Gazette: Sony's 'Killzone 2' lives up to the hype - Review

Gazette: When Sony announced the PlayStation 3 at the 2005 Electronic Entertainment Expo, its centerpiece was a breathtaking chunk of footage from a game called "Killzone 2." The clip, which showed a squad of troopers descending on a city and battling alien forces, was so dramatic that many viewers questioned whether the game itself could possibly live up to it.

Four years later, the verdict is in: "Killzone 2" ($59.99) is awe-inspiring. With crisp, cinema-quality graphics and immersive sound design, this first-person shooter feels like an interactive version of a big-screen war epic.

When the original "Killzone" was released for the PlayStation 2 in 2004, it was hyped as the game that would take down Microsoft's landmark "Halo." It fell far short of that goal, with sloppy controls, inconsistent graphics and weak AI.

In "Killzone 2," Guerrilla has answered all those complaints - and given the mighty "Halo" franchise something to live up to.


This review was unclear about whether this was 3.5 out of 4 or 5 stars. Having no luck finding their review criteria, and based on the tone of the review, I chose 4.

The story is too old to be commented.
Fishy Fingers3584d ago

Yeah pretty wierd. Is it even out of four? The review simply states "Three-and-a-half stars.".

HighDefinition3584d ago (Edited 3584d ago )


Either way, regardless of score...........

"In "Killzone 2," Guerrilla has answered all those complaints - and given the mighty "Halo" franchise something to live up to."

Sound like they liked it.

Fishy Fingers3584d ago

Oh yeah, very positive all in all.

meepmoopmeep3584d ago

i never had doubt that KZ2 wouldn't.

and yeah, weird rating system

Nineball21123584d ago (Edited 3584d ago )

or if it was out of 5 stars. :-/

Should I update the story with that information?

If everyone feels that's important, I'll do that.

Edit: I updated the submission explaining why I used 4 stars. My decision might have been incorrect, but I had nothing else to go by.

fallingdove3584d ago

There is no middle ground, either the game is good with a 3 or 4 or it is bad with a 1 or 2. It eliminates the ambiguity of a middle number indicating that it is both good and bad.

It is a bit strange to look at considering we generally see scales measured in 5 or 10.

PrimordialSoupBase3584d ago

Welcome to the world of newspapers. Why am I not surprised that most of you rarely read one enough to recognize this type of scale?

Max Power3584d ago

it could be out of 4 stars, i know that for dish network movies are rated out of four stars, at least i have never seen higher than four.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 3584d ago
Beg For Mercy3584d ago

the meats down to 91 now if gamespot gives it a low score its gonna probably drop down to like a 89 or something

LarVanian3584d ago

Metacritic is purposefully trying to lower the score.
They are adding in as many 8/10s and 9/10s as possible, ignoring loads of 9.5 and 10/10 scores.

Fishy Fingers3584d ago (Edited 3584d ago )

Doesn't really matter in a few days I'll be playing it not just reading about it, then I can come to my own conclusions (as can everyone else).

Still, off the top of my head, even if Gamespot gave it 0/100 it would only bring the meta score down to around 89.5 and I'm pretty sure they'll be some what more generous than that.

Metacritic has no impact on your own opinion. Or at least shouldn't.

poindat3584d ago

Get your head out of your ass. If you would be intelligent enough to look for it, you would see that Metacritic adds reviews ONLY from sources that are legit enough to make a list. No more than that. They are not purposefully adding lower scores to degrade the rating.

LarVanian3584d ago

Lol yeah like how they added a blog review from a random member of a random site for Fable 2?

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 3584d ago
onomix3584d ago (Edited 3584d ago )

You went from 97% to 91%. In few days, you will have 89%. Hhahahaa.

talltony3584d ago

Dude metacritic has nothing to do how great the game is, The majority of the reveiewers only reviewed the single player and barely touched the multiplayer. Let me ask you this do you think cod4 is praised because of its single player or multiplayer?

Jerk1203584d ago

It just goes to show that it living up to its hype is a load of bullcrap because it sure as hell didn't.

cereal_killa3584d ago

Metajoke is a Muppet fanboy site and the only people who use there scores is people like you....Muppets. This game is AAA no matter what anyone of you fanboys say and the only opinion that should matter to any game is your own.

Sibs3584d ago (Edited 3584d ago )

I'm sorry Sleipnir, have you played it?

I think not.

Plus, why are you using past tense, it isn't even out yet! These reviews mean nothing, it's for the fans to decide what's good and go out and buy it!

Revelation1013584d ago

Killzone 2 cums all over ur moms titties.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3584d ago
pixelsword3584d ago (Edited 3584d ago )

So I guess they're going off of the movie review rating, which would indeed be four stars (Ironically, The movie reviews are done on a A-F grade scale)

Show all comments (37)
The story is too old to be commented.