Killzone 2 was a game that for me didn't completely satisfy me for any number of reasons. The campaign I felt was a little dull and repetitive, and while I enjoyed the multiplayer for about 10 hours I found it too frustrating to stay with for much longer. I awarded the game an 8.5/10, which looking back on my memories of the game feels a little high.
Needless to say when Killzone 3 was announced I wasn't excited for the game in the least, but I decided to try out the multiplayer demo (I refuse to call it a beta) as well as the single player demo. I enjoyed my time in the MP demo, although I certainly had my issues with it, even seeing fit to right up a blog about how I felt about it (which can be found here: http://n4g.com/user/blogpos... The campaign demo left me less than impressed. So come February 24th, what did I do? I went out and bought the game, not expecting to enjoy it much at all but needing something to tie me over before Crysis 2 four weeks later.
My first impressions of the campaign where that I didn't feel immersed at all in the games setting or story. This is at odds with most people's experience, and I don't know if this was my low expectations getting in the way or if it was the harsh graphics and stiff controls, but the feeling was nonetheless there.
As I'm sure everyone knows, Killzone 3 is about the ongoing war between the Helghast and the ISA taking place on the Helgahn home world. You play as Sevchenko, an ISA soldier who is probably the strongest, or rather the least weak of the games characters. The story overall serves only to give reason to the shooting, which is a little disappointing but after Guerrilla's previous works not surprising. Let’s be honest if you're playing Killzone you aren't there for the story but there is certainly room in the narrative for something more fulfilling.
The biggest disappointment with the game is surely its reliance on fade out to canned cut scenes. It just completely breaks any immersion and serves no purpose other than to show off the cool but canned and rough looking set pieces. Crysis 2 is a perfect example of what Guerrilla should have done with the bulk of their cut scenes, first person realtime cut scenes! In that game they work so well to keep the game flowing freely, and they could easily work in Killzone as it is especially annoying when the game has to go to a disjointed third person cut scene for every minor thing.
Another major disappointment is that Rico didn't get a bullet in the brain. Quite frankly he is the most annoying character in gaming history. Every time Captain Narville gives an order you can predict that Rico will be pissed about it, and sure enough literally every time he is. The rest of the characters are more or less just as one track, although I actually kind of feel sorry for Sev for having to put up with Rico as a mate.
The actually gameplay is actually pretty strong. I did grow tired of the constant waiting for enemies to pop out of cover before shooting, but overall it is mostly solid. The guns are very inaccurate which comes off as a little odd to me given that the game is obviously set in the very distant future. It's also annoying that some of the guns like the bolt gun and an LMG in the campaign don't let you aim down sights which also hinders accuracy from medium to long range. The inaccurate and heavy feeling guns do at least serve to make the combat feel different to some of the other shooters released of late, so I'm not complaining.
The cover system needs some work though. What good is a cover system when the bulk of the objects you hide behind are lower than head height, meaning that you can still get headshoted? It’s an annoying design choice and I want it fixed, especially seeing as enemies have the ability to go completely in to cover as well as blind fire. You also can't push back into cover if you reload a gun while leaning out from it, you have to leave cover and then duck down to get out of the way of fire or wait for the animation to end, but which point it might be too late. On top of that it also doesn't let you push from one piece of cover to the next like in Uncharted 2 or if it does it is far from smooth.
The levels and the enemies have a good variety, putting you up against anything from a towering MAWLR which is strikingly similar to something from Resistance to your standard soldiers. You'll also fight jet pack wielding soldiers, soldiers that will rush you with melee weapons, tanks, drop ships and there is also a space combat section and the now standard FPS high speed vehicle level which sees you shooting enemy vehicles up in front of you. The only enemy that the game could really do without is the spider like things that explode near the end of the game. Why Guerrilla? They just don't fit in on a space ship and are annoying to fight. Plus why do they take so long to kill?
The AI is sloppy at times and thoroughly lacks the ability to get you out of cover. They don't advance on you, flank you or lay down suppressing fire, indeed the only method they have is throwing grenades, which they are deadly accurate with. As with most FPS games, the AI also unfairly target their fire on you, when they should be concentrating on silencing Rico once and for all.
This leads me into another annoyance. Why is there no grenade warning icon on the screen? It could be said that they are going for a hardcore approach here, but it simply doesn't work with some of their other design choices. For example, if you are very low on health both your vision gets very dark and removes all colours and your hearing gets dulled. This means that it is very difficult if not impossible to judge just where a nearby grenade is as bright lights and beeping emitted by the grenade is how you are meant to detect it.
The last issue I'll bring up with the campaign is how lame it is in several sections where it basically shows that the main characters are indestructible. At one point Sev is piloting a stolen jet pack when it is struck by a piece of debris from something he just blew up, causing it to break spectacularly (obviously this happens in another third person cut scene). This results in Sev taking a rather hard landing which surely should have dislocated a shoulder, cracked a collarbone, given him concussion or done his back in, if not all of the above. On top of that he is then struck by a tsunami which again you would expect to leave him crippled upon being slammed into something metallic behind him. However, not even a scratch is suffered. Likewise Rico and Sev and separately that annoying woman with the rather daft face paint are part of pretty severe crash landings on one of the open top transporters the ISA use. Again, you would expect them to be dead, but actually they suffer no ill effects. Guerrilla clearly put these things in just to look cool as they couldn't be bothered actually making them have an effect on the game, which is very unsatisfactory.
But I will say this for the combat; it is at least intense with decent pacing and good variety. It may take notes from Call of Duty's textbook but the two games don't feel alike and that is refreshing. I did actually enjoy my time in the campaign, despite the many issues I have outlined above.
The graphics are always perhaps the strongest talking point when it comes to Killzone games, and it’s easy to see why. They really are impressively detailed, with clustered environments and reasonably sharp textures. But you guessed it, I don't like them. The lighting for one is decidedly bad. Why is it that as I write this I am in a room with a bright ceiling light which is subsequently lighting up the entire room. Yet in Killzone 3 you can be in the same situation yet the light source will only light up a small circle of say 3 meter diameter on the ground, leaving the rest of the room in utter darkness. Bring on Global Illumination Guerrilla, your game needs it. I also feel that the dull environments make it difficult to pick out targets as they blend in to the monotone colours of the world too much. They are otherwise impressive though, aside from the lighting they are probably the most technically impressive graphics I've seen on consoles, even if it is all pre-baked. You’re take on a ‘forest’ is unfortunately as dull as the rest of the games environments, which is a bit of a letdown.
They have introduced an element of destructibility to the environment with some buildings and some cover being destructible. But I would have liked them to take it a step further. Wouldn't it be great if they made all of the little concrete block that enemies hide behind able to crumble under sustained fire? Of course it would, and it would in turn give the enemies another way to get you out of cover other than throwing those damn grenades. Lost potential that should be capitalised on when the inevitable Killzone 4 rolls around.
Summing up on the campaign, it has good variety in terms of weaponry, enemies, level design and core combat mechanics. It is however let down by weak characters, a very abrupt ending which could have been so easily expanded upon to add emotional impact, amongst other annoyances. It’s of moderate length, taking me 270 minutes to complete (plus more time for retries obviously), which is really all you can expect from an FPS these days. Oh and one other thing, the next time I play a game which re-uses a segment of its campaign but changes the events, I will snap the disc. Pathetic Guerrilla, and just shows that you couldn't be bothered crafting a proper introduction.
The multiplayer is arguably the main component of the Killzone experience, but I include my thoughts on it here merely to accompany a score down below.
There are about 8 or so maps and a couple of game modes included, with the classic Killzone 2 Warzone returning, this time accompanied by Team Deathmatch and a more story driven Operations mode. There is good variety in weapons and skills, and each of the maps has its own play style and feel to it, even if some of the larger maps tend to be a bit boring on TDM.
My user blog that I linked to up the top contains a very in depth look at the multiplayer based on the demo they released, and I don't feel like going over my thoughts again. After all not much has changed. There is still the one minute intermission where all you can do is vote on a map (why can't you view leader boards, stats etc?), there is still no way to know if a nearby player is going to be able to revive you or not (for example in Bad Company a medic is displayed as such on the mini map if you need a revive, something sorely lacking here), and it still all feels rather unbalanced.
On the plus side, there is plenty of content here to keep you engaged with the game if you enjoy it, even if it has failed to keep me captivated. Guerrilla do seem intent on supporting the game for some time to come which is a good sign, however I think they should make some more drastic changes to the gameplay than they have so far in the first 6 updates.
On top of this you can also play the multiplayer maps against AI controlled bots for practice, although as with all modes similar to this the AI doesn't behave as a human opponent would which kind of defeats the purpose. There is also Move and 3D support, neither of which I have tried out, although I may try out Move in the future if I feel like getting raped.
So should you buy it? My recommendation is maybe. If you enjoyed Killzone 2, you'll likely enjoy this. If you didn't enjoy Killzone 2, you likely won't. There are a lot of FPS options releasing this year and KZ3 is far from the strongest, but it is still a bit of fun if you are looking for something a bit different to CoD or a bit better than Homefront.
The Amsterdam-based studio reflects on its humble beginnings, beloved franchises, and growth through the years.
Up there with the top tier in the industry. Love Guerrilla Games - Horizon Burning Shores is simply STUNNING.
Same. They nailed it with Horizon. The trouble is I also want a new Killzone! Can't I just have it all?!
I have yet to play Burning Shores as I just started Forbidden West (bought at launch, just unwrapped last weekend LOL) and playing on PS5.
man...I still can't believe the graphics especially now I'm playing it on my LG OLED. that graphics and with stable performance backing it up, GG really is the master of their craft!
32.7M sales in the Horizon franchise! With 8.4M coming from Forbidden West alone! Truly a hugely successful game and franchise as a whole. Looking forward to Horizon III
One year after realease HZD sold 7.6 million.
https://www.noobfeed.com/ne...
So not a drop off.
Unless you're saying a HFW should have sold as much now as HZD sold in 5 years?
It's been 3 games, this includes Call of the Mountain. Also no, its a great improvement over HZD.
lol you are comparing:
HZD: 28 February 2017 - May 2023 (6 years+)
HFW: 18 February 2022 - May 2023 (1 year+)
We will see if it surpass original number.
@shane, 2 full main games, 2 DLC add ons, 1 VR spin off game, oh and a an official LEGO set.
Not too bad for an ip that's only been on market for 6 years
Wow, very impressive. I didn't know the numbers were so high for Forbidden West. Still playing through it myself
Yooo, when I first saw that Killzone 1 footage at E3, my friends my brothers and I were like, Holy shit! When it came out, it didn't look exactly like it, but we sunk so many hours into 1 & 2.
I even liked Killzone: SF, it was a spectacle to look at, and even today it looks good. I hope they make a new one. Can you imagine how that will look, and they can get some modern FPS pointers from Bungie.
Such a wonderful studio. They deserve all their success.
The Decima Engine is absolute 🔥 I'm just mad they have abandoned Killzone.
They are probably working on mutiple projects. One of them is Horizon 3, but another is a multiplaer game and probably somehting else.
DSOGaming writes: "While Sony does not plan to release Killzone 3 on the PC, Yahfz shared a video that gives us a glimpse at what such a PC version could look like."
Still looks secure 2 gens later... one of my favorite ps3 moments. With 3D and move the game is on another level
PC almost always ends up the best place to play games, even if it takes a while.
What would you rather play decades down the line? A game at a fixed resolution and frame, considering you have a working disc, and the hardware?
Or run it on an emulator that can update the experience all around, and let you use whatever control input you prefer?
If you insist on the former, it's really only for the sake of nostalgia.
I disagree. The main draw for consoles has always be the simplicity of just putting the disc in / downloading it and playing without worrying about anything else. The average person just wouldn’t want to deal with emulation even though it’s very important for preservation.
Youre getting flak because people on here thibk of themselves as pc wizards. But honestly most poeple try and go get emulators and romz they end up with malware.. yes theyre "easy" if you know the basics but alot of people dont. That said the fact that its taken nearly 20 years to get a sustantially better experience for ps3 games than on its native system shows the complexity of getting bc to work. Sony, if they have any intention, should just invest in a vastly better psnow experience.
jukins
Most people who emulate don't get malware, you'd have to be going to some weird sites for that to happen, heck years ago people were getting sketchier ad's resulting in malware warning on this site if you didn't have a ad-blocker lol.
That's fine if that's the main draw, but it doesn't make it a better experience, just a preference. Having the freedom to do the things you can do on PC is what the appeal of PC is. Buying a game on PC means you never have to worry about the console makers just deciding the next hardware shouldn't support the generation anymore, which means everything you bought is stuck on that hardware instead of moving up with everything else. Nintendo uses this tactic to keep reselling the same games over and over at inflated prices. Sony cut all previous gens off the PS4 and sold it back to people in a poor attempt with PSnow. While the PS5 supports PS4 games, that may not be the case in the next gen after this. No to mention shutting off all the previous stores and updates completely. Even MS stopped making new BC titles at some point, so now there's a big list with 17 pages of titles that are not playable on Xbone and are just trapped on older gen. That's not a problem on PC, the reverse happens where you only have to worry if your hardware can play the newest releases at ultra with no issue.
Shhh don't say that aloud! You're going to trigger a lot of console infidels here.
Well that's the beauty of still owning a retro console tho. Those who usually complain about emulation are just being blindly loyal to a company. Emulation is great for many reason, but if I still owned the console then I disagree nothing beats plugging it back in and going down a nostalgia trip
The RPCS3 devs are doing great work. And Kami works nicely with it too it seems.
Very neat.
While Xbox has committed to backwards compatibility spanning four generations, PlayStation has continued their stance that the feature isn't important. Well, it is! I'm hoping these PlayStation 3 classics that skipped the PS4 entirely show up again on the PS5 for everyone to enjoy.
Resistance, Dead Space franchise, Splatterhouse, Lollipop Chainsaw, Brutal Legends, Alice Madness Returns, Enslaved Journey to the West, Mass Effect franchise. Also wouldn't mind seeing a new Wild Arms game remake or HD remaster, the Xenosaga trilogy, a new Parasite Eve, a new Dino Crisis just too many games to list that are forgotten and left in the dark now adays.
The PS3 is difficult to emulate. PS3 backwards compatibility on PS5 would require translation from PowerPC to x86. Additionally the PS5 likely would have to mimic the PS3’s GPU and CPU.
**Luster Network
Your privacy choices
We and our partners process personal data such as IP address, unique ID, browsing data. Some partners do not ask for your consent to process your data, instead, they rely on their legitimate business interest.**
This is what pops up on my web browser. So I can't even read the site. So, forget that. They don't need my data.
But let's get something straight. OG Xbox had around 1,001 games. How many are BC on Series X? **39** THIRTY NINE. Come on! That's wack BC. You can't tell me that's a complete list. Talking about commitment. Game preservation. Ridiculous. Covers nothing.
How many games released on Xbox 360? Around 2085. How many are BC?
568. That's it. Around 1,517 are **MISSING** Stop playing. Tired of that nonsense.
Anyway, the only games I really want from PS3 that would be awesome are Motorstorm and MGS4. I'll take BC. I'll take a remaster. I'll take a remake. If not those, then Killzone 2. And in VR, maybe Sports Champions, House of the Dead Overkill and the Time Crisis games.
That's all I need. But we've gone over BC again and again in every possible way. It wasn't that important because Sony sold 115 million consoles without it. That's proof enough with no outcry. And PS5 has damn near all 4,000+ PS4 games BC. It's not PS1,PS2 and PS3. But that's plenty. I'll take more but you get what you get.
Although I can't agree with everything, it's well thought out, nice review.
I have beaten all four of the Killzone games several times and I have never had a problem with him. He is a crazy asshole, but he has been like that in every game. It is just weird that after Killzone 2, a bunch of people think he is worst character ever.
To the people that hate him, have you ever played Killzone or Killzone: Liberation?
I dont understand your comment on the cover system needing work seeing that its one of the few FPS games that has it, also saying the environment is to busy thats like saying war is like taking a stroll through the suburbs.
I'm playing through the game now on elite and the A.I. are definitely giving me a run for my money at some points. They actually are flushing me out of cover by flanking me, grenades, and plain rushing. I just got passed the Icy Incursion level, the A.I. was a pain when the 3 jetpack enemies attack you.
Other than that a solid review. Haven't noticed the lighting issue you mention, I'll try to take notice to that.
EDIT: also you should try the Move out with this game if you have it. It is well implemented. Once you get used to it you'll find you are aiming quicker than you would with the DS3. Just make sure you set your rotation settings and dead zone right so you don't have a difficult time turning.
"reliance on fade out to canned cut scenes. It just completely breaks any immersion and serves no purpose other than to show off the cool but canned and rough looking set pieces."
Isn't that EXACTLY what IGN said :P (well along the lines)
I didn't actually have a problem with that during the campaign, I only really realised after I went back and re read the review after playing it through.