Top
140°

Eurogamer: Killzone 2 Hands On

While other PlayStation 3 games, most notably MotorStorm, have shrugged off the stigma of E3 2005's "target renders", Killzone 2's journey to release seems as turbulent today as the bumpy, computer-generated air-to-ground D-Day deployment that first dropped jaws almost three years ago.

The good news for PS3's ardent supporters, then, is that what we're standing on the show floor at Sony's PlayStation Day event in London controlling isn't that far away from what the handsome CG of 2005 predicted: we're on an airborne landing craft with chattering squad-mates gripping the rails tightly, flying low towards a riverside industrial complex as Helghast forces pepper the sky with anti-aircraft gunfire. They're having some luck, too, nailing the craft that's just ahead of us in the magic carpet convoy, which explodes and is consumed by thick cotton wool smoke, and sends lifeless bodies flying past our heads before the Gears of War-style in-game cut-scene switches to a view from the banks of the Corinth River, and captures our safe but violent landing.

Read Full Story >>
eurogamer.net
The story is too old to be commented.
CViper3479d ago (Edited 3479d ago )

Other titles on other systems you just check a couple of things:

-Graphics
-Gameplay
-Control
-Sound

For the ps3 you get

-Graphics - Are they the best I've ever seen?
-Gameplay - Is it the best I've EVER played?
-Control - Are they Perfect?
-Sound - Is it the best surround track in the history of gaming/
-INNOVATION - features that we have never ever seen before in games as we know them? If not, then subtract 1/2 of whatever the total score is.

I'm sick of seeing so many games out there not get singled out for being uber innovative, and just getting a good grade/review/preview based on the pure fun-except for the ps3-. It is a Game after all. So this is going to be yet another victim of "Innovation" it appears. Now that everyone has finally been silenced about Killzone2's graphics and the PS3's capabilities, people have to find SOMETHING to complain about. Why cant they just compare killzone2 to killzone1? Much like halo3 to halo2. There wasn't a HUGE jump in Innovation, we have all played through the type of game Halo3 is with Halo2. Killzone2 set out to be a good fun title, its not trying to break the mold for gaming like Little Big Planet or something. I am sure Killzone2 will improve on gameplay just like all titles do.

Does anyone else feel that this is clearly the case with PS3 titles? The negative strikes for not being innovative is completely ridiculous. Especially when a game like Rainbow6 vegas 1.5 can get 9's . Its like its not on anyones radar to even search for Innovation with Xbox360 titles, because there really is none. Same with the PS3's lineup, I mean we get neat features in games.. Bubble Shields, pants Wet when you get out of water... But nothing that says to me "Wow I've never played a game like Gears of War/Bioshock/COD4/Rainbow6/Hal o/Uncharted/GranTurismo/Ratche t in my life." Which is the definition of innovation. When I have for years, the graphics keep improving. THen someone takes those graphics and really nails down some great innovative gameplay every once in a while. But that doesn't mean that the other games aren't fun or enjoyable anymore. I'm looking for Innovation in a game like Little Big Planet, Not a FIrst Person shooter. I feel like all FPS's are the same basic form of game.

Games like Prey innovated a new style of gameplay for FPS, and was even the precursor to Portal. And we all see how well that one did compared to more popular titles with no innovation.

Diugu3479d ago (Edited 3479d ago )

It could be me saying those words. It is very difficult for the PS3 games to get good scores, even if they are better than the majority out there that get those same good scores.

Bubbles for you.

JokesOnYou3479d ago (Edited 3479d ago )

If they don't say "OMG this (*ps3)game is the best game we've ever seen"

"its bias"
"its the media fault"
"micro paid them off"
"its a conspiracy"....blah, blah, blah you guys can hold hands and believe whatever false sense of reality you've created here on n4g, but

Reality is ps3 big exclusives aren't scrutinized anymore than their competition, the sonyfaithful just can't see that because their wearing sony goggles. This was a very good preview about KZ2, no bashing at all just his impression from what he played.

edit vvvvv fenderputty, thats exactly what I'm talking about many sites do that with both platforms games, especially the big time exclusives, I can prove it, I'll show you many write ups criticizing Halo3 long before it was released, and I'm not just talking about graphics, critics said it lacked innovation it was too much like previous Halo's, but most Halo fans said NO sh!t its Halo, plus they've added cool features, weapons, saved films, forge, 4 player co-op, why should Bungie have to re-create the wheel?, especially when the gameplay has always been its strongest point. This is a subjective market so I understand it, Halo3 was critcised heavily from all angles, but thats life when you're popular....it didn't stop fans from enjoying it, because it delivered what counts most= alot of fun.

It's fine to disagree with the critics but when you try to comfort yourself by exaggerating every minor criticism as some sort of industry bias paid for by micro, it just screams that you are too emotionally wrapped up in the console war and your feelings hurt because YOU WANT THEM TO GLORIFY THE GAME INSTEAD OF GIVE THEIR OWN OPINION. Sorry but thats not how it works the other 99% of gamers who like their site WANT TO READ WHAT HE THINKS OF THE GAME....here's a tip if the whole media is biased, like Eurogamer is, then just read pro-sony sites, play your games and have fun, WHY do you NEED to continue reading what they think IF you know its biased?

JOY

fenderputty3479d ago (Edited 3479d ago )

Kotaku had the audacity to call the game's visuals on par with PS2 visuals. Numerous people have all said the game looks great but that it's a normal shooter with set pieces. Why is it that R6 vegas and COD4 bring the same thing to the table yet don't get any criticism (The cover system alone makes this game better then them already). IGN brought up too many crates ...

I'm not crying ... I don't really even care anymore. It's pretty apparent that the game is a visual masterpiece to anyone who's seen it. It's also rather apparent that critics are searching for something to criticize.

This might not be a criticism of Sony but, rather a backlash of the 05 CGI trailer. The game was touted as the end all be all of next gen shooters from that point on. Now that the bigger worry of the graphics being nailed isn't a concern, they're trying to find sometime else.

CViper3479d ago

I am saying that PS3 games should be graded for what they are, and not required to Innovate at every turn, which is what they are always knocked for. If the PS3 gets knocked for lack of innovation, so should everything else.

There are too many exclusives to sit here and think that every single one must be gold. Killzone2 is showing very impressive gameplay, for an FPS. It does look JUST LIKE all FPS's with single player mode, scripted sequences happening (like they could happen any other way?) Team AI waiting for you to do something to start their next move. Its been this way for decades, now its a problem all of a sudden *again* when a PS3 title fails to blow your mind from what you've previously played in the same genre.

So please, dont think I am sitting here saying "Buh Buh its parfect, why are they saying something negative?!" Because it more than likely isn't(if its an FPS). But its no more imperfect than any other FPS, and should be treated the same way. The same flaws you can point out in PS3 titles when it comes to innovation, you can apply to some of our "AAA" Games out right now. So what is the difference?

The Wood3479d ago (Edited 3479d ago )

I've noticed a lot of goalpost shifting since the ps3's launch. My favourite dumb quote has to be "Too much variety" in criticism of Ratchet n Clank. Twits and Twats. The East vs West undercurrent is realer than some care to acknowledge.

Bubbles for your lead comment

@ below

Halo had the number '3' in the title and you could record the ownage, that's all the innovation you need apparently ;)

Vojkan3479d ago

Yeah funny how now they talk about innovation, where was that word during overrated Halo 3 reviews? Can someone tell me what is innovative and revolutionary about halo 3?

meyers3479d ago

"Does anyone else feel that this is clearly the case with PS3 titles?"

Eurogamer
1Up
EGM

These sites are going to trash Killzone 2 as hard as they can. 6/10s or 7/10s for certain.

The rage and hatred and fear the Xbox fan dominated sites have for Killzone 2 is beyond anything in the history of gaming. When Killzone 2 running realtime was unveiled last E3 matching the original trailer the Xbox fan dominated press sites were denied their moment of glory where they thought they would be gleefully writing stories about Killzone 2 failing to meet the target render and what a disaster. Instead they had the whole gaming world going crazy of how good the Killzone 2 realtime stuff was.

The Xbox/Halo fans at Eurogamer,1Up,EGM and other sites will have their revenge.

JokesOnYou3479d ago (Edited 3479d ago )

don't give me that, oh poor us BS routine, "why are ps3 games required to innovate at every turn" whaannn, whannnn, whannn, ha ha are you serious that is the classic cliche' criticism laid on every major game, especially sequels. Go read past cinemablend's and other sites prereviews/reviews of Halo3. Like I said you guys are wearing sony goggles and the only ones you have convinced is yourselves.

If the sonyfaithful didn't CRY FOUL for every single criticism, you might have some creditability, but when I can basicly read the same comments word for word from sonyfaithful against many different sites, attacking them for reviews of games like Lair, HS, Folklore etc. it just tells me you guys just dont like ANY criticism, only praise.

Again, why do you guys continue to read reviews from sites that you call biased? I mean I don't read sdf site because I *think their biased, lmfao.

JOY

OOG3479d ago

I dont understand why you guys focus on these companies that you know are most likely going to give bad reviews just to do so....

Like really if you dont like their reviews then dont look at them...its that easy....

There is no need to whine and complain about how companies review games....you just go and pick the company that you know will give you an honest review and see what they say....

Like really if I made fun of any of you guys or called you names etc etc would it really matter to you???? hmm nooooooooooo

So dont worry about these companies that you know can be biased and stop complaining because it jus gets sad to find people looking for reasons to vent all the time

clintos593479d ago (Edited 3479d ago )

Does anyone else see the trend here of how game sites seem to give ps3 scores a harsh score and review and seem to give 360 games slack and just give them high scores?, especially on exclusive games.

I own both systems but CViper makes a very good point because when u see a big shooter for the ps3 such as Killzone 2 vs Halo 3 they judge the crap out of killzone 2 and say where is the innovation and dont do the same for halo 3. I dont remember one thing new that halo 3 did that was inovative, and look at the score it got? I also hear sites try an say Resistance has the same bubble shield as halo 3 when resistance came out before halo 3 and was the firs to make the bubble shield and the spike grenades. I have a feeling MS pays these game sites to get high reviews. Call me a fanboy all u want but im speaking the truth, all these sites seem to always say about ps3 games, there is no innovation so we docked scores. I think the game site reviews now days are just full of crap and people shouldnt even go by them and just go by what u want to buy because they seem to just not be fair to other consoles if they favor anothjer console.

Sorry to be so ruff but I didnt mean every site but alot of game sites who seem to point out things like where is the innovation. There are good sites aswell who arent biased.

CViper3479d ago (Edited 3479d ago )

I am not saying that every single sony title has to be praised. I'm not saying that Killzone2 has to be praised. I'm not saying ANY SONY PRODUCT should be praised based on nothing.

It seems like you keep ignoring that, and going ahead with "People were mad because reviews crushed lair" Logic. I agree with the reviews, Lair was a bad game in my opinion. However Lair wasn't in the category of all of the good Sony titles that get knocked for not being Innovative. Lair was knocked for bad controls, and gameplay.

That is what I am specifically speaking on, not the whole "buh buh media is bias im butthurt" I just note the trend to even begin with comparisons of Sony titles vs Unique Titles. I have read comparisons of Halo3/R6V2/System Sh.. err Bioshock to the previous versions and you see clearly that it IS mentioned that the game borrows from the previous title, the only difference here is that it is not a negative strike against the title. Its given a pass and called something like "Veteran gamers will recognize the gameplay from the previous title, which they have improved upon." Now if its for the ps3 it will read like "We have played this game before Sony." Its not a specific reviewer or media outlet, its just the stigma associated with the PS3. I have yet to really see a large release 360 title get thoroughly knocked for:

-Bad Story
-Not Enough Innovation
-Too Much Variety
-Color Scheme
-A.I

The titles that do have a few issues with these, are still ignored when the final conclusion/review is made because in reality, as long as its still a good game you can ignore the AI in Mass Effect and still give it a 9/10 then call it a "flawed gem." I'd love to see the same apply across the board.

JokesOnYou3479d ago (Edited 3479d ago )

"I just note the trend to even begin with comparisons of Sony titles vs Unique Titles. I have read comparisons of Halo3/R6V2/System Sh.. err Bioshock to the previous versions and you see clearly that it IS mentioned that the game borrows from the previous title, the only difference here is that it is not a negative strike against the title."

Did it ever occur to you that games like Bioshock, Mass Effect although not perfect were just BETTER games in general than ps3 exclusives. In other words although reviews will provide a glimpse of the technical aspects of a game (framerate/pop ups/color etc) they MOSTLY DESCRIBE WHAT THE REVIEWER LIKES OR DISLIKES ABOUT THE GAME/*HIS OPINION* (read that statement again my young friend) so if a REVIEWER plays Bioshock and Heavenly Sword but he feels that although Bioshock is NOT perfect its an amazing experience, at the same time he may feel like Heavenly Sword is a good game also BUT his level of enjoyment wasn't the same= so common sense dictates that he will be more critical of Heavenly Swords flaws, simply because he wasn't as satisfied with the game(didn't like it as much).= Thats NOT unfair or bias, its called being human and having a JOB where people actually expect you to pass judgement/rate something that is VERY SUBJECTIVE.

Lets cut the BS, the general feeling in the industry and among Gamers is that ps3 exclusives have been "underwhelming", thus far, even a top sony exec admits it, only the biggest sonyloyalists deny it, so therefore the fact that ps3 games recieved lower scores is quite simply because in general the games weren't as good as the competitions offerings, I blame it on the ps3 difficult tech and dev tools compared to the competition....obviously sony/devs are getting better and I'm sure eventually sony will deliver on their promises, but you can argue until you are "blu" in the face and live in the false reality sonyfaithful have created here on n4g, but fortunately in the real world LOGIC prevails.

JOY

Merritt3479d ago

I disagree with you CVviper.

I'll tell you why. GTAIV. People were much harder on the 360 version than the PS3 version hence a lower average score for the 360.

PS3 is the poster child for biased reviews swinging in their favor. So don't get all teary-eyed about a game that's been delayed...yet again...when the original was a sub-par PS2 title to begin with.

+ Show (11) more repliesLast reply 3479d ago
DomUltra3479d ago (Edited 3479d ago )

@ CViper in the open zone

Don't worry dude Eurogamer is to bias as Kotaku is to Xbox 360. If the the PS3 game isn't blow your pants off amazing, it get's a low mark and then splits it in half.

alexM3479d ago

Seriously who even reads EUROGAMER's impressions.........a horrible website that gave Resistance a 6/10???????????????

and CRACKDOWN a 9/10!!!!!!!!!!

Others this is KZ2 --------the GOD OF ALL GAMES

and THE FINEST LOOKING GAME ever MADE

http://www.gamersyde.com/ne...

Rattles3479d ago

i agree man, one of the xbox fan defences was gameplay over graphics but when a ps3 game has bad graphics its a pile of sh!t, never mind about the gameplay.

Salta_nelas3479d ago

Eurogamer is completely biased, it has always been 360 fans.

How many times do they speak about Gears?

smurfie43479d ago

It is unfair to put so much scrutiny on the ps3. Elements in the fps genre have all been used up by now. All that can be done now is use the elements already established and make them as engaging and solid as possible. Killzone 2 is doing just that.

Merritt3479d ago (Edited 3479d ago )

Why is it unfair to put such scrutiny on the PS3? You the PS3 gamers and the developers talk of this system being the second coming or something. So it's actually unfair to hold the PS3 to the hype that everyone creates for it? That is the best comment I've heard in a long time, I'm actually going to add that to a sig. Hilarious.

"It's unfair to put so much scrutiny on the PS3." Absolutely freaking classic.

Show all comments (40)
The story is too old to be commented.