Top
400°
7.0

GameSpy: Killzone 3 Review

GS: While the action is largely the same as in Killzone 2, some notable additions improve upon the non-combat elements. Being able to just spend your earned points on gear is a big plus, as is the dialed-back class selection (Killzone 2's spread felt a bit bloated). I'm also a big fan of the new Operations mode, which plays out almost like a large-scale, head-to-head co-op match, complete with cut-scenes. Between that and the still-entertaining Warzone mode, PS3 fans will find enough to keep them happy until the inevitable Killzone 4. Maybe that will be the game to finally make me fall in love with the series.

Read Full Story >>
ps3.gamespy.com
The story is too old to be commented.
SonyNGP2379d ago

Just less than 2 weeks and it's mine!!

hennessey862379d ago

my TV and surround sound are waiting patiently

ASTAROTH2379d ago

Im waiting 4 it too!!. I will surely enjoy it. A big KZ fan so 4 me I dont care since I have them all... KILLZONE, KILLZONE LIBERATION, KILLZONE 2 and now KZ3. Also ...haters gona hate no matter how much you improve or not. They hate on Medal of Honor for being just a COD clone yet it was better than BLACK OPS but received average scores. I dont trust reviews on any console. I try to at least rent the games before judge them.

For tha ones saying reviewers are biased against PS3 games... I give you credit for defend that. The proves are everywhere. Just take a look at Dead Space 2. A better game on the PS3 and a game that includes a FULL aditional game on the package and no reviewer mentioned that or use that to give the PS3 version a higher score. It deserved it. Tell me im wrong but in the past the inclusion of one or more levels to one version of a multiplatform game made them the
"definitive" version. The reason to get it on that console. Not the case with Dead Space 2. Anyways....to all the 360 fanies posting here on a PS3 exclusive game... go ahead. Dissagree all you want and report my comment. The truth hurts and you always use the same tactics against opinions you dont like....disagree and hide... ohhh also the mods on this site really sucks!!

candystop2379d ago

Hype seems to have killed this game. Maybe now people will see graphics are not everything (even though Crysis2 is a beast) and get back to gaming.

TheLastGuardian2379d ago (Edited 2379d ago )

Graphics aren't the only thing Killzone 3 has going for it. It has great gameplay too. Story doesn't matter too much in FPS games imo. I've heard the campaign was long enough and full of epic set peices from game journalists I trust. From the 25 hours I've played of the beta so far, I think Killzone 3 is going to be my favorite online shooter ever.

No way does this game deserve a 7. How can Cod Blops get a better score than KZ3? Reviewers must not know a good FPS when they play one. The people who gave it a 7 are probably the same people who complain about how heavy the movement feels in Killzone. I sold my copy of Black Ops to afford Killzone 3. The Last time I played Cod Blops, I couldn't stand it after playing the KZ3 beta. It played like ass. The graphics are lame, the death animations are lame, the way you can miss knifing someone and still get a melee kill is lame, the hit boxes are way off and the movement is way too fast.

The main thing I hate about CoD multiplayer is all the stupid ways you can die. I don't like dying every 5 seconds but CoD has stupid helicopters, planes, claymores, rc cars, dogs and all kinds of other stupid shit to get you killed. I don't want killstreaks to get me free kills. KZ3 actually takes skills, critical thinking and teamwork. The kills are satisfying, especially brutal melee and I feel rewarded for doing something right. So maybe KZ3 doesn't have the best story, we'll it still has an epic campaign, the best use of 3D and Move we've seen so far and fun, addictive multiplayer so it deserves at least a 9 imo.

candystop2379d ago (Edited 2379d ago )

"Story doesn't matter too much in FPS games imo."

Not trying to knock you dude but sense when did story become meaningless? Story is very important and probably a big reason this game is getting so so reviews.

edit: So you pretty much just nailed it down to Gameplay and graphics with no story. strange

ShinMaster2379d ago

Didn't really expect any increase in score from these people.

Jinxstar2379d ago

Candystop.

The problem is the double standard. Look at CODBLOPS and tell me it had a "Great story". It didn't but it still didn't stop every site out there from giving it 9.5/10 scores.

As far as the "Space marine" type game that this falls under it probably has an above average story and I think that the last guardian is right. "Since" when did story matter in a online FPS. UT3 had a horrible story but played great online... if thats what he's buying it for damn right it's a 9 or 10/10 and I think most people feel the same way...

TheDivine2379d ago

Well im not defending kz3 or bashing it as i havnt played it but when you compare to reach and black ops saying the reviews are biased because they have better scores relize reach has 1-4 player co-op through the campaign, firefight, forge with unlimited custom maps, theater mode and was an epic game. Black ops has much more content also with zombie mode exc. Killzone 2 rocked and i loved the campaign but everything else is lacking compaired to the features in other games. Fps are about longevity and it doesnt have lots of modes and co-op, its awesome but the selling points of it are graphics and the fact its a fps for ps3.

BakedGoods2379d ago (Edited 2379d ago )

GameSpy actually gave it a 4/5. Looks like no one's even clicking the link.

ExplosionSauce2378d ago

The stuff people get away with here... -_-

paintsville2377d ago

Same old same old. PS3 fanboys here on the N4PS3.com whining about an "EXCLUSIVE" not getting a perfect 10.

+ Show (7) more repliesLast reply 2377d ago
MAJ0R2379d ago (Edited 2379d ago )

I'm not getting it, from what people are saying on the KZ3 forums it is a huge disappointment and a step down from KZ2

@wesley
wow how did u guess, it couldn't possibly be people who feel the same way as me

NoobJobz2379d ago (Edited 2379d ago )

No. KZ3 is much better than KZ2. KZ2 was a bad game IMO and KZ3 seems to be alot better. It would take alot of effort by GG to make it worse than KZ2.

DoomeDx2379d ago

How many double accounts do you have? Alot of agrees there.

KZ2 forums is full of noobs.
They always said about the KZ2 controls: ''Adept to it! Noobs!''

now the controls are diffrent, and they complain.
now its my turn to tell them to adept! I love it

BiggCMan2379d ago

I think both of you are wrong here. First of all, you should not go by what people say on forums. You should try the game out for yourself, go download the open beta in the store and see what you think. There is also a single player demo coming on Tuesday for everyone to download. Secondly, Killzone 2 was not a bad game, it was an excellent game. The story was very good despite what some people say, and it had a great ending that will start up Killzone 3. The controls are personal preference though, many loved them, others hated them, or bashed them without playing it because it makes them feel better. The multiplayer is still one of the best to this day. It requires skill and team work to succeed, and unlocking things was relieving because it took a while.

bageara2379d ago (Edited 2379d ago )

There are more people on the KZ forums that like the game than those that dont why not listen to them too....infact dont listen to anyone download the demos from PSN and make your own opinion

BARF2379d ago (Edited 2379d ago )

kz3 mp is not better than kz2. kz3's mp is average at best. people that like kz3 game are generally new players. sure there are improvements, but there are terrible changes made to kz3 to make the cod fans happy. kz3 is a twitch shooter full of camping marksman. kz2 actually involved some skill and teamwork, kz3 involves neither.

if not for the move, i would not get this game at all.

wow 8 disagrees with no reply. imagine that.

Downtown boogey2379d ago (Edited 2379d ago )

I didn't like KZ2. I had already seen all that basic FPS stuff before. KZ3 does look better, but it's still endowed by the same intrinsic issues as it's predecessor in that regard.

Again, the Guerrilla Games team is phenomenal but they just need a more creative lead!

Killzone3___2379d ago

@BiggCMan
i agree of everything you said only the team work thing.... if you play with a team it's really good but when you attack alone you have more fun and even kill more if you are good at it :) , yea , im talking about my self , i never liked team work , it's boring for me , MAG-battlefield-killzone and other games are all about team work but i still attack alone and kill more then playing with with a team and i have more fun because i attack which mean more excited , play alot better and faster , team work means hidding for me XD .... don't say im a cod noob , when i play i play for fun not to play like in real -.-

i dunno why but every time a ps3 exclusive is almost released alots of fanboys come and bash these games -.- ... look at the agree's of MAJ0R and other trollers ....

if you hate killzone 2 it means you are sucks at it , the people who knows how to play it are the one who knows if this game is good or not and based of what you trollers saying on your comments , some don't have a ps3 and some have the game but sucks at it ....

PinkFunk2379d ago

You know, I played KZ2 and enjoyed it. I thought the multiplayer was one of the most dynamic and deep experiences i've played FPS-wise in a long time. Coming from an early 1.3 CounterStrike CAL player.

IMO, KZ3 has improved a lot from KZ2. I'll probably get knocked quite a bit for saying this, but there was just something about the polish and controls of KZ2 that made it all seem unresponsive. Not that it totally ruined the experience for me, but I found the experience wasn't 'smooth' so to speak. KZ3, it many aspects, seems to improve upon the formula so much. I just feel like I have so much more flow, like I have a more direct influence upon my character. I love the heaviness is still there, but I feel as though I control my character much more fluently. Again I don't think this has anything to do with myself being a 'noob' in KZ2, I was always a good player and at the top of the class.

Anyway, personal opinion of course. I think KZ3 still definitely maintains its identity, but simply improves upon the formula. It's not at all like COD. COD has a pretty twitchy control scheme, but it's tight. And I personally enjoyed the tightness of it. I don't really like to play COD anymore, however, i've just lost interest. IMO KZ3 is f***ing incredible, and omg is not the Operations mode so AWESOME?!

tacosRcool2379d ago

Listening to other people who have just played demos is stupid. The final build will be a lot better than the demos or beta that I have played. Nonetheless this will be an awesome game and too bad you believe all those people who play CoD with its cheap ass gameplay = noobs will be even bigger noobs in real FPSs

Arksine2379d ago

I disagreed BARF. Killzone 3 has a much heavier feel than Call of Duty...and it still requires strategy to win. I will admit that the one multiplayer map in the Beta gives a significant advantage to Helghast Marksmen that enjoy camping. However, that is why you have Tacticians with spot and mark and Infiltrators. You can frustrate the hell of out of camping marksmen wondering how they keep getting killed.

-Alpha2379d ago (Edited 2379d ago )

Killzone 3 MP is toned down for the casuals. It really is. 1 hit melees, lower damage, ribbons, etc, they took out squads and spawns too. There is a distinct lack of teamwork.

Don't take my word for it, the K3 forums really are asking for some very important changes and I've been following it closely but GG is tight-lipped: http://community.killzone.c...

http://community.killzone.c...

http://community.killzone.c...

They took out spawn nades instead of fixing them, thus our freedom of spawning has been removed. Classes no longer help each other out-- the most important dynamics of teamwork are downplayed in K3 as people just run around and shoot. Lower health makes people not care for medics and with the short respawn time they just get back up, go to the same spawn, and run out again. Ribbons like extra damage are also troublesome.

I miss spawn nades and TSAs are unbalanced in all three maps I've played, with Frozen Dam being the least problematic (though it still heavily favors the ISA). I worry about how the other maps are. WHY couldn't they just allow spawn nades to be destroyed? Instead they remove one problem for another.

All I wanted was more guns, more tweaks on classes, and more variety, they did not offer it IMO. They could have added so many new modes, yet Warfare is just Bodycount and Operations is the only 1 new mode that still uses Warzone features. And why not a 5 on 5 playlist for some more tactical games? At least in K2 I had the freedom to choose, I can understand why fans feel that they removed features because in truth, they did.

The sense of teamwork is strongly diminished.

K2 was great despite some annoying issues (spawn nades), but at least you could blame team mates for that and not the actual game. With TSAs you must blame developers for making the spawns the way they are. There is perfect reason K2 hardcore fans are upset. I like K3, but it required me to get used to it. K2 is much different from it. I foresee huge issues if they dont fix some TSA placements and if they don't bring back the important teamwork dynamics.

COD fans are loving Killzone 3. They love the brutal melee, still complain about controls, but absolutely love the beta. Once MW3 comes out they will leave. I don't know where that will leave the community, it worries me a bit

jjohan352379d ago

All the reviews suggest that the single player in KZ3 is weaker than the single player in KZ2, but the multiplayer in KZ3 is stronger than the multiplayer in KZ2. And I prefer to have it this way than the other way around, which is why I'll be getting KZ3.

Motorola2379d ago

How did people on KZ forums get the game? Exactly TROLL GTFO

RIP_Weazel2379d ago (Edited 2379d ago )

I'm actually loving the lack of respawn grenades. Racing to secure a checkpoint, and then trying to defend is pure gaming adrenaline.
I've also seen a lot of good teamwork - I dont know if its linked to progression, but the higher up the levels I've climbed, the more strategic its got.

BABY-JEDI2379d ago

Sorry Major, but I have a major disagreement with you. LoL

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 2379d ago
phatak2379d ago

Honestly Im gonna get kz3 but it really is a huge stepback imo. I was one of the most diehard kz2 fans . top 400 wo rldwide rank. The controls were just perfect and that was mainly the reason I still play the game today, With Kz3 I just felt they were catering to the cod fanbase who said the kz2 controls were 2 hard. Now it like take 3 bullets with an lmg to kill a guy, recoil is so less, Custom servers Is something that kz2 had and very few games have that, now they might bring that back but still we wont have full customization and player created games like kz2.
Graphics and stuff look awesome but really kz2 was just perfect and im really sad about kz3 being one of the biggest kz2 fans

-Alpha2379d ago (Edited 2379d ago )

Definitely agree. I am going to get it likely, but it feels very different from K2. I expect sequels to outdo and outdate their predecessors but with K3 I still feel K2 is a game that can hold on its own. K2 was so much more unique, while K3 really removes what made it unique. I'm so mad that the teamwork aspects are totally stripped.

K3 has taken many steps back in favor of the more casual fan. I hate how COD fans still complain about down time after you die, the controls, high health, etc. when in reality the controls are fine, downtime needs to be higher, and health needs to be higher too.

I still like it, but there are so many issues that stop it from reaching true potential. I really hope GG listen to the community. I'm still upset their method of fixing spawn nades was to remove it for an equally problematic solution such as TSAs.

Was it so hard just to make spawn nades destructible? That would at least force players to place them better.

And how hard is it to give us actual new modes? Or at least some creative variations on Warzone modes like a classic CTF or a multi-assassination mode.

PinkFunk2379d ago

Hm. I agree with: longer downtimes, and slightly higher health. I think the 'strong bullet' ribbon is unnecessary, and makes the kills too quick. However, I did find that KZ2 health was a bit too high. I always liked the spawn grenades, but there was certainly a major problem with them in KZ2.

I don't know how TSA's will fair in KZ3. So far i've not had much of a problem with them, though I agree with you Alpha, it limits the freedom of movement. It is a feature taken away, and for more professional players it'll be a negative point. From the point of view of how most public games go, what with the casual fanbase, the spawn grenades would most often be a mess. I know that GG is taking that into consideration. Again, for the more hardcore players who play amongst each other in clan matches, it's an issue.

I for one am glad the engine has improved, because in KZ2 it was a combination of so many factors that just made the whole experience stutter. It was always a feeling of something being delayed. The controls (which were improved later, and tightened further in KZ3 which in my opinion is a near perfect mix), but also the frame rate just seemed off, the hit detection at times... I feel these things are improved in KZ3, whether it be the engine revamp or...

I'm glad to see more guns... the Operations mode is really nice. More modes would be nicer. I don't care much for Team Deathmatch (Guerrila Warfare)...

I do find there is almost something pointless in being medic at the moment. Downtimes are too low, and people choose to just respawn and run out again. I hope that as time goes on GG will patch some issues and reconsider some design choices, but I am sure they're on the right track.

BABY-JEDI2379d ago

@ Alpha male. The idea of spawn grenades being destructible is genius. This would def improve the whole gameplay. ; )

DigitalAnalog2379d ago

Apparently in K3, the story seems to take a HUGE chunk out of the scores. If I have to place my two cents, is that Killzone 3 tries to fulfill that requirement that Killzone 2 lacks. Had the predecessor focused to introduce the Helghast in an interesting way, this may not be the issue right now.

-End of Line

PinkFunk2379d ago

Yup. Seems the story is really dragging it down.

xAlmostPro2379d ago

Another review saying it improves on killzone 2 yet recieves a lower score for the story :L

lmao anyways i cant wait for the game :D

Tapewurm2379d ago (Edited 2379d ago )

One of the reasons I am not taking reviews and the general gaming "journalist" community seriously anymore. I will buy the game, try demos or join Betas to see for myself. What they are saying about the game doesn't show in the score. They gave Killzone 2 a 4.5 http://ps3.gamespy.com/play... out of 5 score and say the Killzone 3 has made improvements to address what was wrong with Killzone 2, but give it a 3.5 out of 5. Just doesn't make sense...the game is better than the previous entry, but let's give it a lower score....phooey!

TBM2379d ago

let's see i had a great time playing the demo, and also i great time with a hands one demo that a sony rep brought to my brothers gamestop store.

so why should i listen to some websites opinion, or gamers(haters) who don't like it because it's not like CoD, or any other FPS.

in the end the ONLY OPINION that matters when it comes for which games i'll be buying and loving is MINE. i don't give a rat's ass what anyone else thinks.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 2377d ago
insomnium22379d ago

Yawn.... Won't get hits from me like this that's for sure.

floetry1012379d ago

Yeah, screw honest opinion. I bet Jim Sterling gave it 5/10 or something,

oh wait..

kramun2379d ago

Yeah, it's a solid review.

thief2379d ago (Edited 2379d ago )

Halo odst got a better score 4/5 from this site. Enough said.
kharma45, who is being defensive? If someone feels that KZ3 has major flaws, I am happy to accept that. Very obviously, this game may not appeal to everyone. But if someone scores a game low becauise of bias, thats unacceptable. Especially when its clear that Guerrila have spent a lot of effort on the game and listened to gamer feedback.
Why dont you try explaining how ODST is a a better game?

kharma452379d ago

Stop being so bloody defensive over this game.

Sooner this KZ3 hype leaves N4G the better.

Killzone3___2379d ago

funny but not true ... i don't care about reviews , all are sucks , all bash ps3 exclusive and say stupid things , i come here to see people comments not the reviews ....

unworthyBOZO2379d ago

Its a game that has Halo in the title of course its going to get 9 and 10s thrown at, its not rocket science.

FailOverHero2379d ago (Edited 2379d ago )

Odst has a metacritic of 83, this is an 87. So clearly the halo name wasn't enough to guarantee it 9's and 10's...in fact the highest it got was a 96, zero perfect scores...so quit with the conspiracy theories

OGharryjoysticks2379d ago

thief, gamespy is part of the IGN network and that's Microsoft territory with teamxbox.com being part of that well oiled machine. Also Halo is Microsoft's big earner so nobody on the IGN network was even allowed to score Killzone 3 higher. IGN has been reviewing all the recent PS3 exclusives lower than the norm, but then they come back a couple weeks later and write these second opinion articles that give the staff a little chance to correct the wrongs and say how great the game is, but don't change the score which is what Microsoft likes.

The_Ultimate_Guy2379d ago

@ thief

Why don't you try explaining how Halo ODST ISN'T a better game.

Have you played the full game of Killzone 3? Have you even played Halo ODST?

Most likely the answer is NO to both questions.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 2379d ago
Loner2379d ago ShowReplies(2)
BLACKBOIJONES2379d ago ShowReplies(1)