IncGamers' Andy Alderson looks at PS3 exclusive Killzone 2.
A good review and some good footage too.
Yeah, I am not sure if I would have given it such a low score though...
this guy's biggest beef is the gameplay and controls, and obviously, judging by the footage, he, or whoever reviewed the game really suck. Maybe they should practice a bit more, THEN give us a review.
I think the whole idea of pointing out the issues with the controls, as well as showing how difficult it actually is, is important. I think this demonstrates it well. It's hard not to compare to otehr FPSs as there are some excellent ones out there and most people would have those games and draw comparisons, which is all a reviewer does too. How can you rate a game if there is no benchmark? Other games have set the benchmarks so that newer games can surpass them.
There's a site called teletext, which just gave Killzone 2 it's third 7/10 score, and it's been added to Metacritic. I don't see this score from IncGamers added on Metacritic. I wish they would add all scores so the game could have a fair Metacritic average.
talk about getting someone that's not good at FPS games to do the review. Oh well, just his opinion. You know a game is amazing when AA is a low score.
this on metacritic?
Excellent video :D I'm still reeling from the groin shot though...
Agreed, I'm certain this game deserves a 9 and above and nothing less.
You are talking about a .2 difference from his score.
@omodis420 an 8.8 not a 9.0 The overwhelming CONSENSUS amongst reviews is the Killzone 2 is .....clearly....a 9+/10 game. Only a handful....the clear minority....scored it below 9 - and for the most ridiculous reasons. Majority Rulz folks. Who gives a fck what the small group of biased fanboyz OPINIONS are. BTW. I'm predicting Gamespot has finally grown up and will give a 9.3/10
Awesome, I'm glad they have made great AI for this game... something that lacks in most games these days!
Is there any spoilers in this before I watch it? :O
I ended up watching it, and there's a few times I just had to mute it and look away fast, because yes it does attract spoilers to it. To add to it, this review was mediocre. The journalist really can't just play THIS game for what it IS. He is constantly comparing it to other shooters, and even going so far as to say the train scene near the end of the game is ripped off of Gears of War 1. He mentions the game is just like Rainbow Six Vegas and COD. I think game reviewers today need to be exposed to the Men in Black memory erase thing. That way we can erase your idiotic brain of other shooters, so you can just rate this game for what it does and doesn't do on its own merit. Videogame journalists need to have a big meeting and all agree to just stop doing this,"It doesn't have COD on the box, it fails." The score is great don't get me wrong, but the way the journalist went about it, and the negatives he mentions are just so overlookable it's near mentally handicapped. The biggest gripes he presents is the story doesn't let you learn much more about the Helghast(what's there to learn about them if you have already been to Killzone.com to read up on the games universe), and that the controls are sluggish. The dingle berry probably played with Alternate 2 control scheme, and just kept wishing it was COD. Reviewers need to evolve already this crap is getting juvenile to say the least.
"To add to it, this review was mediocre. The journalist really can't just play THIS game for what it IS. He is constantly comparing it to other shooters, and even going so far as to say the train scene near the end of the game is ripped off of Gears of War 1. He mentions the game is just like Rainbow Six Vegas and COD. " Exactly my point ! Err..guess i should of read your post before i posted my other comment below :P Still..i stand by what i said !
I think comparing the game to others is fairly important, really. The review mentions that it doesn't really do anything new; comparing it to other games that it's borrowing from (as can be seen pretty clearly at some points in the video) gives a decent indication as to who's going to like it. It's a quick and easy way of explaining various mechanics, and I think the video's meant as a companion piece to the written one, too. As for the backstory thing, what you said is mentioned in the review, too - that there is a big, decent backstory, but it's a shame that it's not explored in the game :) I figured the game would have made more of it rather than expecting you'd read the website from top to bottom, but then, it is a highly hyped game... Anyway! Good review. Looking forward to the game :)
I don't understand some of these reviews.. The most harsh ones (the 7-8's) Always complain about it not "revolusionizing" the FPS genre or some Bullsh*t Why can't reviewers just review the game for what it is? What it offers? Instead of comparing to other games that have entirely different goals. Doesn't make sense.
I want to hear about how robust the multi-player is and how in-depth they went with the leveling/badge system. THAT is a games stay power and that should weigh in heavily on review numbers. I dont care about what they mark it down as... Friday it will be mine and I can judge for myself.
I think you're missing the point of the review if you don't see that the game has been based on its own merits, but all reviewers, no matter where they write for or review for, are humans too, and have an opinion. It's this opinion that forms the basis of a review, and the reviewer will obviously draw comparisons. I think, having watched the video again, that the score does reflect that multiplayer is where the game is at, and i don't think the reviewer would have given the game such a high mark if it wasn't a good multiplayer game.
Yes,i understand everyone has their own opinion. I guess my point is..it's just odd that every PS3 exclusive has to somehow change the face of gaming as we know it in order for it to be a good game and get great scores. Resistance 2 for example. decent story Great graphics Amazing gameplay Unrivaled online And it get's 7's & 8's Gears of war 2 Decent story Great graphics amazing gameplay buggy un-playeable online and it get's 9's and perfect 10's. These reviewers always seem to go out of their way to find little things to nit-pick about for PS3 exclusives. It just seems a little un-fair in my opinion.Frankly,im sick of it.
On the same site, Gears of War 2 got a 9...only 0.2 of a difference. Incidentally there is a written review for KZ2 which can be found here and is written by the same guy that did the video review. http://www.incgamers.com/Re...
The game looks really good and will hopefully sell extremely well. Some people disagree with the review and some agree but I myself will never understand why we take them serious. 8.8 is a goodscore and I hope you guys have a blast playing it.
8.8 is a very good score. I understand why everyone is annoyed by the comparisons to other games though. All I know for sure is that tomorrow night/Friday morning at about 12:15 am I will be home from Gamestop and up all night playing the game. I'm going for a straight playthrough.
Stop moaning you childish f*ckers, it's a perfectly fair and decent review Unbelievable
is the content of the review some times does not reflect the score given. That and how some reviewers / journalist will nitpick one aspect of a game that has not been complained about in other games in the past in the same genre. Reviews probably would not be taken so seriously if there was no scoring system. It seems like people are arguing more about numbers (scores, grades, sales) than anything else this generation. Personally the only review I care about is my own.
8.8 hummph should be at least a nine
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.