Early Killzone 2 Reviews Looking Good 140
Reviews are beginning to appear for Guerrilla Games' upcoming first-person shooter, Killzone 2, a PS3 exclusive that has received a great deal of hype over the past several months. The reviews are mostly complimentary, but not overwhelmingly so; Ars Technica says it has "some of the best graphics yet seen on the PS3," and is a "solid take on the war-gaming genre." They also acknowledge that this is the latest game being held up as a standard for how good PS3 games can be, though the PS3 may not need such validation anymore. Edge Magazine is critical of the story, saying, "you could play the levels in random order to little ill-effect," but found the gameplay redeeming enough to warrant a 7/10. Concerns were raised early about the quality of the controls, but Guerrilla Games has affirmed that no changes will be made. Though the game won't be out for about a week yet, rumors of some fairly typical DLC plans are already cropping up. Giant Bomb recorded some video showcasing Killzone 2's multiplayer a while back.
Early? (Score:5, Insightful)
Early reviews? Scores have been pouring in for weeks! The game has received more than two dozen reviews from numerous sources, the vast majority of which have been unanimous in their praise of the game. The only blips have been EDGE (a magazine which has been going rapidly downhill for the past few years) and Maxim's review, which scored less than 50 Cent: Blood on the Sand. There again, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
Having played the demo and watched all the gameplay videos, I'm confident my pre-order decision was a good one (£30 off Play.com, so it's not exactly breaking the bank).
The only downer I felt was that the original cast members from the first game, Templer, Lugar, etc., are not the lead characters in this sequel. I'm not even sure if any of them feature at all, apart from an odd cutscene here and there. A shame, really. Sometimes I think video game writers and designers need to consider that games like Killzone should care more about what happens to these characters as they fight this war. They don't have to be the most overly developed of characters, but at least it would allow the player to build an affinity with them, be more drawn into the story, and therefore enjoy the game on another level. (rant over - sorry)
Re: (Score:1)
I wouldn't piss on Sony if they were on fire.
Re: (Score:2)
That's understandable.
It's much smarter to *stomp* fires out or smother them.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The first game was not a major title. It can safely be said that most people who buy Killzone 2 will probably have never played the first game. From a writers perspective, this is man from heaven. They don't have to worry about the dreaded continuity.
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
From a writers perspective, this is man from heaven.
I don't know whether to make a gay joke or a jesus joke, so I'll settle for a meta-joke.
Story should be about why things happen (Score:2)
I think a story in a shooter in particular is really necessary because otherwise the game will become boring pretty quickly and the player will start wondering why s/he has to go there and click button X, why object O is at spot Y etc. A story gives meaning to all that, and the player thus is able to accept why things happen the way they did and why the environments/objects are the way they are. If you for example played Gears of war 1, there are numerous moments where you simply wonder why you're there, wh
Re: (Score:1)
I disagree. The story tends to provide some extra variety but it's by no means essential (Doom and Quake pretty much had a story that consisted of "Evil guys appear. You're a lone soldier. Go kill them and save the world."). Story can make similar situations seem different by changing the underlying motivation or providing interesting cutscenes but in the end you're shooting enemies because if you don't they'll kill you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Early? (Score:5, Informative)
EDGE (a magazine which has been going rapidly downhill for the past few years)
Personally, I wouldn't agree with that. Edge provides solid reviews, and they actually use the full review spectrum (i.e. if a game's crap, it gets a 1 or 2, not a negative write up and a 6)
While Edge is sorely missing someone of the calibre of Mr Biffo in their columns section, and their gaming comic, Crashlander is trash, they're the only review that I (as a dev in the industry) actually want to read (although Eurogamer's reviews are starting to become equally as credible, although sometimes they're still a little too easily distracted)
Having read the review in question, I can also understand exactly why it is lower than the average. The game seems to be competant and pretty, but not anything 'great' in terms of gameplay or pushing the FPS genre forward. Which sounds like 7/10 to me.
Re: (Score:2)
I still subscribe to EDGE even though I've lost a lot of interest in the games industry. The main reason is that I've got every issue since 1 and it's a hard habit to break! :-)
For me, the best thing about EDGE was the Redeye column, but that's been gone a long time.
I've started reading Retrogamer instead, which I find more interesting.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Early? (Score:4, Interesting)
Let me preface my comment with this: I've owned both a 360 and PS3 and I've never really liked my PS3. I'm getting ready to sell it, in fact. I bought it for Home, blu-ray playback, and exclusives. But Home was delayed for a long time and sucked when it finally did come out, there are much cheaper blu-ray players now that don't require constant updates and actually work with my universal remote, and the few exclusives the PS3 have gotten (with the slight exceptions of Little Big Planet and Metal Gear Solid 4) have been mediocre at best. I'm actually getting ready to sell my launch PS3, as it just gathers dust now that I have a regular blu-ray player. My 360 on the other hand, is invaluable to me. Great exclusives, better quality and downloadable content on even multi-platform games, lets me stream movies from my Netflix account, it let me get in on the brief HD-DVD phase on the cheap (I still treasure my Battlestar Galactica Season 1 boxset, which has never been made available in HD on any other format), better controller for my big hands, etc.
But having said all that, there are still 360 exclusives (even popular ones) that I criticize. There are a lot of mediocre or boring shooter's on the 360 that just don't do it for me. I would give Gears of War 1 & 2 both "meh" scores, the same as some people are giving KZ2. And I just couldn't get into Dead Rising, with it's timed missions. So even a 360 fanboy like me doesn't just slobber over every game just because it's a 360 exclusive.
Re: (Score:1, Redundant)
Why the hell did you buy a Blu-Ray player if you already had a PS3?
Also, your PS3 can work with a universal remote, you just need one of these [nyko.com] or a PS2 remote and USB/PS2 adapter.
The PS3 is a decent machine, it just needs to work on its cock and balls.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
For several reasons. Here are just a few.
Re: (Score:2)
First of all, I was able to get a good one for under $200 now.
Sub-$200 BD players lack the newer profile support (BD-Live), 1080p24 (cheap BD players only do 1080p60) as well as support for lossless codecs (which is noticeable) as DolbyHD and DTS-MA to LPCM decoding. And they do crappy upscaling on regular DVDs. While this might not matter to you, this is an important thing for those of us who have older HDMI receivers that want to listen to lossless audio without having to upgrade.
Add in some HTPC capabilities (streaming Xvid movies over the network
Secondly, my new blu-ray player can be actually used with a universal remote (with a nice back-light, unlike the crappy PS3 blutooth remote) without some jerry-rigged patch that doesn't even work with a number of features. That adapter was never meant to be used with a PS3 and only half-ass works.
I bought a $6
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Claims of bias are coming up a lot when discussing KZ2. I really wonder if that's justified, I don't think anyone except FPS devotees that already own a PS3 even care about the game so why would they try to sabotage it? Especially to the point where claims of "conspiracy!" are warranted (and besides, the game got plenty of 10/10s, of course not everywhere but then again it's not Super Mario Galaxy)
Which is it? (Score:2, Insightful)
So the reviews are looking good, but the game sucks?
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Now you're talking crazy.
Re: (Score:1)
Rail shooters are games where you cannot control your character's movement at all (beyond maybe selecting a branch to follow), not simply linear FPSes.
Re: (Score:2)
They're dull rail shooters with a cool story. They'd make a good film, but as a *game* to, y'know, *play*, they're just typical FPS dreck.
In addition to what's already been corrected abing rail shooters, typical FPS "dreck"? You mean in both it is first person perspective and you shoot stuff? Because that's about all that's typical about those games.
Re: (Score:2)
Sheesh, and all I was doing was commenting on the laughably poor semantics of the title... which said the REVIEWS were looking good, not the game itself.
Re: (Score:2)
Cliff's Notes version of Killzone 2's online reviews: "The game is completely devoid of creativity and the story is paper thin, but other than that it's a fairly nice, fun game".
Some websites focus on the first two points, others on the last part (the ones that have been spared from the "OMG leave KZ2 alone!" cries), but they all pretty much agree on the above description. Whether that means it's a good game or whether it sucks is, of course, up to each individual.
Re: (Score:2)
Errr... I was actually commenting on the careless lack of articulation in the title.
Not a hardcore gamer unless you own a ps3? wtf? (Score:5, Insightful)
Gamers need to stop worrying about the sales numbers of the PS3 and arguing over the merits of PlayStation Home. The truth is that the system is flush with excellent, exclusive games, and we're way past the point where you can call yourself a hardcore gamer and not own the hardware.
That is something I would expect to read on a fan-boy site and not a tech blog.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
P.S. I only own a 360 and I've been happy with it thus far but I would have a ps3 too if I could scrounge up the cash.
Re: (Score:1)
I don't think writing articles that reek of bias (like the "you're not hardcore without a PS3" claim) is going to help reduce the flamewars, instead it's more likely it'll fan the fires, maybe in an attempt to make flame warriors throw links to the article at each other to get page views.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Where is your SNES? Poser.
Re: (Score:2)
monopoly board, now with [...] underlying family issues
Actually, if monopoly taught me anything, it's that the guy who gets the most land the earliest dominates everyone else, including family. Sorry dad, you landed on Boardwalk. Cough it up.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Pfft, Monopoly is for casual board gamers. At least get something like Puerto Rico or Agricola [boardgamegeek.com] when we're talking about hardcore qualifications!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The comment was probably made for the same reason that ~50% of all car advertising is designed to make people who already bought a car feel better about your purchase - except possibly with less of an advertising slant. Hard to day in a world of slashvertisements, right? But the author clearly owns a PS3 - he probably bought it at launch and is trying to make himself feel better about his $599 george foreman grill. Wannabe hardcore gamers are always elitist. I would argue that you're not really hardcore unt
re: Ars and the PS3 (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't know... Accusations are constantly flying about the folks over at Ars having a bias towards the PS3. Perhaps they do. But as someone who is, by and large, not even really a "console gamer" - I came to the same conclusion they have.
I bought a PS3 only 2-3 months after they were released. At that time, Resistance and EA's Fight Night boxing title were about the only noteworthy releases I could find for it. Still, I saw the potential the hardware had, and realized it was finally a "console that ma
Re:Not a hardcore gamer unless you own a ps3? wtf? (Score:4, Informative)
Yeah he's way out of line. You're not a hardcore gamer unless you have a Sega Saturn.
Re: (Score:2)
So why do these companies continue releasing FPS games to a platform that's clearly not meant for them?
Money?
Yay! (Score:2)
my *personal* viewpoint is that KZ2 is one I am really waiting for.
I was mildly unimpressed by the Resistance2 multiplay mode (though the single player is amazing) and I am really looking forward to KZ2.
I think we are beginning to see the effect of the better capabilities of the PS2 in terms of performance, visuals and disc storage (BD vs DVD).
Re:Yay! (Score:4, Insightful)
we are beginning to see the effect of the better capabilities of the PS2
yes, the PS2 will trounce all other current generation systems.
p.s.
In all honestly I think it does in a lot of ways. I have a 360 but the ps2 is the only system I brought to college.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
visuals and disc storage (BD vs DVD)
I still get the feeling that the only way to make HD games spill over into multiple DVDs is to stuff them with fmv. But given how fmv is generally looked down upon over in game cut scenes, I still don't think this will be a major problem. (Resistance: Fall of Man is an fmv offender.)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
FMV can make a a game's story feel disjointed from the actual gameplay.
Having just finished the PC version of Jade Empire and bitched about that exact issue, I agree wholeheartedly. The game was running at 1920x1440, all settings maxed out (on a mid-range computer, which is not hard considering it was originally an Xbox game), with AA and everything. Then it suddenly drops to a pre-rendered video at 640x480 with, aside from some of the smoke effects, generally worse quality even ignoring the drastically lower resolution, and on top of that, it was badly compressed. It's pre
I have a copy and it just rocks!!! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
At least someone has some enthusiasm albeit a little over the top.
I've been dying for a good FPS to come out for the PS3 for a while now. (haven't played any of the Resistance games). MSG4 is still my top PS3 game to date. Now i want more "game" less "movie".
I may be inclined to finally pay $60 for a new release in a very long while. It sucks, I was going to get another game the name of which I can't remember.
Re: (Score:1)
Hahah, you have a crappy job.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
But ... what do you mean by delay-and-then-accelerate-thingy?
In the demo I got the feeling that there was a slight delay between moving the (right) stick and an actual response in the game. Then it felt like I got a slight acceleration in the rotation rather than a constant velocity. Maybe I imagined the whole thing, but I found it harder to aim than in e.g. the Call of Duty games.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Could it be done on the 360? (Score:5, Informative)
You're somewhat in the right direction, but not entirely right. The main difficulty programming the PS3 is not that it's particularly hard to break up a game engine/ AI/ graphics effects/ whatever into enough threads to keep the PS3's SPU's busy, the hardest part is actually scheduling the threads to prevent memory contention, stalling SPU processes, communicating inputs & outputs etc. It's a step back from writing code and having the compiler do all the hard work, only having to track the interaction between 2, maybe 3 threads that run all the time. With the PS3 you'd be handling the same 2 or 3 threads on the PPU, plus tens, maybe even 100s of 'micro-threads' distributed over the SPU's, constantly starting, pulling data from RAM, spending some time processing, pushing back the result, etc.
It doesn't really help that game engines are generally based on existing codebases and ported between architectures all the time either. It's not easy to extract high performance from a game engine that has to run well on the homogenuous 3-core architecture of the 360 as well as on the heterogenuous 2+7 core architecture of the PS3. And let's not forget the split-memory architecture, where half of the main memory effectively has zero bandwidth to the CPU and should only be accessed from the GPU. Which leaves only 256MB of RAM or a major headache laying out your data in memory.
Last but not least you're right about the GPU: the 360 GPU has significantly better fill-rates, especially when complex shaders are used. The Cell in the PS3 can be used to offload graphics stuff and not be limited by shader performance, but again it's not easy.
I believe the KZ2 engine was designed from the ground up for the PS3 architecture, which probably explains why it looks so good compared to cross-platform PS3 titles.
Re: (Score:2)
Someone sounds a little jealous that there are people more intelligent than you out there. By your post, a mollusk has better chances of more intelligent conversation.
Re: (Score:2)
This is what the site mentioned in the OP is like 24/7.
Re: (Score:2)
You made me laugh, thanks!
For the record: I have a PS3 myself, and I like it.
Dumbass...
The Edge Magazine review is odd... (Score:2)
Reading the Edge Magazine review of KZ2, I get the feeling it is written by a person who clearly doesn't like FPS shooters, PS3's or both. Considering the fact that similar games on the 360 received high acclaim from Edge, it looks like Edge wasn't entirely fair with the review. At least, that's what the review tells me. KZ2 arrives a couple of months after GeOW2, it can't be that in those couple of months the requirements to be an entertaining shooter has become that much higher. The review has similaritie
Re: (Score:1)
That's just the way Edge magazine roll. They actually had a heavy pro-PS3 bias for a long time, things were bound to swing back the other way at some point. There is almost universally no point in reading any of their reviews, they tend to just pick a stance, write a paragraph on the way the game 'feels' to them, and possibly throw in some pretentious analogies to liven things up. Actual review scores seem randomly picked at best, from what I've gathered.
Shame really, their features are actually very good
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It wasn't really that odd. Sure the PS3 fanboys went mad, but that was to be expected for anything other than a 9 or a 10. The review its self was pretty positive (if you read it), and Edge traditionally scores lower than the IGN or Gamespot's. 7/10 is a solid score.
Ive not played the game, but honestly from what i have seen, the gameplay is nothing other than run-of-the-mill for a shooter. Multiplayer seems to have had more thought put into it, but even that is basically COD4's level/unlock system.
If i had
Re:The Edge Magazine review is odd... (Score:4, Interesting)
Edge places a high value on innovation, and openly admits to doing so. Even those who rate Killzone highly admit that, while amusing, it brings absolutely nothing to the table not seen before. It takes zero chances, preferring to polish the pre-existing experience. Even Gears 2 made SOME changes to the formula, both technically and in terms of storytelling and gameplay flow.
For many gamers, that's just fine. But as someone who plays most everything that comes out, I'd much rather a score tell me if the game will truly surprise me, as opposed to just being a well-trodden path through the FPS woods. Not everyone looks for the same thing in a review, but then, that's why there are multiple review sources. You can't whine about the over-dependence on metacritic and the generally poor state of numerical reviews, as many do of late, then penalize one source for actually trying something different and using the full 10 scale.
Is it just me? (Score:2)
Is it just me or does it just look like a fairly standard shooter, with a TF-style multiplayer? Graphics? Good. Sound? Good. Gameplay? Standard FPS fare. Controls? Dunno because I don't have a PS3, but I imagine that keyboard/mouse players would be thrashing anybody who's trying to play it with any other controller (ala every other FPS out there). Whoever shot that multiplayer video certainly wasn't using a proper mouse.
I don't see anything astounding here. It might be a good technical achievement (g
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, and "you could play the levels in random order to little ill-effect"...
That's a comment I could apply to 99% of FPS shooters out there, starting with the classics like Quake (four episodes, play them in any order, every X level is a boss level, little melding of scenery, story etc. between levels), Doom (linear levels, pretty much randomly made), even back to Wolfenstein 3D and Spear of Destiny. Admittedly, the more modern ones are more story-based (why people think that's so important, I don't know) l
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Seems to me that truly mindless shooting died out (well, with a few exceptions like Serious Sam, Painkiller and Earth Defense Force) shortly after Half-Life came out as every FPS wanted a solid storyline and smart enemies no matter whether that's a good idea for their design. They just have varying degrees of success.
Re: (Score:1)
The second is that it's a PS3 exclusive. You just don't see exclusives much any more. Even though the PS3 as a platform is just as good (give or take a game or two) as the Xbox, the exclusives are either a given (MGS4) or seen as inferior (Resistance 1&2). So, when an exclusive title comes out for the system and there's no real response from
Re: (Score:1)
Well that and the fact that their cover system has already been done to death, and it doesn't seem terribly interesting. I happen to really like how it's done in Rainbow Six and felt it was only "good" in Gears of War. However both of these harken back to Splinter Cell, which was the first shooter to really push the limits of the idea as I recall.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Yeah, what we have here is a classic case of a game which is, let's face it, more about the petty politics of console wars rather than the quality of the game itself. It's not alone in this; Metal Gear Solid 4 on the PS3, Gears of War and its sequel on the 360 and... well... pretty much any first-party Nintendo game on the Wii (Nintendo fanboys are particularly bad for this) all fall into the same category. The rabid elements of the system in question's fanbase have a psychological need to believe that this
Re: (Score:2)
Oh yeah, you're right about the Kingdom Hearts fanbase. I can't say I've noticed it so much regarding Final Fantasy (which I think, as the "bigger" brand, tends to attact more of the mainstream crowd), but if you go looking around for Kingdom Hearts fansites and stuff... well... you'll very quickly find some scary stuff. The kind of stuff that, frankly, makes you wonder whether this whole new-fangled intarweb thing was such a good idea after all. It's almost as bad as Sonic the Hedgehog fandom, which has be
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, the character classes are blatantly inspired by TF2.
An engineer who uses a shotgun and builds robotic turrets? Gosh, that sounds familiar...
So basically, the multiplayer is TF2 with gritty and gruesome graphics. Not sure that's something I want, really.
Re: (Score:1)
I have to wonder, after reading how many things you think are not found in any other shooter - have you not played any since Doom?
Re: (Score:1)
You're definitely understating the capabilities of a hell of a lot of shooters I've played recently. That's cool and all, opinions are opinions, but I haven't seen enemies simply stand still or rush outside of Fallout 3 (which isn't really a shooter) in years. Like 10+ years.
On a semi-related note, the monstrous amount of typos you've introduced and your unwillingness to sign in undercut the validity of your point. I try to worry about the message rather than the delivery, but really you oughta work on t
Now, Release KZ1 On PC! (Score:3, Insightful)
They could "monetize" KZ1 all over again if they were to release it for PC IMHO. I don't think I'm the only one that would happily buy KZ1 for PC, even with no or limited MP capability. It was great on PS2, but with the control flexibility etc available with a PC, it would rock!
Strat
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
When was the last time Sony released one of their non-MMO games on PC?
I know, I know, but I'm rather hoping this seemingly world-wide economic downturn might have the slight silver lining of causing companies like Sony to think outside the box. It would generate revenue without needing to pay a whole development team or to contract for an outside company to write a new game from scratch. After all, how much can KZ1 be making them currently as things stand?
I actually think this would be a smart/profitable mo
Who's that with the what's it now? (Score:4, Funny)
Playing video games... on a blue ray player? How deliciously absurd!
Early reviews? Good one. (Score:1)
Early reviews? We have published our review (based on a original retail game version provided by Sony) like 9 days ego and we are from Poland, which in game publishers calendar is even worse off than Australia.
And yeah, the game rocks and rocks hard.
"some of the best graphics yet seen on the PS3" (Score:1)
Exactly the point: most games look bad on PS3, unless they're exclusive. Then they come close to those on the 360 and sometimes even on PC. End yet, the KZ2 is a far cry from Sony's promised 1080p HD gamin. In fact, it doesn't even seem to be rendered at 720p - looks more like it's been rendered at a lower resolution, and then scaled up with antialiasing (similar to MGS4).
I can't imagine how can you make a true HD game on a device with only 256MB of Video RAM, and with a BluRay drive that can only read data
Re: (Score:2)
You're missing the point of the PS3. Don't think of it as a gaming system with hardware arguably equivalent to that of the 360 but a poorer overall gaming experience due to poor software implementation. Think of it as a media center with hardware significantly superior to that of the 360 but a poorer overall media serving experience due to poor software implementation.
Re: (Score:1)
Well, I'm thinking of a PS3 as a hardware, developed by someone who has no idea what a _GAMING_ console needs :( And, quite frankly, Sony has mostly been pushing PS3 forward as anything BUT the gaming console, so no wonder it fails in that department :(
And yes, I loved Uncharted, and marginally enjoyed MGS4 (sans its ridiculous cut scenes and ridiculous installation times). Besides that, there aren't many games there that run at least as good as they do on the 360. Dead Space, actually, is the only one that
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Well, I don't give a frak if you think I'm fanboy or anything. MGS takes about 8 minutes first time, and 2-5 minutes every subsequent time. Compare to a few seconds swapping the disk. And speaking of the cut scenes in MGS4 - the length is insane, and worst of all - it's not adding a tiny bit to the game. And I'm not even talking about loading screens every 30-60 seconds in the motorcycle ride scene.
P.S. I own all of them - 360, PS3 and a PC, for a good measure - the one capable of running Crysis at High set
Re: (Score:1)
My time is valuable, where I enjoy spending it. I don't enjoy sitting and staring at the screen, while the game is being installed, right in a middle of gameplay. Or loading screens every 30-60 seconds, IN A CHASE SCENE!!!
So while I have the PS3, most multiplatform games I buy for the 360, as the experience is usually better all around. I only buy exclusives for PS3, or multiplatform games that are proven to be at least as good as their 360 versions (so far I know only two - Dead Space and Devil May Cry 4).
arstech article familiar? (Score:2)
If you replace "PS3" with "Gamecube" and KZ2,Uncharted with Windwaker and Eternal Darkness, you start to have a very familiar story of a 3rd place console.
For what it's worth, there's something to be said for not being the console targeted for every lame shovelware game that's released.
Halo killer? (Score:2)
I am quite sure that THIS time, the killzone franchise will live up to it's "halo killer" predictions from 5 years ago. And by halo killer I do mean that it will be more advanced (and by that I mean graphically) than Halo 1.
Re: (Score:2)
Killzone is not a Halo Killer, it is a Halo Rapist, Beater, Humiliator, Smasher, etc. It simply makes Halo 3 look like a game form XBox 1. And it has a more interesting gameplay and multiplayer.
I guess the joking tone of my post didn't come through. I was not knocking killzone 2, only making fun of the shameful killzone 1.
Action/RPG should replace FPS (Score:1)
No fix, no sale (Score:2)
I'd been looking forward to this game for a long time. And then the demo came out.
It looks gorgeous, but like many others I had that damn floaty/lag effect on the controls. At the default joystick sensitivity it's like moving around in the game by handing the joystick to a friend and using verbal commands to negotiate the level.
Once I cranked up the sensitivity to max the lag decreased, but did not disappear entirely. Best case is 1 or 2 tenths of a second. And in an FPS that's just not the kind of controls
I don't know,, (Score:1)
Relax, it's actually a f$#@ing good game (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
This line has been repeated, ad nauseum, by almost everyone who has encounted or reviewed the game. I'd like to take this to task.
Firstly, on the matter on graphics. Personally, while I understand that they are good, I do not agree that the graphics in Killzone 2 are as much above other games as they have been made out to be. While they are technically i
Re:Hype hype hype... (Score:5, Informative)
Gears, Vegas, GRAW and many other games not only have cover systems, but implement them better than Killzone. That it also sticks doggedly to a first-person view so you can't see much while in cover isn't a significant innovation, if you ask me.
Yes, Edge got rather carried away with their review of Halo 3. However, 7/10 is if anything better than I'd expect to see at the bottom of that text - they've reviewed tonnes of PC FPS titles like that and given them 6/10.
Re: (Score:2)
That it also sticks doggedly to a first-person view so you can't see much while in cover isn't a significant innovation, if you ask me.
Sure it is, I've never seen it done anywhere before and I rather like the sound of it. When you hid behind a wall, rock w/e because some asshold with a gun twice your size is trying fill your body with large metal slugs you can't see the entire battlefield, you see what's in front of your eyes.
Re: (Score:1)
Umm, because it's a videogame?
Speaking to various journalists I know, some have been an awful lot harder on the game than Edge have been. Others think it's as good as Gears 2.
Actually, thinking about it, the ones that hate the game think it's as bad as Gears 2, as well. So make of that what you will.
Re: (Score:2)
Damn man, damn. Well guys, you heard it! Some guy on the internet has called the victory for the PS3. Apparently one game is all it took. I know! It surprised me too!
So you game developers, stop making PC, XBox, and Wii games. Gamers, you need to throw away all your non-PS3 games. I know I'm going to go home right now and snap each of my XBox 360 games in half one by one, in a highly ritualized manner. I'm know I'll be crying myself to sleep over this bitter loss.
We knew that gaming was about which s
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Gee, you think? After all, this is the genre where, apparently, "being close to a wall" is a groundbreaking innovation.
Plenty of FPSs are fun, but they're all essentially the same game - there's only so much that reviewers can find to talk about.