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?
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 far...in 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'...no 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 online...by the logic most of these previews keep using; I have yet to see any other shotters 'stand out' either...
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.
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.
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.
buy resistance and KZ. it looks like both will be fantastic experiences.
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.
NO info has been given? Have they been under a rock?
...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.
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.
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.
Killzone 2 will be 10 TIMES better then Killzone 1.
Get Better. Some, Get Worse. GG looks to have gotten better, to me anyway. Every second of the gamplay looks great to me.
...What do you mean nothing stands out? Are they f*cking serious?! HOW ABOUT THE GAMEPLAY YOU MORONS?
This guy mentions that there has been little multiplayer info released when we all heard about the class system, valor points, multiple objectives in matches, etc...
Yeah, that stuck out to me too. Made me think the guy didn't even follow the game, much less play it.
To say that the cover system is unrealistic is pretty far off base from what I have seen. Comparing it to Rainbow Six is comparing a first person mechanic to a third person mechanic. In Rainbow, while in cover, you see for your character in Killzone you see thru your character. Fail.
whoever did this article needs to at least have their facts straight. the helghast didn't attack earth...it was veckta. and the helghans aren't necessarily "aliens". they feel that they were forced away from veckta and it rightfully belongs to them. this boob obviously doesn't know anything about this series; so he should just f#ck off. i found this "preview" to be biased and not credible at all.
some say the controls feel great others don't, I guess the final reviews will have a similar theme to them, some will think it sucks others will love it, I think it looks great and will defiantly get it because it's just after the Christmas rush and I always like to start the year with a top game this year it was GT5p, next year it will be KZ2
Its an average game nothing new i think i will pass on this game
lol. you off from work today? You been posting a lot more BS than you usually do.
im gonna p p on you
I think I will pass on this one too. It's a shame, so much money invest in this game and is shaping up to be an average game with good graphics.
Mark my words, these inane previews will be put to death when the enormity of the multiplayer takes everyone by storm 'the graphics may or may not be great by the time of release' ehhhhh, what? no they will be the best that either console has to offer nothing else is even remotely close but COD 5 on multi platform and that sadly is just another biased american allied WW2 shooter now if you got to play as the axis powers that would be fantastic and I would maybe give my money but since the game is prolly getting half of everything including dev time that KZ2 is I don't think I will budge a game that actually analyzed WW2 on both fronts since, eh heh, it was pretty much a European war before the german zionists convinced britain to give them palestine and let the americans once again come to the 'rescue', ie, prolong the war for another __ million deaths, WOULD GET MY MONEY anyone who thinks Pearl harbor was the reason we needed to go slaughter 400,000 of our people is brainwashed or dead and it seems like no one remembers churchill and germany negotiating peace terms because they had basically run put of bullets, that was before the young americans were sent to their deaths for politics.... I am sure hitler prolly would have tried to take over everyone after the USSR was done but at least America could have been left alone, aren't we the ones who supported the nazi's in the first place all this and I would just rather play Killzone with a new storyline I am tired of fighting a war I don't entirely understand good ol' uncle Joe as he was called, that would be joseph stalin, is only responsible for the outright murder of 20 million of his own people and surrounding areas like the Ukraine I sure would like to take a gun on him and the reason I even brought it up is that COD5 is the only other FPS with a chance against killzone and even the fans have said they are so tired of WW2 so how does this preview make any sense but in some bot's head with a tired blog trying to get some hits
I'll agree to the fact that i am tired of WW2 shooters, too. Enough is enough ... you can only play the same boring campaign so many times before you feel you have done this to many times already.
The fact is no one today even knows who they are killing, and neither did the soldiers back in 1942. They were told Uncle Joe was good and Nazi's were bad even though Hitler wanted no part of the Americans cuz obviously that was going to create one huge gigantic mess, which it did. "Despite the Churchillian legend, to which American participants in the war were only too happy to pay lip-service later, there was no widespread desire in June or July 1940 to help the British." I mean don't get me wrong, Hitler was a megalomaniac, it just America really had no business in the war and I am tired of killing nazis. Indeed, Hitler himself said as much; as Matthew Cooper notes in The German Army, 1933—1945 (1978), at a conference with his generals on July 31, 1940, the Nazi dictator told them that "decisive victory could be achieved only by the defeat of Britain, but this might be brought about by elimination of the Soviet Union, which, together with the neutralization of the United States by the power of Japan, would end all hope for the little island." And to get even more off topic, yes, the japs were even crazier and more barbaric towards china whatever, on with killing the nazis again
Short correction, that would be the zionists got palestine after convincing america to enter WW1. Then the Zionists basically did the same in the continual Great War in part 2 by establishing the state of Israel. Woodrow Wilson and FDR who was part jewish all had jewish advisors during each respective war. They are so much alike, and many historians refer to them as a continual war, that it is hard to keep track on everything. Now doesn't that make these games kind of strange when no one even knows why they are killing. Most people don't even know that communism in general (german jew Marx) and the england bankers rothschilds are all jews. 85% of the Russian revolution officers were jewish people. Lenin was a quarter jewish. All until Uncle Joe started to purge everyone who didn't say uncle. And we are in Iraq because of..... JEWS and ISRAEL! YAY america! Lets now bomb Iran and start Part 3! History lesson over. (whew)
A lot of selective history here. The genocidal nazi's lost, and their desire to take over the world failed. The US, England and the Soviets kicked their ass(along with anyone in the resistance of the countries they took over). For all the pretentious BS that Nazi's displayed, they were wiped out from Africa back Berlin in no time. As for your Jewish fetish. Jews and arabs are blood relatives, of the same father. The whole zionist crap that you are going on about is quite telling.
Oh god give me a fu**in break. You don't even have dates or numbers or facts. Another slave. How was that SPR viewing in HD. Jews, arabs, blood relatives.... you convince them of that smartie pants.
Neither was 'HALO'!!! ;-D Give me 'TimeSplitters 2' ANYDAY!!! ;-P YAWN...were going to get a lot of this CR*P in the next few months!!! :-/ Hopefully i'll be gone by then!!!
So nothing stood out in Killzone 2? Nothing stood out in Halo either EXCEPT it is the best game the xbox360 has had. I agree completely with Thor. I think that this preview is completely unfair.
you saw reviews that started with 10/10 to reviews like 6/10 and Mgs4 was one of the best games this year and more hyped up than Killzone 2. Now imagine what those biased sites will give Killzone 2 when it is released. EXPECT KILLZONE 2 TO GET FEW FAIR REVIEWS AND ALOT OF BIASED REVIEWS
previews are not reviews so everything a preview say its utterly bullsh*t for all i care, the demo they played was wat 15% of the game and they a complaining about all these sh*t oh yh last time i remember this game is still i pre alpha stage right and when is this coming out oh yes, 09 next fuking year
"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?" Because the first Killzone had an excellent storyline and the graphics were great for a PS2 game. Because the E3 2005 trailer was awesome and it was almost achieved by guerrilla by the looks of it. Now let us reword it: Halo wasn't a spectacular game. It didn't (scratch that, it DID) get lots of press time, it didn't turn the tables on how people viewed shooters in general (it simply garnered a fanbase because it was the only good game on Xbox at the time), and it wasn't special. This begs the question, why is there such an interest in Halo 3? Hype.
Halo was a game that was played by many people, while Killzone was a game that nobody play. So there you have it, a big difference.
Nobody like who? Do you have a statistical number which shows how many people played Killzone?
Juuken, I thought i was in your ignore list. What statictics? If nobody played it. lol. ;)
You may be on my ignore list but ignorance radiates off of you. You never waste time bashing anything PS3 related do you? This is about Killzone 2, not Killzone 1 moron. The only reason why Killzone wasn't a huge success is because of the fact the development team was pretty small and they really didn't get to accomplish much. Now that the team is bigger and Sony is helping with development of the game, Killzone 2 has a bigger chance of succeeding.
Yeah, aha. Whatever makes you feel better girl. The press and previews are the ones saying the game is average, not me, if you want to think otherwise to make yourself feel better, then by all means do it.
Whatever makes you feel better as well. Show me where they said the game was average. Name one article which shows that. And I do recall that the game has ways to go before it's finished. Get over yourself.
I don't trust any preview I read on the web anymore, I mean there are critics out there who say Dark Knight was a bad movie lol.
They add in a weapon that turns your enemies into dinosaurs. That would totally throw out the "It's too much like an FPS" complaints.
but the fact that Resistance had: grenades that caused waves of fire to engulf your foes or shoot out "hedgehog spines". weapons that could shoot through walls and set up protective shields. a sniper rifle that could slow down time (a la FEAR), for precision shots. weapons that could shoot "tags" that caused all shots to travel to where the tag went. weapons that spewed out globs of slime that exploded like mines when enemies walked over it. dual pistols that tracked enemy movement. etc, etc, didn't stop the press, and haters alike, from calling Resistance "a WWII shooter" "just another FPS" "another game with humans fighting aliens" oh yeah, and "the games graphics aren't like Gears of War." so what is it haters? either you bash a game because it doesn't have mind-blowing graphics, even though the weapons and gameplay are quite unique. BUT you also bash a game that has PHENOMENAL graphics, and, from what we've seen, really intense gameplay, that may not be pushing a revolution, but really, how many FUN FPS titles also push for innovation and revolution? you can pretty much nail down the four key titles that defined FPS titles FOREVER: (in no particular order) 1) Wolfenstein 2) Doom 3) Quake 4) Half Life EVERY OTHER FPS game released have been derivatives of those four titles, and HEAVILY inspired and influenced by those four titles. personally, I DON'T CARE, as long as it's a FUN game. did Resistance break the mold? did Halo 3? did Gears of War? did Devil May Cry 4 or Grand Theft Auto 4? NO. but they were good times. further refining and polishing genres that honestly, are hard pressed to improve on the "gameplay revolution" angle, no matter how powerful these machines become. the four FPS titles i mentioned above all had technical innovation on their side. at the time of each of their releases, there hadn't been any tech around to make games like them possible. the FPS genre is carried by improvements in technology. Half Life 2 wasn't that much different from Half Life, or other games in it's ilk, HOWEVER, the thing that made weapons like the gravity gun so awesome was the TECHNOLOGY. the visuals. the physics. no matter how people try to paint it. a first person shooter is just that: a FIRST. PERSON. SHOOTER. how people can expect a revolution when you're, literally, limited to ONLY the viewpoint of your character is beyond me. even Mirror's Edge, which is looking quite nice, will still fall into that FPS mold. but again, the technology is what's making that game stand out. is Killzone 2 going to break the mold in terms of FPS gameplay? somehow, i SERIOUSLY doubt it. but is Killzone 2 pushing the FPS genre ahead by employing techniques, technology, and effects NEVER before utilized in an FPS, let alone ONE game, ALL at the same time? i answher with an emphatic "YES." no matter how awesome games like Halo 3, Call of Duty 4, Resistance 2, Gears of War 2, etc will be, you are still just pointing a gun at an enemy and firing at them. what makes those games unique are the stories, worlds, and characters that populate it. some of you guys are expecting more than what the genre can give you. there will always be devs that try and push it (ie, Dennis Dyack with Too Human, and DICE with Mirror's Edge), but often, it doesn't quite turn out like their ambitions, and they have to admit that the genre is limited. the current amalgamations of genres going on in games these days (3PS/RPGs like Mass Effect, and action/adventure games with lots of different genres thrown in like MGS4), i think, is a good step in keeping our beloved genres fresh, but for us that have been playing games for over 20 years, we need to accept that, at our age, we won't be surprised by much these days. no matter what WE feel, there are gamers out there that have never experienced the formula of a Mario, or Zelda, or GTA, or Resident Evil, or Metal Gear Solid. gamers that ARE wowed by what devs are doing these days. in either case, some of you need to curb your expectations (like the guy who "wrote" this "preview"), and just have fun with the game. his concerns over the controls are noted, but wanting keyboard/mouse controls for a console FPS is kind of a standard thing. i wonder if he even bothered to tweak them. i'm currently playing through Killzone 1, which isn't as bad as i was led to believe, but i had to customize and tweak the buttons and sensitivity until i got it to a comfort level i enjoyed.
guys face it, this game isn't shaping up. EVERY preview has said the gameplay needs a lot of work. it's going to be another haze
then you're only reading previews that support your beliefs.
is a halo and MS lover.. I dont see how this game doesnt stand out from other FPS games. Look at gears 2. its the same crap as gears 1 and the animation is horrible and the battles look no where near as intense as the ones we seen in killzone 2... Gears 2, You shot a enemy 20 times and he just falls while running towards u. wow.. .. Killzone 2, you shot a enemy and his arms start flying where you shot him and he dies realistically.. Awesomness Everything i have seen in killzone 2 i have yet seen done in another FPS game.. The whole wall thing falling down which looks amazing. the way the bad guys move and die. everything about the game screams new crap that hasnt been done yet. Killzone 2 will set the bar for fps games..
other websites like these no name ones have a bunch of idiots working there who no nothing about video games and i actually wonder if the play them sometimes.. If you read the guys article you can tell he is a complete moron.. If he was at e3 how the hell didnt he hear anything about the multi player in killzone 2?? None of us were there and we know more about the game than he does.. They gave out a lot of info about the multi player and showed demos off that impressed a lot of people.. There are a crap load of good previews for killzone 2. and it even won best of e3 at some sites. You can never trust certain websites becasue of fanboys. Its just to weird these days with game reviews becasue there so far off.. If a games good its good and all reviews should be in the same ball park. Same with a bad game.. But these days games get 10's here and a 5 at another website.. Makes no sense.. Its just fanboy crap like this article..
I'm very encouraged by the previews as a good amount of them are saying that the graphics are top-notch, the gameplay is immersive and the A.I. is improved. But I am noticing a trend. What's the deal with this "lacking something special" bullshit? I'm starting to think that what's missing is an Xbox controller and a Live subscription. If this were on the Xbox this would be hyped to death and made to seem like "the next big thing." Instead, reviewers/previewers are grasping at straws for anything negative. The previewer in this article even admits as much when he talks about needing mouse and keypad support... because he doesn't like the controls.
that's really how they feel, at the same time who cares how they feel? Who are these people? Some other guy with a blog thinks MGS4 is horrible, who really cares?
I love the gritty KZ world, the Helgast are a great enemy. The story has great potential. Anyone saying they don't see anything special in the KZ universe just aren't looking very hard. KZ Liberation on PSP was a great addition, and now I am really looking forward to KZ2...
If you had the smallest ounce of a brain, and could read English, you would realize many things about Killzone 2's E3 showing. Sure, not only does it have 6 months until they actually put it into production, but I'm sure that the pretty white blinding letters at the top center of the screen screaming "PRE-ALPHA BUILD" would have gotten to someone. If you were smart, though, you would have realized that games controls are fixed in Pre-Beta, and are usually fixed in a little stage of developement known as the "touch-up" stage (last 2 months) of production. As, when finishing the game is the priority, it you have forgotten that the game was also toned down so the AI was less realistic, they added items such as explosives to make it easier to pass through the levels, and health was increased during playtime. And it was in PRE-ALPHA BUILD. Of course, you should have known this, considering, you are a professional, correct?
Actually, according to the exact same guy who said the AI was toned down: "We will not force you to use one set of controls." And considering the controls in the first Killzone were fully customizable, I'm betting they will be in Killzone 2 also. So any complaints about control schemes are moot from this point on. I guess they'll just have to stick with the "missing something special" complaint. http://killzone.com/kz/_ns:... This is the recap thread, I'm not searching through 30 pages to find the real post. If you want to, go for it.
I would really like it if it was, so far UT3 is the only game to offer support.
seems to me they were asked about keyboard/mouse support at leipzig '07 and the devs said no. i'm not 100% positive though.
This article and it's author seem to be reaching out for anything to complain about. If Killzone 2 could actually transport a person into a fully realized 3d simulator (via matrix)... someone (usually posing a unbias) will find something to complain about. One comment stuck out to me as being extra stupid; "The cover system isn’t realistic as we've seen in FPS's such as Rainbow Six Vegas where characters put their back to the wall" I am not knocking the cover system of other games, but having ones back against a wall is not realistic. I've played paintball for quit some time and I've never seen anyone even "professional" have their backs against the wall ALL the time. ANYWAY, how the hell are the developers suppose to have your back against the wall and still remain in 1st person? You know as soon as they use that cover system to satify the nay sayers, another person (if not the same critic) will accuse KZ2 of copying the other games like Gears of War 2. Honesty, I like the slower more realistic movement of the game. I bet the same author (slash xboxfanboy) probably praised Ghost Recon for the 360. That game has very slow, realistic control and 'feel' maybe even a bit too real for most. Well, of coarse I guess no matter what logic I throw into my argument there is nothing I can post to combat bias fanboyism.
well gears won GOTY due to nothing but graphics so surely this deserves Game of the decade?
All i know from what i've seen and read of Killzone2 it sounds and looks like it's gonna be one heck of an awesome game. I want it. For the cover system I remember just about every FPS i have ever played before any cover systems even existed i'd crouch behind debris or whatever i could use in the environment facing the enemy to get a good look at where i'm getting shot from even standing up to get a better peak then quickly getting back into a crouch as the enemy saw me. From videos I have seen of people using the cover system in K2 it looks to be an extension of this and looks like it's done pretty well.
and this is just from watching demos/trailers. holy sh1t, how crazy is it gonna be to play it!?.....come on feb. '09
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.