Top
790°

Killzone 2 Review Bias?

Badassgamer writes:

"Killzone 2, the highly anticipated Sony's Playstation 3 Sci-fi First Person Shooter has been reviewed by countless online sites and game magazines. while the current scores bode very well for the exclusive shooter, some of them give off a very strong sense of bias and favouritism, not something you would expect when dealing with the mass readership reviews influence. "

Read Full Story >>
badassgamer.co.cc
The story is too old to be commented.
Timberland2K92797d ago (Edited 2797d ago )

that guy just said f*k u haterz and this blows the #(#t out of halo's [email protected]

Edit:'Call of Duty 4 and Halo 3 were both great looking games at the respective times of their release, however they still had low-res textures and poor character models in some places, yet reviewers simply ignored them, Killzone 2 however, every low-res texture is spotted and the game is criticised'

Secondly, it seems like Reviewers are missing the point of Killzone 2's gameplay, some are expecting the game to completely change the genre, this is however not the case, Killzone 2 is a shooter that does what shooters are supposed to do, and does them to a very high standard, neither Halo nor Call of duty 4, revolutionised the genre, yet they were never docked points for it. Reviewers say Killzone 2 is 'samey' with a weak story and cliche FPS techniques, I am sorry to once again disagree but I have never seen a more cliche War story than that of Call of Duty 4, and again nobody felt the need to mention it.

And with the review scores rolling in, we can spot some of this bias still, firstly it seems like some reviewers believe it is their job to review a product based on what it doesn't have, now I have never quite understood this logic, killzone 2 is getting scored down for lacking a co-op mode, sure that would have been a great addition, but the fact is it isn't part of the game, therefore reviewers should not take points away for the lack of the feature, to further my point take a look at the reviews of Call of Duty 4, a great shooter in many ways, with an addicting multiplayer mode, the game did not have co-op, I repeat it did not have a co-op feature, yet it was barely mentioned in reviews, and even in reviews were it was brought up, points were usually not deducted. This is not the same with Killzone 2. If this applies to Killzone 2 then every shooter hence forth had better include a co-op mode, or we should expect the same to happen.

Edit Again On Co-Op

I Say GET YOUR FUGGIN OWN GAME

Edit One More TIME COD 4 Gametrailers.com 9.4 Final Paragraph
We’re a little disappointed that Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare didn’t stretch the boundaries of gameplay a little more in the single-player, but fans will be ecstatic. It’s absolutely relentless in its assault on the senses and never lets up until the last trigger has been squeezed. The multiplayer is even better, with the perks and weapon upgrades acting as a balance to the lack of vehicles. The authenticity on display here is to be commended, getting you as close as you can possibly be to something that far braver people experience--without the risk.

Kz2 gotta 9.2

Simon_Brezhnev2797d ago

I agree with u lol but the article is talking about IGN but yall think ign is not bias they just slick with it. They score it high enough to not lose credibility but not higher then 360 exclusives we know killzone deserves 10 for graphics.

360 man2797d ago

after watching the gametrailers review i saw a comment which said gears 2 blows this out the water. at first i thought lol wat a fanboy, but then i watched the gears 2 review and whilst not blowing kz2 out the water, it was still very much up there with it. the textures in gears 2 made killzone 2s textures seem so blurry and undetailed. and then wen they take cover on to a wall in killzone 2 the textures looked like ps1. my point is whilst kz2 is a good game. its not a perfect game, so if a reviewer doesnt give it 10/10 dont get so annoyed.

Daz2797d ago

The point you just crying because you didnt get what you wanted. ENd of

GamerPS3602797d ago (Edited 2797d ago )

Gears 2 sux period. Its worse than Gear 1. I love gear 1 while Gear 2 is nothing but hype. That game doesn't even make 7 in my rating. Reviewers failed to mention crappy online. Graphic is all plastic looking. I wasted 60+tax on it. Never trusting anything other than oxm for 360 reviews.
Resistance 2 is no better either. Resistance 1 was much better game (gameplay).
while KZ2 looks miles better than both. By the look, it should be much better than COD4. Well, 2 more days to Demo and will know.

edit: 360 man below
You guys just talk about graphic, graphic, graphic. I am just saying graphic alone doesn't make game. I will take Well balanced game any day than just superb graphic game. Gears2 texture might be good but the atmosphere sux and its too Shinny for war feeling. It would not be bad for ratchet game but for gears 1 where it stands gears 2 is just let down.

Danja2797d ago

Good article , but come on we should have all expected this , it's PS3 exclusive reviewers always try to nit-pick and deduct points that they wouldn't do if it was on another platform.....

are PS3 exclusives rated and held so high on a pedestal that each high profile game has to be picked apart just so they can feel good within themselves that the game didn't live up to the hype.

or they just simply wish it wasn't on the PS3...so they hold a grudge.

1st GOTY contender confirmed....

360 man2797d ago (Edited 2797d ago )

'gears 2 sux period' well thank you for enlighting us with ur wisdom

EDIT Below

i never said it werent beautiful, i said it werent perfect which its not.
cant u read

Graphics Whore2797d ago (Edited 2797d ago )

No offense 360 man, but not one reviewer mentioned how broken Gears of War 2 was online. It was one hell of a surprise buying that game going to my friends house to play and the online literally not working.

Killzone 2 is the best looking console game available period. It's not subjective, you have eyes, you can clearly see.

0verdrive2797d ago (Edited 2797d ago )

the graphics of gears2 looking better than kz2? ok, so honestly i havent played eitehr, but i mean... you and whoever posted that comment on GT must be two of a kind, because it seems like you guys are the ONLY two people who see it that way.

i mean, the only argument that you have is that the texture work is slightly better on gears, which only attest to part of the graphical package, including lighting, effects, and physics. and to top it off, gears is a tps, so by design the player is looking at the textures from much farther away, rather than staring at the textures up close on the box your hiding behind in kz2. texture work is going going to look better from farther away, whether it is better or not.

aside from that, i think its pretty much accepted that kz2 is more of a graphical beast than gears is, its pretty much been recognized by... well everyone. its being compared to crysis, for crying out loud; the best looking pc game to date, running on a machines that are as powerful as 3xboxes and 3ps3s all bundled into one. so i mean... yeh.

on topic: this article speaks the truth. no joke.

anh_duong2797d ago (Edited 2797d ago )

seriously, eurogamer is so far up microsoft's arse that they can almost see CVG and UGO's feet.

killzone, is the first game i read where reviews moan so much about co-op and only a 10hr playtime for a fps. most games you don't even hear reviewers complain about not having multiplayer let a lone co-op.

shingo2797d ago

I AGREE with that article

360 man2797d ago (Edited 2797d ago )

wow overdrive u hav to be the dumbest person in the world. didnt u read my comment, thats exactly wat i said. i never said the graphics in gears 2 were better as a whole i said the texture aspect of it was better. which u stated aswell. so wats the problem

SL1M DADDY2797d ago

I will say that any competent gamer with half a brain will see how silly and bias it is to dock the score of a game like this for a lack in Co-Op modes. Sorry, but if it has a spectacular MP and a half way decent SP then the game should get very high marks. If it has anything better it should get even better scores. All I am saying is that to dock the game for lack of co-op is just plain poor journalism.

king dong2797d ago

why are you crying about kz2's score? you didn't make the game, you are gonna buy it no matter what, so whats the problem?? it's obvious that from a campaign standpoint, kz2 brings nothing new to the genre, but it has an impressive sounding multiplayer, so to me the scores seem rite on the money!

Legion2797d ago

You do realize that a portion of the review issue is that the hype prior to the game raised expectations. With previous games they rated higher due to when they came out and what was expected of the game during that time.

Time has passed and expectations have been ramped up. So though the hype has assisted in the sales and awareness of the game, it is a double edged sword because everyone is looking for the game to be so much more then what previous games have offered. Thus the reduction in reviews for some.

sorry the nature of the beast when it comes to reviews these days.

CrazzyMan2797d ago

Gears of War - 5 stars

Pros:

Gorgeous environments; engaging story; improved gameplay mechanics; fun new multiplayer gametypes; bot support; incredibly addictive Horde mode.

Cons:

Vehicle sequences can be frustrating; AI can get in your way; occasional glitches and framerate hiccups.

AND

Killzone 2 - 4.5 stars

Pros:

Superb visuals; diverse multiplayer modes; entertaining gameplay; Helghast are great bad guys.

Cons:

AI can be hit or miss; slight stuttering and loading issues; silly Sixaxis segments.

Nuff said.

Real Gambler2797d ago

Yes, some of the big reviewers are biased, but the problem with a big release like Killzone 2 is the fact that everybody in the world suddendly become a reviewer. Every newspaper (financial, sport, or anything else goes) will have a review from a journalist who probably played only 2 games in his life. Every blog will have a review. And sure enough, they do that to get hits. If they give 10/10, nobody will read the article. They HAVE to find something wrong, so people hit their webpages and they get more money from advertisers.

So don't worry about the big reviewers. By now, you know which one are biased and which one are not. Worry about all the little "experts" who will review this game (or any good game) in their newspaper, blog, website so they can get hits. They are not biased, they just want hits. And sure enough, they'll get many.

P.S.: Great article btw.

morganfell2797d ago (Edited 2797d ago )

http://xbox360.ign.com/arti...

"A "10" is not a score we give out very often. In fact, the last time we gave a 10 to a console game was Soul Calibur in 1999. A 10 doesn't mean a game is perfect -- it means a game is pushing boundaries, expanding a genre, and doing many things to a level so far above and beyond its competitors that they overshadows any flaws. Certainly, GTA IV has some issues, the most noticeable being the occasional flaw in the cover system, but there are many more pieces of GTA IV that are better than anything I've seen from a game in the past decade. We don't give 10s often -- just to games that merit the score."

GTA IV:

Graphics - 10
The level of detail is astounding. Liberty City feels alive and lived in. While there are some technical issues, the artistic merits push the score to the max. A true marvel.

Killzone 2

Graphics - 9.5
Phenomenal visuals prove that Guerrilla either met or surpassed that infamous E3 trailer. Some technical issues hold it back from being a completely flawless masterpiece.

GWAVE2797d ago

Are the complaints legitimate? Maybe. I wouldn't be the first to say that reviewers need to:

1) Review the GAME, not what the game COULD be
2) Be consistent

Even still, I think that docking the game is a legitimate action. I do. HOWEVER, what about the reviews for Left 4 Dead? Were the graphics average? Yup. Was there a storyline? Nope. Yet, when reviews came around they all say "Eh, we can give this game a pass. Storyline doesn't matter". Reviewers said the same thing about the super-adrenaline Gears of War 2. They said "Yeah, the storyline is corny but that's not why this game is awesome!". And let's not even start about how Gears 2's matchmaking and multiplayer servers were broken.

If we're being fair, we should dock those games (both of which came out in late 2008, so it's not like I'm using some long-bygone game as an example) for NOT having those features. Left 4 Dead lacked a competent single-player portion. It should be docked, yet it WASN'T.

Now, I'm fine with reviewers giving a game a pass. I am. Bioshock got a pass for no multiplayer because it was unique enough. Left 4 Dead got a pass because the co-op was very fun. But why doesn't Killzone 2 get a pass? The 32-person multiplayer doesn't make up for it? The stellar graphics don't make up for it? What qualifies a game to get a pass on issues that would otherwise hurt the review score?

THIS is the "bias" that people are complaining about, and it's a perfectly legitimate complaint.

jcgamer2797d ago

right now i have a smile on my face...i own a PS3, i have Killzone 2 a.k.a KillzOWN 2 on pre order, and in a matter of weeks PS3 owners worldwide will be having some goooood times...lol...so don't get it twisted...cause at the end of the day, bias or no bias, PS3 owners are some lucky mofo's...lol...and we're about to be on one hellava first party and exclusive ride in 2009 and beyond! KZ2 February 2009...and man, we're just getting started...

Kizzy 2 FTW! lol :)

freeblue2797d ago

We expected some bias against the PS3.. but expecting doesn't mean we accepted it.

we should all remind the "NO-CO OP" on every shooter reviews from now on if the reviewers "forget" to minus points on their reviews.

It will be a passive protect.. no words beside the "no coop" ocmments. those brown noses will know what that means.

jBat172797d ago

the 1up review mentioned it. broken is the word they used to describe the gears of lag 2 multi. and still gave it an A+. fanboys googles were on

even with the patch, it's still broken. heck, anything p2p is broken.

i've been spoiled by R2 in the past couple of months and moved back to COD4 to get my max emblem. but i can't stand the disconnects in COD4 because R2 never had those. that's p2p for you.

BRG90002797d ago

bias = noun
biased = adjective

The critics exhibit bias.
The critics ARE BIASED.
There exists bias.

Giriath2797d ago (Edited 2797d ago )

This article pretty much sums up what I've been thinking all the time with these reviewers scoring it a 9, all with these same reasons to do so. It would seem the standard of the FPS genre suddenly got upped with the release of Killzone 2. Every FPS is now expected to revolutionize the genre and it has to have co-op and visuals that top Killzone 2's without any low-resolution textures or other minor graphical issues what so ever.

What I find most ridiculous is that being the first FPS to utilize a cover system while remaining in first person, having a dynamically changing mission based multiplayer mode and being able to share abilities among classes to amount to over 50 different class set-ups is considered "not doing anything new".

Phew, Bungie better deliver Jesus with Halo 3: ODST, cause the standard just got insane.

The Lazy One2797d ago

this guy needs to QQ more. The game is rated within 2 points of almost all the top rated games of all of 2008. cry me a river.

soxfan20052797d ago

Over-hyping ANYTHING will bring about negative press, and Killzone 2 has been WAY overhyped. Many on this site are already proclaiming it "best game ever". It's NOT EVEN OUT YET! Remember "Titanic" (the movie)? It was over-hyped, and initially received a lot of negative press. It however, won best picture, and is the #1 movie of all time. Maybe good things are in store for KZ2 as well. Only time will tell. But, over-hyping will only do a disservice to a game. Sony fanboys should remember this when the next big exclusive comes out.

Giriath2797d ago

I think you should target that at the media, cause the Sony fanboys don't sound loud in their forums. Halo 3 did fine even though it's the most hyped game ever...at least it did fine in the reviews.

The Lazy One2797d ago

And it's scoring about the same as halo 3. What's your point?

Lifendz2797d ago

Like I was just telling some guy in another new article, there is a double standard. Look at how they're reviewing KZ2. Good scores but the scores are almost because the game is so good that the gaming sites would just look silly if they knocked it down to AA or A.

I love it. I can't wait to see these guys try to jump back on Sony's D!*K. That Killzone engine is only going to get better. [email protected] haters.

morganfell2797d ago

Great comments Lifendz.

It has to be understood that after the infamous CGI trailer, many of these sites cast disparaging remarks on Sony and the PS3. Some even stated they would never achieve that level of detail. If they admit Sony has accomplished this (and they have indeed) then they are left with egg on their faces looking like the doubting Thomas dirtbags they are in truth.

Guitarded2797d ago

Unless they are in 1080P at 120fps in 4D!

N2NOther2797d ago

You're using a game that came out a year and a half ago's score against a new game. Something that they felt was disappointing nearly 2 years ago is certainly going to have a great effect on the score of a new game. Even if it is 3 tenths of a point.

It's not too much to ask for a genre game to innovate. Especially since the Gold standard of current FPS is called out on it. And really, so what if ANY game scores higher. It's still getting an amazing score.

I think Jackie Brown was the best film of 1997, and certainly better than Titanic, but that doesn't change the fact that Jackie Brown was incredibly well reviewed...And even if it wasn't, I still love the film. What matter is what YOU think...Not some guy on Gametrailers. It's really kind of silly for anyone to get their panties this much in a bunch for review score.

I know I'm going to get the game on release day. The only thing I use reviews for is to see if there is a consensus on the good and the bad and to see if any issues I don't like pop up. So far, my biggest concern is the controls. COD 4 has spoiled the hell out of me.

Alucard_4202796d ago (Edited 2796d ago )

bla bla bla

pain777pas2796d ago

It doesn't matter what they review seriously this is PS3's time to shine. When ME1, Halo3, Bioshock and Rockband came out Xbox was the bomb now PS3 is just starting to rev enjoy every gamer out there. I said ENJOY what looks to be a great game.

Lich1202796d ago

Quick note slightly on topic, I see alot of mention how critics didn't talk about the broken gears 2 multiplayer. Well, I think that largely has to do with it being impossible for them to know about. Obviously the LAN portion worked fine and felt good. Im betting thats what they saw the most of. If they were doing matchmaking then it was also probably fine at the time since the servers weren't overloaded. Just wanted to point out that maybe they weren't being bias... just not thorough enough.

But again lets keep in mind, reviewers aren't testers. If anything we should be bashing epic's testers.

+ Show (33) more repliesLast reply 2796d ago
Graphics Whore2797d ago

It's there, you don't have to look hard. Take a quick skim across the reviews and some of the con's are histerical.

crck2797d ago

That's because Sony didn't send out a $800 bride bag to all the reviewers. I can honestly say these "game journalists" are a joke. Especially that X-play review. It took no more then 20 seconds into their review to bag on the PS3 and its owners.

Lifendz2797d ago

seriously, that was not called for. I agree with you completely. That ugly ***** Morgan Webb has the nerve to crack a joke like that? Okay, she can crack jokes but fair is fair--give it to both sides. I hear NO 360 jokes on there. I wonder how many times Morgan's 360 died on her assuming she even plays games for real and isn't there to serve as eye candy for viewers.

Whatever. Xplay has long been a fanboy show imo. I put them right up there with Gamespot.

IGN is a different story. Jeff Haynes gave Resistance a 9.5 and is embarrased about it. So he's playing it safe now and gave Killzone 2 a 9.4. Didn't even give a 10 in graphics. I can't believe it. Killzone 2, the most gorgeous console game to ever drop, isn't a 10 in graphics? Bad review confirmed.

DeadIIIRed2796d ago

Don't forget Kotaku's "preview" ( I guess that's what you call it when your not prestigious enough to receive a review copy) where the dude said the graphics were "too clean."
I was hoping that IGN would rise above the bs; but giving Killzone a 9 in graphics?

thereapersson2797d ago (Edited 2797d ago )

That picture is funny when viewed in the context of this article :)

Kleptic2797d ago (Edited 2797d ago )

haha I completely agree...i thought the exact same thing right after I saw the headline...I would give you 2 bubbles if I could...maybe its time for a fake account?...

its also funny in that I saw this article right after watching that review 'preview' from GS...where the douche in the hat said 'i haven't seen character models this bad since Oblivion'...

i'll just leave it at that...there really isn't much that can be said about something so blatantly wrong...

solideagle12797d ago

article. UGO and TVG and CVG curse u.
now wait for 1up, gamespot and edge. EGM is closed so no worries from there. 1up is under UGO belt so expect teh same score 8/10.
this game should have got many many perfect scores like GTA4 and COD. its visual and frame rate stability makes this perfect game. no game matched this game's graphics so suck on that reviewers.
thanks

Sasanova2797d ago

just wait till the halo ODST expansion pack comes out. another 0 personality character walking around doing nothing in a combat evolved colorful world which will obviously be so much better then kz2.

Simon_Brezhnev2797d ago

and you know it lil halo fanboys going to have an orgasm for the colorful world

GrieverSoul2797d ago

It will also give revolution to every game genre after!
It surpasses every thing and its the best! Good gameplay and great graphics, arguebly the best looking ever! It will be a monument and a turning point in videogame history! When OSDT laucnhes it will make the transition millions expected! Videogames will become Works of Art! A museum will be opened and a Master Chief statue raised on the front entrance with a fountain and a virtual Cortana will light up at night.

/end of sarcam/

bassturd2797d ago (Edited 2797d ago )

more like lol @ the truth

We know how it is. Killzone 2 is scrutinized beyond justification. Go back and look at many reviews of Halo 3 and it gets way too many passes.

Uh oh a slightly blurry texture on a barricade in Killzone 2. Minus 0.5 points! It's just how it is. Not gonna stop anyone from PS3 owners from buying the game of course. All it does is fuel these fanboy wars further cuz everyone can clearly see the biased.

Kleptic2797d ago

look people...here we are whining about it...yet any person that wasn't ignorant..which included a lot of us...KNEW it would happen...so whatever...like someone mentioned, its not going to change anything...

some people in the media just don't want graphical side of the console war to be single handedly ended by one game...ended by the first game of Sony's crazy lineup for the next year...several of which are said to be so beyond ridiculous in visuals that Sony may actually live up to how much they hyped the PS3's power...

next step...RE5 unanimously getting 'best visuals ever' from neutral websites...its definitely safer that way...not saying I agree with it (after playing the PS3 and 360 demo several times on the same HDTV, its not even close imo)...but I would put money on it getting higher marks than killzone 2 on visuals...

if we knew it was coming...why cry about it?...frankly, its a little less than I expected...overall killzone 2 is still at 93 on meta...not that I care about that either...just surprising...I was expecting the game to drop down under 90 sooner rather than later...still will happen though...

Daishi2797d ago

Sasanova are you trying to advertise everything Halo? If KZ2 was an RTS would you critisize Starcraft because most Starcraft fans wouldn't play it? Your trying so hard to make KZ the next big thing and why? Just because it is or isn't popular doesn't change what you get in the box. If Halo ODST isn't any good, guess what, nobody will play it. Sure you'll have the Halo faithful buy it day one, but they would just turn around and sell it to get something else. And then people who waited wouldn't have to get a new copy lowering new sales for the game. I played KZ more than halo because of the online, but when halo 2 came out I never touched KZ again because it was so much more enjoyable to me. Will I enjoy Halo 3 more than Killzone 2, more than likely. Why? Because of the vast difference in gameplay, which is primarily because of mobility (and you can race, play soccer, take goofy photos, and other things than shooting). Does that make it a better game, absollutely not. I know people who hate the gameplay of Halo because it is so arcadey but I don't rub it in their face. KZ2 will not make or break the PS3, but it certainly will appease fans of the first one, that I am sure of.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 2797d ago