Strategy Informer: Killzone 2 Preview

Killzone wasn't a spectacular game. It didn't get lots of press time, it didn't turn the tables on how people viewed shooters on the PS2, and it wasn't special. This begs the question, why is there such an interest in Killzone 2?

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
Kleptic3794d ago (Edited 3794d ago )

hahaha...the cover system 'isn't realistic as some, as in the characters do not put their back to the wall'...has this guy ever been in battle?...not that I have...but I have played enough paintball to know that if you are taking any kind of cover, its a much better idea to keep your eyes on your enemy, not at the back towards all of your friends whom can't keep up with you...

the cover system is the most realistic system implemented into a game so real life you don't have the option of hovering a camera behind you to see what your enemies are doing, while you are safely stuck behind some cover...whatever though...

either way, good to know the game really is looking that great...the mulitplayer alone makes this game very promising...its just frustrating that so many keep complaining that nothing stands out...when what exactly is supposed to 'stand out' other game shown so far looks this good...the gameplay seems solid (although many didn't care for the default sensitivity for the demo...which will no doubt be adjustable for the final game)...and apperantly GG figured out a way to keep the visuals that insane with 32 players the logic most of these previews keep using; I have yet to see any other shotters 'stand out' either...

thor3794d ago

What I don't like is the way previews always need to take the same tone, "The graphics look awesome, but let's pay our attention to gameplay. Yes the gameplay is good, but...". If this game had none of the hype attached to it, and the graphics only became this good once the game was released and weren't quite up to that standard at the moment, you would read previews such as, "Killzone 2 looks OK but for us it also played quite well and smoothly too", and when the game released, you would see rave reviews because the gameplay would be good and the graphics awesome. What's happening is the other way around.

IMO reviews should not take points away for -ve points of the game, rather reward it points for what it does WELL. There is no doubt in my mind that certain Xbox fanboy sites have already given this game a score out of 10 in their heads. Nothing will change their mind. It's a run-of-the-mill FPS, so? So was COD4 and halo 3 but those weren't marked down because of that. It will always be "just another FPS", and no matter how perfect the control scheme is, how graphically impressive it is, how clever the AI is, how frantic or original the gameplay is, it will _always_ get these kind of complaints.

Afterburn3794d ago

If this game was the greatest looking FPS to ever touch a console (which it may very well be)it's already been rated in half of the reviewers heads. No matter how good the cover system is, how impressive the graphics are, it's going to get dinged for "not having that something special", which is total bs. I'm wondering what the last "original" FPS I played was that was so far out of the realm of typical that it was special.

The game is obviously hyped, it's beautiful, GG already said that the AI was dumbed down for the press demo, but yet the negative whiny attitudes persist.

I played and loved the first KZ and was online with that game for a solid year. Say what you want about this game in the paper, but in the end I know it'll be fantastic. I honestly don't care about the single player, I'm buying it to play online, if the campaign is awesome, then bonus for us.

This game is destined to be nitpicked to death and I, for one, couldn't give a sh1t less what some n00b reviewer thinks of the grey coloring.

NO_PUDding3794d ago

I am so hyped for this.

Resistance 2 money goes to this for me.

This game has an identity, love the design, love the grey - and no one seems to notice tohe obvious hitns of purple and orange in lens flares which occur VERY frequently.

The game is beautiful.

And 32 player online will be awesome.

I want now.

beavis4play3794d ago

buy resistance and KZ. it looks like both will be fantastic experiences.

BattleAxe3794d ago (Edited 3794d ago )

I played and beat the first Killzone and I was really impressed with the graphics at the time. The game did get tiring towards the end though. Having said that, the first killzone wasn't far off from being a great game.

Because its a Sony exclusive game, unfortunately we will see quite a few biased review sites give the game mediocre scores.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3794d ago
Salta_nelas3794d ago

NO info has been given? Have they been under a rock?

pixelsword3794d ago (Edited 3794d ago )

...It's not the fault of the poster, because he's only putting out an article of interest, I'm talking about the person who wrote it.

The writer may have never been in battle, but let's say that I've seen a gun or two in my day. The 180 degree pivot used for shooting like that can go wrong on a battlefield; if you trip trying to dance like that, that's your ass; plus you expose yourself fully by using that technique. You only keep your back to the wall if you have very scant cover in certain situations or sneaking around in certain situations. You put your back against a wall and the enemy knows you have their back to them, a well-timed grenade will come flying your way, because those with their backs against a wall won't see it coming. On top of that, a wall can be shot through and blown-up; cover gives you the ability to avoid being shot outright, not to be a modern day shield; but let's humor the situation a bit: if you're behind a wall that was bullet/blast-proof, what kind of f*cknut presses his back against that when he's not in danger of being shot? That's used in that situation if an enemy can still hit you if you're standing NEAR a wall because the angle of the enemy is of one that can still target you if you didn't. One thing I'm sick of is people commenting on military tactics and techniques when they have zero experience. You may be trained to do this or that, but some things you leave at boot camp, like strapping-on their helmets in WWII; because of the design of the helmets, a blast could tear your head off if it was strapped-on. That would be like jumping with all of the parachute strings around your chin: as soon as that first tug hit, you'd be done for.

Again, I'm not blaming the poster, good for him, but the writer must be someone who watches a little too many action films.

As far as "nothing standing out" That could be said of any game... What stood out from Halo 3 that stood out from Halo 1 and 2? The camera? Or Metroid on the Wii? What about any and all of the CoD games including CoD4? Bad Company? Army of Two had the buddy gameplay, but hell, that's just Lost Vikings on steroids if I wanted to be a jerk about it. Gears of War's gameplay was identical to Kill.Switch in every was except for the chainsaw gun, which didn't work 100% of the time.

It's funny how everyone who says the game isn't original never made a game that proves their point.

So every time I hear "there's nothing that stands out" it translates to "I don't know how to critique, so I just say what other people are saying to sound smart"... which doesn't work for people smart enough to see through the bull.

GMR_PR3794d ago

You have to remember this is the most hyped game on PS3. If it doesn't deliver a near perfect experience is gonna be torn apart by reviewer and fans.

Naism3794d ago

Day 1 buy for me no matter what. The graphics are there, and from all the gameplay vids, the gameplay is there too. So I don't care what the previews say, what the reviews will say, because I'm impressed with what I see and this game is a day 1 buy for me. I look forward to getting this game in my hands and playing it when it comes out. Going to be a fantastic experience without a doubt, one of the best if I may add.

Show all comments (58)
The story is too old to be commented.