact that it was a PS3 launch title and the furore it has created. All this stuff about the monsters and the plot is very interesting to fans and gamers, I'm sure, but it is those two things that are about how the game affected the wider world around it. Yes, some of the material could do with pruning, but the controversy is and should be an integral part of any article about this game that aims to be encyclopedic. GDallimore (Talk) 12:54, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

We've yet to see how 'important' this event is. If the end result is that any game developer that wants to use a public place in a game has to seek permission, this is a ground breaking event at which point it likely will merit its own page. If the end result is that the CoE gets a couple million from Sony and that's it, it's not significant and more a footnote to it's release; as such I would treat it like the "Controversy" section over at Bully.

Problem is right now, there's not enough information and the story isn't definitely over. Thus, we keep the full blown details on the main page, but after a week or more, if no other major news breaks about it, I would consider reducing much of the language to key sound bites but certainly keeping a portion of it on the page. This falls under What WP is Not. --Masem 13:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

That bully article looks pretty good to me, and the controversy section is about a quarter of its total length, which seems appropriate too. Agreed that all this needs revisiting once the final curtain has fallen. GDallimore (Talk) 14:24, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Rating for UK?

The rating section lists PEGI's rating as 18+, however I could've sworn at one point that Playstation Network listed it as 16+. Has the rating been raised recently? Also, should we list that the BBFC has a 15 on the game box? 82.41.128.207 22:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

The game has a PEGI rating of 18+. The BBFC only have stuff like that on boxes if the game contains cinematic content. Like Destroy All Humans! 1. Machine758 18:56, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Co-op

Is it 2 player co-op or 4 player co-op.Sam ov the blue sand 00:19, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

2 player co-op only. 4 players offline and 40 players online. --SDBR39952

Thank you now I see there's no point in buying another 2 controllers.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 22:18, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

It's 2-player co-op, 4-player offline multiplayer. Scarslasher (talk) 01:48, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Note on alternative history stuff

Generally, game article plots (particularly for FPS as opposed to RPGs) should not be excessive. The alternate history stuff was good, but for an encyclopedia article about the game, it borders on being too much, yet the fact that much of it can be wikilinked in sorta makes me think that it may make for a good secondary article "Alternate History of the Resistance series" (presuming that more will be learned in R2). So I've "cut" out most of it (the original stuff is there in html comment) and reduced that down to "ok, russia shuts down, no WWII, and then suddenly, there's the chimera" which is the most basic stuff needed to understand the alternate history as it pertains to the game itself. --Masem 17:08, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Where did all of the alternative history come from?Grayjack 15:39, 11 July 2007 (UTC)Grayjack

• From the official Resistance website, which has an entire timeline going back to 1898, giving the backstory for the game. I agree, the series has a pretty in-depth storyline which a lot of thought has gone into, and an article covering the alternate history of the series (including events from the game itself, and the Map Pack 1, which according to the website takes place after the main game) would be good. I'd be prepared to write it as I've finished the game and feel pretty knowledgeable about the subject matter. --Bohrok Awakener 18:24, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Media bias

I think mention should be made of the fact that most mainstream British news sources claim that gang(?) shootouts take place within the cathedral, despite no such events taking place in-game.

I don't think it deserves input into the article, but maybe the subject matter of the game was inapropriate. Who knows? Machine758 17:17, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Game Engine?

This info is usually put into the infobox at the top right, but in this case, I don't believe this is a licensed engine or the like (similar to Unreal 3 or Havok) so there's no information about it. --Masem 20:23, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

It's a very heavily modified Ratchet & Clank/Jak & Daxter engine. Machine758 18:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Current event template

Is the dispute with the Church of England still going on? I'm asking this because I haven't seen anything of it in the news and hte section hasn't changed in a while. If the event has ended, the template should be removed. Looneyman 14:36, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Sopny has officially apologised but the original demand of banning the game has not been fulfilled (obviously). I'm unawares of what status that leaves the case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Machine758 (talk • contribs) 17:14, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Resistance film

Whats the source for this? No source is given in the article and there is nothing mentioned on the Michael Bay article... sounds like a hopeful fan's dream, TBH. Bohrok Awakener 13:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Please answer ASAP

Is there a way to turn off the cursing without the mute button ? If I were to turn of the blood on the game menu would this also turn of the language. Answer ASAP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.6.37.146 (talk) 22:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Uh there is no way to turn off the cursing, sorry.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 21:50, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Thnx, oh well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.6.37.146 (talk) 02:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

How much do they curse, what words do they use and how often? I need to know this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.6.37.146 (talk) 21:33, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

shit, screw, crap, damn, and a couple of times, fuck.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 00:17, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again, that's not to bad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.6.37.146 (talk) 05:40, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

It is a Mature game though, you should expect that kinda stuff. :) Machine758 20:57, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Its pretty well concealed, generally to hear it you need to hang around people who are talking for a fair while to hear any swearing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.216.35.159 (talk) 09:10, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I remember Killzone, with one bit where the guy keeps on saying die mother f***ers and for some reason he kept on repeating it every 5 seconds(mabye my ps2 was getting too hot) . :) User:dd3 20:57, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Dead Bodies

when you kill somone, do the bodies dissapear or stay there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.6.37.146 (talk) 20:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

I believe that the body will stay where it is... But I'm not 100% sure. Dan 00:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

If the bodies disappear, they will at least remain visible for a ridiculously long time. --HQ 00:42, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Rumble

Given this game is disc-based, how will it be updated with rumble? Will there be a new file on the hard drive that will recognise when the game is loaded and run alongside? 86.17.211.191 00:27, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's exactly what happens. This will tell you more. Machine758 20:56, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Sequel

Exactly how much has been confirmed about this sequel byond that it will happen? --HQ 19:57, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

that it's been confirmed, and that certain parts have been revealed.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 01:46, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Gamespot tournament

Shouldn't we add that, I mean it seems notable enough, we would have several 3rd and 2ndary sources.Sam ov the blue sand, Editor Review 03:01, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Awards & Reviews infobox

I replaced the template that was used for the review ratings with what I found to be a more recent template. This fixed the quote from the Church controversy was misplaced. I also incorporated the awards won by this game into that template and removed that list from the text body. I think it looks better. Hopefully others agree. will381796 (talk) 17:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Locked sections at us.playstation.com/resistance

On Sony's official Resistance website ([2]), there is a map/timeline detailing the fictional history of the game. However, there are two red points on the map which are marked as "locked" events (located in Alaska and California). I know this isn't a discussion forum for discussing the game, but I'm wondering if anyone know how to access these two locked events? It seems like it wants some sort of password... I'm asking because I'm currently construcing a Resistance Wikia that could benefit greatly from this information. Thanks. --Bohrok Awakener (talk) 17:47, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

there is a thread at myresistance.net under the world of resistance that covers those passwords and the chimera timeline. I'll check for it.. --FyiFoff —Preceding unsigned comment added by FyiFoff (talk • contribs) 16:56, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

2 passwords "frozen fortress" and "several concerns" FyiFoff (talk  —Preceding comment was added at 14:49, 29 June 2008 (UTC) 

Guinness

A part of the article, labeled Guinness, is not only a small section which in my opinion is unworthy of a titlehead, but is also inappropriately placed. This needs to be moved from the "story" section to the "critical reception" section. However my attempts to move it were immediately reversed. In order to avoid an editing war, what is everyone's thoughts on the subject? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rucha58 (talk • contribs) 02:37, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

I was trying to remove it, not move it to a new location. Sorry about that. But, anyway, I removed it because it's un-sourced and sounds pretty fake to me. If you find a reference for it, I'd put it in the intro paragraph.--Koji†Dude ^(C) 02:42, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Other Systems

Will It Come Out On Other Systems?Peace out (talk) 19:03, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Simply, NO! they'll state this repeatly on their myresistance.net forums. They program sololy for one platform. --FyiFoff —Preceding unsigned comment added by FyiFoff (talk • contribs) 16:58, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Suggestions

Just some comments before you get a GA review.

• The reception section is way short, especially considering the number of reviews in the reviewbox. Incidentally, all those need references (in said reviewbox).
• No development information?
• References need formatting - publishers, access dates.
• Ref 3 and 4 - are either of those sources reliable?

giggy _(:O) 09:39, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Resistance: Fall of Man/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Sorry, but I am failing this article for GAN, primarily because the article is severely under-referenced. Essentially, all of the information provided in the article should be referenced, except for the Plot (even that can be referenced, however, and it would be appreciated). For instance, Gameplay, an important section, is completely unreferenced. Sections such as "Multiplayer" is too verbose for an encyclopedic article that is aimed towards a general, non-gamer audience. Please look at articles such as Halo 3 and Call of Duty 4 for ideas on how to better organize the information. Gary King (talk) 01:52, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Platoon reference?

Could the end of Resistance be possibly based of the end of the movie Platoon? --Seb0910 (talk) 01:38, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Controversy over the use of Manchester Cathedral in Resistance: Fall of Man into Resistance: Fall of Man#Manchester Cathedral controversy

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Electing to close this discussion as merge, as aside from myself, the result has been unanimous and the discussion has been open for nearly a month now. At the very least, the result changing would require a significant sharp turn in the consensus to even reach a no consensus result. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 20:30, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

---

The main game's article is still fairly short and there is easily space for an explanation of the controversy. Most of the controversy article restates things that are already in the game's article. The church's case was ultimately completely groundless, did not affect game sales, and in fact assisted the church in raising tourism money, so it was a nothingburger. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:30, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose. Besides size, nothing of what you're arguing is really an argument for merging. For example, No Russian - the controversy is largely caused by an abundance of misinformation, ie groundless. Hot Coffee incident was also groundless, and yet that was a huge controversy about the best-selling GTA at the time. The No Russian controversy also didn't hurt sales. The reception also has the developer acknowledge the controversy, and has Sony declaring that the series would not have cathedrals in future entries. It also resulted in the Church of England creating new guidelines on how their holy grounds could be depicted in media. The fact that the controversy was a boon for the cathedral is also not relevant to notability - it seems like you have beef with the cathedral for making a stink about this! These arguments you're making don't appear to be guided on any guidelines or policies, as they don't have anything to do with what determines notability. Now, as far as the main article goes, the main article isn't short because it lacks a robust controversy section, it's short because the article is overall undeveloped, which would not really be fixed by it being merged back into it. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 12:17, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

What really amazes me about the article is that it doesn't even show Manchester Cathedral was used ingame. The comparison image looks nothing alike, and was solely a matter of coincidence. While Sony pledged not to use that specific cathedral in future games, they never admitted to actually using it in the game, saying it was a generic cathedral. If one were not being generous, they could call it a work of pure misinformation. Such an article needs drastic paring down to reduce it to the sole facts of the situation - people confused it for a certain church, and Sony apologized to make them feel better. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:27, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

What you're proposing is using your own personal original research. I suggest you familiarize yourself WP:OR. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 12:32, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

I am not conducting original research, I can quote the article on this. On 15 June 2007, Sony issued the following statement: "We do not accept that there is any connection between contemporary issues of 21st century Manchester and a work of science fiction in which a fictitious 1950s Britain is under attack by aliens. It is not our intention to cause offence by using a representation of Manchester Cathedral in chapter eight of the work. If we have done so we sincerely apologise." Emphasis on "if". They did not admit to using Manchester Cathedral at all, so the entire foundation of the article is faulty - based entirely on a coincidental occurrence or rumor. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:36, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

An involved party disputing the claims against it is not sufficient to demonstrate that the claim is untrue. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 12:38, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

...Actually re-reading that, Zx, what the heck? They literally said that they used a representation of Manchester Cathedral in the quote you posted. The "if" is clearly referring to "causing offense." - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 12:45, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Well, ultimately, the statement is very vague in how it can be interpreted. It can be seen as saying "we did not mean to cause offense", or "we did not mean to cause offense, or include a hypothetical representation of the cathedral". For the most part, the sources state the resemblance was "alleged", without a single source actually outright stating the two looked the same. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:48, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

"A source that says they look the same" is not a standard that needs to be reached, most if not all sources included in the article do not even question whether it's a depiction of the cathedral. Going off of a possible interpretation of a quote from Sony is bordering on OR, and I absolutely reject the notion that we should give that notion that Sony denied the similarities. The only thing that should be done with the quote is provide it to readers and allow them to interpret it as they feel appropriate. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 12:53, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Also, another argument you made was that "most" of the article is a restatement of content in the main article. However, I'm not finding that to be true at all. In fact, only a couple paragraphs seem to be covered. What are you referring to? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 13:00, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

I meant that if you remove the restatements about the game, as well as the back and forth "he said, she said" that characterizes the rest of the article and focus on the facts, there would be very little left. In any case, I think it's clear we both have our views about it that will never change, so it's probably pointless to continue debating in this way. I will wait to see what others believe about whether it is undue. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:01, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

I mean, stating "it's mostly restatements of the article" doesn't really infer "as long as you remove content that got significant coverage in mainstream and gaming press." - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 15:54, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

This article just looks...unnecessary. Many of the paragraphs just look overblown, over-relying on quotes seemingly to pad it out. I'd support a Merge, with some of the content able to add to areas of the main article that are lacking. --ProtoDrake (talk) 15:59, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

@ProtoDrake: I also just expanded the main game's article section to a size I believe isn't undue. I think it shows it can be merged into a far smaller section while communicating largely the same information. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:19, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Merge I think this controversy could probably be covered by 1 or 2 paragraphs in the article, maybe 3 at the most. This is barely notable outside of the context of the game. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:32, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

• Merge I think WP:NOTNEWS applies here. Nearly two decades on, it doesn't seem that the controversy is of lasting significance in the same way the Hot Coffee (minigame) was for instance that would justify its status as a separate article. Hemiauchenia (talk) 21:32, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
• Merge. I think the relevant policy here is DUE/UNDUE weight. Relative to the coverage of the game as a whole, this controversy is given far too many words and is disproportionate as a fraction of total coverage. There's also the issue of WP:POVFORK, which is magnified since the article has the word "controversy" in the title (which is discouraged by WP:CSECTION). It is exceptionally difficult to maintain NPOV between and within both the original article and the split article when the split is about a controversy. Controversies demand context or they lose perspective in the re/telling. Merging will aid in that proper context and perspective. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:43, 15 May 2023 (UTC)
• Merge - Not sure why this would be a separate articles. WP:CSECTION discourages dedicated sections like this, let alone entire articles. And adding the two articles together in their entirety still falls well within SIZESPLIT standards. Sergecross73 msg me 00:17, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
• Merge doesn't need to be forked from the main article; proper summary style would make it easy enough to include the germane facts here. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 01:00, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Resistance: Jinrui Botsuraku no Hi" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Resistance: Jinrui Botsuraku no Hi has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 5 § Resistance: Jinrui Botsuraku no Hi until a consensus is reached. ArcticSeeress (talk) 16:29, 5 October 2023 (UTC)