Top
Shalome! XbonePS4WiiUPCMobileHandheld fan

pixelsword

Contributor
CRank: 11Score: 0

The Biggest Double Standard This Gen Exposed

To fully appreciate the point of this story, you'll either have to relive the four years of nit-picking you had to endure, or jog your memory to about three years ago and remember promises that weren't kept.  The double standard I am talking about is the way Killzone is being raked over the coals for it's trailer although it in almost every way surpassed the trailer and Halo 3 for showing an arguably equally as detailed and impressive trailer for Halo 3, but not being kept to it's standard of quality despite being told that the quality of Halo 3 would also match it's highest quality trailer, but Halo 3 did not nearly match it's quality in any way.

The reason I'm saying this is the biggest double standard is because these two games are probably the two that are the most well known FPS for each respective console. Halo 3 with it's legions of followers and console-saving reputation, and Killzone with it's unbelievable trailer flagshipping Sony's exclusive titles this gen.

I decided to bring up the points because I'm probably one of the few who will admit to both loving both Killzone and Halo. I'm also probably the only PS3 owner who will say Halo 1 was better than Killzone 1, so I'm not looking to knock either game or either franchise, but to again expose the bias in the corporate media. If you can't tell, I can't stand the corporate media's utter lack of professionalism, but I digress.

The Killzone scenario I'll do last, because it's known, and I don't want to waste time on it.

So the first franchise I would like to cover is probably one of my all time favorites, Halo.

In 2006, Halo was shown at the tail end of E3 with incredible footage that was said to be in-game by Bill Gates, and confirmed by Peter Moore's nodding head (shown @ 1:17:40):

http://www.gamespot.com/video/6149780

but the very next year, Halo 3's trailer didn't even look half as good as the trailer:

http://www.spike.com/video/halo-3-e3-2007/2873826

You'd think the media would've been all over that, but critics were rather silent. Odd, since the media had a two whole years of practice to (rightly) rip on Kilzone 2's trailer being fake. Perhaps it wasn't so obvious... or was it?

To further the comparison, here's an image from the trailer:

http://www.youthcentral.vic.gov.au/digitalAssets/14483_Halo3Body.jpg

Versus

http://www.bungie.net/images/Games/Halo3/Screenshots/H3_E307_Chief01.jpg

which I got from Bungie's site directly to convey the point about The Chief from 2006 to 2007.

Even my four favorite Halo 3 pics show the stark differences between the trailer and final game:

(my favorite trailer pic of the chief)
http://www.youthcentral.vic.gov.au/digitalAssets/14483_Halo3Body.jpg

(my favorite Halo 3 in-game pic: looks the most real, like an overcast day. Hopefully not a bullshot)
http://buttonmashing.com/wp-content/uploads/halo3-hands.jpg

(my favorite trailer pic of the background)
http://ployer.com/archives/2007/04/27/Halo3.jpg

(my favoirte pic from the multiplayer Beta)
http://punchbutton.beloblog.com/archives/images/0507/halo%203.jpg

Because of that, when the bubble shield commercial came out:
http://www.mydigitallife.info/wp-content/uploads/2006/12/halo3ad.JPG

who doubted that the footage shown in that commercial wasn't in-game?

Again, I'm not trying to take Halo 3 "down a peg" at all; it's just to show how Halo 3 was given a pass for over-promising and under-delivering whereas Killzone 2 exceeds it's trailer in almost every way, but gets torn-down for very minor issues.


The second part of the story all goes back to the 2005 E3 trailer where they showed incredible footage of Killzone2, you know the one:

http://ps3.ign.com/dor/objects/748475/killzone-next-gen/videos/killzone_081005.html

Anyways, everyone called Bull-scat on the trailer being real (and they were right to do so in this instance), but the game (as we know so far) did right by the trailer:

http://media.psu.com/media/Killzone2_final_intro.mov

to the point that the side-by-side using (now) older footage shows that Killzone 2 exceeds the trailer in almost every way shot by shot:

http://talkplaystation.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/05/killzone2-e3-vs-now.jpg


Yet this game is so picked-apart by the media and the "media" (read: glorified bloggers) that we learned about the industry term for a widely-used technique called the "bullshot" from Killzone's image tweaking incident:

http://cdn1.gamepro.com/article_img/gamepro/156868-1-1.jpg


The curious thing is that simple things like this can be brought up just as quickly and easily as looking through the information, but for some reason, it becomes too hard for "reporters" nowadays if they can't copy and paste it.

The story is too old to be commented.
toughNAME2755d ago (Edited 2755d ago )

Killzone was a flop. When it's sequel looks surprisingly amazing, people began to doubt.

Microsoft used deceptive methods, Sony on the other hand lied outright.

I'm sure Killzone 2 will be a fine game. But there is no chance in hell it will have the gameplay or be as innovative as Halo 3 was. Not to mentioned the monstrous sales and high review scores. Even with the 18 month gap...let's not compare the two.

Graphics Whore2755d ago (Edited 2755d ago )

I-n-n-o-v-a-t-i-o-n. You're definitely using the wrong descriptors.

In all honestly if you set up two pictures one each from Killzone 2 and Halo 3 it doesn't even look like it's in the same generation of gaming.

socomnick2755d ago

Killzone 1 was a gigantic flop. I dont think kz 2 will fail though it might just be mediocre who knows.

toughNAME2755d ago

I agree Killzone won't embarrass the gaming industry (again), I see it as the next Army of Two or Conflict: Denied Ops.

I just hope it doesn't get a free pass like Resistance 2 did.

Aclay2755d ago

"I'm sure Killzone 2 will be a fine game. But there is no chance in hell it will have the gameplay or be as innovative as Halo 3 was."

How do you know that Killzone 2 "won't have the gameplay" if you haven't even played the game?, and what in the world is that supposed to mean?

I seriously don't know why so many Xbox fans keep mentioning Killzone 2's gameplay like it's some kind of taboo or mystery. Killzone 2 is a more realitic, tactical First Person Shooter, Halo to me is more Run-and-Gun with little skill needed to play the game.

And what in the world was so innovative about Halo 3 or Halo 3's gameplay? Nothing if you ask me and Halo 3 is far from innovative. If you want to talk about innovation, talk about Killzone 2's First Person Cover system because it is the first of it's kind. Rainbow Six Vegas has a Cover System, but it's not like Killzone 2's.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2755d ago
panasonic232755d ago

the probably is ms didn't say the halo 3 trailer is real time like sony and to me k2 still don't match cgi trailer from 05. lol ign did a video about sony lieing showing fake cgi claiming it real time lol

goflyakite2755d ago

You obliviously didn't read the entire blog.

pixelsword2755d ago (Edited 2755d ago )

I was going to put that in this blog. Here's the link you're talking about:

http://ps3.ign.com/dor/obje...

But also please READ the blog. I included a clip of Bill Gates saying that the initial trailer was IN-GAME footage, which is different from IN-ENGINE(shown @ 1:17:40):

http://www.gamespot.com/vid...

The only reason I didn't include the clip you were referring to was because all of the videos in that clip were target renders versus final product, and I didn't want to start another side discussion. Killzone 2's clip showed preview code as well. I decided it wasn't fair to compare the two in this instance because as of now, we all know that there are already improvements to the preview code.

If they would've had a trailer versus final code comparison, I would have put it on the blog.

Halo 3 didn't improve dramatically from it's 2007 pre-release showing to the actual release like I hoped it would, so that comparison was valid.

Again, not bashing Halo 3 or Killzone 2... I loved the first games, and Killzone 2 has the burden of impressing me now, not Halo 3.

Halo 3 did that already. :D

orakga2755d ago (Edited 2755d ago )

WELL YOU ARE WRONG!!

You are NOT the only one who thinks so!!!
(because I do too) =D

pixelsword2755d ago

I loved both games, but Halo makes me sweat!

Jager2755d ago

As much as i loved the first killzone (its ranking system, online play, playing against bots with friends) it was never as good as Halo imo... Some area's Killzone was better, but most areas Halo was better (IE, Killzones sniper rifle sucked, big time :/ )

Aclay2755d ago

I think that Halo got Free passes when it came to the video game trailers simply because it was "Halo".

I think a lot of the gaming media just took advantage of the fact that Killzone 1 wasn't all that it was proclaimed to be and didn't have problems with taking shots at Killzone 2 because of that. If Killzone 1 had turned out something like Halo on the first Xbox, then I doubt they would be giving Killzone 2 such a hard time.

Sometimes I think a lot of gaming journalists are really afraid to say anything negative towards Halo because if they do, it's like a sin or something.

I'm glad that Killzone 2 has actually matched and surpassed the infamous E3 2005 trailer in almost every aspect because I think that it will finally shut up all the doubters and naysayers.

Sev2755d ago

I don't like to get into comparisons, so I won't comment about the games.

However, I would like to comment that, the writer of this blog article has done a great job remaining unbiased and reporting facts, with links/pics/vids to back up his claims.

Excellent job, and really a good point you are making.

Bubbles +

Also thanks to BigPete7978 for sending me a link to this article as I may not have ever noticed it.

Pixelsword, I hope to see more from you.

Show all comments (23)