Top
640°

Killzone 2 dev explains absence of cover system in multiplayer

According to Guerrilla Games QA Manager Seb Downie, the "Lean and Peak" system seen in Killzone 2's single player campaign will not be present in the game's multiplayer mode.

The story is too old to be commented.
TheColbertinator4269d ago

That makes sense since many loopholes exist when using the cover systems.

Capt CHAOS4269d ago

get a full view of you and you couldn't even see them..

prowiew4269d ago

comment: That is a good decision. I dont like cover on a FPS.
question: Does killzone have a matchmaking for online play? I hope it does or else, it would kill it for me (at least online).

Legion4269d ago

WHAT??? Think of all the multi player games that have cover and it ADDS to the game. But KZ2 thinks people wouldn't use it? Bullcrap!!! Put it in the game and let people use it if they want and if they don't know how to guard their flank then that is their issue.

This whole reasoning is just cover-up!!!

Man_of_the_year4269d ago

HMMM...the cover system in Rainbow 6 vegas and Gears 1 & 2 seem to work well within a "360 environment"...

Cenobia4269d ago

From the videos it seems pretty obvious that you stick out a little when behind cover. Your head seems slightly exposed, and a few limbs are probably hanging out too. That's fine against AI opponents, but it would be ridiculously easy for real players to pick people off. If they left it in, I guarantee no one would use it after the first hour of online gameplay.

Anyway, I'm sure you can still kneel behind cover and everything, you just won't stick.

Mr_Showtime14269d ago

Yea, I can play the game anyday I feel like it (you should be able to figure out how), so I can tell you first hand, that it would certainly break the game if there was a cover system, it's a run and gun shooter, much like CoD and not a tactical one like R6:V or Gears, it would slow everything down and the whole thing would be less engaging, having no cover system in multiplayer works.

Exquisik4269d ago

You two do know that the games you both mentioned, or at least Man mentioned, are Third Person Shooting games? That's why cover system worked for them in MP! KZ2 is a FPS game, there's no need for cover system. Name one other FPS game that has a cover system where you can peak and shoot.

CaptainHowdy4269d ago

thanx for pointing out that the cover system for two TPS works well...now back to this here uh, FPS!

Pain4269d ago

really!!?? new to me, i always thought 'cover stuff" was just there for me to shoot when i miss the enemy.

The Lazy One4268d ago

Ghost recon had it originally. It made some camping spots ridiculously overpowered though. It was fun, but really cheap. Some, the only way you could kill the guy was to be behind him, or hide so good he didn't know you were there to shoot.

They're justification is more than enough to remove it from the game tbh. In an fps, anything outside of leaning will hurt your movement and makes you really vulnerable when you're stuck to things.

Oner4268d ago (Edited 4268d ago )

The best way to handle this by GG is to implement the OPTION to use either in the server setup options. So people who want cover and those that don't are both satisfied. I honestly don't see a problem with it either way...after playing Counterstrike for more than 8 years without a cover system & prone capability it didn't hurt that game so it won't hurt K2. Simple. Not a big deal.

cherrypie4268d ago

Of course it makes sense *to you*. Your an irrational zealot.

To the rest of the world, this is a "WTF" answer. Not every game should be a run-and-gun shooter. Killzone2 was going to be the first proper cover-based Multi-player for PS3. Now what?

It would be nice if you zealots would admit when you're getting lied to and shafted.

Its too bad you'd rather bend over backwards and make excuses than keep them honest -- its only YOU who looses.

Oner4268d ago (Edited 4268d ago )

Look, the best ting to do is make yourself heard. Go to the thread (or anywhere else they have something similar) and post! Let GG know what you feel. If you don't then you really can't complain if they didn't know, right?

I posted and hopefully it will brought to GG's attention. But if thousands more of us request these features to be included it will have a greater chance of being implemented or offered as an option at least!

Seriously, if you can take the time to beach ;) & complain here you could do the same over there...I bet you will be heard and your opinion would carry much more weight as well as possibly do some good!

Think about it, if even 100 N4G'ers (or whoever) went there and let GG know how they felt about which options they need to keep then I wouldn't doubt GG will have to re-evaluate how they handle it.

Man_of_the_year4268d ago (Edited 4268d ago )

Actually only gears is a third person game - RB is a first person that then goes into a 3rd person when in cover...also you can choose 1st person only view in Ghost recon and still use a lean cover system...and that seemed to work fine...

The excuse of being in a "360 environment" is a lame excuse to not have a cover system in a shooter game...(for online)

In the COD single player campaign it was linear...and yet i still had the enemy AI show up beside/behind me in many cases - are you telling me that KZ2 is so linear that you will never have guys shooting at you from the sides or behind??? cause thats pretty crappy then...what is the scense of being able to move your gun in a complete 360 degrees if all the fighting is going to be infront of you...

DiabloRising4268d ago

It's a design choice. They want the game to play a certain way. rying to make it sound like a flaw is as stupid as the instances of people claiming Gears of War 2 should have 40 people in its competitive games.

Balancing weapons and level design in an MP game is rough enough. Adding in level balancing for a cover system too would take even more dev time. I can respect their choice, especially considering the praise I've heard from the Beta.

I just wish they would allow you to HOLD to aim, instead of just toggle.

Sevir044268d ago

and those come a dime a dozen. 360 range motion arena based combat with 3rd person cover gaming works because you can see just about everything. But in in a FPS thats a little different. also things to keep in mind.. the maps for 3rd person shooter with cover are relatively small and is mostly for choke point play and only support small number of players. 2v2 4v4 5v5 and very seldom, 8v8. These maps and game play types are made for tactical shooting and close combat play... for a Game like KZ2 the removal of cover from multiplayer was a given. and i applaud them.. These maps will be crowded... if you didn't realize the game maps support up to 32 players... that freakin insane.. thats a fragfest trying to find cover and tactically shoot somebody while being shot at in a frantic war zone = massive cheap shots and unenjoyment from most everyone on that server..

i for one thank GG from scrapping that as it make more sense to keep that function in the single player campaign where the AI is always or most of the time in front of you and in a linear progression.

good deal... KZ2 equals awesome

Legion4268d ago

Exquisik, I think you are incorrect. Last time I played Vegas2 it was a FPS. It just pulled back to 3rd person when you gained cover. Simple fact is that KZ2 does not have a good cover system built. they dumb down the AI in solo play so they don't pick off your legs and heads that stick out??? Why not just fix the cover system?

Think of ALL the games that have cover systems and you will realize that in a tactical shooter that it comes in handy... now if you want a run and gun Halo game then so be it. But don't offer cover in solo play and take it away because you gimped the system and don't have the balls to fix it.

More lackluster "we did things this way for the fans..." bullocks! you did it because you didn't have the time or inkling to fix what you created. Just FIX the cover and add it to the game... if people want to use it then let them. If they don't then they don't. It doesn't take away from the game play!

+ Show (15) more repliesLast reply 4268d ago
Fishy Fingers4269d ago (Edited 4269d ago )

Makes sense, although I would of liked to have seen it maybe implemented in a single game mode, maybe like 4Vs4 clan battles, I could see the cover system working quite well in a more tactical setting.

Then again, you'll always have the 4 player co-op if you want to get your "lean and peak" on with friends. I know I do :)

xhi44269d ago

"It didn't work too well in the 360 degree combat environment that is multiplayer," wrote Downie on the Official PlayStation forums. "In single player the path is more linear and the action is usually ahead of the player. In MP levels are more arena based and you are more susceptible to flanking and being attacked from various angles."

- Makes sense to me. From what I've seen and people who've been in the beta have told me and from IGN and other sites impressions, this is one of the best multiplayer experiences out there. Can't wait!!

Legion4268d ago (Edited 4268d ago )

So they want you to play multiplayer the way they wish. not the way you want??? Even in an arena style stage team work would be enhanced if you had a cover system and you new to use it that you would have to have each others backs!!!

Or even the opportunity to go in and out of cover to deal with a person in FRONT of you. Duh...

Think about it... makes sense!